Chicago95 VS MS-DOS

If that's a concern for you, there are themes for GTK3 and GTK4 that replicate classic 3D widgets and remove much of the excess padding in modern apps. https://github.com/B00merang-Project/Windows-95 https://github.com/grassmunk/Chicago95 (You should install both; Chicago95 is more actively developed, but B00merang gives you a GTK+4 theme that's currently missing from Chicago95.) Works reasonably well as a daily-driver, giving you a similar look to the modern SerenityOS GUI on a standard Linux system. Even the modern GTK+4 "responsive" apps work as designed, with some non-critical graphical quirks.

https://github.com/grassmunk/Chicago95

Chicago was the code name for the development version of the highly anticipated Windows95

Haven’t tried it, but there’s https://github.com/grassmunk/Chicago95

Might be looking for something closer to this: https://github.com/grassmunk/Chicago95

I bloody want my Linux and apps on it to look like this or something of this flavour. Most retro themes are poor quality shams (Chicago95[1] is the only good one, yet still not perfect). I feel like I would gladly pay serious money for a really high quality conversion of all the parts, including themes for all widget libraries and no quirks.

[1]https://github.com/grassmunk/Chicago95

Chicago95

Related: you can make Linux look like Windows 95 (98/2000/XP), icons and all: https://github.com/grassmunk/Chicago95

It works really well.

I recently stumbled across the MS-DOS 1.25 and 2.0 source code [1].

[1] https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS

“Despite this reduction in scope for MS-DOS 2.0, it did carry many bits of XENIX. The system adopted I/O redirection via less-than and greater-than symbols, piping, a hierarchical directory tree, file handles […]”

The source code for MSDOS 2 is available and the file descriptor stuff appears to be in https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/blob/master/v2.0/source/... and XENIX2.ASM. It stands in contrast to the File Control Block API which MSDOS 1 (née 86-DOS) modeled after CP/M’s API.

Asynchronous I/O figures in prominently in Windows NT. I was really surprised to see[0]:

Each driver in the chain defines two entry points; the strategy routine and the interrupt routine. The 2.0 DOS does not really make use of two entry points (it simply calls strategy, then immediately calls interrupt). This dual entry point scheme is designed to facilitate future multi-tasking versions of MS-DOS. In multi-tasking environments I/O must be asynchronous, to accomplish this the strategy routine will be called to queue (internally) a request and return quickly. It is then the responsibility of the interrupt routine to perform the actual I/O at interrupt time by picking requests off the internal queue (set up by the strategy routine), and process them. When a request is complete, it is flagged as "done" by the interrupt routine. The DOS periodically scans the list of requests looking for ones flagged as done, and "wakes up" the process waiting for the completion of the request.

I didn't realize that kind of forwarding-looking perspective was going into the design of MS-DOS.

[0] https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/blob/master/v2.0/source/...

>Any others I'm missing?

I would suggest MS-DOS: https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS

I wonder if looking at the code would be helpful: https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS

White a clone of MSDOS (see github.com/microsoft/ms-dos) in C and try to push that into the market. In the meantime write a GUI for that system and release a newer version of your OS combining the two components. Support your efforts with Diet Coke and pizza. For legal reasons you might need a new name for the system, call it "Doors 10" or something - the name should not be too IT-specific for marketing reasons.

MS-DOS