You'll get about the speed of a 1Mhz 8088 if you try to run it on a 486.

OPL3 passthrough is doable though.

Why when it runs Dos natively?

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-06, 01:17:

Why when it runs Dos natively?

- Save states
- Greater control
- compatibility with what is not on my hardware
- Stability

Rikintosh wrote on 2021-07-06, 03:59:

- Save states - Greater control - compatibility with what is not on my hardware - Stability […]
Show full quote

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-06, 01:17:

Why when it runs Dos natively?

- Save states
- Greater control
- compatibility with what is not on my hardware
- Stability

Lol. Good luck.

Rikintosh wrote on 2021-07-06, 03:59:

- Save states - Greater control - compatibility with what is not on my hardware - Stability […]
Show full quote

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-06, 01:17:

Why when it runs Dos natively?

- Save states
- Greater control
- compatibility with what is not on my hardware
- Stability

Square peg in a round hole for too-much-time-on-your-hands reasons

Sorry if that sounds harsh but there is really no good reason to do this... build a Pentium III machine, and you will get 486 speeds out of DOSBox and you can play the games natively if you want

Rikintosh wrote on 2021-07-06, 01:08:

But for example, that it is possible to disable certain features and use real hardware like my native sound blaster instead of an emulated one.

What makes you think your "native sound blaster" would sound any different from the "emulated one"? If there are flaws in the emulation, then those can be corrected.

It is possible to run DOSBox in DOS using HX DOS Extender, and some versions of HX DOS Extender even support sound. But even if it ran at acceptable speed, I very much doubt you would find anyone even remotely interested in re-writing anything to somehow "disable certain features and use real hardware". Good luck figuring that out on your own.

I think the same, except.. It would be a nice proo-of-concept experiment to port DOSBox to Windows 3.1, DesqView/X or PC/GEOS.
And in the process, a few things would have to be simplified, anyway.
For example, Windows 3.x programs can normally allocate ~16MB, at max, if memory serves (not checked as I'm sleepy).
Anyway, this is just a thought. Porting SDL to Win16 or PC/GEOS would be hard. Win32s.. Well, not sure. GDI is there, MCI, too..

MS Windows 3.x in 386enhaced mode can already do multiple windowed Dos sessions. A lot of folk did that when it was released. Same with OS/2 v2 up.

Well, yes, but the OP wanted save states, among other things. I thought a special Win32s version of DOSBox, with compiler flags set for i486 could also run on HX Extender..
Anyhow, it was just an idea. Older versions of DOSBox also ran on Win95 (Win32c), so SDL 1.x should be very humble when it comes to minimum requirements.
With a little bit of tweaking, and ommiting some features, it could be able to compile in Visual C++ 4.x ? Pleaaase ? 😀

Hi again. Here's something interesting, that may fit here.
QB8086, a PC/XT emulator written in QuickBasic 4.5, boots on a 286 PC/AT @12MHz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFGcL26ECGY

Yes, it's very slow, but it works. Remember, it was written in QuickBasic (!).
A 486DX2-66 or an OverDrive CPU might be quite a different story.

So, perhaps, DOSBox, if optimized, could provide performance of a Turbo XT on fast 486 system.
Again, many features would have to be omitted, perhaps, resulting in a DOSBox "Lite".

Maybe all cores, except for a 486 dynarec core, could be removed ?
4MB memory limit ? Just one VGA devices instead of many ?

Jo22 wrote on 2021-07-06, 06:48:

So, perhaps, DOSBox, if optimized, could provide performance of a Turbo XT on fast 486 system. Again, many features would have t […]
Show full quote

So, perhaps, DOSBox, if optimized, could provide performance of a Turbo XT on fast 486 system.
Again, many features would have to be omitted, perhaps, resulting in a DOSBox "Lite".

Maybe all cores, except for a 486 dynarec core, could be removed ?
4MB memory limit ? Just one VGA devices instead of many ?

While that might make the binary smaller, I can't imagine why that would make the program faster. And besides, savestates almost certainly qualify as an "advanced feature".

Come to think of it, it would be especially impractical to use savestates and then throw in some kind of magical passthrough for the sound card hardware, since that would imply saving and restoring the state of everything except the sound card. Maybe it would work, but it would probably put a big dent in the "stability" that is also supposed to be the benefit here.

It's an interesting idea but yeah I don't think full emulation would be the way to go. I wonder if you wanted to implement the features you mentioned, if you most likely would end up creating something along the lines of SoftICE.

Ok, I'll explain the whole story so you can understand my idea:

A few years ago, I worked providing maintenance in computers, until a computer came to me, which was inside a machine for cutting and refining metal parts. I don't fully understand how that machinery worked, I just know it was something like a machine that carved metal and stuff like that. It was a machine ordered from Japan in the mid 90's. The computer inside it came to me because it was having overheating, stability problems, etc, there were capacitors to change, a lot of dust, and a psu dying.

After I fixed it, I had to run it for a few hours to make sure there weren't any major problems, so I opened up her system. She used a Win95 or something graphically similar, I don't remember, but it was in Japanese, and she had a system that virtualized everything, every program she had, ran in a virtual "capsule", because if the program crashed, the system wouldn't would be compromised.

I figured if there was something like that for games, it would be cool.

Rikintosh wrote on 2021-07-06, 18:38:

Ok, I'll explain the whole story so you can understand my idea: […]
Show full quote

Ok, I'll explain the whole story so you can understand my idea:

A few years ago, I worked providing maintenance in computers, until a computer came to me, which was inside a machine for cutting and refining metal parts. I don't fully understand how that machinery worked, I just know it was something like a machine that carved metal and stuff like that. It was a machine ordered from Japan in the mid 90's. The computer inside it came to me because it was having overheating, stability problems, etc, there were capacitors to change, a lot of dust, and a psu dying.

After I fixed it, I had to run it for a few hours to make sure there weren't any major problems, so I opened up her system. She used a Win95 or something graphically similar, I don't remember, but it was in Japanese, and she had a system that virtualized everything, every program she had, ran in a virtual "capsule", because if the program crashed, the system wouldn't would be compromised.

I figured if there was something like that for games, it would be cool.

Sound a bit like Xwindows on *nixs. A game will run in its own console/terminal session. If it freezes you just type xkill in a separate user terminal session. Drag the x created and click your left mouse on the problematic session an it will be gone. Or you can run topas administrator in a terminal or separate tty by seleting ctl-alt-F* and kill it.

You can also kill Xwindows with top as administrator as well and it will restart without a complete system reboot.

And yes you can play Doom, Hexen, Heretic etc in a separate terminal or full screen...😉

Rikintosh wrote on 2021-07-06, 18:38:

She used a Win95 or something graphically similar, I don't remember, but it was in Japanese, and she had a system that virtualized everything, every program she had, ran in a virtual "capsule", because if the program crashed, the system wouldn't would be compromised.

Well, that definitely wasn't running on a 486, now was it? Don't you think it would be easier to figure out whatever was running there rather than trying to mash DOSBox into something that it was never intended to be?

Also, what does it mean that "the system wouldn't be compromised"? If Windows 95 is running in some sort of virtual capsule, and that virtual capsule somehow crashes, what exactly is left afterwards? DOS, especially on a 486, is already a single-tasking environment.

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-06, 19:00:

And yes you can play Doom, Hexen, Heretic etc in a separate terminal or full screen...😉

I'm sure you're very proud, but it's starting to seem like you post those pictures in every thread and it's getting kind of weird.

Jorpho wrote on 2021-07-06, 19:34:

Well, that definitely wasn't running on a 486, now was it? Don't you think it would be easier to figure out whatever was runnin […]
Show full quote

Rikintosh wrote on 2021-07-06, 18:38:

She used a Win95 or something graphically similar, I don't remember, but it was in Japanese, and she had a system that virtualized everything, every program she had, ran in a virtual "capsule", because if the program crashed, the system wouldn't would be compromised.

Well, that definitely wasn't running on a 486, now was it? Don't you think it would be easier to figure out whatever was running there rather than trying to mash DOSBox into something that it was never intended to be?

Also, what does it mean that "the system wouldn't be compromised"? If Windows 95 is running in some sort of virtual capsule, and that virtual capsule somehow crashes, what exactly is left afterwards? DOS, especially on a 486, is already a single-tasking environment.

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-06, 19:00:

And yes you can play Doom, Hexen, Heretic etc in a separate terminal or full screen...😉

I'm sure you're very proud, but it's starting to seem like you post those pictures in every thread and it's getting kind of weird.

Only backing up my claims old boy. Unlike some. You know evidence , examples n stuff..😉

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-06, 19:37:

Only backing up my claims old boy. Unlike some. You know evidence , examples n stuff..😉

I can't imagine what sort of "evidence" is constituted by photographs of graphics on a monitor, chum. If you want to show off, I suggest getting a Youtube channel or an Imgur gallery or something. In any case, we certainly don't need to see it in every thread.

Jorpho wrote on 2021-07-06, 19:34:

Well, that definitely wasn't running on a 486, now was it? Don't you think it would be easier to figure out whatever was runnin […]
Show full quote

Rikintosh wrote on 2021-07-06, 18:38:

She used a Win95 or something graphically similar, I don't remember, but it was in Japanese, and she had a system that virtualized everything, every program she had, ran in a virtual "capsule", because if the program crashed, the system wouldn't would be compromised.

Well, that definitely wasn't running on a 486, now was it? Don't you think it would be easier to figure out whatever was running there rather than trying to mash DOSBox into something that it was never intended to be?

Also, what does it mean that "the system wouldn't be compromised"? If Windows 95 is running in some sort of virtual capsule, and that virtual capsule somehow crashes, what exactly is left afterwards? DOS, especially on a 486, is already a single-tasking environment.

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-06, 19:00:

And yes you can play Doom, Hexen, Heretic etc in a separate terminal or full screen...😉

I'm sure you're very proud, but it's starting to seem like you post those pictures in every thread and it's getting kind of weird.

If the program crashed, it would close and reopen immediately, without displaying a blue screen, or errors, because the machine was a kind of server that received files from other computers. Imagine a printer on the network, where the printer was such a machine to work with metals.

I found this out, because I didn't know how to use any of that, as everything was in Japanese or something with Asian characters, I kept clicking on things, until I broke the program, and it was immediately reopened as if it was an x session.But I'm not sure if that was *nix or Win95

edit: the machine was a pentium mmx 200mhz with EDO memories, Trident 3D Image video card, no sound card, intel 430 chipset. I don't have access to that anymore, it happened in 2006 or 2007, many years ago. At the time I wasn't so enthusiastic, today I wanted to build new things for old hardware lovers, I'm studying various possibilities to know what I'll dedicate my development and learning time

I said dosbox, because I figured the closest thing to what I saw on that machine could be something like dosbox.

Jorpho wrote on 2021-07-06, 19:42:

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-06, 19:37:

Only backing up my claims old boy. Unlike some. You know evidence , examples n stuff..😉

I can't imagine what sort of "evidence" is constituted by photographs of graphics on a monitor, chum. If you want to show off, I suggest getting a Youtube channel or an Imgur gallery or something. In any case, we certainly don't need to see it in every thread.

No! h ha ha...😉

Please refrain from telling me what I can and can not do, dude. You are no better than anyone else here and you certainly ain't a moderator.