link to FREE Operating Systems (no warez or abandonware here)

  • Thread starter Thread starter * ProteanThread *
  • Start date Start date
* ProteanThread * said:
finally, a compiled LIST:

http://www.freeos.com/download.php
Click to expand...

Well, if you're into free OS's, these are more like emulations, but still
are neat.

Tur(n)key MVS for Windows or Linux: http://www.bsp-gmbh.com/turnkey/ Run MVS
3.8j on your pc.

VM4pack: http://www.cbttape.org/vm6.htm Run VM370/CMS Release 6 on Windows
or Linux.

There are others on the CBTTAPE site like MVT and OS/VS1. All of these are
free and legal.

They all use the Hercules S/360/370/390 emulator
http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules/

Dick Kistler
 
To show people Linux, Windows and Mac OS are not as bad as most people think
they are?

To be honest: I think OS developers (and especialy the above 3 mentioned)
should download them and take a good look. Sometimes they have real nice
features. For one thing, I think most operating systems could be reduced by
70% of the size without losing functionality, looks, or userfriendly(n)ess
I'm sure it could speed up tings with atleast 200 (real) %.

Personally, I like the one 3,5" disk windows o/s projects very much (as they
spport my theory). I have to admit, they are still nowhere in functonality,
ut they show us what can be. (just like some univerity has shown it is
possible to make gold out of lead. It is possible in smal quantaties, but at
a higher cost than the price of gold. I beleve it cost about 8x more than
the market value)

On the other side, some o/s may even be quite populair, like freedos. (it
slices, it dices and it makes bread, but only in text mode :-)

Mighty Kitten

J44xm said:
["* ProteanThread *"; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 23:30:09 GMT]
http://www.freeos.com/download.php
Click to expand...

What would be a point in downloading an alternate OS?
Click to expand...
 
Bjorn Simonsen said:
The point is to see how many operating systems you can
make coexist on the same PC, and how many your boot
manager can handle. See for instance
"One PC, Six Hard Drives, 37 OSes!"
<http://www.maximumpc.com/features/feature_2002-09-24.html> ;)

(ps: XOSL - mentioned in above article - now hosted at
<http://www.ranish.com/part/xosl.htm>

All the best,
Bjorn Simonsen
Click to expand...

I couldn't even locate the download link for half of them and the one's that
I did find..... didn't seem to work :o\

--
Regards

Steven Burn
Ur I.T. Mate Group
www.it-mate.co.uk

Keeping it FREE!

Disclaimer:
I know I'm probably wrong, I just like taking part ;o)
 
Steven Burn wrote in said:
http://www.freeos.com/download.php
Click to expand...
[...]
<http://www.maximumpc.com/features/feature_2002-09-24.html> ;) [...]
<http://www.ranish.com/part/xosl.htm>
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I couldn't even locate the download link for half of them and the one's that
I did find..... didn't seem to work :o\
Click to expand...

Half of? Those mentioned in the first or second link
above? I assume not the third?
Hint: <http://home.online.no/~shughes/a57998/quote.html>

All the best,
Bjorn Simonsen
 
Bjorn Simonsen said:
The point is to see how many operating systems you can
make coexist on the same PC, and how many your boot
manager can handle. See for instance
"One PC, Six Hard Drives, 37 OSes!"
<http://www.maximumpc.com/features/feature_2002-09-24.html> ;)
Click to expand...

I had four on a PC once (Win 98, Win 2K, Win XP and trial Win 2003) but
never near that many. Hell, I didn't even know there *were* that many
;-).

Have a great day!

Ernest
_____________________
"paid
I am
worked."
 
Ernest said:
I had four on a PC once (Win 98, Win 2K, Win XP and trial Win 2003) but
never near that many. Hell, I didn't even know there *were* that many
;-).
Click to expand...
This is a partial list of the OS versions that ran on x86 systems I was
supporting software running on once upon a time (about 1994):
MS/PC-DOS 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 5, 6, 6.12, 6.2, 6.21, 6.22
DR-DOS 2, 3, 4
Windows 3.0, 3.1, 3.11 running on variants of the above
OS/2 1.2, 2.0
WinNT 3.1, 3.51

That's 19, without the win3 permutation effect, and ignoring needing to
run localised (i.e. Japanese) versions of some things.

It was such fun!

Cheers,
Gary B-)
 
Gary R. Schmidt said:
This is a partial list of the OS versions that ran on x86 systems I was
supporting software running on once upon a time (about 1994):
MS/PC-DOS 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 5, 6, 6.12, 6.2, 6.21, 6.22
DR-DOS 2, 3, 4
Windows 3.0, 3.1, 3.11 running on variants of the above
OS/2 1.2, 2.0
WinNT 3.1, 3.51

That's 19, without the win3 permutation effect, and ignoring needing to
run localised (i.e. Japanese) versions of some things.

It was such fun!
Click to expand...

Right. I don't know what I was thinking ;-).

But, when I write software, I write it to Win32 only, which was why I
needed such a fun computer in the first place. I also had a separate
Win95 test-bed. Alas, notice I said "had."

We had to dispose of the two older computers as they were crashing more
often, and I didn't feel like figuring out why. They both got nice
homes, though, with friends who figured a free computer that crashes
once in a while was better than having to pay for one ;-).

Have a great day!

Ernest
_____________________
"paid
I am
worked."
 
To be honest: I think OS developers (and especialy the above 3 mentioned)
should download them and take a good look. Sometimes they have real nice
Click to expand...
Personally, I like the one 3,5" disk windows o/s projects very much (as they
spport my theory). I have to admit, they are still nowhere in functonality,
Click to expand...

I remember going through a short-lived phase of trying different
operating systems. One of them was Oberon. What struck me about it was
it had a tiled Windows Manager, and text files could have commands
that users could execute (a bit like C-x C-e (or whatever) in emacs).
It is something that I would like to see on other Operating Systems.
Oberon wasn't very good (to be stating the matter rather generously)
at multitasking, though.

Alas, most Operating Systems out there are just toys. And even if they
became really good in their own right, they would probably still
suffer from lack of driver support, and applications that are worth
running.

An interesting article about the future of software development is at:
http://www.richardwhitehead.co.uk/wheregoing.htm
I don't necessarily agree with his argument about the state of afairs
as it exists today; but it is interesting nevertheless.

Don't get me wrong, I hate Microsoft as much as anyone else, maybe
even more so, but it will be some time before Bill Gates's monopoly
is finally halted. Linux: it's not there yet!
 
Back
Top