Crazy stuff man! crazy...

Posted Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:03 PM
Posted Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:42 PM
Posted Wed Feb 28, 2007 10:45 PM
Posted Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:18 PM
Posted Thu Mar 1, 2007 9:14 PM
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 12:36 AM
Edited by Gunstar, Fri Mar 2, 2007 12:42 AM.
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 5:56 AM
... Never mind looking, here's the image:
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 9:58 AM
Right.. I'm not saying DOS 3 was good. I did in fact have to use it for some time before learning about DOS 2.x.. It was the only DOS that came with the 1050 for a window of time.
There were also a bug fixed version that was released. I remember there being some white card included with DOS 3 that said to check certain memory locations to see if you had some bugs.
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 2:25 PM
Sorry, my computer crashed while attempting to zip and upload an image last night, and I forgot all about this post by the time I got it straightened out. I didn't even think the post edit went through...I'll get it up soon (the image)
... Never mind looking, here's the image:
Where?
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 3:05 PM
Does anyone know of the history of DOS 3? I'm curious about how such a thing came into being and later how it was addressed with DOS 2.5. DOS XE might even be good history.. although I just don't know why they didn't modify 2.0D.
Crazy stuff man! crazy...
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 4:14 PM
... Never mind looking, here's the image:
Where?
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 6:00 PM
Then others like 2.6f which I always personally loved.
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 7:07 PM
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 7:57 PM
I got a 1050 w/DOS 3 and began writing a new game in basic for it. I got far enough along when I realized DOS 3 was a POS - I then found out I couldnt transfer any of my work to a DOS 2.0 disk and therefore abandoned my project
Wish I could find the disk though - it was a neat adventure I was working on
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 9:37 PM
Nobody ever ended up using 130K disks, unless you specifically made them for yourself and transfered 2.0 files to 3.0.
Posted Fri Mar 2, 2007 11:16 PM
Nobody ever ended up using 130K disks, unless you specifically made them for yourself and transfered 2.0 files to 3.0.
I used a lot of 130K disks, once I got hold of DOS 2.5. I was *poor*, so I couldn't just throw away a third of the storage on each disk... I even wrote a utility that turned off the "uses extended sectors" bit in the directory, so my 130K DOS 2.5 disks would work with Fenders 3-sector game loader, and SpartaDOS/MyDOS could read the files in the extra sectors (the versions I had normally couldn't read the files with <> around them in DOS 2.5).
Edited by Gunstar, Fri Mar 2, 2007 11:33 PM.
Posted Sat Mar 3, 2007 9:36 AM
Does anyone remember the "extended DOS 2" from Bill Wilkinson's "Insight:Atari" column, in Compute? He rewrote parts of DOS 2.0S so it would work with the 1050 and actually use 1050 enhanced density, and published it as a set of patches (probably BASIC DATA statements and a loader). Did anyone ever actually use this DOS? I remember wanting to, but it was a set of patches to DOS 2.0S, which I didn't have... by the time I found a copy of 2.0S, Atari had already released 2.5, and I already had a copy of it.
Posted Sun Mar 4, 2007 4:27 PM
Edited by kheller2, Sun Mar 4, 2007 9:56 PM.
Posted Thu Mar 8, 2007 11:27 PM
Posted Wed Apr 12, 2017 11:44 PM
I have some emails I'll dig up and share shortly...
There were actually two iterations of DOS 3, one internally that the engineers were working on and the marketing version that went out the door.
There was DOS 2.0D
Then others like 2.6f which I always personally loved.
OSS had actually written DOS XL for Atari, but Atari choose not to go with it and OSS brought it out itself, you could technically consider that DOS 3.0 in a sense.
QDOS or Dos 4.0 meant for the 1450XLD is yet another DOS which didn't exactly make it out, interestingly enough it was brought out through ANTIC's Disk subscription, curiously enough "Lizard" is another program done internally within Atari which was a phenomenal terminal program with multi device support and multimodes was later brought out also through ANTIC and called Chameleon.
DOS 2.5 was a great stopgap DOS and one of the nicer improvements to the DOS line, though still not up to the same level's of MYDOS or others.
DOS XE was very well done, some really good effort was put into one of the remaing Atari released products for the 8bits.
Curt
I've been waiting a long time for e-mails.... snail mail is taking on a new meaning
Posted Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:49 AM
A Few things to say about DOS 3, as I've studied it about as much as one can by disassembling it:
* The OS was obviously meant for much larger capacity disks that never materialized. The bitmap based file allocation tables and 8 allocation unit minimum size for a file seems to indicate this. It was just never extended beyond the 1050, although it looks like there are data structures in DOS 3 to do just this.
* The OS was written by Bill Wilkinson of OSS, just as was done with DOS 1, DOS 2.0S, 2.0D, 2.5, and ADOS (DOS XE).
* The file allocation system that DOS 3 had, would it have been tweaked a bit better, is actually miles better than the original Atari DOS filesystem as was handed on spec to Shepardson Microsystems by Atari, as it didn't rely on wasting bytes at the end of a sector for a linked list, but had something very much like FAT.
-Thom
Posted Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:53 AM
Also I find almost _NOBODY_ talking about OSS OS/A+ 4.1, AT ALL... which is very troubling, as it was also a very good DOS. It utilized a port of the Apple DOS 3.3 filesystem to the Atari, which gave very large filenames (with spaces), and explicit file types...not to mention a filesystem that would have handled the Atari's maximum sector size in CIO (65535 sectors) quite nicely.
-Thom
Posted Thu Apr 13, 2017 7:40 AM
Dos 3 came with my 1050, so it was the first DOS I ever used. I thought it had a nice menu system. Then going back to DOS 2.x's interface after being used to 3 was jarring to say the least! Main reason I had to was that 2.x was compatible with everything and 3 wasn't.
Posted Thu Apr 13, 2017 9:22 AM
* The OS was written by Bill Wilkinson of OSS, just as was done with DOS 1, DOS 2.0S, 2.0D, 2.5, and ADOS (DOS XE).
DOS 1.0 & 2.0S were written by Paul Laughton. DOS 2.5 was just a modified version of 2.0S, so Laughton essentially wrote much of it.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users