Hi guys My speedchk was done with stupidrvive /x enabled. I can disable this or replace with a better cache program.
Meanwhile I blew off my P100, reloaded with MS-DOS 6.2 (and stupidrive, of course), put 4DOS 6.00 and 4FILES 3.20 (very fast file manager) on, the Linksys 100 TX packet driver for my NIC, and Arachne 1.71. My chief interest is *fast* web browsing. Arachne works amazingly well, but is much slower in this configuration than Opera 6.01 on Win95 on the same machine. Could you please fix up a full version of DOS 3.3 with all the goodies for speed? Would making a large enough Turbodisk and loading all Arachne files in it improve browsing speed? I have DSL and a 100 Mbps LAN. Also, since Opera is very fast, and has been ported to many platforms, how about a DOS port? Do you know a good way to get a Dvorak keyboard layout in DOS? Bernie 5/10/2002 9:08:50 PM, "Clarence Verge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Fri, 10 May 2002 17:52:51 -0400, Bernhard Hane wrote: > >> Hi Clarence > >> How are you? I have been busy working and studying >> for MCSE, and this is why I like minimal >> systems..... Could you tell us a little bit more >> about your twice as fast DOS? > >Usually when there is no list activity the list is actually "down". <g> > >Thanks for replying Bernhard.;-) > >I only have input from about 6 testers besides myself but they all >agree: >The test DOS is about/almost twice as fast as the second place runner. > >The test DOS was PC-DOS 3.3 and there is no question that it is the >only reasonable choice for an older PC - say anything less than a P75. >Don't even THINK about any other OS for an older box. <g> > >There is only one serious drawback with it, and that is its inability >to handle/recognize HD partitions greater than 32 MB. >This is not usually a problem with an older computer because one can >partition the hard drive to satisfy this requirement and one is usually >not dumb enough to try to run W9+ FATCRAP on it. > >But it would be nice to make your P75 run like a P133 and use at least >a 128Mb partition so you don't have to spend every weekend deleting the >trash to make working space. For some, even 128Mb is too small to be >convenient. :(( >So, we need a patch for DOS 3.3 to enable its use with large partitions. > >Sam Heywood wrote that he had Compaq DOS 3.31 which already has this >ability. Unfortunately we don't know yet if there is any speed penalty. > >I think there is enough talent available on this list to compare the >two OS binaries and write an upgrade patch for 3.30. >The problem would likely be that there is insufficient interest in the >talent base if everyone is running a 100MHz + Pentium. :(( > >What else is missing that is pretty much essential ? >Mem. >Deltree. >Rendir. >There are freeware packages that do these things as good as or better >than the DOS builtins. > >Loadhigh, Devicehigh. >Qemm 5+ beats the heck out of the DOS versions. You will definitely >end up with more free low memory with DOS 3.3 amd Qemm 5.12. > >So all we need is a patch to IBMbio.sys and/or IBMdos.sys. <G> > >> 5/10/2002 4:54:23 PM, "Clarence Verge" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> Hello CQ. >>> Where did everyone go ? > >- Clarence Verge. >-- Using Arachne 1.66 on DSL. > > > Bernhard Hane A+ certified Computer Technician Computers Plus 760 East Main Street Laurens, SC 29360 (864) 984 3313
