well, DosBox is not a Dos Program or even a console program but just a normal 32-Bit Windows program and therefore should just work.+

Should work, I agree but I'm more interested to see if anyone here has tested it on one of the beta versions of Vista to see if DOS programs will or will not run full screen. By the way, many DOS programs, such as ones written in QuickBasic, will work in Vista but will not run full screen. Same seems to be the case with programs even written as a VB.NET Console application where Alt-Enter instead of producing a full screen will produce the message: "This system does not support full screen mode."

So, thanks for the reply but if anyone here has actually seen what DOSBox can do on a Vista in regard to running a DOS program full screen, I would appreciate your comments as well.

Pete

programs in DOSBox will be able to run in fullscreen.

As Qbix wrote, Dos programs you run inside of Dosbox will be able to go fullscreen as Dosbox will be able to run fullscreen.
Again the program DosBox is not to be confused with the command prompt which is sometimes refered to as dosbox 😀

I can confirm. When I bothered to test Vista Beta 2 a couple of months ago DosBox worked fine. From reports from people running the RC's DosBox runs fine there too.

And I have used it in RC1 (64) with no issues

Thank you for the many replies, everyone!

I guess I should say I'm not looking forward to Vista at all. I may very well even switch to a Linux OS next year and add DOSBox to it. I'm more the type that would join the "Not a Micro$ost" Fan Club. I liked Win 95 an 98 but XP was a step in...well, a step in something. I anticipate Vista will be worse. That's why I asked for some help here. I have no intention of ever using a bloated emulator like Virtual Machine, free or not, to run DOS programs full screen. DOSBox as an emulator is a clearly better choice. I wish the developers here much success with it.

Thanks again,

Pete

Well, after my much loved Windows 3.11, XP was the best Windows MS yet published.

Nope, Windows 2000 was the best Windows.......

(Of course comparing Windows versions is like comparing hemroids......)

FIGHT!

If it wasn't for frigging games I would have moved to Linux a long time ago. 😁

My next machine will be a Mac, though I'll probably will run both on it at first 😀

DosFreak wrote:

Nope, Windows 2000 was the best Windows.......

(Of course comparing Windows versions is like comparing hemroids......)

FIGHT!

Absolutely - Win2K was the dogs bits but was too expensive for the general masses! WinXP [Home at least] brought stability to the masses 'cause it was relatively inexpensive. Vista, well it has 'borrowed' a truck load of OS X UI and packaged it up in a reasonably slick interface (the much touted glass doesn't float my boat...) But just where is the real gain for the pain of upgrading??? I can't see really anything much I'd *want* or need to run (excluding DX10). UAC is just such a completely crap solution I'm surprised it's been allowed to get this far and this alone turns me off the idea completely! I'm certainly not planning at upgrading - my PC is stable and does what I need it to do 😀

Very off topic rant..... Anyway!!!

My primary OS for the last 3 years have been WinXP (except for work, where I admin Solaris servers) on the same little barebone PC, and my shiny new laptop.

I will stay with WinXP on the laptop - and maybe upgrade to Vista - as this is where I need all the corporate-compatible office automation programs like Outlook, Word, Excel, mobile phone sync, etc.

My home PC, the little barebones with and AMD 2600+ and on-board graphics, is doing just fine with WinXP for now, and I have no plans to upgrade. When I eventually decide it is time to upgrade, it will be either Solaris or some Linux distribution that will be my primary OS.

I am p...ssed off, when I hear about the new licenses and DRM restrictions that Vista will be bound to. I don't want Ballmer to dictate to me when and where I install Vista, and how many hardware upgrades I can perform before I have to buy a new license. I don't want Warner to dictate how, when, and where I can enjoy my legally bought movie.

That is why I switching to free, open software whenever I get the chance. Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice.org, Juice, VLC, PuTTY, Miranda, VNC, Cygwin, Timestamp, Vim .... They are all part of my arsenal of free, open software today.

If it happens that I *really* need to run some Windows-only stuff, I hope that virtualisation will be enough, be it Wine, Xen, WMware, VPC or whatever.

I will probably also make a quadrupple-boot setup (currently my PC will boot DOS/Win95, Win98 and 2 x WinXP) just to be able to play the odd game, or to test/verify problems with the emulation/virtualization setups.

I was a lifelong DOS/Windows user... and Windows Vista is the reason I switched to Ubuntu :)