[Optimal autoexec/config.sys for PC-XT era machine and games?]

Thank you for your replies. I attach the scr$ for @wierd_w

 

This is indeed not meant for a very particular machine, like "strictly XT", just a bit of a catch-all due to the nature of the collection and target platforms. MiSTer's core is the main one but it's not a pure XT - you can read a bit more about it here: https://github.com/MiSTer-devel/PCXT_MiSTer

Then there's also DOSbox, or PCem, or real machines. But for them I expect people being able to make their own changes, as I can't cover all the bases.

 

I wonder what the nansi.sys and freespt from my config are. I know nansi is suppposed to be an improved ansi.sys, but does it benefit my purpose at all?

 

Ltemm is being used because I think MiSTer's core allows EMS memory - during boot it says it's "installed"

 

I also had another config, made by flynnsbit, which uses swapfile, ramdrive.sys and ncache, but it seemed a bit of an overkill.

 

How about tkbd.com? ndos.com?

 

[Optimal autoexec/config.sys for PC-XT era machine and games?]

Following on the hdd size thread I'd like to hear your advice regarding the MS-DOS config files for the games from the "XT era". This is of course a vague phrase, but my collection spans years 1981-1989 and the MiSTer core can at the moment run cycle accurate programs for XT at several speeds, 286 AT @ 3.5MHz and also Tandy/PCjr, so this is roughly the target.

 

My auoexec/config editing skills are a bit rusty and in any case hail from much later era so any suggestions as to what could be the best catch-all config for this era are welcome. The priority is of course max compatibility, followed by snappiness of Norton Commander, which has to navigate some large directories (I did divide them a bit but still some directorises contain between 100-200 sub directories). I'm using 3 hdd volumes: 251, 512 and 1024 MB, though am not sure if that matters.

 

At the moment I'm using pretty basic ones autoexec.bat
 

@echo off
path=c:\dos
echo.

ECHO Running FREESP on C: ...
C:\DOS\FREESPT.COM C

prompt $p$g
cd nc
nc

 

and config.sys:

 

DOS=UMB
REM DEVICE=C:\USE!UMBS.SYS C000-CFFF
DEVICEHIGH=C:\LTEMM\LTEMM.EXE /p:A000 /n /z
DEVICEHIGH=C:\UTILS\NANSI.SYS
FILES=30
BUFFERS=20

 

...both cobbled together from some other ones, so I'm sure things could be improved.

[Problems with older MS-DOS file systems vs hard drive capacity.]

Alright, thanks. I will give it a go. I think I did fdisk /mbr before but not sure.

 

I'm still after these separate 250, 500 and 1GB disks, if you can be bothered

 

 

[Problems with older MS-DOS file systems vs hard drive capacity.]

Ok, so the first one (with one big partition) behaved like the 2GB I made - just took over 600MB. The one with 3 partitions was far more useful and I managed to squeeze the whole collection on it. But when I put MS DOS 6.22 the whole thing wouldn't boot and also stopped being recognized in PCem (in my 3 configs for PCXT, P133 with DOS and PII with Win 98, using both IDE and XTIDE bioses). Also, the Win98 setup reports it as "LBA disk", not sure if it's relevant.

 

So I can use it as container now, though would prefer to maybe make it bootable - not sure what I'm doing wrong here (I was just using standard MS DOS 6.22 disks to install from A: in PCem).

 

Any chance you could make separate 250, 500 and 1GB disks when you have a moment @wierd_w? I think maybe this would be a better solution for me. The collection is sorted by-year, that's its whole point, and I can't really break it up by size. Also, mounting separate volumes could speed the boot up in MiSTer core (there are 2 slots for hdd and it mulls over quite long when one is empty during boot).

I just made a 251MB disk and managed to squeeze years 81-86 on it, and make it bootable. But would like to try disks from somebody who knows what they are doing.

 

[Problems with older MS-DOS file systems vs hard drive capacity.]

Thanks a lot @wierd_w, I will try these and report back.

[Problems with older MS-DOS file systems vs hard drive capacity.]

I read this, in an offical IBM document: https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/selecting-best-microsoft-file-system-fat16-fat32-ntfs-ibm-intellistation

Quote

If FAT16 is selected, the hard disk drive will be divided into 512 byte pieces called sectors. These sectors are grouped into larger pieces called clusters. Due to design limitations, the maximum number of clusters that the FAT16 system can keep track of is 65,535. Hard disk drives larger than 1.2GB therefore become very inefficient in storing data because large amounts of hard disk drive space is unused but occupied by the file allocation table. FAT16 does provide excellent performance on small hard disk drives that are less than 1.2GB. Hard disk drives larger than 1.2GB should be formatted as FAT32. Security in a FAT16 partition is limited to the volume access restrictions under the operating system supporting data security.

If the FAT16 performance is so excellent, why my 1GB disk wastes more than half of the space when simply filled up with some pretty standard files? I don't get it. I have a feeling that I'm doing something wrong after all.

[Problems with older MS-DOS file systems vs hard drive capacity.]

The MiSTer's core is using XTIDe bios.

 

I made a 2GB hdd, but managed to fill it with only ~670 MB worth of files. This slacking is brutal. 1GB hdd only managed to take 440MB. 

 

500 MB hdd fared a bit better, and took 340MB. But - now I can't see the GAMES directory which contains the data...

 

I only need to fit 1GB of data but this is proving to be a major headache.

[Problems with older MS-DOS file systems vs hard drive capacity.]

Thanks, but I guess setting a LAN share would be too much for most users, for me even. I'm trying to keep this to be as straightforward as possible; mount the vhd-boot DOS-browse from NC. The wasted space is somewhat annoying but seeing as this is an extra ~1GB it's not really a deal breaker in the age of huge SD cards and external storage.

 

Do you have some suggestions on how to create an optimal sized HDD image for this task? For now I'm kind of groping in the dark, just typing something in the "size" box in th PCem new hdd creation GUI, but not really adjusting any other parameters. Annoyingly, I have just tried to create some ~950MB sized vhds and they all show only 503MB in fdisk. But before I was able to create bigger ones, so not sure what I'm missing.

[Problems with older MS-DOS file systems vs hard drive capacity.]

Thank you for the replies. I mainly wanted to confirm this is indeed the known slack space issue and not something I'm doing wrong perhaps.

 

As for solutions, the thing is that this collection contains all the MS-DOS games from 1981-1989 and is meant for general public, so the maximum compatibility is paramount. I've heard that FreeDOS and DRDOS might have problems with that so I'm reluctant to use them.

 

As for

14 hours ago, Krebizfan said:

running a compressed drive without turning on the compression.

...how would I go about that?

 

At the moment I think perhaps the easiest solution for me would be just to eat up the loss and use two <1GB drives. The whole collection weighs 1030MB, so I hope perhaps the 16KB clusters Krebizfan mentions would be kind to me and let it fit in 2x1GB. Having 2 mounted drives also would speed up the core boot up, which atm hangs at detecting the drive for quite a few seconds.

[Problems with older MS-DOS file systems vs hard drive capacity.]

I'm trying to update & expand my PC-XT dedicated software collection. This is primarily meant to run on MiSTer's new PCXT core (though it can be also ran on DOSbox/PCem) and for that I need to use hdd images. I've created a few using PCem, Win10 and also MiSTer's Linux, then have formated with MS-DOS 6.22. The size varies from ~500MB to 1.3GB.

 

These images work as hard drives, and are bootable and can be filled with content. But one problem persists: there's a big loss of hdd space when filling them with my collection, which mostly consists of very small files. So, eg, for the initial release (v0.1) I've used a 487MB-sized hdd image and managed to only fill it with 334 MB of stuff (~30% space loss). A bigger one I need for the expaned collection, 1GB-size, only took 442MB of files, that's merely a 43% fill rate. After that the disks report running out of space (despite their original size being correctly reported in NC or fdisk). I've also tried filling the 1GB disk with big files (like 10x100MB) and in that case was able to fill it up to ~98%.

 

I read a liitle bit about this whole topic, and how this quagmire might be related to old FAT16 (which I need to use for PCXT - I think, not sure it'd be compatible with MSDOS 7.1 which can offer FAT32 ?) cluster size limits and the resulting space loss - but even then my impression was that it should account for 20-30% max of space loss (and possibly only when going over 1GB). But ultimately this is all above my pay grade, and so I'm hoping maybe some of local MS-DOS experts might have simpler explanation, or perhaps even a solution.

[Attempting to create a hash-based comprehensive software library]

Gamebase is the ultimate 1G1R resource. Though this collection is mostly meant for emulators so there's no guarantee everything will work with Fuji3/SIDE3. Still, it's worth having a look in seeing as the creators have already done the heavy lifting.

[If Atari had not Entered the Personal Computer Market]

13 hours ago, JamesD said:

Lets face it, pirating games is always going to be more attractive than buying cart games back then, so the "crash" might still take place.

Piracy was undeniably a big attraction, but it always amazes me how people these days forget that so many of us wanted computers because they were computers, not because we were too cheap to buy carts.

 

Seriously, if you offered me a choice of NES with 50 top games vs ZX Spectrum (not even C64) back in 85-87, I'd go with the micros. I wanted to play computer-style games, and do computer things like writing programs, doing POKEs, etc. Earlier on it wouldn't even be a contest (sorry, A2600 et al) and later it'd be the same choice with Amiga over SNES/MD.

[What Jaguar games were able to reach 60fps? What 3D games were able to reach 30fps?]

14 hours ago, DEATH said:

so much shit in this discussion

But, hey, it's Another Troll Mission Accomplished. Seems there's been another outcrop of these honeypot threads recently, perhaps this coincides with the Mayan calendar, tides, or maybe shortage of meds in the OP's local pharmacy.

 

In any case it's always a good time for me to take a break from AA for a while

[The world is ready for Trevor McFur 2]

Meanwhile, in the OP's HQ...

 

[You know those systems that are like, double systems?]

I seem to recall there was some add on for MSX that would let you play SMS or SG-1000 games? Or maybe it was a hack?

 

Or maybe I just dreamed it up

 

Ah, yes, a modern loader: https://www.msx.org/wiki/Sega_SG-1000#Run_SG-1000_software_on_MSX

[What is the most impressive game graphics you've ever seen (STFM only)]

From 2D games, Storm Master, BAT, Lost Patrol (the digi clips). I played them on Amiga actually but would imagine that ST versions were on par graphically.

[Things that annoy me about the 99/4a]

I, too, can't comprehend how is it possible that people who were pioneering an industry could make some bad moves/mistakes, at least "bad" in a context it seems to us, the armchair designers who have the benefit of 40+ years of hindsight.

[Did computers have 3rd-person 3D action games before Tomb Raider? (non-fixed camera)]

A new user, typical honeypot thread, argument within the first page? I wouldn't be surprised if LeeroyST/JaguarVision/TigerSuperman/etc is back to entertain us once again

[If you could change one thing about the 520ST/STM/STFM......]

2 hours ago, oky2000 said:

the Spectrum +2 for poor people (a pitiful machine with pathetic graphics)

If you want to be a dick, let me point out that this "pitiful" line sold 2.5 much units as the ST and its influence is credited with kicstarting the enire UK programming industry - thus partially enabling the ST to exist at all.

 

Also, the ST was designed in a haste and on the cheap, due to the messy anti-Commodore war Tramiel was in, therefore any 2022-based hand wringing of "what were they thinking" are completely pointless.

[If Atari had not Entered the Personal Computer Market]

30 minutes ago, MrMaddog said:

Then there would be no "home computer" market or any reason for families to buy a personal computer except as an electronics hobby or business use.

Wait, what happened to the 77'Trinity & the TI? Also, VIC-20 and a bunch of other machines were just around the corner.

[FPGA Based Videogame System]

There's no business like retro gaming business. You can get away with stuff which would be unthinkable in most other markets.

[Sony Trinitron Multisync G220]

2 hours ago, BigO said:

I may have to just drag it out on the deck and ]push it off when it dies.

Lol, it'd probably make the house collapse or something.

 

I also can't really lug anything bigger than 21" myself, but negotiating with sellers often does wonders. Last big 29" Trinitron I got, the guys who sold it (plus another small one) to me for ~40USD were so happy that they carried it up to the 2nd floor themselves.

 

I also once just hired a moving van with two young big geezers to do the legwork. The TV in question was nearly free - and awesome - so it was a good deal anyway.

[The world is ready for Trevor McFur 2]

7 hours ago, agradeneu said:

Nothing, nix, nada. 

I thought as much. Somebody was asking earlier why the negativity, this perhaps helps to explain it a bit.

 

I also wouldn't be surprised if the OP was yet another incarnation of the old TigerSuperman/LeeroyST/Bubsy/etc troll - the posting pattern pretty much fits the bill.

[The world is ready for Trevor McFur 2]

23 hours ago, Jag64 said:

Everything I make and release is for free (always has and always will be)

Do tell! I mean, do link plz!

[PlayStation 1 S-Video Cable]

On 10/18/2022 at 9:29 AM, RARusk said:

Years ago I had a Power Macintosh with S-Video ports in the back for limited video recording. At that time I acquired a Nintendo S-Video Monster Cable and was doing a little playing around with the recording feature using my N64. I used the regular Nintendo brand S-video cable for some Turok 2 and the image didn't look too great. I then switched out the regular cable with the Monster Cable and it looked pretty close to RGB and looked great.

This sounds like there might've been something wrong with the cable itself, if the difference was really that big. I'm a bit of a CRT fanatic, and have just finished taking photos from N64 for this collection. I used a cheapo S-Video cable from Aliexpress for the connection. The quality is also "close to RGB" with no interference, and I also have a few other micros/consoles which use basic cables for S-video with great results. I had one for 3DO which had a lot of noise but it was a ridicululously cheap job (like >4 bucks) and also very long - 5 meters. Bought a slightly better one which is fine.

 

It's very easy to suggest yourself when talking/thinking about these slight differences, hence my question about side-to-side comparison. It happens to me all the time, since I constantly switch between many different displays and connection types.

 

And Monster cables are well known to be overpriced, to the point were they literally became memes and have dedicated Wikipedia section on the subject. That doesn't mean that they are bad of course, I'm sure the IQ quality is also great on them, but it just can't be better than on another well-made cable because they can't improve the original signal. So imo it's rather pointless overpaying for them. Build quality in a cable only matters to some extent - it's not a moving part, and for 95% of time it will just hang/lie there undisturbed.

 

In the end of the day, it's anybody's choice and indeed 40$ is not breaking the bank. Still, I prefer to do it my way and spend the difference on something else. And if the OP already has a cable, then trying it out is probably the best idea. If you don't see any interference using this cable then a Monster one won't really improve anything past that.