Missing OS

  • Thread starter Thread starter Curt
  • Start date Start date
C

Curt

a relative of mine passed away and I have his computer. On
boot it gives me choices (Safe) (Last boot that worked)
etc. The set-up was set for CD first boot. I assume he had
a cd to boot the system although there is no CD with the
machine.


How can I get XP to run?

How can I get to a dos prompt? I try safe mode and all I
get is a blue screen.


Help please

Thanks
 
The CD is first in the boot sequence in order to facilitate a clean install
of XP which can boot from the CD. On most modern systems, if the CD-ROM is
first in line and there's no boot CD in the drive, the system will then
check the next available drive. On some systems, after setup, the boot
order must be changed to Hard Drive first however, if that was the issue
here, the system would be requesting the CD and that is not the case.

It would appear setup is corrupted and needs to be reinstalled. However,
without the CD that's not possible.

You need to acquire an XP CD in order to do either a repair install or
reinstall the OS. There is no DOS prompt in XP, there is no DOS in XP.

If you wish to install some other operating system, you can use a DOS boot
disk to access FDISK, delete the XP partition, create a new one, set it
active, exit FDISK, reboot with the boot disk in the drive, format the C
drive and run setup of your other OS assuming it is Windows.

As stated above, without an XP CD you are virtually foreclosed from getting
it to run with one possible caveat. If the system originally came with XP
pre-installed, it's possible that the system has a recovery routine and
partition. You might check the manufacturer's website to find out if that
is the case and how to run their system recovery routine.
 
Since XP software licence is for one PC, and is already loaded, it will be
of no use to anyone except the new owner of the machine, which is apparently
you. Same actually applies to all other software loaded. Suggest you
tactfully approach the next-of-kin and ask for all the associated computer
bits and bobs incl manuals and software CD's ... failing that you're
probably going to have to purchase a new OS.
An alternative is to change the BIOS to boot C:\ first - if it boots up,
make a bootable system CD or floppy, and re-adjust the BIOS to boot
accordingly

Hope this helps LEN.
 
In
Curt said:
a relative of mine passed away and I have his computer. On
boot it gives me choices (Safe) (Last boot that worked)
etc. The set-up was set for CD first boot. I assume he had
a cd to boot the system although there is no CD with the
machine.


How can I get XP to run?
Click to expand...


If I bought or inherited a used computer, the first thing I would
do with it is reinstall the operating system cleanly. You have no
idea how the computer has been maintained, what has been
installed incorrectly, what is missing, what viruses and spyware
there may be, etc. I wouldn't want to live with somebody else's
mistakes and problems, and I wouldn't recommend that anyone else
do either.
 
There is no DOS prompt in XP, there is no DOS in XP.

Thats what they said about Windows95...

It is there (and no, I dont mean the command line as such, I mean DOS), its
just cut down to the point where the user cannot access it...

The DOS (remember the DOS and Command line are two seperate componants),
acts as an interface between the Operating System and the Disk drives (hence
Disk Operating System).
 
For the purposes of which the OP had in mind, there might as well not be any
DOS especially if XP was using NTFS as opposed to FAT32. There is a command
prompt but this is only an emulation of DOS and outside the OS, assuming
NTFS file system, there'd be virtually nothing useful to the OP.
 
In
Zoolook said:
Thats what they said about Windows95...
Click to expand...


I don't know who you mean by "they," but I never said that, and I
don't know anyone else who said that either.

It is there (and no, I dont mean the command line as such, I mean
DOS), its just cut down to the point where the user cannot access
it...

The DOS (remember the DOS and Command line are two seperate
componants), acts as an interface between the Operating System and
the Disk drives (hence Disk Operating System).
Click to expand...


If you are using the term "DOS" to mean any operating system
which accesses disk drives, you are using it in a peculiar and
ideosyncratic way. That's not what people mean when they talk
about DOS. DOS is a specific operating system--MS-DOS (and
variants). Unlike Windows 95, 98, and Me, neither Windows XP nor
any other memember of the Windows NT family is built on DOS nor
contains DOS.
 
I don't know who you mean by "they," but I never said that, and I
don't know anyone else who said that either.
Click to expand...

Not so much individuals, more the likes of M$ and the press etc...
If you are using the term "DOS" to mean any operating system
which accesses disk drives, you are using it in a peculiar and
ideosyncratic way.
Click to expand...

I was using DOS to describe the portion of code responsible for accessing
drives, which is technically correct.
That's not what people mean when they talk
about DOS.
Click to expand...

I appologise for trying to educate people that DOS actually means Disk
Operating System (rather then the C:\ prompt).
DOS is a specific operating system--MS-DOS (and
variants).
Click to expand...

No... DOS is the code in any non-specific OS that is responsible for
accessing the drives under such OS.
Unlike Windows 95, 98, and Me, neither Windows XP nor
any other memember of the Windows NT family is built on DOS nor
contains DOS.
Click to expand...

Windows-XP contains a portion of code assigned to operate disks, if it did
not, disk access would be impossible... this means the DOS is there, the
reason it is not evident is the asumption that DOS and C:\ are the same
thing, which is incorrect.

The fact that the user needs to click on a drive instead of typeing the
assigned drive letter, does not mean that there is no DOS present.
 
"No... DOS is the code in any non-specific OS that is responsible for
accessing the drives under such OS."

This is an incorrect statement. Semantically, you may be correct but you
are applying DOS generically and by that definition, then you are also
talking about any operating system. That may be true semantically but
MS-DOS was the name of the pre-Windows operating system used on IBM
compatible PCs. It is a product name, it is a trademark, it is licensed and
registered as such and lest you think the name had any greater implication
than that, you might want to have a look here:
http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa033099.htm

The implication of your original post implied to the OP that he could
perform functions, in this case specifically outside the Windows shell as he
wanted a DOS prompt, not the command prompt inside of Windows but to boot to
a DOS prompt and be able to do the things he did in Windows 9x systems, all
of which included means to do exactly what I've described.

In XP, even if he has an MS-DOS boot floppy, if the file system is NTFS,
that boot floppy will be useless. He can boot but nothing on the hard drive
will be recognized. His typical MS-DOS commands would be useless. Even if
he booted to the XP command prompt, assuming a FAT32 setup, he would not
have been able to accomplish many of the things he's used to doing on
previous setups and that was the point of my initial response. For all
intents and purposes, the MS-DOS that he knew, no longer exists on an XP
setup.

DOS is not now, nor has it ever been a generic in the sense that you've
implied. It may well be descriptive and in that way support your contention
but that wasn't even the reason for the name in the first place because,
initially, MS-DOS was based on QDOS and that stood for "Quick and Dirty
Operating System."
 
In
Zoolook said:
I was using DOS to describe the portion of code responsible for
accessing drives, which is technically correct.


I appologise for trying to educate people that DOS actually means Disk
Operating System (rather then the C:\ prompt).


No... DOS is the code in any non-specific OS that is responsible for
accessing the drives under such OS.


Windows-XP contains a portion of code assigned to operate disks, if
it did not, disk access would be impossible... this means the DOS is
there, the reason it is not evident is the asumption that DOS and C:\
are the same thing, which is incorrect.
Click to expand...


You persist in confusing two distinct things. Yes, Windows XP is
an operating system which includes code to access disk drives. In
that sense, *a* disk operating system is there.

However, there are specific operating systems with the name
"DOS," such as MS-DOS. Almost invariably, when people refer to
DOS, that is what they mean: a product which has the trademarked
name "DOS." And that doesn't exist in Windows XP.

You do nobody a service by mixing up your ideosyncratic use of
the word with its standard usage. A "disk operating system" and
"DOS" are *not* the same thing.
 
You persist in confusing two distinct things. Yes, Windows XP is
an operating system which includes code to access disk drives. In
that sense, *a* disk operating system is there.
Click to expand...

XP is an OS that contains a DOS... is that so hard for people to
comprehend..?
However, there are specific operating systems with the name
"DOS," such as MS-DOS.
Click to expand...

Which is technically incorrectly named, as it is implying it allows access
to disks only... MS-DOS should be termed MS-OS since it allows access to the
screen, keyboard, the memory (when programs are launched) etc...

Cheese is cheese, even if someone registers it internationally as Joe Bloggs
Curdled milk... MS-DOS is an OS, not a DOS...
Almost invariably, when people refer to DOS, that is what they mean:
a product which has the trademarked name "DOS." And that doesn't
exist in Windows XP.
Click to expand...

The post I originally replied to and you now are stating "there is no DOS in
XP."... which is incorrect... without a DOS, without a portion of code that
tells the OS how to communicate with the disk drives, you get no drives...
plain and simple as that...
You do nobody a service by mixing up your ideosyncratic use of
the word with its standard usage. A "disk operating system" and
"DOS" are *not* the same thing.
Click to expand...

Excuse me... but what exactly does the acronym DOS actually stand for... no
ifs, and or buts... it stands for "Disk Operating System" and anyone who
suggests it means likewise is incorrect...

As for "doing nobody a service"... thats maybe right... but saying DOS and
CLI are seperate componants of an OS is 100% right...
 
You misinterpreted what I said, which was simply that XP has a DOS, if you
read any more into that statement so be it, but I am not incorrect in that
staement.

I never once "implied" that MS-DOS was present... I said a DOS was
present... The windows shell contains a DOS... its that simple...

Again, any assumption that DOS and C:\ are the same thing is incorrect. The
CLI is a means for the end user to utilise commands and or programs that in
turn access the DOS, that in turn access the drives.
 
In
Zoolook said:
XP is an OS that contains a DOS... is that so hard for people to
comprehend..?
Click to expand...


Have it your way. I'm not interesting in continuing what is
already too long an argument here. Suffice it to say that I
completely disagree with you, and that's the end of my
participation in this thread.
 
Inserting your post in this thread and making the comment you made could
give a false impression to the OP and others just lurking that he could
indeed find what he was looking for and reach his goal through traditional
MS-DOS means or commands.

If you wish to have a discussion of semantics, this is not the appropriate
venue and insofar as the OP in this thread and these boards are concerned,
your post gives the wrong impression. If it isn't clear to you that when we
or other users, used to Windows 9x on these "Windows Boards," talk about
DOS, we are referring to MS-DOS and the traditional commands and workings
thereof, then you are in the wrong place and your comments will only serve
to confuse less informed users.
 
Back
Top