chung@Ainur.ee.surrey.ac.uk (L N Chung) (08/13/90)
Hi, DR advertised that DR-DOS ver 5 can give you >620K. But does it apply to any machine configurations? I would like to know whether it will help in the following two cases: 1) We need to run programs that require more than 600K of base memory. The machine is an *OLD* IBM AT (6MHz type) with a Everex EMS memory board and a EGA card (I think it only has the min. amount of video memory installed). Currently we have to boot on a MSDOS ver 2.11 disk when using these programs. 2) A PC clone with C&T chipset, Herc. mono, and 2 MB memory. It has a BICC ethernet card, and running PC-NFS. The trouble is only 470K of base memory is left for application. We would like to push some of the network drivers out of the base memory area. Has anybody got experience with DR-DOS? Are there any other better alternatives? Thanks in advance. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- L.N. Chung Dept of Elec. Eng, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 5XH. UK. (chung@uk.ac.surrey.ee) PHONE: +44 483 509104 FAX: +44 483 34139
frotz@drivax.UUCP (Frotz) (08/15/90)
chung@Ainur.ee.surrey.ac.uk (L N Chung) writes: ]DR advertised that DR-DOS ver 5 can give you >620K. But does it apply to any ]machine configurations? I would like to know whether it will help in the ]following two cases: Sigh... Someday I'll convince enough people in our European Development Offices to read news...;-) They would be better able to respond to this... Anyways, parts of this response are from: "Mark Aitchison, U of Canty; Physics" <uunet!canterbury.ac.nz!PHYS169> Responses are taken from private email (mine) without permission. ]1) We need to run programs that require more than 600K of base memory. The ] machine is an *OLD* IBM AT (6MHz type) with a Everex EMS memory board and ] a EGA card (I think it only has the min. amount of video memory installed). ] Currently we have to boot on a MSDOS ver 2.11 disk when using these programs. How much memory do you have on this box? (Including EMS...) DR DOS gets much of its memory by using as much as possible in the "high" memory (above 640K and below 1M). You must have some place to put the OS (e.g. high memory) to be able to get that kind of available memory. On my 386, 4M memory, VGA, this is the MEMMAP that I get: ] Allocated Memory Map - by TurboPower Software - Version 2.9 ] ] PSP blks bytes owner command line hooked vectors ] ----- ---- ----- -------- ------------------- ------------------------------ ] 0007 1 253952 config N/A ] 0008 5 66080 N/A <mouse driver> ] 0462 2 7904 command C:\ /P /E:3000 22 2E ] 0671 2 1600 MARK all ] 06D7 2 7824 HISTORY 21 ED FA ] 08C2 2 619472 free ] ] block bytes (Expanded Memory) ] ----- ------ ] 1 1048576 ] free 1949696 ] total 3145728 My DCONFIG.SYS is: ] SHELL=C:\COMMAND.COM C:\ /P /E:3000 ] BREAK=OFF ] BUFFERS=30 ] FILES=80 ] FCBS=8,8 ] FASTOPEN=0 ] LASTDRIVE=Z ] HISTORY=OFF ] COUNTRY=001,,C:\BIN\DRDOS\COUNTRY.SYS ] HIDOS=ON ] DEVICE=C:\BIN\DRDOS\EMM386.SYS /F=AUTO /K=AUTO /B=FFFF ] HIDEVICE=C:\BIN\DRDOS\ANSI.SYS ] HIDEVICE=C:\BIN\DRDOS\CACHE.EXE /S=1024 /X ] HIDEVICE=C:\BIN\DRV\MMOUSE.SYS /A8 Here is a map of my memory (via DR DOS' mem command) ASCIIfied... +- Address -+- Owner --+- Size -----------+- Type ----------------------------+ | 0:0000 | -------- | A0000h, 655360 | ------------- RAM --------------- | +-----------+----------+------------------+-----------------------------------+ | 0:0000 | -------- | 400h, 1024 | Interrupt vectors | | 40:0000 | -------- | 100h, 256 | ROM BIOS data area | | 50:0000 | DR DOS | 200h, 512 | DOS data area | | 70:0000 | DR BIOS | 18D0h, 6352 | Device drivers | | 70:052F | PRN | | Built-in device driver | | 70:0541 | LPT1 | | Built-in device driver | | 70:0553 | LPT2 | | Built-in device driver | | 70:0565 | LPT3 | | Built-in device driver | | 70:0577 | AUX | | Built-in device driver | | 70:0589 | COM1 | | Built-in device driver | | 70:059B | COM2 | | Built-in device driver | | 70:05AD | COM3 | | Built-in device driver | | 70:05BF | COM4 | | Built-in device driver | | 70:0659 | CLOCK$ | | Built-in device driver | | 70:0695 | CON | | Built-in device driver | | 70:06A7 | A:-F: | | Built-in device driver | | 1FD:0000 | DR DOS | 11B0h, 4528 | System | | 1FD:0048 | NUL | | Built-in device driver | | 318:0000 | DR DOS | 1490h, 5264 | System | | 34B:0000 | EMMXXXX0 | | Loadable device driver | | 461:0000 | COMMAND | 1330h, 4912 | Program | | 594:0000 | COMMAND | BD0h, 3024 | Environment | | 651:0000 | -------- | F0h, 240 | FREE | | 660:0000 | MARK | 100h, 256 | Environment | | 670:0000 | MARK | 560h, 1376 | Program | | 6C6:0000 | HISTORY | 100h, 256 | Environment | | 6D6:0000 | HISTORY | 1DB0h, 7600 | Program | | 8B1:0000 | MEM | 100h, 256 | Environment | | 8C1:0000 | MEM | 13B10h, 80656 | Program | | 1C72:0000 | -------- | 838D0h, 538832 | FREE | | 9FFF:0000 | EXCLUDED | 3E010h, 253968 | Upper system memory | +-----------+----------+------------------+-----------------------------------+ | C000:0000 | -------- | 8000h, 32768 | ------------- ROM --------------- | | C800:0000 | EMS | 10000h, 65536 | ---------- EMS memory ----------- | +-----------+----------+------------------+-----------------------------------+ | C800:0000 | EMM386 | 5000h, 20480 | EMM386 device driver code | +-----------+----------+------------------+-----------------------------------+ | DE00:0000 | -------- | 12000h, 73728 | ---------- Upper RAM ------------ | +-----------+----------+------------------+-----------------------------------+ | DE00:0000 | DR DOS | 1000h, 4096 | System | | DE01:0000 | CON | | Loadable device driver | | DF00:0000 | DR DOS | 4F50h, 20304 | System | | DF01:0000 | CACHE$ | | Loadable device driver | | E3F5:0000 | DR DOS | 30C0h, 12480 | System | | E3F6:0000 | PC$MOUSE | | Loadable device driver | | E701:0000 | DR DOS | 5DD0h, 24016 | System | | E702:0000 | DR DOS | 3C00h, 15360 | 30 Disk buffers | | ECDE:0000 | -------- | 3220h, 12832 | FREE | +-----------+----------+------------------+-----------------------------------+ | F000:0000 | -------- | 10000h, 65536 | ------------- ROM --------------- | +-----------+----------+------------------+-----------------------------------+ | FFFF:0000 | DR DOS | 96E0h, 38624 | DR DOS kernel code | +-----------+----------+------------------+-----------------------------------+ +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | |<------------------- Conventional memory ---------------------> | | 0h 10000h 20000h 30000h 40000h 50000h 60000h 70000h | | 0K 64K 128K 192K 256K 320K 384K 448K | | +-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------- | | **************************************************************** | | ****************................&&&&########...*********&&&&&&&& | | +-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+ | | 512K 576K 640K 704K 768K 832K 896K 960K 1MB | | 80000h 90000h A0000h B0000h C0000h D0000h E0000h F0000h 100000h | | >-------------->|<-------------- Upper memory ---------------->| | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Key: *=RAM &=ROM %=Shadow ROM #=EMS 655,360 bytes, ( 640K), conventional memory 619,472 bytes, ( 604K), largest available block 3,145,728 bytes, (3072K), extended memory 3,145,728 bytes, (3072K), extended memory used 0 bytes, ( 0K), extended memory available Rest assured that I have complained to our DR DOS development group about stopping short on mem (Read: no trapped interrupts and no ems page reporting). ]2) A PC clone with C&T chipset, Herc. mono, and 2 MB memory. It has a BICC ] ethernet card, and running PC-NFS. The trouble is only 470K of base memory is ] left for application. We would like to push some of the network drivers ] out of the base memory area. Here is what Mark had to say after only a couple of days of use with 5.0. ) From: "Mark Aitchison, U of Canty; Physics" <uunet!canterbury.ac.nz!PHYS169> ) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 90 12:49 +1200 ) Subject: Re: DR-DOS (Long biased opinion;-) ) (2) It works with DEC's DECnet-DOS. I've only tried version 2.1 so far (I'll ) try 1.2 and PCSA later). Works okay by using the old way (everything in ) conventional memory), or everything in high memory, but there are problems when ) using a mixture (the NDU utility reports network drivers not installed if SCH, ) DLLWD21, DNP are loaded high, while LAT & NDU aren't; SETHOST still works under ) these conditions, TFA fails; still, who's going to put just part of the network ) layers into high memory?). I've only tried WD cards so far; I'll try 3COM next ) week. ) (3) It works with NCSA ftp. I haven't tried Sun's PC-NFS yet (next week, ) probably). ) (4) It works with DM's dmdrvr.bin, and with all the DOS partitions I can find. ) (5) When using DECnet's TFA (Transparent File Access, which intercepts int 21h ) calls to let you treat VMS directories as your own), it works *better* than MS ) DOS (strange; MS wrote most of DECnet DOS for DEC, I thought!) For example, DIR ) and COPY work as expected (MS-DOS must use the old FCB-based calles for this). ) (6) When using DECnet's NDU (Network Disk Utility, I think, that lets you ) access a big file (disk image) on the VAX as an MS DOS disk), DR DOS with ) caching improves the speed subjectively quite noticeably; other caching ) systems I've tried wouldn't work with the network drives. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ]Has anybody got experience with DR-DOS? A fair amount. I have been running it on my 2 386 boxes and have installed it on a number of others 286s and a couple of 8086s. ]Are there any other better alternatives? I'm too biased to answer this to your satisfaction (besides, haven't I already answered it?... :-) Appologies to the net for the verbosity... -- John "Frotz" Fa'atuai frotz%drivax@uunet.uu.net (email@domain) Digital Research, Inc. {uunet|amdahl}!drivax!frotz (bang!email) c/o MIS Dept. (408) 647-6570 (vmail) 80 Garden Court, C13 (408) 649-3896 (phone) Monterey, CA 93940 (408) 646-6248 (fax) ========== "He who knows does not speak. He who speaks does not know." -- Lao Tzu
dlow@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Danny Low) (08/15/90)
>DR advertised that DR-DOS ver 5 can give you >620K. But does it apply to any >machine configurations? I would like to know whether it will help in the >following two cases: DR DOS most likely reclaims portions of memory between 640KB and 1MB that are not actually in use. While that entire portion is "reserved" only a small portion of it is actually used in most systems. There are MS DOS add ons that does the same thing. QRAM, 386Max, etc. are all memory managers that reclaim this memory space. Some also move TSRs and network drivers to EMS freeing up the lower 640KB for applications that can only run in low memory. Danny Low "Question Authority and the Authorities will question You" Valley of Hearts Delight, Silicon Valley HP SPCD dlow%hpspcoi@hplabs.hp.com ...!hplabs!hpspcoi!dlow
frotz@drivax.UUCP (Frotz) (08/17/90)
dlow@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Danny Low) writes:
] >DR advertised that DR-DOS ver 5 can give you >620K. But does it apply to any
] >machine configurations? I would like to know whether it will help in the
] >following two cases:
] DR DOS most likely reclaims portions of memory between 640KB and 1MB
] that are not actually in use. ... Some also move TSRs and network
] drivers to EMS freeing up the lower 640KB for applications that can
] only run in low memory.
Actually, the sweet thing about DR DOS is that it moves itself up there in
addition to the other things like TSRs, drivers, etc...
--
Frotz
Disclaimer: This is probably a little biased...;-)pnl@hpfinote.HP.COM (Peter Lim) (08/17/90)
> / dlow@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Danny Low) / 4:08 pm Aug 14, 1990 / > > DR DOS most likely reclaims portions of memory between 640KB and 1MB that > are not actually in use. While that entire portion is "reserved" only > a small portion of it is actually used in most systems. There are MS DOS > add ons that does the same thing. QRAM, 386Max, etc. are all memory > managers that reclaim this memory space. Some also move TSRs and > network drivers to EMS freeing up the lower 640KB for applications > that can only run in low memory. > While this is true, you'll never be able to get > 600 K free with MS-DOS and one of QRAM, 386MAX etc. (unless you use hercules card). This is because MS-DOS must reside in low memory. Now, one question for DR DOS 5.0 advocates. Does the setup works with MS Windows 3.0 running in 386 enhanced mode ? Regards, ## Life is fast enough as it is ........ Peter Lim. ## .... DON'T PUSH IT !! >>>-------, ########################################### : E-mail: plim@hpsgwg.HP.COM Snail-mail: Hewlett Packard Singapore, : Tel: (065)-279-2289 (ICDS, ICS) | Telnet: 520-2289 1150 Depot Road, __\@/__ ... also at: pnl@hpfipnl.HP.COM Singapore 0410. SPLAT !
malloy@nprdc.arpa (Sean Malloy) (08/17/90)
In article <35010004@hpfinote.HP.COM> pnl@hpfinote.HP.COM (Peter Lim) writes: >While this is true, you'll never be able to get > 600 K free with MS-DOS >and one of QRAM, 386MAX etc. (unless you use hercules card). This is >because MS-DOS must reside in low memory. How strange -- with my 386/25 with SVGA, I use QEMM-386 and LOADHI to shove everything I can into high memory; using 4DOS as the primary command processor, MAPMEM reports 608K free; with COMMAND.COM, it reports 604K free. But since I can't get more than 600K free, I _must_ be hallucinating. :-) | "The three most dangerous Sean Malloy | things in the world are a Navy Personnel Research & Development Center | programmer with a soldering San Diego, CA 92152-6800 | iron, a hardware type with a malloy@nprdc.navy.mil | program patch, and a user | with an idea."
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (08/18/90)
In article <9129@skinner.nprdc.arpa> malloy@nprdc.arpa (Sean Malloy) writes: |In article <35010004@hpfinote.HP.COM> pnl@hpfinote.HP.COM (Peter Lim) writes: |>While this is true, you'll never be able to get > 600 K free with MS-DOS |>and one of QRAM, 386MAX etc. (unless you use hercules card). This is | |How strange -- with my 386/25 with SVGA, I use QEMM-386 and LOADHI to |shove everything I can into high memory; using 4DOS as the primary |command processor, MAPMEM reports 608K free; with COMMAND.COM, it |reports 604K free. But since I can't get more than 600K free, I _must_ |be hallucinating. :-) Nope, it's not you, I can do it too. Peter's just wrong, again. (wish I had a nickel for every time he's been wrong.) -- Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil Were the Americans of Japanese descent interned during WWII hostages?
mlord@bwdls58.bnr.ca (Mark Lord) (08/19/90)
In article <35010004@hpfinote.HP.COM> pnl@hpfinote.HP.COM (Peter Lim) writes: >... you'll never be able to get > 600 K free with MS-DOS >and one of QRAM, 386MAX etc. (unless you use hercules card). This is >because MS-DOS must reside in low memory. How strange. On my MSDOS 3.3 system, I have about 612K free with QEMM. This is a VGA system, with 4DOS as the command interpreter. -- ___Mark S. Lord__________________________________________ | ..uunet!bnrgate!bmerh724!mlord | Climb Free Or Die (NH) | | Ottawa, Ontario. 613-763-7482 | Personal views only. | |________________________________|________________________|
joonsong@monsoon.Berkeley.EDU (Suk-Hyun Song) (08/22/90)
In article <3944@bwdls58.UUCP> mlord@bwdls58.bnr.ca (Mark Lord) writes: >In article <35010004@hpfinote.HP.COM> pnl@hpfinote.HP.COM (Peter Lim) writes: >>... you'll never be able to get > 600 K free with MS-DOS >>and one of QRAM, 386MAX etc. (unless you use hercules card). This is >>because MS-DOS must reside in low memory. > >How strange. On my MSDOS 3.3 system, I have about 612K free with QEMM. >This is a VGA system, with 4DOS as the command interpreter. I suppose this is all a matter of definition. Does a 640K computer have 640000 bytes or 655360? If you think 1K = 1024 bytes, then 600K = 614400 bytes. Or if 1K = 1000 bytes, then 600K = 600000 bytes. Nobody is really wrong. The question is, does DR-DOS 5.0 provide 620*1000 bytes or 620*1024 bytes?
frotz@dri.com (Frotz) (08/23/90)
joonsong@monsoon.Berkeley.EDU (Suk-Hyun Song) writes: ]In article <35010004@hpfinote.HP.COM> pnl@hpfinote.HP.COM (Peter Lim) writes: ]>... you'll never be able to get > 600 K free with MS-DOS ]>and one of QRAM, 386MAX etc. (unless you use hercules card). This is ]>because MS-DOS must reside in low memory. ]I suppose this is all a matter of definition. ]Does a 640K computer have 640000 bytes or 655360? ]If you think 1K = 1024 bytes, then 600K = 614400 bytes. ] Or if 1K = 1000 bytes, then 600K = 600000 bytes. I guess you answered your own question here. 655360. ]Nobody is really wrong. The question is, does DR-DOS 5.0 provide ]620*1000 bytes or 620*1024 bytes? Yes, somebody is wrong. When dealing with computers in general, k==1024. When dealing with mathematics in general, k==1000. When dealing with a mixture of both, it is the responsibility of the speaker to denote what 'k' means. In this case, we are talking computers. Any other use of 'k' is wrong! If you are talking to an end-user (someone not on the net and barely computer literate by our standards) then K will probably be the mathematical definition. I have a 386 Silicon Valley Computer, 4M memory, 104M disk with 30 buffer, 80 files, EMS, ANSI driver, CACHE (1M), Bus Mouse driver, VGA, History v1.41, 26 drive letters and a 3000 byte environment (SHELL=...), COUNTRY.SYS. MAPMEM 2.9 from Turbopower shows 619440 bytes free conventional memory. It also shows the expanded memory usage: block bytes (Expanded Memory) ----- ------ 1 1048576 free 1949696 total 3145628 DRDOS 5.0 MEM shows 655,360 bytes, ( 640K), conventional memory 619,440 bytes, ( 604K), largest available block 3,145,728 bytes, (3072K), extended memory 3,145,728 bytes, (3072K), extended memory used 0 bytes, ( 0K), extended memory available DRDOS 5.0 CACHE shows 1 drive cached in 62 track buffers 1023K bytes of Expanded Memory used 100% of CACHE in use with a 86% hit rate. Now I think that this qualifies as being greater than 600K (K==1024), and admittedly barely, but I do have a lot going on in my environment too. advAPPOLOGIESance if this is inflamatory. -- Frotz Disclaimer: I do not speak for this company this time, as my remarks are potentially inflamatory.
chung@surrey.ac.uk (L N Chung) (08/24/90)
In article <073NSGP@drivax.UUCP> frotz@dri.com writes: >dlow@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Danny Low) writes: > >] DR DOS most likely reclaims portions of memory between 640KB and 1MB >] that are not actually in use. ... Some also move TSRs and network >] drivers to EMS freeing up the lower 640KB for applications that can >] only run in low memory. > >Actually, the sweet thing about DR DOS is that it moves itself up there in >addition to the other things like TSRs, drivers, etc... Does this mean that DR DOS requires extra memory between 640K and 1MB (i.e. those used by shadow ram) in order to relocate drivers etc. ? Can it relocate everything to extended memory above 1 MB ? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- L.N. Chung Dept of Elec. Eng, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 5XH. UK. (chung@uk.ac.surrey.ee) PHONE: +44 483 509104 FAX: +44 483 34139
frotz@dri.com (Frotz) (08/28/90)
chung@surrey.ac.uk (L N Chung) writes: ]In article <073NSGP@drivax.UUCP> frotz@dri.com writes: ]>Actually, the sweet thing about DR DOS is that it moves itself up there in ]>addition to the other things like TSRs, drivers, etc... ]Does this mean that DR DOS requires extra memory between 640K and 1MB (i.e. ]those used by shadow ram) in order to relocate drivers etc. ? Can it relocate ]everything to extended memory above 1 MB ? It uses what memory is available between 640K and 1M (actually the first segment above 1M) to load itself, drivers, system structures and TSRs. It also allows the user to specify whether to copy slow BIOS code to faster RAM... (I am a little unclear on what "shadow ram" means...;-( -- Frotz
chung@surrey.ac.uk (L N Chung) (09/01/90)
In article <XPKPTCP@dri.com> frotz@dri.com writes: > >It uses what memory is available between 640K and 1M (actually >the first segment above 1M) to load itself, drivers, system >structures and TSRs. Can it load everything above the 1M mark? My problem is that the Everex card can only fill memory extended memory starting from 1M. In fact we have now got 1M extended memory and 3M expanded memory on the card. However, there is *no* memory between 640K and 1M. Will I be able to get more than 600K out of the DR-DOS? If we use window3, and load himem.sys, will DR-DOS stop loading drivers, etc to memory above 640K? > >It also allows the user to specify whether to copy slow BIOS code >to faster RAM... (I am a little unclear on what "shadow ram" >means...;-( "Shadow Ram" are memory between 640K and 1M, which are being used to *shadow* ROM or VIDEO BIOS, according to C&T. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- L.N. Chung Dept of Elec. Eng, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 5XH. UK. (chung@uk.ac.surrey.ee) PHONE: +44 483 571281 FAX: +44 483 34139
frotz@dri.com (Frotz) (09/06/90)
chung@surrey.ac.uk (L N Chung) writes:
]Can it load everything above the 1M mark? My problem is that the Everex card
]can only fill memory extended memory starting from 1M. In fact we have now
]got 1M extended memory and 3M expanded memory on the card. However, there is
]*no* memory between 640K and 1M. Will I be able to get more than 600K out of
]the DR-DOS?
]If we use window3, and load himem.sys, will DR-DOS stop loading drivers, etc
]to memory above 640K?
I will not be able to give you a good answer to that question as I no longer
work for Digital Research. You can forward your messages to:
alias sue 76703.455@compuserve.com (Sue Nageotte)
Please give her my appologies for publishing her address on the net...;-)
If anyone has a job for an all-around PC hack in the South San Jose,
Santa Cruz, or Monterey Peninsula areas, please give me a call. My
personal information is:
John "Frotz" Fa'atuai
30 Monte Vista Drive #3102
Monterey, CA 93940-6044
408/373-0295
--
Frotz
"So long and thanks for all the fish"
-- Douglas Adamsphys169@canterbury.ac.nz (09/12/90)
In article <1990Sep1.090154.4095@EE.Surrey.Ac.UK>, chung@surrey.ac.uk (L N Chung) writes: > In article <XPKPTCP@dri.com> frotz@dri.com writes: >> >>It uses what memory is available between 640K and 1M (actually >>the first segment above 1M) to load itself, drivers, system >>structures and TSRs. > > Can it load everything above the 1M mark? My problem is that the Everex card > can only fill memory extended memory starting from 1M. In fact we have now > got 1M extended memory and 3M expanded memory on the card. However, there is > *no* memory between 640K and 1M. Will I be able to get more than 600K out of > the DR-DOS? > Yes, if you have a 386. Possibly otherwise. With a 2Mb 386 and Hercules graphics card, I get about 800Kb available, with a VGA I get about 620Kb available (with "reasonable" balance between speed and memory size). On a 386 with more than 1Mb of RAM, it can map memory down into any gaps in the 640K-1Mb region. Not all software likes going there, of course, but most will. Some 286 chip sets also let you do this, but none that I have tried yet. Even if you only have a common-or-garden-variety 286, with more than 640Kb of RAM, DR-DOS can use some of the first 64Kb above 1Mb, by saying it is segment number FFFF (i.e. within the first 1Mb area), but it only loads about 37Kb of its own kernel there, not your programs (still, you do get a bit more memory left at the bottom then). A few old AT motherboards seem to loose the extra 384Kb, though (so if you can't use it for Extended, you can't shove the kernel there either). Also, some 1Mb 386's seem to insist such RAM can be only be used for some purposes, limiting what DR-DOS can do with it. And on old 8088 machines, DR-DOS still usually gives you more memory than MS DOS 3.30, partly because it is more code-efficient, it seems, and partly because you have a lot of control over memory use. It will make better use of EMS (and extended) than DOS 3.30, but about the same as DOS 4. > If we use window3, and load himem.sys, will DR-DOS stop loading drivers, etc > to memory above 640K? > You can choose in config.sys whether device drivers are loaded "high" or not, and you can specify whether programs (e.g. TSR's) are to be loaded high, and whether upper memory should be turned on or off during execution. There is a special note mentioning using DR-DOS with windows3 and a few other 386-specific programs that comes with the software (but I haven't tried it yet). > "shadow ram"... Shadow RAM takes up the same memory space as the ROM it copies and replaces. It seems a good idea, but it is not always worthwhile shadowing video rom, since some loadable drivers bypass that code anyway. All in all, DR-DOS 5.0 seems a very nice product, especially if you have a 386 with a bit of memory you are wondering how to put to best use. The user interface is very good, well, compared with what has come before, from the installation process to the command interpreter and on-line help (why didn't they do that before??). But there are some limitations (really minor, but someone's got to mention them). [Please read these understanding that, on balance, DR-DOS is easily the nicest little o/s for a PC you can get, IMHO] (1) You don't get a great deal extra below-640K ram on a "normal" (non-C&T) 286, only 37K plus what you get from having less buffers and more memory-efficient FASTOPEN code, etc (say, about 60Kb more than DOS3.3). Still, that's important to some people who can't otherwise install a network driver and still run some big DTP software, etc. (2) Some software doesn't like going up above 640K, e.g. DECNET DOS can have problems if particular modules (like DNP) are loaded high, and MARK and RELEASE can give problems unless high memory is turned off. That's not really DR-DOS's fault, though. The sort of problems are assumptions in old software that the world ends at 640K, and that if a vector points above 640K it must still be pointing to BIOS ROM. The system has a too-common habit of freezing until you work out what can and cannot work; again, that might not be DR's fault. (3) The screen-oriented editor is much nicer than EDLIN, and very similar to Wordstar and Turbo's interactive compiler editors, but it lacks decent global search and replace options, and defineable keys (F1 is "Help", but no other function key is used). (4) The system call that returns the capacity of a disk fails if that disk is JOINed. (5) Trying to do: DEL *ABC*.* returns an error message, which is better than MS/PC-DOS (everyone know that bug? it does a DEL *.*), but it would have been better to fix the wildcard matching problem, since some software assumes the system calls to find a file matching *something* will return everything. (6) Their disk caching software slows down access times (it sounds like there are too many disk seeks being done for each access), although in other ways the caching system is very good (you keep good transfer rates with 1:1 controllers, and good software compatibility, and Norton's SI disk test returns very good performance figures). (7) Not all commands have on-line help (e.g. COPY and other internal commands). (8) The FILELINK program doesn't handle modems, and you have to keep going back into the program after each command, but is still a valuable tool. There may be a problem with the way it gets the date and time from the CMOS clock, but it might be my hardware - if anyone notices any strange behaviour, I'd be interested to know. Mark Aitchison, Physics, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.
mvolo@uncecs.edu (Michael R. Volow) (09/12/90)
DR-DOS 5.0 sound very interesting. Is it true that one can write-protect subdirectories? If a PC is being used both for business and recreation, is DR-DOS 5.0 compatible with game software? Is popping to DOS from within a program possible in DR-DOS 5.0? I'd like to try DR-DOS 5.0, but I'm put off by the price of $199 I see in the mail order firms. Has anyone seen a cheaper price. -- Michael Volow, Psychiatry, Durham VA Med Center, Durham NC 27712 919 286 0411 Ext 6933 mvolo@ecsvax.edu
phys169@canterbury.ac.nz (09/17/90)
In article <1990Sep12.133600.3281@uncecs.edu>, mvolo@uncecs.edu (Michael R. Volow) writes: > Is it true that one can write-protect subdirectories? Yes, write-protect, read-protect and delete-protect files and directories. > > If a PC is being used both for business and recreation, is DR-DOS 5.0 > compatible with game software? So far it seems to be. > > Is popping to DOS from within a program possible in DR-DOS 5.0? You mean, like Alt-F-O form Turbo Pascal? Yep. Just like MS-DOS. > P.S. I'll be trying windows 3 soonish. It says it can do it, but I'd like to check myself. Mark Aitchison.
mvolo@uncecs.edu (Michael R. Volow) (09/17/90)
One further question. I occasionally see DR DOS 5.0 advertised for $199. Can it be bought more cheaply anywhere? -- Michael Volow, Psychiatry, Durham VA Med Center, Durham NC 27712 919 286 0411 Ext 6933 mvolo@ecsvax.edu