Wikipedia

DR-DOS

(Redirected fromDR DOS 5.0)
For other uses, seeDRDOS.

DR-DOS(written asDR DOS,without a hyphen, in versions up to and including 6.0) is adisk operating systemforIBM PC compatibles.Upon its introduction in 1988, it was the first DOS that attempted to be compatible withIBM PC DOSandMS-DOS(which were the same product sold under different names).

DR-DOS
DeviceLogics DR-DOS 8.0
Developer
OS familyDOS
Working stateDiscontinued
Source modelMixed; primarilyclosed-source,some versionsopen-source
Initial release28 May 1988;36 years ago(1988-05-28)
Final release7.01.08 / 21 July 2011;13 years ago(2011-07-21)
Available inEnglish,older versions also in German, French, Italian, Spanish, Japanese
Platformsx86
KerneltypeMonolithic kernel
Default
user interface		Command-line interface(COMMAND.COM)
LicenseProprietary
Official websitedrdos(dead since 2018)

DR-DOS was developed byGary A. Kildall'sDigital Researchand derived fromConcurrent PC DOS6.0, which was an advanced successor ofCP/M-86.As ownership changed, various later versions were produced with names includingNovell DOSandCaldera OpenDOS.

History

edit

Origins in CP/M

edit

Digital Research's originalCP/Mfor the 8-bitIntel 8080- andZ80-based systems spawned numerous spin-off versions, most notably CP/M-86 for theIntel 8086/8088family of processors. Although CP/M had dominated the market since the mid-1970s, and was shipped with the vast majority of non-proprietary-architecture personal computers, theIBM PCin 1981 brought the beginning of what was eventually to be a massive change.

IBMoriginally approached Digital Research in 1980, seeking anx86version of CP/M. However, there were disagreements over the contract, and IBM withdrew. Instead, a deal was struck withMicrosoft,who purchased another operating system,86-DOS,fromSeattle Computer Products(SCP). This became MicrosoftMS-DOSandIBM PC DOS.86-DOS's command structure and application programming interface imitated that ofCP/M 2.2(withBDOS2.2). Digital Research threatened legal action, claiming PC DOS/MS-DOS to be too similar to CP/M. In early 1982, IBM settled by agreeing to sell Digital Research's x86 version of CP/M,CP/M-86,alongside PC DOS. However, PC DOS sold forUS$40 while CP/M-86 had a $240 price tag. The proportion of PC buyers prepared to spend six times as much to buy CP/M-86 was very small, and the limited availability of compatible application software, at first in Digital Research's favor, was only temporary.[2]

Digital Research fought a long losing battle to promote CP/M-86 and its multi-tasking multi-user successorsMP/M-86andConcurrent CP/M-86,and eventually decided that they could not beat the Microsoft-IBM lead in application software availability, so they modified Concurrent CP/M-86 to allow it to run the same applications as MS-DOS and PC DOS.

This was shown publicly in December 1983[3]and shipped in March 1984 asConcurrent DOS 3.1(a.k.a. CDOS with BDOS 3.1) to hardware vendors.[4]While Concurrent DOS continued to evolve in various flavours over the years to eventually becomeMultiuser DOSandREAL/32,it was not specifically tailored for the desktop market and too expensive for single-user applications. Therefore, over time two attempts were made to sideline the product:

In 1985, Digital Research developedDOS Plus 1.0to2.1,a stripped-down and modified single-user derivative ofConcurrent DOS 4.1and5.0,which ran applications for both platforms, and allowed switching between several tasks[5][6]as did the original CP/M-86. Its DOS compatibility was limited, and Digital Research made another attempt, this time a native DOS system.[6]This new disk operating system was launched in 1988 as DR DOS.

Although DRI was based inPacific Groveand later inMonterey,California, USA, the work on DOS Plus started inNewbury,Berkshire in the UK, where Digital Research Europe had its OEM Support Group located since 1983.[nb 1]Beginning in 1986, most of the operating system work onConcurrent DOS 386andXM,Multiuser DOS, DR DOS and PalmDOS was done in Digital Research's European Development Centre (EDC) inHungerford,Berkshire.[nb 1]Later on some work was also done by Digital Research GmbH inMunich,Germany.

First DR DOS version

edit

As requested by severalOEMs,Digital Research started a plan to develop a new DOS operating system addressing the defects left by MS-DOS in 1987.[7]Of particular importance was a million dollar deal withKazuhiko "Kay" NishiofASCII Corporation,who had previously been instrumental in opening the Japanese OEM market for Microsoft.[6]The first DR DOS version was released on 28 May 1988.[7]Version numbers were chosen to reflect features relative to MS-DOS; the first version promoted to the public was DR DOS 3.31,[7]which offered features comparable toCompaq MS-DOS 3.31with large disk support (FAT16Ba.k.a. "BIGDOS" ). DR DOS 3.31 reported itself as "IBM PC DOS 3.31", while the internal BDOS (Basic Disk Operating System) kernel version was reported as 6.0, single-user nature, reflecting its origin as derivative ofConcurrent DOS 6.0with the multitasking and multiuser capabilities as well as CP/MAPIsupport stripped out and theXIOSreplaced by an IBM-compatibleDOS-BIOS.The system files were namedDRBIOS.SYS(for the DOS-BIOS) andDRBDOS.SYS(for the BDOS kernel), the disk OEM label used was "DIGITAL␠".

DR DOS offered some extended command line tools with command line help, verbose error messages, sophisticatedcommand line historyand editing (HISTORYdirective) as well as support for file and directory passwords built right into the kernel.[8]It was also cheaper to license than MS-DOS, and was ROMable right from the start. The ROMed version of DR DOS was also named ROS (ROM Operating System).[9]DRI was approached by a number of PC manufacturers who were interested in a third-party DOS, which prompted several updates to the system.

At this time, MS-DOS was only available to OEMs bundled with hardware. Consequently, DR DOS achieved some immediate success when it became possible for consumers to buy it through normalretailchannels beginning with version 3.4x.

Known versions are DR DOS 3.31 (BDOS 6.0, June 1988, OEM only), 3.32 (BDOS 6.0, 17 August 1988, OEM only), 3.33 (BDOS 6.0, 1 September 1988, OEM only), 3.34 (BDOS 6.0, OEM only), 3.35 (BDOS 6.0, 21 October 1988, OEM only), 3.40 (BDOS 6.0, 25 January 1989), 3.41 (BDOS 6.3, June 1989, OEM and retail). Like MS-DOS, most of them were produced in several variants for different hardware. While most OEMs kept the DR DOS name designation, 2001 Sales, Inc. marketed it under the name EZ-DOS 3.41 (also known as EZ-DOS 4.1).[10][11]

Further information:Comparison of DOS operating systems

DR DOS 5.0

edit

DR DOS version 5.0 (code-named "Leopard" ) was released in May 1990,[7]still reporting itself as "PC DOS 3.31" for compatibility purposes, but internally indicating a single-user BDOS 6.4 kernel. (Version 4 was skipped to avoid being associated with the relatively unpopularMS-DOS 4.0.) This introducedViewMAX,aGEM-basedGUIfile management shell.[12][13]ViewMAX's startup screen would present the slogan "Digital Research - We make computers work".[14][15][16]DR DOS 5.0 also introduced the patentedBatteryMAXpower management system, bundled disk-caching software (DRCACHE), a remote file transfer tool (FILELINK), a cursor shape configuration utility (CURSOR), and offered a vastly improved memory management system (MemoryMAX).[12][13]For compatibility purposes, the DR DOS 5.0 system files were now namedIBMBIO.COM(for the DOS-BIOS) andIBMDOS.COM(for the BDOS kernel) and due to the advanced loader in the boot sector could be physically stored anywhere on disk.[13]The OEM label in the boot sectors was changed to "IBM␠␠3.3".

Front and rear views of theCarry-Ibook-sized diskless workstation, bundled with DR DOS 5.0, based on anIntel 80286processor and produced by Taiwan'sFlytech Technologyc. 1991

DR DOS 5.0 was the first DOS to include load-high capabilities. The kernel and data structures such as disk buffers could berelocatedin theHigh Memory Area(HMA), the first 64 KB ofextended memorywhich are accessible inreal mode.This freed up the equivalent amount of critical "base" orconventional memory,the first 640 KB of the PC's RAM – the area in which all DOS applications run.[13]

Additionally, onIntel 80386machines, DR DOS's EMS memory manager allowed the operating system to load DOS device drivers into upper memory blocks, further freeing base memory.

DR DOS 5.0 was the first DOS to integrate such functionality into the base OS (loading device drivers intoupper memory blockswas already possible using third-party software likeQEMM). This allowed it, on 286 systems with supported chipsets and on 386 systems, to provide significantly more free conventional memory than any other DOS. Once drivers for a mouse, multimedia hardware and a network stack were loaded, an MS-DOS/PC DOS machine typically might only have had 300 to 400 KB of free conventional memory – too little to run much late-1980s software. In contrast to this, DR DOS 5.0, with a little manual tweaking, could load all this and still keep all of its conventional memory free – allowing for some necessary DOS data structures, as much as 620 KB out of the 640 KB. With MEMMAX +V, the conventional memory region could even be extended into unused portions of the graphics adapter card typically providing another 64 to 96 KB more free DOS memory.

Because DR DOS left so much conventional memory available, some old programs using certain address wrapping techniques failed to run properly as they were now loaded unexpectedly (or, under MS-DOS, "impossibly" ) low in memory – inside the first 64 KB segment (known as "low memory"). Therefore, DR DOS 5.0's new MEMMAX -L command worked around this by pre-allocating achunkof memory at the start of the memory map in order for programs to load above this barrier (but with less usable conventional memory then). By default, MEMMAX was configured for +L, so that applications could take advantage of the extra memory.

DR DOS 6.0 / Competition from Microsoft

edit
Digital Research DR DOS 6.0 startup disk
Novell DR DOS 6.0 manual

Faced with substantial competition in the DOS arena, Microsoft responded with an announcement of a yet-to-be released MS-DOS 5.0 in May 1990.[7]This would be released in June 1991[7]and include similar advanced features to those of DR DOS.[17]It included matches of the DR's enhancements in memory management.[17]

Almost immediately in September 1991, Digital Research responded with DR DOS 6.0,[7]code-named "Buxton". DR DOS 6.0, while already at BDOS level 6.7 internally, would still report itself as "IBM PC DOS 3.31" to normal DOS applications for compatibility purposes. This bundled inSuperStoron-the-fly disk compression, to maximize available hard disk space, and file deletion tracking and undelete functionality by Roger A. Gross.

DR DOS 6.0 also included a task-switcher named TASKMAX[18]with support for the industry-standard task-switching API[19]to run multiple applications at the same time. In contrast to Digital Research's Multiuser DOS (successor of Concurrent DOS in the multi-user products line), which would run DOS applications in pre-emptively multitasked virtual DOS machines, the DR DOS 6.0 task switcher would freeze background applications until brought back into the foreground. While it ran on x86-machines, it was able to swap to XMS memory on 286+ machines.[18]TASKMAX did support someCopy & Pastefacility between applications.[18] Via the task-switcher API, graphical user interfaces such asViewMAX[18]orPC/GEOScould register as the task manager menu and thereby replace the TASKMAX text mode menu, so that users could switch between tasks from within a GUI.

Microsoft responded with MS-DOS 6.0, which again matched some features of DR DOS 6.0.

In December 1991, a pre-release version ofWindows 3.1was found to return a non-fatal error message if it detected a non-Microsoft DOS.[7]This check came to be known as theAARD code.[20][21]It was a simple matter for Digital Research to patch DR DOS 6.0 to circumvent the AARD code 'authenticity check' in the Windows 3.1 beta by rearranging the order of two internal tables in memory (with no changes in functionality), and the patched version, named "business update", was on the streets within six weeks of the release of Windows 3.1.[22][23][24][25]With the detection code disabled, Windows ran perfectly under DR DOS and its successor Novell DOS. The code was present but disabled in the released version of Windows 3.1.[26]

In July 1992,Digital Research Japanreleased DR DOS 6.0/V, a JapaneseDOS/Vcompatible version of DR DOS 6.0.[27][28]A Korean version appears to have been available as well.

PalmDOS

edit

In 1992 Digital Research, still under its old name but already bought by Novell in July 1991,[29][30]also embarked on a spin-off product code-named "Merlin" and later released as NetWare PalmDOS 1, which, as its name implies, was a very resource-light DR DOS 6.0 derivative aimed at the emergingPalmtop/PDAmarket.[31]

PalmDOS was the first operating system in the family to support the new BDOS 7.0 kernel with native DOS compatible internal data structures instead of emulations thereof. Replacing the DOS emulation on top of a CP/M kernel by a true DOS compatible kernel helped a lot in improving compatibility with some applications using some of DOS' internal data structures and also was the key in reducing the resident size of the kernel code even further—a particular requirement for the PDA market. On the other hand, introducing a genuineCurrent Directory Structure(CDS) imposed a limit on the depth ofworking directoriesdown to 66 characters (as in MS-DOS/PC DOS), whereas previous issues of DR DOS had no such limitation due to their internal organization of directories as relative links to parent directories instead of as absolute paths.[32][33][34]PalmDOS still reported itself as "PC DOS 3.31" to applications in order to keep the kernel small and not run into compatibility problems with Windows, which would expect theDOSMGRAPI to be implemented for any DOS version since 5.0.

As well as a ROM-executing kernel, PalmDOS had palmtop-type support for features such asPCMCIAPC Cards(withDPMSsupport), power management (BatteryMAXand the$IDLE$device driver with its patented dynamic idle detection[35]by Gross and John P. Constant),MINIMAXtask switcher support forPIM(Personal Information Modules) applications stored and executed from ROM viaXIP(Execute-In-Place), etc.

The PCMCIA stack for PalmDOS was partially written byIan H. S. Cullimore,the original instigator of the PCMCIA/PC Card movement.

Novell DOS 7 / Contribution by Novell

edit
A typical command line in Novell DOS 7

Novell DOSwasNovellCorporation's name for DR DOS during the period when Novell sold DR DOS, after the acquisition of Digital Research in 1991.[36][37][30][29][38]Regarding features and performance, it was typically at least one release ahead of MS-DOS.[39]In 1993,PC DOS 6.1,MS-DOS 6.2andPC DOS 6.3were trumped by Novell'sDOS 7.[40]

Novell CEORobert J. Frankenberg's strategy included "major trimming", selling off products like transactional databaseBtrieveand killing others such as Novell DOS andWordPerfect's multimedia Main Street children's titles.[41]Novell licensed technology fromStac Electronicsfor use in Novell DOS and itsnetwork operating systemNetWare.[42][43]Novell sold the product line off toCalderaon 23 July 1996, after it approached Novell looking for a DOS operating system to bundle with itsOpenLinuxdistribution.[7]

Marc Perkelclaimed to have had inspired Novell in February 1991 to buy Digital Research and develop something he envisioned as "NovOS".[44]Novell had actually bought Digital Research in July 1991 with a view to using DR's product line as a lever in their comprehensive strategy to break the Microsoft monopoly. (This was part of a massive and ultimately disastrous spending spree for Novell: they boughtWordPerfectCorporation at about the same time, some ofBorland's products, and invested heavily inUnixas well.) The planned "DR DOS 7.0", internally named "Panther", intended to trump Microsoft's troubled MS-DOS 6.0, was repeatedly delayed, while Novell was working on an optionally loadable Unix-like multi-user security extension (with, if loaded, file commands likeBACKUP,DELPURGE,MOVE,TOUCH,TREE,UNDELETE,XATTRIB,XCOPY,XDELandXDIRsupporting an otherwise disabled /U:name command line option to select specific users or groups,[33]compatible with Multiuser DOS) and two new graphical user interfaces (ViewMAX 3,a derivative of GEM, and "Star Trek",a true port of Apple'sSystem 7.1to run under the new DR DOS multitasker named "Vladivar" ).

When DR DOS eventually arrived in December 1993 (with localized versions released in March 1994), renamed Novell DOS 7 (a.k.a. "NWDOS" ), and without these three components, it was a disappointment to some. It was larger and lacked some finishing touches,[45]but was nevertheless seen as best DOS by many industry experts.[46]

In Germany, Novell DOS 7 was aggressively marketed with the slogan "Trau keinem DOS unter 7"(Don't trust any DOS below 7) in the press and with free demo floppies in computer magazines.[47][48][46]The campaign aimed at 20% of the DOS market and resulted in about 1.5 million copies sold until February 1994 and more than 3000 dealers interested to carry the product.[47][48]Novell DOS 7 was available through various OEMs, a dedicated mail order shop and authorized dealers.[47]

A major functional addition was Novell's second attempt at a peer-to-peer networking system,Personal NetWare(PNW).[nb 2]This was better than its predecessor,NetWare Lite(NWL), but it was incompatible with Microsoft's networking system, now growing popular with support inWindows for Workgroups,OS/2,andWindows NT.A considerable amount of manual configuration was needed to get both to co-exist on the same PC, and Personal NetWare never achieved much success.

Since Novell DOS 7 implemented the DOSMGR API and internal data structures had been updated, its BDOS 7.2 kernel could report with a DOS version of 6.0 and OEM ID "IBM" without risking compatibility problems with Windows. Most tools would report this as "PC DOS 6.1", because IBM PC DOS 6.1 also reported as DOS 6.0 to applications.

Novell DOS 7 introduced much advanced memory management including new support for DPMI (DOS Protected Mode Interface) and DPMS (DOS Protected Mode Services) as well as more flexible loadhigh options.[46]It also introduced support for "true" pre-emptive multitasking[46]of multiple DOS applications invirtual DOS machines(VDM), a component originally named MultiMAX. This was similar to Multiuser DOS, but now on the basis of a natively DOS compatible environment, similar to Windows 386 Enhanced Mode, but without a GUI. By default, the bundled TASKMGR would behave similar to the former DR DOS 6.0 TASKMAX. However, ifEMM386was loaded with the option /MULTI, EMM386 would load a natively 32-bit 386 Protected Mode operating system core providing API support for pre-emptive multitasking, multi-threading, hardware virtualization and domain management of virtual DOS machines. This API could be used by DR DOS-aware applications. If TASKMGR was run later on, it would use this API to instance the current 16-bit DOS system environment, create virtual DOS machines and run applications in them instead of using its own Real Mode task-switcher support. The multitasker was compatible with Windows, so that tasks started before launching Windows could be seen as tasks under Windows as well.

Novell DOS 7 and Personal NetWare 1.0 also shipped withNetWars,a network-enabled 3Darcade game.

Novell DOS 7 and Personal NetWare required several bug-fix releases (D70xyy with x=language, yy=number) and were not completely stable when the next development occurred. With beta versions of Microsoft's "Chicago"(what would later become Windows 95) in sight, Novell wound down further development on Novell DOS 7 in September 1994[7]and stopped maintenance in January 1996 after more than 15 updates.

After Novell

edit

When Caldera approached Novell looking for a DOS operating system to bundle with theirOpenLinuxdistribution,[49]Novell sold the product line off to Caldera on 23 July 1996,[7]by which time it was of little commercial value to them.

Between the Caldera-owned DR-DOS and competition from IBM's PC DOS 6.3, Microsoft moved to make it impossible to use or buy the subsequent Windows version,Windows 95,with any DOS product other than their own. Claimed by them to be a purely technical change, this was later to be the subject of a majorlawsuitbrought inSalt Lake Cityby Caldera with the help of theCanopy Group.[7][50]Microsoft lawyers tried repeatedly to have the case dismissed but without success. Immediately after the completion of the pre-trial deposition stage (where the parties list the evidence they intend to present), there was an out-of-court settlement on 7 January 2000 for an undisclosed sum.[51][52]This was revealed in November 2009 to be $280 million.[53][54][55][52]

In August 1996, the US-based Caldera, Inc. was approached by Roger A. Gross, one of the original DR-DOS engineers, with a proposal to restart DR-DOS development and to make Windows 95 run on DR-DOS which would help the court case. Following a meeting in September 1996 inLindon,Utah, USA, between Gross,Ransom H. Love,Bryan Wayne SparksandRaymond John Noorda,Gross was hired and tasked to set up a new subsidiary in the UK.[nb 1]On 10 September 1996, Caldera announced the coming release of OpenDOS (COD) and their intent to also release the source code to the system,[49]and Caldera UK Ltd. was incorporated on 20 September 1996.[56][nb 1]Gross hired some of the original developers of the operating system from the Novell EDC as well as some new talents to continue work on the operating system in a converted barn at the periphery ofAndover,Hampshire, UK,[nb 1]nearby the former Digital Research and Novell EDC.[nb 1]Besides other improvements and enhancements all over the system, a string of new key features were added subsequently over the course of the next two years, including aTCP/IPstack (derived fromLAN WorkPlace for DOS/NetWare Mobile), a graphical 32-bit DOS Protected ModeHTML 3.2web-browserDR-WebSpyder(originally based on source code from theArachneweb browser byMichal Polák) with LAN and modem dialup, aPOSIXPthreadsextension to the multi-tasker by Andy T. Wightman,long filename(LONGNAME) support by Edward N. Hill Jr., as well asLBAandFAT32support (DRFAT32) by Matthias R. Paul. Gross also hired Andrew Schulman (who had been, with Geoff Chappell, instrumental in identifying the AARD code in 1992) to work as a consultant and, in Andover, assist Paul in his work on "WinGlue", a secret project to create a version of DR-DOS compatible with Windows 95,98and98 SEand replace its MS-DOS 7.xx component.[57][58][59]This was demonstrated atCeBITin March 1998,[57][58]and later, in a small team, developed into "WinBolt", both versions of DR-DOS, which remained unreleased as of 2023,but played an important role in thecourt case.[50][60][59][61][62][63][64]

Caldera UK officially released Caldera OpenDOS 7.01 on 3 February 1997, but this version was just Novell DOS 7 update 10 (as of December 1994) compiled only with the necessary adaptations to incorporate the new name in display messages as well as inenvironment variablesand file names. It was missing a year's worth of patches which had been developed for the Novell DOS updates 11 (January 1995) to 15.2 (January 1996).[33]This was due to parts of the Novell DOS sources having been lost at Novell meanwhile.[65]Consequently, this version still reported an internal BDOS version of 7.2, identical to Novell DOS 7. The new suite also lacked theSETFIFOcommand, which had been added with one of the Novell DOS updates, as well asFifth Generation'sSearch&Destroyvirus scanner andFastBack Plus 2.0utility, which previously came bundled with Novell DOS. Instead it came bundled with a newer version ofPNUNPACKand brought a much advanced version ofNetWars.[33]

Parts of OpenDOS 7.01 were released asopen source[49]in form of the M.R.S. kit (for Machine Readable Sources) in May 1997, but withlicenseterms mostly incompatible with existingopen-source licenses.[66]The source was thenclosedagain as Gross felt this would undermine the commercial aspirations of the system.

After beta releases in September and November 1997, the next official release came in December 1997, with the name changed to Caldera DR-OpenDOS 7.02, soon followed by a further release in March 1998, when the DR-DOS name returned as Caldera DR-DOS 7.02,[67]now for the first time written with a hyphen. Version 7.02 (now reporting itself as BDOS 7.3) incorporated improved BIOS and BDOS issues, developed by Paul,[65][68]adding many new boot and configuration options, integrating many compatibility enhancements, bug-fixes and optimizations for size and speed, and re-implementing all fixes of the missing Novell DOS updates.[65][68]The BIOS improved the coexistence of DR-DOS withWindows 9xand its support for third-party disk compression drivers such as Microsoft'sDriveSpace.[65][69][70]It introduced a diagnostics mode (activated byScroll Lock),[65][69]integrated debugger support (withDEBUG=ONand a debugger loaded before or from within CONFIG.SYS)[65]and more flexible CONFIG.SYS tracing capabilities via theF5/F6/F7/F8hotkeys and theTRACEandTIMEOUTcommands,[65][71][69]thereby also improving the integration of alternative command line shells such as4DOS.[65][69][34]Together with LOADER, SYS /DR:ext and theCHAINdirective, it brought enhanced multi-configuration support forDR/D/CONFIG.extfiles[69][72]and came with enhancements to the BASIC-like CONFIG.SYS language for more powerful boot menus, convenient user interaction[69]and programmatical acting upon conditions (CPU386), return codes and error levels (ERROR,ONERROR).[65]It also allowed to change theSCROLLOCK,CAPSLOCK,INSERTandVERIFYsettings as well as theSWITCHAR,YESCHAR,NOCHARandRESUMECHARcharacters.[65][69]Various behavioural details could be controlled with new parameters /Q (Quiet), /L (Lowercase), /Y (Yes) and /S (Switch) forSWITCHES.[65]Further, it provided optional support for a LPT4: device and allowed to configure the built-inCOMx:andLPTx:devices as well as to change thePRN:andAUX:defaults.[65]The handling of environment variables in CONFIG.SYS was improved and new load-high facilities included such as theHIFILES/FILESHIGHandHIFCBS/FCBSHIGHoptions to relocate file handles and FCB structures into UMBs, which typically gave between 1 and 4 KB (and up to 15 KB) more free conventional memory compared to previous versions, or theHISHELL/SHELLHIGHSIZE directive to control the pre-allocation of HMA memory forCOMMAND.COM,which helped to avoid memory fragmentation and thereby typically gave between 5 and 8 KB more continuous HMA memory for HMA-capable third-party drivers to work with in conjunction with third-party command line shells, which could not load into the HMA as COMMAND.COM with its /MH option.[65][71]At a reducedmemory footprintversion 7.02 also brought an enhancedNLS4.xx sub-system by Paul to allow multiple, distributed and possibly user-configured COUNTRY.SYS files to be used by the system at the same time in a hierarchical model.[65][73][71][74]This also gave dynamic parser support for MS-DOS/PC DOS COUNTRY.SYS file formats in addition to DR-DOS' own COUNTRY.SYS formats,[65][73][71][74][75][76][77]and it introduced support for theISO 8601international date format[74][71](including automatic detection) and the then-newEuro currency.[74][71]Some DR-DOS files such as IBMBIO.COM, IBMDOS.COM and COUNTRY.SYS carried misleading file extensions for compatibility reasons; with DR-DOS 7.02 they were enhanced to incorporate afat binary-style safety feature devised by Paul so that they wouldexit gracefullywhen called inappropriately.[65][33][77][74]DR-DOS 7.02 was fullyYear 2000compliant and provided special support to work with buggy system BIOSes. It also came with an updatedFDISK,which could partition and format FAT32 volumes (but not yet work with LBA). The sources of the Novell patches for the external tools and drivers had meanwhile been found in Germany and could thus be retro-fitted into the system as well, so that DR-DOS 7.02 finally not only caught up with Novell DOS 7, but was a true step forward. The release was followed by various updates in June, August and September 1998.

The updated internal BDOS version number introduced a new problem: some legacy third-party applications with special support for Novell DOS, which were no longer being updated, stopped working.SETVERalready allowed Novell DOS to disguise itself as DOS versions by file name and globally and, specifying a magic sub-version of 255, it would even disable its own internal BDOS version check in order to cope with programs specifically probing for "DR-DOS".[33]The modified kernel and SETVER driver by Paul would, in an hierarchical model, also support load paths in order to distinguish between multiple executables of the same file name, and it introduced an extended mode, in which SETVER could not only fake DOS versions, but also BDOS kernel versions.[77]Sub-versions of 128 to 255 would be reported as DOS sub-versions 0 to 127 to applications, but with the BDOS version check disabled, while sub-versions 100 to 127 could be used to fake different BDOS versions,[77]whereas the DOS revision number (typically set to 0 in a static, pre-boot patchable data structure) would be taken as the reported sub-version instead, so that SETVER /G /X 6.114 would allow versions of DR-DOS since 7.02 to still report themselves as a "DOS 6.0" and with a faked BDOS version 7.2 (114 decimal = 72 hexadecimal), thereby masquerading as Novell DOS 7 / OpenDOS 7.01.[77]

While otherwise beneficial, the new HIFILES triggered a compatibility problem in the DOS-UP feature of the third-party memory manager QEMM 8, which was hard-wired to expect achunkof five handle structures in conventional memory under DR-DOS (as with previous versions up to 7.01), whereas version 7.02 by design left eight handles in low memory when loading high files in order to maintain full compatibility with older versions of Windows 3.xx.[71][23]Compatibility with Windows for Workgroups 3.11 had not been affected by this. A maintenance fix was devised to patch a single byte in IBMBIO.COM in order to switch the behaviour and optionally re-invoke the old chunking. This freed some 150 bytes of conventional memory and enabled full compatibility with DOS-UP, but at the same time broke compatibility with older versions of Windows 3.xx when using the HIFILES feature, and vice versa. The patch named IBMBIO85.SCR continued to work with newer versions of DR-DOS.[65][78][79][80]

In August 1998[81]the US-based Caldera, Inc. created two new subsidiaries,Caldera Systems,Inc. for theLinuxbusiness, andCaldera Thin Clients,Inc. for the embedded and thin-client market.[82]

Another version, DR-DOS 7.03 (still with BDOS 7.3 and reporting itself to applications as "PC DOS 6.0" for compatibility purposes), was pre-released at Christmas 1998 and then officially released on 6 January 1999 by Caldera UK. It came with significantly improved memory managers (in particular enhanced DPMI support in conjunction with the multitasker) and other enhancements, such as added DEVLOAD and DRMOUSE utilities, but a changedOEM labelin the boot sector of volumes formatted under DR-DOS could also cause problems under other operating systems (which can be circumvented by NOVOLTRK).[83][84]DR-DOS 7.03 would become the last version of DR-DOS also tailored for desktop use.

Caldera, Inc. wanted to relocate the DR-DOS business into the US and closed the highly successful UK operation[85][86]in February 1999[87]after Gross resigned and set up iCentrix to develop theMarioNet split web browser.Development was then moved into the US (which never worked out due to a total lack of expertise in this field at Caldera US),[87]and the DR-DOS line fell to its branch company, Caldera Thin Clients, which was renamedLineo,Inc. on 20 July 1999.[88][85]DR-WebSpyder was renamedEmbrowserand was said to be ported to Linux.[88]Lineo re-released DR-DOS 7.03 in June and September 1999, still branded as "Caldera DR-DOS"[89]and without any changes, but otherwise focussed on Linux for embedded systems, based on a stripped-down version of OpenLinux namedEmbedix.[88][85]

Among the latest and independently developed versions of DR-DOS were OEM DR-DOS 7.04 (as of 19 August 1999)[79]and 7.05 (as of 30 November 1999), still branded as "Caldera DR-DOS".[90][91]These were variants of the system consisting only of the kernel and command shell. With a specialized native implementation of FAT32 and large hard disk support they could be found bundled withOntrack'sEasy Recovery5 in 2000, replacing the dynamically loadable DRFAT32 redirector driver, which still came with Easy Recovery 4.[92][93]They were also used forSeagate Technology'sSeaTools[94]and the CD imaging softwareNero Burning ROM.While still reporting a BDOS 7.3 internally, these were the first versions to report themselves as "PC DOS 7.10" to applications in order to indicate integrated FAT32 support. Designed to be mostly backwards-compatible, the DR-DOS 7.04/7.05 IBMBIO.COM could be combined with the DR-DOS 7.03 IBMDOS.COM in order to give the desktop-approved DR-DOS 7.03 kernel LBA capabilities and work with drives larger than 8 GB. For specific OEM requirements, DR-DOS 7.06 (as of 14 December 1999)[80]by Wightman combined the kernel files into a single binary executable, so that, similar toIO.SYSofWindows 98,it could be booted by MS-DOS 7.10boot sectors(but no longer by DR-DOS boot sectors). DR-DOS 7.07 (with BDOS 7.4/7.7) by Paul introduced newbootstraploaders and updated disk tools in order to combine support forCHSand LBA disk access, theFAT12,FAT16and FAT32 file systems, and the differing bootstrapping conventions of DR-DOS, PC DOS, MS-DOS, Windows,REAL/32and LOADER into a singleNEWLDRMBRand boot sector, so that the code would continue to load any version of DR-DOS down to 3.31 (and since DR-DOS 7.04 also with FAT32 support), but could also be used to launch the PC DOS or MS-DOS system files, including those of Windows 9x and PC DOS 7.10. At the same time the kernel could not only be booted by the new sectors, but also by any previously DR-DOS formatted disks, as well as off disks with existing PC DOS or MS-DOS boot sectors and a variety of other boot-loaders, thereby easing the coexistence and setup ofmulti-bootscenarios in conjunction with other operating systems.

Later versions

edit

In 2002, Lineo was bought out, and some of Lineo's former managers purchased the name and formed a new company, DRDOS, Inc. dbaDeviceLogicsL.L.C. They have continued to sell DR-DOS for use in embedded systems. DR-DOS 8.0 was released on 30 March 2004 featuring FAT32 and large disk support, the ability to boot from ROM or Flash, multitasking and a DPMI memory manager. This version was based on the kernel from version 7.03.[95]

The company later released DR-DOS 8.1 (with better FAT32 support) in autumn 2005. This version was instead based on OpenDOS 7.01.xx. DR-DOS 8.1 was withdrawn for GPL violations (seeControversies).

Aside from selling copies of the operating system, the DRDOS, Inc. website lists a buyout option for DR-DOS; the asking price is US$25000.[96]

The OpenDOS 7.01 source code was a base forThe DR-DOS/OpenDOS Enhancement Project,set up in July 2002 in an attempt to bring the functionality of DR-DOS up to parity with modern PC non-Windows operating systems. The project's added native support for large disks (LBA) and theFAT32file system, and several other enhancements, including improved memory management and support for the newFAT32+file system extension which allows files of up to 256 GB in size on normalFATpartitions. DR-DOS 7.01.08 WIP (work in progress) was released on 21 July 2011.[97]

From 2023 on the last Enhanced DR-DOS release 7.01.08 WIP was ported to an open source build tool chain, which makes the kernel and command interpreter cross-buildable from operating systems other than DOS.[98]The kernel can be built as a single binaryKERNEL.SYSto make it compatible with boot loaders supporting the FreeDOS kernel. It received several bug fixes and updates and as of October 2024 is under active maintenance.

Controversies

edit

In October 2005, it was discovered that DR-DOS 8.1 included several utilities fromFreeDOSas well as other sources, and that the kernel was an outdated version of the Enhanced DR-DOS kernel. DR DOS, Inc. failed to comply with theGNU General Public License(GPL) by not crediting the FreeDOS utilities to their authors and including the source code.[95]After complaints from FreeDOS developers (including the suggestion to provide the source code, and hence comply with the GPL), DR DOS, Inc. instead withdrew version 8.1, and also the unaffected 8.0, from its website.

Commands

edit

APPEND, ASSIGN, BATCH, DBG, DELQ, ERA, ERAQ, MORE and SUBST have been among the internal commands supported since DR DOS 3.31. DR DOS 5.0 removed BATCH and added HILOAD.[99][34]GOSUB, IDLE, RETURN and SWITCH were added as internal commands with DR DOS 6.0.[34]ASSIGN and SUBST were changed to become external commands with DR DOS 6.0.[34]ECHOERR and PAUSEERR existed as internal commands in DR DOS 6.0 (and in Multiuser DOS), but were not normally enabled.[99]MORE remained an internal command up to including PalmDOS, but was changed to an external command with Novell DOS 7. DBG was removed with Novell DOS 7, LOADHIGH, LH andTRUENAMEwere added as internal commands. APPEND[citation needed]was still an internal command in DR DOS 6.0, but was changed to an external command with Novell DOS 7.

Internal commands

edit

The following list ofinternalcommandsis supported byDR DOS 6.0:[100][99]

Batch processing subcommands

edit

Batch processing subcommands ofDR DOS 6.0include:[100][99]

External commands

edit

DR DOS 6.0supports the following external commands:[100]

See also

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ^abcdefDigital Research Europe's OEM Support Group was opened inNewbury,Berkshire, UK (51°24′22″N1°19′35″W/ 51.40612°N 1.326374°W/51.40612; -1.326374(Digital Research (UK) Ltd., Oxford House, 12-20 Oxford Street, Newbury, Berkshire, UK)) in 1983. Relocated toHungerford,Berkshire, UK, in 1986, this facility became Digital Research's newly created European Development Centre (EDC), originally at Station Road (51°24′52″N1°30′47″W/ 51.414478°N 1.512946°W/51.414478; -1.512946(Digital Research (UK) Ltd., Station Road, Hungerford, Berkshire, UK)), but later moved to Charnham Park (51°25′13″N1°30′55″W/ 51.420339°N 1.515223°W/51.420339; -1.515223(Digital Research (UK) Ltd., Charnham Park, Hungerford, Berkshire, UK)). It became Novell's Digital Research Systems Group between 1991 and 1992 and was later merged into Novell's Desktop Systems Group (DSG). The facility was closed between 1994 and 1996. Caldera's new Digital Research Systems Group opened Caldera UK Ltd. inAndover,Hampshire, UK, in 1996. This was originally located at Winchester Street (51°12′19″N1°28′44″W/ 51.20531°N 1.478786°W/51.20531; -1.478786(Caldera UK Ltd., Aldwych House, Winchester Street, Andover, Hampshire, SP10 2EA, UK)), but soon moved into a converted barn in Upper Clatford at the periphery of Andover (51°11′18″N1°29′15″W/ 51.188306°N 1.487498°W/51.188306; -1.487498(Caldera UK Ltd., Norman Court Barns, Norman Court Lane, Upper Clatford, Andover, Hampshire, UK)). It closed in 1998.
  2. ^abcIn order to improve performance offile transfers,the internalCOPYcommand in some versions of COMMAND.COM since Novell DOS 7[66]has built-inNCOPYcapabilities, that is, it automatically detects if a file is to be copied locally on a remote NetWare orPersonal NetWarefile server and then will initiate a remote file transfer eliminating the need to send the file contents over the network.

References

edit
  1. ^"About DRDOS".DRDOS Embedded DOS.DRDOS, Inc.2013. Archived fromthe originalon 2018-06-03.Retrieved2015-01-18.
  2. ^The rest of the story: How Bill Gates beat Gary Kildall in OS war, Part 1 | ScobleShow: Videoblog about geeks, technology, and developers
  3. ^Borreson, Nan, ed. (March 1984)."PC-Mode bridges CP/M and PC-DOS".Digital Dialogue - Employee Newsletter of Digital Research Inc.3(1).Digital Research:3.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-09-10.Retrieved2017-09-10.[1]
  4. ^Borreson, Nan, ed. (May 1984)."Concurrent DOS bridges PC-DOS, CP/M".Digital Research News - for Digital Research Users Everywhere.4(2).Digital Research:3.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-09-10.Retrieved2017-09-10.Concurrent DOS Release 3.1is rapidly gaining momentum and support from a wide range of microcomputer manufacturers, "Wandryk said." Some 60 hardware companies have licensed the product since it was released in early March.[2]
  5. ^Burton, Robin (September 1989)."Chapter 7: DOS Plus: A short history".Written at Leicestershire, UK.Master 512 Technical Guide(First edition, first printing ed.). Prestwich, Manchester, UK:Dabs Press.ISBN1-870336-80-1.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-09-10.Retrieved2018-05-09.[3]
  6. ^abcWein, Josef "Joe" (2010-02-19) [November 2009]. Johnson, Herbert R. (ed.)."DRI History and Joe Wein".Archivedfrom the original on 2017-01-17.Retrieved2017-01-17.
  7. ^abcdefghijkl"Software Developer Caldera sues Microsoft for Antitrust practices alleges monopolistic acts shut its DR DOS operating system out of market".Caldera News.1996-07-24.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-06-24.Retrieved2017-06-24.
  8. ^Brown, David K.;Strutynski, Kathryn;Wharton, John Harrison(1983-05-14)."Tweaking more performance from an operating system - Hashing, caching, and memory blocking are just a few of the techniques used to punch up performance in the latest version of CP/M".System Design/Software.Computer Design - The Magazine of Computer Based Systems.Vol. 22, no. 6. Littleton, Massachusetts, USA:PennWell Publications/PennWell Publishing Company.pp.193–194, 196, 198, 200, 202, 204.ISSN0010-4566.OCLC1564597.CODENCMPDA.ark:/13960/t3hz07m4t.Retrieved2021-08-14.(7 pages) (NB. This source is aboutCP/M Plus,where some similar concepts were introduced into the DRI family of operating systems a couple of years earlier.)
  9. ^Ponting, Bob (1988-08-15)."Award Software plans to implement Digital Research's OS on ROM chip".InfoWorld.Retrieved2014-09-06.
  10. ^"EZ-DOS - Break the stranglehold on your PC".BYTE Magazine(Advertisement). Vol. 14, no. 5.McGraw-Hill.May 1989. pp.198,320C.ISSN0360-5280.ark:/13960/t88g9x33p.Retrieved2021-11-14.
  11. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2002-02-20)."How to detect FreeCOM/FreeDOS in-batch?".freedos-dev mailing list.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-11-06.Retrieved2014-08-06.
  12. ^ab"Kompatibles PC-Betriebssystem kann mehr als MS-DOS und PC-DOS - Digital Research stellt sich dem Monopolisten mit DR-DOS 5.0".Computerwoche(in German). IDG Business Media GmbH. 1990-07-06.Archivedfrom the original on 2019-07-25.Retrieved2019-07-26.
  13. ^abcdRosch, Winn L. (1991-02-12)."DR DOS 5.0 - The better operating system?".PC Magazine.Vol. 10, no. 3. pp. 241–246, 257, 264, 266.Archivedfrom the original on 2019-07-25.Retrieved2019-07-26.
  14. ^"Digital Research - We Make Computers Work".1992-11-13 [1990-08-13]. Serial Number 74087063.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-09-02.Retrieved2018-09-02.
  15. ^Elliott, John C. (2013)."ViewMAX/1 screenshots".Seasip.info.Archivedfrom the original on 2013-01-11.Retrieved2018-09-10.
  16. ^Elliott, John C. (2013)."ViewMAX/2 screenshots".Seasip.info.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-09-11.Retrieved2018-09-10.
  17. ^abDryfoos, Mike, ed. (1991-09-18) [1991-07-19]."MS-DOS 5.0 Development Post-Mortem Report"(PDF)(mail as court document).Microsoft.p. 10. MS-PCA1179169 (MS-PCA1179159-MS-PCA1179191). MS7020988 (MS7020978-MS7021010). Depo. Ex. 1109.Comes v MicrosoftPlaintiff's Exhibit 3473. CA.No.2:96CV645B Plaintiff's Exhibit 477.Archived(PDF)from the original on 2019-04-02.Retrieved2019-07-22.[…] One of the most important stimulanta for adding features was competitive pressure fromDRDOS 5.0,which we first learnt of in the spring of 1990. The DRDOS feature set led us to addUMBsupport, task swapping, and Undelete. […] Considerable amounts of the team's management attention was diverted to new features such as file transfer software, undelete and network installation […] Eventually this situation reached a crisis point at the end of July 1990, and, led byBradS,the team's management spent an arduous series of meetings nailing down a schedule and process for closing the project down […](1+32 pages)
  18. ^abcdSalemi, Leo (1991-11-12)."DR DOS 6.0 Leapfrogs MS-DOS 5.0 With Task-Switching in RAM".PC Magazine.First Looks. Vol. 10, no. 19. pp. 48, 50.Retrieved2019-07-28.
  19. ^OpenDOS Developer's Reference Series — OpenDOS Multitasking API Guide — Programmer's Guide.Caldera, Inc.August 1997. Caldera Part No. 200-DOMG-004. Archived fromthe originalon 2017-09-10.(Printed in the UK.)
  20. ^"The AARD Code".Archived fromthe originalon 2010-01-13.Retrieved2007-09-20.
  21. ^Meyer, Egbert (1998-08-27)."Microsoft: Vorgetäuschter Bug legte DR-DOS lahm".Heise Online(in German).Verlag Heinz Heise.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-07-14.Retrieved2018-07-14.[4]
  22. ^"DR DOS 6.0 does Windows 3.1".Computerworld.News Shorts. 1992-04-20. p. 6.Archivedfrom the original on 2019-07-22.Retrieved2019-07-22.
  23. ^abSchulman, Andrew;Brown, Ralf D.;Maxey, David; Michels, Raymond J.; Kyle, Jim (1994) [November 1993].Undocumented DOS: A programmer's guide to reserved MS-DOS functions and data structures - expanded to include MS-DOS 6, Novell DOS and Windows 3.1(2 ed.). Reading, Massachusetts:Addison Wesley.ISBN0-201-63287-X.(xviii+856+vi pages, 3.5-inch floppy) Errata:[5][6]
  24. ^Susman, Stephen Daily;Eskridge III, Charles R.;Southwick, James T.; Susman, Harry P.; Folse III, Parker C.; Palumbo, Ralph H.; Harris, Matthew R.; McCune, Philip S.; Engel, Lynn M.; Hill, Stephen J.; Tibbitts, Ryan E. (April 1999)."In the United States District Court - District of Utah, Central Division - Caldera, Inc. vs. Microsoft Corporation - Consolidated statement of facts in support of its responses to motions for summary judgement by Microsoft Corporation - Case No. 2:96CV 0645B"(Court document). Caldera, Inc.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-08-05.Retrieved2018-08-05.
  25. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2000-09-18)."25 years of DR DOS history - Digital Research DOS history".FreeDOS.org.Archived fromthe originalon 2016-11-25.Retrieved2013-10-05.See footnote #19 (BDOS 1067h "DR DOS 6.0Windows 3.1 update, April 1992 "; 1992-03, 1992-04-07:" This public DR DOS 6.0 update only includes patches addressing full Windows 3.1 compatibility. There should have been a full "business update" for registered users, shipping a little bit later. "), #27 (BDOS 1072h" Novell DOS 7 Panther/Smirnoff BETA 3 ", 1993-09:" This issue does not have workarounds for Windows 3.1 AARD code. "), #29 (BDOS 1072h" Novell DOS 7 German release "; 1994-02-22:" This issue is known to have workarounds for Windows 3.1 AARD code. This should also apply to the earlier English issue. ")
  26. ^Dr. Dobb's Journal investigation
  27. ^"Timeline of DOS/V versions"(in Japanese). 2014-11-28. Archived fromthe originalon 2017-01-18.Retrieved2017-01-16.
  28. ^Tam, Roy; Elliott, John C. (2014-01-12)."DR DOS 6.0/V".Archivedfrom the original on 2018-09-03.Retrieved2017-01-16.(NB. Has screenshots of aDBCS-enabled version ofViewMAX 2running on DR DOS 6.0/V and ahex dumpof the corresponding DRFONT databaseSCREENHZ.FNTfor its$FONT.SYS.)
  29. ^ab"Novell and Digital Research sign definitive merger agreement".Business Wire.1991-07-17.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-08-18.Retrieved2017-01-24.
  30. ^abScott, Karyl (1991-07-29)."Novell/DRI merger to reap better client management".InfoWorld:33.Retrieved2017-01-21.
  31. ^CW (1992-09-11)."Markt für Desktop-Betriebssysteme im Visier - Novell kündigt die ersten Low-end-Produkte mit dem Betiebssystem DR DOS 6.0 an".Computerwoche(in German). Munich, Germany:IDG Business Media GmbH.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-07-04.Retrieved2017-07-04.
  32. ^Paul, Matthias R. (1997-06-07) [April 1994]. "Chapter 1.3.xi: Überlange Pfade".NWDOS7UN.TXT — Zusammenfassung der dokumentierten und undokumentierten Fähigkeiten von Novell DOS 7.MPDOSTIP (in German).Archivedfrom the original on 2016-11-07.Retrieved2016-11-07.
  33. ^abcdefPaul, Matthias R. (1997-07-30) [1994-05-01].NWDOS-TIPs — Tips & Tricks rund um Novell DOS 7, mit Blick auf undokumentierte Details, Bugs und Workarounds.MPDOSTIP. Release 157 (in German) (3 ed.).Archivedfrom the original on 2017-09-10.Retrieved2014-08-06.(NB. NWDOSTIP.TXT is a comprehensive work on Novell DOS 7 and OpenDOS 7.01, including the description of many undocumented features and internals. It is part of the author's yet largerMPDOSTIP.ZIPcollection maintained up to 2001 and distributed on many sites at the time. The provided link points to a HTML-converted older version of theNWDOSTIP.TXTfile.)[7]
  34. ^abcdeBrothers, Hardin;Rawson, Tom;Conn, Rex C.;Paul, Matthias R.; Dye, Charles E.; Georgiev, Luchezar I. (2002-02-27).4DOS 8.00 online help.
  35. ^"US Patent 5355501 - Idle detection system".Archived fromthe originalon 2012-04-07.
  36. ^Hildebrand, J. D. (2011-12-19)."Novell v. Microsoft trial ends in hung jury".SD Times.Archived fromthe originalon 2012-05-15.Retrieved2012-03-02.
  37. ^"Novell DOS".PC Magazine.Archived fromthe originalon 2013-01-31.Retrieved2012-03-02.
  38. ^Allchin, James Edward(1992-05-27) [1991-07-17]."Novell/Digital Research reach definitive agreement…"(PDF)(Court document). Plaintiff's exhibit 828,Comes v. Microsoft.Archived(PDF)from the original on 2016-11-19.Retrieved2017-01-21.
  39. ^Fisher, Lawrence M. (1994-07-24)."The Executive Computer; Microsoft's Operating System Rivals Get a Boost, Sort Of".The New York Times.Retrieved2012-03-02.
  40. ^Anthony, Sebastian (2011-07-27)."MS-DOS is 30 years old today".ExtremeTech.Retrieved2012-03-02.
  41. ^Fisher, Lawrence M. (1995-09-18)."Novell Readies a Response to Windows".The New York Times.Retrieved2012-03-02.
  42. ^Fisher, Lawrence M. (1994-03-06)."The Executive Computer; Will Users Be the Big Losers in Software Patent Battles?".The New York Times.Retrieved2012-03-02.
  43. ^Sheesley, John (2008-04-09)."My DOS version can beat up your DOS version".TechRepublic.Archivedfrom the original on 2019-11-01.Retrieved2012-03-02.
  44. ^Perkel, Marc(1996-10-18) [1991-03-20, 1991-05-23, 1991-07-21, 1991-07-24, 1991-08-02]."Digital Research - The Untold Story".Archivedfrom the original on 2019-04-19.Retrieved2019-04-19.[8][9][10]
  45. ^Goodman, John M. (1994-05-02)."Novell ups the ante for DOS functionality - But long-awaited revamp of DR DOS is slightly unstable, and some utilities lack finish".InfoWorld:107–110.
  46. ^abcdSchneider, Stefanie (1994-06-17)."Das Ende von DOS ist nur noch eine Frage der Zeit"[The end of DOS is only a question of time].Computerwoche(in German). Munich, Germany:IDG Business Media GmbH.Archivedfrom the original on 2022-01-02.Retrieved2022-01-02.[…] Novells DOS 7 fuer viele die Nummer eins […] Novell-DOS 7 gilt bei vielen Fachleuten derzeit als bestes DOS. […]
  47. ^abc"Novell: Power-Marketing I - Dosis gegen den Marktfuehrer"[Novell: Power marketing I - dosis against the market leader].Absatzwirtschaft (ASW).Neue Marktauftritte (in German) (4): 8. 1994-04-01.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-09-02.Retrieved2018-09-02.
  48. ^abHill, Jürgen (1994-05-27)."Microsoft wird mehr Wind von vorne bekommen".Computerwoche(in German).Archivedfrom the original on 2018-09-02.Retrieved2018-09-02.
  49. ^abcBall, Lyle;Pomeroy, Nancy, eds. (1996-09-10)."Caldera announces open source code model for DOS - DR DOS + the Internet = Caldera OpenDOS".Provo, UT, USA:Caldera, Inc.Archived fromthe originalon 1996-10-18.Retrieved2019-07-14.Caldera […] will openly distribute the source code for DOS via the Internet as part of the company's plans to encourage continued development of DOS technologies and applications, further leveling the playing field for software developers worldwide. This effort, targeted to benefit both individual developers and industry partners, follows Caldera's commitment to embrace and fund an open software environment. Caldera also announced plans for internal development and marketing of DOS, including a new product called Caldera OpenDOS. […] Caldera plans to openly distribute the source code for all of the DOS technologies it acquired from Novell […] including CP/M, DR DOS, PalmDOS, Multi-User DOS and Novell DOS 7. Pending an evaluation and organization of the […] technologies, the source code will be made available from Caldera's web site during Q1 1997 […] Individuals can use OpenDOS source for personal use at no cost. Individuals and organizations desiring to commercially redistribute Caldera OpenDOS must acquire a license with an associated small fee. Source code for proprietary third-party components of Novell DOS 7 will not be published. […]
  50. ^abSusman, Stephen Daily;Eskridge III, Charles R.;Susman, Harry P.; Southwick, James T.; Folse III, Parker C.; Borchers, Timothy K.; Palumbo, Ralph H.; Harris, Matthew R.; Engel, Lynn M.; McCune, Philip S.; Locker, Lawrence C.; Wheeler, Max D.; Hill, Stephen J.; Tibbitts, Ryan E. (May 1999)."In the United States District Court - District of Utah, Central Division - Caldera, Inc. vs. Microsoft Corporation - Case No. 2:96CV 0645B - Caldera, Inc.'s Memorandum in opposition to defendant's motion for partial Summary Judgment on plaintiff's" Technological Tying "claim"(Court document).Caldera, Inc.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-08-05.Retrieved2018-08-05.
  51. ^Lea, Graham(2000-01-13)."Caldera vs Microsoft - the settlement".BBC News.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-06-24 – via bbc.co.uk.
  52. ^abGomes, Lee (2000-01-11)."Microsoft Will Pay $275 Million To Settle Lawsuit From Caldera".The Wall Street Journal.Archivedfrom the original on 2016-12-31.Retrieved2019-11-24.Microsoft Corp.agreed to pay an estimated $275 million to settle an antitrust lawsuit byCaldera Inc.,heading off a trial that was likely to air nasty allegations from a decade ago. […] Microsoft and Caldera, a small Salt Lake City software company that brought the suit in 1996, didn't disclose terms of the settlement. Microsoft, though, said it would take a charge of three cents a share for the agreement in the fiscal third quarter ending March 31 […] the company has roughly 5.5 billion shares outstanding […]
  53. ^"Exhibits to Microsoft's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment in Novell WordPerfect Case".Groklaw.2009-11-23.Archivedfrom the original on 2013-08-21.Retrieved2011-10-22.[…] exhibits attached to Microsoft's Memorandum of Law in support of Microsoft's cross motion for summary judgment in the Novell v. Microsoft antitrust litigation. We finally find out what Microsoft paidCalderato settle the DrDOS litigation back in 2000: $280 million. We even get to read the settlement agreement. It's attached as an exhibit. […] The settlement terms were sealed for all these years, but […] now that mystery is solved. […] We also find out what Caldera/Canopythen paid Novell from that $280 million: $35.5 million at first, and then after Novell successfully sued Canopy in 2004, Caldera's successor-in-interest on this matter, an additional $17.7 million, according to page 16 of the Memorandum. Microsoft claims that Novell is not the real party in interest in this antitrust case, and so it can't sue Microsoft for the claims it has lodged against it, because, Microsoft says, Novell sold its antitrust claims to Caldera when it sold it DrDOS. So the exhibits are trying to demonstrate that Novell got paid in full, so to speak, via that earlier litigation. As a result, we get to read a number of documents from the Novell v. Canopy litigation. Novell responds it retained its antitrust claims in the applications market. […]
  54. ^Wallis, Richard J.; Aeschbacher, Steven J.; Bettilyon, Mark M.; Webb, Jr., G. Stewar; Tulchin, David B.; Holley, Steven L. (2009-11-13)."Microsoft's memorandum in opposition to Novell's renewed motion for summary judgement on Microsoft's affirmative defenses and in support of Microsoft's cross-motion for summary judgement"(PDF)(Court document). United States District Court, District of Maryland. p. 16. Novell, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, Civil Action No. JFM-05-1087.Archived(PDF)from the original on 2019-05-24.Retrieved2018-08-03.[…] Microsoft paid $280 million toCalderato settle the case, and $35.5 million of the settlement proceeds were provided by Caldera to Novell as a so-called "royalty." […] Dissatisfied with that amount, Novell filed suit in June 2000 against Caldera (succeeded byThe Canopy Group), alleging that Novell was entitled to even more. […] Novell ultimately prevailed, adding $17.7 million to its share of the monies paid by Microsoft to Caldera, for a total of more than $53 million […]
  55. ^Burt, Thomas W.;Sparks, Bryan Wayne(2000-01-07)."Settlement agreement - Microsoft Corporation and Caldera, Inc. reach agreement to settle antitrust lawsuit"(PDF)(Faxed court document). Case 1:05-cv-01087-JFM, Document 104-8, Filed 2009-11-13; NOV00107061-NOV00107071; LT2288-LT2298; Lan12S311263739.1; Exhibit A.Archived(PDF)from the original on 2017-07-04.Retrieved2018-08-03.[…] Microsoft will pay toCaldera,by wire transfer in accordance with written instructions provided by Caldera, the amount of two hundred eighty million dollars ($280,000,000), as full settlement of all claims or potential claims covered by this agreement […](NB. This document of theCaldera v. Microsoftcase was an exhibit in theNovell v. MicrosoftandComes v. Microsoftcases.)
  56. ^"Basic information about company" Caldera (UK) Limited "".Company Data Rex. 2001-07-01. Company Number 03252883. Archived fromthe originalon 2017-06-24.Retrieved2017-06-24.
  57. ^abLea, Graham(1998-03-23)."Cebit: Caldera shows Windows on DR-DOS, denying MS claims".CeBITnews. Hanover, Germany. Archived fromthe originalon 2017-06-24.Retrieved2009-06-01.
  58. ^abLea, Graham(1998-09-28)."Caldera's DR gets OnSatellite of love - Service to offer voice, email and smartie cards".The Register.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-08-22.Retrieved2018-02-13.
  59. ^abSchulman, Andrew (2000-02-07)."The Caldera v. Microsoft Dossier".O'Reilly Network.O'Reilly and Associates, Inc.Archived fromthe originalon 2000-08-19.
  60. ^Romano, Mike (1998-09-17) [1998-09-16]."The mouse that roared. Forget the feds. It's up to an obscure Utah company to prove what we already know: that Microsoft is a monopoly".Seattle Weekly.Archived fromthe originalon 2017-06-24.Retrieved2017-06-24.Furthermore, Caldera claims that Microsoft's flagship product,Windows 95,is nothing more than an "artificial tie"between its MS-DOS operating system andWindowsgraphic interface with no business justification other than to keep competing underlying operating systems—like Caldera's DR-DOS—off the market. To prove its point, Caldera will soon release a piece of demonstration software called "WinBolt,"which, it says, will allow users to install the Windows 95 interface atop DR-DOS. The demo will show, Caldera says, that there is no significant technological advancement, or justified business efficiency, to the combination of MS-DOS with Windows in Windows 95.[11]
  61. ^Schulman, Andrew (2000-03-02)."Undoc".Undoc.Archived fromthe originalon 2000-08-16.
  62. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2002-07-25)."Will Windows 3.1 work with DR-DOS 7.03?".Newsgroup:alt.os.free-dos.Retrieved2018-05-09.[…] DR-DOS 7.03 is compatible with Windows andWindows for Workgroupsup to 3.xx (and internal versions of DR-DOS even with Windows 4.xx aka Windows 95/98/SE[…]
  63. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2002-04-10)."[fd-dev] HMA access from TSR".freedos-dev.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-09-09.Retrieved2017-09-09.[…]MS-DOS 7.0+ […] introduced a […] for the most part undocumented RMD data structure usually located in theHMA.The kernel collects and records configuration and Real Mode Driver data during boot (type of driver, interrupts hooked by driver,CONFIG.SYSline of invocation, etc.) and stores this information in a […] complicated […] growing data structure. Presumably […] meant to be used by the Windows core to get a better picture of the loaded Real Mode drivers […] or even attempt to unhook or unload some of them, […] it is only used to a very limited extent ([…] some of the info reflected in the log files created on […] startup, and some parts of the […] configuration manager also make use of it), […] leaving room […] beyond the technical side […] because nothing of the interesting stuff is documented […]
  64. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2002-08-13)."Suche freien Speicherbereich unterhalb von 1 MB, der nicht von OS überschrieben wird"(in German).Newsgroup:de p.lang.assembler.x86.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-09-04.Retrieved2017-09-03.
  65. ^abcdefghijklmnopqPaul, Matthias R. (1997-10-02)."Caldera OpenDOS 7.01/7.02 Update Alpha 3 IBMBIO.COM README.TXT".Archived fromthe originalon 2003-10-04.Retrieved2009-03-29.[12]
  66. ^ab"Caldera OpenDOS Machine Readable Source Kit (M.R.S) 7.01".Caldera, Inc. 1997-05-01.Archivedfrom the original on 2021-08-07.Retrieved2022-01-02.[13]
  67. ^"The Doctor Is Back!".Caldera. February 1998. Archived fromthe originalon 1998-02-05.
  68. ^abRalf D. Brown.Ralf Brown's Interrupt List,INTER61 as of 2000-07-16 ([14]), entry for DR-DOS version check under INT 21h/AH=4452h.
  69. ^abcdefgPaul, Matthias R. (2004-06-17)."Re: Random Lockups with DR-DOS 7.03".opendos@delorie;FidoNetconference: ALT_DOS.Archived fromthe originalon 2019-04-28.Retrieved2019-04-28.[15][16]
  70. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2004-06-17)."Re: Random Lockups with DR-DOS 7.03".opendos@delorie; FidoNet conference: ALT_DOS.Archived fromthe originalon 2019-04-28.Retrieved2019-04-28.[17][18]
  71. ^abcdefgPaul, Matthias R. (2000-11-22)."Optimizing CONFIG.SYS…".opendos@delorie.Archivedfrom the original on 2019-05-06.Retrieved2019-05-06.
  72. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2004-06-17)."Re: Random Lockups with DR-DOS 7.03".opendos@delorie;FidoNetconference: ALT_DOS.Archived fromthe originalon 2019-04-28.Retrieved2019-04-28.[19][20]
  73. ^abPaul, Matthias R. (2000-01-11)."Possible DR-DOS enhancements".delorie /opendos.Archivedfrom the original on 2019-04-20.Retrieved2019-04-20.
  74. ^abcdePaul, Matthias R. (2001-06-10) [1995]."DOS COUNTRY.SYS file format"(COUNTRY.LST file) (1.44 ed.).Archivedfrom the original on 2016-04-20.Retrieved2016-08-20.
  75. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2001-06-10) [1995]."Format description of DOS, OS/2, and Windows NT.CPI, and Linux.CP files"(CPI.LST file) (1.30 ed.).Archivedfrom the original on 2016-04-20.Retrieved2016-08-20.
  76. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2001-06-10) [1995]."Overview on DOS, OS/2, and Windows codepages"(CODEPAGE.LST file) (1.59 preliminary ed.).Archivedfrom the original on 2016-04-20.Retrieved2016-08-20.
  77. ^abcdeDR-DOS 7.03 WHATSNEW.TXT - Changes from DR-DOS 7.02 to DR-DOS 7.03.Caldera, Inc. 1998-12-24. Archived fromthe originalon 2019-04-08.Retrieved2019-04-08.(NB. The file states these changes were introduced with DR-DOS 7.03, however, many of them became actually available with updated 7.02 revisions already.)
  78. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2001-11-05)."QEMM OPTIMIZE and DR-DOS".OpenDOS.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-05-11.Retrieved2018-05-11.[…] FILES+FCBS […] are now grouped in 3 chunks while they were arranged in 2 chunks previously […]QEMM's DOS-UP feature does not expect this […] This results in ca. 1 Kb less conventional memory than the theoretical possible maximum under QEMM […] I once wrote a patch (a DEBUG script named IBMBIO85.SCR […]) […] which will reenable the old handle memory layout. This will free even more conventional memory under DR-DOS, but causes serious compatibility problems with Windows 3.xx when theFILESHIGH=,FCBSHIGH=,orDOS=AUTO directives are used […] because it will leave only 5 handles in low memory in contrast to the 8 handles that are required for Windows to work properly due to an extremely dangerous hack on Microsoft's side to determine the size of the […] SFT structures (this is known as "CON CON CON CON CON" hack, because Windows opens CON five times and […] scans the first 512 Kb of memory for the "CON" string to measure the displacement […] something that could be easily fooled by just placing some "CON" strings in the […] memory image with incorrect offsets from each other […]
  79. ^abPaul, Matthias R. (2001-11-28) [1997]."QEMM 8.xx and Linux".1.06.Newsgroup:comp.os.msdos.desqview.Retrieved2018-05-11.[…] DR-DOS 7.04/7.05 (1999-08-19) […] -->
  80. ^abPaul, Matthias R. (2003-01-06) [2003-01-04, 1997]."drdos + qemm = problems".1.08.Newsgroup:comp.os.msdos.misc.Retrieved2018-05-11.[…] DR-DOS 7.06 up to 1999-12-14 […] -->
  81. ^Jones, Pamela(2004-02-29)."Caldera, Inc./Caldera Systems, Inc. 1998 Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement".Groklaw.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-06-25.Retrieved2017-05-25.
  82. ^Caldera(1998-09-02)."Caldera Creates Two Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries"(Press-release).PRNewswire.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-06-24.Retrieved2017-06-24.
  83. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2002-02-20)."Need DOS 6.22 (Not OEM)".Newsgroup:alt.msdos.programmer.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-09-09.Retrieved2006-10-14.
  84. ^Paul, Matthias R. (2004-08-25)."NOVOLTRK.REG".drdos.org.Archived fromthe originalon 2016-03-04.Retrieved2011-12-17.[21]
  85. ^abcBall, Lyle(1999-10-01) [1999-08-04]. Richardson, Marjorie "Margie" (ed.)."Interview: Lyle Ball, Lineo".Linux Journal.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-12-13.Retrieved2019-06-01.[…] We […] have very deep experience with embedding DR DOS, and we've been making millions from that. So we are in a unique position: we are not a startup and we have funding. Our DOS product paid for all ourR&Don embeddedLinux.[…] we are […] evolving our focus from an embedded DOS-only company to anembedded Linuxcompany. […] We are not killing our DOS product immediately; […] the market is not killing our DOS product. There is still a high demand for embedded DOS, and we will continue to sell and market it. However, there has been an increasing demand for embedded Linux. So we are shifting our focus and renaming the company to match our longer-term revenue stream, which will be Linux-based […] as the market has requested us to do […] We will keep selling both technologies during the transition. […] we spoke to our OEM companies—not just in the U.S., but around Europe and Asia—they were interested in our DOS solution and they would […] like to switch to Linux […]
  86. ^Collins, Lois M.; Nii, Jenifer (2000-01-16)."Settlement fuels Caldera 'family' - Orem company is 'settling up' with spinoffs thriving".Deseret News.Archivedfrom the original on 2019-11-30.Retrieved2019-11-30.
  87. ^abLea, Graham(1999-04-27)."Caldera closes UK thin client development unit - Development being moved over to Utah".The Register.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-06-25.Retrieved2017-06-24.
  88. ^abcCaldera, Inc.(1999-07-20)."Embedded Linux moved to top priority at Lineo, Inc. formerly known as Caldera Thin Clients, Inc."(press-release).Archivedfrom the original on 2017-06-25.Retrieved2017-06-24.
  89. ^"Archived copy".Archived fromthe originalon 2016-11-25.Retrieved2008-08-02.{{cite web}}:CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  90. ^http://drdos.moriy /files/autoexec.gif[permanent dead link‍]
  91. ^http://drdos.moriy /files/configsys.gif[permanent dead link‍]
  92. ^Diedrich, Oliver; Rabanus, Christian (2000-03-11)."Notaufnahme - Alle Daten futsch - was nun?".c't - magazin für computertechnik(in German).2000(6).Heise Verlag:106+.Archivedfrom the original on 2018-05-13.Retrieved2018-05-13.
  93. ^"EasyRecovery - Sophisticated Data Recovery".Ontrack Data International, Inc.1999. Archived fromthe originalon 2018-08-26.Retrieved2018-08-26.[22]
  94. ^"FREE SOFTWARE FOR DOS — Operating Systems".Archived fromthe originalon 2009-11-04.Retrieved2009-09-08.
  95. ^ab"Archived copy".Archived fromthe originalon 2010-06-26.Retrieved2008-06-14.{{cite web}}:CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  96. ^"DR DOS Buy Out".DRDOS Embedded DOS.DRDOS, Inc.2013. Archived fromthe originalon 2018-06-03.
  97. ^Welcome to the DR-DOS/OpenDOS Enhancement Project!
  98. ^"Enhanced DR-DOS kernel and command interpreter".Retrieved2024-10-04.
  99. ^abcdefghijklmnoPaul, Matthias R. (1997-04-13) [1993-12-01].Zusammenfassung der dokumentierten und undokumentierten Fähigkeiten von DR DOS 6.0[Summary of documented and undocumented features of DR DOS 6.0]. MPDOSTIP. Release 60 (in German).Archivedfrom the original on 2018-10-11.Retrieved2019-08-14.[23]
  100. ^abcDR DOS 6.0 User Guide Optimisation and Configuration Tips(PDF)(3 ed.).Digital Research, Inc.February 1992. 10005695 0045-5424. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2019-09-30.Retrieved2019-08-14.(NB. Licensed fromNovelltoAcorn.)

Further reading

edit
edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DR-DOS&oldid=1250250626#5.0"