X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <008a01c05ead$1c18bbb0$c2881004@dbcooper> From: "Patrick Moran" To: References: <20001204 DOT 162239 DOT -446893 DOT 0 DOT domanspc AT juno DOT com> <2 DOT 07b7 DOT KRFT DOT G52LN7 AT belous DOT munic DOT msk DOT su> Subject: Re: BASIC & EMS (was: Optimizing CONFIG.SYS...) Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 04:16:21 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com Yes, you are correct on this, but I did not want to elaborate, because the discussion is already out of hand with a bunch nit-picking. I just wanted to distinguish that it does use real memory and the memory does physically exist in your computer. In fact virtual memory can be any kind of memory storage, like bubble memory, a tape drive, or any other device that can store binary data. Even though I did not state it, virtual memory is also real physcial memory that stores binary data. But before I get stomped on these devices like tape and hardrives can also be made to use for storing analog data as well. In fact Tape drives, hard drives and other assorted instruments used to store binary data are actually analog devices that store the binary data in analog format. Raw binary data cannot be directly stored on a tape drive or a hard drive, as it can in silicon, it must first be converted and encoded. He also made some statement that it is not memory that memory is made out of silicon by memory manufactures. He is also wrong there as well. That is synthetic memory, real memory are the neuron cells in your brain. We just make use of the physical properties of solid state physics with silicon memory to store binary data. He has really just gone too far. He will probably argue that and say that neurons are some spcification and neurons don't really exist! Neuron: A specialized impulse-conducting cell that is a functional unit of the nervous system. I even have a diagram of a typical neuron. I have had it with this nit-picking. I will say one last thing about it. DR DOS's Task manager DOES NOT swap tasks in memory. It does not shove memory through a tiny 64k window, you switch from one virtual 8086 machine to another and no memory is being swapped from one loaction to another except for such things such as your video card which has it's own on board memory rewritten to view the new window you are looking at on your CRT and other such types of memory if I happen to leave one out. Task manager does not require any EMS memory, it can however utilize it if you install it. I don't install EMS or use it in normal operations of my computer. I did with DV, but no longer use DV. I originally stated that I hated EMS memory, I still do and probably always will. I never originally stated that XMS memory was better, in fact, I don't even recall saying ANYTHING about XMS in my orginal statement.. Someone else made that erroneous interpretation. As far as I am concerned EMS should have died with the 8086 CPU and only used with the 8086 CPU or other such restrctive CPUs. The EMS page frame hogs valueable memory that I have much better uses for. I currently have available on this system 622k RAM, and a 67K of contigous memory in UMB that I can use for networking, loading TSR programs or whatever else I wich to put up into UMB. I CANNOT DO THIS WITH EMS, period. I have over 600K avaiable for each and every task I wish to use with Task Manager and can use all the extended memory I want with each task until I run out of RAM. I am not inited to a total of 32MB of memory above 1MB. I can use all 48MB of RAM in my system, If I put more memory into it I can also use that too. I cannot do these things with DV and EMS memory. I am lucky to get a little over 500K for each app in DV and can only use 32 MB RAM. Pat ----- Original Message ----- From: "Arkady V.Belousov" To: Sent: Monday, December 04, 2000 6:04 PM Subject: Re: BASIC & EMS (was: Optimizing CONFIG.SYS...) > X-Comment-To: Robert W Moss > > Hi! > > 4-δΕΛ-2000 15:42 domanspc AT juno DOT com (Robert W Moss) wrote to opendos AT delorie DOT com: > > RM> Virtual memory is not "memory". It is the swap space on the > RM> hard drive which is used to opn up space in real memory by > RM> copying frequently used information out to the hard disk > RM> where the program can call it up when needed. > > Not necessarily. I.e. I mean this is only _one_ way to implement > virtual memory (VM). VM is a memory which exists as plain memory for > application which works in this memory, but it should be mapped into some > physical medium (RAM, disk, etc.). For example, some DOS extenders implement > swap files to increase available VM, other not. > > RM> It is slow because it is limited to the access speed of the hard drive. > > _Only if_ part of VM, which must be accessed, currently swapped into > disk. If all used VM already mapped into phisycal memory then there is no > drawback, only advantages. > > Advantages: VM blocks can be moved in the physical memory to avoid > memory fragmentaion. VM allow to isolate separate application and prevent > one app memory contents corruption from other app. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com