umcarls9@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Charles Carlson) (08/29/90)
I had been sort of confused about what people had been saying regarding the memory available in DR DOS 5.0 for DOS applications. Then I saw an 800 number for DR posted on a BBS so I called and asked myself, this is what they told me: On a 286 machine, with atleast 1 meg, WITHOUT the C&T NEAT chipset, you will have between 585K and 604K available for DOS applications. With the C&T NEAT chipset, you will have 604K to 620K available for DOS applications, which is also what will be available to 386 users. This means you DO NOT! need EMS memory to get the 585K to 604K free, which is what I had assumed from some of the postings. Hope this clears up some confusion for others. For those interested the number is 1-800-443-4200 and it works from Canada too! Charles
marks@pwa-b.uucp (Evan R. Marks) (01/03/91)
I am interested in opinions and information on DR DOS 5.0. I just purchased
it and am interested in compatability problems/issues. So Far I have noticed
the following:
1. Joe Montana Football has problems
2. SYTOS tape backup software will not run
3. Lotus 123 R 3.1 has problems
4. VGA MAHJONGG will not run
Any people knowing how to get these to work, please let me know
thanx
--
Evan R. Marks Pratt & Whitney Aircraft
Sr. Systems Support Analyst 400 Main St. M/S 161-05
Sun Workstation Support East Hartford, CT 06108
{philabs,albion}!pwa-b!marks (203) 565-5444daveg@hpcvra.cv.hp.com. (Dave Guggisberg) (01/05/91)
>> 1. Joe Montana Football has problems
Yes, but Joe typically has a let down just before the play-offs. Look
for things to improve two weeks from now, in the play-offs.
OH, you mean the software game, excuse me!
Dave Guggisberg
Hewlett-Packarddab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) (05/22/91)
In a previous article, proberts@disk.uucp (Phil Roberts) says: > >Why, "according to all reports", is DR DOS 5.0 superior? I have a 386sx20 with 3 megs of ram in my config.sys I have: emm386.sys ansi.sys an ems disk cache prog. that comes with dr dos 5.0 f-driver from f-prot anti virus and clarkson packet drivers in my autoexec.bat I have: CED Command line EDitor gmouse and more packet driver stuff. According to norton 5.0, I have 584k of free conventional memory left. That's pretty superior. -- Douglas Bell "... but that's not important, that's just numbers." dab6@po.cwru.edu Dr. Wu, Math Professor
kens@hplsla.HP.COM (Ken Snyder) (05/23/91)
dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) writes: | | In a previous article, proberts@disk.uucp (Phil Roberts) says: | > | >Why, "according to all reports", is DR DOS 5.0 superior? | | I have a 386sx20 with 3 megs of ram 387DX w/8 megs running MSDOS 4.01 | | in my config.sys I have: | | emm386.sys QEMM386 | ansi.sys me too | an ems disk cache prog. that comes with dr dos 5.0 NCACHE-F, Norton's disc cacher | f-driver from f-prot anti virus | and clarkson packet drivers I have HPIB.SYS, RAMDRIVE.SYS | | in my autoexec.bat I have: | | CED Command line EDitor 4DOS already has a built in CED | gmouse MOUSE | and more packet driver stuff. no packets for me | | | According to norton 5.0, I have 584k of free conventional memory left. According to Norton 5.0 I have 587k of conventional memory left. | | That's pretty superior. Superior to what???? I am curious about DRDOS 5.0 (I've seen the adds) but the question remains, what will it do for me that I don't already have? Obviously, memory management isn't it (at least from this example). Ken
dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) (05/24/91)
In a previous article, kens@hplsla.HP.COM (Ken Snyder) says: [ while comparing 4dos with dr dos 5.0 ] > I am curious about DRDOS 5.0 (I've seen the adds) but the question >remains, what will it do for me that I don't already have? Obviously, >memory management isn't it (at least from this example). Here are a few other things that dr dos 5.0 can do If I don't care to run windows in 386 enhanced mode, I can run my system with ansi, ced, disk cache and stuff and have 620k of free memory. I can also use clarkson packet drivers & b.y.u. ipx to run my machine on a novell network, or use ka9q to do tcpip stuff across the internet. I am not familiar with 4dos. Is it also networkable, and does it run ms windows? But this illustrates the biggest problem of ibm pc's. Something is wrong when you have 3 megs of ram, but you are still happy to clear up 50k of memory, while over 2 megs sits around pretty much unused. Dr Dos 5.0 isn't any sort of tremendous break through, but it does provide the memory features of qemm for less money. -- Douglas Bell "... but that's not important, that's just numbers." dab6@po.cwru.edu Dr. Wu, Math Professor
frotz@dri.com (Frotz) (05/30/91)
kens@hplsla.HP.COM (Ken Snyder) writes: ] dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) writes: ]| In a previous article, proberts@disk.uucp (Phil Roberts) says: ]| >Why, "according to all reports", is DR DOS 5.0 superior? ]| According to norton 5.0, I have 584k of free conventional memory left. ] According to Norton 5.0 I have 587k of conventional memory left. ]| ]| That's pretty superior. ] Superior to what???? ] I am curious about DRDOS 5.0 (I've seen the adds) but the question ]remains, what will it do for me that I don't already have? Obviously, ]memory management isn't it (at least from this example). Command help for one. C:\> DIR/H gives you something rational about how to use DIR... The same for most (if not all) other commands in DR DOS. Granted. You probably don't need this. Nifty-whiz-bang-setup utility for quick reconfiguration... Again, it doesn't sound like you *need* this. FILELINK. Our response to an OS supplied lap-link... A rational TREE command. I would expect that they big gains are in memory management for _people_who_don't_already_have_it_... I would also say that the comparison is against vanilla DOS 3.3 or 4.01... We are not comparing vanilla operating systems with add-ons, we are comparing operating systems to like operating systems. -- Frotz
kmcvay@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca (Ken McVay) (06/06/91)
In article <WNN3G4V@dri.com> frotz@dri.com writes: >Command help for one. C:\> DIR/H gives you something rational about >how to use DIR... The same for most (if not all) other commands in DR >DOS. Granted. You probably don't need this. >Nifty-whiz-bang-setup utility for quick reconfiguration... Again, it >doesn't sound like you *need* this. >FILELINK. Our response to an OS supplied lap-link... >A rational TREE command. > >I would expect that they big gains are in memory management for >_people_who_don't_already_have_it_... I would also say that the >comparison is against vanilla DOS 3.3 or 4.01... > >We are not comparing vanilla operating systems with add-ons, we are >comparing operating systems to like operating systems. Let's not overlook the PASSWORD functions either - Switch Affect on file -------------------- -------------- PASSWORD /R:password - required for reading, copying, writing, deleting, renaming, changing attrib's /W:password - file can be read without password, but pwd required for copy, delete, rename or change attributes /D:password - required only for deleting or renaming file - don't need pwd for read, modify, or change attrib's /P:password - password operates on subdirs instead of files /G:password - sets GLOBAL default password - or the cache - or the added CHKDSK switches - or the DELQ/ERAQ "delete with query" commands - or the FIND command (searches for strings of char's in a group of text files and displays lines containing them) - or the REPLACE function - or the SHARE command.... which isn't needed to support large drives, since the o/s already has built-in support for them, unlike DOS, which forces you to use SHARE whether you need it (LANS, etc) or not.. - or TOUCH - or XDEL, which can remove empty subdirs, delete multiple files in subdirs and then del the subdir, and which enhances security by permitting you to force "overwrite before delete" to make SURE the file is completely erased, permanently... - or the enhance debugger, full-screen, WS-compat. editor, etc. DOS? Phooey :-) -- 1B Systems Management Limited - FrontDoor/TosScan VAR +1-604-754-7423 | Nanaimo, British Columbia, CANADA
phys169@csc.canterbury.ac.nz (06/07/91)
In article <1991Jun05.200857.26326@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca>, kmcvay@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca (Ken McVay) writes: > Let's not overlook the PASSWORD functions either - I've found that the password protection facility in DRDOS 5 beats the Dark Avenger virus. Has anyone found with what other common viruses such protection is helpful? (Obviously not boot sector infectors). Because DRDOS has some basic differences, such as in the "list of lists", I would guess some sneaky-trick viruses will also fail, but I'd love to hear from anyone with experience of such things. Mark Aitchison, Physics, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.