kevin@kosman.UUCP (Kevin O'Gorman) (06/13/91)
Skip the next three (all?) the paragraphs if you don't care about setting the scene. For one thing, this has got to be one of the more stupid things you've heard of today: I'm installing DOS 5.0 with a bottle of wine next to me -- but it's fun and it's my home machine and I'm still able to spell halfway right. You didn't want to know this -- you should have skipped these 3 paragraphs. I've been running some big applications on my 200 MB disk, so I'm upgrading from 4.01. This has been a nuisance because of the memory squeeze, so I'm glad 5 is now available. I hadn't known how cheap it was. I dropped by Egghead a few hours ago and they had a s**tpile of "Upgrade" packages for $39.99. Well, actually priced at $59.99 with a rebate of $20.00 on the spot if you fill out this question- naire. Since I walked in thinking to pay $100+ I was very pleased. I filled out the questionnaire, though I hardly think the answers I gave were typical: I have 5 computers at home of 3 wildly different types -- Dos, Mac and UNIX. This made even answering a bit hard, as is usual when the questions make an assumption contrary to fact. Sorry this price info won't help you outside the USA. --- business starts here --- I installed according to directions. I wanted to make a system floppy, and I copied a bunch of the DOS files to it so it would be more than minimally useful. I created a CONFIG.SYS and an AUTOEXEC.BAT to make things even better. Now the problem: When I have both HIMEM.SYS and EMM386.EXE in CONFIG.SYS, I get a complaint from EMM that this version of HIMEM will cause trouble. What gives? --- Next item --- I have been using Desqview 386 for a couple of weeks only, but I want to keep using it. With this installation, I finally got around to RTFM-ing. So I found I could have been putting DOS resources in high memory. I also found out that I should *not* try to put DOS 4.x buffers there because of a format difference. The question is: does this apply equally to DOS 5 (I have assumed so). And, why when or whether QD will or will not upgrade this to work with DOS 4 or DOS 5????? It seems to me that buffers would be one of the bigger wins for me since I use 40 of the darned things. (As recommended by (I think) Datatree MUMPS, which is my main money-making use of this silly machine anyway). --- results so far --- I'm impressed: 'mem' outside of Desqview reports 633920 largest executable program size and I can't really say how they did it given the 640K limit. Neat. I'm also impressed that with all these changes in memory use all my programs still seem to work, QEMM and Desqview seem happy (and they are a kind of acid test, considering the way they mess around with what's happening). -- Kevin O'Gorman ( kevin@kosman.UUCP, kevin%kosman.uucp@nrc.com ) voice: 805-984-8042 Vital Computer Systems, 5115 Beachcomber, Oxnard, CA 93035 Non-Disclaimer: my boss is me, and he stands behind everything I say.