wozniak@utkux1.utk.edu (Bryon Lape) (11/25/89)
I am having problems with QEMM-386 and a Tandy 4000. I am unable to load anything into high memory (ie- Mouse driver). The computer has a paradise VGA board, 4 meg memory, and an 80 meg SCSI driver with an Adaptec controller. The DesqView people seem to think that the problem is with the controller, but I have no idea. -bryon-
plim@hpsgpa.HP.COM (Peter Lim) (11/30/89)
> > I am having problems with QEMM-386 and a Tandy 4000. I am > unable to load anything into high memory (ie- Mouse driver). The > computer has a paradise VGA board, 4 meg memory, and an 80 meg SCSI > driver with an Adaptec controller. The DesqView people seem to think > that the problem is with the controller, but I have no idea. > Did you put the RAM keyword in the DEVICE=QEMM.SYS line in your CONFIG.SYS ? Otherwise, QEMM-386 will not fill the empty space above 640K with RAM and naturally LOADHI will not be able to find it. And even if you do sometimes QEMM-386 can't figure it out properly. In which case, you'll need to specify RAM=XXXX-YYYY to get QEMM-386 to fill the particular space. Hope that helps ! Regards, Peter Lim. HP Singapore IC Design Center. E-mail address: plim@hpsgwg.HP.COM Snail Mail address: Peter Lim Hewlett Packard Singapore, (ICDS, ICS) 1150, Depot Road, Singapore 0410. Telephone: (065)-279-2289
mlord@bmers58.UUCP (Mark Lord) (12/01/89)
>> I am having problems with QEMM-386 and a Tandy 4000. I am >> unable to load anything into high memory (ie- Mouse driver). The >> computer has a paradise VGA board, 4 meg memory, and an 80 meg SCSI >> driver with an Adaptec controller. The DesqView people seem to think >> that the problem is with the controller, but I have no idea. Hmm.. I have a paradise VGA 16+ card, which has an "extended bios" that QEMM does not notice on its own. To get the system to work, I have to use one of: EXCLUDE=A000-BFFF ROM=C000-C7FF or EXCLUDE=A000-C7FF Give it a try! -- +----------------------------------------+----------------------------+ | Mark S. Lord | Hey, It's only MY opinion. | | ..!utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!mlord%bmers58 | Feel free to have your own.| +----------------------------------------+----------------------------+
wozniak@utkux1.utk.edu (Bryon Lape) (05/29/90)
In my acrticle named DesqView,,,,,,,,,again I mentioned Quick C not working. I am running it in text mode with 50 lines. -bryon lape
shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) (05/30/90)
In article <1990May28.174442.4059@cs.utk.edu> wozniak@utkux1.utk.edu (Bryon Lape) writes: > > In my acrticle named DesqView,,,,,,,,,again I mentioned Quick C >not working. I am running it in text mode with 50 lines. > > >-bryon lape 1. Cut out the attitude. Just because you are having problems with Desqview doesn't mean it doesn't work and it stinks. With all the variations in hardware and software, there are going to be compatibility problems with even the best software/hardware. 2. Be nice on the net. Stop being so obnoxious. Don't treat us like shit and then maybe we'll help you. 3. Get a dictionary and learn how to spell. 4. If you have a problem, don't post a message saying it doesn't work or it stinks. Explain the problem in a little more detail and explain what steps you took to try to fix it. For example, with the above problem, you could have posted the PIF file which would make it easier for us to help you. Then, I wouldn't have to ask questions like "Are you virtualizing text/graphics when running Quick C?" "Are you setting up the Desqview window to be 80x50?" 5. Concerning your Adaptec device driver problem, STOP THE NONSENSE! Just because you haven't seen a device driver doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And don't automatically blame it on Desqview because you have no other program to blame. As you saw, there is a device driver for your SCSI controller. SCSI controllers/drives don't work very well with a lot of programs and hardware simply because it does not emulate the WD 1003 controller like every other disk drive standard. In most cases with a SCSI combo, a device driver is needed, or will help in solving some of the compatibility problems. 6. Desqview is a great program (much much better than Windows 3.0). Don't you dare say it doesn't work or it stinks. It is the premier MS-DOS multitasker on the market. Because of its power, Desqview is hard to learn. It sounds like you are having some problems learning it, but I can't tell for sure because you don't know how to post messages properly. What kind of message is like this (taken from part of a previous message by you)? " I know what DesqView is supposed to do, but it does not!!! I argues with the SCSI drive (It not I)!! It does not do virtual 8086 stuff that the 386 can do. It stinks!!!" 7. If you are not going to post properly, please don't post at all. You have upset/angered more than one of us in netland. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 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 | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ucmpme@swuts.swbt.com (1593]) (05/30/90)
> > 1. Cut out the attitude. ........... > 2. Be nice on the net. Stop being so obnoxious. Don't treat us like shit... > 3. Get a dictionary and learn how to spell......................... > 7. If you are not going to post properly, please don't post at all. You have > upset/angered more than one of us in netland. Well put. I scan the article titles to see if there's discussion about anythingI've been having problems with, or software that I own. DESQVIEW is a recent purchase. It has been more than a little irritating to choose these recent postings, and be put down and insulted. -- M. E. Evans UUCP: swuts!ucmpme or sw1e!ucmpme
phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (05/31/90)
In article <2443@zipeecs.umich.edu> shim@eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) writes: |6. Desqview is a great program (much much better than Windows 3.0). Don't Only if you never ever want to use Super VGA. And I still haven't gotten it to work right with PC-NFS. Maybe I should add that DV is great if you want a lot of hassle with networking too. Oh, and let's not forget First Party DMA devices, they give DV a fit also. -- Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil "Separate but equal": bad for blacks, good for women.
yoon@aludra.usc.edu (Dae-Kyun Yoon) (05/31/90)
In article <4ab42bf8.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: > ... > > From: shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) > > >6. Desqview is a great program > > This must be an entirely new use of the term "great" with which > I was previously unfamiliar. > > > > (much much better than Windows 3.0). Don't > > you dare say it doesn't work or it stinks. It is the premier MS-DOS > > multitasker on the market. > > > Given DOS and the variations in PC configurations it is a wonder > that Desqview works at all. And while I wouldn't say it "stinks" > it certainly does not work all that well. At last count (this weekend) > *half* of my programs either don't run at all under Desqview or require > special handling like being loaded first or not having certain > other programs in the system at the same time. Now granted, I > probably have a larger percentage of graphics programs than other > people and graphics appears to be Desqview's Achilles Heel, but > given the increasing popularity of graphics programs on the market > and the apparent unwillingness of companies to write PC software > which is well-behaved, this will seriously limit the value of Desqview. > > I'm also curious about the use of "premier", above. Desqview has > sold a little over a million copies. Windows, prior to 3.0, has > sold about 7 million copies. Microsoft is expected to sell some > 4.5 million copies of 3.0 in the near term, and some estimates > suggest that figure could be as high as 7 million. > > Do you have any personal experience with Windows 3.0? For that > matter, does anyone here on the net? I am very interested in > knowing how it compares with Desqview it its ability to multitask > programs not written explicitly for that environment, especially > graphics or communications programs. > > I am still of the opinion that multitasking DOS, especially given > the way most DOS programs are written, is so difficult that it is > impossible to say any product does it "well". Desqview may not > be as bad as some competitors, but that's a long way from saying > that it is truly "good" at it, nevermind "great". > > ---Peter > ... > I'v been using DesqView on my 386sx machine before I bought (upgraded) to MS-windows 3.0. Before I state comparison between these two programs, the following assumptions should be taken into consideration. 1. I am just the end user, not a programmer for these programs. So, I can't say anything about programability of multitasking S/W under DesqView or Windows. 2. My platform is 386sx, so any comparison stated here may not be applied to other types of platforms. (8086 or 80286) In other words, I compare DesqView with Windows' 386 enhanced mode. 3. The comparions stated here may not be generally acceptable, as this is done by recalling the experiences I'v had. << Multitasking >> Both programs do multitasking farely well. For example, I can play my favorite games while I am compiling a very long document written in LaTeX form. << Memory Management >> Both programs provide a sort of virtual memory, by "swapping" to/from disk. The performance of swapping is a very important factor with me since I have only 2Meg of "real" memory. Under DesqView, swapping is intolerablly slow. Under windows it works just fine, and I can run as many programs I want only if it fits into total virtual memory spaces. (When using permanent "swapfile"). Of course, swapping degrades the performance but it's tollerable with me under windows. << User Interface >> How could we compare ICON based Graphical user interface of Windows with DesqView's user interface ? Needlees to say, Windows is far better. << Working with Dos apps. (non-windows apps) >> Both programs seem to work fine with any regular dos apps. Under Windows, I can open a dos shell (actually 4dos) window and can run any non-graphic apps. Some graphic apps would run in a window, though. I didn't seriously check the program which requires expanded memory. But I believe it would also run without any problems in 386 enhanced mode of windows, because Windows can simulate expanded memory in this mode according to the "user's guide, p541. I am not sure about how TSR programs could be loaded other than conventional memory and could be run if they requires expanded memory in Windows. From what I understood from the user's guide, I have to load "emm386.sys" and have to allocate a certain amount of memory to "emm386" to run these programs. You may not be able to expect some features provided by QEMM386 in Windows. For now, I am still trying to use Windows3.0 more intensively. BUt, it is most likely that I finally would switch to Windows 3.0 despite incompatibilities with old-version Windows apps. DesqView is also a good program, but I like the Graphical user interface better. If I am able to have a chance to try X-windows under DesqView, I may change my mind, though. :-). -- ----------------------------------------------- Dae-kyun Yoon dkyoon@priam.usc.edu, ..!uunet!usc!priam!dkyoon ----------------------------------------------- Dae-kyun Yoon dkyoon@priam.usc.edu, ..!uunet!usc!priam!dkyoon
shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) (05/31/90)
In article <4ab42bf8.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: > Given DOS and the variations in PC configurations it is a wonder > that Desqview works at all. And while I wouldn't say it "stinks" > it certainly does not work all that well. At last count (this weekend) > *half* of my programs either don't run at all under Desqview or require > special handling like being loaded first or not having certain > other programs in the system at the same time. Now granted, I > probably have a larger percentage of graphics programs than other > people and graphics appears to be Desqview's Achilles Heel, but > given the increasing popularity of graphics programs on the market > and the apparent unwillingness of companies to write PC software > which is well-behaved, this will seriously limit the value of Desqview. I've heard from the net that a tech support guy from Quarterdeck said that they haven't found a single program that does not run under Desqview. Slight exaggeration, but mostly true, I think. He said that some program might require some major hacking on Desqview, but Quarterdeck has gotten it to work. I've had very few problems with graphics programs, since I run a lot of graphics programs (mostly games). I think that is a good test of how well a multi-tasking program is. Desqview is not a multi-tasker for the average computer user. It is a hacker's multi-tasker (at least in my opinion). Some programs, especially graphic programs, require a lot of option flipping to get it right. Usually the best combo for a difficult program is to run it full-screen with direct writes to screen and no virtualization. That has solved most of my problems. Sometimes however, setting something totally unrelated to a different value will fix it also (a bug somewhere, but I'm not sure which). It's a difficult program to use, but I feel that the rewards are worth it. > I'm also curious about the use of "premier", above. Desqview has > sold a little over a million copies. Windows, prior to 3.0, has > sold about 7 million copies. Microsoft is expected to sell some > 4.5 million copies of 3.0 in the near term, and some estimates > suggest that figure could be as high as 7 million. To put it simply, SO? I've seen estimates (I think from PC Week) that Microsoft will be lucky if they have 250,000 people actually running Windows 3.0 by the end of the year. I have a copy of Windows 3.0, but it's sitting on the shelf for now. Microsoft tries to bundle Windows with everything they sell, and I've heard dealers can get copies really cheap. But many users (including some of my friends) have a copy but just put it aside. I think in a year Windows will really catch on. But not yet. Many with NewWave environment will Windows become big. My impression (from people I work with, my friends, Compuserve, and the net) is that there are about equal numbers of Windows and Desqview users out there. > Do you have any personal experience with Windows 3.0? For that > matter, does anyone here on the net? I am very interested in > knowing how it compares with Desqview it its ability to multitask > programs not written explicitly for that environment, especially > graphics or communications programs. > > I am still of the opinion that multitasking DOS, especially given > the way most DOS programs are written, is so difficult that it is > impossible to say any product does it "well". Desqview may not > be as bad as some competitors, but that's a long way from saying > that it is truly "good" at it, nevermind "great". I have used Windows 3.0. I find it really nice to use, but a little awkward. I guess it's because I'm used to Desqview's quick menus and the speed of Desqview (Windows, being graphical, doesn't feel to run as fast as Desqview). I would easily recommend it, but I would recommend Desqview even more if the user is willing to play with Desqview. Windows seems to multi-task non Windows (standard DOS) programs pretty well (Yes, it even handles the games that I tried), but not as smoothly as Desqview. I feel Desqview is truly great, and so do many other users. So does many of the computer journals. Desqview has received many awards and many recommendations from comp journals. You might disagee with me, and that's fine too. Desqview is not perfect, and it requires a lot of work to get it working properly. In someone else's eyes that might make the program not great. In my eyes, that's no problem. What I am concerned about is the end result from the program and all my hacking. Quarterdeck's customer support sticks really badly. It's customer support is legardary. There are not many other companies with customer support as bad as them (I have yet to see any). I learned to manage on my own with some help from Compuserve. I don't mind. But they really should take a look at Zeos, or Northgate or Wordperfect (all have 20+ hour customer support per day) and see how well their customer support depts are. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 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 | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) (05/31/90)
From: shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) >> it certainly does not work all that well. At last count (this weekend) >> *half* of my programs either don't run at all under Desqview or require >> special handling like being loaded first or not having certain >> other programs in the system at the same time. Now granted, I >> probably have a larger percentage of graphics programs than other >> people and graphics appears to be Desqview's Achilles Heel, but >> given the increasing popularity of graphics programs on the market >> and the apparent unwillingness of companies to write PC software >> which is well-behaved, this will seriously limit the value of Desqview. > > Desqview is not a multi-tasker for >the average computer user. It is a hacker's multi-tasker (at least in >my opinion). Some programs, especially graphic programs, require a lot >of option flipping to get it right. Usually the best combo for a difficult >program is to run it full-screen with direct writes to screen and no >virtualization. This doesn't make sense to me. If you turn virtualization off, at least with all my graphics app's then when you put it in background it scribbles all over whatever is in foreground. Moreover, anything which got drawn while in background is not retained when you put it back in foreground. That's the whole idea of virtualizing things: it doesn't write to the physical screen it writes to a virtual one in RAM so that A.) it doesn't clobber the real screen and B.) everything it did in background is retained to refresh the screen with when you bring back to foreground. I don't understand how you can truly multitask most programs without virtualization. >setting something totally unrelated to a different value will fix it also >(a bug somewhere, but I'm not sure which). If it's "totally unrelated" then there's no systematic way to make a choice so you have to try things at random. How many different parameters can you set with Desqview between QEMM and the Change Screen pages? I don't have it front of me but let's say there are 30 (although I'm sure there are more). Also, to GREATLY over-simplify let's say that each parameter had only two values instead of the many that some, like "EXCLUDE" or "Program Size", really have. This means that a hacker would have 2^30 possibilities, i.e., 1073741824 possible settings. At ten seconds to test each one, that comes out to over 30,000 years at 16 hours a day, no days off. Of course, there's a 50/50 chance that he would solve his bug at the 15,000 year mark. The dedicated Desqview user who takes THIS approach had better stock up on Domino's pizza and Coca-Cola (or better yet, Jolt -- "all the sugar and twice the caffeine"). > It's a difficult program to use, but I feel that the rewards are > worth it. I already know more than some of their tech support staff. I've spent $120 in phone calls to them (and I only spent $115 on the program itself!). I can't wait for the rewards to start rolling in! ---Peter
nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) (06/01/90)
From: shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) >In article <4ab90c6d.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: >> This doesn't make sense to me. If you turn virtualization off, at >> least with all my graphics app's then when you put it in background >> it scribbles all over whatever is in foreground. Moreover, anything >> which got drawn while in background is not retained when you put it >> back in foreground. That's the whole idea of virtualizing things: > >When you turn vitualization off and if the program does direct writes to >screen, then it doesn't run in the background. Usually this only needs to >be done for ill behaved games. Usually, most programs run fine with >virtualization. I dunno about "most" programs. I don't know *any* commercial graphics programs which are well-behaved in the sense that they don't make direct writes to the VGA control registers instead of only going through the BIOS calls, except for a few which are written explicitly for a multi-tasking environment, like CorelDraw for Windows. Certainly popular programs like PC Paintbrush IV Plus are downright naughty. When I asked ZSoft about this they said that they *had* to do it to get decent performance. >for troublesome problems. Yes, it does defeat multi-tasking, but task >switching of difficult programs is better than nothing at all. I think >I'll play around with Windows 3.0 some more and try running some of my >most difficult games and see how it handles it. Me, too. A few hours ago I broke down (some say I've been broken down for a long time!) and ordered Windows 3.0 from PC Connection for $89 plus next-day shipping. So I should have it tomorrow and I hope to give my initial impressions sometime next week. >> I already know more than some of their tech support staff. I've spent >> $120 in phone calls to them (and I only spent $115 on the program >> itself!). I can't wait for the rewards to start rolling in! > >I hope so to. I don't bother calling them. I usually log onto Compuserve >if I have any questions or need any help. There's many of us here (I think) >who are more than willing to help. So forget about them and this of us! :) I did, I did! In February I described the problems I was having and several people gave me various suggestions. None of them worked but did I write back and insult the net like another recent Desqview poster?!! No!!! I know that on Usenet you get what you pay for. (Now, if that were only true for certain software....) ---Peter
gordon@eecea.eece.ksu.edu (Dwight Gordon) (06/01/90)
shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) writes: >In article <4aba9e1a.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: >> I dunno about "most" programs. I don't know *any* commercial graphics >> programs which are well-behaved in the sense that they don't make >> direct writes to the VGA control registers instead of only going >> through the BIOS calls, except for a few which are written explicitly >> for a multi-tasking environment, like CorelDraw for Windows. Certainly >> popular programs like PC Paintbrush IV Plus are downright naughty. >You can tell Desqview that the program writes directly to the screen, and >if you want, you can turn off virtualization. Even if the program writes >directly to the screen and if virtualization is on, Desqview will run it >in the background in a window. Some programs are very naughtly (heavily >graphics based programs and some games usually) and won't run at all or >very well in any windowed 386 multi-tasking environment. I guess it's a >limitation of DOS multi-taskers. But DOS was never designed to run in a >multi-tasking environment in the first place so I consider multi-tasking >programs (such as Desqview and Windows) to be remarkable programs and just >accept the fact that not everything will work under them. Agreed (about DOS and multi-taskers)! One interesting thing that I've discovered is that certain misbehaved programs are sensitive to the '386 "protection level" setting of DesqView. That is - they work at a particular protection level, but don't at another. (Maybe I should say that DesqView's "protection level" setting is sensitive to certain misbehaved programs! :-) Another difficulty I had was with my version of "Twin" (spreadsheet). Twin's auto-detection code on the monitor-type does some reads and writes at B000:0-F. If it detects memory there, then it assumes that you have a Hercules card (not QEMM with back-filled memory as I had). Such programming style _may_ yield problems with ANY multitasker. By the way, I did receive written correspondence from Quarterdeck regarding my questions about problems with VGA 320x200x256 virtualization. They confirmed that they were aware of the problems and were "working on them." This is not terribly satisfying in light of the fact that the problems have been around since version 2.22 (and we are now at version 2.26). One positive statement is that they advised me to _not_ get the upgrade at this time because it wouldn't necessarily have the fix that I wanted. (Note: It took several weeks to answer my letter!) - DWG - Dwight W. Gordon, Ph.D. | 913-532-5600 | gordon@eecea.eece.ksu.edu Electrical & Computer Engineering Department | dwgordon@ksuvm.bitnet Kansas State University - Durland Hall | rutgers!ksuvax1!eecea!gordon Manhattan, KS 66506 | {pyramid,ucsd}!ncr-sd!ncrwic!ksuvax1!eecea!gordon