M Mordkovych wrote: > Hi All! Can Clipper 5 application be run on it?
Clipper 5 is a 16-bit MSDOS application and creates 16-bit MSDOS executables. Until now, Windows allows these programs through ntvdm.exe, NT Virtual DOS Machine, an MSDOS emulator. I don't know whether any version of Windows 7 provides ntvdm.exe. Ask Microsoft.
-- Joe Wright "If you rob Peter to pay Paul you can depend on the support of Paul."
On Oct 31, 8:24 am, otto <oha...@freesurf.ch> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:23:48 -0400, "M Mordkovych" <mmordk1_no_spam_...@verizon.net> wrote: > >Hi All! Can Clipper 5 application be run on it?
> I just bought 7 and installed it! > No, no 16bits application are running!
If you right click on "Computer", then select "Properties", the "Basic Information" screen should say "System type:" followed by 32-bit or 64- bit Operating System.
On Oct 25, 9:23 pm, "M Mordkovych" <mmordk1_no_spam_...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Hi All! Can Clipper 5 application be run on it?
Clipper 5 application can't run
I suggest you recompile your application using the harbour project that have made a free and open source compiler 100% clipper compatible You need simple steep and easy step as 123 for compile your harbour application: 1) download last version from http://www.syenar.hu/harbour/ 2) put c:\harbour20\bin in path 3) compile your source using hbmk2 myprg1.prg myprg2.prg run your compiled application
Harbour is more fast of clipper and more reliable of clipper work on pure 32bit/64 bit and support also windows mobile application
<geo...@softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote: > Maybe it's time to move away from Clipper? > Especially if the customer wants to use W7 > for other things.
> I'm not being flippant here but I doubt > there isn't an application out there now > that couldn't benefit from an upgrade to > the world of Windows.
Data entry programs suffer a loss of speed, but this just makes the programmer's job more difficult to minimize it.
I had a customer whose main complaint was that it took his operators much longer to enter tax form information in Windoze, vs. the compiled VB code running in NTVDM I had made for him... But he is well and truly on Windoze now, electronic filing took care of that.
Performance issues just mean that the windows code version sucked. The developer has at his disposal all tools necessary to make a windows data entry application just as fast as a clipper one. In fact, on a 64 bit platform, probably faster. But with windows you have far, far greater and more professional tools at your disposal to do the job better than Clipper could ever dream of.
> On Nov 2, 1:24 am, "Geoff Schaller" > <geo...@softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote:
> > Maybe it's time to move away from Clipper? > > Especially if the customer wants to use W7 > > for other things.
> > I'm not being flippant here but I doubt > > there isn't an application out there now > > that couldn't benefit from an upgrade to > > the world of Windows.
> Data entry programs suffer a loss of speed, but this just makes the > programmer's job more difficult to minimize it.
> I had a customer whose main complaint was that it took his operators > much longer to enter tax form information in Windoze, vs. the compiled > VB code running in NTVDM I had made for him... But he is well and > truly on Windoze now, electronic filing took care of that.
> On Oct 25, 9:23 pm, "M Mordkovych" <mmordk1_no_spam_...@verizon.net> > wrote:
> > Hi All! Can Clipper 5 application be run on it?
> Clipper 5 application can't run
> I suggest you recompile your application using the harbour project > that have made a free and open source compiler 100% clipper > compatible > You need simple steep and easy step as 123 for compile your harbour > application: > 1) download last version fromhttp://www.syenar.hu/harbour/ > 2) put c:\harbour20\bin in path > 3) compile your source using hbmk2 myprg1.prg myprg2.prg > run your compiled application
> Harbour is more fast of clipper and more reliable of clipper > work on pure 32bit/64 bit and support also windows mobile application
> Massimo Belgrano
Does Harbour handle T-Browse of DBF files? I've been trying xHarbour and so far I haven't gotten T-Browse to work correctly.
Windows 7 does in fact run 16 bit apps so you can all relax.
What you do is download Virtual PC (which is free). It installs in such a way to W7 that it becomes like an application loader. You will install your 16 bit Clipper app into an XP mode window but you can extend the icon out to the regular W7 desktop for Joe Citizen to use. The Microsoft site has a bunch of small tutorials on the issue and instructions on how to set this up.
Essentially you are running your Clipper app in a virtual PC but the interface is relatively seamless to the user.
Geoff Schaller
"M Mordkovych" <mmordk1_no_spam_...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>Windows 7 does in fact run 16 bit apps so you can all relax.
>What you do is download Virtual PC (which is free). It installs in such >a way to W7 that it becomes like an application loader. You will install >your 16 bit Clipper app into an XP mode window but you can extend the >icon out to the regular W7 desktop for Joe Citizen to use. The Microsoft >site has a bunch of small tutorials on the issue and instructions on how >to set this up.
>Essentially you are running your Clipper app in a virtual PC but the >interface is relatively seamless to the user.
>Geoff Schaller
There are a few caveats though. For starters, XP virtualization requires a fairly beefy machine. MS is recommending 2GB of memory. Also, the PC must have chip-level virtualization, and that's not a given. Most older machines don't have it and many newer machines have it turned off in the bios. Given that a lot of the folks still running Clipper apps are probably running on older, less-endowed hardware means that Virtual PC won't be a universal panacea. -- ScottCoffey at Scott dash(-) Coffey dot net
Why on earth would you be wanting to put Windows 7 on an old PC? Why on earth would someone be wanting to use an old PC? How old?
It can't be a case of economy. For instance, 2GB DDR2 RAM is now less than $80 a stick so heck, just assume everyone can have 4GB or more. Most people are reasonable about this and it makes everything else run faster too.
Let's face it. The correct (commercial or personal) thing to do would be to replace a PC at least every three years. It is just specious to expect people are going use a dinosaur and to want to keep using a dinosaur to carry out commercial activity. A new dual core PC is less than $600. A new i7 box probably $900.
So yes, W7 needs the RAM to run XP mode but then I find this perfectly reasonable.
Geoff
"Scott Coffey" <n...@noemail.com.invalid> wrote in message
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:47:53 GMT, "Geoff Schaller" > <geo...@softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote:
> >Good news.
> >Windows 7 does in fact run 16 bit apps so you can all relax.
> >What you do is download Virtual PC (which is free). It installs in such > >a way to W7 that it becomes like an application loader. You will install > >your 16 bit Clipper app into an XP mode window but you can extend the > >icon out to the regular W7 desktop for Joe Citizen to use. The Microsoft > >site has a bunch of small tutorials on the issue and instructions on how > >to set this up.
> >Essentially you are running your Clipper app in a virtual PC but the > >interface is relatively seamless to the user.
> >Geoff Schaller
> There are a few caveats though. For starters, XP virtualization > requires a fairly beefy machine. MS is recommending 2GB of memory. > Also, the PC must have chip-level virtualization, and that's not a > given. Most older machines don't have it and many newer machines have > it turned off in the bios. Given that a lot of the folks still > running Clipper apps are probably running on older, less-endowed > hardware means that Virtual PC won't be a universal panacea. > -- > ScottCoffey at Scott dash(-) Coffey dot net
> Why on earth would you be wanting to put Windows 7 on an old PC? > Why on earth would someone be wanting to use an old PC? How old?
> It can't be a case of economy. For instance, 2GB DDR2 RAM is now less > than $80 a stick so heck, just assume everyone can have 4GB or more. > Most people are reasonable about this and it makes everything else run > faster too.
> Let's face it. The correct (commercial or personal) thing to do would be > to replace a PC at least every three years. It is just specious to > expect people are going use a dinosaur and to want to keep using a > dinosaur to carry out commercial activity. A new dual core PC is less > than $600. A new i7 box probably $900.
> So yes, W7 needs the RAM to run XP mode but then I find this perfectly > reasonable.
> Geoff
According to my personal experience, DOS programs run under XP mode, but their performance is not quite good. OTOH, the 32-bit Windows 7 still runs DOS programs directly, and even in full-screen with a suitable video driver. It looks no worse than Vista, at least.
>Why on earth would you be wanting to put Windows 7 on an old PC? >Why on earth would someone be wanting to use an old PC? How old?
>It can't be a case of economy. For instance, 2GB DDR2 RAM is now less >than $80 a stick so heck, just assume everyone can have 4GB or more. >Most people are reasonable about this and it makes everything else run >faster too.
>Let's face it. The correct (commercial or personal) thing to do would be >to replace a PC at least every three years. It is just specious to >expect people are going use a dinosaur and to want to keep using a >dinosaur to carry out commercial activity. A new dual core PC is less >than $600. A new i7 box probably $900.
>So yes, W7 needs the RAM to run XP mode but then I find this perfectly >reasonable.
>Geoff
"OLD" wasn't the only qualifier I mentioned. I can buy a brand new PC today that doesn't have chip-level virtualization support. See http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-xp-mode-virtualization-intel... which shows that a hefty percentage of the Intel processors sold TODAY don't have support for virtualization.
And it bears repeating that if you're running Clipper applications then you're not exactly on the cutting edge. There's a ton of PC's out there running as cash registers in a Clipper-based POS application. My client is running over 100 IBM Netvista boxes with P4's and 512 MB of memory, and for what they do even those specs are overkill. -- ScottCoffey at Scott dash(-) Coffey dot net
Correct. Although if you have 8GB or 16GB of RAM on an i7 processor, performance will leave even DOS for dust. But seriously, I would take this as a warning to finally move all DOS apps to windows.
> On Nov 12, 11:59 pm, "Geoff Schaller" > <geo...@softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote:
> > Scott.
> > Why on earth would you be wanting to put Windows 7 on an old PC? > > Why on earth would someone be wanting to use an old PC? How old?
> > It can't be a case of economy. For instance, 2GB DDR2 RAM is now less > > than $80 a stick so heck, just assume everyone can have 4GB or more. > > Most people are reasonable about this and it makes everything else run > > faster too.
> > Let's face it. The correct (commercial or personal) thing to do would be > > to replace a PC at least every three years. It is just specious to > > expect people are going use a dinosaur and to want to keep using a > > dinosaur to carry out commercial activity. A new dual core PC is less > > than $600. A new i7 box probably $900.
> > So yes, W7 needs the RAM to run XP mode but then I find this perfectly > > reasonable.
> > Geoff
> According to my personal experience, DOS programs run under XP mode, > but their performance is not quite good. OTOH, the 32-bit Windows 7 > still runs DOS programs directly, and even in full-screen with a > suitable video driver. It looks no worse than Vista, at least.
Agreed. But what you can do even with embedded OS (let alone a full PC) now is just amazing. I've been around quite a few department stores that persisted with 'dumb terminals'... because they were just POS stations. But such thinking is so flawed. Put in a decent PC and then it can access the web, run inventory checks. Other stuff. Some would say they don't want to but then compare the stores by features that the POS operator can effect right in front of you and usually it is the store with more than gets repeat business.
Geoff
"Scott Coffey" <n...@noemail.com.invalid> wrote in message
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:59:39 GMT, "Geoff Schaller" > <geo...@softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote:
> >Scott.
> >Why on earth would you be wanting to put Windows 7 on an old PC? > >Why on earth would someone be wanting to use an old PC? How old?
> >It can't be a case of economy. For instance, 2GB DDR2 RAM is now less > >than $80 a stick so heck, just assume everyone can have 4GB or more. > >Most people are reasonable about this and it makes everything else run > >faster too.
> >Let's face it. The correct (commercial or personal) thing to do would be > >to replace a PC at least every three years. It is just specious to > >expect people are going use a dinosaur and to want to keep using a > >dinosaur to carry out commercial activity. A new dual core PC is less > >than $600. A new i7 box probably $900.
> >So yes, W7 needs the RAM to run XP mode but then I find this perfectly > >reasonable.
> >Geoff
> "OLD" wasn't the only qualifier I mentioned. I can buy a brand new PC > today that doesn't have chip-level virtualization support. See > http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-xp-mode-virtualization-intel... > which shows that a hefty percentage of the Intel processors sold TODAY > don't have support for virtualization.
> And it bears repeating that if you're running Clipper applications > then you're not exactly on the cutting edge. There's a ton of PC's > out there running as cash registers in a Clipper-based POS > application. My client is running over 100 IBM Netvista boxes with > P4's and 512 MB of memory, and for what they do even those specs are > overkill. > -- > ScottCoffey at Scott dash(-) Coffey dot net
On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 06:09:54 GMT, "Geoff Schaller"
<geo...@softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote: >Agreed. But what you can do even with embedded OS (let alone a full PC) >now is just amazing. I've been around quite a few department stores that >persisted with 'dumb terminals'... because they were just POS stations. >But such thinking is so flawed. Put in a decent PC and then it can >access the web, run inventory checks. Other stuff. Some would say they >don't want to but then compare the stores by features that the POS >operator can effect right in front of you and usually it is the store >with more than gets repeat business.
>Geoff
Last time I checked, a P4 with 512MB could still surf the web and do "other stuff". ;)
I'm not disagreeing with you though on the benefits of a virtualized OS. It opens up a lot of doors for IT. Given my platform of choice (http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/i/) I've been reaping the benefits of that capability for quite some time now. -- ScottCoffey at Scott dash(-) Coffey dot net
> Why on earth would you be wanting to put Windows 7 on an old PC? > Why on earth would someone be wanting to use an old PC? How old?
> It can't be a case of economy. For instance, 2GB DDR2 RAM is now less > than $80 a stick so heck, just assume everyone can have 4GB or more. > Most people are reasonable about this and it makes everything else run > faster too.
> Let's face it. The correct (commercial or personal) thing to do would be > to replace a PC at least every three years. It is just specious to > expect people are going use a dinosaur and to want to keep using a > dinosaur to carry out commercial activity. A new dual core PC is less > than $600. A new i7 box probably $900.
> So yes, W7 needs the RAM to run XP mode but then I find this perfectly > reasonable.
> Geoff
I do not use Clipper, but know it and have somthing similar that I wrote (and compatinble). I was directed to visit this Forum because of the on-going discussion on Windows V.7.
I have tried it out on a Dell Machine and it runs 16-bit code, but you don't get full screen, so you can't see anything very well in a tiny window. The partial fix is to change the font size and line number and spacing values in the option box for the emulator.
Apart from the above, I want to answer Geoff question.
First: Many countries value the old working PC's. I'm amazed that all our museum of computers still work, although we change the odd disk drive for spindle wear.
I run a software company since 1972. We supply multi-language software for DOS (various versions of), Mac emulting DOS, and DOS-in Windows. It's the same exact executables (over 100 programs) for every machine we've tried. Average 38k per executable. So program distribution is easy and e-mailable even to dial-up users. Only the tiny selectable language message modules are different for clients.
A complete DOS systems is about 1.4 Mb still and still runs on any 386 and up and some 286's and any Windows machine so far (Vista not tried, and no client ever asked to use one).
We also offer two real-native-wondows menu programs that call the for- dos programs nad that work fine too. We tried witing windows versions (simply re-compiling for Windows targets) and the executanbles were an average of 15 times the size of the DOS ones. These are NOT easily distributable.
There is a VAST amount of very good DOS programs "out there" that are still extremely useful. (e.g. I use WordStar to this day, bacause I can type in most languages of interest). And the first versions of many good programs were the best; after which bloat happened.
That's why most people with old machines want to keep them, or at least keep dos compatiblity.
One other reason is the RS232C port, which is used to drive lab and other measuring equipment, some useful scanners and plotters. Windows took away the access to the ports with XP and Vista. So old machines suddenly had higher values, even Windows machines with older operating systems.
On Nov 14, 2:45 am, vbdasc <vbd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> According to my personal experience, DOS programs run under XP mode, > but their performance is not quite good. OTOH, the 32-bit Windows 7 > still runs DOS programs directly, and even in full-screen with a > suitable video driver. It looks no worse than Vista, at least.
I'd be very interested to know how. My Dell tech expert could not find how to get full screen DOS on the November V.7 offering. Perhaps only offered in 32-bit mode? I know 16-bit works, but no full screen option setting found.
The horse and cart were useful and still can be. It doesn't mean that a transport business should hang on to them as a primary means of going from one place to another unless it was for tourists. This is the year 2009 and last time I looked, close to 2010. It just isn't appropriate hanging on to 80's technologies, regardless of how good they were at the time. The simple fact is that it can be done better now and all of us: developers and clients, should just move on.
> On Nov 13, 8:59 am, "Geoff Schaller" > <geo...@softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote:
> > Why on earth would you be wanting to put Windows 7 on an old PC? > > Why on earth would someone be wanting to use an old PC? How old?
> > It can't be a case of economy. For instance, 2GB DDR2 RAM is now less > > than $80 a stick so heck, just assume everyone can have 4GB or more. > > Most people are reasonable about this and it makes everything else run > > faster too.
> > Let's face it. The correct (commercial or personal) thing to do would be > > to replace a PC at least every three years. It is just specious to > > expect people are going use a dinosaur and to want to keep using a > > dinosaur to carry out commercial activity. A new dual core PC is less > > than $600. A new i7 box probably $900.
> > So yes, W7 needs the RAM to run XP mode but then I find this perfectly > > reasonable.
> > Geoff
> I do not use Clipper, but know it and have somthing similar that I > wrote (and compatinble). > I was directed to visit this Forum because of the on-going discussion > on Windows V.7.
> I have tried it out on a Dell Machine and it runs 16-bit code, but you > don't get full screen, so you can't see anything very well in a tiny > window. The partial fix is to change the font size and line number and > spacing values in the option box for the emulator.
> Apart from the above, I want to answer Geoff question.
> First: Many countries value the old working PC's. I'm amazed that all > our museum of computers > still work, although we change the odd disk drive for spindle wear.
> I run a software company since 1972. We supply multi-language software > for DOS (various versions of), Mac emulting DOS, and DOS-in Windows. > It's the same exact executables (over 100 programs) for every machine > we've tried. Average 38k per executable. So program distribution is > easy and e-mailable even to dial-up users. Only the tiny selectable > language message modules are different for clients.
> A complete DOS systems is about 1.4 Mb still and still runs on any 386 > and up and some 286's and any Windows machine so far (Vista not tried, > and no client ever asked to use one).
> We also offer two real-native-wondows menu programs that call the for- > dos programs nad that work fine too. We tried witing windows versions > (simply re-compiling for Windows targets) and the executanbles were an > average of 15 times the size of the DOS ones. These are NOT easily > distributable.
> There is a VAST amount of very good DOS programs "out there" that are > still extremely useful. > (e.g. I use WordStar to this day, bacause I can type in most languages > of interest). And the first versions of many good programs were the > best; after which bloat happened.
> That's why most people with old machines want to keep them, or at > least keep dos compatiblity.
> One other reason is the RS232C port, which is used to drive lab and > other measuring equipment, some useful scanners and plotters. Windows > took away the access to the ports with XP and Vista. > So old machines suddenly had higher values, even Windows machines with > older operating systems.
> On Nov 14, 2:45 am, vbdasc <vbd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > According to my personal experience, DOS programs run under XP mode, > > but their performance is not quite good. OTOH, the 32-bit Windows 7 > > still runs DOS programs directly, and even in full-screen with a > > suitable video driver. It looks no worse than Vista, at least.
> I'd be very interested to know how. > My Dell tech expert could not find how to get full screen DOS on the > November V.7 offering. > Perhaps only offered in 32-bit mode? > I know 16-bit works, but no full screen option setting found.
In article <83eff9c2-1b0c-428f-b547-215317826...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com> tbwri...@cantv.net "Terence" writes:
> On Nov 13, 8:59am, "Geoff Schaller" > <geo...@softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote:
> > Why on earth would you be wanting to put Windows 7 on an old PC? > > Why on earth would someone be wanting to use an old PC? How old?
Because it works?
> > It can't be a case of economy. For instance, 2GB DDR2 RAM is now less > > than $80 a stick so heck, just assume everyone can have 4GB or more. > > Most people are reasonable about this and it makes everything else run > > faster too.
This sort of presumes that "most people" want to run "everything else" concurrently; I would hazard a guess that there is still a fair amount of [16-bit] Clipper code out there which is the only application running on the box. And RAM drives and disk caches aside, any RAM over 1Mb will have little of no effect on speeding up a DOS app.
> > Let's face it. The correct (commercial or personal) thing to do would be > > to replace a PC at least every three years.
<HobbyHorse> Correct? The "correct" thing to do is to send working, seviceable kit to landfill? Don't get me wrong -- I'm not a "progress is evil" Luddite -- but do question the throwaway attitude of western society because it's "cheaper". We have been indoctrinated by Big Business to know the cost of everything and tha value of nothing. But I digress... </HobbyHorse>
> > It is just specious to > > expect people are going use a dinosaur and to want to keep using a > > dinosaur to carry out commercial activity. A new dual core PC is less > > than $600. A new i7 box probably $900.
> > So yes, W7 needs the RAM to run XP mode but then I find this perfectly > > reasonable.
> > Geoff
> I do not use Clipper, but know it and have somthing similar that I > wrote (and compatinble). > I was directed to visit this Forum because of the on-going discussion > on Windows V.7.
> I have tried it out on a Dell Machine and it runs 16-bit code, but you > don't get full screen, so you can't see anything very well in a tiny > window. The partial fix is to change the font size and line number and > spacing values in the option box for the emulator.
> Apart from the above, I want to answer Geoff question.
> First: Many countries value the old working PC's. I'm amazed that all > our museum of computers > still work, although we change the odd disk drive for spindle wear.
> I run a software company since 1972. We supply multi-language software > for DOS (various versions of), Mac emulting DOS, and DOS-in Windows. > It's the same exact executables (over 100 programs) for every machine > we've tried. Average 38k per executable. So program distribution is > easy and e-mailable even to dial-up users. Only the tiny selectable > language message modules are different for clients.
> A complete DOS systems is about 1.4 Mb still and still runs on any 386 > and up and some 286's and any Windows machine so far (Vista not tried, > and no client ever asked to use one).
> We also offer two real-native-wondows menu programs that call the for- > dos programs nad that work fine too. We tried witing windows versions > (simply re-compiling for Windows targets) and the executanbles were an > average of 15 times the size of the DOS ones. These are NOT easily > distributable.
> There is a VAST amount of very good DOS programs "out there" that are > still extremely useful. > (e.g. I use WordStar to this day, bacause I can type in most languages > of interest). And the first versions of many good programs were the > best; after which bloat happened.
> That's why most people with old machines want to keep them, or at > least keep dos compatiblity.
> One other reason is the RS232C port, which is used to drive lab and > other measuring equipment, some useful scanners and plotters. Windows > took away the access to the ports with XP and Vista. > So old machines suddenly had higher values, even Windows machines with > older operating systems.
Terence, have you investigated running your app under DOSemu in Linux?
Pete -- "We have not inherited the earth from our ancestors, we have borrowed it from our descendants."
