Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!nosc!manta!grantk
From: grantk@manta.NOSC.MIL (Kelly J. Grant)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: MS-DOS 4.01 vs. 3.3
Message-ID: <1187@manta.NOSC.MIL>
Date: 22 Aug 90 16:09:06 GMT
References: <38144@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> <12725@hydra.gatech.EDU> <56756@microsoft.UUCP>
Reply-To: grantk@manta.nosc.mil.UUCP (Kelly J. Grant)
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation
Lines: 36

In article <56756@microsoft.UUCP> steveha@microsoft.UUCP writes:
>
>If you want a disk partition >32MB, you must load SHARE.EXE each time you
>boot up or else risk losing data.  (The people I have asked about
>NOSHARE.EXE, which is available on USENET, have all told me they think it
>is a bad idea.  Use the real thing, SHARE.EXE.)
>
>Steve "I don't speak for Microsoft" Hastings    ===^=== :::::
>uunet!microsoft!steveha  steveha@microsoft.uucp    ` \\==|

Nice enterprise :-)

We are supporting a large Clipper application used at a Naval laboratory
here that runs on hundreds of PC's successfully.  We have been dealing with
DOS 4.01 for some time now, and even Nantuckett admits that Clipper
applications will have a difficult time with certain DOS 4 systems.  We 
have found that the application works well *IF* we remove the SHARE.EXE
command.  (On an interesting note, one of our field people said that
even if you don't load SHARE explicitly, it shows up in memory or
device driver chains.  Can this be true ?)

The machines seem to run properly without the SHARE command loaded.  Are
we treading on thin ice here ?  Has anyone been successful at running
Clipper programs in DOS 4 ?

I'd appreciate any information.

Thanks,  

Kelly

-- 
Kelly Grant        grantk@manta.nosc.mil   (619) 225-8401
Computer Sciences Corp          ^^^^^^^^ Important: manta.UUCP won't get to me
4045 Hancock Street      "If you are given lemons.....see if you can trade for
San Diego, CA 92110       chocolate" - me