- OP here. I like to read "finge" writeups like this. Hobbyist-level question to the community here, though: what do you think about the ideas and approaches of the author (and of actually using XP for casual tasks or work these days)?
- Another one, fairly common in late Soviet and very early 1990s Estonia (pronounced "Yuku"): https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juku_(arvuti)
It was often ridiculed by posh youngsters who already had their hands on a 386, though. :)
- I remember a time in Moscow in the early nineties when guys would wear their PC keys on their neck chain. Partly for status and partly to lock up their secrets?
- Haha, this is really cool. I would guess this had to be 99% status and 1% secrets, at least for younger guys. Or, did the keys and physical computer locks really make sense for high-end industry professionals?
I think our first 386 also had a physical lock, but since I was a kid back then, I don't remember having ever seen anybody actually using a lock like this anywhere. But ours was a tiny province town in almost-rural Estonia, so there were no real industry-level secrets anyhow.
- Additional Wikipedia link for background: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juku_E5101
For the Github repo, feel free to google-translate those Estonian texts. :)
- (FWIW, link found via the Dos Ain't Dead forums, in a thread about DosView, a new image viewer and converter for DOS: http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/board_entry.php?id=20798)
- Here's an excellent source. A repository of FreeDOS-compatible freeware and OSS software. No abandonware: https://clasqm.github.io/freedos-repo
Interesting dev, too, he has his own other DOS-related stuff available as well, e.g. in qbasic. See his main github.io page.
EDIT: From the linked Github repo, another great resource. "Reviews, descriptions, links to 1000+ DOS programs. Freeware and free-for-private-use shareware listed ... since 1994": http://reimagery.com/fsfd
- I wonder if one could hide the line numbers in Edlin, e.g. via a batch file.
I've always found line editors interesting. For many tasks, e.g. writing texts, they create a different kind of "flow" because you cannot see the entire composition on one screen. You're composing more "in your head" and focus visual attention to smaller fragments of your text.
However, as for Edlin, those line numbers are a minor visual disturbance (I understand that the command language relies on them, though). In the Unix-land (or rather, Plan 9), Rob Pike's sam editor [1] is imo excellent in the CLI mode -- even though it is intended to use with the GUI and a 3-button mouse. But you can also just not load the GUI with a command line switch (sam -d).
sam has a truly great command language [2]; according to some, especially good for editing multiple files at a time. I like its recursive nature, and I have done many complex replacements in large files that seemed to be much harder to write with something like sed (considering my modest skills of course :).
The central paradigm is that as opposed to ed, sam is not line-oriented. In sam, everything is a sting. This makes multi-line substitutions simpler (and recursively complex if you want! :). You can do a lot of interesting things with it. Piping stuff to/from the OS terminal (e.g. fmt) works great as well.
I'm just a hobbyist, but I've been thinking about trying to port sam's command line interface (not the GUI) for DOS as well. It is currently Unix or Plan9 only.
I suppose a standard quote from Ken Thompson suits here as well. What he said, comparing visual editors to something like ed:
"Yeah, I've seen [visual] editors like that, but I don't feel a need for them. I don't want to see the state of the file when I'm editing." [3]
Great quote for feeling nostalgic, at least, hehe. However, I do think he might be onto something here in terms of how the human brain and cognition works. Maybe even in our times of huge screens, those complex visual word processors should not always be taken for granted. I've felt that "fear of blank screen" a lot while writing stuff with a word processor. It is almost never the case on a line editor where you simply cannot visualize the whole text -- or the fact that you have not yet written even a single paragraph :).
So it's always interesting to (try to :) think about whether and how much cognitive overload those screenfuls of visual information might cause at times.
All that said, it is also great fun to see that FreeDOS Edlin was actually updated to version 2.22 only this spring, in 2023. [4] That is 43 years after the first version was realeased. DOS ain't dead. :)
2: http://doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/sam_lang_tutorial/sam_tut.pdf
3: http://web.archive.org/web/20080103071208/http://www.dcs.qmu.../ (as summarized by Peter Salus in "A Quarter Century of UNIX" (Addison-Wesley, 1994)
- Yeah, well aware and interested in QB64. However, if the focus is on teaching children, I find QBASIC 1.1 somewhat more suitable: it provides less options, menus and other potential footguns that may scare the child away at first.
Also, most importantly, QB64 is a compiled language, whereas QBASIC is an interpreted one. I noticed that QB64 does have an additional interpreter available on the site, but it didn't feel quite as comfortable to use as the QBASIC IDE. I assume children would prefer instant results -- in this regard, waiting for an .exe generation is maybe somewhat a hindrance as compared to pressing F5 or shift+F5 in the old QBv1.1 IDE.
My plan is to first learn QB1.1 via DOSBox and maybe later, if our son shows interest, introduce him to QB64, which is definitely a more serious tool (or LowResNX which is an excellent find for sure; looks like it is somewhere in between QB1.1 and QB64 or the old QB4.5 in terms of complexity and possibilities). Also, a definite pat on the QB64 devs' shoulders for keeping that old QBASIC look! Ha.
- Slightly offtopic, but the author's (retired) blog Programming in the 21st Century is also highly recommended. Lots of timeless essays IMO: https://prog21.dadgum.com/
- I had it bookmarked, but completely forgotten. Many thanks! Will definitely look into this with our son.
EDIT: wow, this seems perfect for us. A Pico-8 clone in BASIC, essentially. Even simpler.
From the manual: "LowRes NX is based on second-generation, structured BASIC. It offers all the classic commands, but with labels, loops and subprograms instead of line numbers."
Does this mean that it supports all of QBASIC? So after finishing the QB tutorial linked in this thread, we can switch over to LowRes NX with no additional learning curve needed? (This would get rid of the DOSBox layer, making the learning and exploring experience maybe more straightforward for a child.)
I'm no oldschool BASIC specs expert, hence the question.
- (OP here.) It really is an excellent guide. Maybe even the best introduction to programming for children I've found so far. Obviously written and structured with true care -- e.g. note that it teaches file saving and loading only in Chapter 8, not earlier. So the rationale seems to be that up to this point, the child should focus on typing in those really short programs; no need to save, yet.
Also, as a non-native speaker (and a computer hobbyist, not an educated IT guy), I would point out that the language of this guide seems really-really good.
The author seems to be a collector of old computer books for kids as well [1] -- this very probably also contributes to why his QB guide feels so well polished. The author very successfully avoids overwhelming the kids with programming terms; he is really careful in introducing those. Also, the sentences are simple, short and to the point; and somehow... warm, empathetic towards the (learning) child.
I'm actually in the process of translating this to my language (Estonian), and going through the exercises simultaneously with our 10yo son. I think we're doing great! That Blue Screen of QB really helps in maintaining a child's focus. QB is a notably good IDE for kids, maybe almost unbeatable in this regard even in 2023?
1: http://tedfelix.com/books/index.html and http://tedfelix.com/cs4kids/index.html
2: see also the author's additional tutorial, Sprites in QBASIC: http://tedfelix.com/qbasic/sprites.html
When I need to use those devices, I can just fire it up and go.
Risks are low too. Keep online use by the book, focused and there just us not that much to worry about
Also, disabling the task scheduler, NTP and windows file sharing? Disabling Windows updates without suggesting an offline update package? yeah, no, thanks.
To me at least half of this guide sounds like snake oil or cargo cult.
But yeah, some things might be useful for some people. The trick is finding the needle in the haystack
I use Win2003 daily on more powerfull PC (i5-2400, 16GB RAM) and its indeed blazing fast. When cache is warm, everything starts pretty much instantly, so SSD is not really needed. Cache FTW!
Do any of his instructions fix all the TLS updates that break old software?
Surely there must be someone compiling a modern browser for XP?
From a semi regular XP user, this writeup is exemplary. Well done.