On 29 Jan 00 at 18:31, Bernie wrote:
> 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).
Yes you are right, that was your original question. In sum: We now
know that himem.sys in MS-DOS 6.x and DR-DOS 7.x can not see memory
above 64Mb. Since MS-DOS 6.x and PC-DOS 6.x is practically the same,
I assume this holds for PC-DOS 6.x as well (How about 7/2000?)
Where I am aiming at with my question is: Will or can it
for any practical or theoretical reason be any risk involved in
"solving" the memory problem by use of himem.sys from MS-DOS 7.x
with any of the other/older DOS versions? With risk I mean
possible crash and/or general data loss. But also of interest,
if any penalty on performance - or if the opposite??
Are there any differences in this respect between the himem.sys
that ships with Win95A, and that of Win95B (OSR2) ( I would not think
so, would not think that himem.sys is involved in anyway when it
comes to reading the VFAT??). I don't expect you to hold all
the answers Bernie, but it would be interesting if anyone knows
and/or can shed some light on this. But maybe I put the question
wrong?
Personally I have no need to use himem.sys from Win9x, at least
not now - as non of my systems have any more than 16MB RAM.
I'm still curios though.
All the best,
Bjorn
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
