Info-IBMPC@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL ("Info-IBMPC Digest") (06/17/91)
Info-IBMPC Digest Sun, 16 Jun 91 Volume 91 : Issue 145
Today's Editor:
Gregory Hicks - Rota Spain <GHICKS@WSMR-Simtel20.Army.Mil>
Today's Topics:
Any news about MS-DOS 5.0? (2 msgs)
DesqView and DOS 5.0
DOS 5.0 @ $39?
MS-DOS 5.0
Re: MS DOS 5.0 Install procedure
Re: PC Tools PCFORMAT & DOS 5.0 (was DOS 5.0 & QEMM-386 5.12) (4 msgs)
Upgrade policy of DOS 5.0
looking for updated COMMCALL.PAS or Alan Bishop
Send Replies or notes for publication to:
<INFO-IBMPC@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL>
Send requests of an administrative nature (addition to, deletion from
the distribution list, et al) to:
<INFO-IBMPC-REQUEST@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL>
Archives of past issues of the Info-IBMPC Digest are available by FTP
only from WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL in directory PD2:<ARCHIVES.IBMPC>.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 91 11:56:00 EDT
From: "Kurt Schmidt" <KURT%TITAN%RTI.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu>
Subject: Any news about MS-DOS 5.0?
I have not seen any mail about MD-DOS 5.0, although it has been in stores for
a few days. If I missed it, could you point to the correct list/archive? I
do not have reasonably easy access to USENET/newgroups.
Thanks,
Kurt
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| Internet: kurt@sybil.rti.org | Kurt Schmidt |
| Internet: kurt%sybil@rti.rti.org | Research Triangle Institute |
| Bitnet: KURT@RTI | Research Triangle Park, NC |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| Opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 91 11:22:52 CST
From: Rob <C08926RC%WUVMD.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu>
Subject: Any news about MS-DOS 5.0?
>I have not seen any mail about MD-DOS 5.0, although it has been in
> stores for a few days.
I'd like to see any info on it also. New owners, how do you like it? Is
it worth the upgrade price ($39 after rebate at Egghead)?
Rob
------------------------------
Date: 12 Jun 91 20:22:30 GMT
From: phil@hansen.ncd.com (Phil Graham)
Subject: DesqView and DOS 5.0
I called Quarterdeck today and asked them about DOS 5.0 and DESQVIEW.
What Tech suport told me was the following:
- There is a new upgrade of DesqView to support DOS 5.0 (2.34 is new
version) This update is needed to fix some "small" problems with DOS 5
and DesqView.
- Update cost is $10 (I purchased Desqview 3 weeks ago :-(
- The memory management of QEMM and DOS 5.0 can not co-exist. This
means that you have to pick DOS 5.0 memory management or QEMM
- There are some reasons to stick with QEMM since the DOS 5.0 memory
management is not as effecient as QEMM. Also the benefit that you gain
my loading DOS in high memory is lost since DesqView can not load
itself in high memory. This means that the actual amount of memory
available in the first 640 KB is less than if you leave DOS 5 in low
memory and run QEMM.
- Since I am running DOS 4.01 now moving to DOS 5.0 w/o loading DOS
in high memory will still give me a 10K memory benefit (in the first
640KB), if you are running DOS 3.3 then you will not see this gain.
Well It is worth a try... DOS 5.0 can be purchased for 39.95 out here
with a 20 dollar "instant rebate" Seems like the thing to do!
If any one actually trys DOS 5 and DesqView please let me know!
Phil
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 91 11:55:45 CST
From: Rob <C08926RC%WUVMD.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu>
Subject: DOS 5.0 @ $39?
Yep. Egghead Software is selling the MS-DOS 5.0 upgrade package for
$39, after a $20 mail-in rebate. I don't know if you have to prove
ownership of an older DOS or not...
Rob
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 91 14:00:16 EDT
From: James_Williams%ESS%NIAID%NIH3PLUS.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Subject: MS-DOS 5.0
I purchased and installed MS-DOS 5.0 on two computers. One was a
stand- alone 286, the other a networked 386. Getting it to work on my
network (3COM 3+) will require some work, but otherwise it is a good
package. It is not another DOS 4.0!
I have little to no respect for either DOS or Microsoft, but I have to
admit, I was impressed.
Its load into high memory (a real plus on my 286). It has an
interesting icon driven interface (It's way to early to say if I like
it). The install program is amazing (I could not believe Microsoft had
written it). It has an uninstall feature in case DOS 5.0 bombs (I have
used this feature once already and it worked). It has an undelete
command. It has aliasing. It remembers the last 10(?) command you
entered, and allows you to edit the command line. It has a mediocre
help feature. A lot of old commands have new features: for example DIR
seperates file names and directory names, allows you to pick a sort
order, and searches subdirectories for matches, backup tells you how
many disks you'll need, if allows redirection for input...
There is a lot I didn't mention and probably a bunch I have yet to
find. Still I haven't gotten this much software for $40 in years.
--------------------------------------------
| James Williams |
| Bitnet: JWW%ESS%NIAID@NIH3PLUS.BITNET |
| Internet: JWW@ESS.NIAID.PC.NIAID.NIH.GOV |
--------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 13 Jun 91 13:20:07 GMT
From: yev_g@athena.mit.edu (Yevgeny Gurevich)
Subject: Re: MS DOS 5.0 Install procedure
In article <1991Jun13.062855.16838@beach.csulb.edu>
sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes:
> What does the setup procedure (install) for msdos 5.0 do precisely
>that makes it different from the old way of format, sys, and copying
>the dos files. Does it write to the install disk also ?
Unlike previous install disks, none of the disks that come with DOS 5.0
are bootable. This makes it easy for MSoft to demand that DOS be
already installed - if you didn't have DOS already, you wouldn't be
able to use the disks. The disks are write-protected and the install
program uncompresses the DOS files onto your disk using the expand.exe
program first encountered in Windows 3.0.
You will need to have at least one disk for the uninstall data that DOS
5.0 requires that you make (I used a 1.2 meg 5.25"). IMPORTANT - this
disk (uninstall) MUST be in A: The install program will NOT let you
change source drives as installs in Win 3 did, for instance. What is
interesting is that my install disks wwere in B: since I bought 3.5"
media and can't switch my A and B drives (CMOS setup doesn't affect
them for some reason and my only recourse is ASSIGN). DOS installed
fine from B even though the booklet suggested that everything must be
in A. Go figure.
I experimented some more with Himem + EMM386.EXE combination and
determined that the DOS 5.0 + QEMM is much better for memory
management. I get the max ram and still have the full use of Extended
AND Expanded memory. I save about 11K using QEMM.
Still DOSSING away,
Yev
[ Yevgeny Gurevich
[ 500 Memorial Drive
[ Cambridge, Mass. 02139
[ _______________________
[ yev_g@athena.mit.edu
------------------------------
Date: 13 Jun 91 17:31:16 GMT
From: todd@pinhead.pegasus.com (Todd Ogasawara)
Subject: Re: PC Tools PCFORMAT & DOS 5.0 (was DOS 5.0 & QEMM-386 5.12)
Summary: PCFORMAT 6.0 fails under DOS 5.0
In article <1991Jun11.215901.22013@pinhead.pegasus.com>
todd@pinhead.pegasus.com (Todd Ogasawara) writes:
>Does anyone have any advice on how to best install MS-DOS 5.0 and
>QEMM-386 5.12 together? In specific:
>
>1. Is it safe to set DOS=HIGH,UMB in CONFIG.SYS when using QEMM instead
> of DOS 5.0's HIMEM.SYS?
>2. Is it safe to use QEMM's LOADHI instead of DOS' high memory loaders?
>3. Does DOSKEY have any problems with QEMM?
Thanks to everyone who response via e-mail to my net-query. I loaded
DOS 5.0 on my Gateway 386/33 last night.
The answers to my questions are:
1. If you have QEMM-386, don't place DOS=HIGH,UMB in CONFIG.SYS.
DOS=HIGH sufficient. Let QEMM load the drivers and other programs into
high memory. This has worked out fine on my system. I have 622K of base
RAM free now. DOS was also "smart" enough NOT to install HIMEM.SYS in
my CONFIG.SYS since I already had QEMM386.SYS in there.
2. Yes, QEMM's LOADHI works fine under DOS 5.0.
3. DOSKEY seems to work fine with QEMM running.
I have run into one problem though. PC Tools 6.0 PCFORMAT does not work
under DOS 5.0. It reports "Wrong DOS version" when I try to run it.
Does anyone know if PCFORMAT in PC Tools 7.0 works under DOS 5.0? I am
still waiting for my upgrade to arrive. Other PC Tools 6.0 software
seems to work ok though (including COMPRESS).
Todd Ogasawara ::: Hawaii Medical Service Association
Internet ::: todd@pinhead.pegasus.com
Telephone ::: (808) 536-9162 ext. 7
------------------------------
Date: 13 Jun 91 22:42:31 GMT
From: reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim Reisert)
Subject: Re: PC Tools PCFORMAT & DOS 5.0 (was DOS 5.0 & QEMM-386 5.12)
In article <1991Jun13.173116.143@pinhead.pegasus.com>,
Todd Ogasawara writes:
>Does anyone know if PCFORMAT in PC Tools 7.0 works under DOS 5.0?
It better! Central Point Software provided the MIRROR, UNDELETE and
UNFORMAT programs to Microsoft - they better have gotten their own
FORMAT right for version 7. In fact, DOS 5.0 probably *HAS* the format
from PC tools, otherwise, the UNFORMAT stuff just wouldn't work.
- Jim
"The opinions expressed here in no way represent the views of Digital
Equipment Corporation."
James J. Reisert Internet: reisert@mast.enet.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corp. UUCP: ...decwrl!mast.enet!reisert
146 Main Street Voice: 508-493-5747
Maynard, MA 01754 FAX: 508-493-0395
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jun 91 00:28:29 GMT
From: rschmidt@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (roy schmidt)
Subject: Re: PC Tools PCFORMAT & DOS 5.0 (was DOS 5.0 & QEMM-386 5.12)
Summary: Cooperation to the hilt!
Keywords: cross-license
todd@pinhead.pegasus.com (Todd Ogasawara) writes:
[comments here on qemm deleted]
>I have run into one problem though. PC Tools 6.0 PCFORMAT does not work
>under DOS 5.0. It reports "Wrong DOS version" when I try to run it. Does
>anyone know if PCFORMAT in PC Tools 7.0 works under DOS 5.0? I am still
>waiting for my upgrade to arrive. Other PC Tools 6.0 software seems to work
>ok though (including COMPRESS).
And little wonder! I just received a flyer from Central Point
announcing a cross-licensing agreement with Microsoft. MS is using
CP's undelete, unformat, mirror, and format programs, and CP gets to
use the "MS-DOS 5.0 look and feel" in their PC-Tools version 7.0!
So if you want to use PC-FORMAT version 7.0, just use the format.com
that came with your DOS 5.0 -- it's the same!
Now I wonder if they managed to make PC-Cache work with Win3.0?
And just what is a DOS 5.0 look and feel? Maybe we should ask Lotus
for an interpretation. :-)
Roy Schmidt
Indiana University
Graduate School of Business
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jun 91 22:02:57 GMT
From: todd@pinhead.pegasus.com (Todd Ogasawara)
Subject: Re: PC Tools PCFORMAT & DOS 5.0 (was DOS 5.0 & QEMM-386 5.12)
Keywords: cross-license
In article <1991Jun14.002829.13057@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
rschmidt@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (roy schmidt) writes:
>todd@pinhead.pegasus.com (Todd Ogasawara) writes:
>>I have run into one problem though. PC Tools 6.0 PCFORMAT does not work
>>under DOS 5.0. It reports "Wrong DOS version" when I try to run it. Does
>So if you want to use PC-FORMAT version 7.0, just use the format.com
>that came with your DOS 5.0 -- it's the same!
Good point... I actually am using the FORMAT that came with DOS. My
comment about PC Tools 6.0's FORMAT not working was made because it was
the first application (commerical, shareware, or public domain) that
didn't work "as is" under DOS 5.0. Others rightly pointed out that I
forgot to try SETVER to see if it works under those conditions. In any
case, I'm sure my PC Tools 7.0 is on its way and everything will be "as
usual" soon.
>Now I wonder if they managed to make PC-Cache work with Win3.0?
That would be nice... I noticed that PC-Cache 6.0 and Windows 3.0
really messed up my hard disk (I lost megabytes of stuff). I ended up
going back to SMARTDRV.SYS for disk caching.
>And just what is a DOS 5.0 look and feel? Maybe we should ask Lotus for
>an interpretation. :-)
My guess is "DOS 5.0 look and feel" refers to the new DOSSHELL provided
with 5.0. If you didn't look at it because of memories of that awful
so-called shell provided with 4.0, you should take a few minutes to
look at this new one. Although I would guess that most of will never
use it, it looks like something that neophyte users might find helpful.
It has a much cleaner design than the DOSSHELL that came with 4.0. I
still prefer using DESQview-386 or Windows 3.0 though.
-- Todd Ogasawara
::: Hawaii Medical Service Association Internet :::
todd@pinhead.pegasus.com Telephone ::: (808) 536-9162 ext. 7
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 91 13:08:00 CDT
From: "Ronald Hahm @ University of Northern Iowa"
Subject: Upgrade policy of DOS 5.0
I do not know if this has been alread discussed. What is the upgrade
policy of users of DOS 4.01? (This is if there is such a policy on
DOS). How can on get an upgrade?
| Ronald Hahm
| Graduate Assistant
| College of Business Administration
| University of Northern Iowa
| Cedar Falls, Iowa 50613
INTERNET ADDRESS HAHM5247@ISCSVAX.UNI.EDU
------------------------------
Date: 17 Jun 91 04:01:30 GMT
From: u5533129@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au
Subject: looking for updated COMMCALL.PAS or Alan Bishop
On SIMTEL there is some Turbo Pascal v3.0 code in a file called
COMMCALL.ARC, written by Alan Bishop. It seems to work well. I also
have the source of a terminal emulator, written by one Steve Nutt,
which uses Alan Bishop's code.
I have put a lot of work into modifying Steve's terminal emulator, and
now want to port it to a later version of Turbo Pascal. Unfotunately,
Alan's stuff is won't compile under later versions of TP. (It makes
extensive use of the * operator in inline code).
Has anyone been through the exercise of rewriting the code in COMMCALL
for later versions of Turbo Pascal?
Alternatively, can anyone tell me where I might contact Alan? The last
address I have for him is bishop@ecsvax. I don't seem to get any
response when I send mail there.
Many Thanks,
Peter Summers
u5533129@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au
------------------------------
End of Info-IBMPC Digest V91 #145
*********************************
-------