You can download the printable manuals from internet, and all the binary's are in MASM32 or are seriously outdated (like MS's previous attempt at a debugger). IMO, there's not much to be gained by buying a second-hand copy of Masm 6.0 (MS doesn't sell or support it anymore, or they never did, I'm not sure). You can try to find one at ebay, though. -> Don't forget to patch it up to version 6.14 if you buy it.
Posted on 2001-04-28 13:05:00 by Qweerdy
MicroSoft is not really trying to destroy things, BILL just wants to get rid of DOS and as you can see with windows ME it has no option to restart in DOS mode. you still have a does prompt window, but you can't go into TRUE DOS mode or I have not found away, MS is slowly getting rid of DOS. inside sources say that even the DOS prompt windows will soon be gone in next versions of windows. this would mean that soon on those OS's MASM will not run. or DOS based programs as well. makes you see why MS gave out MASM for free..... This is why I have on the drawing board a windows based compiler. But it is long ways off. as I have to hunt all the info on the CPU's and the byte codes, and the CPU's are growing at a fast rate, adding more instructions ect. This message was edited by Zcoder, on 4/28/2001 2:14:52 PM
Posted on 2001-04-28 14:10:00 by Zcoder
Yea, I hear ya. I still use MASM 5.1 for some of my old DOS stuff. There is a M510 option in 6, but it doesn't catch a bunch of things. But I do use 6.15 for anything new that I start, DOS or Win. Anyway, I think 6.0 was still a retail product, so I'm not sure if it's "legal" for free. As far as I know, the first free version was somewhere around 6.11, when they released it with the DDK. :)
Posted on 2001-04-28 15:04:00 by S/390
No, MASM will not be dead that fast, MS is smart enough to know that you can't move to fast. it will be a slow prosses, but if you have been watching closly you can see a trend. as of windows ME, win3.X programs still run in ME, so they have not moved that fast. but they will soon with newer windows versions. they can't support the real old OS's to long, same as with motherboards, I have seen thru the years that some of the buss slots have been droped. thru the years as I have gotton new motherboards I have noticed that the older slots like the ASI lets moved over to the left with less of them, and next is your PCI with more of them then ASI's next is this new buss slot I am not sure of it's name yet, I have two of them and it will take over the PCI someday they just push the ASI off to where there is none then the PCI is next ect. OS's are about the same. And about the 64bit systems, I am not sure about that stuff, what would the instructions for that look like??? eeAX, eeBX?? and if Microsoft does not give out a 64bit compiler then what would we do???? I know for some time 32bit apps would still run in a 64bit OS, but MS would thru time get rid of that as well. but it would be a long while for that. as you can see ME still will run 16bit windows apps. so who knows, I just know that it is comming. I just hope MS will still make a 64bit compiler, and that DOS does not fade away from windows. just have to wait and see. Until then I am still codeing.
Posted on 2001-04-28 17:34:00 by Zcoder
"And by the way, how do I create dos app using masm6.14?" The one thing you need is an older version of LINK, since the newer ones only create PE files. Icz has one at his site. :)
Posted on 2001-04-28 19:37:00 by S/390
disease, Building DOS files in MASM is no big deal if you get the linker from Iczelion's site and use the current version of ML.EXE. You will need to get the technical data on DOS EXE and COM format but that should not be that hard to get on the internet. I would be surprised if Microsoft are game to exclude DOS programs in the near future as they still have a large user base and Microsoft will not take any further risks of alienating their market. Where you will have to be careful is in using things like direct disk access and other similar low level operating system access if you want the programs to run on the later versions of Windows. If you want to be able to do all of the old style stuff, you will have to stick to the last true version of DOS in version 6.22. Regards, hutch@pbq.com.au
Posted on 2001-04-28 20:05:00 by hutch--
As for the registers on the 64bit (sledgehammer). The prefix is "f" so now it's feax, febx, fecx, fedx, etc. Intel provides a free 64bit assembler that's open source in C. You can snag it on it's website, i forgot the link though.
Posted on 2001-04-28 21:41:00 by Jon Richardson
I renamed the old linker to LINKDOS.EXE, then changed the BAT file that builds old DOS apps to run LINKDOS. Works for me. :)
Posted on 2001-04-29 22:53:00 by S/390
Jon: Sledgehammer is the 64bit processor form AMD not Intel... The 64bit processor from Intel is the Itanium (code name Merced I think). My guess is that the registers will be called R00 to R64. =)
Posted on 2001-04-29 23:16:00 by GogetaSSJ4
Gogetta: I know that sledgehammer is by AMD. I was stating that i knew the facts on the sledgehammer. I didn't say i knew the facts on merced.
Posted on 2001-04-30 00:40:00 by Jon Richardson
I'm using Win98 and this is the last version of Win that I'm gonna use at home. WinMe sux, and if the new version of Win is going to be without a prompt, then I'm out. I'm not going to use a OS that hides all his functionalyties behind a fucking colorful desktop. Who knows what Bill will hide behind this beauty desktop. WinMe connects itself to www.microsoft.com/update and looks for updates. Or does it just seem to be looking for updates? Without the source of Win, Bill can put all the shit he want's in Win and no one will know that he is watching us. Maybe Bill is removing the DOS Prompt because he wants to remove the control that we have over Win trough it. Without a prompt, it will be easy to hide any process he wants. I think I'm going to code in XFree32Asm. Maybe I go back to my old Commodore 64. Maybe I go to a desert island and live there without any technology. This world is going crazy and soon we all will live with a chip below our skin (this is already being tested by IBM). We will be watched day and night. Maybe we're heading the Apocalypse, because I can't imagine how this world will be in 60 years. There will be no water anymore, computers will control our life. This message was edited by eeprom, on 4/30/2001 9:23:13 PM
Posted on 2001-04-30 21:21:00 by eeprom
the sole reason that windows OSes become bloaty and thing like the command line dissappear: MS does not design their OSes with developers/knowledgeable users in mind. I dare say that they know their userbase. It's a bit of a bold statement, but every monkey and his dog has a PC these days, although they barely know how to turn it on. This is not a bad thing per se, but the increasing 'dummy mode' in MS OSes worries me a lot. More dummy mode == less control. When was the last time that Professional really meant professional? (XP will get even worse from what I've seen so far) I'm just mad at my crashing OS today :P I was working in access and suddenly that darn clippy jumped up (and down and up ;)) and windows crashed :eek: needless to say me :mad:
Posted on 2001-04-30 22:43:00 by Hiroshimator
Hahahah!!! The clippy is ONE of thousand things that I hate on MS Office. Ex: MS-Word It seems that this shitty proggy tries to write all the text alone. If you write "1)" and then press Enter, Word will create a "2)" on the next line. Then you press Backspace do erase this "2)" but it doesn't work. So you mark this "2)" with the mouse and then hit DEL to finally delete this "2)", but what happens? TADAAA, this shitty proggy deletes the "2)" AND the "1)" too. And later, the whole OS crashed. It simply stoped everything, even the mouse. I fear MS-Word. I get scared when I'm going to write something using MS-Word. Some days I think that it would be better to write the same thing using EMACS or VIM, and I have WordPerfect for Linux, too. Why does I continue to use MS software? Because 90% of the world use it, and I want to get some money. I will not get rich writing GPL'ed free software :P.
Posted on 2001-05-01 01:19:00 by eeprom
As far as Word, I'm with Hutch. He posted on the IA-64 thread that he still uses a 1992 version. Mine is a little newer, Word 6, released in 1994, part of Office 4.3. I never have any problems with it. And except for being able to publish an HTML document, I still haven't found much that the newer versions can do, that I can't. Plus, being in the typesetting business for many years, if I do want something that Word can't do, I've got Ventura publisher, the DOS version! Price of progress? :)
Posted on 2001-05-01 02:23:00 by S/390