will give it a try. Nice find., thanks.

I've noticed one minor anomaly. I only notice this on my (slower) Centrino laptop, not my faster Athlon64 desktop PC.

Without the CPU idle device driver, when I click on a program within Program Manager, it follows click--> quick hour glass --> program launches.

With the driver loaded, the hour glass step is replaced with a minor pause. Everything still works though, so far.

-Robert

Does that pogram have viruses in it because it would be quite useful to use.

Do you trust people who tell you "hey xyz has no virus, just execute it,
no need for anti virus software" ?

Use Linux, forget about virus(es) (I know this does not really rhyme ... ).

🤣 if its posted here you can trust it doesn`t have any viruses. The mods would be on it right away otherwise.

But how would we know if it contained a virus or not?

And what is the big deal anyway if it contain a virus or not? It will run in the emulated Win31 environment, not on your physical PC.

And what is the big deal anyway if it contain a virus or not? It will run in the emulated Win31 environment, not on your physical PC.

That concept is not always that easy to grab 😀
Anyway, a virus scanner is mandatory if you are really afraid of catching a virus

It can still give you a virus on your xp tough as you are installing it in xp.

Oh i knew YOU'd install virii under your xp...

abyss wrote:

It can still give you a virus on your xp tough as you are installing it in xp.

From the Readme.txt of WQGHLT:

1Installation
2============
3
4To install WQGHLT, copy WQGHLT.386 to C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM, add a line to
5C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM.INI's [386Enh] section, like this:
6
7    [386Enh]
8    ...
9    device=WQGHLT.386
10
11and restart Windows.

Now - exactly how do you propose that a virus hidden inside the file WQGHLT.386, placed inside an emulated filesystem, run by an emulated CPU, can affect the outside WinXP ?

I'm with MiniMax on this.... how did my thread become a topic of viruses? 😖

-Robert

Just read the postings of abyss and you know.

emulated filesystem?

As for System.INI...

NT4/2K/XP/2003/Vista come with an SYSTEM.INI for backwards compatibility with 16bit applications.
I don't know if drivers placed in the [386Enh] section work or not....

I doubt any company would support their users doing anything with viruses wether the likelyhood is minimal if they infect their computer with a virus or not, which is why when questions come up concerning viruses and DosBox I always am 120% paranoid. Last thing we need is a bunch of dumbass users running viruses in DosBox and thinking that it's safe because the "DosBox people" said it was.

DosFreak wrote:

emulated filesystem? […]
Show full quote

emulated filesystem?

As for System.INI...

NT4/2K/XP/2003/Vista come with an SYSTEM.INI for backwards compatibility with 16bit applications.
I don't know if drivers placed in the [386Enh] section work or not....

But which System.INI ?

This driver is for Windows 3.11, right? So it needs to go in the System.INI that Win3.11 can see. Assuming that the person installing this driver did NOT do the braindead thing of mounting the real C:\ as the emulated C:\ in DOSBox, but instead did a

mount C "C:\DOSBox-stuff\Win31-drive"

then the System.INI in question will be

C:\DOSBox-stuff\Win31-drive\WINDOWS\System.INI

Now, how can the contents of that file possible affect the host OS ?

Ok just for clarification: you should NEVER run virii or virus-like
code inside dosbox. You are FULLY resposible yourself to check
that the programs contain no virus or similar stuff.

Assuming that the person installing this driver did NOT do the braindead thing of mounting the real C:\ as the emulated C:\ in DOSBox,

Which alot of users still do.

Also I have actually seen users modify their system.ini's in NT4/2K/XP for stupid things just because they think it will make their game work. In fact I can guarantee that there will be a user out there who will modify their System.ini in their XP directory just so that their Windows 3.1 in DosBox will function correctly.

and why not? They are running Windows aren't they? So why shouldn't it work? 🙄 😀

This is a very nice tip. Someone should add this to the Wiki so it is not lost.

Now CPU usage for me is lower in Win3.1 than just sitting at the DOS prompt. I wonder why when sitting at the dos prompt the CPU load is at 40% with nothing running (no TSRs)? In Win3.1 cpu load drops to 0%.

Becsause nothing is running is just wrong?