>> this is 2025. Are there really programs *in use* that *require* EMS, and >> can't >> use XMS? I'm sure they exist, but are they of any public interest? > > 100% yes there are. > > Indeed most classic-era DOS apps want and use EMS and very few can use XMS. > > Lotus 1-2-3 r2, Wordperfect, SuperCalc, As Easy As, Quattro Pro... all > want EMS, not XMS.
Even if a program doesn't *require* EMS, some programs will use it if it is available, and it can greatly enhance the use of the program (e.g., by allowing it to open large files or multiple files at the same time). Some people seem to think that XMS is a "better" or "simpler" version of EMS, but it isn't. They're two completely different things, and EMS does a lot of things that XMS can't do. For example, you can *directly* manipulate data and even run code that's stored in EMS memory (even from real mode). If it's stored in XMS, you can't do that -- you either *must* run from protected mode, or else temporarily copy the data from XMS into "regular" (conventional/upper memory), do the manipulations, and then copy it back to XMS again. With EMS you don't need to do that. The other thing about EMS is that it is designed to directly work with TSR's and device drivers, while XMS is not. I'm converting my TSR programs to take advantage of EMS if it exists, and it can save a LOT of memory when it is used. I can't do the same with XMS. I'm not saying EMS is a panacea, and it does have its issues. But to say it's worthless just because it's approaching 50 years old simply isn't true (just like DOS itself). _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
