"Glenn Gilbreath Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wrote: ---------------------------------------- >ANYTIME...that means EVERYTIME you use a DOS box in Win9X, >even in Win3.X in "enhanced mode", or "Restart in MS DOS Mode" >in Win95, you will have a stub of WIN.COM in memory. I have >found that this sometimes takes up just enough UMB to not >let some DOS apps run as desired. There is a setting in the >"Properites, Advanced" dialogue (Right mouse click, Properties) >where you can set DOS apps to not detect Windows 95 at all...
Win.com takes less than 4K of conventional memory, and vmm32 less than 2K (if you do not enable umbs) -- usually not enough to affect most programs, even in real dos. There are exceptions such as dos pine that needs every but of the 640K of conventional memory. The ``not detect windows'' option does not cause win.com or vmm32 to be absent from the dos box memory. > I gave up on NS a long time ago. Why did you give up, what is your alternative, and surely you did not find IE better ? > if you run DOS apps in a DOS box in Win95 that it is NOT > necessary to use SMARTDRV for disk cache, Win95 has its own cache, I suspected that the windows', vcache, still operates in a dos box, since the box is running as a windows emulation program. But I have never seen microsoft admit this. How do you kow vcache caches RAM for dos programs? In `ms dos mode' vcache could not do this, since, vcache itself is no longer in RAM - only the win.com stub. >if you boot into "plain" DOS, without WIN.COM in memory, you >will need a disk cache, such as SMARTDRV, which can speedup quite >a number of applications, especially Arachne! No - if you drop to `ms dos mode' in win95 or use utilities to do the same in win3.1 -- only with win.com stub remains, not the remainder of windows programs. Since the windows cache software, vcache, itself is no longer in RAM memory it can no longer cache dos memory. Therefore you need smartdrive in this case too. "Inigo M.de Azagra y de Miota" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ----------------------------------------------------- >EMM386.EXE can either be set to optimal for using DOS, >or optimal for using WINDOWS. It depends on what >option you chose when you set up the configuration >using memmaker(I am guessing you are using DOS 6.xx). No - I use dos7 that comes with win95. What options do you mean by `optimal for using windows" ? I have never heard of any such options and I know all the emm386 options. I use the same options you mentioned: device=c:\windows\emm386.exe noems DOS=HIGH,UMB These options existed BEFORE windows existed and to my knowledge have nothing to do with optomizing windows. They allow part of the command.com shell to be loaded in hi, versus upper or extended memory, and enable dos access to devices and TSRs loaded in upper memory blocks. NOEMS simply disables the older EMS memory, providing somewhat more XMS memory for programs. If you try to obtain as many UMB blocks as possible you will be blocking windows from accessing that memory and therefore it will go noticeably slower. (You will notice this speed reduction no matter how much memory you have.) Windows needs that memory area where UMBs are created to go faster. I suspect this may be true for windows 9x, but have never seen it admitted to my microsoft. Where did you get this information and how do you know windows uses the umb area at all, or specifically to increase speed? The amount of memory is small: umbs take up less than 1/2 a meg since they are from 640K to 1meg. The location of the umb memory may be significant, since windows 9x, like windows 3x still runs on top of dos: First dos is started, then win.com and vmm32 are run as dos executables to go into windows. 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
