SEAL Forum Index SEAL
The SEAL Forums
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

SEAL's Direction...

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SEAL Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
roamer_1



Joined: 29 Dec 2003
Posts: 5
Location: Montana, USA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 3:11 am    Post subject: SEAL's Direction... Reply with quote

Hi Gents,

I too am excited by the activity on this page. I have been lurking here
for some time and have a cent or two to add...

:: Argument--------------------------------------------------------------

I see alot of talk about "Operating System" going on here and writing
apps "for" SEAL which is all well and good, but please remember that you
guys are as close as anyone to developing a "real" GUI for DOS. If it is
indeed "for" DOS then shouldn't it first and foremost work with and
complement the existing DOS environment (at least as well as WIN)??

I see you guys wondering what APPS/Features would attract more
Programmers/Users. Again, all well and good, but there are probably still
more apps available for DOS than any other sys and as you know DOS users
have been hung out to dry by M$- Wouldn't your primary audience be those

disaffected outcasts? Isn't there a ready-made veritable host of
applications/programmers at your beck-and-call?

:: What I need is a GUI --------------------------------------------------

Please be a GUI for DOS before and above all other things. That is really
all that is needed to preserve DOS itself. And make the GUI modular- The
basic desktop essentials first, able to run off a ROM or Ramdrv, small
enough for legacy (and useful for embedded guys too). Then maybe a
networking plugin, multimedia plugin, WINE, etc. Plug the rest in as you
will. you can bloat it up as much as M$ does, but leave that lightweight
core fast, accessible upgradeable, and documented. Kinda like being able
to pull WIN31 out of WIN9x to use for light-weight or portable work but
with 9x desktop, FAT32 and LFN

Perhaps the plugins could be hierarchical as well,
i.e. modular networking-
where the light version is capable of loading a user specified driver, but
the heavy version could search an expandable PNP database and install the
proper driver on the fly... (nice for techs like me).

I need memory access /management to shove all the drivers out of the way.

I need a really extremely serious file manager- Probably the most
important function of a GUI is file management. Have you ever looked at
porting DOS Navigator(Open Source Project)? It's a Norton Commander clone
available in 16bit, dpmi, win32 with LFN API support (LFN w/ DOSLFN),
Multi-archive support ('nuther must-have), built in commandline,
association, neat editor, and many, many, more useful features. Would look
nice skinned for SEAL.

I need a very serious editor, multi-file, tabs, maybe even with color
coding, perhaps capable of HEX and DISK.

I need it to work with or continue to work with existing common drivers-
EMM386, NTFSDOS/Pro,DOSLFN, DOSKEY, SMARTDRV XMSDSK, DUSE etc, I need to
fire it from MSDOS 710, FREEDOS, OPEN/DRDOS, ROMDOS, etc (Not become yet
ANOTHER Multi-boot option). Native NTFS, Ext2, etc. would be great.

I would really like (almost really need) a DOS Console. I have read that
it's a drag, but it would be very nice to multi-task consoles with progs
running inside the desktop. If not multi, I would be very happy with one
that is "Real DOS" and compatable with most progs. This is the
signature move, if it (SEAL) isn't compatable with DOS, then what is it
for?

I would like disk utilities- Part, Defrag, Scandisk, Format. DEFRAG is not
even available for VFat DOS

I would like a fast easy way to put icons on the desktop and in the bar at
the same time. I need to easily link to anything. I need to easily
associate with anything.

And someone needs to write some stuff down:

FAQS Like: Why slash in commandline instead of backslash? (WTF?
Smells like linux)

INSTALL / CONFIG like: I really thought the RUN line was some weird
BASH #...
Till I found Allegro was set up for UK (I need US) keyboard
(BS: might opt that in the installer)

SERIOUS HELP.TXT and ONLINE KBAs: Why does it crash exactly every 10 min??
why does Maximize quit working?? How to use the Registry???

I would be willing to compile / Edit that knowledge if you can figure out
how to get it into my brain without writing it all yourselves anyway.

:: Summary and subtle exit------------------------------------------------

Well, I will quit now- Started out to give you 2 cents, I'm probably at
$5 or $10...
Before ya flame me: Like I said, I am a tech, not a programmer, and I
know that I am asking for the moon. But I really think your direction
must lie in SEAL's function. What it NEEDS to do to achieve its basic
function- the rest is moot. It has to work well for your client / user and
that is mostly going to be (most first) IT/Tech, DOS Powerusers, Gamers,
and Legacy. If they will use it they will sustain it. As it grows in
popularity more people will write for it, and it could easy get to home
desktops in time. ("If you build it they will come" haha )

I have been looking high and low for a GUI that meets even some of these
requirements and have found absolutely NOTHING (and I am sure I am not
alone). The 16bit ones are easy to use / config, but are clunky and don't
do LFN. The new 32bit stuff has great graphics, LFN, but nary a one will
play nice with it's DOS roots, and most are more concerned with looks and
goodies than with function. I am sure the sweet spot is somewhere in that
middle ground.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
crashfourit



Joined: 10 Dec 2003
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We could write Seal so that it can be stand alown (OS) and work with dos at one's choice. Although one should be able to strip it down to only what one needs.
_________________
"seal" must be in the subject line if you email me.
If you try to make something idiot proof, some one will come and make a better idiot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Fenix*NBK*



Joined: 29 Nov 2003
Posts: 28

PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2004 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As for archivator - the 7-Zip is simply the best one - it goes head-to-head with top proprietary compressors, and since this is a small util, it can be ported to seal quite easily.

As for command line - I think it must be like in Windows 95 - so you could:
a) boot into DOS before Win95
b) exit to DOS from Win95
c) start Win95 from DOS
d) run DOS-emulation (V86) from Win95 (this emulation is far from perfect, but it works with about half of my apps) - actually the MS-DOS promt.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
roamer_1



Joined: 29 Dec 2003
Posts: 5
Location: Montana, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2004 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@crashfourit:

That would be excellent. Perhaps take it a bit farther though, and make the core 100% DOS comliant and driver independant (Maybe even 16bit for legacy): After all, IF it works I can always load drivers from DOS for sound, CDROM/CDRW, USB, Even LFN/NTFS and UDMA (MEM probs though...). It will run on ANY X86 which is an awesome feature. Then build your OS around that core to offer a more full featured experience. I know that seems bass-akwards, but that is basically how win9x does it- You just can't get at the 3.1 core anymore for some insane reason (well, you can, it's just a significant pain in the %##).

It would seem that there would be benefits for the SEAL Team in this approach:

1). Less to do to make a presentable product- Everyone works on the Basic OS and basic apps. NOTE: I am not implying that SEAL2 is not presentable- but that the total re-write would be less intensive (also more quality)`

2). INSTANT Applications for EVERYTHING through DOS. This is already there, just needs to be a bit easier to set up and a wee bit more compatable(IMHO).

3). "Extended" Services (THE OS) such as WINE, Driver Systems, Extended Mutimedia, Internet, etc. can be handled singlely, can be "swarmed" by everyone, can be handled at a more leisurely pace, and no "one" holds all the cards. NOTE: no offense on that last bit, it seems to have been an issue in the past and has set back development quite a bit.

4). Portable? Can one rewrite just the core gui to run on NT? would the "OS" then be able to run on NT? Same for *.nix? PS: SEAL on NT would be a useful thing. SEE WinPE, Bart's PE BUILDER.

5). Maybe better for UPGRADES?

DISCLAIMER: Just suggestions, It ain't ever as easy as it looks, No I don't know what the hell I am talking about.

Regards,
The F@T Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
roamer_1



Joined: 29 Dec 2003
Posts: 5
Location: Montana, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2004 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Fenix*NBK*

I too used 7-Zip in WIN for a long time. I recently found TUGZip which I like even better. You might try it out .

I recommended DOS Nav(OSP) because I thought a DOS program would be easier to work with and because I find the side-by-side approach for file management much more appealing (if not more functional). I cannot stress enough how useful DN(OSP) is- If you can't use it directly it would still be a worthy model for file management.

I like everything you said about the command-line. I would add a couple other things:

DOS/WIN Hotkeys including Commander/Explorer

DOS Conventions (drive:\path\file.exe /switch) in command-line (DOSBOX and RUN) and *.ln would be EXTREMELY desireable.

SEAL needs to search %PATH%, use %VARS% and Batch.bat %1 %2 . (DOSBOX, RUN, .LN)
%VARS% are what makes DOS so nimble.

i.e. It is a drag to type the exact path in RUN when my BINS or BATS to get to them are all in %PATH%

i.e. I use my DOS programs on rescue zips and CDROMs and RAMDRIVEs. I anchor all of my DOS stuff with the SEAL GUI. I am currently writing a batch that basically will write all the .LNs in the Programs DIR on every SEAL startup dependent upon my assigned %VARS% because my BINS may be in different places (CDROM, RAM, HDD). I even MD'd a BATCH dir in SEAL's DIR structure hoping to link to "batch/my.bat" and let the batch do the %VARS%, but no joy. SEAL won't process batches that contain %VARS%. It isn't that SEAL won't do what I need, but it is alot of overhead to make it work

I may be too N00B. There may be a way to do these things, but it isn't evident to me.

I don't mean to bawl so much- I REALLY like SEAL and use it all the time. You've all done a spectacular job. I am trying to be "constructively critical" so these things may be added to the new ver.

Thx for the comment,
The F@t Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
biggyp



Joined: 16 Oct 2001
Posts: 1473
Location: England, United Kingdom

PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2004 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TUGZip may be free as in beer, but it's not free software.
_________________
http://www.theopencd.org/ - OpenSource for the Masses

Gallery

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
roamer_1



Joined: 29 Dec 2003
Posts: 5
Location: Montana, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@BiggyP:

I sit corrected. I never have enjoyed that particular comparison though... I like beer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
biggyp



Joined: 16 Oct 2001
Posts: 1473
Location: England, United Kingdom

PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i too like beer, especially of the free variety, but the definition between Free Software and freeware needs to be made
_________________
http://www.theopencd.org/ - OpenSource for the Masses

Gallery

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
^_Daniel_^



Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2004 6:29 am    Post subject: Cludge? Reply with quote

Core smaller (does anyone know Assembly?) and cludge optional x.x Talking about WINE even?

I use cracked QuikMenuIII - It is not freeware, let alone open sourced. It does little that is anything flash... But it IS small and it DOES have VMem support and it IS fast and it CAN drop in and out of DOS and GUI..

I mean.. It IS DOS.. No Kernel, barely even holding what can be concidered a core, it is just a simple, small, fast, reliable GUI for DOS.

Am I plugging proprietry software? No.. I am just giving an egsample of why smaller is better.. YES with cludge the possibilaties become endless, but in real mode or even V86 mode, coded in C, it is just going to get fat, slow, memory intensive, unstable, blah blah blah... Trying to run XP in DOS mode does not sound like an acceptable vision.

At the start, the guy was right. It has to get smaller, even have a usable system on a 360k disk (Does noone here know Assembly?). If you build it, they will come. All the DOSers out there that have resighned to the cludge and fated destiny of Linux and all the DOSers that still cling desperatly to the beauty of real mode will flock to SEAL if the above mentioned traits are given into it.

>Small.
>DOS COMPLIANT! FULLY, even if only to have a tiny conventional residant and drop in and out of a command line, with nothing but XMS memory filled with suspended SEALness.
>Less cludgery! Yes skinning is nice, yes it makes the user feel at home in 'their own OS' but it is wasteful and bloating and blah blah blah.
>Unless you are managing 32bit proccessing, or MTasking/MThreading there is little need for much of a kernel/core. Most of the things can be done at DOS level, assuming the libraries are there. (check the Dwin site)
- http://dwin.sourceforge.net/ -
>Modular system! Yay! Don't need this *throws* Don't need that *throws* Don't need that *throws* Oh damne, that bmp being thrown out makes SEAL WORK DUMB!
>More system level application. the techie is right! Hexing and Remote debugging and shell accounts and User management and I am drooling.
(Repeats are to second previous genius)

OMG! I want a SEAL all technical and attractive, but not solely atractive and fast. Slide up to a linux junkie in their KDE. Show them my system technician style laptop with the SEAL logo cranking!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
crashfourit



Joined: 10 Dec 2003
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2004 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I did come up with a nasm macro that makes calling a C function easier in Asm.
Also, it can 'wrap' a ASM function so that it can be called as a C function.
Oh, i did write it for flat 32bit mode.
_________________
"seal" must be in the subject line if you email me.
If you try to make something idiot proof, some one will come and make a better idiot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
^_Daniel_^



Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2004 5:26 pm    Post subject: There we go then. Reply with quote

Half way there then?

That SHOULD be baiting to use ASM for the kernel.. get a flat32 environ? Even if still in realmode, SEALX will become very powerful... More powerful then it would be, even with the Force core.

The only porblem is, how many ASM programmers can you find to get into it? For DOS, there are heaps, no?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
ucosty



Joined: 02 Dec 2003
Posts: 41
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Sun Jan 11, 2004 7:56 pm    Post subject: Re: There we go then. Reply with quote

^_Daniel_^ wrote:
Half way there then?

That SHOULD be baiting to use ASM for the kernel.. get a flat32 environ? Even if still in realmode, SEALX will become very powerful... More powerful then it would be, even with the Force core.

The only porblem is, how many ASM programmers can you find to get into it? For DOS, there are heaps, no?


Flat real mode won't work with DJGPP as it is a segment memory model. DJGPP only likes paged memory. In fact most 32bit compilers only work properly with paged memory. You would have you use a 16bit compiler and therefore a really old version of Allegro.

A true PM environment is still good tho...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
roamer_1



Joined: 29 Dec 2003
Posts: 5
Location: Montana, USA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 17, 2004 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@^_Daniel_^:

Thanks for the vote of confidence!

I looked at QuickMenu, but as I recall, no LFN/VFAT. (yes/no?)

I wholeheartedly agree with (and wish to re-emphasize your re-emphasis on) your comments in "If you build it...". This IS the singular, most salient point.

I don't care about WINE. Others are wanting WIN32, and I agree it would be cool, but not needed at the first. I was attempting to use it for illustration as it has been bandied about as part of the whole "Let's make an OS" thing.

P.S, I am no genius (but I can lift heavy things ), just about every serious post about what SEAL needs says some/most of what I am asking for. I think I just have a firm grip on the obvious.

@Anyone:

In the interest of education (I really do want to know), I wish to reposition my previous posts and throw this out there:

Can anyone tell me (in a small bunch of nutshells) Why NOT DOS? Is it just a bootstrap? Why NOT full compatability with improvement? What are the obstacles?

Who do you guys think your users are? What "markets" are you aiming at?

The F@t Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
crashfourit



Joined: 10 Dec 2003
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Sat Jan 17, 2004 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

1. You have to hack dos to make it multitask.
2. To have more than one dos task you can use the 386+ VM controle to
do this.
3. You whoulld have to trap legicy x86 interrups in the PM enviroment.
4. IRQs 0-7, Bios int 0x13, and Video Rom int 0x10 conflect with 386+
exeptions.
5. Withall that, you have the stablity problem; plus much more.

That souds like a lot of work.
_________________
"seal" must be in the subject line if you email me.
If you try to make something idiot proof, some one will come and make a better idiot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SEAL Forum Index -> General All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group