slc1290@hare.udev.cdc.com (steve chesney x4662) (05/02/91)
SOme discussion has been made of the upcoming MS-DOS 5 and its ability to locate itself and maybe TSRs to Upper Memory Blocks. My question: does MS-DOS 5 know how to relocate these things, or will the user still have to use a QEMM or MOVE'M type product to do this? -- Steve Chesney Control Data Corporation slc1290@hare.udev.cdc.com
ccorzine@hmcvax.claremont.edu (05/06/91)
In article <32733@shamash.cdc.com>, slc1290@hare.udev.cdc.com (steve chesney x4662) writes: > SOme discussion has been made of the upcoming MS-DOS 5 and its ability to > locate itself and maybe TSRs to Upper Memory Blocks. My question: does > MS-DOS 5 know how to relocate these things, or will the user still have to > use a QEMM or MOVE'M type product to do this? Well, MS-DOS 5.0 definitely locates itself in high-memory, and it does have a load-hi program. I have not messed with it much, by on the system we have tried it on, MS-DOS 4.01 leaves 526k free after all device drivers are load, with QEMM that figure goes up to about 590k, and MS-DOS 5.0 tops off at 596k of free memory. The only problem that I have noted so far is that MS-DOS 5.0 doesn't like Smart-Drive if the hard disk is over 120MB, but I am sure that there is a fix for this in the works. Other than that, it works terrific.
awhite@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Andrew J. White) (05/06/91)
In article <1991May5.191257.1@hmcvax.claremont.edu> ccorzine@hmcvax.claremont.edu writes: >In article <32733@shamash.cdc.com>, slc1290@hare.udev.cdc.com (steve chesney x4662) writes: >> locate itself and maybe TSRs to Upper Memory Blocks. My question: does >> MS-DOS 5 know how to relocate these things, or will the user still have to >> use a QEMM or MOVE'M type product to do this? >Well, MS-DOS 5.0 definitely locates itself in high-memory, and it does have >a load-hi program. I have not messed with it much, by on the system we have >tried it on, MS-DOS 4.01 leaves 526k free after all device drivers are load, >with QEMM that figure goes up to about 590k, and MS-DOS 5.0 tops off at I am running a MS-DOS 5.0 and QEMM 5.1 combination, and with DOS=HIGH in my config.sys and using QEMM's loadhi.com and loadhi.sys to load my TSRs and device drivers into high memory, I have 628K of conventional memory free... that's with an ANSI driver, a mouse driver, a disk cache, a print spooler and a keyboard enhancer all loaded. Some misbehaved TSRs cause system crashes, but I have not had any more problems than I did under DOS 3.3. Now Windows, however, that's a different story... -- __________________________________________________________________________ Andrew J. White | U. of Pennsylvania | awhite@eniac.seas.upenn.edu Comp. Science 1993 | School of Engineering | whiteaj@clutx.clarkson.edu
phys169@csc.canterbury.ac.nz (05/10/91)
In article <1991May5.191257.1@hmcvax.claremont.edu>, ccorzine@hmcvax.claremont.edu writes: > Well, MS-DOS 5.0 definitely locates itself in high-memory, and it does have > a load-hi program. I have not messed with it much, by on the system we have > tried it on, MS-DOS 4.01 leaves 526k free after all device drivers are load, > with QEMM that figure goes up to about 590k, and MS-DOS 5.0 tops off at > 596k of free memory. Have you (or anybody) compared MSDOS 5 with DRDOS 5? DRDOS seems to do better than that (typically 610K for me), but it must depend on the configuration. Mark Aitchison, Physics, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.