[comp.sys.ibm.pc] Mutlitasking/ task switching

gavin@mit-caf.MIT.EDU (Gavin C. H. Zau) (06/13/90)

	I recently posted a request for information on softwarer for
switching between application/ multitasking on 286 and 386 PCs.  The 
current forerunners are :
	Desqview 386 (+ QEMM 386 ?)
	Windows 3.0
	VM/386
and
	Software Carousel for 286.
Can anyone who has used these software please comment on the ease of 
use, hardware requirement, compatibility with a network drive (PCNFS)
and speed.   Windowing capabilities are not critical but are nice to
have.

Thanks alot.

-- 
************************************************************
Gavin Zau	Dept of Chemical Engineering, MIT
		gavin@caf.mit.edu	mefl@eagle.mit.edu

shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) (06/14/90)

In article <4632@mit-caf.MIT.EDU> gavin@mit-caf.UUCP (Gavin C. H. Zau) writes:
>
>	I recently posted a request for information on softwarer for
>switching between application/ multitasking on 286 and 386 PCs.  The 
>current forerunners are :
>	Desqview 386 (+ QEMM 386 ?)
>	Windows 3.0
>	VM/386
>and
>	Software Carousel for 286.
>Can anyone who has used these software please comment on the ease of 
>use, hardware requirement, compatibility with a network drive (PCNFS)
>and speed.   Windowing capabilities are not critical but are nice to
>have.

No offense, but I think you should not have posted this also to
comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d.  It is not the proper place for this message.
Now, answering your question.

I use both Desqview 386 (which is Desqview 2.26 & Qemm 5.0) nad Windows 3.0.
In some ways, they are very similar (such as their multi-tasking abilities)
but in other ways they are not.  Windows 3.0 is not only a multi-tasker but
a graphical interface similar to the Mac interface.  Very nice, but you can't
really take much advantage of it unless you are using Windows applications.
Desqview is basically a multi-tasker and it does that much better than
Windows 3.0.  It doesn't crash as often, and it can run graphic DOS
applications in the background.  Because of its power Desqview (in my
opinion) is not very easy to set up.  Windows is a bit easier but still
not easy enough (IMHO).  Another advantage of Desqview 386 is that QEMM
can map extended memory into high memory, so you can load tsrs, drivers, 
etc... into high memory and not lose any of the 640K memory.  Because of
this my Desqview windows are a bit bigger than my Windows windows (about
585K to 525K with the same tsrs and drivers loaded).  Also, Windows is
a memory hog compared to Desqview.  You can open more windows with Desqview
than Windows for the same amount of memory.  Windows requires 1 Meg on a
286, 2 Megs on a 386.  Desqview requires only 640K, but at least 1 Meg
is recommended.

I haven't heard much about VM/386 so I can't help you there.  But I've heard
it is not fully DOS compatible.  And I don't use Software Carousel so
I can't help you out there either.  I believe all it does is tash switch
tsrs.


 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Sam Shim                                   | "I didn't do it...            |
|  EECS Departmental Computing Organization   |  It wasn't me...              |
|  University of Michigan                     |  Nobody saw me do it...       |
|  Ann Arbor, MI 48109                        |  Nobody can prove a thing..." |
|  internet: shim@eecs.umich.edu              |  - Bart Simpson               |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

rdg@virtech.uucp (Roger D. Gough) (06/14/90)

In article <2630@zipeecs.umich.edu>, shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) writes:
> In article <4632@mit-caf.MIT.EDU> gavin@mit-caf.UUCP (Gavin C. H. Zau) writes:
> >
> >	I recently posted a request for information on softwarer for
> >switching between application/ multitasking on 286 and 386 PCs.  The 
> >current forerunners are :
> >	Desqview 386 (+ QEMM 386 ?)
> >	Windows 3.0
> >	VM/386
> >and
> >	Software Carousel for 286.
> >Can anyone who has used these software please comment on the ease of 
> >use, hardware requirement, compatibility with a network drive (PCNFS)
> >and speed.   Windowing capabilities are not critical but are nice to
> >have.
> 
> I use both Desqview 386 (which is Desqview 2.26 & Qemm 5.0) nad Windows 3.0.
> In some ways, they are very similar (such as their multi-tasking abilities)
> but in other ways they are not.  

I basically agree with the views of the respondent.  I've not experimented
as much as I'd like with Windows 3.0, but 'til I do, I'm running my Windows
applications (in real mode) under DESQview 386.  I may _never_ switch.

I used to use Software Carousel, and it's pretty good to.  It's more than
a TSR switcher, though.  It'll switch among up to 12 applications.  If I didn't
have a 386, I'd probably still be using it.
-- 
Roger D. Gough                                                  +1 703 689 1692
Sequel Technologies                                            uunet!sequel!rdg

doug@ozdaltx.UUCP (Doug Matlock) (06/15/90)

In article <4632@mit-caf.MIT.EDU>, gavin@mit-caf.MIT.EDU (Gavin C. H. Zau) writes:
> 
> 	I recently posted a request for information on softwarer for
> switching between application/ multitasking on 286 and 386 PCs.  The 
> current forerunners are :
> 	Desqview 386 (+ QEMM 386 ?)
> 	Windows 3.0
> 	VM/386
> and
> 	Software Carousel for 286.
> Can anyone who has used these software please comment on the ease of 
> use, hardware requirement, compatibility with a network drive (PCNFS)
> and speed.   Windowing capabilities are not critical but are nice to
> have.
> 
> Thanks alot.


I have used DESQview for a little less than a year.  I have been very 
satisfied with the program.  It takes a little time and patience to
set it up, but the setup tools are adequate (you change numbers on 
a data-entry-form type screen for each application).  

I did some benchmarking of run time for DV.  In compute-intensive apps,
DV introduces almost no overhead (i.e. it took almost exactly twice as much 
time to run two copies of a compute loop as to run one copy).

The places I've had trouble are:
1. not all device drivers can be loaded into high memory (IBM's Token
Ring drivers especially)
2. Quarterdeck support for developers is terrible

I need to specify that I am fortunate enough to use a Compaq 386/20 with
9 Meg of RAM.  Others have had more trouble with DV on other machines.

I just got Windows 3.0 yesterday, and have not had a lot of time to play
with it.  First impression: "I'm in LUUUUV"[tm].  It seems MUCH faster than
OS/2 (I have nothing to back that up, just my impression) and is every
bit as sexy.

I hope to have a more objective opinion of Windows in the near future.
-- 
Doug.

"If you want Peace, work for Justice."