Linked by Adam S on Wed 28th Jun 2006 18:57 UTC, submitted by groool
OSNews, Generic OSes FreeDos has been declared dead, and the homepage been moved to Sourceforge. From the FreeDos.org site: "On 28 June 1994, the project that became FreeDOS was announced to the world. It's 12 years later, we still haven't reached "1.0", and there's no sign of getting there anytime soon. I have given up. I've stopped waiting for "1.0". FreeDOS is dead." You can still see the message if your DNS servers haven't been updated yet.
Order by: Score:
RE
by Kroc on Wed 28th Jun 2006 19:12 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

So who's going to buy the domain? Would be a good place for a massive spyware payload considering the number of inbound links and google rank.

Reply Score: 5

RE
by Adam S on Wed 28th Jun 2006 19:17 UTC in reply to "RE"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

This is the rest of the page:
-------------------------------

I'll still continue to register the freedos.org domain, and I'll keep it current. That's the least I can do. But I'll no longer host the FreeDOS.org web site on my server. As of 22 June 2006, www.freedos.org has moved to the SourceForge.net servers.

If you are seeing this message, it probably means your upstream DNS is caching the old www.freedos.org value. Please refresh your DNS (if possible) or talk to your Internet provider. This is how your DNS lookup should look:

host www.freedos.org
www.freedos.org is an alias for vhost.sourceforge.net.
vhost.sourceforge.net has address 66.35.250.210

Until your DNS is updated, you can visit the new FreeDOS web site at freedos.sourceforge.net.

Reply Score: 1

That's sad
by thebluesgnr on Wed 28th Jun 2006 19:13 UTC
thebluesgnr
Member since:
2005-11-14

My notebook came with FreeDOS as an OS, though they didn't install it though, and neither did I (in case you're wondering the law here requires that an OS is sold with the computer, so I picked FreeDOS instead of that other one).

I guess the right wording here would be "FreeDOS development is dead", as FreeDOS will always be freely available.

Reply Score: 4

dos
by SEJeff on Wed 28th Jun 2006 19:16 UTC
SEJeff
Member since:
2005-11-05

You can download DRDos for free, but it is not opensource:
http://www.drdos.net/

Also, there is a really good DOS emulator called DOSBox which is actively developed.
http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/news.php?show_news=1

I use DOSBox on my parents Linux pc so my father can run an obscure dos based database app (paradox).

Reply Score: 5

RE: dos
by Beresford on Wed 28th Jun 2006 20:49 UTC in reply to "dos"
Beresford Member since:
2005-07-06

I think Dosbox uses FreeDOS for some things.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: dos
by dylansmrjones on Wed 28th Jun 2006 21:03 UTC in reply to "RE: dos"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

There is quite a lot of FreeDOS in DOSBox and the author(s) of DOSBox also states so.

So in a way FreeDOS still lives on.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: dos
by Brmbolec on Wed 28th Jun 2006 21:57 UTC in reply to "RE: dos"
Brmbolec Member since:
2005-07-23

Maybe there's some code from FreeDOS used in DOSbox, but as far I remember, actual FreeDOS is being used in DOSemu...
---
Pixel image editor - http://www.kanzelsberger.com

Reply Score: 0

Tragic...
by JacobMunoz on Wed 28th Jun 2006 19:19 UTC
JacobMunoz
Member since:
2006-03-17

It really hurts to see a project come this far and stop. There seem to be more and more projects that don't reach enough developers - or that those who work on them become busy in their personal lives (not that I can blame any of them). Hobbies take time, and that's getting harder and harder to come by these days...

(sigh)

Reply Score: 5

RE: Tragic...
by Ronald Vos on Thu 29th Jun 2006 19:22 UTC in reply to "Tragic..."
Ronald Vos Member since:
2005-07-06

There seem to be more and more projects that don't reach enough developers - or that those who work on them become busy in their personal lives (not that I can blame any of them).

What's more of a problem: there are only so many people skilled enough to be kernel-hackers. From what I heard a while back is that FreeDOS only had 1 dedicated kernelhacker. And that guy was busy..

Reply Score: 1

tomcat
Member since:
2006-01-06

"The magic of open-source software is not the software. It has nothing to do with the code at all. Most open-source code is terribly inferior to commercial software code," Hilf said. "The magic is the community and how you interact and participate in a community and make development transparent enough that the community believes in you and trusts you."

When the community evaporates, what's left?

Reply Score: 2

spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18

nothing.

Reply Score: 2

thebluesgnr Member since:
2005-11-14

What do you mean, what's left? The code is still here!

Unlike proprietary software, you can't kill free software.

Reply Score: 5

markjensen Member since:
2005-07-26

Well, it is not exactly like FreeDOS is/was a widely used or critical Open Source project. If it was, those that need it would take it up (they probably would have been involved to some extent, by bug reports or feature requests at a minimum).

Or they can keep what they have now (like Microsoft does with Win 95,NT, etc.) as the 'current' version is now at "end of life".

Larger projects, like the Linux kernel, Apache, Gnome, KDE and so forth are widely used, and therefore have a large community.

When the "community evaporates", that means the software is hardly in use any more, now doesn't it? It becomes extinct as the last user stops using it. Bill Hilf just puts a nice menacing spin on it. ;)

Reply Score: 1

d0nk3y Member since:
2005-12-15

Thats right - remember blender anyone?

Company structure around it dies but the code lives on!

It's alive! Muwwwaaahhaaahaaaaa

Reply Score: 1

Sphinx Member since:
2005-07-09

Unmaintained software
rots unused as tools change and
hardware abandoned

Reply Score: 1

I'd like to think...
by Shaman on Wed 28th Jun 2006 19:57 UTC
Shaman
Member since:
2005-11-15

...that nobody wanted to go back to DOS. I know I sure don't want to.

Reply Score: 1

RE: I'd like to think...
by fmaxwell on Wed 28th Jun 2006 20:25 UTC in reply to "I'd like to think..."
fmaxwell Member since:
2005-11-13

> ...that nobody wanted to go back to DOS.
> I know I sure don't want to.

I'd like to think that people understand that embedded systems don't always have a gigabyte of RAM, a 3ghz CPU, and a 20" LCD display.

DOS is useful because it can live in minimal systems that could never support Windows, Linux, or even QNX. There are plenty of places where Free/MS/PC/DR/etc.-DOS is a good solution.

Edited 2006-06-28 20:27

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: I'd like to think...
by SEJeff on Wed 28th Jun 2006 20:44 UTC in reply to "RE: I'd like to think..."
SEJeff Member since:
2005-11-05

Please tell me 1 embedded board that DOS makes a better fit than Linux does? New motorolla smart phones use Linux, not DOS.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I'd like to think...
by Anonymous Coward on Wed 28th Jun 2006 22:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I'd like to think..."
Anonymous Coward Member since:
2005-07-06

Know those bar-top video games like video poker and the like? They run DOS. I've seen 'em boot, the game just starts at the end of Autoexec.bat

If bar games aren't important, then what is?

Edited for spelling errors

Edited 2006-06-28 22:54

Reply Score: 3

RE: I'd like to think...
by hobgoblin on Wed 28th Jun 2006 22:36 UTC in reply to "I'd like to think..."
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

maybe not the ms-dos of old. but maybe a dos with dynamicaly unloadable TSR software, multiple paralell commandlines (this would require multitasking), and desktop thats basicly a collection of running software that autoload onto a special "virtual screen".

ok, so in many ways its linux, but without the multiple run levels and all the rest that makes it a fair bit harder to understand then the sequensial structure of config.sys and autoexec.bat...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: I'd like to think...
by killerbyte on Thu 29th Jun 2006 12:29 UTC in reply to "RE: I'd like to think..."
killerbyte Member since:
2006-02-19

Actually there is at least one commercial "multitask DOS-Like" operating system... It is called Real32.

Reply Score: 1

I remember DOS
by cyclops on Wed 28th Jun 2006 20:11 UTC
cyclops
Member since:
2006-03-12

DOS is dead. I'm not surprised this project, is finally gone. In the main it must have been a fairly thankless task.

Emulation from DOSBox, and recreating the engine has become more common for legacy software.

The last time I used freedos was to upgrade firmware on motherboard, but most of those upgrades for better or worse have become Windows(TM) based.

I suspect parts or the whole of this project will live on elsewhere.

Reply Score: 1

Re: I remember DOS
by tdemj on Wed 28th Jun 2006 20:43 UTC
tdemj
Member since:
2006-01-03

There are very few applications where DOS is still wonderfully useful. I'd only consider using it in extreme real-time conditions. The only major product that I know of using FreeDOS is SpinRite (http://www.grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm), which is a hard disk resurfacing and emergency data recovery tool. When it's simply impossible to boot your operating system anymore, and no OS can recognize your hard disk, then this can save your butt. There you can take advantage of a lightweight run-exclusively-my-process type of environment, where nanosecond precision timing is absolutely essencial, yet it has to run on a PC, not on a microcontroller. I can hardly think of any different application which can truly benefit from the simplicity of DOS, other than emergency hard disk data recovery software or backup/mirroring tools.

Reply Score: 4

Site update
by clausi on Wed 28th Jun 2006 21:24 UTC
clausi
Member since:
2005-07-12

I've no interest in FreeDOS but if the last remaining maintainer has stopped to work on FreeDOS, he should post a news on the new SF website and say so.Otherwise people will be fooled into thinking it's still an active project and waste their time testing it.

Additionally, if he still owns the domain, he might as well redirect to the new adress.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Site update
by BrianH on Wed 28th Jun 2006 21:29 UTC in reply to "Site update"
BrianH Member since:
2005-07-06

Additionally, if he still owns the domain, he might as well redirect to the new adress.

Better yet, according to his message he has reassigned the old domain to the new site.

Reply Score: 1

Open source doesn't die
by stew on Wed 28th Jun 2006 21:35 UTC
stew
Member since:
2005-07-06

Open source software doesn't die. It just fades away.

Reply Score: 1

Why wait for 1.0?
by BrianH on Wed 28th Jun 2006 21:36 UTC
BrianH
Member since:
2005-07-06

Why was he waiting for 1.0? As far as I can tell, FreeDOS was usefull as-is. People have been using it for years. What was missing? A number?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why wait for 1.0?
by Ronald Vos on Thu 29th Jun 2006 19:16 UTC in reply to "Why wait for 1.0?"
Ronald Vos Member since:
2005-07-06

Why was he waiting for 1.0? As far as I can tell, FreeDOS was usefull as-is. People have been using it for years. What was missing? A number?

Feature-completion. A lot of games won't run on FreeDOS as is by recollection.

Reply Score: 1

Sad
by patrick_ on Wed 28th Jun 2006 23:28 UTC
patrick_
Member since:
2006-03-02

That's sad... I always hate it when good software projects stop development.

Reply Score: 1

Maybe not so bad...
by blixel on Thu 29th Jun 2006 00:12 UTC
blixel
Member since:
2005-07-06

This is sad news for reasons of nostalgia, but I'm not sure it's bad news from a technical point of view. (Key words - *I am not sure* - meaning there could be reasons that I'm not aware of.)

But I would imagine any software that was relying on FreeDOS could be ported to run on OpenBSD/FreeBSD, or Linux. I run OpenBSD on an embedded computer which has minimal resources and the programs I use run flawlessly.

Are there really any systems in use these days, embedded or otherwise, that have such tight requrirements where a minimal *BSD/Linux kernel can't do the job?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Maybe not so bad...
by killerbyte on Thu 29th Jun 2006 12:33 UTC in reply to "Maybe not so bad..."
killerbyte Member since:
2006-02-19

I've a client whose disco runs a dos-compatible application in every bar. The machines are recycled 486's with 4Mb ram and no disk - the boot is made via floppy - and that's right, they all run FreeDos, with network support.

Reply Score: 1

openbsd-user
Member since:
2006-06-28

People get upset when they read the word 'forge'
( forged signatures , forged identity etc)

So, I think it doens't look good in your business communications, to link the word forge to a software project or to use the word in any website name:
i.e: forge.novell.com/modules/xfmod/project/?apparmor
Apparmor formely know as immunix


Some synonyms and antonyms of the word forge:

copying
counterfeit
commit forgery
duplication
work as a blacksmith
invent painstakingly
imitation
imitate fraudulently
stealing
swindle
theft
repetition
robbery
plagiarism

With regards,
Openbsd-user

Edited 2006-06-29 00:47

Reply Score: 0

macintroll Member since:
2005-11-15

Okay, so which of the items in your list are "antonyms of the word forge"?

Answer: none of them

"Synonym" is an antonym of "antonym".

Reply Score: 1

openbsd-user Member since:
2006-06-28

I can think of many more negative words for the word forge than positive ones.

Let's give it a try:

Innovate, ms is very innovative, and always ten years way ahead.

Advance, the X protocol is an advanced stable protocol

Progressiveness, step by step progression

Improved, Vista is a great improvement in new technology

New

Can somebody explain the fun/double meaning of forge
in the website newsforge. Am I missing something ?

With regards

Edited 2006-06-29 06:06

Reply Score: 1

re: "I hate the word forge"
by oma2la on Thu 29th Jun 2006 00:58 UTC
oma2la
Member since:
2005-07-05

You've got a point, but don't forget the other, more creative meaning of the word 'forge'. Think of the blacksmith's forge, where shapeless metal was worked into useful tools. And horsehoes. Everybody needs those... ;)

Reply Score: 5

It's takes an important role in boot images
by checko on Thu 29th Jun 2006 01:42 UTC
checko
Member since:
2006-06-29

There are some CD burner programs use freeDos as a boot image.

It is still the best solution for the boot image because the MS DOS is not free, and it's quite useable.

Reply Score: 1

hmm
by Tomasz Dominikowski on Thu 29th Jun 2006 06:57 UTC
Tomasz Dominikowski
Member since:
2005-08-08

I work in a computer shop as a technician and I often see FreeDOS being used by AsRock's drivers discs, when you try to boot one (mainly for sata driver floppy generation). So it's being used to this day (these are brand new AsRock boards).

Reply Score: 1

Censorship?
by Marcellus on Thu 29th Jun 2006 07:14 UTC
Marcellus
Member since:
2005-08-26

Or why is the death message not on the sourceforge page?

At the very least I'd expect an official statement on the freedos sourceforge page to clarify to users why they suddenly get to sourceforge.

Reply Score: 2

I wonder...
by jbalmer on Thu 29th Jun 2006 08:34 UTC
jbalmer
Member since:
2005-12-18

I wonder why a free project would die. Isn't GPL a guarantee that projects that are released in this licence cannot be killed by the people who created them in the first place ?

And I am supposing that freedos has been released under GPL, Can't a person who is interested in it actually start maintaining the project?

Reply Score: 1

Only a joke
by RockRock on Thu 29th Jun 2006 08:52 UTC
RockRock
Member since:
2006-06-29
Uhm, guys...
by deathshadow on Thu 29th Jun 2006 09:35 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

I have the NASTY feeling this was a squatter being an butt monkey - otherwise why would there be no mention on the sourceforge version...

MUCH LESS, that www.freedos.org works (and continues to work) just fine, only freedos.org was returning the message (and now returns server not found)

Reply Score: 2

ok then..
by csynt on Thu 29th Jun 2006 09:54 UTC
csynt
Member since:
2006-03-19

Not suprised to see they stopped development.. what else can you improve on freedos ?? multitaskin' ? ;-)

Its a nice OS for old machines esp. if you combine it with openGEM !! no kidding.. its a nice and simple environment to perform some simple tasks on that old machines...

Reply Score: 1

DOS
by Andre on Thu 29th Jun 2006 11:15 UTC
Andre
Member since:
2005-07-06

yeah this is sad ... but DOS had its best years.
And maybe DOS is still the best operating system ever,
it just doesn't give what the computer user of today
wants. Today people want GUI and skinning support and other useless good looking useless stuff.

Reply Score: 1

Not dead yet
by xiaokj on Thu 29th Jun 2006 14:38 UTC
xiaokj
Member since:
2005-06-30

Well, judging by the situation, we can only say that the development of FreeDOS has officially paused. Even if it is for an indefinite amount of time, its not going to die in any way (even if SF.net dies, it can live on...)

Really, we need to be more cautious of how we use words.

Also, FreeDOS has a very fine niche to fill. It simply won't die in the next few years. Although I've removed my floppy drive, DOS is still the only "language" MS emulates as a command line best. Too many scripts and niche apps run on DOS and FreeDOS does them just fine.

Reply Score: 1

So...
by 1c3d0g on Thu 29th Jun 2006 14:51 UTC
1c3d0g
Member since:
2005-07-06

...for instance, SpinRite uses FreeDOS for its (temporary) OS, does this mean that Steve Gibson will have to switch to something else (Linux)?

Reply Score: 1

FreeDOS is not dead
by chase@osdev on Fri 30th Jun 2006 00:27 UTC
chase@osdev
Member since:
2006-06-21

Spoke with Jim(owner of FreeDOS.org) and FreeDOS is not dead. As the last sentence in the OSNews article implies, no one was expected to see the message. Not sure how that equals "Official"....

Reply Score: 3

April's Fool
by NTOSKRNL_VXE on Mon 3rd Jul 2006 09:12 UTC
NTOSKRNL_VXE
Member since:
2006-07-03

"I think Dosbox uses FreeDOS for some things."

Maybe. But I prefer true DOS without silly things
like EMUs or BOXes.

And, FreeDOS is not dead. It was a delayed April's fool.

Reply Score: 1