China DOS Union

Wengier said:
hi
Ru Shi said:
hi
Wengier said:
Which IO does he want?
Ru Shi said:
Yours, change it to display 98, not 71
Wengier said:
Oh, why?
Wengier said:
The logo of 98 is gone, then it's no longer 98.
Ru Shi said:
Saying 71 is not pure
Wengier said:
71 is not pure?
Ru Shi said:
He wants to make 98
Ru Shi said:
Don't want your logo
Wengier said:
I didn't put the logo in IO.SYS, just no LOGO.SYS.
Ru Shi said:
The disk has been uploaded, take a look
Ru Shi said:
He doesn't want to display the 71 character
Ru Shi said:
Have personality
Wengier said:
Oh, it seems I like making DOS boot disks, but he doesn't like making DOS boot disks.
Ru Shi said:
Everyone has their own preferences
Wengier said:
Then the Win98 boot disk should best be placed in the "WIN and Other Operating Systems Column".
Ru Shi said:
Are you going to steal my business?
Wengier said:
What do you mean??
Wengier said:
Don't be like that....
Ru Shi said:
Finally got them all to make boot disks
Wengier said:
Oh,,,,,,
Ru Shi said:
Upload it


Has added Lang Hua to the conversation.

Wengier said:
Lang Hua is here.
Ru Shi said:
Hmm
Wengier said:
Why aren't you talking??
Lang Hua said:
I'm here~
Lang Hua said:
I've been here for about 20 minutes
Lang Hua said:
Speak up
Lang Hua said:
I'm looking for SN on GOOGLE
Lang Hua said:
Who is LK
Ru Shi said:
Rigorous, meticulous
Wengier said:
I want to know, if making a win boot disk, then does it count as a "DOS boot disk"?
Ru Shi said:
Exactly what I'm lacking
Wengier said:
Need to configure, take some time.
Wengier said:
I often spend hours researching configurations.
Ru Shi said:
As long as it's under dos, it counts
Lang Hua said:
CD or floppy
Wengier said:
Then it's best to mark it, otherwise others might think it's under WIN!
Ru Shi said:
Both
Ru Shi said:
Inclusion is great
Lang Hua said:
Confused~
Lang Hua said:
What do you mean under WIN
Wengier said:
Someone makes a WIN boot disk, others might think it's under WIN.
Lang Hua said:
There's no such division
Ru Shi said:
I spend all day researching
Wengier said:
I'm still researching new boot technologies recently
Ru Shi said:
Not as good as Wengier's
Ru Shi said:
Which category
Lang Hua said:
WINDOWS boot disk?????
How confusing to call it that~
Wengier said:
I think it's better to call it a DOS boot disk, at least it should be marked.
Ru Shi said:
Why are you confused, dd said he's going to kick you
Lang Hua said:
Call it a DOS boot disk...
People will know what it is at a glance
Lang Hua said:
WIN boot disk.. not good
Wengier said:
Yeah? Others might think "Why put a WIN boot disk in the DOS forum"?
Ru Shi said:
Just boot disk
Wengier said:
But the name above is "DOS Boot Disk/LOGO Technology"?!
Ru Shi said:
What win, dos
Wengier said:
Then does the entire name need to be changed?
Ru Shi said:
DOS is fundamental
Lang Hua said:
WIN boot disk, too unclear! WIN2K/XP boot disk????
Wengier said:
Exactly
Wengier said:
DOS boot!
Lang Hua said:
Just call it a DOS boot floppy, don't call it WIN/.....
Wengier said:
We are researching DOS technology in the DOS forum, not WIN technology.
Ru Shi said:
Then why do you emphasize being able to boot win
Lang Hua said:
Right~~ Can't call it WIN
Wengier said:
That's talking about the relationship between DOS boot disk and WIN, that is, DOS is fundamental, but it's not a WIN boot disk specifically for booting WIN
Ru Shi said:
So is DOS an accessory to WIN
Wengier said:
No, it's just that a DOS boot disk can do anything after booting, can run various DOS programs, such as WIN.
Wengier said:
WIN, SEAL, QUBE, etc.
Wengier said:
I've tried it.
Ru Shi said:
Before 98, it was basically a DOS interface
Wengier said:
What about Win3.1?
Lang Hua said:
Don't understand what the two of you are discussing~
Lang Hua said:
Confused~~~~~~
Ru Shi said:
After 2000, the boot disk can't boot anymore
Wengier said:
Win3.x isn't a DOS program? Win98 isn't either.
Ru Shi said:
Yeah
Wengier said:
Win2K boot disk doesn't exist either, that's just Win2K emergency recovery disk.
Ru Shi said:
So no need to divide
Wengier said:
Saying Win2K boot disk is okay, but a DOS boot disk can't be called a WIN boot disk.
Lang Hua said:
Ru Shi means that there's no difference between WIN and DOS boot disks?
Ru Shi said:
Before 98, they were all DOS graphical interfaces
Wengier said:
What do you mean?
Wengier said:
Win 98 is a DOS program.
Ru Shi said:
After 2000, it's actually NT
Wengier said:
Win2000 is NT 5.0
Wengier said:
WinXP is NT 5.1
Ru Shi said:
Hmm
Ru Shi said:
So, there's no division between authentic win and dos
Wengier said:
Right, a DOS 7.1 boot disk is for booting DOS, running various WINs, including 3.x, 9x, etc., and can also run other DOS programs, such as SEAL, QV, etc., so how can it be called a WIN boot disk,
Lang Hua said:
But don't call it a WIN boot disk
Lang Hua said:
But it's better not to call it a WIN boot disk
Wengier said:
And a DOS 7.1 can boot WinME.
Ru Shi said:
Actually, after 2000, it's not win
Wengier said:
2000 is also WIN, but it's the WinNT series of WIN.
Ru Shi said:
The real win is dos
Lang Hua said:
Can boot WIN and call it a WIN boot disk???
Wengier said:
That's also okay, but...
Ru Shi said:
Before 98
Wengier said:
A DOS 7.1 boot disk can boot Win 3.2, then can it be called a Win3.2 boot disk?
Ru Shi said:
Win is also dos
Lang Hua said:
Ru Shi said:
Actually, after 2000, it's not win

Many people don't think so
Ru Shi said:
Still call it a dos boot disk
Wengier said:
A DOS 7.1 boot disk can boot QV, then it's better to call it a QV boot disk.
Wengier said:
Right, a DOS 7.1 is a DOS boot disk, not a WIN boot disk.
Ru Shi said:
Booting win is just one of the functions
Lang Hua said:
I think just call it a DOS boot disk. The others are not good...
Wengier said:
Exactly!
Lang Hua said:
Ru Shi said:
Booting win is just one of the functions
Exactly
Wengier said:
Booting WIN is just one of the functions, so it can't be called a WIN boot disk.
Ru Shi said:
benlaijiusi
Ru Shi said:
Originally
Wengier said:
Yeah, so we can't make WIN boot disks in the DOS boot disk section.
Lang Hua said:
OK, the opinions are unified, why discuss anymore
Wengier said:
Booting WIN is just one of the functions.
Lang Hua said:
Ah~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ru Shi said:
Also dos
Wengier said:
Right, being able to boot WIN is one of the functions of a DOS boot disk.
Lang Hua said:
OK, the opinions are unified, why discuss anymore???
Ru Shi said:
Winme is 80
Wengier said:
Okay, everyone is unified.
Ru Shi said:
Win98 is 71
Wengier said:
Of.
Lang Hua said:
Oh my god~~~~~~~~~~ What is this going to do~
Wengier said:
没错，Win98 is run under DOS 7.1.
Lang Hua said:
Is it endless? Ah????
Lang Hua said:
The opinions are all unified~~~ Still discussing?????
Ru Shi said:
What are you going to do? Owe a kick?
Wengier said:
Then set a rule, this forum only makes DOS boot disks, not WIN boot disks.
Wengier said:
Except for the "WIN and Other Operating Systems" section.
Ru Shi said:
Can't say that
Wengier said:
??
Lang Hua said:
I服YOU
Lang Hua said:
Yeah~~, it's a DOS boot disk
Ru Shi said:
It will dampen the enthusiasm of many colleagues
Lang Hua said:
A DOS boot disk can boot WIN (DOS kernel)
Ru Shi said:
Guide slowly
Lang Hua said:
In terms of name, it can boot (DOS kernel) functionally
Ru Shi said:
Hmm
Wengier said:
Yeah, my "DOS boot disk should be able to boot WIN" means this.
Ru Shi said:
Agree
Lang Hua said:
There's no conflict in opinions~~ Then why keep talking endlessly~~~ Haha
Wengier said:
But the Win98自带的DOS 7.1 boot disk can't boot any version of WIN, whether it's 3.2 or 98.
Wengier said:
My DOS 7.1 boot disk can do it all.
Ru Shi said:
I don't think before me are win, they are all dos
Ru Shi said:
Let Wengier vent
Lang Hua said:
Can everyone listen to me for a moment????
Wengier said:
My IO.SYS doesn't even have the WIN logo, has nothing to do with WIN.
Lang Hua said:
Technical matters... it's not up to us to decide.....
Ru Shi said:
Nan Hua, you say
Lang Hua said:
You've set all the rules...

Lang Hua said:
It's useless
Lang Hua said:
Guests don't care
Ru Shi said:
Isn't this the case in China?
Lang Hua said:
I think, put guests first
Ru Shi said:
Agree
Lang Hua said:
So discussing here is of little significance
Ru Shi said:
Chinese tradition
Lang Hua said:
Specific situations, specific analysis
Ru Shi said:
Respect guests
Wengier said:
Agree.
Lang Hua said:
If someone asks, we'll help
Ru Shi said:
Don't limit
Ru Shi said:
Yeah
Lang Hua said:
Right~
Lang Hua said:
Don't limit
Ru Shi said:
I want to make a boot CD, Nan Hua, help me
Wengier said:
I want to ask, was the MiniWin 3.11 boot disk I made before considered a DOS boot or a WIN boot disk?
Lang Hua said:
Love to say WIN is WIN, love to say DOS is DOS, one heart, two hands (DOS/WIN) ready
Wengier said:
It's MS-DOS 7.10+WFW 3.11
Ru Shi said:
Agree
Ru Shi said:
Lang Hua's view
Wengier said:
Is it better to put it in the "DOS Boot Disk" section or in the "WIN and Other Operating Systems Column"?
Wengier said:
Refers to the MiniWindows 3.11 I made
Ru Shi said:
In win
Lang Hua said:
DOS disk
Lang Hua said:
Hehe
Wengier said:
到底是？
Ru Shi said:
Hehe
Lang Hua said:
Disagreed~~~~
Lang Hua said:
I'll listen to you
Ru Shi said:
In win
Lang Hua said:
Just WIN
Wengier said:
Oh, then WIN. WIN boot disks should be placed in the WIN section.
Ru Shi said:
Fence-sitter
Lang Hua said:
No..........
Wengier said:
??
Lang Hua said:
I think it's still placed in the DOS area
Ru Shi said:
Is that so
Ru Shi said:
Why
Lang Hua said:
Place it in the DOS boot disk area
Wengier said:
More and more confused
Lang Hua said:
If W made this, put it in the DOS area
Ru Shi said:
It's an independent system, no longer a boot disk
Lang Hua said:
WIN area, leave it for others to discuss WINDOWS98/2K/XP....
Ru Shi said:
Wengier thinks...
Wengier said:
3.x?
Wengier said:
WIN3.x?
Ru Shi said:
Certainly makes sense
Ru Shi said:
Still dos
Ru Shi said:
Fundamentally
Wengier said:
Then 98 is also DOS.
Ru Shi said:
Yeah
Lang Hua said:
Our WIN area, just like other forums, discuss WINDOWS9X/NT/2K/XP, etc....
Wengier said:
NT series are not DOS.
Lang Hua said:
Don't say 98 is DOS
Ru Shi said:
So I said no need to divide
Lang Hua said:
We can say that. Others can....
Wengier said:
If 98 is not DOS, then is Win3.x DOS?
Lang Hua said:
Since there is and, then can't say 98 is DOS anymore
Wengier said:
What about 3.x?
Ru Shi said:
We need to correct the understanding and be orderly
Lang Hua said:
3.X is a problem~~~~~~~~
Ru Shi said:
Before me were all dos
Wengier said:
This is getting more and more confusing
Ru Shi said:
Can discuss in the forum
Lang Hua said:
Then if someone has a Win98 problem, do you let them ask in the DOS area, not the WIN area????
Wengier said:
What to do?
Wengier said:
If a WIN98 problem is asked in the WIN area, then should the WIN98 boot disk also be asked in the WIN area?
Ru Shi said:
I say remove the WIN area
Wengier said:
Teacher Mo said to have the WIN area.
Ru Shi said:
Just keep the other systems area
Wengier said:
He said "Water is too clear has no fish".
Lang Hua said:
Change the name
Ru Shi said:
Include win
Wengier said:
It's originally "WIN and Other Operating Systems Column".
Ru Shi said:
Will it work?
Wengier said:
No change.
Ru Shi said:
Remove win
Wengier said:
Remove? Teacher Mo won't agree.
Ru Shi said:
Ask
Lang Hua said:
It's not good to remove
Ru Shi said:
Why not?
Wengier said:
The popularity will be lower if removed.
Lang Hua said:
This matter is not big, but quite troublesome~~
Ru Shi said:
Aren't there other systems?
Wengier said:
What about the posts inside if removed?
Lang Hua said:
Wengier said:
The popularity will be lower if removed.
Exactly~~
Wengier said:
The WIN area still can't be removed.
Lang Hua said:
Don't remove
Ru Shi said:
Classify
Wengier said:
That would be a bit like seizing the main position, just like DOS Home.
Ru Shi said:
All belong to other systems, include win
Wengier said:
The current "WIN and Other Operating Systems" column is like this.
Wengier said:
Posts about UNIX, LINUX, WIN, etc. are all there.
Ru Shi said:
Relatively to dos, it should be like this
Lang Hua said:
What to do~~~~~~

Ru Shi said:
All others
Wengier said:
In this case, shouldn't the WIN boot disk be placed in the WIN area?
Lang Hua said:
Better not to put it in the WIN area
Ru Shi said:
The win boot disk is DOS kernel
Ru Shi said:
All are DOS files
Wengier said:
Then the Win98 problem shouldn't be placed in the DOS area either? All are DOS kernels.
Wengier said:
If all are DOS files, then how can it be called a WIN boot disk?
Lang Hua said:
Hehe??????
Wengier呀~~~ What can I say to you
Ru Shi said:
Temporarily in the other systems area, after we discuss in the forum....
Wengier said:
Okay, then say that if it's a WIN-related problem, put it in the WIN area.
Lang Hua said:
I mean, just leave it as it is for now.
Wengier said:
Win3.x?
Ru Shi said:
Girl, it's like this
Lang Hua said:
I can't say well about 3X
Wengier said:
Hehe. . . . . .
Lang Hua said:
You two say
Wengier said:
Then what to do?
Ru Shi said:
Water is too clear has no fish
Lang Hua said:
Put it in the WIN area
Wengier said:
Classification still needs to be there. If it's about WIN, put it all in the WIN area.
Lang Hua said:
Ru Shi said:
Water is too clear has no fish
Planning to fish in troubled waters????
Ru Shi said:
Guests can put it wherever they like
Wengier said:
This?
Lang Hua said:
WIN3.X is WIN, put it in WIN
Ru Shi said:
How?
Lang Hua said:
Ru Shi said:
Guests can put it wherever they like
Also right~~~~~~~~
Wengier said:
Does that mean the Win3.x boot disk is placed in the WIN area?
Ru Shi said:
Can you stop them?
Lang Hua said:
This WIN3.X is up to the guest~~
Wengier said:
The Win98 boot disk is also best placed in the WIN area.
Wengier said:
If placed in the DOS area, then只好....
Ru Shi said:
How
Wengier said:
We can also move it.
Wengier said:
Move the post.
Ru Shi said:
No need
Lang Hua said:
I mean put it in the WIN area. But if someone asks about WIN3.X in the DOS area, it's also okay.
Lang Hua said:
Better not to move, others won't find it..
Ru Shi said:
If they can't find the post, they'll lose interest
Wengier said:
But then the classification will be a bit messy?
Lang Hua said:
For example me~~~ I'll lose track~~~ Hehe
Lang Hua said:
Not messy~~~~~~~
Ru Shi said:
Can only be like this for now
Lang Hua said:
No forum is particularly clear
Wengier said:
Same Win3.x, some ask in the DOS area, some in the WIN area, how is this good?
Ru Shi said:
Ten forums?
Lang Hua said:
All can
Ru Shi said:
Should be lively
Lang Hua said:
Exactly lively is good
Wengier said:
We'll post the conversation on the forum later, let everyone see.
Ru Shi said:
Okay
Ru Shi said:
Let's do it
Lang Hua said:
This is unnecessary~~~~~~
Wengier said:
??
Lang Hua said:
This little thing also~~~~~~~
Wengier said:
It's okay to sort out the main points.
Lang Hua said:
It's not a major decision~
Ru Shi said:
Lang Hua,
Lang Hua said:
Ah~~ call me
Ru Shi said:
Democratic
Wengier said:
Still announce the classification method, but not a hard rule.
Wengier said:
This is better for management and browsing.
Ru Shi said:
It's better to discuss in the form of a post
Lang Hua said:
I think it doesn't matter much to guests~~ So~~~~
Ru Shi said:
No need to post, Lang Hua has a point
Lang Hua said:
If it's related to guests' matters, it's necessary to post~~~~~
Ru Shi said:
Hmm‘
Wengier said:
Because everyone sees, I put the Win3.x boot disk all in the WIN area, and the Win9x boot disk should be placed in the WIN area even more, and Win9x can only be in the WIN area

My view:
The first screen presented after the boot disk is booted has the greatest impact, which will make people think what type of boot disk it is. This is the first impression. The screen presented after a DOS boot disk is booted is a black background with white text. Others will immediately know it is a DOS boot disk. If the screen presented after booting is a WINDOWS screen, then people must think it is a WIN boot disk. So, I think it is better to determine whether to put it in the WIN area or the DOS boot disk area based on the first screen after booting. Everyone has different levels of understanding of operating systems. Not everyone knows that WINDOWS was originally a graphical interface under DOS. Especially when it comes to WIN98/ME, which starts with a WINDOWS screen, even fewer people know about it.
Whether to keep the "WIN and Other Systems" section, I have thought about this for a long time, and finally I think it is better to keep it. Although our forum is named "China DOS Union" and mainly discusses DOS technology, if guests see that there are also discussions about other systems in the forum, will they stay longer? Maybe they will also think the forum is good, and it is not just about discussing DOS. Because not everyone likes to study DOS. In Taiwan, many people have turned to UNIX/LINUX. Moreover, DOS is now following an open-source strategy, which is just the same as UNIX/LINUX systems. WINDOWS is the most used OS currently. Keeping this section will increase popularity. But such a section should be one. We mainly discuss DOS technology, and WINDOWS and UNIX/LINUX are purely for service purposes.
The division of forum posts must be clear, otherwise guests will definitely be confused and it will also be more systematic.
The above is my personal view. I wonder what everyone thinks??

It seems that the discussion content in MSN hasn't been fully posted yet?

I don't know! If it's a master, just post these

Going crazy...
What and what is this? This also needs to be discussed?
To put it simply, it's all DOS boot disks...
Moreover, regardless of whether it's a DOS boot disk or not, if it's a boot disk, just put it in the logo/boot disk section, right?

That makes sense, but I don't know what to do.

Long time no see. At first glance, I'm dizzy. What WIN and DOS... Since it's a boot disk, it's naturally to boot the computer before entering the main operating system. Therefore, whether it's DOS or WIN, it's naturally a DOS boot disk, because its main technology is DOS. Who can say that a WIN... boot disk is not DOS technology? What we study is DOS technology, not what is called a disk by booting an operating system. Even the command prompt of WIN2K or WINXP should belong to the scope of DOS research.

In addition, I also remind all moderators that we must not separate DOS and WINDOWS, they are inseparable. If we study DOS for DOS's sake, it's meaningless.

Now everyone is very enthusiastic about boot disk technology, but it's all similar. Now making boot disks is a hot topic in China, but it's all repetitive work. Except for WENGIER's, there are no major technical breakthroughs. The purpose of everyone making boot disks is nothing more than to maintain the system more conveniently and make gorgeous LOGOs and interfaces. A boot disk is nothing more than booting an operating system, and there are only so many things to say. Those who are already experts in making boot disks should not spend their efforts on it anymore, but should focus on the DOS system itself, such as the localization of DOS software, programming under DOS, interface under DOS, driver under DOS. Or more advanced computer experts can cooperate to study the operating system technology of DOS. Isn't it more challenging.

We all are probably studying the connection between DOS and GNU to a large extent, unlike in other places where they just一味 study the connection between DOS and WIN. It is恐怕 very important to strengthen the connection and partnership between DOS (especially FreeDOS) and GNU/Linux and issues related to future development. Naturally, it is not just for studying DOS for the sake of DOS.

Speaking of boot disks, besides the ones I made, some others in this forum have also made some very innovative ones, which is something that no other domestic DOS forum can do. For example, Master Rushi uses the ROM-DOS 7.1 kernel instead of the MS-DOS kernel to boot, and Roy uses PC-DOS 7.1 to make a MiniWindows 3.x boot disk, etc. This is obviously not repetitive work, isn't it?

KO's view really hits the mark, what the moderator of the yiyesong version said is very true...