Great Hierophant
Veteran Member
I use the term x86 DOS instead of PC DOS to let people know that I am focused on software that works on PC compatibles and semi-compatibles. Otherwise people may think I was solely focused on IBM products. I use x86 to avoid references to Apple DOS, Atari DOS, CBM DOS etc.
So, with explanations out of the way, what is your favorite version of DOS to use? For myself, I always gravitate towards MS-DOS 5.0. The golden standard of IBM PC Compatible Game compatibility, it is lean enough that it can install on virtually any compatible PC. (You need 6x360KB floppies or 3x720KB floppies for low density drives and the PCJr. requires patching). It supports 2GB partitions and 8GB drives. It does not have the buggy reputation of its predecessor or the bloat of its successor. It retains virtually all the old external commands from DOS 1.x and forward, whereas 6.x puts them on a supplemental disk. It has proper support for loading DOS in the HMA and DOS and device drivers in the UMB. With MSCDEX it can support CD-ROM drives. It takes less RAM in general than its successor and maybe even its predecessor. QBASIC and EDIT make their first appearances. Its not all rosy, as DOS 6 has useful commands like MOVE and DELTREE and supports multiple configurations. SCANDISK, MSD & even MEMMAKER can be useful programs. Even for the older systems, it can be useful if you do not want to be limited to 32MB drives or an alphabet soup of logical drives.
So, with explanations out of the way, what is your favorite version of DOS to use? For myself, I always gravitate towards MS-DOS 5.0. The golden standard of IBM PC Compatible Game compatibility, it is lean enough that it can install on virtually any compatible PC. (You need 6x360KB floppies or 3x720KB floppies for low density drives and the PCJr. requires patching). It supports 2GB partitions and 8GB drives. It does not have the buggy reputation of its predecessor or the bloat of its successor. It retains virtually all the old external commands from DOS 1.x and forward, whereas 6.x puts them on a supplemental disk. It has proper support for loading DOS in the HMA and DOS and device drivers in the UMB. With MSCDEX it can support CD-ROM drives. It takes less RAM in general than its successor and maybe even its predecessor. QBASIC and EDIT make their first appearances. Its not all rosy, as DOS 6 has useful commands like MOVE and DELTREE and supports multiple configurations. SCANDISK, MSD & even MEMMAKER can be useful programs. Even for the older systems, it can be useful if you do not want to be limited to 32MB drives or an alphabet soup of logical drives.