News

  Frontpage
  News archive
  News topics

Resources

  MSX Forum
  Articles
  Reviews
  Fair reports
  Photo shoots
  Fairs and meetings
  Polls
  Links
  Search

Software

Downloads
Webshop

MRC

  Who we are
  Join our team
  Donate
  Policies
  Contact us
  Link to Us
  Statistics

Lost your password?

Statistics

There are 59 guests and 6 MSX friends online

You are an anonymous user.

MSX-DOS3?

Monday, September 27, 2004 - 17:21
Submitted by: [D-Tail]
Topic: Development

We've found quite an interesting project announcement at Grauw's web spot. Grauw had the idea of making MSX-DOS3 (as a kind of successor to ASCII's/Microsoft's MSX-DOS and MSX-DOS2), which would at least be MSX-DOS2 compatible. He decided to dedicate a complete web page to this project, which you can find over here.

Although he says the amount of already written code is not that impressive, he seems to have worked out quite some details. Aside from some technical ideas and the feature list, Grauw also put his motivation on this page.

Relevant link: Grauw's web spot - DOS 3

By Google

By konamiman on September 27 2004, 20:01

Very interisting. Especially the filesystems and the malloc part.
But sorry, I still thinking that multitasking is a too big piece of cake for an MSX. Well, I hope I'm wrong. :-)

By snout on September 27 2004, 20:36

The plans of Grauw's MSX-DOS3 have been around for quite some time now. It's good to see there's a website about it now. So how about it? I'd really like to see this happen, as this MSX-DOS3 clearly has quite some advantages. Grauw? Are you up to it?

And to Konamiman; just because you -can- multitask doesn't mean you -have- to

By dhau on September 27 2004, 22:11

A new better DOS is a good idea, but why infridge on copyrights? Call it Grauw-DOS

By Grauw on September 28 2004, 00:33

dhau: sounds nice

. The name is 100% an 'internal name', so don't worry.

I am not sure whether I will really get going on this project, I just wrote down some thoughts and what my intentions would be, should I really start to work heavily on this. For the time being I plan to do some more research and write initial code as I need it, but I am not working on this on a high profile (yet?). So please don't consider me writing down some of my thoughts on this on my web site as going 'official', as I don't want to raise false expectations

.

konamiman: multitasking is very much doable. Let's take an example case where you have 3 programs running: 1. a command line, 2. a text editor, and 3. an assembling job. In this case, 1 and 2 will 95% of the time idle waiting for user input, and only 3 will be active. This is just one example, but a very common case.

~Grauw