I am thinking of just getting an os/2 licence and just run a bbs off that. Im too lazy to run linux.


--- WWIV 5.9.03748[Windows]
* Origin: inland utopia * california * iutopia.duckdns.org:2023 (21:4/108)

I am thinking of just getting an os/2 licence and just run a bbs off that. too lazy to run linux.

Good for you. Atleast that has "real DOS" to run the BBS in and not some bullshit emulated crap of linux.

... No battle plan survives contact with the enemy

--- Renegade v1.35/DOS
* Origin: The Titantic BBS Telnet - ttb.rgbbs.info (21:1/144)

Exodus wrote to Utopian Galt <=-

I am thinking of just getting an os/2 licence and just run a bbs off that. too lazy to run linux.

Good for you. Atleast that has "real DOS" to run the BBS in and not
some bullshit emulated crap of linux.

OS/2 is "real DOS"?



... Excuse my driving ... I'm trying to reload.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.29-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

Good for you. Atleast that has "real DOS" to run the BBS in and not some bullshit emulated crap of linux.

OS/2 is "real DOS"?

More so than anything we have today without installing DOS itself.

... Exxon - greasing the coastline for smoother boating!

--- Renegade v1.35/DOS
* Origin: The Titantic BBS Telnet - ttb.rgbbs.info (21:1/144)

Exodus wrote to Gamgee <=-

Good for you. Atleast that has "real DOS" to run the BBS in and not some bullshit emulated crap of linux.

OS/2 is "real DOS"?

More so than anything we have today without installing DOS itself.

Well, OK... So it would be safe to say that running a DOS BBS in OS/2
would *also* be using "some bullshit emulated crap", right?




... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.29-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

Re: Re: windows 10/32bit
By: Exodus to Utopian Galt on Sat Oct 18 2025 02:14 pm

Good for you. Atleast that has "real DOS" to run the BBS in and not some bullshit emulated crap of linux.

Is this a trolling attempt?

DOS application emulation on most popular operating systems is quite good at this point.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
--- SBBSecho 3.29-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

Well, OK... So it would be safe to say that running a DOS BBS in OS/2
would *also* be using "some bullshit emulated crap", right?

He certainly has a way with words, doesn't he? :P

|03--|11[|05esc|13!|05dEMONIC|11]|03--|07

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15a
* Origin: [>mONTEREYbBS.COM>] (21:3/203)

Gamgee wrote to Exodus <=-

Good for you. Atleast that has "real DOS" to run the BBS in and not
some bullshit emulated crap of linux.

OS/2 is "real DOS"?

Yes, and more. You could run OS/2's DOS in a window, or run VDMs with
multiple versions of DOS or multiple configurations.

I ran LANTastic in a DOS virtual machine, loading MS-DOS 6 and the
LANTastic DOS drivers. That window could talk to my c: drive and talk to
the BBS running DOS.

The beauty of OS/2 was a gateway to OS/2 native binaries. I was running Maximus, BinkleyTerm and Squish, with TimEdit and a bunch of other
utilities under DOS. Moved it all to an OS/2 window, then replaced the
binaries with OS/2 binaries and the BBS chugged along in its window,
barely making a dent in my system resources. This was back when a 486/66
with 16 MB of RAM was decent.



--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

Gamgee wrote to Exodus <=-

Well, OK... So it would be safe to say that running a DOS BBS in OS/2 would *also* be using "some bullshit emulated crap", right?

Depends, see my previous post. You could run any DOS you want in a
virtual machine, or run OS/2s DOS. They even marketed it as "A Better
DOS than DOS, a better Windows than Windows".



--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

esc wrote to Gamgee <=-

Well, OK... So it would be safe to say that running a DOS BBS in OS/2
would *also* be using "some bullshit emulated crap", right?

He certainly has a way with words, doesn't he? :P

Someone leaked my code for BEC-DOS, apparently.



--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

More so than anything we have today without installing DOS itself.

Well, OK... So it would be safe to say that running a DOS BBS in OS/2
would *also* be using "some bullshit emulated crap", right?

No, because IBM and MS worked together on OS/2 and there is real mode DOS there.

... If the enemy is within range, so are you.

--- Renegade v1.35/DOS
* Origin: The Titantic BBS Telnet - ttb.rgbbs.info (21:1/144)

Is this a trolling attempt?

Nope, just my distaste for linux.

... At last, the Eludium Q36 explosive space modulator

--- Renegade v1.35/DOS
* Origin: The Titantic BBS Telnet - ttb.rgbbs.info (21:1/144)

Well, OK... So it would be safe to say that running a DOS BBS in OS/2 would *also* be using "some bullshit emulated crap", right?

Depends, see my previous post. You could run any DOS you want in a
virtual machine, or run OS/2s DOS. They even marketed it as "A Better
DOS than DOS, a better Windows than Windows".

That DOS was pretty good. I ran a BBS under Warp 4 for a long time but
finally wanted some OS features that it could no longer provide.

So the DOS BBS now runs under "emulated crap" while the main BBS is linux native. ;)


* SLMR 2.1a * Remember when safe sex was not getting caught in the act?
--- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (21:1/175)

Well, OK... So it would be safe to say that running a DOS BBS in OS/2 would *also* be using "some bullshit emulated crap", right?

No, because IBM and MS worked together on OS/2 and there is real mode DOS there.

True. However, at some point during the evolution of Windows, didn't the
DOS terminal go from being "real" to emulated once the underpinnings switch from 9x to NT?


* SLMR 2.1a * Basic Flying Rule #1: Keep the pointy end forward.
--- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (21:1/175)

On 20 Oct 2025, Dumas Walker said the following...

Well, OK... So it would be safe to say that running a DOS BBS in OS/2 would *also* be using "some bullshit emulated crap", right?

No, because IBM and MS worked together on OS/2 and there is real mode DO there.

True. However, at some point during the evolution of Windows, didn't the DOS terminal go from being "real" to emulated once the underpinnings switch from 9x to NT?

we've talked about this before.. it's been 'emulated' since the Windows 3 days. by the cpu and by windows. "fake" memory, "fake" computer "fake" DOS.. even in NT (2000 XP 7..) 32bit tho. no, you were not safe from this evil
emulation in DesqView either. so much for this "muh pure DOS" concept.

this was a pretty important advancement in computing heh

the main difference between windows 3, 9x, etc and NT is that the older ones were allowed access to the hardware directly for *un-emulated* calls. to apply modern terminology to windows 95, your copy of Monkey Island would be running
in a VM, with hardware pass-through to your Sound Blaster 16.

OS/2 took it a step further and can emulate any version of DOS. you can slap
a boot disk in the drive and double click an icon and a window will pop up with a copy of MS-DOS 6.22 inside of it. i've used this before (to rebuild the Borland Pascal 7 RTL with an inbuilt runtime error 200 fix) because it wouldn't progress past a certain point in the regular OS/2 DOS window.

dosemu[2] works in the same way if there's a 32-bit cpu in your machine, and is no less "authentic" than running it on windows 3..

so yeah pretty much anyone who has run a multi-node bbs on a single machine has been running some emulated DOS junk that they should be ashamed of. or some elitist drivel i don't know..

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (21:1/616)

Re: Re: windows 10/32bit
By: Dumas Walker to EXODUS on Mon Oct 20 2025 10:11 am

True. However, at some point during the evolution of Windows, didn't the DO terminal go from being "real" to emulated once the underpinnings switch from 9x to NT?

Yes, but those were interesting times. Windows 2000 finally got timeslicing under control, we got faster PCs, and we stumbled upon the fact that Windows 2K could run OS/2 console apps just fine!

Which was good, because the emulated terminal wasn't quite there. Qedit for DOS would run choppily, and I could out-type it. Qedit for OS/2 ran fine in a DOS window and was much smoother.
--- SBBSecho 3.30-Win32
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

On 20 Oct 2025 at 06:07p, poindexter FORTRAN pondered and said...

Which was good, because the emulated terminal wasn't quite there. Qedit for DOS would run choppily, and I could out-type it. Qedit for OS/2 ran fine in a DOS window and was much smoother.

DOS was so anemic and let programs get away with so many shenanigans
to get around its limitations, that I'm not at all surprised that some
of those workarounds came back to bite once those programs were moved
to a real operating system that did things like enforce memory safety
and isolate programs from the hardware. That pain would have already
been suffered in the OS/2 world a few years before.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

Re: Re: windows 10/32bit
By: Exodus to Arelor on Sun Oct 19 2025 12:30 pm

Is this a trolling attempt?

Nope, just my distaste for linux.

Then I wonder what the difference is between emulated crap on Linux and emulated crap elsewhere.

I bet emulated crap in Windows is fine? :-P


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
--- SBBSecho 3.29-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

Then I wonder what the difference is between emulated crap on Linux and emulated crap elsewhere.

I bet emulated crap in Windows is fine? :-P

No, its not. The reason I am no longer running Win10 for the BBS. Each update slowly ruined NTVDM (Virtual DOS Machine - ie emulated), so I needed to go back to something more stable and DOS like such as XP. Which is also
semi emulated.

BBS stuff was made for MS-DOS, in DOS days. Even PC-DOS, etc. would have issues running sometimes.

... You don't still use a human and a keyboard do you?

--- Renegade v1.35/DOS
* Origin: The Titantic BBS Telnet - ttb.rgbbs.info (21:1/144)

EXODUS (21:1/144) wrote to Arelor <=-

No, its not. The reason I am no longer running Win10 for the BBS.
Each update slowly ruined NTVDM (Virtual DOS Machine - ie emulated), so
I needed to go back to something more stable and DOS like such as XP. Which is also semi emulated.

I would love to go back to WIndows 10, but as soon as Windows 10 ages, script kiddies are going to find things to mess with my virtual machine.


... "Spam, spam, spam, spam, baked beans and spam."
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52


--- WWIV 5.9.03748[Windows]
* Origin: inland utopia * california * iutopia.duckdns.org:2023 (21:4/108)

Exodus wrote to Arelor <=-

Then I wonder what the difference is between emulated crap on Linux and emulated crap elsewhere.
I bet emulated crap in Windows is fine? :-P

No, its not. The reason I am no longer running Win10 for the BBS.
Each update slowly ruined NTVDM (Virtual DOS Machine - ie emulated), so
I needed to go back to something more stable and DOS like such as XP. Which is also semi emulated.

So.... if I recall correctly from earlier in this thread, you were quite offended about running "DOS BBS software" in any kind of emulated
environment. I believe the word used was "emulated crap". And yet...
you run DOS BBS software in a Windows emulator (whether it's Win10 or
WinXP doesn't much matter). Having trouble understanding that logic.

It seems to me that you could (should?) be running the old DOS software
on .... DOS.

BBS stuff was made for MS-DOS, in DOS days. Even PC-DOS, etc. would
have issues running sometimes.

Newsflash! BBS stuff is now made for many other OS's, most of which run natively on the OS, with no need for "emulated crap".



... I'm going to make something Canadian out of maple syrup and beavers.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.29-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

I would love to go back to WIndows 10, but as soon as Windows 10 ages, scr kiddies are going to find things to mess with my virtual machine.

I didn't mind it either running the BBS, but every time they screwed with the NTVDM on a windows "update" which is plain bullshit, I had doors from 89-93 that didn't work any longer, but worked on Win7, Win XP, etc. Just pissed me off. Why ruin something that WORKS and say, you have to do it this way now, instead of saying, there is is, deal with whats left, and here's something new. Not like DOS takes up that much system resources.

... The hippopotamus rests on his belly in the mud. And you?

--- Renegade v1.35/DOS
* Origin: The Titantic BBS Telnet - ttb.rgbbs.info (21:1/144)

So.... if I recall correctly from earlier in this thread, you were quite offended about running "DOS BBS software" in any kind of emulated environment. I believe the word used was "emulated crap". And yet...

Just Linux. I find it to be a horrible replacement for what is here. Nick will agree with me. I HATE jumping thru hoops to just read a friggin' SD card or an external drive because of a permission bullshit issue.

Newsflash! BBS stuff is now made for many other OS's, most of which run natively on the OS, with no need for "emulated crap".

Yes, but the doors everyone bitches and moans about NOT working are made for DOS and ment to run on DOS based. It's like be trying to shove a Chevy
engine in a Ford. Could it be done? Yes, but why would I put shit into a Ford?

It seems to me that you could (should?) be running the old DOS software
on .... DOS.

If DOS could task 10 windows at a time, sure I would. DV isn't gonna cut it. OS/2 doesn't have the applications to run in the background to off-set the ones written for windows. ArcaOS is a nice upgrade, but it doesn't cut it.

... Noble deeds that are concealed are most esteemed.

--- Renegade v1.35/DOS
* Origin: The Titantic BBS Telnet - ttb.rgbbs.info (21:1/144)

Exodus wrote to Gamgee <=-

So.... if I recall correctly from earlier in this thread, you were quite offended about running "DOS BBS software" in any kind of emulated environment. I believe the word used was "emulated crap". And yet...

Just Linux. I find it to be a horrible replacement for what is here.
Nick will agree with me. I HATE jumping thru hoops to just read a friggin' SD card or an external drive because of a permission bullshit issue.

You're doing it wrong. I plug in an external drive (SD/USB/SATA,
whatever), and it auto-mounts, ready to use. <SHRUG>

Newsflash! BBS stuff is now made for many other OS's, most of which run natively on the OS, with no need for "emulated crap".

Yes, but the doors everyone bitches and moans about NOT working are
made for DOS and ment to run on DOS based. It's like be trying to
shove a Chevy engine in a Ford. Could it be done? Yes, but why would
I put shit into a Ford?

Again, my experience is different. I have dozens of DOS doors all
working perfectly on a Linux 64-bit system. Yes, emulated, but you'd
never know it as a BBS user. They're probably faster than they ever
were on old DOS era hardware (which I also used to run back in the day,
just FYI).

It seems to me that you could (should?) be running the old DOS software
on .... DOS.

If DOS could task 10 windows at a time, sure I would. DV isn't gonna
cut it. OS/2 doesn't have the applications to run in the background to off-set the ones written for windows. ArcaOS is a nice upgrade, but
it doesn't cut it.

Why would you need 10 windows? Do you ever have 10 callers (or even
more than 2) at the same time?

Not trying to give you a hard time, just want to understand your
thinking.




... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.29-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

Why would you need 10 windows? Do you ever have 10 callers (or even
more than 2) at the same time?

I didn't mean BBS windows, I meant 10 windows running in the background for programs. ANd yes, I've had all 4 nodes online at one time. Within the last few years, it's mainly 2, but once in a while I will have 3 online at the same time.

Not trying to give you a hard time, just want to understand your
thinking.

Good, I told Nick you were trying to group me in with Mr. Professor. :) I just hate linux a little less than I do Apple. If it wasn't for that anit-trust suite back in 95/96? ANd MS bailed them out by releasing office on to Apple, that company would be gone.

Don't get me wrong, I love me a good Android, which is linux based, but the stupid permission crap kills me. Why am I forced to do this. If I want my hardware to get fuc%ed up, and want to restore from a backup, I should be free to do so. I don't see why we dumb things down to the lowest dumbest user of something. I don't get society. Survial of the fitess ... needs to come back.

... I escaped from a political correction facility...

--- Renegade v1.35/DOS
* Origin: The Titantic BBS Telnet - ttb.rgbbs.info (21:1/144)

will agree with me. I HATE jumping thru hoops to just read a friggin'
SD
card or an external drive because of a permission bullshit issue.

Sounds like a problem that exists between the keyboard and computer. I have
no such issues.


|03--|11[|05esc|13!|05dEMONIC|11]|03--|07

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15a
* Origin: [>mONTEREYbBS.COM>] (21:3/203)

Exodus wrote to Gamgee <=-

Why would you need 10 windows? Do you ever have 10 callers (or even
more than 2) at the same time?

I didn't mean BBS windows, I meant 10 windows running in the background for programs. ANd yes, I've had all 4 nodes online at one time.
Within the last few years, it's mainly 2, but once in a while I will
have 3 online at the same time.

Okay... well, you can have 10 (or 100) windows open on a Linux
computer, just like you can on Windows.

Not trying to give you a hard time, just want to understand your
thinking.

Good, I told Nick you were trying to group me in with Mr. Professor. :)
I just hate linux a little less than I do Apple. If it wasn't for
that anit-trust suite back in 95/96? ANd MS bailed them out by
releasing office on to Apple, that company would be gone.

Don't get me wrong, I love me a good Android, which is linux based, but the stupid permission crap kills me. Why am I forced to do this. If
I want my hardware to get fuc%ed up, and want to restore from a backup,
I should be free to do so. I don't see why we dumb things down to the lowest dumbest user of something. I don't get society. Survial of
the fitess ... needs to come back.

The permissions thing is a very good thing, as it protects your data
from other people that might be using the same computer. It is not a difficult thing to understand or use, once you know the basic concepts
of it. In this day and age, it is RARELY a problem and "just works".
You may have had a bad experience with it long ago or something, when
Linux was indeed somewhat difficult to use. It's not that way any more.

All right, well.... to each his own, I guess. Have a good one!



... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.29-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)