From: "Florian Xaver" <dos DOT fire AT aon DOT at>
To: <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: BASIC & EMS (was: Optimizing CONFIG.SYS...)
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 12:00:38 +0100
Message-ID: <01c05c4f$1af046a0$e55cb7d4@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com

Hi!

>PM> DV is not a true multi-tasker, it shares CPU time between applications
>PM> loaded, just like Gates' stupid WINDOZE does.
>
>     Wrong. Yes, Win 3.x is an "preemtive multasking" (i.e. cooperative
>multitasking) but Win95 is an... hm, forget the word which describes
>displaced multitasking... for Win95 native apps, also as DV, Linux and...
>NT.

Wrong :))

Win3.x and Win9x are cooperative multitasking, The latest version Desqview
(not older versions) and Dr-DOS taskmanager (7.03) are pre-emptive
multitasking which is much better.

>PM> So what is XMS. And what does Task manager use.

No, Taskmgr uses the "Virtual V86 mode". A driver can provide XMS, but the
Taskmgr has only some (as much as you want :)) virtual virtual v86 mode
"windows", where 16-bit programs can run.

>PM> I believe it uses DPMS which is DOS Protected Mode Services. That is
>PM> what I use for multi-tasking in DOS.

Wrong. DPMS is an API which moves most of an driver into RAM/Extended
memory.

>PM> That is EXTENDED memory in PROTECTED MODE. I believe it is virtual 86
>PM> protected mode that Task manager uses. There is no freeking memory
swapping
>PM> with Task manager.

Yes.

>PM> Desqview, on the other hand, uses stupid time consumming memory
swapping
>PM> through a tiny 64K window and uses stupid EMS to do it. Each process
running
>PM> is swapped into and out of conventional memory.

Not the latest version.

>
>PM> Try Linux sometime and you will not even mention things like EMS, XMS,
DPMS,
>PM> DPMI,VCPI and a ton of other crap.
>
>     Because Linux not based on real mode apps/system (i.e. DOS).

Yes, Linux as a 32-bit protected mode system, DOS supports 16/32-bit
real/protected mode.

Bye, Florian Xaver
www.drdos.org