News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by burade on Friday December 04, 2020 @10:53PM (#25311571)
It's still pointless because no MS-DOS system will be alive in 2107.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by userbinator on Friday December 04, 2020 @11:06PM (#25311646)
"Wanna bet...?"

I wouldn't be surprised at all if there were some original embedded systems still running machinery and the like in a century from now, catastrophic events notwithstanding. The sort of low-power embedded systems likely to be running DOS don't really experience any wear. There's quite a bit of equipment in the "low-level" manufacturing industry which is around a century old, and has basically been in continuous operation since it was installed.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by kevin_thibedeau on Saturday December 05, 2020 @01:20AM (#25312288)
Their capacitors will die. In the power supply this could destroy unobtanium parts.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by yjftsjthsd-h on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:36AM (#25312642)
Capacitors are replaceable, and in fact the process of replacing them is already a routine operation in the retrocomputing community.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by Iv on Saturday December 05, 2020 @01:25AM (#25312310)
I don't think any hardware running MS-DOS will survive that long.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by flomo on Saturday December 05, 2020 @01:38AM (#25312367)
Modern x86 PCs still can boot DOS, no? (If not, sounds like a bug.)

The bigger issue would be ISA control cards and the like. A HN user recently posted a link of "new" ISA boards for sale, but the latest CPU support was Pentium 4 (about 20 years ago).

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by userbinator on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:05AM (#25312492)
but the latest CPU support was Pentium 4

No, you can find plenty of ones that will hold a recent i7:

https://www.dfi.com/product/index/1502

https://ipc.msi.com/product_detail/Industrial-Motherboard/AT...

http://ibase-usa.com/english/ProductDetail/EmbeddedComputing...

(I wish they would make "ultimate" mobos with all the interfaces in between too --- I mean if ISA with a Coffee Lake CPU is possible, how about a pair of IDEs, floppies, and parallel ports too...)

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by xxpor on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:30AM (#25314771)
A board with ISA, Extended ISA, PCI, AGP, PCI-X and PCIe would be fun.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by exikyut on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:44AM (#25314871)
Are there PCI IDE+floppy+parallel(+serial+joystick+PS/2+etc) controllers out there that are bug-for-bug indiscernible from the controllers mounted on motherboards?
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by flomo on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:16AM (#25314695)
Good to know - thanks.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by Iv on Saturday December 05, 2020 @01:45AM (#25312392)
I am not even sure of that. Booting DOS requires a legacy BIOS mode and some legacy video modes that I am not sure manufacturers support anymore.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by djxfade on Saturday December 05, 2020 @05:59AM (#25313559)
I think most (if not all) modern PCI-E GPUs still supports this. If I am not mistaken, this is what is preventing them from working on ARM right now (Raspberry PI 4, Apple M1, etc.), because the driver expect specific BIOS features
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by exikyut on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:47AM (#25314902)
Aaaand that's why X11 has an x86 (v86) emulator in it, so Suns (circa late 90s/early 2000s) could use PC-focused graphics cards with BIOSes containg x86 initialization code.

._.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by tjoff on Saturday December 05, 2020 @04:55AM (#25313216)
USB to ISA adapters do exist. I'm sure there are compatibility edge-cases but not sure a P4 would be perfectly safe from that either.

http://arstech.com/install/ecom-prodshow/usb2isa.html

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by voxadam on Saturday December 05, 2020 @07:22AM (#25314012)
The problem with such adapters is that being USB based they're timing is far from deterministic. One very common use case for ISA based interfaces is industrial automation where realtime determinism is very common requirement.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by beagle3 on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:04AM (#25314626)
Doesn’t usb support isochronous scheduling? It did for v1.0
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by msla on Saturday December 05, 2020 @03:20AM (#25312804)
> Modern x86 PCs still can boot DOS, no?

Even if you assume it can boot DOS, it doesn't mean it can run DOS. No DOS has drivers for a lot of modern hardware, and they're never going to be written.

> (If not, sounds like a bug.)

BIOS is buggy? Say it ain't so! Say! It! Ain't! So!

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by jlgaddis on Saturday December 05, 2020 @08:20AM (#25314336)
My ~4-year-old workstation -- with a pair of 8C/16T Xeons, 128 GB of RAM, and NVMe storage in a PCIe slot (not to mention everything else) -- boots into and runs FreeDOS just fine.

Additionally, over the last several years, I've used it on probably a dozen or more different "makes and models" of enterprise server hardware to update firmware (BIOS/HBA/NIC/SSD) and can't recall experiencing any major issues while doing so (fortunately, more and more of these bootable firmware update utilities are now Linux-based!).

That's with FreeDOS 1.0, by the way. A quick check shows that it was released in 2006, making it a fair bit older than the servers I most recently used it on. For what it's worth, FreeDOS 1.2 was released four years ago and the third release candidate of 1.3 was just released this past summer. It seems that FreeDOS, at 26, is still alive and, in fact, doing quite well!

To be clear, I've not actually attempted to boot any of the other DOS systems in, well, quite a long time -- at least 10 years for MS-DOS and likely 20 years or more for DR-DOS and PC-DOS -- as I haven't had any reason to. FreeDOS has been a superior replacement since before the turn of the century.

In my case, FreeDOS is booted via (i)PXE and the "hard disk" (image), which contains the various firmware images, utilities, etc., is downloaded via HTTP and loaded as a ramdisk. In those rare instances when it's actually been needed, it is just so absolutely useful.

Honestly, I'd be a bit surprised if MS-DOS (a.k.a. PC-DOS) did not (for the most part) also "just work"(TM) ...

... and, now that I've said that, I'm fairly confident that MS-DOS 5.0 (1991, IIRC?) is also available on the netboot server. I can't confirm that at the moment but (assuming it is) now I'm quite curious so I'll try to remember to try booting my workstation into it the next time I happen to restart it.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by bonzini on Saturday December 05, 2020 @03:51AM (#25312921)
Just virtualize it or even emulate x86 on ARM. You can even emulate an ISA bus over GPIO.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by jbay808 on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:48AM (#25312694)
I wonder how many transit systems worldwide are running on DOS right now?
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by Frenchgeek on Saturday December 05, 2020 @10:29AM (#25315226)
Or in the industrial sector: Milling machines running Windows 95/98 (fun times getting it to talk with windows 10 on the network) or working with floppies are still around: Those beasts are too expensive to not run until dead.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by Iv on Saturday December 05, 2020 @05:25AM (#25313368)
And will for 80 more years?
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by jbay808 on Saturday December 05, 2020 @06:35AM (#25313756)
Ah, yeah the hardware probably won't still be running in 2107, but will be running in 2040.

Of course, if New York's subway controls are anything to go by, 2107 is pretty reasonable.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by imhoguy on Saturday December 05, 2020 @03:25AM (#25312826)
I guess some said same about buildings and bridges centuries ago.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by epx on Friday December 04, 2020 @11:32PM (#25311772)
Once a guy told me that MS-DOS would be alive in 2000, I laughed at him. It was 1994 or so. Worked in DOS-based systems (running on Windows machines, at least) until 2005, had to find a job cross-country, and tell "no" firmly a number of times, to finally get rid of them and force the clients to move on.

Clipper/xBase systems that do their job is one niche of MS-DOS apps that refuse to die. Another niche I know of, is gambling machines (one-armed bandits), for some reason people kept using DOS (at least they moved to FreeDOS by early 2000s).

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by pjmlp on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:54AM (#25312722)
As someone that wrote Clipper applications during the early 90's, there are few systems that can match its elegance for CRUD driven applications.

Doing DB operations is relatively simple, formdata entry and validation is super easy, supports modules, OOP and even compiles to native code.

Yeah not good for networked operations, but in many mom and pop shops it isn't needed anyway.

Even VB/Delphi for all their RAD capabilities were already much more complex than Clipper, but they messed up their migration into the GUI world and CA Visual Objects was too complex for the Clipper crowd.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by neverartful on Saturday December 05, 2020 @08:41AM (#25314485)
Spot on with Clipper. I used it to write software for a mom and pop shop and it worked fantastic until I started running out of memory. We transitioned from DOS/Clipper to OS/2 with VX-REXX at that point. VX-REXX was also equally impressive.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by watermelon59 on Saturday December 05, 2020 @03:23AM (#25312819)
Do you think Clipper/xBase is a niche one could get into at this point in history? Or is that market already fully taken by old timers?
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by exikyut on Saturday December 05, 2020 @10:12AM (#25315090)
In all honesty my two responses would be COBOL and simplicity-focused PHP/HTML5/{SQLite/MySQL}.

COBOL/FORTRAN/Prolog/etc type applications are out there, apparently, and if you're in the right place at the right time you can entrench reasonably effectively, at least short term.

However, these types of jobs also have their own unique pain points. This recent article (they surface reasonably frequently on here), and the comments, make for good reading: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25148840

As for PHP+et al, I recommend these for their overall simplicity, relatively low learning curve, and ability to scale "well enough", for above-average values of "well enough". PHP itself isn't the most ideally designed language, but it can actually get things done. Furthermore, its reputation as a "simple" or "stupid" language, like eg VB6, can also serve to catalyze the upper bound of expected complexity of a particular solution. This has the downside of maybe a bit of isolation from truly interesting challenges, but allows for a slower/relaxed and perhaps more maintainable pace. (And there's nothing stopping you building something Facebook-sized if you needed to.)

On the client side, HTML5 is expansive and... very backward compatible with how things have been done for the past 20 years. Elitist forum commentators may make snooty noises about your use of tables, but Chrome won't. JavaScript could be a harder language to reason about, especially for simple enhancements like fetching bits of data which won't require learning pages of theory first.

Finally, my recommendation to focus on the Web is that, well, once you grumble and context-switch to "ugh, fine, HTML+JS", everything else can roll in incrementally as you go along.

With something stuck in the 80s/90s, sure, you guarantee that you're completely isolated from the firehose... at the cost of being objectively less economically viable in industry.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by epx on Saturday December 05, 2020 @11:08AM (#25315534)
Not sure how much xBase code still runs out there to be maintained or rewritten. Depends on your market.

At least here, the businesses that still ran xBase were the ones unwilling or unable to pay decently for maintenance and/or migration, and that was the situation 10+ years ago.

Haven't looked into Harbour featureset, but I feel xBase in general is simply too simple for new developments. Even mom-and-pop stores need features way beyond the Clipper/MS-DOS capabilities.

The language is outdated, too; even Delphi/Lazarus sounds too 1990ish to me, I have fond memories of Delphi and Object Pascal but it is impossible to justify using them in a world with so many good new languages.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by neverartful on Saturday December 05, 2020 @08:46AM (#25314520)
There are 2 aspects you would need to consider - the toolset and the product market. I don't think Clipper is sold anymore although there are some alternatives (Harbour). I think the products that still use Clipper would likely either be POS or a niche utility use. I don't know the feasibility of new entries in those markets.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by SomeoneFromCA on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:10AM (#25314659)
DOS is the cheapest RTOS and simplest RTOS, with very hard guarantees (just disable interrupts altogether, and run a busy loop).
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by cable2600 on Saturday December 05, 2020 @12:01AM (#25311910)
Wings of Hope, my uncle volunteered for them. They use MS-DOS and Netware to control flight simulators and other old stuff.

NASA still uses PC-DOS based IBM PCs to control things.

DOS doesn't crash like Windows.

GRR Martin uses Wordstar and MS-DOS to write his novels because he does not want to be distracted by pop up windows and system alerts and updates.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by yjftsjthsd-h on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:39AM (#25312650)
> DOS doesn't crash like Windows.

No, it crashes like DOS. I suppose if your application is well written and you have fully exercised the functionality that you use, it might be more stable, but "reliable" is not a word I would have associated with those systems.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by SomeoneFromCA on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:13AM (#25314676)
If you a write a simple protected mode monitor and debug it well, your app (running under the abovementioned monitor) will be more stable than if it were running on Linux, Windows or other monstrosity.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by jacobush on Saturday December 05, 2020 @03:16AM (#25312788)
It’s like embedded software. DOS is basically bug free at this point. If there are bugs in DOS, they are known.

ANY bugs will be in the application.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by neverartful on Saturday December 05, 2020 @08:48AM (#25314536)
Or misconfigured CONFIG.SYS.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by beagle3 on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:09AM (#25314651)
Or some clash with a TSR (sidekick?)
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by pjmlp on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:57AM (#25312728)
Indeed it doesn't crash, just hangs in some strange way that forces a reboot, or if you are lucky it affects the beeper that starts issuing random beep noises with different kinds of volume until you reach for the power button running like crazy,
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by exikyut on Saturday December 05, 2020 @10:27AM (#25315211)
Serious question from back in my young impressionable days of What Even Is This Square Thing Anyway:

I once wanted to copy/record the layout of a particular PC's boot up sequence, and (without a camera) got the great idea (uh oh) to use the Pause key while staring at the BIOS screen.

I think... I think it worked too well.

Once I'd copied the layout onto paper and hit a key to un-pause the system, it started behaving... very weirdly. I don't remember exactly what it did, but I do remember getting really freaked out because something was very wrong.

What I do remember was playing a game (to test/see if the system would settle back down) and, as time went on, keyboard input became progressively less and less responsive and erratic, and the system started beeping like crazy, almost like the keyboard input buffer had indigestion.

IIRC, the machine hung shortly thereafter and would not turn back on (read: initialize video and POST). O.o

To this day I still wonder what happened to that poor box, and a part of me wants to buy another AT&T Globalist 515 and film it to see if the fault(?) wasn't specific to my machine and maybe figure out exactly what happened.

My initial theory was flash corruption; it's also possible I overheated the CPU, especially given the lack of a heatsink, but it was a 486DX2-66, which didn't need a heatsink, and I'd used the Pause key in DOS plenty of times prior with no issues.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by bonzini on Saturday December 05, 2020 @04:01AM (#25312952)
Your application crashes. DOS does not.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by mikewarot on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:12PM (#25317367)
Amen! I never had a problem that wasn't bad hardware or my fault. All MS-DOS did was manage the disk, and keep track of time. There wasn't much to go wrong.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by pjmlp on Saturday December 05, 2020 @04:08AM (#25312984)
I guess you never wrote DOS applications, nor used it on its prime days.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by bonzini on Saturday December 05, 2020 @04:24AM (#25313059)
I did; I mean that if the system crashes it's your application's fault, not DOS's.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by pjmlp on Saturday December 05, 2020 @06:52AM (#25313870)
How can you prove that?
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by neverartful on Saturday December 05, 2020 @08:52AM (#25314558)
I suspect that they're alluding to the fact that DOS was more of a program loader than an OS and that once it loaded your program it was your program that was in the driver's seat. BUT there are subtle issues with drivers and networking still.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by pjmlp on Saturday December 05, 2020 @12:14PM (#25316186)
I know that, but unless you can 100% guarantee that the application was clean from any kind of DOS interrupt calls, there are zero guarantees that it wasn't DOS, one of the drivers or the pseudo multitasking TSRs that were the culprit, there is no way to assert that the application was the one at fault.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by bonzini on Saturday December 05, 2020 @02:08PM (#25317339)
DOS was simple enough that it can be considered essentially bug free. And in an embedded setting there are not going to be TSRs (you just boot directly into the application) and probably no DOS calls during the runtime. You would only use disks for special operations such as software updates.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by pjmlp on Saturday December 05, 2020 @03:21PM (#25317925)
Ah such a lucky one, never crashing DOS code, I guess you never used MS-DOS 4, nor had the experience of porting code across PC-DOS, MS-DOS and DR-DOS.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by bonzini on Sunday December 06, 2020 @03:43AM (#25322099)
Some DOS versions were better than others. But often the cause was non portable code on the applications. That wouldn't apply if the DOS version is frozen.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by secondcoming on Saturday December 05, 2020 @05:24AM (#25313364)
I can't recall the last time I had a BSOD
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by sgerenser on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:15AM (#25314687)
Consider yourself lucky. I had a spate of BSODs a couple months ago presumably after some combination of Windows 10 updates and Lenovo updates on my work-issued ThinkPad. Rolling back updates didn’t seem to help. Finally went away after some other update installed. After the 5th one in maybe 10 days I was ready to have the machine wiped and reimaged (if I didn’t smash it with a sledgehammer first).
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by shakna on Friday December 04, 2020 @11:16PM (#25311693)
I find this statement to be overly hopeful.

Legacy systems exist in all walks of life, for all kinds of systems. They've solved the problem they were set up for, and so even maintaining them is often something management can be unwilling to set a budget for.

There's an oft shown, but rarely sourced, image suggesting that the US Navy food service management system was running on MS-DOS in 2011, and if that is accurate, I can't find any suggestion they have since changed that situation.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by xvilka on Friday December 04, 2020 @11:57PM (#25311889)
If it works, has all necessary features, no significant bugs, and still performing all functions - why change? Especially since the change to modern technologies will not guarantee to produce a better result in terms of features and stability. The change is necessary if the system unmaintainable, buggy, or can't be easily interfaced with other modern systems.
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by shakna on Saturday December 05, 2020 @03:32AM (#25312855)
> The change is necessary if the system unmaintainable, buggy, or can't be easily interfaced with other modern systems.

Unfortunately, all of these are frequently true of legacy systems. Only a small number are relatively bug free. Most are simply unmaintained. Few are easy to interface with.

I have no particular problem with old software and hardware. But the massive expenditure leading up to Y2K is demonstrative of the legacy problem. Let it rot until an impending crisis forces your hand, costing far more than if you had simply maintained it.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by oblio on Saturday December 05, 2020 @09:03AM (#25314618)
Unless you want to end up with Adeptus Mechanicus worshipping the Machine God in the MS-DOs boxen, you need to change from time to time. You need to at least be able to open the metaphorical box and see if you can reproduce it in case of disaster recovery.

The more important the system, the higher the existential threat for the organization if you just let it be.

I do understand that it's a thankless job, so this needs to be enforced from up high.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by exikyut on Friday December 04, 2020 @11:04PM (#25311637)
Yes it will; it (the last one) will host a single file documenting the true source of the "640K of RAM" quote.

And it will make it available over PC/TCP, using a chain of adaptors and converters from 100BASE-TX.

Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by colejohnson66 on Friday December 04, 2020 @10:58PM (#25311598)
Hopefully
Re:The future of 32-bit Linux by throwaway201103 on Friday December 04, 2020 @11:02PM (#25311623)
They will be if they are still providing value.