>> Nor do I use JEMM386 in everyday work ... I am only saying that you
>> ought not so-quickly "dismiss" the idea of using an "EMM" driver.
>> They DO have their uses!
> Yes, but not necessarily for EMS ...

Obviously not, as there are few actual "EMS memory" applications still
around and worth using.   When I say "EMM" driver, I refer to JEMM386/
JEMMEX or equivalents like EMM386/QEMM/386MAX/etc., which all provide
DOS support for protected-mode and its features.

>> I must DISAGREE:  EMM386 may have been written for "EMS" memory
>> but it EVOLVED into Microsoft's protected-mode provider ...
> MS doesn't even support EMS at all in NTVDM these days --

Sad, that they flatly abandoned their own MS-DOS, and so EMM386 is still
130K of mostly-obsolete trash.   JEMMEX saves about 100K, due to Japheth
having "paid attention, where Microsoft now pays NO attention to EMM386!

> I know there are a few minor quirks, but yes, AMD deserves high praise
> for its products.

I agree.   My AMD CPU is unable to do a backward "MOVSD" ("D" bit set) if
both move addresses do not start on 32-bit boundaries; runs SLOW and gives
data errors!   So, UIDE2 does only a 16-bit "MOVSW" in backward mode which
is O.K. at the point I use it.   Otherwise, a few "rumors" which I respect
in UIDE/UIDE2, but really NO serious problems using an AMD CPU.

>>> In a way, it's a great idea (and one that PatV often mentioned) to
>>> bring DOS into the 21st century ...
>> I don't think it is as NECESSARY at you think!
> It's not necessary at all, but when the current crop of computers die
> out, we will buy new ones, and they will be less compatible, etc. etc.
> So eventually everything dies. It's kinda crappy, I don't really like
> it. Can't we just have some stability? No, apparently not. It's all a
> chase after the wind. (And don't tell me about Windows or Linux, they
> aren't stable, lots of "barely" old software doesn't work anymore.)

I agree entirely.   What would we do without computer "salesmen"??!!

>> We need NO more "hardware", CERTAINLY NOT any damned 64-bitters
>> having 64-GB of memory, when in fact Intel/Microsoft never REALLY
>> learned to use 32-bit or even 16-bit systems all that well! ...
> I agree, but nobody else does ... Pperhaps you should read what
> Niklaus Wirth had to say back in 1995, "Plea for Lean Software".
> Unfortunately, it seems that nobody listened.

I did read Wirth's comments, and he is essentially correct, although he
LOST my attention by making his project specific for his needs, e.g. it
includes an object-oriented language (YECCH to me, even more than "C").
And I agree, nobody listened -- Microsoft had to continue "feeding" its
1500 Win/NT programmers and its maybe 500 DOS programmers at that time!
They remind me of the old Jason Robards and Barbara Harris movie titled
"A Thousand Clowns"!

Best wishes,

Jack R. Ellis

This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here
Freedos-user mailing list

Reply via email to