• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Edit for DOS 3.3 and ealier

Ole Juul said:
It does bring a smirk to my face though because it really shows up the huge lack of editors in the Linux/Unix world. DOS rulz! - certainly when it comes to choice and variety of editors.
Click to expand...

Linux has vim and emacs. We don't need anything else. :p



Since Commander style interfaces came up, I'd also point out [url="http://www.briggsoft.com/fmdos.htm]File Maven[/url]. I used that on my Tandy 1000TX for a while. For some reason NC wouldn't run on my TX, but file maven proved a good alternative. It does come with a text editor too.
 
DR-DOS 7.x comes with a text editor that runs just fine in DOS 3.3 and doesn't take up too much disk space. It is rather slow on a 4.77 MHz 8088, however.
 
Thanks Mike. This is exactly what I'm looking for. This way, I can test them all on my tweener before adding one or two to my 5150.
 
Yer welcome. One thing that I recently evaluated but didn't put on that page was Tiny Emacs, the favorite tiny editor of the maintainer of texteditors.org. I compiled a version that works for 8088 and it grew from 4k to 5k, but still a neat little emacs. Not my cup of tea, but might be yours. You can snag it here: http://www.texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?TM

I have been warming up to VDE and am using that more and more for text documentation that I want to distribute in 80-col; it has nice wordwrap that survives multiple editing sessions while staying within ASCII 32-127.
 
bettablue said:
During my search, I ran into a couple of threads here in the forums where members have written their own replacement programs for the earlier versions. As an example: Mem.exe. which was written by one of our regulars (I believe it was Chuck). The program was only 41 Bytes in size. That little program is a perfect example of what I'm looking for.
Click to expand...

It's impossible to create a functional editor in 41 bytes, so maybe you meant 41KB?
 
Trixter said:
It's impossible to create a functional editor in 41 bytes, so maybe you meant 41KB?
Click to expand...

I saw that and was wondering too. There are some small editors out there though. Like I mentioned, the very functional TED (PCmag/Ziff) comes in at just under 3K which is not bad for something that one would actually want to use as one's main editor - as I have for years. However, I also have a small version which is a total of 656 bytes. The writer did have to forgo a few niceties in order to achieve that though. One is that you hit Ctrl-C to exit. lol In any case I do think that one (TEDL.COM) is the winner of the small editor record, and was written for that purpose. You wouldn't happen to have another really small one for my collection would you?
 
No, I saw something that Chuck G wrote. I think it was a memory tool or something like that. It came in at 41 bytes. I got my terms messed up again. This is happening a lot more to me as my health issues get worse. And yes they are getting worse for now. I'm facing three things, a liver and kidney transplant, plus the removal of my overly enlarged spleen Trust me, it's not fun, But because of the constant illness I have been feeling and going through, I have a lot of trouble concentrating on what I write. It does take a lot for me to focus.

Sorry about the confusion.

Ole Juul said:
I saw that and was wondering too. There are some small editors out there though. Like I mentioned, the very functional TED (PCmag/Ziff) comes in at just under 3K which is not bad for something that one would actually want to use as one's main editor - as I have for years. However, I also have a small version which is a total of 656 bytes. The writer did have to forgo a few niceties in order to achieve that though. One is that you hit Ctrl-C to exit. lol In any case I do think that one (TEDL.COM) is the winner of the small editor record, and was written for that purpose. You wouldn't happen to have another really small one for my collection would you?
Click to expand...
 
bettablue said:
Sorry about the confusion.
Click to expand...
Not to worry. As you know, I've got related health issues, so I can certainly sympathise. Mental mixups are indeed the hardest things to accept, because we all want to be sharp all the time. Anyway . . . just have to go with it. Intelligence has many forms and it's not a competition. :)

Regarding a super small editor, I was actually hoping that trixter would have something like that in his collection. To date the TEDL at 656 bytes is the record in my experience. Funny though, it comes with a very small documentation file which, even then, is twice the size as the editor. Haha.
 
Ah yes. I would definitely be interested in getting that. I'll see if I can find a copy.

Thanks.



Ole Juul said:
Not to worry. As you know, I've got related health issues, so I can certainly sympathise. Mental mixups are indeed the hardest things to accept, because we all want to be sharp all the time. Anyway . . . just have to go with it. Intelligence has many forms and it's not a competition. :)

Regarding a super small editor, I was actually hoping that trixter would have something like that in his collection. To date the TEDL at 656 bytes is the record in my experience. Funny though, it comes with a very small documentation file which, even then, is twice the size as the editor. Haha.
Click to expand...
 
bettablue said:
Ah yes. I would definitely be interested in getting that. I'll see if I can find a copy.
Click to expand...

Hehe, I don't think you'll want to use it though. It really is just a collector's item or curio. Nevertheless, I just put it here for you. :)

Seriously, the smallest editor that really works for everything, and which requires no learning curve because of it's built in bottom line function key menu is - TED. I've used it for years and I know others who have as well. Under 3K, you can put it on all boot disks. Anyway, it's in the package I posted for you earlier. :)
 
bettablue said:
I'm facing three things, a liver and kidney transplant, plus the removal of my overly enlarged spleen Trust me, it's not fun, But because of the constant illness I have been feeling and going through, I have a lot of trouble concentrating on what I write. It does take a lot for me to focus.
Click to expand...

No worries; here's hoping you recover in the upcoming year. At least you have vintage computing to relax with :)
 
Trixter said:
No worries; here's hoping you recover in the upcoming year. At least you have vintage computing to relax with :)
Click to expand...

That's about all I have that's keeping me sane. You know the funny part? I didn't find out all of this other stuff until after I rebuilt the expansion unit for my 5150. If I had known all of this was going to happen, I probably wouldn't have even bothered. Now I have a small collection of 6 different vintage home and small business computers. 2 of them need some work, and of course, Alice is always looking at me with that big Cyclops eye of a monitor! She's constantly begging me to give her some attention. So, I play some games and test other programs on her floppy drives before I permanently commit them to her hard drives.

I think I need to take some semi-close-ups of my 5150 system to show each and every component that makes Alice what she is. I have so many upgrades, and yet I'm still not done. I need to configure the Ethernet lll adapter, and the modem, plus I want to add in a sound card, and finally, I want to get a plotter for some design work I'm planning on. (Oh, What HAVE I gotten myself into?)

Thanks for the sentiment too Trixter. I appreciate it.
 
steal the editor edit.exe from dos 7 win 95 98
it does not rewuire qbasic and you likely have it
I riun xp and the same? editor is in win xp
BUT if you need to cut and paste from windowy apps use notepad. likelu npwillnot work w deos 33
 
wdegroot said:
steal the editor edit.exe from dos 7 win 95 98
it does not rewuire qbasic and you likely have it
I riun xp and the same? editor is in win xp
BUT if you need to cut and paste from windowy apps use notepad. likelu npwillnot work w deos 33
Click to expand...

The standalone version of MS-DOS EDIT from Windows 95+ requires a NEC V20/V30 or 286 or higher CPU to run. If you try to run it on an 8088 or 8086, it will lock up.
 
I've actually decided on just using the text editor that comes bundled with Dosmenu. After reading about all of the menu programs, and weeding through almost two dozen different menu programs, I decided to go with DOS Commander because it takes up a much smaller footprint in the systems memory than other similar programs like Norton Commander, leaving more room for other programs to run effectively. As for the text editor, it's simple, easy to call up, just navigate to the file and press F3. You now have direct access to the file and can make whatever changes you might want.

I have to thank ole juul for this nice little program. Plus, we spent over 5 hours over the phone in one day getting my LAN adapter working, then the modem. Now I have to find another dual 9 pin serial card to replace my old one. My current one is a complete mystery. But that is a subject I've covered in another thread.

I just want to say thanks to all of you. To be honest, it was stone who recommended that I use the editor that comes with Norton Commander, and ole juul who gave me the copy of DOS Commander. I still want to thank all of you for your ideas. They were all welcome. And yes, I'll still be looking at using a couple as I progress with this machine.
 
vwestlife said:
The standalone version of MS-DOS EDIT from Windows 95+ requires a NEC V20/V30 or 286 or higher CPU to run. If you try to run it on an 8088 or 8086, it will lock up.
Click to expand...
Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I came across this via Google and began wondering since things like Win3.0's VGA.SYS have been patched to work on 8080/8086, would it be possible to patch the Win95 EDIT.COM to do the same?
Right now I'm using Q (posted above) on DOS 3.31, but would like to be able to run a copy of MS EDIT, ideally one that isn't tied to QBASIC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top