BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Database Screenshots Gallery Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 19d, 22h, 26m | CPU: 28% | MEM: 5848MB of 12287MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:11 pm 
Reply with quote
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Sep 01, 2018 1:16 pm

Posts
21

Location
Italy

Favourite OS
OS\2 Warp 4.5
Why didn't Microsoft ever release a MS-DOS version for CP/M machines? *-)
Did someone ever did a port of MS-DOS to the Zilog 80?

I think porting MS-DOS 1.x or 2.x to the Osborne 1 (for example) would be possible because Microsoft released source code for them.

_________________
Image

C'è solo l'Inter, AMALA!


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 2:22 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 pm

Posts
1459

Location
SE Asia

Favourite OS
MS-DOS 3.30a & Windows/386!
why would they?

the 8080 CP/M were entirely last generation. It was time for the rise of 16bit micros.

There was a lot of people clamoring for that 1MB of addressable space.

_________________
"Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." – Henry Spencer


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 3:16 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:28 am

Posts
1591

Location
Slovenia

Favourite OS
5111
louisw3 wrote:
why would they?

the 8080 CP/M were entirely last generation. It was time for the rise of 16bit micros.

There was a lot of people clamoring for that 1MB of addressable space.


Indeed. CP/M already dominated the 8-bit market, but failed to make an early claim on the emerging 16-bit one. In a way, this decision defined decades of computing history, imagine if DR became what Microsoft is today.

_________________
Image

KRNL386 - my site about retro computing | My site about Windows 1.0 | My blog | 86Box Manager - my configuration manager for 86Box


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:25 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:26 pm

Posts
278

Location
Edinburgh, Scotland

Favourite OS
Windows for Workgroups 3.11
MotorolaFLARE wrote:
Why didn't Microsoft ever release a MS-DOS version for CP/M machines?

Unlike modern operating systems, the MS-DOS source code is heavily architecture dependent, and a port wouldn't have been trivial.
But even then, who would have bought DOS to replace CP/M? The whole reason for the success of MS-DOS was the lack of competition in the x86 market.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:32 pm 
Reply with quote
Offline

Joined
Thu Aug 25, 2011 7:46 pm

Posts
71

Favourite OS
Ubuntu 10.04.3 LTS
MSX-DOS is probably the closest you'll get.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2019 12:24 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Online

Joined
Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am

Posts
1210

Location
Brisbane, Queensland

Favourite OS
OS/2 Wrp 3.0
CP/M and such are eight-bit computers. MS-DOS was written for a 16-bit processor, but soon had to overcome the 640 kB barrier. (This for what it's worth, is like the 3 GB barrier in Win32 systems.) In both, they had to write processes like himem.sys etc, to get around the barriers.

MS-DOS did borrow a lot from CP/M, and a 16-bit CP/M does exist.

8-bit machines were more the domain of pre-operating systems, where one might load basic directly and program that. The tandy 1000 laptop was a 8-bit machine, with 24k of gross memory (storage + working memory), you could by extra ram at $1000 for 8 kilobytes, to max it out. It is most notable, in that it had a fat that allowed 32 files of 5.2 names, along with an operating system (a pruned version of basica: no DEFFN routines), an editor, a coms proggie, and you could write to the CAS: device.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 2:01 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:40 pm

Posts
42
How much more advanced was MS-DOS compared to CP/M anyway? Could you do the same things with these, or were there big differences functionality-wise?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Wed May 08, 2019 11:23 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Online

Joined
Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am

Posts
1210

Location
Brisbane, Queensland

Favourite OS
OS/2 Wrp 3.0
Much of DOS 1.x is pretty much at the same level as CP/M. But where CP/M was at the end of its tether, DOS was just beginning.

An 8080 can access 64K of ram. A good number of programs at that era were made available as type-in code. The proggie i wrote was entered by paper tape on each boot. However, I did not use an OS, instead the proggie and data shared the same 2K of memory. The data array was 512 bytes or 1024 bytes.

Even DOS 1.x can not handle hard drives. Its last version is 1.5, an OEM thing used to run word-processors (actual typewritters that edit a line at a time) and other things of that nature.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Wed May 08, 2019 11:40 am 
Reply with quote
Offline

Joined
Sat Apr 29, 2017 2:21 pm

Posts
74
Well, CP/M did grow up a bit, even on the Z80.

At one point I had a couple of second hand Morrow MD-11 machines, 128k RAM, 10 MB Full Height 5 1/4" Hard Disk, and I CP/M 3. Somewhat better than the RM 380Z I remember paying with at school, but the 380Z did have good pixel graphics, for which we managed to write a few games (Missile Command, Joust).

After playing for a while, I scavenged the disks to use on a self build 286 PC clone.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Wed May 08, 2019 4:53 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:26 pm

Posts
278

Location
Edinburgh, Scotland

Favourite OS
Windows for Workgroups 3.11
nar002 wrote:
How much more advanced was MS-DOS compared to CP/M anyway? Could you do the same things with these, or were there big differences functionality-wise?

The main advantage of DOS 1.x over CP/M was its file system: FAT was so much more efficient than whatever CP/M used at the time.
Come think of it, we are still using FAT derivatives in 2019: that's quite an accomplishment.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Thu May 09, 2019 10:49 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:22 pm

Posts
35

Favourite OS
Solaris 10 u8
Mainly because MS-DOS requires an IBM Compatible BIOS. It depends on it and it extends it. Everything is implemented as a software interrupt. The IBM PC BIOS and the card Option ROMS provide some of the software interrupts (generally hardware access) and MS-DOS provides the rest. If you want, the OS part of MS-DOS is a disk based BIOS extension that also provides filesystem and memory management. Futhermore, the OS is entirely written in ASM, so porting it would require rewriting it and reimplementing the IBM BIOS as well. It just makes no sense. It's the same reason for which FreeDOS is not ported to UEFI.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Thu May 09, 2019 3:02 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am

Posts
2006

Location
Slovenia, Central Europe.

Favourite OS
Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222B
That's false. If this was true, MS-DOS would never exist for RM Nimbus PC-186, NEC PC-98, or Fujitsu FM-Towns. But it did.

_________________
Join #softhistory @ RoL IRC, a nice community for true enthusiasts!
Anime channel: #doki-doki @ RoL IRC, Mibbit, KiwiIRC.
The 86Box help channel is #softhistory now!

Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.


Top  Profile  WWW  ICQ  YIM
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Thu May 09, 2019 3:11 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:28 am

Posts
1591

Location
Slovenia

Favourite OS
5111
Battler wrote:
That's false. If this was true, MS-DOS would never exist for RM Nimbus PC-186, NEC PC-98, or Fujitsu FM-Towns. But it did.


And for many other x86 computers that didn't have a fully IBM compatible BIOS as well. The whole point of IBMBIO.COM/IO.SYS is that it was adapted by the OEMs to work with their hardware.

_________________
Image

KRNL386 - my site about retro computing | My site about Windows 1.0 | My blog | 86Box Manager - my configuration manager for 86Box


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Thu May 09, 2019 5:44 pm 
Reply with quote
Offline

Joined
Sat Apr 29, 2017 2:21 pm

Posts
74
Overdoze wrote:
Battler wrote:
That's false. If this was true, MS-DOS would never exist for RM Nimbus PC-186, NEC PC-98, or Fujitsu FM-Towns. But it did.


And for many other x86 computers that didn't have a fully IBM compatible BIOS as well. The whole point of IBMBIO.COM/IO.SYS is that it was adapted by the OEMs to work with their hardware.


Quite. The original Apricot XEN was 286 based, an with completely different chips sets for almost every part, and different Monitor calls - it didn't have much of a BIOS. Yet MS-DOS and Windows 1.0 ran on it.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Thu May 09, 2019 7:57 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:22 pm

Posts
35

Favourite OS
Solaris 10 u8
Off the top of my head, the following software interrupts would need to exist for any reasonably software:
int10h for video card access
int13h for disk access (partitioning software and such)
int14h for serial port access
Int17h for parallel port access
int1Ah for RTC access

I'm not saying that they couldn't be implemented as long as you had an x86 CPU, but without them MS-DOS wouldn't even work. They had to be implemented in the ibmbio.sys/io.sys. You would have to implement most of what the IBM BIOS and the VGA Option ROM do in order to have a functioning DOS. It's actually why old DOS versions needed to be customized by the OEM and were not available in retail. So basically DOS assumed IBM compatible unless you added the missing bits. And if you did, software that depended on those software interrupts would fail to work anyway.

Regarding the other examples, they were x86 computers and my initial point of it being basically X86-ONLY still stands. You needed x86 since you didn't have an official OS SDK with standard libraries.

Porting software to a Z80 version of MS-DOS would require rewriting the software, not just a recompile since you weren't using libraries but calling direct software interrupts with x86 style registers for parameters and return values.

The BIOS was the worst part of X86. As an example: on non-AT computers by IBM (such as the early PS/1 series), although they all had a very standard IDE (I/O ports and IRQ), since the FDPT was not at the 40h address most protected mode OSs would fail to detect the disks, including Linux. I remember that on Linux, I had to use: ide0=0x1f0,0x3f6,1 hda=3884,16,63 hda=noprobe in order to boot, because the probing would blindly look for the FDPT expecting the same address for it as an AT system, but the PS/1 was not AT. Microsoft actually expected the BIOS to die very soon and in Windows NT expected the kernel to be loaded by an ARC firmware (conceptually very similar to the modern EFI). NTLDR/NTDETECT were precisely that, an ARC firmware emulator with osloader.exe ARC binary padded at the end of the binary and it used boot.ini to deduce the firmware variables that OSLoader should get (SYSTEM PARTITION, OS LOADER PARTITION, etc.).

Anyway, I've diverged from the original thread.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Thu May 09, 2019 11:35 pm 
Reply with quote
Offline

Joined
Sat Apr 29, 2017 2:21 pm

Posts
74
I suggest you investigate the MS-DOS OAK, there is at least one version floating around out there.
See here - summary and here - readme.txt for an intro.

MS-DOS came in two parts, MSDOS.SYS and IO.SYS; MSDOS.SYS made no BIOS calls, it had all hardware dependent logic handled by IO.SYS. It is IO.SYS which makes BIOS calls. The OAK included complete source for IO.SYS, and the tunable bits for system startup / bootstrap.

This what the likes of Apricot used for port MS-DOS.

Hence real useful DOS programs, which only used console output could be run - e.g. various compilers and development tools, even on non PC compatible systems.

Yes later software made use of PC BIOS calls, and even assumed PC clone hardware, but there were some programs supplied with drivers for non PC compatible MS-DOS machines, and some even just used the likes of ANSI.SYS for screen output.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Fri May 10, 2019 9:36 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Online

Joined
Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:12 am

Posts
1210

Location
Brisbane, Queensland

Favourite OS
OS/2 Wrp 3.0
A really useful DOS in 64K. You're kidding, i suppose.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Why MS-DOS wasn't never released on Z80-CP/M Machines?        Posted: Fri May 10, 2019 3:42 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am

Posts
2006

Location
Slovenia, Central Europe.

Favourite OS
Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222B
d3vi1 wrote:
Off the top of my head, the following software interrupts would need to exist for any reasonably software:
int10h for video card access
int13h for disk access (partitioning software and such)
int14h for serial port access
Int17h for parallel port access
int1Ah for RTC access

I'm not saying that they couldn't be implemented as long as you had an x86 CPU, but without them MS-DOS wouldn't even work. They had to be implemented in the ibmbio.sys/io.sys.

Well, MS-DOS worked fine on the PC-98 with video access on INT 18h, for example. Now yes, a lot of DOS software for IBM compatibles did not work on PC-98, but anything that only used the DOS API, did (eg. LHA/LHARC, PKZIP/PKUNZIP, PKLITE, etc.).

_________________
Join #softhistory @ RoL IRC, a nice community for true enthusiasts!
Anime channel: #doki-doki @ RoL IRC, Mibbit, KiwiIRC.
The 86Box help channel is #softhistory now!

Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.


Top  Profile  WWW  ICQ  YIM
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All views expressed in these forums are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the BetaArchive site owner.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Copyright © 2006-2019

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS