Bjorn wrote:
>Have anyone tried to use himemsys from MS-DOS 7 with other versions
>of DOS, like PC-DOS? Any benefits from doing something like that?
>Does other DOS versions have any problems seeing memory above 64MB or
>is this peculiar to Dr-DOS? Just curios.
MS-DOS 6.20 doesn't see more than 64MB (and my original question was if
DR-DOS would work instead - installing all the 5 floppies just to test and
see seems like a little much to do, unfortunately it doesn't work according
to the info you sent me).
>Btw: As someone mentioned here before, Edit from MS-DOS 7 works
>just fine with other versions of DOS, at least PC-DOS. It is much
>improved over the old MS-DOS edit.com. The old version was basically
>a small com program that called Qbasic/edit (right?), while the new
>version is a standalone editor - capable of handling very large
>files - compared to the old.
It's qbasic/edcon in some versions.
IMO it would have been better to have edit/qbasic and a standalone qbasic
interpreter, but the editor is anyway much better then the ones that come
with the other DOSes (that I've seen anyway).
I do wonder why NT has edlin.com (and an older version of edit). Perhaps we
can expect new versions of edlin and edit with the new Windows versions?
But I don't think it's worth buying it to get any of them ;)
//Bernie
http://hem1.passagen.se/bernie/index.htm DOS programs, Star Wars ...
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
More info can be found at;
http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
