555:@Dragon: That's somewhat in line with the points I made as well, although I came to somewhat different conclusions. Microsoft's MIDAS is notable for the context it existed in and for being the first operating system to implement FAT (excluding Stand-alone Disk BASIC, which wasn't a true operating system)) even before the advent of 86-DOS and MS-DOS. Some of that information is already discussed in the FAT article, as you suggest, but there are considerable differences between the FAT implementations of Stand-alone Disk BASIC (8-bit), MIDAS (8-bit, 10-bit, 12-bit, 16-bit), 86-DOS (12-bit) and MS-DOS (12-bit originally). These differences are important to know for historians and technicians to better understand how and why FAT was developed the way it was - including some otherwise unexplainable peculiarities. That's too much information to add this all to the FAT article, so the implementation-specific aspects should ideally be discussed in the context of their respective implementations (as it already happens for 86-DOS, MS-DOS and MSX-DOS). I plan to add similar information to Stand-alone Disk BASIC (for which I have collected enough reliable sources to go for it when time allows - but it took me several years actively searching for sources to find them) and MIDAS (for which I do have the information, but not yet the desired sources), so that we'd have a carefully rounded out discussion of the various related topics in the end, on which technical historians can reliably base their research on in the future. If we delete the MIDAS article, there is no place to put the information any more - and it is unlikely that it will be recreated given that the people in the know on such already historical topics are slowly dying out.
420:. According to the article, Microsoft even had several volumes of reference documentation for this operating system (I cannot verify this, since I do not own these documents, but I also do not have reasons to doubt they existed - the fact that they can't be found via Google is hardly relevant as the majority of docs pre-dating Google cannot be found this way). The fact, that these documents don't carry ISBNs is hardly relevant either, as most printed product documentation does not carry ISBNs - actually, only a small fraction of documents from the pool qualifying as RS carries ISBNs in general. Some while back Marc McDonald himself also offered to provide copies of MIDAS reference documentation from his archive. So, we have at least two sources (one internal, and one external of Microsoft) indicating that a full set of documentation existed for this operating system - sooner or later it might pop up in someone's archive and/or put online, so it is premature to call them "broken" or "fabricated".
679:) - since developing articles is an incremental process and sometimes those knowledgable enough to further develop an article are few and far between and they may stop by here only by accident, I would have absolutely no problems to keep it as stub for a decade or longer, for as long as it can at least provide a little bit of useful and reliable information on a topic - and, I think, it already does that even in its currently very basic form - most people don't know anything about it, so having an entry for MIDAS explaining what it was (and that it's not the same as MS-DOS) is already much better than not discussing it at all. It's normal for an encyclopedia to have short as well as long entries - not every article needs to become a great or featured article in the end.
283:
worked at DRI's
European office and inherited all the documentation, computers, S-100 boards, development software etc etc, and as such, the entry for MDOS is for completeness. And encyclopedia is supposed to be a correct reference. It seems to me that the people that decided to have this entry up for deletion obviously were not involved in the beginning of microcomputers. When I get a chance, I will upload images of the documentation concerned. This documentation should be in the Archives of Microsoft. -- 2014-10-13T09:25:25 Petervee
349:. While I agree that little is known about Microsoft's MDOS aka MIDAS, it clearly is no hoax. The fact that some obviously uninformed readers confused it with MS-DOS and assumed it to be a hoax in the past is hardly a valid argument against it - after all we are here to preserve and provide knowledge to those interested. We can't do that by deleting relevant information. MIDAS might not have been a great OS in itself (I really don't know), but it is notable historically for two reasons:
514:" M-DOS was a true multitasking operating system modeled after the DEC TOPS-10 operating system. M-DOS provided good performance and, with a more flexible FAT than that built into BASIC, had a better file-handling structure than the up-and-coming CP/M operating system. At about 30 KB, however, M-DOS was unfortunately too big for an 8-bit environment and so ended up being relegated to the back room. "
405:), Microsoft for some time went the other direction when they (Paterson, actually) developed MSX-DOS, a sort of MS-DOS clone for 8080 8-bit processors. In this view, MIDAS is important as it can be seen as one of the origins for the technology. Marc McDonald also once mentioned that MIDAS (or technology derived from it) was used in some Japanese computers.
704:
While these are primary sources and may not be written from a neutral point of view, we can at least derive undisputable basic technical information from them like a description of the operating system's architecture or its command set, information you just deleted from the article claiming they were
302:
is actually Marc MacDonald? Why should I believe some random "Petervee", someone impersonating the developer of this OS, and some guy whose name coincides with a DR-DOS developer's? How can I be justified in assuming the scans you upload are not fake? (Never mind they would be deleted in short order
427:
To sum it up, while I think that it may take another couple of years before the article will have become more than a stub, I think, MIDAS is important and notable enough to deserve an article of its own and meet our basic notability criteria - so give it the necessary time to grow. Rome wasn't built
238:
Both appear to contain bare passing mentions. The article also lists some technical manuals by
Microsoft as references, but without any information as to where they were published (if at all) and no ISBN numbers, so I think we should consider them broken (or even fabricated) citations. A merger into
558:
While the MIDAS article is still a stub and lacking, it has already grown over the years. And it already has five references, and from what I know about MIDAS does not contain wrong information. This makes me confident, that we'll have enough information for a neat article on this piece in a couple
282:
Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia written by people that are supposed to know what is going on; either historians, researchers or people intimetaly involved with the subjects. MDOS was a real written OS; I contain some of the only surviving documents (mentioned in the column) from the time when I
290:
You are mistaken. Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia written by literally anyone who can figure out how to do it. And those people may have good intent or evil intent, they may have a clue, or be completely misguided, they may be careful, cautious and stick to reliable information, or they may be
444:
Delete - Without accessible references there is not enough information about MDOS to keep this article. Assuming it existed, it should be documented as part of
Microsoft's history, then a WP article can be justified. Many companies have internal developments that may be documented on internal
580:
this is an area where wp has and should continue to have comprehensive coverage. The practical aspects of computer science were our earliest strength, and w remain perhaps the best current reference. Articles on topics of possible historic importance should be kept, even though they may have
839:
In the area of operating systems, IBM seemed to offer one proprietary system, PC:DOS, and one standard system CP/M-86. ... Secondly, PC:I)OS turns out to be MDOS, a proprietary system developed by MICROSOFT available on several other machines. MDOS has an attractive base of software of its
658:
We searched, we failed. The only two sources found are the two listed above: for all we know, there are no others. You will be struggling to write a paragraph based on that. Keeping it marked as "stub" indefinitely is out of the question. What else? Merge maybe? Where?
408:
While we already discuss some of these aspects in various related articles, it makes sense to also have a "central" article about MIDAS itself in order to avoid too much redundancy in other articles and to properly establish logical connections between pieces of
559:
of years if we continue to develop it. If we delete it, we get nothing, and the net outcome for
Knowledge (XXG) is negative. We cannot develop something by deleting it for being immature while still being developed, as some deletionists seem to believe. --
522:" At that meeting, Paterson was introduced to Microsoft's M-DOS, which he found interesting because it used a system for keeping track of disk files - the FAT developed for Stand-alone Disk BASIC - that was different from anything he had encountered. "
298:: it tells me that MS-DOS 7.1 has been released by Microsoft under the GNU GPL. Should I add it to the article? You can say any idiot can upload a video to YouTube, but then any idiot can upload scanned pictures to Knowledge (XXG). Why should I assume
539:(including making false claims or attacking and trying to discredit constructive editors) than to actually help building an encyclopedia. The project is going to fail if we allow this kind of destruction to happen on a broader scale. --
166:
759:. Did multiple runs of several main databases (PQ/LN/JSTOR) and historical databases (Historical Abstracts, EBSCO History of Science, Technology, Medicine). Other than the two books mentioned above, the only other real hit is:
771:
which is to say that we don't have much on this topic, and the stuff that we do have is centered around McDonald. Theoretically, more content may exist in a box somewhere, but as it stands, this topic doesn't meet the
310:
The whole point of using previously published sources is that it does not matter whether you are a dog or not; claims in articles are justified by citations, not by editors claiming authority on the topic. If the
909:
per Czar. Thin sourcing for this article, but it is important that we keep it as it is very interesting relevant and accurate information. Maybe add a redirect incase anyone is looking for it. --
393:
ported to 8086 16-bit processors with FAT file system support added (after
Standalone Disk BASIC and MIDAS). 86-DOS later became MS-DOS. And while Digital Research added an MS-DOS emulator to its
465:. Otherwise, this may be a Delete. It would however be a shame to lose the content as it may have some historical value in 200 years time. Is there somewhere we can submit this data to?
483:
The claim about being "the first operating system to use FAT" is unreferenced. The only thing that seems to be verifiable is "it existed, and it was some sort of influence on MS-DOS".
160:
119:
766:"TECHNOLOGY; Back to the Fold for a Former Microsoft Employee." The New York Times. January 12, 2001 Friday . Date Accessed: 2014/10/25. www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic.
197:
Unreleased operating system by
Microsoft which appears to be non-notable. For a while this article was thought to be a hoax. Only two sources appear to discuss this topic:
682:
Regarding sources, in addition to the two sources mentioned above we do already have at least three more published sources (and have at least two independent
Wikipedians (
503:
To the contrary of what Kephir is trying to make believe, this is well referenced in several sources. Let me cite a few sentences from Ray Duncan's "MS-DOS encyclopedia":
262:
369:
b) MIDAS is also an interesting stepping-stone in the history of
Microsoft operating systems for microcomputers. This becomes particularly apparent in the context of
428:
in a day, and
Knowledge (XXG) still has many years (decades?) to grow and mature. (Alternatively, the information should be moved into the Marc McDonald article.) --
784:
spin-out) but is more about giving a home for this content proportional to the information available about it. (After the merge, I also recommend redirecting
92:
87:
828:
William C Dwyer, The IBM PC: Standards as marketing strategy, Computers and
Standards, Volume 1, Issues 2–3, September 1982, Pages 137-144, ISSN 0167-8051,
126:
304:
96:
79:
506:" During this same period, Marc McDonald also worked on developing an 8-bit operating system called M-DOS (usually pronounced "Midas" or "My DOS"). "
780:
and would be best displayed in McDonald's article (perhaps as its own section). This merge would not preclude later expansion (or subsequent
446:
181:
530:" So for fast, efficient file handling , he used a file allocation table, as Microsoft had done with Stand-alone Disk BASIC and M-DOS. "
148:
17:
228:
210:
412:
Regarding notability, I think, the fact that MIDAS is mentioned in several books is enough to meet our notability criteria per
294:
The world is full of hoaxes, and the DOS world is not any different. On the Internet, I can find an ISO image of "MS-DOS 7.1".
142:
611:
83:
138:
918:
897:
870:
807:
735:
720:
666:
653:
635:
615:
592:
568:
548:
490:
474:
454:
437:
329:
274:
254:
61:
937:
40:
461:
Comment - If MIADS was the first operating system to use FAT, then at least some of the article should be merged into
647:
Then we must search for reliable source,help it for expanding and if necessary mark it as stub rather then deleting.
188:
781:
648:
607:
845:
Gandal, Neil. Greenstein, Shane. Salant, David. 1999. "Adoptions and Orphans in the Early Microcomputer Market"
535:
It's a pity that some individuals seem to be more obsessed with getting stuff they obviously don't like deleted
355:
291:
gullible, jump to conclusions, and add rumours. Which means we should apply some scepticism to their additions.
75:
67:
450:
470:
358:, which hardly can be called an operating system in itself, it was the first operating system utilizing the
716:
564:
544:
433:
154:
628:
being an unreleased OS is not a problem in itself. The real problem is the scarcity of reliable sources.
933:
793:
359:
36:
672:
893:
59:
833:
424:
does require verifiability, not personal access to the sources to verify the information by oneself.
728:
Those are published sources? Point me to a library where I can read them. Or a book store. Please.
174:
773:
731:
662:
642:
631:
486:
466:
325:
312:
250:
696:
Microsoft Disk Operating System Technical Manual (MDOS), Copyright 1979, Microsoft, Bellevue, WA
445:
documents, but unless information is published and notable then these are inappropriate topics.
315:
taught us anything, it is that we should not rely on an individual editor's claims of authority.
222:
Gates: How Microsoft's Mogul Reinvented an Industry—and Made Himself the Richest Man in America
712:
560:
540:
429:
319:
270:
225:
207:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
932:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
676:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
914:
796:
to save the hatnote confusion.) Please ping me if non-English or offline sources are found.
386:
777:
725:
889:
56:
417:
699:
Microsoft Interrupt Driven Asynchronous System, User's manual, Copyright 1980 Microsoft
462:
421:
413:
906:
885:
756:
687:
588:
363:
344:
51:
683:
382:
299:
266:
829:
113:
910:
244:
693:
Microsoft Disk Operating System (MDOS), Copyright 1979 Microsoft, Bellevue, WA
295:
853:
862:
799:
583:
398:
690:), who claim to own copies of them and offered to make them available):
394:
390:
378:
836:) – mentions Microsoft's MDOS briefly, but I think they meant MS-DOS.
366:, the developer of MIDAS, is also the inventor of the FAT file system.
888:
per Czar - sourcing is thin and centered around McDonald, but exists.
789:
402:
374:
370:
240:
785:
834:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0167805182900237
926:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
416:. Given enough time, I might be able to locate a few more
606:
Deleting Unreleased article or O/S is nott policy of WP
856:– no mentions, but useful for those writing on this era
709:
706:
109:
105:
101:
173:
726:
There is a deadline, and it is expiring as we speak.
187:
204:The MS-DOS Encyclopedia - version 1.0 through 3.2
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
940:). No further edits should be made to this page.
307:. There is nothing that convinces me otherwise.
830:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-8051(82)90023-7
624:The article is already publicly readable. Its
303:because of copyright issues.) For all I know,
837:
263:list of Software-related deletion discussions
8:
261:Note: This debate has been included in the
819:relatedly interesting but likely unhelpful
813:
260:
854:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6451.00091
220:Manes, Stephen; Andrews, Paul (1993).
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
296:Here is how the installer looks like
847:The Journal of Industrial Economics
24:
671:Knowledge (XXG) has no deadline (
243:has been explicitly rejected at
581:relatively weak documentation.
397:port for 16-bit processors in
1:
919:01:04, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
62:19:07, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
898:11:30, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
871:15:20, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
808:15:05, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
736:12:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
721:18:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
667:12:55, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
654:12:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
636:10:30, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
616:14:34, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
593:07:41, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
569:09:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
549:09:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
491:16:54, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
475:10:04, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
455:06:52, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
438:11:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
330:12:04, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
275:02:22, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
255:14:34, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
318:(Apologies for approaching
957:
708:) although they weren't (
385:'s 86-DOS was a clone of
929:Please do not modify it.
356:Standalone Disk BASIC-80
76:MIDAS (operating system)
68:MIDAS (operating system)
32:Please do not modify it.
705:unferenced and broken (
842:
650:AmRit GhiMire "Ranjit"
608:AmRit GhiMire 'Ranjit'
322:levels of verbosity.)
794:MDOS (disambiguation)
774:significant coverage
202:Duncan, Ray (1988).
206:. Microsoft Press.
313:Essjay controversy
305:you might be a dog
48:The result was
877:
876:
320:User:Matthiaspaul
277:
948:
931:
869:
867:
820:
814:
806:
804:
734:
665:
646:
634:
489:
387:Digital Research
328:
253:
234:
216:
192:
191:
177:
129:
117:
99:
34:
956:
955:
951:
950:
949:
947:
946:
945:
944:
938:deletion review
927:
878:
863:
860:
821:
818:
800:
797:
729:
660:
640:
629:
484:
323:
248:
231:
219:
213:
201:
134:
125:
90:
74:
71:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
954:
952:
943:
942:
922:
921:
900:
875:
874:
858:
857:
843:
823:
822:
817:
812:
811:
810:
769:
768:
767:
761:
760:
749:
748:
747:
746:
745:
744:
743:
742:
741:
740:
739:
738:
702:
701:
700:
697:
694:
680:
619:
618:
600:
599:
598:
597:
574:
573:
572:
571:
556:
553:
552:
551:
533:
532:
531:
525:
524:
523:
517:
516:
515:
509:
508:
507:
496:
495:
494:
493:
478:
477:
463:FAT filesystem
458:
457:
447:81.129.132.171
441:
440:
425:
410:
406:
367:
351:
350:
335:
334:
333:
332:
316:
308:
292:
285:
284:
279:
278:
241:MS-DOS#History
236:
235:
229:
217:
211:
195:
194:
131:
70:
65:
52:Marc McDonald
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
953:
941:
939:
935:
930:
924:
923:
920:
916:
912:
908:
907:Marc McDonald
904:
901:
899:
895:
891:
887:
886:Marc McDonald
883:
880:
879:
873:
872:
868:
866:
855:
851:
848:
844:
841:
835:
831:
827:
826:
825:
824:
816:
815:
809:
805:
803:
795:
791:
787:
783:
782:summary style
779:
775:
770:
765:
764:
763:
762:
758:
757:Marc McDonald
754:
751:
750:
737:
733:
727:
724:
723:
722:
718:
714:
710:
707:
703:
698:
695:
692:
691:
689:
688:User:Petervee
685:
681:
678:
674:
670:
669:
668:
664:
657:
656:
655:
652:
651:
644:
639:
638:
637:
633:
627:
623:
622:
621:
620:
617:
613:
609:
605:
602:
601:
596:
595:
594:
590:
586:
585:
579:
576:
575:
570:
566:
562:
557:
554:
550:
546:
542:
538:
534:
529:
528:
526:
521:
520:
518:
513:
512:
510:
505:
504:
502:
501:
500:
499:
498:
497:
492:
488:
482:
481:
480:
479:
476:
472:
468:
467:TheDragonFire
464:
460:
459:
456:
452:
448:
443:
442:
439:
435:
431:
426:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
404:
400:
396:
392:
388:
384:
380:
376:
372:
368:
365:
364:Marc McDonald
362:file system.
361:
357:
353:
352:
348:
346:
345:Marc McDonald
340:
337:
336:
331:
327:
321:
317:
314:
309:
306:
301:
297:
293:
289:
288:
287:
286:
281:
280:
276:
272:
268:
264:
259:
258:
257:
256:
252:
246:
242:
232:
230:0-385-42075-7
227:
224:. Doubleday.
223:
218:
214:
212:1-55615-049-0
209:
205:
200:
199:
198:
190:
186:
183:
180:
176:
172:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
140:
137:
136:Find sources:
132:
128:
124:
121:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
69:
66:
64:
63:
60:
58:
54:
53:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
928:
925:
902:
881:
864:
859:
849:
846:
838:
801:
776:part of the
752:
713:Matthiaspaul
684:User:MarcMcd
649:
625:
603:
582:
577:
561:Matthiaspaul
541:Matthiaspaul
537:by all means
536:
430:Matthiaspaul
409:information.
383:Tim Paterson
342:
338:
300:User:MarcMcd
237:
221:
203:
196:
184:
178:
170:
163:
157:
151:
145:
135:
122:
49:
47:
31:
28:
673:WP:DEADLINE
401:(and later
343:Merge into
245:Talk:MS-DOS
161:free images
890:Dialectric
57:j⚛e decker
934:talk page
354:a) After
267:• Gene93k
50:merge to
37:talk page
936:or in a
399:DOS Plus
120:View log
39:or in a
677:WP:TIAD
395:CP/M-86
391:CP/M-80
379:MSX-DOS
167:WP refs
155:scholar
93:protect
88:history
911:Obsidi
790:My DOS
643:Kephir
403:DR DOS
375:MS-DOS
371:86-DOS
139:Google
97:delete
905:into
903:Merge
882:Merge
861:czar
852:(1).
798:czar
786:M-DOS
753:Merge
711:). --
626:topic
589:talk
418:WP:RS
182:JSTOR
143:books
127:Stats
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
915:talk
894:talk
840:own.
788:and
732:Keφr
717:talk
686:and
675:and
663:Keφr
632:Keφr
612:talk
604:Keep
578:Keep
565:talk
545:talk
487:Keφr
471:talk
451:talk
434:talk
422:WP:V
414:WP:N
377:and
341:(or
339:Keep
326:Keφr
271:talk
251:Keφr
226:ISBN
208:ISBN
175:FENS
149:news
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
884:to
832:. (
792:to
778:GNG
755:to
584:DGG
527:or
519:or
511:or
389:'s
360:FAT
189:TWL
118:– (
917:)
896:)
850:47
730:—
719:)
661:—
630:—
614:)
591:)
567:)
547:)
485:—
473:)
453:)
436:)
381:.
373:,
324:—
273:)
265:.
249:—
247:.
169:)
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
55:.
913:(
892:(
865:♔
802:♔
715:(
645::
641:@
610:(
587:(
563:(
543:(
469:(
449:(
432:(
347:)
269:(
233:.
215:.
193:)
185:·
179:·
171:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
141:(
133:(
130:)
123:·
116:)
78:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.