I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4.00
I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4.00
I can't say this is 100% authentic, so I'm not calling it an OFFER, but I'll just explain what I found.
There's a set of 4.01 5.25" disk images out there - not sure where it comes from, it's called "Microsoft MS-DOS 4.01 (5¼)", it's a 6 disk set. The files are in a weird format with a 512-byte header, so they're 369152 bytes long instead of 368640.
OK, that's not extraordinary.
THIS is, though: while COMMAND.COM, FDISK.EXE, FORMAT.COM, AUTOEXEC.BAT (on Install), COMMAND.COM (on Operating 1 and Operating 2), COMMAND.COM, FASTOPEN.EXE, FORMAT.COM (on Operating 3), FORMAT.COM (on Select) and COMMAND.COM (on Shell) all have later dates - and COMMAND.COM is obviously that of 4.01 - and while on investigation the same is true of IO.SYS and MSDOS.SYS - the other files are all dated 10/6/88, except README.TXT is dated 10/12/88 - exactly as 16bitos reports!
So I go, check the CRC32s against the Sampo 4.00.
AUTOEXEC.BAT, COMMAND.COM, FASTOPEN.EXE, FDISK.EXE, FORMAT.COM, IO.SYS, MSDOS.SYS differ; everything else is the same.
Lo and behold, that's the EXACT set of files that don't have the 4.00 date stamps.
So I look at the Shell disk - like I said - command.com is the only one with a date other than 10/6/88. Is it safe to bet that if one copied COMMAND.COM from one of the Sampo disks over this, you'd have the missing Shell disk? I think so, at least.
Keep in mind that obviously this won't give you a disk image that's authentic to anything, so I don't think such an image would be wanted here - but I think it's as valid a reconstruction as can be done right now.
There's a set of 4.01 5.25" disk images out there - not sure where it comes from, it's called "Microsoft MS-DOS 4.01 (5¼)", it's a 6 disk set. The files are in a weird format with a 512-byte header, so they're 369152 bytes long instead of 368640.
OK, that's not extraordinary.
THIS is, though: while COMMAND.COM, FDISK.EXE, FORMAT.COM, AUTOEXEC.BAT (on Install), COMMAND.COM (on Operating 1 and Operating 2), COMMAND.COM, FASTOPEN.EXE, FORMAT.COM (on Operating 3), FORMAT.COM (on Select) and COMMAND.COM (on Shell) all have later dates - and COMMAND.COM is obviously that of 4.01 - and while on investigation the same is true of IO.SYS and MSDOS.SYS - the other files are all dated 10/6/88, except README.TXT is dated 10/12/88 - exactly as 16bitos reports!
So I go, check the CRC32s against the Sampo 4.00.
AUTOEXEC.BAT, COMMAND.COM, FASTOPEN.EXE, FDISK.EXE, FORMAT.COM, IO.SYS, MSDOS.SYS differ; everything else is the same.
Lo and behold, that's the EXACT set of files that don't have the 4.00 date stamps.
So I look at the Shell disk - like I said - command.com is the only one with a date other than 10/6/88. Is it safe to bet that if one copied COMMAND.COM from one of the Sampo disks over this, you'd have the missing Shell disk? I think so, at least.
Keep in mind that obviously this won't give you a disk image that's authentic to anything, so I don't think such an image would be wanted here - but I think it's as valid a reconstruction as can be done right now.
- os2fan2
- Donator
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am
- Location: Brisbane, Queensland
- Contact:
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
What you are looking at is a copy of 4.00 with PD0255.EXE applied.
The copy i keep of 4.01 is unmodified since it is the original Microsoft diskettes.
Code: Select all
Searching ZIP: PD0255.zip
Length Method Size Ratio Date Time CRC-32 Attr Name
------ ------ ----- ----- ---- ---- -------- ---- ----
6350 Implode 2381 63% 31-08-1992 16:37 cac3e721 --wa README.TXT
46835 Implode 32915 30% 01-03-1991 12:15 d649f54e --wa PATCH32M.EXE
16693 Implode 9625 43% 12-01-1990 04:03 4b663e94 --wa GRAPHICS.COM
16718 Implode 9603 43% 07-04-1989 00:00 b27c4c5a --wa FASTOPEN.EXE
22875 Implode 16756 27% 07-04-1989 00:00 fc797e99 --wa FORMAT.COM
------ ------ --- -------
109471 71280 35% 5
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Huh.
Well, then. Fair to say copying the 4.00 command.com back over it should make it pretty genuine, then, ne?
Well, then. Fair to say copying the 4.00 command.com back over it should make it pretty genuine, then, ne?
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
In fact MS-DOS 4.00 (Sampo OEM) is the same thing as MS-DOS 4.00 with the only exception - missing disk 6 (DOS Shell). If you look at other OEM releases (i.e. MS-DOS 4.00 RM Nimbus OEM) and compare command.com, you'll see that both files are binary equal.buricco wrote:Huh.
Well, then. Fair to say copying the 4.00 command.com back over it should make it pretty genuine, then, ne?
So if you replace command.com on the disk 6 technically you'll get the same release defined on 16bitOS as "MS-DOS 4.00". But it's not "The Holy Grail" of OS collectors
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
A complete copy of the OTHER MS-DOS 4.0, or MS-DOS 4.1, would be that, ne? (ETA: Or the mythical 2.25 which I've never seen any sort of evidence of.)
There was a port of a DOS other than 3.1 to the Nimbus? O_o You learn something new every day.
There was a port of a DOS other than 3.1 to the Nimbus? O_o You learn something new every day.
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
It's hard to say how many OEM partners have got the version 4.00 before it was updated.buricco wrote:A complete copy of the OTHER MS-DOS 4.0, or MS-DOS 4.1, would be that, ne?
There's kinda weird story with DOS 4.00 (counting IBM PC-DOS as well).
1. IBM released PC-DOS 4.00 dated "17 June 1988". This it the first "real" DOS 4.00 (the first multitasking DOS 4.00M is a totally different story).
2. Many sources claim that MS-DOS 4.00 was released in July 1988. That version from 16bitOS is dated "October 1988". Could it still be 4.00 ? The version string in command.com says: yes, it's 4.00. But what about MS-DOS 4.00 dated "xx July 1988" then ?
3. 10 August 1988. IBM releases it's first Corrective Service Disks, files have dates 1988-08-03. It's the first official bugfix for PC-DOS 4.00. This fix doesn't change OS version number, but in fact it's not "original 4.00" after this update anymore. Version numbers other than 4.00 or 4.01 we'll see only in Japanese PC-DOS J4.0xV - 4.05, 4.06, 4.07, 4.08.
4. October 1988. Ok, now we see that version from 16bitOS (or Sampo OEM which is in fact the same). Could Microsoft wait without bugfixes until October and release 4.00 once again ? Not sure. Moreover we've been told that original MS-DOS 4.00 was released in July.
So the point is to find MS-DOS 4.00 dated "xx July 1988" (if it ever existed).
Why mythical ? As far as I remember it was a version with expanded character sets support for Japanese and Korean computers. It's hard to find such versions in the West, sure, as well as MS-DOS 2.01 with kanji support introduced at Japan Data Show in October 1983(ETA: Or the mythical 2.25 which I've never seen any sort of evidence of.)
At least 3.05, few revisions of 3.10 and 4.00. Maybe some other versions also existed.There was a port of a DOS other than 3.1 to the Nimbus? O_o You learn something new every day.
-
The Distractor
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
No, there wasn't. That DOS 4.0x is for RM's later PC-compatible systems (some of which do share the Nimbus name).buricco wrote:There was a port of a DOS other than 3.1 to the Nimbus? O_o You learn something new every day.
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
"Mythical" because I've seen no evidence it existed, just claims that there was such a version that had such and such features.
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Ok. I asked this question and I'm gonna answer it. I decided to do a small research using InfoWorld magazine archives (thanks to Google Books). There's enough information to restore all the chronology of IBM and Microsoft releases and to bust some myths.Many sources claim that MS-DOS 4.00 was released in July 1988. That version from 16bitOS is dated "October 1988". Could it still be 4.00 ? The version string in command.com says: yes, it's 4.00. But what about MS-DOS 4.00 dated "xx July 1988" then ?
The myth no.1: MS-DOS 4.00 was released in July 1988. I saw few versions of it, i.e. "released to OEM customers". Nope, it wasn't.
On the July, 19 1988 IBM announced OS/2 Extended Edition, Windows Kit for Personal System/2 and PC-DOS 4.0. On the next day (July, 20) IBM started shipping PC-DOS 4.0 (the very first version dated 1988-06-17) to major dealers. Right from the beginning a lot of bugs and incompatibilities have been found and many reviews recommended to stay away from DOS 4.0 until those bugs get fixed. At that moment Microsoft released nothing.
InfoWorld September, 5 1988:
So somewhen around mid-August 1988 few selected OEM customers just got preview builds of MS-DOS 4 for testing, bugfixing and adoptation. No releases yet from MS itself.Microsoft acknowledged the problems, however, and said that when Microsoft OEM ship their versions of DOS 4.0 - which is expected to begin by the end of 1988 - all such problems will be resolved.
...
"We started shipping [our version of] DOS 4.0 to our OEM customers more than two weeks ago," said Pascal Martin, Microsoft's product manager for MS-DOS, who added that Compaq, Hewlett-Packard, AST, Dell, Zenith and Tandy have recieved copies of DOS 4.0. "Some of the problem fixes are already done, and some are being done," said Martin. "When Microsoft's OEM customers put it out, those problems will be fixed".
InfoWorld, September, 19 1988: "IBM ships unannounced DOS 4.01". Ok, we already know it was the first update via retail boxes and so-called "Corrective Service Disk".
InfoWorld, October, 3 1988:Sources warn that the box is still labeled DOS 4.0, and that users must check the labeling on the diskettes themselfs to make sure they are getting the latest version.
So it's a start of October 1988 and still no MS "generic" DOS 4.0 released !Microsoft has urged its OEMs to wait for a bug-fixing update of DOS 4.0 code before shipping their own versions and expects to release that final version by mid-month.
Microsoft released a DOS 4.0 Binary Adaptation Kit - containing the operating system and utilities to help OEMs adapt it to their hardware - shortly after the mid-July announcement of DOS 4.0, said Russ Werner, general manager of Microsoft's DOS and Windows Business Unit. Two weeks ago Microsoft told manufacturers who distribute DOS under their own labels not to use BAK and instead to wait for the maintenance update that Microsoft expects to ship withing two weeks, he said.
The update contains several bug fixes, primarily for a problem with page frames involving EMS, Werner said. He declined to say whether the code was changed to correct some of the problems reported in IBM's PC-DOS 4.0
...
Werner said he expects every major OEM will ship his own version of DOS 4.0 within six months.
Microsoft will also release "packaged-product DOS" for bundling by clone developers who don't want to modify the package for their hardware.
InfoWorld, October, 10 1988:
So ladies and gentlemen, the version from October, 6 1988 defined on 16bitOS.com as "Microsoft MS-DOS 4.00" is indeed 4.00 and there were no other production box versions earlier from MS itself. Just get Sampo OEM release, get the 6th disk (DOS Shell) from 5.25" version of 4.01, replace on it command.com with the one from Sampo and you'll get pure and nearly authentic MS-DOS 4.00.Microsoft to unveil "fixed" DOS 4.0
Microsoft is set to deliver a final "fixed" release of MS-DOS 4.0 by mid-October, and at least one PC maker said it will begin shipping the first commercial release around Halloween. Northgate Computer Systems announced last week it will begin selling MS-DOS 4.0 as an option with systems by the end of this month, said Robert Ryks, the company's vice president of technical development.
The version will not be renumbered 4.01, as in the "fixed" IBM release, because "as far as Microsoft is concerned, the earlier copies of DOS 4.0 were betas," Ryks said.
Hopefully it will help some collectors to end the endless search of "elusive" and nearly "mythical" MS-DOS 4.00. It's already here.
Last edited by tarlabnor on Wed Jul 29, 2015 1:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Thanks, that was a very enlightening read.
I'd known for years about the existence of single user MS-DOS 4.00 - saw it on someone's Dell back in 1992 - but for years I'd been trying to prove it to everyone else, and a lot of sites have the misinformation that "Microsoft skipped 4.00 to avoid confusion with their multitasking version". Not only that, but whenever I found images of "MS-DOS 4.00" it always turned out to be 4.01. >_<
I'd known for years about the existence of single user MS-DOS 4.00 - saw it on someone's Dell back in 1992 - but for years I'd been trying to prove it to everyone else, and a lot of sites have the misinformation that "Microsoft skipped 4.00 to avoid confusion with their multitasking version". Not only that, but whenever I found images of "MS-DOS 4.00" it always turned out to be 4.01. >_<
- os2fan2
- Donator
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am
- Location: Brisbane, Queensland
- Contact:
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
I have here a six diskette layout of dos 4 from 1989, and a boot 720k from 1988 with fix 255 etc applied
The 4.01 set is mastered from the original diskettes.
The 4.01 set is mastered from the original diskettes.
- Battler
- Donator
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am
- Location: Slovenia, Central Europe.
- Contact:
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
The problem is, mrpijey doesn't accept that on the FTP because he claims we have no evidence that the Shell files are truly identical to 4.00. He claims they might be modified even though they have the dates and times of MS-DOS 4.00.tarlabnor wrote:Just get Sampo OEM release, get the 6th disk (DOS Shell) from 5.25" version of 4.01, replace on it command.com with the one from Sampo and you'll get pure and nearly authentic MS-DOS 4.00.
I know of one site which is about Commodore 64 but it had a FTP that mirrored the contents of a CD that so happened to have had MS-DOS 4.00 for PC on it. Sadly, the FTP in question now requires username and password and the owner hasn't replied to my e-mail in almost two years now, despite the fact he has the FTP listed on his website and lists his e-mail addresses for contact.
The only other person with a 4.00 is some museum site run by someone who has been on BA before and categorically insisted he does not share binaries because he follows the law to the letter. Which is sad because he also has Multitasking MS-DOS 4.1.
Main developer of the 86Box emulator.
Join the 86Box Discord server, a nice community for true enthusiasts and 86Box supports!
The anime channel is on the Ring of Lightning Discord server.
Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.
Join the 86Box Discord server, a nice community for true enthusiasts and 86Box supports!
The anime channel is on the Ring of Lightning Discord server.
Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
That's why I didn't offer the result. I believe it's correct, and I'm probably right, but I admit there isn't any real evidence (paper trail, SFV, MD5 checksums).Battler wrote:The problem is, mrpijey doesn't accept that on the FTP because he claims we have no evidence that the Shell files are truly identical to 4.00. He claims they might be modified even though they have the dates and times of MS-DOS 4.00.
*nod*. Ain't it always the way.I know of one site which is about Commodore 64 but it had a FTP that mirrored the contents of a CD that so happened to have had MS-DOS 4.00 for PC on it. Sadly, the FTP in question now requires username and password and the owner hasn't replied to my e-mail in almost two years now, despite the fact he has the FTP listed on his website and lists his e-mail addresses for contact.
The only other person with a 4.00 is some museum site run by someone who has been on BA before and categorically insisted he does not share binaries because he follows the law to the letter. Which is sad because he also has Multitasking MS-DOS 4.1.
I believe that preserving this stuff is more important than the letter of the law, and as the old saying goes, you can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs.
ETA: Waitasec. I wonder if we could find someone who, although he won't share 4.00, will at least give us an SFV and a page of MD5 checksums for the files on the shell disk? That should all but prove it.
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Dates, times and sizes are the same. The question is file contents. So the only thing we need to know is SHA1 / SHA256 / whatever hash sums of all files. Then we could compare it with what we already have.Battler wrote:The problem is, mrpijey doesn't accept that on the FTP because he claims we have no evidence that the Shell files are truly identical to 4.00. He claims they might be modified even though they have the dates and times of MS-DOS 4.00.
No need to share. Can he just calculate hashes of all files and provide us this hash-list ? It would be enough to be sure.The only other person with a 4.00 is some museum site run by someone who has been on BA before and categorically insisted he does not share binaries because he follows the law to the letter.
- Battler
- Donator
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am
- Location: Slovenia, Central Europe.
- Contact:
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Yes, we thought of that. We tried contacting the owner of that museum website for the hashes of all the files on Disk 6 of MS-DOS 4.00, but our e-mails got bounced back because his inbox is full.
Main developer of the 86Box emulator.
Join the 86Box Discord server, a nice community for true enthusiasts and 86Box supports!
The anime channel is on the Ring of Lightning Discord server.
Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.
Join the 86Box Discord server, a nice community for true enthusiasts and 86Box supports!
The anime channel is on the Ring of Lightning Discord server.
Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Mivehind.tarlabnor wrote:Dates, times and sizes are the same. The question is file contents. So the only thing we need to know is SHA1 / SHA256 / whatever hash sums of all files. Then we could compare it with what we already have.
No need to share. Can he just calculate hashes of all files and provide us this hash-list ? It would be enough to be sure.
I did CRC32 (SFV), MD5 and SHA1 checksums. You can fool one checksum algorithm...good luck fooling THREE.
Of course, that won't make the DISK authentic, but it will make the CONTENTS authentic.
Oy. Guess we gotta find someone else with the disks. Still, I'm sure finding someone who'll checksum a bunch of files is easier than finding someone who'll upload them.Battler wrote:Yes, we thought of that. We tried contacting the owner of that museum website for the hashes of all the files on Disk 6 of MS-DOS 4.00, but our e-mails got bounced back because his inbox is full.
- Battler
- Donator
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am
- Location: Slovenia, Central Europe.
- Contact:
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
By the way, that museum site I mentioned, is 16bitos.com . You can try contacting the guy yourself, maybe he's cleared his inbox by now.
Edit: The contact form on his site gives "site not found".
Edit: The contact form on his site gives "site not found".
Main developer of the 86Box emulator.
Join the 86Box Discord server, a nice community for true enthusiasts and 86Box supports!
The anime channel is on the Ring of Lightning Discord server.
Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.
Join the 86Box Discord server, a nice community for true enthusiasts and 86Box supports!
The anime channel is on the Ring of Lightning Discord server.
Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Exactly.buricco wrote:I did CRC32 (SFV), MD5 and SHA1 checksums. You can fool one checksum algorithm...good luck fooling THREE.
Personally I have no doubt those files are 100% the same, but I don't try to convince anyone
Yep. It's good to have 100% authentic disk, but 100% authentic contents would be enough (until original disks appear on the horizon one day).Of course, that won't make the DISK authentic, but it will make the CONTENTS authentic.
It was up and running just yesterdayBattler wrote:By the way, that museum site I mentioned, is 16bitos.com . You can try contacting the guy yourself, maybe he's cleared his inbox by now.
Edit: The contact form on his site gives "site not found".
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
I was figuring that maybe someone else had resurrected the site. It was down for quite a while (I think DNS expired or something) and came back.
Yes, I'm familiar with 16bitos.
Yes, I'm familiar with 16bitos.
- os2fan2
- Donator
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am
- Location: Brisbane, Queensland
- Contact:
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
The dos 4.01 shell diskette looks like this:
This is my msdos 4.00 shell diskette with 1988 dates
Code: Select all
Extract NT - Extract file in wImage - V 2.10 (c) 1991-96 Gilles Vollant
Visit web page : http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/gvollant/extract.htm
image file : mds400_d.ima label : SHELL V401
CHKDSK.COM 17787 07.04.89 00:00a
COMMAND.COM 37557 07.04.89 00:00a
DISKCOPY.COM 10396 07.04.89 00:00a
DOSUTIL.MEU 6660 07.04.89 00:00a
PCIBMDRV.MOS 263 07.04.89 00:00a
PRINT.COM 14131 07.04.89 00:00a
SHELL.HLP 66527 07.04.89 00:00a
SHELL.MEU 4588 07.04.89 00:00a
SHELL.CLR 4406 07.04.89 00:00a
SHELLB.COM 3894 07.04.89 00:00a
SHELLC.EXE 153855 07.04.89 00:00a
320064 bytes in 11 files, 36864 bytes free
This is my msdos 4.00 shell diskette with 1988 dates
Code: Select all
image file : msdos401.ima no label
DRIVER.SYS 5241 06.10.88 00:00a
EGA.CPI 49068 06.10.88 00:00a
FASTOPEN.EXE 16718 07.04.89 00:00a
FDISK.EXE 60935 19.12.88 00:00a
FORMAT.COM 22875 07.04.89 00:00a
GRAFTABL.COM 10239 06.10.88 00:00a
GRAPHICS.COM 16693 06.10.88 00:00a
GRAPHICS.PRO 9397 06.10.88 00:00a
HIMEM.SYS 6261 06.10.88 00:00a
IO.SYS 33337 19.12.88 00:00a
KEYB.COM 9876 23.07.90 01:50a
KEYBOARD.SYS 21559 22.08.90 01:31a
LCD.CPI 10703 06.10.88 00:00a
MSDOS.SYS 37376 07.04.89 00:00a
NLSFUNC.EXE 6878 06.10.88 00:00a
PRINT.COM 14131 06.10.88 00:00a
PRINTER.SYS 18914 06.10.88 00:00a
RAMDRIVE.SYS 8235 06.10.88 00:00a
REPLACE.EXE 19415 06.10.88 00:00a
SELECT.DAT 22999 06.10.88 00:00a
SELECT.EXE 95107 06.10.88 00:00a
SELECT.HLP 28695 06.10.88 00:00a
SELECT.PRT 1329 06.10.88 00:00a
SHARE.EXE 13424 06.10.88 00:00a
SMARTDRV.SYS 10224 06.10.88 00:00a
SYS.COM 11456 06.10.88 00:00a
XMA2EMS.SYS 29211 06.10.88 00:00a
4201.CPI 6404 06.10.88 00:00a
4208.CPI 720 06.10.88 00:00a
5202.CPI 370 06.10.88 00:00a
ANSI.SYS 9105 06.10.88 00:00a
AUTOEXEC.BAT 39 06.10.88 00:00a
COMMAND.COM 37557 19.12.88 00:00a
CONFIG.SYS 114 01.06.90 05:51p
COUNTRY.SYS 12806 06.10.88 00:00a
DISKCOPY.COM 10396 06.10.88 00:00a
DISPLAY.SYS 15692 06.10.88 00:00a
683499 bytes in 37 files, 25600 bytes free
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Code: Select all
Volume in drive : has no label
Volume Serial Number is 1101-1B52
Directory for ::/
COMMAND COM 37557 1988-12-19 0:00
CHKDSK COM 17787 1988-10-06 0:00
DISKCOPY COM 10396 1988-10-06 0:00
PCIBMDRV MOS 263 1988-10-06 0:00
PRINT COM 14131 1988-10-06 0:00
SHELL CLR 4406 1988-10-06 0:00
SHELL HLP 66527 1988-10-06 0:00
SHELL MEU 4588 1988-10-06 0:00
SHELLB COM 3894 1988-10-06 0:00
SHELLC EXE 153855 1988-10-06 0:00
DOSUTIL MEU 6660 1988-10-06 0:00
11 files 320 064 bytes
36 864 bytes free
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
I doubt it was missing "by design", the previous owner probably lost it somewhere.tarlabnor wrote: In fact MS-DOS 4.00 (Sampo OEM) is the same thing as MS-DOS 4.00 with the only exception - missing disk 6 (DOS Shell)
Also, what I think happened with those disks is that SAMPO just used Microsoft's master, added their sticker to it and distributed it like that. Back then, Microsoft wasn't really distributing worldwide and was counting on other companies to do the shipping for them. A lot of other (czech) Windows 3.1 floppies I have for example are marked as "Produced by Buhl Data Service GmbH", which doesn't make their content any less original.
I've probably mentioned it several times, but I still physically own these floppies and even uploaded their KF dumps, so you can all see they are perfectly authentic.
Windows TEN - Totally Erroneous Numbering
Always watching you...
Always watching you...
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Agreed.jagotu wrote:I doubt it was missing "by design", the previous owner probably lost it somewhere.tarlabnor wrote: In fact MS-DOS 4.00 (Sampo OEM) is the same thing as MS-DOS 4.00 with the only exception - missing disk 6 (DOS Shell)
That was pretty common and almost SOP for 3.2 and later, wasn't it?Also, what I think happened with those disks is that SAMPO just used Microsoft's master, added their sticker to it and distributed it like that. Back then, Microsoft wasn't really distributing worldwide and was counting on other companies to do the shipping for them. A lot of other (czech) Windows 3.1 floppies I have for example are marked as "Produced by Buhl Data Service GmbH", which doesn't make their content any less original.
I've probably mentioned it several times, but I still physically own these floppies and even uploaded their KF dumps, so you can all see they are perfectly authentic.
Though, all the 5.0 3.5"s I see out there are 3x720K and all the ones I've had enter my hands IRL are 2x1440K. (I did have a 5x5.25 pass into my hands once. Lost part of it and installed the rest on my then machine, a 5160 that I really should've kept running PC DOS 3.3.)
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
It's possible.jagotu wrote:I doubt it was missing "by design", the previous owner probably lost it somewhere.tarlabnor wrote: In fact MS-DOS 4.00 (Sampo OEM) is the same thing as MS-DOS 4.00 with the only exception - missing disk 6 (DOS Shell)
SAMPO was a copmany from Taiwan that produced clones of different western computer models and sold 'em mostly in the asian region. For example it did SAMPO Color Computer - a clone of well-known Tandy TRS-80 (aka Tandy Color Computer). Later Tandy sued SAMPO due to stolen ROM code. I seriously doubt that firm who stole ROM code later did any changes in generic DOS version.
Most probably that's how it was.Also, what I think happened with those disks is that SAMPO just used Microsoft's master, added their sticker to it and distributed it like that.
But it's still possible that SAMPO simply "removed" DOS Shell disk to reduce number of floppies and left the other 5 disks without any change.
Yes, it's a later version. You can download MS-DOS 4.01 (5.25) from winworldpc and you'll find there a bit different disk6 (DOS Shell).os2fan2 wrote:The dos 4.01 shell diskette looks like this:
- Battler
- Donator
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am
- Location: Slovenia, Central Europe.
- Contact:
Re: I might have recreated the missing "shell" disk of DOS 4
Thing is, the Shell disk is requested by the setup program when installing DOS. So you can't just remove it - people would then call you and complain about Setup wanting a disk that is missing.tarlabnor wrote:But it's still possible that SAMPO simply "removed" DOS Shell disk to reduce number of floppies and left the other 5 disks without any change.
Main developer of the 86Box emulator.
Join the 86Box Discord server, a nice community for true enthusiasts and 86Box supports!
The anime channel is on the Ring of Lightning Discord server.
Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.
Join the 86Box Discord server, a nice community for true enthusiasts and 86Box supports!
The anime channel is on the Ring of Lightning Discord server.
Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.