• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Recommended DOS Versions

S

Smack2k

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
1,348
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
OK,

Quick question for the masses here:

What versions of DOS would you recommend for:

8088
286
386
486

I didnt want to ask the same question in two different areas..

Thanks
 
8086/286 probably DOS 3.3
386 and newer DOS 6.22

The real cutoff is DOS 6.x uses quite a bit of 640K RAM and anything pre a 386 doesn't have upper memory management so it limits the apps you can run. You also have maximum 32MB partitions with DOS 3.3 so you might switch to DOS 5 for a 286 with a decent sized HD.

I am sure there are very old apps out there that might require something pre DOS 3.x also
 
Don't forget about Compaq DOS 3.31. It was uncommon, but could handle larger hard drives up to 512mb. Useful on an 8088/8086 system with a larger hard drive.

For a 286 either DOS 5 or 6.22 would work well as it would save memory by loading DOS in to HMA.

So it also depends on if you are using a hard drive, or what size the hard drive is. For a floppy only 8088/8086 DOS 2 or 3.x is a good fit. If you have a 512mb hard drive or larger, you will probably want DOS 5 or 6.x, even for a 8088/8088 at the expense of memory usage. For a 2gb or larger you would probably want a 386+ CPU and Win95's MS-DOS 7.1 for FAT32 support.

I also assume you are only talking about IBM PCs and 100% compatible clones. Some early "MS-DOS" machines would run nothing later than the versions provided by the OEM.

Also, the so called MS-DOS 7, 7.1, and 8.0 bundled with Windows 9x/ME require a 386+. They will not boot at all on an 8088 or 286.
 
Rick Ethridge said:
Whatever you do AVOID MSDOS 4.0. It's a DOG!
Click to expand...

Now, now. :) I'd agree with you in a sort of non vintage way and certainly have always avoided it in the past.

But - this is a vintage forum so we're interested in vintage software - right? Many vintage computers are "a dog", so I don't see anything wrong with a vintage OS being a little smelly. In fact, I'd argue that because of its special place in the history of DOS, version 4.0 would be quite collectible. No?
 
I've got a boxed IBM DOS 4.00/4.01 if there's anybody interested in it. Everything about this set says Version 4.00 except the disks, themselves, which say:

Version 4.01 © Copyright International Business Machines Corp. 1981, 1988
Licensed Material - Program Property of IBM - All Rights Reserved
© Copyright Microsoft Corp. 1981 - 1986
 
Ole Juul said:
All versions from 2.0 to 6.22 are good for those.
Click to expand...

DOS doesn't stop at 6.22 :) There's also PC DOS 6.3, 7.0, and 2000.

Quoting myself for reference:

I just went through all my boot disks, and ran CHKDSK on each one to display the amount of free RAM (out of 640K) on each one, using a totally clean boot (no CONFIG.SYS or AUTOEXEC.BAT):

PC DOS 2.00 ... 630,672 bytes
PC DOS 2.10 ... 630,672
PC DOS 3.10 ... 616,432
MS-DOS 3.10 ... 616,432
PC DOS 3.21 ... 609,392
PC DOS 3.30 ... 600,528
MS-DOS 3.30 ... 600,368
IBM DOS 5.00 ... 593,328
MS-DOS 5.00 ... 593,328
MS-DOS 6.00 ... 592,256
IBM DOS 6.10 ... 593,056
MS-DOS 6.22 ... 592,256
PC DOS 6.30 ... 593,024
PC DOS 7.00 Revision 0 ... 593,840
PC DOS 2000 (7.00 Revision 1) ... 593,760

I also have an MS-DOS 4.01 boot disk, but not a copy of CHKDSK which will work with it, so I can't give it an accurate free RAM amount, but judging by what other utilities report, it's somewhere in the ballpark of 590,000 bytes. So IBM claimed that PC DOS 7 offered the most free RAM of any version of DOS since 3.3, and that does appear to be true!
Click to expand...
 
vwestlife said:
I also have an MS-DOS 4.01 boot disk, but not a copy of CHKDSK which will work with it, so I can't give it an accurate free RAM amount, but judging by what other utilities report, it's somewhere in the ballpark of 590,000 bytes.
Click to expand...
Do you want a copy of IBM 4.00/4.01 CHKDSK to try it out?
 
For me, DOS 5.0 is the general winner for 286's and below, while I run DOS 6.22 on 386's and higher. Exception being if I have a memory card on the 286, in which case I'll go with DOS 6.22 there as well.

After dealing with the partition sizes, DOS 5 through 6.22 are pretty much interchangeable to me, as the supporting software I use is platform independent. With each, I have memory management and can get > 600kb free ram. The extra tools that came with DOS 6.x are pretty easily found in other packages like Norton Utilities, and those programs are usually part of my default install package on any DOS machine that I use.
 
I used to like DOS 5 and 6 best but DOS 7 from WIN98SE is now my favorite, mainly because of it's support of large partitions. No more fooling around with multiple drives or partitions. :)
 
This is really a subjective thing, many answers, none are really right or wrong, lol.

Myself, I run 6.22 on most my machines for consistency, but I am also the same fool who runs Windows 3.0 on most my stock 8086/88's, so what do I know, lol

Really I would probably be best with older versions on my pre 286 boxen (I have boxed copy of IBM 3.30). MS-DOS 6.22 has been a pretty good match for anything with more than 640k on it for me (even my lowest end 286 has 896k), I use it pretty consistently.

While I prefer MS-DOS for some reason, I am not opposed to PC DOS (or even DR-DOS, I ran it back in the 90s on my 286's), but I wouldn't really run PC-DOS 7 on less than a 386, even those I tend to stick with 6.22 and Windows 3.11 combo.
 
If you are not looking to run Win 3.x, you might try FreeDOS (freedos.org). I have found it to be much more stable than MS-DOS, and it has many modern conveniences such as tab completion. Plus it is open source and pretty much compatible with MS-DOS software and drivers. At least, I've never had any problems.
 
Freedos has problems with some utilities not working on 808x or 80286 systems. The compiler used starts off by including code to check for 32-bit registers which crashes 16-bit systems.

I tend to prefer 6.22 for everything. Simplifies matters when a compressed floppy gets moved between system.
 
DOS 3.3 is still best for floppy-only systems or those with hard drives <=32 MB. Many of the utilities from later versions of DOS can be added to it and will work fine, such as QBASIC/EDIT, MOVE, DELTREE, ACALC (from PC DOS 7/2000), etc. (Note that the files from PC DOS are less strict about checking version numbers than MS-DOS.) DEFRAG requires DOS 5.0 or higher, but SPEEDISK from Norton Utilities 6.x is identical except for the name and works fine with DOS 3.3. I miss the DIR /S command to automatically sort directory listings in alphabetical order, but DS (Directory Sort) from Norton Utilities takes care of that.
 
cmc said:
If you are not looking to run Win 3.x, you might try FreeDOS (freedos.org). I have found it to be much more stable than MS-DOS, and it has many modern conveniences such as tab completion. Plus it is open source and pretty much compatible with MS-DOS software and drivers. At least, I've never had any problems.
Click to expand...

Tab completion and such is not a function of the distribution. Like all utilities and functions it is a personal choice.
 
Trixter, I noticed that your SIG consists of this:

Trixter said:
I prefer email over PMs.
Click to expand...
Why did you put this there?

Do we know your email address to send you an email if so inclined?

Am I missing something?

What's so wrong with a PM which the board is configured to facilitate everyone to send with ease?

Can you help with this?
 
Thanks for all the advice so far....very interesting to read through..

One thing I wanted to add / ask:

What versions of DOS were the preferred version when each type of machine (8088 / 286 / 386 / 486) was at its peak? To get that true, "in the era" Vintage feel?
 
Smack2k said:
Thanks for all the advice so far....very interesting to read through..

One thing I wanted to add / ask:

What versions of DOS were the preferred version when each type of machine (8088 / 286 / 386 / 486) was at its peak? To get that true, "in the era" Vintage feel?
Click to expand...

DOS 2 was the XT default OS and probably accounted for most sales when the 808x were mainstay of sales.
DOS 3 came with AT and DOS 3.3 would be the major OS when the 286 was the peak, high end 8086s were out there and the first 386 were rolling off the lines.
DOS 5 would be the OS of choice when the 386 was the important CPU with some copies attached to 486s and the VGA equipped budget 286.
DOS 6 was when the 486 was the mainstream CPU but also some Pentiums and speedy 386 versions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top