Why doesn't mine work?
China DOS Union
Union site: www.cn-dos.net Forum site: www.cn-dos.net/forum
DOS stands for freedom, openness and progress. Let us work hard, learn from the openness and GNU spirit of FreeDOS and Linux, and together build and grow a free GNU GPL world!
中国DOS联盟论坛 » DOS软件下载 & 游戏分享 （下载室） » [Discussion] The best USB 2.0 drivers under DOS
View 22,758 Replies 68
Floor 46
Posted 2005-10-25 10:09 · 中国 陕西 渭南 电信
Floor 47
Posted 2005-11-01 14:17 · 中国 上海 浦东新区 电信
初级用户
★
Credits 133
Posts 19
Joined 2005-04-14 00:00
21-year member
UID 38155
Gender Male
Posts 19
Joined 2005-04-14 00:00
21-year member
UID 38155
Gender Male
Status Offline
Thanks
Floor 48
Posted 2005-11-17 13:42 · 中国 河北 邯郸 联通
There are cracked versions in the forum.
Floor 49
Posted 2005-11-18 20:45 · 中国 河北 邯郸 联通
Floor 50
Posted 2007-05-12 14:17 · 中国 香港 第一线有限公司
USB 2.0 under DOS, that's amazing~
Floor 51
Posted 2007-06-07 15:02 · 中国 广东 深圳 罗湖区 电信
中级用户
★★
Credits 223
Posts 52
Joined 2004-03-07 00:00
22-year member
UID 19481
Gender Male
Posts 52
Joined 2004-03-07 00:00
22-year member
UID 19481
Gender Male
Status Offline
Some USB drives can be used with usbmass, but some can't be recognized with usbaspi + di1000dd. It's necessary to manually onload usbmass. If you forget, it will stay in memory. Using mi to check several times with usbmass, you'll find multiple usbmass occupying memory. In this way, the executable memory runs out quickly.
Floor 52
Posted 2007-07-03 14:31 · 中国 河北 唐山 联通
Floor 53
Posted 2007-08-20 12:22 · 中国 浙江 温州 电信
I have no points, so I can't download.
Floor 54
Posted 2007-09-27 22:13 · 中国 重庆 石柱土家族自治县 电信
Floor 55
Posted 2007-09-29 14:06 · 中国 内蒙古 呼伦贝尔 联通
It seems good, next one
Floor 56
Posted 2007-09-29 14:09 · 中国 内蒙古 呼伦贝尔 联通
Unable to download? Depressed
Floor 57
Posted 2007-10-11 21:18 · 中国 广东 广州 电信
It seems good, let's try the next one
Floor 58
Posted 2007-10-18 14:49 · 中国 广东 深圳 罗湖区 电信
Floor 59
Posted 2007-10-22 13:19 · 中国 安徽 蚌埠 电信
There is such a good thing
Floor 60
Posted 2007-12-11 08:22 · 中国 湖北 孝感 电信
Everyone is discussing the USB2 transmission of this software under DOS, but I don't know if it's really the case.
The boot USB drive I made with the boot USB drive making software downloaded from this site has only DUSE.EXE, and none of the other related drivers. So the transmission speed is extremely slow. An 800M file took more than 40 minutes to finish, which is really annoying. Then
1. In this post, it is said that only one line needs to be added to CONFIG.SYS: "device=duse.exe INT13 drive=2" (actually, I just added "INT13 drive=2" to the original device=duse.exe). Is it really enough? Because compared with the original SYS, it's just adding "INT13 drive=2" in the same line. Will this definitely have an effect? I have doubts.
2. Some experts also said to add this
device=USBASPI.SYS
device=Di1000dd.SYS
(Of course, I know that his premise is that these two and related files must be available). Then will this definitely be feasible?
There is no way to talk nonsense without comparison, and the success of only one attempt cannot be taken as a feasible method. Technology emphasizes "precision, uniqueness, and effectiveness"!
I don't know if all the experts have considered these things.
The boot USB drive I made with the boot USB drive making software downloaded from this site has only DUSE.EXE, and none of the other related drivers. So the transmission speed is extremely slow. An 800M file took more than 40 minutes to finish, which is really annoying. Then
1. In this post, it is said that only one line needs to be added to CONFIG.SYS: "device=duse.exe INT13 drive=2" (actually, I just added "INT13 drive=2" to the original device=duse.exe). Is it really enough? Because compared with the original SYS, it's just adding "INT13 drive=2" in the same line. Will this definitely have an effect? I have doubts.
2. Some experts also said to add this
device=USBASPI.SYS
device=Di1000dd.SYS
(Of course, I know that his premise is that these two and related files must be available). Then will this definitely be feasible?
There is no way to talk nonsense without comparison, and the success of only one attempt cannot be taken as a feasible method. Technology emphasizes "precision, uniqueness, and effectiveness"!
I don't know if all the experts have considered these things.
Forum Jump: