Windows 7
M Mordkovych
Marco A. Cruz Quevedo
wrote:
> Hi All! Can Clipper 5 application be run on it?
It is supposed to, anyway, it is a DOS application.
Regards,
Marco.
Freedom is not a permission for chaos.
Joe Wright
> 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."
dlzc
On Oct 25, 1:23 pm, "M Mordkovych" <mmordk1_no_spam_...@verizon.net>
wrote:
> Hi All! Can Clipper 5 application be run on it?
As long as you do not have a 64-bit version of Windoze, it should. If
you do have a 64-bit version (as I do), no.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/282423
Maybe DOSbox will help?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/dosbox/
David A. Smith
otto
>Hi All! Can Clipper 5 application be run on it?
>
I just bought 7 and installed it!
No, no 16bits application are running!
R. Totale
32 or 64-bit?
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
dlzc
> 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.
Which is it for you?
David A. Smith
Geoff Schaller
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.
Geoff
"otto" <oha...@freesurf.ch> wrote in message
news:d7loe5hn95ru86cv9...@4ax.com:
Massimo Belgrano
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
Massimo Belgrano
dlzc
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.
David A. Smith
Geoff Schaller
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.
Such things are all in the design.
A slow windows app is just a poorly designed one.
Geoff
"dlzc" <dl...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:a0a161f5-235a-425d...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com:
Texextra
wrote:
> 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:
> 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.
Geoff Schaller
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_n...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:hc2c4m$hhe$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
Scott Coffey
<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
Geoff Schaller
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" <no...@noemail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:7puof5dr2vc3ae79q...@4ax.com:
vbdasc
<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.
Scott Coffey
<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,7709.html
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.
Geoff Schaller
performance will leave even DOS for dust. But seriously, I would take
this as a warning to finally move all DOS apps to windows.
"vbdasc" <vbd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:928064fa-4030-49a2...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
Geoff Schaller
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" <no...@noemail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:k54rf5d3gn597a59s...@4ax.com:
Scott Coffey
<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.
Terence
<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.
Terence
>
> 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.
Geoff Schaller
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.
Geoff
"Terence" <tbwr...@cantv.net> wrote in message
news:83eff9c2-1b0c-428f...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com:
Geoff Schaller
Someone needs some retraining.
"Terence" <tbwr...@cantv.net> wrote in message
news:e8aab92d-e5f4-410d...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
pe...@nospam.demon.co.uk
tbwr...@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>
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."
tom knauf
search the web for DOSFONTS, its a special version of some fonts allowing
you to set nearly every window size.
So you can have a dos window which fills the screen except the task bar
(1280x1024,...)
btw : we have converted NEARLY all our dos apps to windows,
but still there are customers saying : why, it works fine and fast ?
What should we answer ?
They will only switch away from XP if they cannot buy a computer running XP
(using the old licence of the broken one),
and this will take some time .....Even their antivirus software supports XP
up to 2015 or more, so ...
HTH
Tom
"Terence" <tbwr...@cantv.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:83eff9c2-1b0c-428f...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Terence
>
> Terence, have you investigated running your app under DOSemu in
> Linux?
>
Funny you should ask; a client gave me an un-opened early Red Hat
linux system.
Although I've worked on (or helped design) very many computers in UK
and France since 1950, it's always been with changes one step at a
time. Your suggestion would imply quite a projrct:-
a) getting another appropriate bare new computer
b) learning about installing Linux and doing it
c) learning Linux
d) getting DOSemu
e) learning about installing DOSemu and doing it
f) working with the emulator and looking for critical differences, if
any; (we use a LOT of MSDOS service calls, especially ASM coded
keyboard and screen control and 256 colour displays and scrolling. And
our output is now either pure printable ascii or Word-for-Windows
compatible documents after junking our long line of printer drivers as
just too much maintenance work.
Er, that box is still unopened...
But I DO have clipper under DOS...
Norman Perelson
Hi Terrence,
I agree with you completely. But sometimes we have to get the old
programs to run on new computers. No floppy drives, No parallel port, No
RS232 ports. For this reason Linux may be a good solution.
To answer your comments:
a) Yes, you will need a new computer - but you can get a low-priced
netbook.
b) Forget your early Red Hat system. Linux has advanced a lot. I
recommend the latest version of Ubuntu (9.10). It is really easy to
install, and you can install DOSemu or DOSbox off the system menu.
c) Well worth the effort. And with your DOS background you will love the
power and simplicity of the command line as well.
d) Simple no-brainer install with the command 'sudo apt-get install dosemu'.
e) Just type the command 'dosemu' and you get a C:\> prompt.
f) You got me with this one. Any calls to hardware might fail. I really
don't know - why not try it and see?
I overcame this problem once by doing a complete re-write of an old
BASIC program to harbour. See:
http://norman.shoso.com/index.php?entry=entry070827-235407
and
http://norman.shoso.com/index.php?entry=entry071015-221412
Kind regards,
Norman