klee@grads.cs.ubc.ca (Kenneth Lee) (08/23/89)
I am currently considering the purchase of DESQview 2.2 or 386 depending on whether I end up buying a 286 or a 386 for my next system. In the August issue of BYTE, there is a two page ad for the following Quarterdeck products: DESQview 2.2, DESQview 386, QEMM, DESQview API Toolkit. Has anyone in netland used any of these products? If so, what do you think of the products that you have used? Would you use MS-Windows instead of DESQview? +---------------------------------------+-----------------------+ | Ken Lee | klee@cs.ubc.ca | | Department of Computer Science | klee@cs.ubc.cdn | | University of British Columbia | uunet!ubc-cs!klee | | Vancouver, BC, Canada | (604) 228-3061 | +---------------------------------------+-----------------------+
davidr@hplsla.HP.COM (David M. Reed) (08/25/89)
I LOVE DESQview, and use it all the time. In my support position I install and help many people with MSWindows, and I consider it a VERY poor environment. Yes, there are some wonderful programs that run in that environment (like Excel), but it is still a poor environment, and a very unfriendly piece of code. I have never found a reason to recommend someone buying MSWindows. DESQview has true multi-tasking (even on a 286 system with EEMS), while MSWindows can not do it properly even in Windows/386. DESQview cares very little about your hardware, and is easy to modify if the need arises, while you have to re-install MSWindows if your change your mouse or video display. DESQview allows a DOS window to behave very much as though DESQview were not running, while MSWindows needs to have virtually every program you want to run in its DOS window defined in the WIN.INI file or with a .PIF file. DESQview does not care about things like psuedo drivers for printers, while MSWindows MUST talk to the hardware, and even then may not work properly. DESQview is fast and easy in switching between programs, while MSWindows is somewhat laborious (though almost tolerable on a fast 386). DESQview will run most standard DOS programs (even a lot of "unfriendly" programs like MSWindows), while MSWindows has a lot of problems running some popular programs. MSWindows has a slight advantage in cut and paste between windows, but in DESQview it can be done even without a mouse. (DESQview does not need a mouse, while MSWindows almost requires one.) I love DESQview's macro capability; it saves a lot of time and effort. We typically have our LAN cards defined as COM2, but MSWindows will mess up the card (often requiring a hard reboot), even if you do not use any program requiring access to COM2. And I can go on, and on....
JLI@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (08/25/89)
In article <5190037@hplsla.HP.COM>, davidr@hplsla.HP.COM (David M. Reed) writes: > I LOVE DESQview, and use it all the time. In my support position I install > and help many people with MSWindows, and I consider it a VERY poor environment. > Yes, there are some wonderful programs that run in that environment (like > Excel), but it is still a poor environment, and a very unfriendly piece of > code. I have never found a reason to recommend someone buying MSWindows. > > DESQview has true multi-tasking (even on a 286 system with EEMS), while > MSWindows can not do it properly even in Windows/386. DESQview cares very > little about your hardware, and is easy to modify if the need arises, while > you have to re-install MSWindows if your change your mouse or video display. > DESQview allows a DOS window to behave very much as though DESQview were > not running, while MSWindows needs to have virtually every program you > want to run in its DOS window defined in the WIN.INI file or with a .PIF > file. DESQview does not care about things like psuedo drivers for printers, > while MSWindows MUST talk to the hardware, and even then may not work > properly. DESQview is fast and easy in switching between programs, while > MSWindows is somewhat laborious (though almost tolerable on a fast 386). > DESQview will run most standard DOS programs (even a lot of "unfriendly" > programs like MSWindows), while MSWindows has a lot of problems running > some popular programs. MSWindows has a slight advantage in cut and paste > between windows, but in DESQview it can be done even without a mouse. > (DESQview does not need a mouse, while MSWindows almost requires one.) > > I love DESQview's macro capability; it saves a lot of time and effort. > We typically have our LAN cards defined as COM2, but MSWindows will mess > up the card (often requiring a hard reboot), even if you do not use any > program requiring access to COM2. > > And I can go on, and on.... I agree! It works great on LAN systems. If you don't intend to use window applications (i.e. PageMaker, Word ... etc) very frequently, DesqView is a good choice.
len@netsys.Netsys.COM (Len Rose) (08/25/89)
Has anyone used Starlan networking with Desqview? Are there any problems or special considerations involved with same? I'd like to be able to bring up the Starlan software under DESQview, and from what i've read here in this group, it seems quite feasable. Meanwhile, is anyone using DESQview on an AT&T 6300 Plus? Thanks for any comments. Len
randy@chinet.chi.il.us (Randy Suess) (08/26/89)
In article <9710@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> JLI@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
]I agree! It works great on LAN systems. If you don't intend to
]use window applications (i.e. PageMaker, Word ... etc) very frequently,
]DesqView is a good choice.
Oh? I run Windows/286, Excell, AMI, and many other Windows
programs under Desqview on my 386 machine. I get even more
memory for windows aps then under dos, because I can move
all my tsr's and device drivers into hi memory with loadhi.
-randy
--
Randy Suess
randy@chinet.chi.il.uspalowoda@fiver.UUCP (Bob Palowoda) (08/27/89)
From article <5190037@hplsla.HP.COM>, by davidr@hplsla.HP.COM (David M. Reed): [some text removed] > > DESQview has true multi-tasking (even on a 286 system with EEMS), while > MSWindows can not do it properly even in Windows/386. DESQview cares very I got to stick my two cents in here. For many years I tried many different multi-tasking programs for DOS and even if some worked well like DESQview I would eventually find some way to crash the system. I have tried DESQview, VM386, Taskview, MSwindows, Double DOS etc. One of the *most* important things to me is running a multi-tasking envirnment that dosn't crash the system. Performance and limited memory where not a concern. What I didn't like was running some program that would lock up the system while all the other programs where doing disk writes and than corrupting my disk fat tables. Than after that I would have to reformat over 200meg and reinstall the software. The problem seems to be when running programs compiled with MSC 286 (could be others). What happens is that one program running in a window writes to the address space of a program running in another window. If it writes to the execution code of the other window it alters the the other a number of things can happen, most of the time it locks up the system or worse writes incorrect data to the disk (sometimes not updateing the fat tables). This has happened to me more than once. I started running DOS under UNIX with a dos emulator and these problems don't seem to occur. The multi-tasking of dos under unix seems to run more smoothly. Slower but doing alot of disk writes dosn't bring the system to it's knees like it does with Desqview. And you get a full 640k in the dos partition. Of coarse thier is drawbacks to this. It is expensive and your sure to find some software it cannot run under the emulator. ---Bob -- Bob Palowoda *Home of Fiver BBS* login: bbs Home {sun,dasiy}!ys2!fiver!palowoda (415)-623-8809 1200/2400 Work {sun,pyramid,decwrl}!megatest!palowoda (415)-623-8806 1200/2400/9600/19200 Voice: (415)-623-7495 Public access UNIX system
arnesen@aftp.UUCP (Geir Arnesen) (09/01/89)
In article <4808@ubc-cs.UUCP> klee@grads.cs.ubc.ca (Kenneth Lee) writes: >I am currently considering the purchase of DESQview 2.2 or 386 >depending on whether I end up buying a 286 or a 386 for my next >system. In the August issue of BYTE, there is a two page ad for >the following Quarterdeck products: DESQview 2.2, DESQview 386, >QEMM, DESQview API Toolkit. Has anyone in netland used any of >these products? If so, what do you think of the products that >you have used? Would you use MS-Windows instead of DESQview? > >+---------------------------------------+-----------------------+ >| Ken Lee | klee@cs.ubc.ca | >| Department of Computer Science | klee@cs.ubc.cdn | >| University of British Columbia | uunet!ubc-cs!klee | >| Vancouver, BC, Canada | (604) 228-3061 | >+---------------------------------------+-----------------------+ It depends whether you want multitasking possibilites or not. With a AT 286 you would not get multitasking with the MS-windows,- you get it with the Desqview. The problem is the memory handling when you choose the AT. I run an AT286 with Desqview 2.2 and 4mB ram, used as extended. And with an extra card (All charge card) - a MMU which is placed between the 286 processor and the processor socket. This card does the same which is possible to do with software on a 386 (Qemm.sys and 386max). This card handles the memory, and gives me possibilities to run programs up to 576k (in memory) in conventional memory and the same in expanded memory. (The all charge card emulates expanded memory out of extended, and lifts the device drivers up in an area above 640 k which is used as extended mem.) Regards Geir Arnesen /* * Geir Arnesen - Aftenposten * adress: Akersgt.51, P.b. 1178, Sentrum, 0107 Oslo 1, Norway * UUCP: ...mcvax!ndosl!aftp!arnesen * Internet: arnesen@aftenp.uu.no * Phone: +47-2-863232 Priv: +47-2-809133 FAX: +47-2-426325 TLX: 71230 aftp N */
larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) (09/04/89)
In article <519@aftp.UUCP>, arnesen@aftp.UUCP (Geir Arnesen) writes: > I run an AT286 with Desqview 2.2 and 4mB ram, used as extended. And with > an extra card (All charge card) - a MMU which is placed between the > 286 processor and the processor socket. This card does the same which > is possible to do with software on a 386 (Qemm.sys and 386max). This card > handles the memory, and gives me possibilities to run programs up to > 576k (in memory) in conventional memory and the same in expanded memory. > > (The all charge card emulates expanded memory out of extended, and lifts > the device drivers up in an area above 640 k which is used as extended mem.) I have an all charge card in one of my machines (Northgate 20 mhz 1 wait state 80286 "super micro") and have had major problems with the unit when the system was running a 2372b set at the secondary address (C800) due to the fact that the machine was running with a VGA monitor. The ACC worked great when the system was running with the controller set at the primary address (CC00) when running EGA - but for some reason the ACC didn't work well with the 2372 installed at C800. -- Larry Snyder uucp:iuvax!ndcheg!ndmath!nstar!larry The Northern Star Usenet Distribution Site, Notre Dame, IN USA