edwong@bucsf.bu.edu (Edward Wong) (04/19/91)
Has anyone tried out this DOS yet? I heard it is released. -- 8) _ _ | user's name: Edward Wong |_ |\ \ / /\ |_) |\ | ARPA: edwong@bucsf.bu.edu |_ |/ \^/ /==\ | \ |/ | UUCP: bucsf.bu.edu!edwong
ts@uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi) (04/20/91)
In article <EDWONG.91Apr18212121@bucsf.bu.edu> edwong@bucsf.bu.edu writes: >Has anyone tried out this DOS yet? I heard it is released. There has been information about it in other MsDos oriented newsgroups. Please let's also note before the discussion baloons that a discussion of DOS 5.0 does not fit within comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d themes. ................................................................... Prof. Timo Salmi Moderating at garbo.uwasa.fi anonymous ftp archives 128.214.12.37 School of Business Studies, University of Vaasa, SF-65101, Finland Internet: ts@chyde.uwasa.fi Funet: gado::salmi Bitnet: salmi@finfun
smith@NCoast.ORG (Phil Smith) (04/20/91)
As quoted from <EDWONG.91Apr18212121@bucsf.bu.edu> by edwong@bucsf.bu.edu (Edward Wong): +--------------- | Has anyone tried out this DOS yet? I heard it is released. | -- DR DOS 5.0 (that's Digital Research) is out (at least a month now) MS DOS 5.0 (Microsoft) has not 'officially' been released.
rxcob@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Owen Baker) (04/21/91)
edwong@bucsf.bu.edu (Edward Wong) writes: >Has anyone tried out this DOS yet? I heard it is released. I have had a cut down Beta release for a few weeks which had only the COMMAND.COM interpreter and DOSSHELL. Once (if) we get the full Beta release I will post a report to the net if anyone is interested, but briefly the main things I have noticed are: 1. The internal commands within the command interpreter such as dir and copy now have a /? parameter to display usage instructions. 2. COMMAND.COM is approximately 43Kb in size vs 25-26Kb for v3.3. Im not sure what the size of the memory resident portion is yet. 3. The DOS Shell is now graphics based and looks very similiar to Windows 3. I have not heard that it has been officially released yet. Anyone know??? +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Owen Baker | | odb@bodoni.csu.rmit.oz.au RMIT Novell - BODONI/ODB | | CSU, RMIT, Melbourne, Vic. Australia. Telephone (61) (3) 660-2038 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) (04/22/91)
In article <1991Apr21.004302.14658@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au> rxcob@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Owen Baker) writes: >edwong@bucsf.bu.edu (Edward Wong) writes: >1. The internal commands within the command interpreter such as dir and copy > now have a /? parameter to display usage instructions. Users at a complete loss can type HELP and you will see a list of ALL available commands. >2. COMMAND.COM is approximately 43Kb in size vs 25-26Kb for v3.3. Im not > sure what the size of the memory resident portion is yet. The kernal in DOS 5.0 can relocate itself to the UMB in 286s+, and as well, on 386+ systems, you can relocate TSRs and devices such that they are also in the UMB. As a result, even with some 10 TSRs and devices, you can still get numbers like 623k free conventional memory with things like QEMM 5.11 etc. >3. The DOS Shell is now graphics based and looks very similiar to Windows 3. The DOS shell still isn't fantastically impressive, and people planning on living off this should likely check out DR DOS 5.0, but it DOES include a task switcher and a few other nifty features. >I have not heard that it has been officially released yet. Anyone know??? They are on Release Candidate 3 last I heard. It will not be offic- ially releassed until sometime late in the summer at least. ./*- -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ storm@cs.mcgill.ca McGill University It's 11pm, do YOU Marc Wandschneider Montreal, CANADA know what time it is? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
hartnegg@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de (Klaus Hartnegg) (04/22/91)
storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes: > The kernal in DOS 5.0 can relocate itself to the UMB in 286s+, and >as well, on 386+ systems, you can relocate TSRs and devices such that they >are also in the UMB. As a result, even with some 10 TSRs and devices, you >can still get numbers like 623k free conventional memory with things like >QEMM 5.11 etc. I have 645k free conventional memory with Dos 3.3 and Qemm 5.11 with several devices and TSR's installed. No, it's not a typo, I really have 645k free, it is definitively conventional memory and I am really running Dos 3.3. So why should I upgrade? Is 5.0 any faster? Does DESQview 2.3 work without any problems? What about Norton Commander and all the Norton Utilities? And Turbo Profiler, Turbo Debugger 386? And what will be the price? -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Klaus Hartnegg, Kleist-Str. 7, D-7835 Teningen, Germany | include standard Bitnet : hartnegg@dfrruf1 or hartnegg@cernvm | disclaimer here! Internet : hartnegg@ibm.ruf.uni-freiburg.de |
storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) (04/23/91)
In article <1991Apr22.113002.4147@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de> hartnegg@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de (Klaus Hartnegg) writes: >I have 645k free conventional memory with Dos 3.3 and Qemm 5.11 with >several devices and TSR's installed. No, it's not a typo, I really have >645k free, it is definitively conventional memory and I am really running >Dos 3.3. > >So why should I upgrade? Is 5.0 any faster? Online help, large partitions on the hard drive, and a nifty new shell (oooooh). >Does DESQview 2.3 work without any problems? >What about Norton Commander and all the Norton Utilities? >And Turbo Profiler, Turbo Debugger 386? We have used pretty well everything including things like SideKick and have encountered no problems whatsoever... >And what will be the price? Probably what DOS normally goes for ~$75.... -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ storm@cs.mcgill.ca McGill University It's 11pm, do YOU Marc Wandschneider Montreal, CANADA know what time it is? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
frotz@dri.com (Frotz) (04/23/91)
smith@NCoast.ORG (Phil Smith) writes:
]As quoted from <EDWONG.91Apr18212121@bucsf.bu.edu> by edwong@bucsf.bu.edu (Edward Wong):
]+---------------
]| Has anyone tried out this DOS yet? I heard it is released.
]DR DOS 5.0 (that's Digital Research) is out (at least a month now)
]MS DOS 5.0 (Microsoft) has not 'officially' been released.
Sorry, don't mean to fan this:-} It has been out 10-11 months
(sometime in May 1990)! Follow-ups re-directed to
comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc.
--
John "Frotz" Fa'atuai frotz@dri.com (email@domain)
Digital Research, Inc. uunet!drivax!frotz (bang!email)Conrad.Bullock@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Conrad Bullock) (04/23/91)
In article <1991Apr22.113002.4147@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>, hartnegg@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de (Klaus Hartnegg) writes: |> storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes: |> > The kernal in DOS 5.0 can relocate itself to the UMB in 286s+, and |> |> >as well, on 386+ systems, you can relocate TSRs and devices such |> that they |> >are also in the UMB. As a result, even with some 10 TSRs and |> devices, you |> >can still get numbers like 623k free conventional memory with things |> like |> >QEMM 5.11 etc. |> |> I have 645k free conventional memory with Dos 3.3 and Qemm 5.11 with |> several devices and TSR's installed. No, it's not a typo, I really |> have |> 645k free, it is definitively conventional memory and I am really |> running |> Dos 3.3. OK, you are obviously talking about a Mono system whereby you have extended the DOS area to 704K (or 736K with CGA). Of course under DOS 5 you can do this too, which would give you an extra 64K, or 687K free. (You must be doing this, because normally there only IS 640K of DOS memory) I have tried running a DOS 5 Beta - with DOS loaded into the HMA, (BUFFERS live up there too), and plenty of TSRs loaded high. Until yesterday I had found no programs that wouldn't work (More on that in a moment). DOS 5 with itself loaded into HMA is definitely smaller than DOS 3.3 - if I run 4DOS as the primary shell, I have 626K free - out of 640K on a VGA system. SHARE does not have to be loaded for large partitions either. QEMM 5.11 didn't have any problems whatsoever, and even Manifest had no problem, saying that DOS was living in the HMA. |> So why should I upgrade? Is 5.0 any faster? |> |> Does DESQview 2.3 work without any problems? |> What about Norton Commander and all the Norton Utilities? |> And Turbo Profiler, Turbo Debugger 386? All of those programs work fine. However, yesterday I discovered that the Borland C++ protected mode compilers will not work with DOS 5 loaded high - there is an immediate Exception #13 from QEMM when I run it (I did not try it with DOS 5 loaded high with HIMEM.SYS instead of QEMM). There is no problem with DOS 5 loaded low. However, when running under DesqView under QEMM and DOS 5 (whether loaded low OR high), the protected mode compilers work OK until you try and run a program - when the compiler screen swaps back, BCX aborts with a "Memory Manager cannot read from disk" error. No problems at all running BCX under DV under DOS 4. I have yet to track down the exact source of this problem. Another point with DV is that because the lowest 64K of memory cannot be paged in or out with QEMM/DV, running DOS 5 will not increase the size of your biggest DV windows much (if at all) - DV in fact seems to simply pad out to the 64K mark. (You may be able to load more into high memory before you start, but I haven't tried this). -- Conrad Bullock | Domain: conrad@comp.vuw.ac.nz Victoria University of Wellington, | or: conrad@cavebbs.gen.nz New Zealand. | Fidonet: 3:771/130 | BBS: The Cave BBS +64 4 643429
schwalbe@pinocchio.Encore.COM (Jim Schwalbe) (04/24/91)
In article <1991Apr22.113002.4147@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de> hartnegg@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de (Klaus Hartnegg) writes: >storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes: > >> The kernal in DOS 5.0 can relocate itself to the UMB in 286s+, and >>as well, on 386+ systems, you can relocate TSRs and devices such that they >>are also in the UMB. As a result, even with some 10 TSRs and devices, you >>can still get numbers like 623k free conventional memory with things like >>QEMM 5.11 etc. > >I have 645k free conventional memory with Dos 3.3 and Qemm 5.11 with >several devices and TSR's installed. No, it's not a typo, I really have >645k free, it is definitively conventional memory and I am really running >Dos 3.3. > Wow, that's a good trick. How can you do that with only 640K of "conventional memory" to start with? Are you using the first 64K of "high memory" (640K-1M) as "conventional memory" which precludes the use of some video modes but gets you 704K? .---------------------------------------------------------------------------. : Jim Schwalbe .----------------. "Half of what I say is : : Hardware Research Group .--+-------------. | meaningless; but I say it : : Encore Computer Corp. | | E N C O R E | | so that the other half may : : Mail: schwalbe@ | `-------------+--' reach you." : : encore.com `----------------' - Kahil Gibran : `---------------------------------------------------------------------------'
ts@uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi) (04/24/91)
: >Wow, that's a good trick. How can you do that with only 640K of "conventional >memory" to start with? Are you using the first 64K of "high memory" (640K-1M) >as "conventional memory" which precludes the use of some video modes but gets >you 704K? : Folks please! This is interesting, but let's followup eg to comp.os.msdos.apps or comp.os.msdos.programmer. Dos 5.0 is a fully commercial product, and the current line of discussion does not relate in any way to the original c.b.i.p.d problem that started the thread. ................................................................... Prof. Timo Salmi Moderating at garbo.uwasa.fi anonymous ftp archives 128.214.12.37 School of Business Studies, University of Vaasa, SF-65101, Finland Internet: ts@chyde.uwasa.fi Funet: gado::salmi Bitnet: salmi@finfun
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr22.113002.4147@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de> hartnegg@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de (Klaus Hartnegg) writes: >storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes: > >> The kernal in DOS 5.0 can relocate itself to the UMB in 286s+, and >>as well, on 386+ systems, you can relocate TSRs and devices such that they >>are also in the UMB. As a result, even with some 10 TSRs and devices, you >>can still get numbers like 623k free conventional memory with things like >>QEMM 5.11 etc. > >I have 645k free conventional memory with Dos 3.3 and Qemm 5.11 with >several devices and TSR's installed. No, it's not a typo, I really have >645k free, it is definitively conventional memory and I am really running >Dos 3.3. > >So why should I upgrade? Is 5.0 any faster? > >Does DESQview 2.3 work without any problems? >What about Norton Commander and all the Norton Utilities? >And Turbo Profiler, Turbo Debugger 386? > >And what will be the price? This must be because you have a system, that allows you to map unused lower memory addresses as useable conventional memory, so that total base memory is something like 704K. This is kind of cheating since many people can't do this. (VGA, don't have the chipsets that allow it, etc) These people want to get as much as they can out of 640K base memory which is all most people have in their machines. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
mcastle@mcs213c.cs.umr.edu (Mike Castle {Nexus}) (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr22.113002.4147@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de> hartnegg@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de (Klaus Hartnegg) writes: >I have 645k free conventional memory with Dos 3.3 and Qemm 5.11 with >several devices and TSR's installed. No, it's not a typo, I really have >645k free, it is definitively conventional memory and I am really running >Dos 3.3. And what kind of graphics card do you have??? A friend of mine has something like 704k available (don't remember how much actually free, but I believe it's 640+) but that's only because he has a Hercules graphics card, and maps some of that video memory for use by DOS. I still don't see why they can't make a protected mode version..... -- Mike Castle (Nexus) s087891@umrvma.umr.edu or mcastle@mcs213k.cs.umr.edu Feel lonely? Want someone to send you e-mail? Just post to *.test with a Reply-To: field, and watch your mailbox explode!!