fireman@s.cs.uiuc.edu (11/29/89)
Basic questions about Windows Will windows (386) allow me to run as many applications programs as possible in a total of 640K or will it use my full 2MB and partition it off. I often would like to run 2 or 3 applications programs each of which need at least 350K and in one case 600K. Is there any way I can simultaneously run a 600K, 400K, and 350K program all at the same time. If not, what good is windows if all of your programs have a DOS access feature. Thanks in advance for answering a simple but important (to me at least) question. Neil
firest r@s.cs.uiuc.edu (11/29/89)
Basic questions about Windows Will windows (386) allow me to run as many applications programs as possible in a total of 640K or will it use my full 2MB and partition it off. I often would like to run 2 or 3 applications programs each of which need at least 350K and in one case 600K. Is there any way I can simultaneously run a 600K, 400K, and 350K program all at the same time. If not, what good is windows if all of your programs have a DOS access feature. Thanks in advance for answering a simple but important (to me at least) 53estion. Neil
malpass@vlsi.ll.mit.edu (Don Malpass) (12/05/89)
In article <213400073@s.csd?ouc.edu> firest r@s.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > >... Basic questions about Windows.... >.... what good is windows .... A few weeks ago I asked that even MORE basic question, since I had tried it and concluded that it was slick but was badly in need of a problem for which it was a solution. The response was underwhelming - NOBODY defended it, and the only people who responded agreed with me that unless you secretly wished you had bought a Mac, Windows was nearly worthless. -- Don Malpass [malpass@LL-vlsi.arpa], [malpass@gandalf.LL.mit.edu] "Why should the TAXPAYERS have to pay for it - let the GOVERNMENT pay instead." [Example of the mentality that got us in this mess.] 12/89
phil@diablo.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (12/05/89)
In article <413@vlsi.ll.mit.edu> malpass@ll-vlsi.arpa.UUCP (Don Malpass) writes: |A few weeks ago I asked that even MORE basic question, since I had |tried it and concluded that it was slick but was badly in need of a |problem for which it was a solution. The response was underwhelming - |NOBODY defended it, and the only people who responded agreed with me |that unless you secretly wished you had bought a Mac, Windows was |nearly worthless. I must not have seen this. For the average office that has to tolerate both Macs and PCs, Excel seems required. And of course, Excel runs under windows. I am also looking forward to Word for Windows, for much the same reason. There's also Micrografx Designer, etc. Finally, there's nothing wrong with wanting a Mac-like interface at PC prices. I think there'll be a whole bunch of money in it, actually. -- Phil Ngai, phil@diablo.amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil AT&T Unix System V.4: Berkeley Unix for 386 PCs!
mms00786@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (12/05/89)
Umm, I guess I differ. I use Windows/386 for multitasking windows and DOS apps. So far, it has worked flawlessly even with the most unforgiving DOS apps. My favorite configuration is Procomm downloading yet another useless file in the background, while I use Lotus Manuscript in the foreground, and just to speed things up, I give Manuscript 2Megs of EMS 4.0 RAM, managed by windows/386. Or, I have a DOS session with an editor, another one to compile source (I write windows progs), and then I switch to Windows to try out my latest fiasco in C! I also know that Windows/386 will run 123 and FoxBase+ Multiuser in fullscreen and window mode, each with its own DOS space. Hope this helps a bit. Milan .
hadgraft@civeng.monash.edu.au (Roger Hadgraft) (12/07/89)
> > A few weeks ago I asked that even MORE basic question, since I had > tried it and concluded that it was slick but was badly in need of a > problem for which it was a solution. The response was underwhelming - > NOBODY defended it, and the only people who responded agreed with me > that unless you secretly wished you had bought a Mac, Windows was > nearly worthless. To see the benefits of Windows (and the Macintosh, and all the other GUIs), you have to forsake your PC mentality. Under DOS we have unrestrained freedom for developers, and unrestrained torment for users trying to learn a plethora of different user interfaces for packages that won't talk to each other. The advantages of Windows are: 1. standard user interface 2. inter-program communication via Clipboard and DDE (Dynamic Data Exchange) 3. multi-tasking (of a kind) However, you won't get these advantages while you want to use it merely as a task switcher. You WILL get these advantages as you steadily junk all your DOS applications, and instead use the excellent Windows applications that are now available. But if you can't wean yourself off Sidekick, don't use Windows! -- Roger Hadgraft | hadgraft@civeng.monash.edu.au Lecturer in Civil Engineering | phone: +61 3 565 4983 Monash University | fax: +61 3 565 3409 Clayton, Vic. 3168. Australia. |