I might just try good ole MS-DOS 6.22 and see if it got all the needed functions done - I'd use the lowest common denominator that will work -
if you don't need the networking tools of FreeDOS, MS-DOS has been tried and true for both of the things you want to do with the machine...

I don't see any reason why MTCP should not work in MSDOS 6.22 environment if there is right networking card that is enlisted on supported packet driver list.

I run MTCP on 86box with MSDOS just fine.
I have FreeDOS on my iMac from 2011 and it also works just fine unless I want to use or programs use 0x60/61 IO ports for keyboard handlers. int 21h keyboard functions work but direct port scanning not, thus some PMODE extenders that rely on 0x60 checks for some reason and most games don't work with FreeDOS anyway... if they are UEFI systems with limited Legacy mode for BIOS boot ups.

That's my experience.

-h1

... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a mere copy.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: 2o fOr beeRS bbS>>20ForBeers.com:1337 (21:2/150)

I don't see any reason why MTCP should not work in MSDOS 6.22
environment if there is right networking card that is enlisted on supported packet driver list.

I run MTCP on 86box with MSDOS just fine.

FreeDOS has recently thrown me lots of fade when trying legacy software... its great for playing games in 2024, but not so much when trying to use legacy software that think its 1990.

Its great, but more useful for getting the most of out of current retro-systems than running legacy software IMO.

86Box is sick - and I'm still thankful that you turned me onto it.



|07p|15AULIE|1142|07o
|08.........

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: 2o fOr beeRS bbS>>20ForBeers.com:1337 (21:2/150)

I don't see any reason why MTCP should not work in MSDOS 6.22 environment if there is right networking card that is enlisted on supported packet driver list.

It'll run happily on DOS5.x+ in VMs. Given the provisions already mentioned. VirtualBox has by default 2 supported card types.

Spec


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
* Origin: A camel is a horse designed by a committee. (21:3/101)

86Box is sick - and I'm still thankful that you turned me onto it.

My pleasure :)

-h1

... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a mere copy.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: 2o fOr beeRS bbS>>20ForBeers.com:1337 (21:2/150)

I don't see any reason why MTCP should not work in MSDOS 6.22 environ if there is right networking card that is enlisted on supported packe driver list.

It'll run happily on DOS5.x+ in VMs. Given the provisions already mentioned. VirtualBox has by default 2 supported card types.

I run my DOS inside 86box emulator. If you really want to turn your modern PC into a legacy one, with exact setup (CPU,GPU, Motherboard, you name it).. then I find no other way than 86box.net today.

-h1

... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a mere copy.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: 2o fOr beeRS bbS>>20ForBeers.com:1337 (21:2/150)

it).. then I find no other way than 86box.net today.

I hazard a guess, if you want to emulate something a bit "out of the box"
that it'll do that nicely. For most use cases though, the bells and whistles aren't a major component to DOS software though. I find VB more than sufficient for BBS work, which is all it does.

Spec


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
* Origin: A camel is a horse designed by a committee. (21:3/101)

hollowone wrote to Spectre <=-

I run my DOS inside 86box emulator. If you really want to turn your
modern PC into a legacy one, with exact setup (CPU,GPU, Motherboard,
you name it).. then I find no other way than 86box.net today.

This was new to me - I've added it to my list to 'check into later'
one day. :-)



... Clones are people two.
=== MultiMail/Mac v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Win32
* Origin: Battlestar BBS : battlestarbbs.dyndns.org (21:2/127)

Jimmy Anderson wrote to hollowone <=-

hollowone wrote to Spectre <=-

I run my DOS inside 86box emulator. If you really want to turn your
modern PC into a legacy one, with exact setup (CPU,GPU, Motherboard,
you name it).. then I find no other way than 86box.net today.

This was new to me - I've added it to my list to 'check into later'
one day. :-)

Wow, had not heard of this one either. VERY interesting - I'm going to
be checking this out too.

Thanks to Hollowone for mentioning it!



... Daddy, what does "now formatting drive C:" mean?
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.24-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

Re: Re: FreeDOS vs MS-DOS
By: Gamgee to Jimmy Anderson on Sun May 04 2025 08:42 am

Wow, had not heard of this one either. VERY interesting - I'm going to
be checking this out too.

Thanks to Hollowone for mentioning it!

I tested it for an article that I recently published.

In my opinion, if you just want to run some DOS or even Windows 95 application, DOSbox-X is probably the easiest way.

PCem and its fork 86box are targetted at emulation precision, which means they take a good bunch of resources to run in comparison. Also, since they are designed to emulate a number of devices, they are harder to setup. These are the options to pick if you need to replicate a specific environment... otherwise they are a bit overkill.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
--- SBBSecho 3.24-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)

Arelor wrote to Gamgee <=-

Re: Re: FreeDOS vs MS-DOS
By: Gamgee to Jimmy Anderson on Sun May 04 2025 08:42 am

Wow, had not heard of this one either. VERY interesting - I'm going to
be checking this out too.

Thanks to Hollowone for mentioning it!

I tested it for an article that I recently published.

In my opinion, if you just want to run some DOS or even Windows 95 application, DOSbox-X is probably the easiest way.

Yeah, that's probably my usual use-case.

PCem and its fork 86box are targetted at emulation precision, which
means they take a good bunch of resources to run in comparison. Also, since they are designed to emulate a number of devices, they are harder
to setup. These are the options to pick if you need to replicate a specific environment... otherwise they are a bit overkill.

Great info, thanks. Gonna move this one to the back-burner I guess. :-)



... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.24-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)