sysandprog
asked on
DOS Shell --> 1dirPlus --> Bourbaki, Inc. --> Boise, Idaho, USA
The original Bourbaki was a pseudonym for a group of French mathematicians. Somehow the name was used for a small software development company in Boise, Idaho, USA.
The company developed a very good DOS Shell and called it "1dir". A later version was called "1dirPlus". The Shell worked quite well on the early personal computers.
1dirPlus was released about 1988. There were some bugs in it that were never corrected. There was a half-hearted attempt to keep the package current with computer development, but it never arrived at the 32 bit stage. I think software piracy may have helped the company go down the tube.
At one time the company had 22 employees. After 1dirPlus was dropped, they continued working with fractals. A few years ago I had a brief correspondence with a former employee.
My guess is that the employees might have been mostly college students working free-lance.
I wonder whether the copyright laws allow such a package to enter the public domain. Certainly the original owners have either died or gone on to other things.
Can anyone add any insight on what happened to Bourbaki, Inc.?
With used computers selling for a few dollars at swap meets, it would be an interesting idea to do some reverse engineering on the code and bring it up to date. Then it could be used as an operating system for many applications for, say, a small business, or for games.
The company developed a very good DOS Shell and called it "1dir". A later version was called "1dirPlus". The Shell worked quite well on the early personal computers.
1dirPlus was released about 1988. There were some bugs in it that were never corrected. There was a half-hearted attempt to keep the package current with computer development, but it never arrived at the 32 bit stage. I think software piracy may have helped the company go down the tube.
At one time the company had 22 employees. After 1dirPlus was dropped, they continued working with fractals. A few years ago I had a brief correspondence with a former employee.
My guess is that the employees might have been mostly college students working free-lance.
I wonder whether the copyright laws allow such a package to enter the public domain. Certainly the original owners have either died or gone on to other things.
Can anyone add any insight on what happened to Bourbaki, Inc.?
With used computers selling for a few dollars at swap meets, it would be an interesting idea to do some reverse engineering on the code and bring it up to date. Then it could be used as an operating system for many applications for, say, a small business, or for games.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
All the companies went out. I wonder if novell got rid of its dos and now has it back what with the linux fiasco. I am not sure if you have a question remaining here. Wondering just what you want to do with someone's old DOS. Want some good old IBM v1.0?
ASKER
Windows 98 has a very good DOS. Microsoft stopped providing DOS version numbers as they moved toward a full Windows Operating System. Perhaps they were trying to forestall just such a move on the part of computer users as I am proposing here.
1dirPlus is NOT a DOS. It is a SHELL that COULD work very well if an expert would do some reverse engineering and adapt it to operate in a 32-bit mode as needed for the large disk drives now on the market. As it stands now, only the 1dirPlus VIEW/EDIT command works under Windows 98. The fulll 1dirPlus works after a Restart in DOS, but the TREE command fails with a message about not enough memory. My impression is that it doesn't like the virtual memory swap file.
Most of us have some version of a licensed DOS operating. 1dirPlus should work quite well with any version. With a good SHELL in place, it shouldn't be a big deal to add email and even a text download capability. That text could feed an HTML reader.
The only things missing from this scenario are viruses, worms, spyware, malware and those features intended to make advertisers rich.
In other words, my interest is in the HOME user who wants to have his/her computer back, to do the sort of information exchange that was originally planned before Wall Street got into the act.
1dirPlus is NOT a DOS. It is a SHELL that COULD work very well if an expert would do some reverse engineering and adapt it to operate in a 32-bit mode as needed for the large disk drives now on the market. As it stands now, only the 1dirPlus VIEW/EDIT command works under Windows 98. The fulll 1dirPlus works after a Restart in DOS, but the TREE command fails with a message about not enough memory. My impression is that it doesn't like the virtual memory swap file.
Most of us have some version of a licensed DOS operating. 1dirPlus should work quite well with any version. With a good SHELL in place, it shouldn't be a big deal to add email and even a text download capability. That text could feed an HTML reader.
The only things missing from this scenario are viruses, worms, spyware, malware and those features intended to make advertisers rich.
In other words, my interest is in the HOME user who wants to have his/her computer back, to do the sort of information exchange that was originally planned before Wall Street got into the act.
If you really think DOS is the answer (which did have virus, worms and spyware), then why not use Linux and NOT install X-windows. There is a text only web browser called Lynx and there are text based e-mail clients.
So you can have your "command line and text only enviroment" in a supported OS that is considered MUCH more secure that DOS ever was.
Actually most people do not have a licensed version of DOS. Very few people actually ever purchased DOS as a seperate item for personal use. If you read your OS licensing agreement when you buy a PC with an OS pre-loaded (at least a MS OS) you will find that it is only licensed to run on that computer. You can't buy without an OS or build your own comptuer and transfer the OS license from one what was preloaded to the new one. Don't ask me what happens if you upgrade a PC with all new components in the same case.
Umm, if you really want to go back to before Wall Street got into the act, then you would not have Internet access. Before Wall Street got into the act the Internet was reserved for the government and educational facilities. A regular Joe could not gain acces to the Internet. Comercial access up until the early 90's was limited to companies that provided research to or for educational services or the government.
Unfortunetly what made computer easy to use for home users was the GUI. A command line interface was preceived to be difficult because you had to remember all of those commands and key strokes to get work done. A gui allowed you to point and click, a just about anybody can do that.
Again, if you really think that Windows is evil, then try Linux without X.
So you can have your "command line and text only enviroment" in a supported OS that is considered MUCH more secure that DOS ever was.
Actually most people do not have a licensed version of DOS. Very few people actually ever purchased DOS as a seperate item for personal use. If you read your OS licensing agreement when you buy a PC with an OS pre-loaded (at least a MS OS) you will find that it is only licensed to run on that computer. You can't buy without an OS or build your own comptuer and transfer the OS license from one what was preloaded to the new one. Don't ask me what happens if you upgrade a PC with all new components in the same case.
Umm, if you really want to go back to before Wall Street got into the act, then you would not have Internet access. Before Wall Street got into the act the Internet was reserved for the government and educational facilities. A regular Joe could not gain acces to the Internet. Comercial access up until the early 90's was limited to companies that provided research to or for educational services or the government.
Unfortunetly what made computer easy to use for home users was the GUI. A command line interface was preceived to be difficult because you had to remember all of those commands and key strokes to get work done. A gui allowed you to point and click, a just about anybody can do that.
Again, if you really think that Windows is evil, then try Linux without X.
ASKER
Anyone with a licensed copy of Windows has a licensed DOS. It is part of the package.
The question is about 1dirPlus, not Linux or anything else. The responses so far indicate that the experts have NEVER worked with 1dirPlus and have no idea how it works.
I have never heard of ANY malware that attacked systems based on DOS.
The question is about 1dirPlus, not Linux or anything else. The responses so far indicate that the experts have NEVER worked with 1dirPlus and have no idea how it works.
I have never heard of ANY malware that attacked systems based on DOS.
When you mean "Windows", what do you mean? Windows 2000 and XP do NOT have a licensed copies of DOS. There is nothing in there that will allow me to boot up and run DOS. They have a DOS emulator, but it is not true DOS.
Although Windows 9x/ME are really DOS you are really licesened to use the DOS part as you wish, because your license is for Windows 9x/ME.
I may be misunderstanding your point. I thought, based on this thread and others, that you are attempting to state that DOS 1DirPlus is the answer to todays security problems. That Windows is bad and DOS with 1DirPlus would be good. If that is what you are attempting to say, then I am saying that if you are not comfortiable with the security in Windows, that Linux is an alternative.
It gives you what you are claiming DOS and 1DirPlus gives you. A command line enviroment, text web browsing and text e-mail.
You state you have never heard of ANY malware that attacked systems based on DOS. Windows 3.1, 9x, and ME are all DOS based systems. You have never heard of any malware that attacked them?
Even before the Windows 3.1 and followons, there was malware that affected DOS. Just because you have not heard of it, does not mean it did not exist.
Maybe we need to define malware. In my book malware is any malicious software, you know virus and Trojans. What is your definition of malware? You have heard of virus and Trojans for DOS systems. If you haven't then you really have no clue about what you are attempting to say.
You are correct, I have never used 1DirPlus. I never heard of it until now. However, I have used DOS, Windows (all flavors execpt ME and CE), Linux, AIX, Solair, and a few mainframe based OS's.
DOS is NOT secure. In fact it has NO security built into it. No shell sitting on top of an OS can make the OS secure. Mainly because the shell does NOT execute programs, but allows them to be executed. Shells can only be as secure as the underlying OS.
Maybe you need to understand how OS's and shells work and who is in charge of what.
Although Windows 9x/ME are really DOS you are really licesened to use the DOS part as you wish, because your license is for Windows 9x/ME.
I may be misunderstanding your point. I thought, based on this thread and others, that you are attempting to state that DOS 1DirPlus is the answer to todays security problems. That Windows is bad and DOS with 1DirPlus would be good. If that is what you are attempting to say, then I am saying that if you are not comfortiable with the security in Windows, that Linux is an alternative.
It gives you what you are claiming DOS and 1DirPlus gives you. A command line enviroment, text web browsing and text e-mail.
You state you have never heard of ANY malware that attacked systems based on DOS. Windows 3.1, 9x, and ME are all DOS based systems. You have never heard of any malware that attacked them?
Even before the Windows 3.1 and followons, there was malware that affected DOS. Just because you have not heard of it, does not mean it did not exist.
Maybe we need to define malware. In my book malware is any malicious software, you know virus and Trojans. What is your definition of malware? You have heard of virus and Trojans for DOS systems. If you haven't then you really have no clue about what you are attempting to say.
You are correct, I have never used 1DirPlus. I never heard of it until now. However, I have used DOS, Windows (all flavors execpt ME and CE), Linux, AIX, Solair, and a few mainframe based OS's.
DOS is NOT secure. In fact it has NO security built into it. No shell sitting on top of an OS can make the OS secure. Mainly because the shell does NOT execute programs, but allows them to be executed. Shells can only be as secure as the underlying OS.
Maybe you need to understand how OS's and shells work and who is in charge of what.
ASKER
Note there are many good shell programs for free "out there". The difference is that this one appears to be in the public domain by default. The company is out of business.