MS-DOS 7.1

Lou Scaruffi

unread,

Feb 7, 2005, 4:01:36 PM2/7/05

to

In my research into the best DOS for my Model 30-286 I thought the choice
was MS-DOS 6.22 versus PC-DOS 2000. I've stumbled across MS-DOS 7.1. It
appears to be the DOS that underlies Windows 9.x and is available free for
download as a stand alone DOS.
http://newdos.yginfo.net/msdos71/

I cannot seem to find much else on this DOS. I wonder if there are any
legal concerns vis-a-vis Microsoft. And I wonder if this this download
works as promised.

Any insights are appreciated.

-Lou

Tim Knight

unread,

Feb 7, 2005, 4:16:56 PM2/7/05

to

Tim Knight

unread,

Feb 7, 2005, 4:41:23 PM2/7/05

to

As you can see in my previous non-post that I didn't post anything
because I hit the wrong !@#$%^&*( button again. Using Google instead
of AOL and my fingers haven't learned what to do as yet.

1. I have downloaded MSDOS 7.1 and used it.

2. It performed for me as advertised.

3. Microwho?

CT the Unrepentant

Basil Holloway

unread,

Feb 7, 2005, 4:41:09 PM2/7/05

to

I have used this version of DOS and it works well as stand alone or under
Win 3.11. It was compiled by a Chinese gentleman called Wengier who used to
hand out on
http://computing.net/dos/wwwboard/wwwboard.html
http://computing.net/windows31/wwwboard/wwwboard.html
Do a search on either for Wengier or DOS 7 and you will get heaps of links
and info.

"Tim Knight" <ferr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1107811016.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Lou Scaruffi

unread,

Feb 13, 2005, 2:53:06 PM2/13/05

to

I also downloaded it. I tried to install it on my Model 30-286 but the
install routine requires a 386 or better.

I then loaded it on a Compaq Pentium I had loaded with MS-DOS 6.21. It just
did an upgrade. It failed to load my soundcard utility from autoexec.bat
after the upgrade claiming that the utility would not run in Windows DOS
box.

Would love to hear more about this MS-DOS 7.1 if anyone has further
comments.

-Lou

"Tim Knight" <ferr...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1107812483.3...@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

Message has been deleted

Daniel Hamilton

unread,

Feb 13, 2005, 4:16:46 PM2/13/05

to

Lou Scaruffi wrote:
> I cannot seem to find much else on this DOS. I wonder if there are any
> legal concerns vis-a-vis Microsoft. And I wonder if this this download
> works as promised.
>
> Any insights are appreciated.

Okay, OS History (Of the PC kind at least) is something I've taken a
great interest in, so I can shed some light on this for you.

All this "MS-DOS 7.1" is, is a copy of the DOS supplied with either
Windows 95 OSR2, Windows 98, or Windows 98 Second Edition. This person
took the COMMAND.COM and butchered it with a hex editor to make it say
MS-DOS 7.1.

The setup supplied with this hack is not the Microsoft setup, it's one
that's been created to simply look like it, hence it's requirement for a
386 processor.

Notice that it saying this is in itself a testimate to it's fraudulent
origins: Microsoft never called any of their DOS's X.X, they are always
X.XX. Although IBM's where X.X (6.1, 6.3, 7.0).

Microsoft(R) MS-DOS(R) Version X.XX
(C)Copyright Microsoft Corp 1981-19XX.

Like MS-DOS 6 was "MS-DOS 6.00" and 6.2 was "MS-DOS 6.20". If this was
from Microsoft, then it would say "MS-DOS 7.10." Not to mention that
Microsoft suspended all development for standalone DOS during the spring
of 1995. They did release a Beta version of MS-DOS 7.00 prior to this
and I have a copy. Any DOS after 6.22 that was released by Microsoft
was part of Windows 9x.

These are the versions of "MS-DOS" released after 6.22:

7.00 Windows 95 Original, OSR1
7.10 Windows 95 OSR2, OSR2.1, OSR2.5 (Added FAT32 support)
7.10 Windows 98 Original, Second Edition
8.00 Windows Millenium Edition (Removed real-mode support)

MS-DOS 8.00 is a very strange beast indeed. Microsoft totally disabled
any real mode support for Windows Me, therefore this DOS boots straight
into protected mode. HIMEM.SYS has been integrated into the kernel.
You can still boot to the gool ole command prompt by creating an
"Emergency Disk."

IBM released two versions of DOS after Microsoft released 6.22. The
both are internally versioned 7.0, but the second is "Release 1", while
the first shows no release (so it's assumed to be "Release 0" I guess).

The first was released in 1995. It was a very superior release compared
to Microsoft's 6.22. IBM released a refreshed version of 7.00 in 1998
and called it "PC DOS 2000." This was for marketing only, as if you
boot it, it still says "PC DOS 7.0." It only included a few Y2K bug
fixes and the ability to automatically correct hardware clocks that have
problems with Y2K.

I think I've beat this topic to death! :)

--Daniel

J. Clarke

unread,

Feb 13, 2005, 6:21:35 PM2/13/05

to

Daniel Hamilton wrote:

> Lou Scaruffi wrote:
>> I cannot seem to find much else on this DOS. I wonder if there are any
>> legal concerns vis-a-vis Microsoft. And I wonder if this this download
>> works as promised.
>>
>> Any insights are appreciated.
>

> Okay, OS History (Of the PC kind at least) is something I've taken a
> great interest in, so I can shed some light on this for you.
>
> All this "MS-DOS 7.1" is, is a copy of the DOS supplied with either
> Windows 95 OSR2, Windows 98, or Windows 98 Second Edition. This person
> took the COMMAND.COM and butchered it with a hex editor to make it say
> MS-DOS 7.1.
>
> The setup supplied with this hack is not the Microsoft setup, it's one
> that's been created to simply look like it, hence it's requirement for a
> 386 processor.
>
> Notice that it saying this is in itself a testimate to it's fraudulent
> origins: Microsoft never called any of their DOS's X.X, they are always
> X.XX. Although IBM's where X.X (6.1, 6.3, 7.0).
>
> Microsoft(R) MS-DOS(R) Version X.XX

> Copyright Microsoft Corp., 1981-19XX

>
> Like MS-DOS 6 was "MS-DOS 6.00" and 6.2 was "MS-DOS 6.20". If this was
> from Microsoft, then it would say "MS-DOS 7.10." Not to mention that
> Microsoft suspended all development for standalone DOS during the spring
> of 1995. They did release a Beta version of MS-DOS 7.00 prior to this
> and I have a copy. Any DOS after 6.22 that was released by Microsoft
> was part of Windows 9x.
>
> These are the versions of "MS-DOS" released after 6.22:
>
> 7.00 Windows 95 Original, OSR1
> 7.10 Windows 95 OSR2, OSR2.1, OSR2.5 (Added FAT32 support)
> 7.10 Windows 98 Original, Second Edition
> 8.00 Windows Millenium Edition (Removed real-mode support)
>
> MS-DOS 8.00 is a very strange beast indeed. Microsoft totally disabled
> any real mode support for Windows Me, therefore this DOS boots straight
> into protected mode. HIMEM.SYS has been integrated into the kernel.
> You can still boot to the gool ole command prompt by creating an
> "Emergency Disk."

FWIW, XP and Server 2K3 will also make an emergency disk and when you run
"ver" on it it comes up "Windows Millennium [Version 4.90.3000]". Note
that Microsoft recommends this version for some purposes because it has a
smaller kernel than 6.x or the 7s.

Unfortunately they don't seem to have much in the way of utilities to run on
it.

> IBM released two versions of DOS after Microsoft released 6.22. The
> both are internally versioned 7.0, but the second is "Release 1", while
> the first shows no release (so it's assumed to be "Release 0" I guess).
>
> The first was released in 1995. It was a very superior release compared
> to Microsoft's 6.22. IBM released a refreshed version of 7.00 in 1998
> and called it "PC DOS 2000." This was for marketing only, as if you
> boot it, it still says "PC DOS 7.0." It only included a few Y2K bug
> fixes and the ability to automatically correct hardware clocks that have
> problems with Y2K.
>
> I think I've beat this topic to death! :)
>
> --Daniel

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

ratboy

unread,

Feb 28, 2005, 1:43:40 AM2/28/05

to

where do you download msdos 7.1.
the site at the top dosent work
Ratboy

Charles Lasitter

unread,

Mar 1, 2005, 4:38:06 PM3/1/05

to

"ratboy" <coli...@gmail.com> wrote in news:1109573020.825927.34510
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

> where do you download msdos 7.1.
> the site at the top dosent work

The hacked version I'd mention is here:

http://newdos.yginfo.net/msdos71/

-- CL.

ratboy

unread,

Mar 9, 2005, 8:03:32 PM3/9/05

to

that site dont work and it take so lond to download on broadband.
Im stuck between 2 rocks and it isnt good!

Basil Holloway

unread,

Mar 9, 2005, 10:16:00 PM3/9/05

to

"ratboy" <coli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110416612.2...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

> that site dont work and it take so lond to download on broadband.
> Im stuck between 2 rocks and it isnt good!
>

Give this site a go. Just downloaded CD iso and 5 Floppy images and all went
okay.

http://newdos.yginfo.net/msdos71/index.htm

Felicia

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 5:40:42 PM12/24/21

to

On Sunday, February 13, 2005 at 2:16:46 PM UTC-7, Daniel Hamilton wrote:

> All this "MS-DOS 7.1" is, is a copy of the DOS supplied with either
> Windows 95 OSR2, Windows 98, or Windows 98 Second Edition. This person
> took the COMMAND.COM and butchered it with a hex editor to make it say
> MS-DOS 7.1.

I just want to say that "MS-DOS 7.1", regardless of how it was created, is actually a great version of DOS to use if you're making a DOS system for any reason. Among other things, it features tab completion which is very useful.

Following richud's instructions (https://www.richud.com/wiki/Ubuntu_Create_Floppy_Image) I was able to edit the DOS 7.1 disk01.img and remove SETUP.BAT and references to it in AUTOEXEC.BAT which makes it very useful for creating utility disks (for example for BIOS updates on old systems).

Grant Taylor

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 6:45:24 PM12/24/21

to

On 12/24/21 3:40 PM, Felicia wrote:
> I just want to say that "MS-DOS 7.1", regardless of how it was created,
> is actually a great version of DOS to use if you're making a DOS system
> for any reason. Among other things, it features tab completion which
> is very useful.

I've found that MS-DOS 7.1 (from Windows 95 / 98) to be problematic for
some things that I want to do. As such I've tended to revert to MS-DOS
6.22 or other DOS. This usually presents itself with non-Microsoft
products, particularly network related, e.g. Novell NetWare (server).

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

Louis Ohland

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 7:38:45 PM12/24/21

to

PC-DOS 7.1?

Grant Taylor

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 7:42:03 PM12/24/21

to

On 12/24/21 5:36 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
> PC-DOS 7.1?

I didn't try IBM's PC-DOS 7.1. I should.

As I type this reply I'm struggling to remember where PC-DOS 2000 lands
in the PC-DOS version numbers. I'm focusing on PC-DOS 2000 because I
believe I have a physical copy of it somewhere in my collection.

I've usually ended up using MS-DOS 6.22 or Novell DOS that comes with
the NetWare, depending on version. NetWare 5.x tends to come with
Novell DOS.

Louis Ohland

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 8:18:45 PM12/24/21

to

PC DOS 7.1 was never released as such, but it was part of a toolkit to
install some sort of networking?

There was a way to extract the good stuff, but that's above my pay
grade. At one time, Tim Clarke was looking into it.

Louis Ohland

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 8:19:48 PM12/24/21

to

PC DOS 2000 was superseded by PC DOS 7.1

Grant Taylor

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 8:51:05 PM12/24/21

to

On 12/24/21 6:16 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
> PC DOS 7.1 was never released as such, but it was part of a toolkit to
> install some sort of networking?

Odd.

Maybe I'm thinking of retail boxes of PC-DOS 7.0.

> There was a way to extract the good stuff, but that's above my pay
> grade. At one time, Tim Clarke was looking into it.

You should be able to copy IBMBIO.SYS, IBMDOS.SYS, and COMMAND.COM off
of any bootable disk. -- I think that's the file names, if I'm
remembering correctly.

Grant Taylor

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 8:51:29 PM12/24/21

to

On 12/24/21 6:17 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
> PC DOS 2000 was superseded by PC DOS 7.1

Ya. I thought something like that had happened.

Grant Taylor

unread,

Dec 24, 2021, 9:24:18 PM12/24/21

to

On 12/24/21 6:51 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:
> Ya. I thought something like that had happened.

I see boxed copies of PC-DOS 7(.0) on eBay.

However, 7.0 != 7.1.

I can see how IBM might have updated 7.0 to 7.1 for use in things.
There might even be a patch for 7.0 to bring it up to 7.1 if you know
where to look.

Louis Ohland

unread,

Dec 25, 2021, 9:50:22 AM12/25/21

to

Never seen a patch.

Louis Ohland

unread,

Dec 25, 2021, 9:53:48 AM12/25/21

to

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_DOS#PC_DOS_7.1

"PC DOS 7

PC DOS 7 was released in April 1995 and was the last release of DOS
before IBM software development (other than the development IBM
ViaVoice) moved to Austin. The REXX programming language was added, as
well as support for a new floppy disk format, XDF, which extended a
standard 1.44 MB floppy disk to 1.86 MB. SuperStor disk compression
technology was replaced with Stac Electronics' STACKER. An algebraic
command line calculator and a utility program to load device drivers
from the command line were added. PC DOS 7 also included many
optimizations to increase performance and reduce memory usage.[16]

PC DOS 2000

The most recent retail release was PC DOS 2000 – released from Austin in
1998 – which found its niche in the embedded software market and
elsewhere. PC DOS 2000 is a slipstream of 7.0 with Y2K and other fixes
applied. To applications, PC DOS 2000 reports itself as "IBM PC DOS
7.00, revision 1", in contrast to the original PC DOS 7, which reported
itself as "IBM PC DOS 7.00, revision 0".[nb 1]

Hitachi used PC DOS 2000 in their legacy Drive Fitness Test (4.15) and
Hitachi Feature Tool (2.15) until 2009.[17] ThinkPad products had a copy
of the latest version of PC DOS in their Rescue and Recovery partition.[18]

PC DOS 7.1

PC DOS 7.1 added support for Logical Block Addressing (LBA) and FAT32
partitions.[nb 1] Various builds from 1999 up to 2003 were not released
in retail, but used in products such as the IBM ServerGuide Scripting
Toolkit.[19] A build of this version of DOS appeared in Norton Ghost
from Symantec.[20] Version 7.1 indicates support for FAT32 also in
MS-DOS.[16]

Most builds of this version of DOS are limited to the kernel files
IBMBIO.COM, IBMDOS.COM, and COMMAND.COM. The updated programs FDISK32
and FORMAT32 allow one to prepare FAT32 disks. Additional utilities are
taken from PC DOS 2000, where needed. "

Louis Ohland

unread,

Dec 25, 2021, 9:56:39 AM12/25/21

to

https://liam-on-linux.livejournal.com/59703.html

Louis Ohland

unread,

Dec 25, 2021, 10:00:20 AM12/25/21

to

http://toogam.com/software/archive/opsys/dos/ibmpcdos/getpcd71.htm

Uh, there is no pre-packaged floppy images.

At one time I pulled the SGTK down, might have it yet.

JWR

unread,

Dec 25, 2021, 2:38:59 PM12/25/21

to

It's all here:
https://tinyurl.com/y4b8khwu

Merry Christmas!

--
Jelte,
Admirer of the letter of IBM with blue Ishiki