Jump to content

Talk:DOS

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by FairNPOV (talk | contribs) at 04:46, 28 September 2020 (→Terminate & stay resident?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Former good article nomineeDOS was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 20, 2007Articles for deletionKept
July 27, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
October 22, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee
WikiProject iconComputing High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSoftware: Computing
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.


Abundant inaccuracies

There are many inaccuracies in this article about IBM and Microsoft and DOS.

First, it says primarily consisting of MS-DOS and a rebranded version under the name IBM PC DOS. The truth is closer to the reverse of that. More specifically, IBM contracted with Microsoft to develop an operating system that was also available separately from IBM. It was IBM's intent that DOS be available without the IBM brand but Microsoft developed DOS because IBM paid then to. I understand that I need to find a reference for that but it is taking time just to document all these inaccuracies.

Next, it says None of these operating systems were officially called "DOS". Actually IBM did call it "DOS". I have a copy of DOS, apparently version 1, and reference manual, as in https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ibmpcdos61_7006095. On the side (the binder?) it says "DOS". Also see https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ibmpcdos61alReferencePreliminaryFeb85_8083844.

It says "DOS instead ran on Intel 8086 16-bit processors". Well, this is a minor detail, but IBM PCs used the 8-bit 8088 version. The 8086 and 8088 are the same internally, they just communicate on different size busses, but traditionally the 8088 was called 8-bit.

It also says about IBM "possibly believing that Microsoft owned CP/M". Well IBM is not that stupid. Someone was just unable or unwilling to explain the truth.

It also says "Microsoft later required the use of the MS-DOS name, with the exception of the IBM variant." and it says "IBM continued to develop their version", ignoring the fact that IBM contracted with Microsoft to develop DOS. IBM wanted the PC to consist of nearly all third-party components; that is why the IBM PC was made with Intel processors when IBM was totally capable of making the hardware themselves.

The article says "After AT&T began selling Unix" but Unix existed before Microsoft.

The article says "They split development of their DOS systems as a result" and sites I.B.M. Executive Describes Price Pressure by Microsoft but that article says nothing relevant.

Okay, I will edit the article later. It has taken me at least three hours to analyze and document this stuff. Sam Tomato (talk) 02:28, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.
You wrote:
  1. "it says primarily consisting of MS-DOS and a rebranded version under the name IBM PC DOS." (The full stop is yours.)
    You are misquoting. The article continues: "...as well as some later compatible systems from other manufacturers: DR-DOS (1988), ROM-DOS (1989), PTS-DOS (1993), and FreeDOS (1998)."
  2. "Actually IBM did call it "DOS". I have a copy of DOS [...]"
    Fair enough. The mentioned sentence is unsuitable anyway. "Officially" has the status of near-taboo in Wikipedia. I'm deleting it.
  3. "IBM PCs used the 8-bit 8088 version".
    This issue is covered in the very next paragraph: "When IBM introduced the IBM PC, built with the Intel 8088 microprocessor [...]"
  4. "Well IBM is not that stupid."
    The source says so and we write what the source says. We're neither allowed to assume IBM was stupid nor allowed to assume it was NOT stupid.
  5. "It also says "Microsoft later required [...]" and it says "IBM continued [...]", ignoring the fact that IBM contracted with Microsoft to develop DOS."
    We can see all that. What is your objection?
  6. "Unix existed before Microsoft."
    So what?
  7. "[...] and sites [sic] I.B.M. Executive Describes Price Pressure by Microsoft but that article says nothing relevant."
    I get on it and check. I'll update when I am done.Update: The source clearly indicates that the two companies split all their development efforts. According to the source, "The final split came in the early 1990's".
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on DOS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:42, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:25, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Primarily consists of?

Surely DOS is a generic term - with DOS/360 probably being first - and this is referring to the PC/DOS-come-MS/DOS version only? I'm sure this page is contentious, but how about changing

"DOS (/dɒs/, /dɔːs/[1]) is a family of disk operating systems, hence the name.[2] DOS primarily consists of MS-DOS and a rebranded version under the name IBM PC DOS, both of which were introduced in 1981."

to "DOS usually refers to a family of operating systems, primarily MS-DOS and a rebranded version under the name IBM PC DOS, both of which were introduced in 1981." Number774 (talk) 19:18, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The second version would lose the first-line link to disk operating systems, the generic article, which seems like a poor change. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:27, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DOS is a generic term, and within various computer communities the term "DOS" refers to different software (e.g. Apple DOS, Atari DOS, etc.). But the the overwhelming association between "DOS" and "MS-DOS" will take time to shake. Dgpop (talk) 02:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is this part of the article still true?

"Available DOS systems in 2012 are FreeDOS, DR-DOS, ROM-DOS, PTS-DOS, RxDOS and REAL/32. Some computer manufacturers, including Dell and HP, sell computers with FreeDOS and DR-DOS as OEM operating systems."
Should this be changed to past tense now? (FairNPOV (talk) 04:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Terminate & stay resident?

Article says, "DOS is a single-user, single-tasking operating system with basic kernel functions that are non-reentrant: only one program at a time can use them, and DOS itself has no functionality to allow more than one program to execute at a time. The DOS kernel provides various functions for programs (an application program interface), like character I/O, file management, memory management, program loading and termination." At this point in the article should Terminate and Stay Resident programs be addressed? (FairNPOV (talk) 04:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:DOS&oldid=980738243"