Attached here is a zipped copy of the disk image that has 4 test programs (they each have a different test pattern, though each has the same set of options). They are called Test1.com, Test2.com, Test3.com, and Test4.com. After running one of these test programs, hit one key from the first list, and then one key from the second list. The modes you will want to test here are 8, 9, and A (those keys from the first list) and always hit 2 (the key from the second list to select the correct memory segment for graphics). Try these in Tandy mode, then in PCjr mode, and notice they all crash in PCjr mode.

To quit, after hitting the second key such that graphics are displayed (or no graphics are displayed, if the mode isn't supported for the emulated machine in question), hit the "q" key. Any other key will get you back to the menu. If it crashes like when DosBox is in PCjr mode when running the 3 graphics modes I've been talking about here, it will crash and not respond to any key presses.

Note that the disk image is bootable, so you can boot DosBox right up to the A:\> prompt with the disk, and run the programs from there.

* Attachment Removed *

First of all, do not post illegal copies of software (MS-DOS 6.22 in this case) on vogons. FYI, only MS-DOS versions 2.1 through 3.3 are compatible with PCjr. You can post images with FreeDOS, if you must, but it may also not be compatible with PCjr.

As to your programs, the PCjr has a video memory window for graphics at segment 1800h, which you don't account for; and they write so much video data that it would go past the memory window at segment 1800h, overwriting stuff in DOS memory. A better title for this thread would have been "I don't understand how the PCjr works", rather than assuming the problem is with DOSBox.

First of all, it was not DOS. It was a "DOS boot disk", not a "DOS install disk". A DOS boot disk is NOT illegal to distribute, as it only contains the essential 3 files to boot the computer (IO.sys, MSDOS.sys, and COMMAND.com), and possibly will also have FDISK and FORMAT. These specific "baseline" files are not protected by the part of the license agreement on not redistributing. The license agreement only says that the whole "suite" may not be distributed (the whole set of disks, that together permit the installation of the entire package that is called "DOS"). Distributing the entire set of DOS installer disks (that has every last feature and program that comes with DOS, the entire suite that collectively is called "DOS") would be illegal. You can download DOS boot disks at many places on the net (there are even websites specializing in ONLY boot disk images, and no other kind of files), but full DOS installation disks can ONLY be found on PIRACY websites. Websites that uphold the law only distribute boot disks. The entire install disk set is always found only on websites that violate the law.

A boot disk image will have at the very least the above 3 mentioned files, and possibly also FDISK and FORMAT (to allow making an unused harddrive bootable). Distributing this is best described as "distributing a DOS boot disk", not "distributing DOS". This is legal to distribute.

An install disk image set will be a set of disk images that not only permits the computer to be booted (and possibly making the harddrive bootable), but also will install every program that comes with DOS (the DOS shell GUI, and a crap load of other stuff, that spans multiple disks). This would indeed be accurately described as "distributing DOS", which most certainly is NOT legal.

As for DOS compatibility with PCjr, if it is only compatible with DOS 2.1 to 3.3, why is my DOS 6.22 disk image successfully booting DOSBox in PCjr mode?

MS-DOS is a copyrighted work, and you do not have the right to distribute it, in part or in total. Your views on what is legitimate are erroneous, and you cannot use the illegal distribution of MS-DOS on other websites as justification for trying to distribute it here.

videogamer555 wrote:

As for DOS compatibility with PCjr, if it is only compatible with DOS 2.1 to 3.3, why is my DOS 6.22 disk image successfully booting DOSBox in PCjr mode?

Because booting doesn't switch into graphics mode.

ripsaw8080 wrote:

MS-DOS is a copyrighted work, and you do not have the right to distribute it, in part or in total. Your views on what is legitimate are erroneous, and you cannot use the illegal distribution of MS-DOS on other websites as justification for trying to distribute it here.

videogamer555 wrote:

As for DOS compatibility with PCjr, if it is only compatible with DOS 2.1 to 3.3, why is my DOS 6.22 disk image successfully booting DOSBox in PCjr mode?

Because booting doesn't switch into graphics mode.

Freedos came about, not as a solution for free boot disks. It came about as a solution to replace the entirety of the suite that is called "DOS". There's no need to provide a free alternative for DOS boot disks, because DOS boot disks are already perfectly legal to distribute.

What you call a "boot disk" is the core of the DOS software, minus external utilities -- it is still software, copyrighted by Microsoft. Again, your views of what is "perfectly legal" or legitimate are erroneous. You are allowed to distribute disks formatted by MS-DOS, but not ones containing MS-DOS software, unless you can prove that Microsoft has authorized you or anyone else to do so.

ripsaw8080 wrote:

You are allowed to distribute disks formatted by MS-DOS

And that's exactly what a boot disk is. A boot disk is a floppy disk that has been formatted with the command "FORMAT.COM /s a:". This command run from another floppy disk (such as drive B), or from a harddisk containing FORMAT.COM, will produce a bootable floppy. The resulting bootable floppy will containt IO.SYS, MSDOS.SYS, and COMMAND.COM, which are the very files that you are arguing are are the "core" of DOS, such that they are illegal to redistribute. You are making 2 mutually exclusive claims. Only one of them can be correct.

And by the way, the floppy disk image I had uploaded had ONLY those 3 files from DOS (IO.SYS, MSDOS.SYS, and COMMAND.COM), which are the very files that you would expect to find on a formatted floppy disk. ALL of the other files were mine (the autoexec.bat was typed by myself, not copied from an official Microsoft disk, and of course the 4 graphics test programs I uploaded were also my own).

Where is it written that you have to use the /s parameter when formatting a disk? That switch is an option that transfers the DOS software to the disk after it is formatted.

Seriously, at this point you are only further demonstrating your ignorance of simple concepts. I suggest you have fun experimenting with DOSBox rather trying to convert me or anyone else to your personal views on what does or doesn't constitute copyright infringement.

Videogamer555: Is this going to go anywhere?
You can split hairs all you want, the stance of this forum is, no illegal software distribution. A formated disk image is ok, a system formated disk image is not.
Accept this please.

If you want to discuss the "issue" you seem to have found, please do so. If you want to further discuss copyrights, this thread is going into lockdown...

ripsaw8080 wrote:

Where is it written that you have to use the /s parameter when formatting a disk? That switch is an option that transfers the DOS software to the disk after it is formatted.

Seriously, at this point you are only further demonstrating your ignorance of simple concepts. I suggest you have fun experimenting with DOSBox rather trying to convert me or anyone else to your personal views on what does or doesn't constitute copyright infringement.

Are you telling me that just one command line parameter is the difference between something legal, and something illegal? That sounds ridiculous.

videogamer555 wrote:

ripsaw8080 wrote:

Where is it written that you have to use the /s parameter when formatting a disk? That switch is an option that transfers the DOS software to the disk after it is formatted.

Seriously, at this point you are only further demonstrating your ignorance of simple concepts. I suggest you have fun experimenting with DOSBox rather trying to convert me or anyone else to your personal views on what does or doesn't constitute copyright infringement.

Are you telling me that just one command line parameter is the difference between something legal, and something illegal? That sounds ridiculous.

No. It's what you do with the floppy disk (image) that can make something illegal. Formatting with /s does not make ANYTHING illegal. Distributing that disk (image) with Dos on it is what's making it illegal.

Thread locked, you've been warned. Congratulations, 2nd locked thread on your belt.