[Eagle of Fire]

Somehow it always amazes me that people expect Windows to be dosgaming compliant.
It's Windows, not Dos.

It will help you use Win9X the best (and correct) way.

What amaze me is when people who have no clue of what they are talking about start giving me tips and tricks.

I used the Windows version since Win 3.0. I do not need help "understanding" how it works. I learned it all by myself back in the day when I needed to know, just like I did with XP when it got out. I certainly could not explain to your the inner working, but I know the general idea very well.

What I find amazing is that some people used to use Win 3.0 and Win 3.11 for gaming. That's probably what amaze me the most when Windows versions are concerned. To be frank, it really amaze me that people used Windows 3.0 and 3.11 willingly for anything. Man, was that a piece of crap...

What amaze me is that people don't understand anymore that DOS was still strong and commonplace in the time of Win95, and dying but still commonplace in the time of Win98. That's why people expected Win95 and Win98 to be compatible with DOS, which were not unless you were willing to spend a long time fiddling with advanced DOS tricks next to nobody knew. That's also pretty much why DOS died... What also amaze me is that peopple don't realise that in the Win95 and early Win98 era, all big production games were produced with both Windows and DOS startups to make sure the game would run on a greater range of systems. C&C and Fallout are great examples.

So please, drop the "It amaze me when I see people expect their programs to be DOS compliant" argument... It was very well valid in the time of Windows 95 and 98. What is amazing is that it never really got fixed, but it is pretty obvious at the time that Microsoft wanted to kill DOS in favor to their new white horse which was Windows. They knew where the big bucks were, and the big bucks were to move toward the masses, not to aim for those computer geeks who were way less numerous and picked their programs and hardware very carefully.

The reason why people wants their modern gaming computer to be compatible with old games is part nostalgia, part because old games tend to be way better in general in comparison to new games. For several reasons which would be way off topic to discuss in great lenght here... But that is why VDMSound and DOSBox were created. I think we can all thank the Gods of gaming that those projects were open source... Otherwise we would either have no compatibility whatsoever and those games would be lost to memories, or we would need to pay to get access to those programs.

Commands that you don't need to run DOS games, yes, they are missing. But why would you need obsolete DOS commands, as that was just the part of OS, not of the games them self.

I do not know of obsolete DOS commands. They all were used for a reason in DOS. Anyhow, there is no point in arguing that the WIN DOS was a dumbed down version of the "real" DOS, stipped down to it's minimum core. About any tech who know their salt will tell you the same thing, and I never heard otherwise to be frank. Most techs didn't even care that there was some DOS available in Windows either, to be frank...

You apparently have forgot boot disks

No, I didn't. I simply thought that the subject of the conversation was the role of MS-DOS in Win95. A boot disk is a completely different OS to me. I remember I used bootdisks back in the days for the most troublesome games.

If there are still topics from old abandonia, there should be topic with instructions of how to do this.

Yes, there is.

I'm not sure how much you remember DOS 6.22, but if you tried to name 2 files this_is_long_name.txt and this_is_long_name_2.txt, OS will tell you that you are trying to overwrite first file, even names are different. They fixed that with introduction of long file names in DOS 7.0.

That's why you never named your files longer than 8 characters with 3 extra character for the extention in DOS? That's the most basic thing to know... DOS users never had a use for extended names and as far as I know, it was a Microsoft Windows "improvement". DOS never tryied to actually do that but had no choice to comply with other programs who did or tryied to do it. Maybe Norton Commander, which for a reason I really didn't understand was extremely popular back in the DOS days, tryied too... But as you may guess, I never had a problem cruising around directories in DOS and never used my own version of Norton Commander I downloaded from a BBS to try out...