Hi, > 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?
Microsoft knows it for sure!!!! I got this info from their Windows 3.1 manual!! MS-DOS 6.xx manuals will also contain the same information. I don't know for certain that Windows 95 uses this area(I'm quite sure it does), but I DO know that it is used for Windows 3.x (It is stated in the manual). There are two ways to install Windows 95: You can install DOS 6.xx and then Windows 95 on top of it.(You can then Dual boot between WIN95 and DOS 6.xx) Or you can directly install Win95. If you have directly installed Win95 then the original settings of the config.sys are probably the best.If you have installed windows the 2nd way then you should try to adjust the *.pif files to get the most out of DOS 7. you can also disable some drivers which will be supplied by Windows if you use DOS 7 without starting in real mode. Sound Card and Cd-rom drivers for DOS can usually be disabled.(NOTE: If you disable this drivers and boot in real mode you will not be able to use your CD-ROM or Sound Card). If you installed windows the First way then you can boot into MS-DOS 6.xx(pressing F8 or CTRL during boot, if I am not mistaken) and you will have a totally Windows free system (no Win.com loaded in memory). Microsoft --- howard schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "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:windowsemm386.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. > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com 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
