Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!chaph.usc.edu!aludra.usc.edu!yoon From: yoon@aludra.usc.edu (Dae-Kyun Yoon) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: DesqView (VGA line correction) Message-ID: Date: 30 May 90 22:47:58 GMT References: <4ab42bf8.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> Sender: news@chaph.usc.edu Distribution: usa Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Lines: 126 In-reply-to: nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM's message of 30 May 90 16:07:00 GMT In article <4ab42bf8.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes: > ... > > From: shim@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Sam Shim) > > >6. Desqview is a great program > > This must be an entirely new use of the term "great" with which > I was previously unfamiliar. > > > > (much much better than Windows 3.0). Don't > > you dare say it doesn't work or it stinks. It is the premier MS-DOS > > multitasker on the market. > > > Given DOS and the variations in PC configurations it is a wonder > that Desqview works at all. And while I wouldn't say it "stinks" > it certainly does not work all that well. At last count (this weekend) > *half* of my programs either don't run at all under Desqview or require > special handling like being loaded first or not having certain > other programs in the system at the same time. Now granted, I > probably have a larger percentage of graphics programs than other > people and graphics appears to be Desqview's Achilles Heel, but > given the increasing popularity of graphics programs on the market > and the apparent unwillingness of companies to write PC software > which is well-behaved, this will seriously limit the value of Desqview. > > I'm also curious about the use of "premier", above. Desqview has > sold a little over a million copies. Windows, prior to 3.0, has > sold about 7 million copies. Microsoft is expected to sell some > 4.5 million copies of 3.0 in the near term, and some estimates > suggest that figure could be as high as 7 million. > > Do you have any personal experience with Windows 3.0? For that > matter, does anyone here on the net? I am very interested in > knowing how it compares with Desqview it its ability to multitask > programs not written explicitly for that environment, especially > graphics or communications programs. > > I am still of the opinion that multitasking DOS, especially given > the way most DOS programs are written, is so difficult that it is > impossible to say any product does it "well". Desqview may not > be as bad as some competitors, but that's a long way from saying > that it is truly "good" at it, nevermind "great". > > ---Peter > ... > I'v been using DesqView on my 386sx machine before I bought (upgraded) to MS-windows 3.0. Before I state comparison between these two programs, the following assumptions should be taken into consideration. 1. I am just the end user, not a programmer for these programs. So, I can't say anything about programability of multitasking S/W under DesqView or Windows. 2. My platform is 386sx, so any comparison stated here may not be applied to other types of platforms. (8086 or 80286) In other words, I compare DesqView with Windows' 386 enhanced mode. 3. The comparions stated here may not be generally acceptable, as this is done by recalling the experiences I'v had. << Multitasking >> Both programs do multitasking farely well. For example, I can play my favorite games while I am compiling a very long document written in LaTeX form. << Memory Management >> Both programs provide a sort of virtual memory, by "swapping" to/from disk. The performance of swapping is a very important factor with me since I have only 2Meg of "real" memory. Under DesqView, swapping is intolerablly slow. Under windows it works just fine, and I can run as many programs I want only if it fits into total virtual memory spaces. (When using permanent "swapfile"). Of course, swapping degrades the performance but it's tollerable with me under windows. << User Interface >> How could we compare ICON based Graphical user interface of Windows with DesqView's user interface ? Needlees to say, Windows is far better. << Working with Dos apps. (non-windows apps) >> Both programs seem to work fine with any regular dos apps. Under Windows, I can open a dos shell (actually 4dos) window and can run any non-graphic apps. Some graphic apps would run in a window, though. I didn't seriously check the program which requires expanded memory. But I believe it would also run without any problems in 386 enhanced mode of windows, because Windows can simulate expanded memory in this mode according to the "user's guide, p541. I am not sure about how TSR programs could be loaded other than conventional memory and could be run if they requires expanded memory in Windows. From what I understood from the user's guide, I have to load "emm386.sys" and have to allocate a certain amount of memory to "emm386" to run these programs. You may not be able to expect some features provided by QEMM386 in Windows. For now, I am still trying to use Windows3.0 more intensively. BUt, it is most likely that I finally would switch to Windows 3.0 despite incompatibilities with old-version Windows apps. DesqView is also a good program, but I like the Graphical user interface better. If I am able to have a chance to try X-windows under DesqView, I may change my mind, though. :-). -- ----------------------------------------------- Dae-kyun Yoon dkyoon@priam.usc.edu, ..!uunet!usc!priam!dkyoon ----------------------------------------------- Dae-kyun Yoon dkyoon@priam.usc.edu, ..!uunet!usc!priam!dkyoon