Timeline for Why does MS-DOS 6.22 boot so slowly?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2025 at 21:33 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jan 5, 2025 at 20:28 | vote | accept | pts | ||
| Jan 5, 2025 at 19:43 | answer | added | Justme | timeline score: 52 | |
| Jan 5, 2025 at 19:08 | comment | added | user3840170 | @Joshua How can you be sure then that it’s a simulated delay “somewhat appropriate for the the hardware in question”? | |
| Jan 5, 2025 at 16:30 | comment | added | Joshua | @user3840170: If I understand correctly; that will make no difference, but attaching int13 to your own hard disk driver would. I got the expected speed after transitioning to 32 bit disk drivers but I'm not absolutely sure which is the actual thing it checks to insert the delays. | |
| Jan 5, 2025 at 16:28 | comment | added | user3840170 | @Joshua Does that mean it would be faster with a virtio hard disk? | |
| Jan 5, 2025 at 16:19 | comment | added | Joshua | It's not slow; it's the two second press key delay (mostly). In my experience with QEMU it simulates a disk read delay somewhat appropriate for the the hardware in question; must faster than real hardware but still much slower than modern hardware. | |
| Jan 5, 2025 at 14:54 | comment | added | user3840170 |
Yes, SWITCHES=/F in CONFIG.SYS disables that. I wrote about it in <retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/a/20008/15334>.
|
|
| Jan 5, 2025 at 14:28 | comment | added | Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen | Something about giving the user two seconds to hit a function key influencing how the boot sequence runs | |
| Jan 5, 2025 at 13:47 | history | edited | pts | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 266 characters in body
|
| Jan 5, 2025 at 13:22 | history | asked | pts | CC BY-SA 4.0 |