/retro/ - Y2K

>>5241 (OP) 
FreeDOS really tickles my fancy for some reason, although I'm so you I never actually had to use DOS. Still, it's a shame that the site is a mess with little-to-no documentation.

>>5242
I've tried it before, but not for very long. I'm too busy now to check it out but I would like to see if using it would extend the capabilities of and old computer like a 486 or something.

>>5243
A 486 should be able to run Windows 95 or maybe even NetBSD, and those should add more capabilities. DOS is more of a launcher than an operating system as far as I'm concerned, and that's exactly why I like the idea of a free and open source drop-in replacement.

dnd.gif
[Hide] (10.6MB, 2348x5028)

>>5242
Hehehe open source mostly sucks at documentation. Also in general if it's modern software, it will be slow and bloated. Try to get old OS+software on 486, if you want it to be actually usable. But the problem is if you run old Windows or Linux/BSD then it's got security holes. So you're probably better off with a "dumb" OS like DOS, if it can run the software you want. I like dumb OS for same reasons I like dumb phone. Lucky for me, I really like ancient stuff like GW-BASIC and text games.

Obligatory Supermium mention:
https://www.win32subsystem.live/supermium/

>>5245
>the problem is if you run old Windows or Linux/BSD then it's got security holes
That's practically a non-issue since a 486 is of no use to attackers.

Sanco_8001.jpg
[Hide] (1.1MB, 2560x1920)

>>5246
Botnet can still encrypt files and ask for bitcoin, or whatever they do these days. Maybe it doesn't matter if there's no important files on there, but I'd rather just avoid the situation altogether. I got hacked before when I was new to Linux and I was hanging out on IRC. It was even a 486 with slackware. I had to reinstall, and then learn about security. If I still had only DOS on there, they wouldn't have any way to hack me, since I would have been using plain old dialup shell (where IRC runs on the remote host) instead of a SLIP/PPP that assigns my computer an IP address and leaves it entirely exposed to the world.
Not that I care that much about DOS, most 1980's microcomputers have the same advantage. Actually my favorite is CP/M because it's so minimal!

Does anyone have any questions? I would be happy to help.

>>5263
I'm interested in having an OS that simply doesn't have (or has it completely disabled) networking at all. The JewSA & their cohorts have driven me to these feels, and I'm sure I'm not alone in this. I can sneakernet anything onboard if needed there.

Got any ideas?

>>5264
>an OS that simply doesn't have (or has it completely disabled) networking at all
TempleOS

>>5265
Heh, fair enough. I was thinking one suited for use with a robowaifu that enabled all kinds of modern electronics. Maybe my mindset is wrong that TempleOS couldn't handle this? Good idea though, Anon.

>>5266
>that otherwise enabled*

>>5264
>I'm interested in having an OS that simply doesn't have networking at all.
Back in the day you would install Windows and just... not install the wifi driver from the CD-ROM. :^)
On a more serious note, you could make a custom Windows ISO with as many disabled or outright removed features as you want using tools like NTLite (Windows 7, 8, 10) or nLite (Windows 2000, XP) or even 98lite (Windows 98). I've used the last two extensively years ago although I never disabled something as crucial as networking. 
There's also Linux and the BSDs which, being open source, should give you the freedumbs to remove/disable any part of the OS that you do not want.

>>5268
Thanks! Hmm, sounds interesting. I was already leaning towards OpenBSD, so I'll probably investigate that approach.

Any specifics detail advice would be appreciated here.