spesso wrote on 2026-07-20, 09:11:

Ekb wrote on 2016-09-03, 00:18:

Where can I find "AMIBCP" (for DOS) ? […]
Show full quote

Where can I find "AMIBCP" (for DOS) ?

For example:
BCP14.EXE (for core BIOS 07/07/91)
BCP20.EXE (for core BIOS 12/12/91)
BCP21.EXE (for core BIOS 06/06/92)
BCP21A.EXE (for core BIOS 11/11/92 and 08/08/93)

please, share?

"AMIBCP" (for DOS)

Thanks for bringing these to light! We can finally put most of this thread to rest, as WBCP511 is still unfortunately missing

spesso wrote on 2026-07-20, 09:11:

Ekb wrote on 2016-09-03, 00:18:

Where can I find "AMIBCP" (for DOS) ? […]
Show full quote

Where can I find "AMIBCP" (for DOS) ?

For example:
BCP14.EXE (for core BIOS 07/07/91)
BCP20.EXE (for core BIOS 12/12/91)
BCP21.EXE (for core BIOS 06/06/92)
BCP21A.EXE (for core BIOS 11/11/92 and 08/08/93)

please, share?

"AMIBCP" (for DOS)

Hi, @spesso,
And thank you for these AMIBCP versions!

Are these attachments taken from here: https://retrolib.info/_x86__/ibm-wgam-wbiz-co … iness/wbiz0819/

aVd wrote on 2026-07-20, 14:17:

Are these attachments taken from here: https://retrolib.info/_x86__/ibm-wgam-wbiz-co … iness/wbiz0819/

yes.

nice, thanks for digging this up!

I have found that v2.1AP works fine with an amstrad amibios I tested with...
in case it is not known, AMIDIAG can also change the hidden bios options - but ofcourse you do not get them to appear in the actual bios screens, only through amidiag

edit:
I have converted to PDF the AMIBCP 2.1 manual using this converter: https://convert.guru/w51-converter
attached to this post

Trying to figure out how the different BCPs map to supported AMIBIOS dates. The manual hints at 1.4 for 07/07/91, 2.0 for 12/12/91, and 2.1 for 06/06/92 but otherwise it's not clear. BCP21A works on 08/08/93 (or is at least able to open it, didn't try saving and running) but these strings are in the files:

BCP14E.EXE: 0123AAAAMMMMIIII07/07/91(C)1990 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
BCP14.EXE: 0123AAAAMMMMIIII07/07/91(C)1990 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
BCP20E.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)12/12/91(C)1991 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
BCP20.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)12/12/91(C)1991 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
BCP21AE.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)06/06/92(C)1992 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
BCP21A.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)06/06/92(C)1992 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
BCP21E.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)06/06/92(C)1992 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
BCP21.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)06/06/92(C)1992 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
GBCP2.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)11/11/92(C)1992 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
GBCP3.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)11/11/92(C)1992 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
WBCP33.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)12/15/93(C)1993 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved
WBCP40.EXE: AMIBIOS W 04 00 06/15/94(C)1994 American Megatrends Inc.AMIBIOSP
WBCP.EXE: (AAMMIIBBIIOOSS)11/15/93(C)1993 American Megatrends Inc., All Rights Reserved

WOW OK that is a bit amazing. Finally these are available! This thread was dead for so long. Thank you!
Well I making so many tests with 386 M/Bs and these nearly all had AMI BIOS so I was looking for this.
I was so desperate that I even made my own AMI BIOS editing tool to cover this.

And here is the crazy part, I released my tool 3 days ago with a video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-AGa3NN7DQ

I even said in the video unfortunately these old version still missing showing this tread.
Then yesterday all was found?? If this is a coincidence then... what can I say?? absolutely crazy!!!
Having all these helps in many ways. I have a lot of study to do. Might be possible to support more version with my tool.

galanopu wrote on 2026-07-20, 23:38:

And here is the crazy part, I released my tool 3 days ago with a video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-AGa3NN7DQ

Hello,
I saw parts of the video and need to finish it.
I wonder if you came across this while developing it and it helped or if you rediscovered this: Re: AMI Color BIOS (1993 and earlier) modification in hex editor
I also wondered, how did you figure out which regions of the AMIBIOS were not in use so that you could put XT-IDE BIOS there.
Thanks!

jakethompson1 wrote on 2026-07-21, 00:12:

Hello, I saw parts of the video and need to finish it. I wonder if you came across this while developing it and it helped or if […]
Show full quote

galanopu wrote on 2026-07-20, 23:38:

And here is the crazy part, I released my tool 3 days ago with a video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-AGa3NN7DQ

Hello,
I saw parts of the video and need to finish it.
I wonder if you came across this while developing it and it helped or if you rediscovered this: Re: AMI Color BIOS (1993 and earlier) modification in hex editor
I also wondered, how did you figure out which regions of the AMIBIOS were not in use so that you could put XT-IDE BIOS there.
Thanks!

Going deep into this here will go off topic and I do not want. Empty regions in the bios are obvious, big blocks of just 00s.
Regarding the thread, I am not the read read type of person at all!! Especially then it looks a bit to much and I am looking for something specific.
Now the last year for sure I didn't checked this. Can not tell for sure if I ever checked it before. I might have a look now.
The thing is my tool is about editing settings, that ok is very basic to do, and injection that I figured more or less, no other stuff.

galanopu wrote on 2026-07-21, 00:32:

Going deep into this here will go off topic and I do not want. Empty regions in the bios are obvious, big blocks of just 00s. Re […]
Show full quote

jakethompson1 wrote on 2026-07-21, 00:12:

Hello, I saw parts of the video and need to finish it. I wonder if you came across this while developing it and it helped or if […]
Show full quote

galanopu wrote on 2026-07-20, 23:38:

And here is the crazy part, I released my tool 3 days ago with a video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-AGa3NN7DQ

Hello,
I saw parts of the video and need to finish it.
I wonder if you came across this while developing it and it helped or if you rediscovered this: Re: AMI Color BIOS (1993 and earlier) modification in hex editor
I also wondered, how did you figure out which regions of the AMIBIOS were not in use so that you could put XT-IDE BIOS there.
Thanks!

Going deep into this here will go off topic and I do not want. Empty regions in the bios are obvious, big blocks of just 00s.
Regarding the thread, I am not the read read type of person at all!! Especially then it looks a bit to much and I am looking for something specific.
Now the last year for sure I didn't checked this. Can not tell for sure if I ever checked it before. I might have a look now.
The thing is my tool is about editing settings, that ok is very basic to do, and injection that I figured more or less, no other stuff.

Makes sense. I also never dug much deeper than unhiding settings, and figuring out where the defaults are stored.
One thing was, flipping the bit that masks whether the board is allowed to have a PS/2 mouse port or not. That is part of the ROM image and can't be done using AMISETUP, and is of use to those here who modify their KBC to have a PS/2 mouse port and would like built-in BIOS support.

jakethompson1 wrote on 2026-07-21, 00:34:

galanopu wrote on 2026-07-21, 00:32:

Going deep into this here will go off topic and I do not want. Empty regions in the bios are obvious, big blocks of just 00s. Re […]
Show full quote

jakethompson1 wrote on 2026-07-21, 00:12:

Hello, I saw parts of the video and need to finish it. I wonder if you came across this while developing it and it helped or if […]
Show full quote

Hello,
I saw parts of the video and need to finish it.
I wonder if you came across this while developing it and it helped or if you rediscovered this: Re: AMI Color BIOS (1993 and earlier) modification in hex editor
I also wondered, how did you figure out which regions of the AMIBIOS were not in use so that you could put XT-IDE BIOS there.
Thanks!

Going deep into this here will go off topic and I do not want. Empty regions in the bios are obvious, big blocks of just 00s.
Regarding the thread, I am not the read read type of person at all!! Especially then it looks a bit to much and I am looking for something specific.
Now the last year for sure I didn't checked this. Can not tell for sure if I ever checked it before. I might have a look now.
The thing is my tool is about editing settings, that ok is very basic to do, and injection that I figured more or less, no other stuff.

Makes sense. I also never dug much deeper than unhiding settings, and figuring out where the defaults are stored.
One thing was, flipping the bit that masks whether the board is allowed to have a PS/2 mouse port or not. That is part of the ROM image and can't be done using AMISETUP, and is of use to those here who modify their KBC to have a PS/2 mouse port and would like built-in BIOS support.

Well I checked the tread now... I think something like 2 years ago when I wanted to unhide some options I checked it and used hex editor or something.
This knowledge stuck on me. Then 1 year ago I did my fist version, and recently finalized it with the injector and released.
So thank you for the info, in a way probably helped me.
ok flipping the bit is easy but auto parsing the options and not miss something was a bit tricky, had to figure out.
Now finally we have the AMIBCPs, so yeah... I tested them just now, for sure these do everything except inject.

galanopu wrote on 2026-07-20, 23:38:

If this is a coincidence then...

This is thanks to your video and MAXIOL who created https://retrolib.info/

galanopu wrote on 2026-07-20, 23:38:

Well I making so many tests with 386 M/Bs and these nearly all had AMI BIOS so I was looking for this. I was so desperate that I […]
Show full quote

Well I making so many tests with 386 M/Bs and these nearly all had AMI BIOS so I was looking for this.
I was so desperate that I even made my own AMI BIOS editing tool to cover this.

And here is the crazy part, I released my tool 3 days ago with a video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-AGa3NN7DQ

Hi, @galanopu,
I just watched the video about your AMI "color" BIOS editing utility for windows. It seems very handy, especially its option ROM injection functionality. It is sad, that you're neglecting DOS and scrapped the original DOS version, since many retro PC enthusiasts still use DOS and utilities and tools for DOS.

I have а question for you: Could you explain with what your IDE option ROM is superior and/or inferior compared to XT-IDE's one?

Thank you!

aVd wrote on 2026-07-21, 04:14:

I just watched the video about your AMI "color" BIOS editing utility for windows. It seems very handy, especially its option ROM injection functionality. It is sad, that you're neglecting DOS and scrapped the original DOS version, since many retro PC enthusiasts still use DOS and utilities and tools for DOS.

I have а question for you: Could you explain with what your IDE option ROM is superior and/or inferior compared to XT-IDE's one?

Well the tool is bios file editor. Not meant to run locally on the system you try to mod.
So it is better at windows were you also have your rom programmer software.
Now that AMIBCP is also out, this makes my DOS variation even more irrelevant.

Now about my IDE Option ROM "Atheatos IDE-386+" it is on the pervious video in detail!
Yeah I made this first. Not the best recoded, edited video but I check everything there.
Long story sort, it is way smaller only 2KB, so easier to inject.
Also better and faster at really everything but only supports 386+. Optimized for that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xlvU5Oa_XM

Ok, thanks for the video about the OpROM, I'll see it later. I just got into some serious problems with your windows BIOS editor.

I decided to try your utility, but I'm always suspicious with the obfuscated PE executables, so I had to dig-in a little, if there's something hidden beneath in "AthAMIed.exe" and got the unpacked version by using something like Detect It Easy. And the Avira got triggered immediately. This was what I got before "avgnt.exe" (Avira system tray agent) was nuked (yes, I reinstalled it the whole Avira package after, and now I have to scan the stupid windows partition with other av-tools offline):

I also sent the unpacked "AthAMIed.exe:" for scan at VirusTotal and got this:

Do you have any reasonable explanation?

I don't claim,that you're trying to push some kind of malware or trojan intentionally, but it's also a very bad practice to obfuscate windows executables for free utilities like this one by using some virus-infested malicious exe-obfuscating file tools.

aVd wrote on 2026-07-21, 12:30:

Ok, thanks for the video about the OpROM, I'll see it later. I just got into some serious problems with your windows BIOS editor […]
Show full quote

Ok, thanks for the video about the OpROM, I'll see it later. I just got into some serious problems with your windows BIOS editor.

I decided to try your utility, but I'm always suspicious with the obfuscated PE executables, so I had to dig-in a little, if there's something hidden beneath in "AthAMIed.exe" and got the unpacked version by using something like Detect It Easy. And the Avira got triggered immediately. This was what I got before "avgnt.exe" (Avira system tray agent) was nuked (yes, I reinstalled it the whole Avira package after, and now I have to scan the stupid windows partition with other av-tools offline):

The attachment avira_warning.jpg is no longer available

I also sent the unpacked AthAMIed.exe for scan at VirusTotal and got this:

The attachment virustotal_report.jpg is no longer available

Do you have any reasonable explanation?

I don't claim, that you're trying to push some kind of malware or trojan intentionally, but it's also a very bad practice to obfuscate windows executables for free utilities like this one by using some virus-infested malicious file tools.

OMG... There is nothing obfuscated there! I did not use anything! This is a normal MinGW compilation.
The fist version I compiled with TCC, it was barebones and all, but yeah was it was faulty, triggering all this AV.
The new one from MinGW, It just has the right extras (tags signatures, I do not know) so all these modern heuristic based AV do not trigger.
I suffered a lot with my initial TCC release that did not had this, then just switched to MinGW, problem solved.

But then, you went there and striped everything, made something else, then wonder why it triggers AV?
Any executable not officially signed that misses all these fields triggers these stupid systems, unfortunately.
Ok to be fair, maybe not any executable, but for sure anything that modifies files and has links.

Then ok... Here is not the place to discus all that! Totally off topic, this is a tread about AMIBCP.
Bug reports, or any requests is better sent to me directly.

aVd wrote on 2026-07-21, 17:00:

This looks very much like false positives. Microsoft (Wacatac.B!ml): The !ml (Machine Learning) suffix explicitly indicates that the Microsoft antivirus did not find an exact virus signature. It simply flags the file as suspicious based on AI analysis.
Other antiviruses are not very trustworthy because they often make mistakes.

P.S.
The TR/Crypt.XPACK.Gen verdict from Avira looks scary, but it is not the name of a specific virus, but a technical description of how the file is structured.

TR/ — Short for Trojan; Avira uses this for all suspicious files that aren't worms.
Crypt — Means the file code is encrypted or compressed with a special packer (protector).
XPACK — Avira's internal tag for popular old or commercial packers like UPX, ASPack, or Themida.
Gen — Short for Generic; it means "no specific virus found, but the file is packed like malware."

Source: Google AI.

Rio444 wrote on 2026-07-21, 17:25:

Everyone decides for himself, based on his own level of understanding and knowledge. The idea is good, but its realization.... And I already submitted the necessary materials to a "higher authorities", which will determine whether that is a scam.

With all my respect to you for not sanding down your chips, I think, you will not get any royalties for being a virtual lawyer here.

Looking into the issue, I'm inclined to agree that this appears a case of a false positive. Even applications like Epic Online Services apparently gets flagged with the TR/Crypt.XPACK.Gen warning from Avira. See this Reddit thread as an example: https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckepic/comments/1e … rcryptxpackgen/

And AI based malware detectors are somewhat notorious for false positives. I've experienced cases where I've even had legacy software applications falsely flagged by malware tools. Unless someone has evidence of actual malware in question, I'm inclined to give Atheatos the benefit of the doubt in this situation.

@aVd, I would ask that you cease from any goading responses in this thread. If you have concerns about the software, per Atheatos's direction you can contact him directly.

Otherwise, I would advise anyone to exercise caution when downloading and using random applications from the internet.

I’ve manually analysed the original executable. To the best of my time and ability, I don’t see any evidence of malware. It is not packed or obfuscated and does not contain any suspicious system calls. That VT screenshot is for a copy of the utility run through an “unpacker” tool which mangled the image file by writing .bss and section alignment bytes into the output. Since a normal compiler would never generate an executable like that, this makes the image look suspicious. AV sees some executable which has clearly been modified by something else—because it has. That’s exactly what a self-replicating virus would do. But this is a bogus result.

It’s good to be vigilant, it’s also important to recognise that these detection tools market themselves as being foolproof but actually rely heavily on heuristics which shouldn’t be taken as authoritative. I’m glad that this was reported so it could be investigated to make sure that there was no problem. I hope this experience offers confidence that you have access to a whole community of people with specific domain knowledge and who are willing to take a look and give better answers than some “easy” utility, and as a result, can avoid strong feelings and time and energy wasted on a false positive.

Shponglefan wrote on 2026-07-21, 18:49:

@aVd, I would ask that you cease from any goading responses in this thread. If you have concerns about the software, per Atheatos's direction you can contact him directly.

Otherwise, I would advise anyone to exercise caution when downloading and using random applications from the internet.

I will just play safe by not using this free windows stuff, but rather the manual method, described in another thread by @jakethompson1. This breaks no forum rules and causes no virtual dramas. And as you can see now, the forum administration took the decision to keep the link, which leads to this still suspicious win32 PE executable. Freedom means responsibility, and freedom controls means responsibility^n. We have no right to discuss this further, no matter, if we agree or disagree with this - we obey the forums rules. Case closed.