It's still pointless because no MS-DOS system will be alive in 2107.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if there were some original embedded systems still running machinery and the like in a century from now, catastrophic events notwithstanding. The sort of low-power embedded systems likely to be running DOS don't really experience any wear. There's quite a bit of equipment in the "low-level" manufacturing industry which is around a century old, and has basically been in continuous operation since it was installed.
The bigger issue would be ISA control cards and the like. A HN user recently posted a link of "new" ISA boards for sale, but the latest CPU support was Pentium 4 (about 20 years ago).
No, you can find plenty of ones that will hold a recent i7:
https://www.dfi.com/product/index/1502
https://ipc.msi.com/product_detail/Industrial-Motherboard/AT...
http://ibase-usa.com/english/ProductDetail/EmbeddedComputing...
(I wish they would make "ultimate" mobos with all the interfaces in between too --- I mean if ISA with a Coffee Lake CPU is possible, how about a pair of IDEs, floppies, and parallel ports too...)
._.
Even if you assume it can boot DOS, it doesn't mean it can run DOS. No DOS has drivers for a lot of modern hardware, and they're never going to be written.
> (If not, sounds like a bug.)
BIOS is buggy? Say it ain't so! Say! It! Ain't! So!
Additionally, over the last several years, I've used it on probably a dozen or more different "makes and models" of enterprise server hardware to update firmware (BIOS/HBA/NIC/SSD) and can't recall experiencing any major issues while doing so (fortunately, more and more of these bootable firmware update utilities are now Linux-based!).
That's with FreeDOS 1.0, by the way. A quick check shows that it was released in 2006, making it a fair bit older than the servers I most recently used it on. For what it's worth, FreeDOS 1.2 was released four years ago and the third release candidate of 1.3 was just released this past summer. It seems that FreeDOS, at 26, is still alive and, in fact, doing quite well!
To be clear, I've not actually attempted to boot any of the other DOS systems in, well, quite a long time -- at least 10 years for MS-DOS and likely 20 years or more for DR-DOS and PC-DOS -- as I haven't had any reason to. FreeDOS has been a superior replacement since before the turn of the century.
In my case, FreeDOS is booted via (i)PXE and the "hard disk" (image), which contains the various firmware images, utilities, etc., is downloaded via HTTP and loaded as a ramdisk. In those rare instances when it's actually been needed, it is just so absolutely useful.
Honestly, I'd be a bit surprised if MS-DOS (a.k.a. PC-DOS) did not (for the most part) also "just work"(TM) ...
... and, now that I've said that, I'm fairly confident that MS-DOS 5.0 (1991, IIRC?) is also available on the netboot server. I can't confirm that at the moment but (assuming it is) now I'm quite curious so I'll try to remember to try booting my workstation into it the next time I happen to restart it.
Of course, if New York's subway controls are anything to go by, 2107 is pretty reasonable.
Clipper/xBase systems that do their job is one niche of MS-DOS apps that refuse to die. Another niche I know of, is gambling machines (one-armed bandits), for some reason people kept using DOS (at least they moved to FreeDOS by early 2000s).
Doing DB operations is relatively simple, formdata entry and validation is super easy, supports modules, OOP and even compiles to native code.
Yeah not good for networked operations, but in many mom and pop shops it isn't needed anyway.
Even VB/Delphi for all their RAD capabilities were already much more complex than Clipper, but they messed up their migration into the GUI world and CA Visual Objects was too complex for the Clipper crowd.
COBOL/FORTRAN/Prolog/etc type applications are out there, apparently, and if you're in the right place at the right time you can entrench reasonably effectively, at least short term.
However, these types of jobs also have their own unique pain points. This recent article (they surface reasonably frequently on here), and the comments, make for good reading: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25148840
As for PHP+et al, I recommend these for their overall simplicity, relatively low learning curve, and ability to scale "well enough", for above-average values of "well enough". PHP itself isn't the most ideally designed language, but it can actually get things done. Furthermore, its reputation as a "simple" or "stupid" language, like eg VB6, can also serve to catalyze the upper bound of expected complexity of a particular solution. This has the downside of maybe a bit of isolation from truly interesting challenges, but allows for a slower/relaxed and perhaps more maintainable pace. (And there's nothing stopping you building something Facebook-sized if you needed to.)
On the client side, HTML5 is expansive and... very backward compatible with how things have been done for the past 20 years. Elitist forum commentators may make snooty noises about your use of tables, but Chrome won't. JavaScript could be a harder language to reason about, especially for simple enhancements like fetching bits of data which won't require learning pages of theory first.
Finally, my recommendation to focus on the Web is that, well, once you grumble and context-switch to "ugh, fine, HTML+JS", everything else can roll in incrementally as you go along.
With something stuck in the 80s/90s, sure, you guarantee that you're completely isolated from the firehose... at the cost of being objectively less economically viable in industry.
At least here, the businesses that still ran xBase were the ones unwilling or unable to pay decently for maintenance and/or migration, and that was the situation 10+ years ago.
Haven't looked into Harbour featureset, but I feel xBase in general is simply too simple for new developments. Even mom-and-pop stores need features way beyond the Clipper/MS-DOS capabilities.
The language is outdated, too; even Delphi/Lazarus sounds too 1990ish to me, I have fond memories of Delphi and Object Pascal but it is impossible to justify using them in a world with so many good new languages.
NASA still uses PC-DOS based IBM PCs to control things.
DOS doesn't crash like Windows.
GRR Martin uses Wordstar and MS-DOS to write his novels because he does not want to be distracted by pop up windows and system alerts and updates.
No, it crashes like DOS. I suppose if your application is well written and you have fully exercised the functionality that you use, it might be more stable, but "reliable" is not a word I would have associated with those systems.
ANY bugs will be in the application.
I once wanted to copy/record the layout of a particular PC's boot up sequence, and (without a camera) got the great idea (uh oh) to use the Pause key while staring at the BIOS screen.
I think... I think it worked too well.
Once I'd copied the layout onto paper and hit a key to un-pause the system, it started behaving... very weirdly. I don't remember exactly what it did, but I do remember getting really freaked out because something was very wrong.
What I do remember was playing a game (to test/see if the system would settle back down) and, as time went on, keyboard input became progressively less and less responsive and erratic, and the system started beeping like crazy, almost like the keyboard input buffer had indigestion.
IIRC, the machine hung shortly thereafter and would not turn back on (read: initialize video and POST). O.o
To this day I still wonder what happened to that poor box, and a part of me wants to buy another AT&T Globalist 515 and film it to see if the fault(?) wasn't specific to my machine and maybe figure out exactly what happened.
My initial theory was flash corruption; it's also possible I overheated the CPU, especially given the lack of a heatsink, but it was a 486DX2-66, which didn't need a heatsink, and I'd used the Pause key in DOS plenty of times prior with no issues.
Legacy systems exist in all walks of life, for all kinds of systems. They've solved the problem they were set up for, and so even maintaining them is often something management can be unwilling to set a budget for.
There's an oft shown, but rarely sourced, image suggesting that the US Navy food service management system was running on MS-DOS in 2011, and if that is accurate, I can't find any suggestion they have since changed that situation.
Unfortunately, all of these are frequently true of legacy systems. Only a small number are relatively bug free. Most are simply unmaintained. Few are easy to interface with.
I have no particular problem with old software and hardware. But the massive expenditure leading up to Y2K is demonstrative of the legacy problem. Let it rot until an impending crisis forces your hand, costing far more than if you had simply maintained it.
The more important the system, the higher the existential threat for the organization if you just let it be.
I do understand that it's a thankless job, so this needs to be enforced from up high.
And it will make it available over PC/TCP, using a chain of adaptors and converters from 100BASE-TX.