Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpsgwp!plim From: plim@hpsgwp.sgp.hp.com (Peter Lim) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 is here! READ THIS, you'll be impressed Message-ID: <3360021@hpsgwp.sgp.hp.com> Date: 22 Apr 91 08:36:22 GMT References: <1991Apr21.135534.724@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> Organization: HP Singapore IC Design Ctr Lines: 107 / wayne@csri.toronto.edu (Wayne Hayes) / 5:55 am Apr 22, 1991 / writes: $ >How do they do that? Magic?? What do they do with wait loops? $ $ Actually you're right. I chose a bad example. A terminal program $ probably has lots of wait loops that would require near magic to $ detect and eliminate. My point was, how often do you try running $ multiple truly CPU intensive DOS applications under Windows? Whenever $ I heard mentioned over and over again that there is a program called TAME under DOS/Windows which will allow you to detect and eliminate timing loop to speed up Windows. Never try that myself though. $ 1) Disk *writes* can be buffered under HPFS. As far as I know, all $ the DOS disk cachers under FAT are write-through, so that you can $ turn your machine off immediately after doing a write without losing $ BBBBzzzzzzttt !!! There are quite a few write buffering cache programs under DOS. Like SUPERPCK and HYPERDISK. And they perform quite well with the crummy MesSyDOS FAT disk structure, thank you. $ 3) I'm not a DOS expert, but I believe there is significant overhead in $ task switching between two DOS sessions that are really only using the $ single DOS session available under Windows. OS/2 runs all DOS sessions $ completely independently, and thus is far more efficient at switching $ between them. $ DOS sessions under Windows 3.0 enhanced mode are truely separate virtual 86 machines. As far as I know, if OS/2 uses the same virtual 86 approach (which is vital for DOS compatibility), it will suffer the same performance problem. ..... But it might do better with a true 32-bit native 386 protected mode as the control environment. Anyone to comment ? $ that won't run even under Windows 3.0. (Yes, that *slightly* diminishes $ the claim of running your DOS 1.1 spreadsheet if it tries hardware access, $ but this feature is far more probable to be used with say, DOS 3.x, 4.x $ and maybe 2.x.) This is because OS/2 is running in 386 protected mode and $ can "see" all memory access and translate from FAT language to HPFS language. $ .... which means taking a big performance hit again due to all the need to intercept all these stuff. Besides, a lot of people still write programs that will never run under Windows 3.0 --- I am referring to the games programmers. So, under DOS/ Windows, you have the option to quit Windows and run the games under DOS. What can you do once you loaded up OS/2 ? Is there are way to "PARK" OS/2 to one side to prevent it from interferring with the games ? Please comment. $ But installing HPFS means completely re-formatting your hard drive. So $ you back up your current partitions, and restore under the DOS box after $ installing OS/2. Big deal. It's well worth the massive increase in $ performance you'll get. I used OS/2 1.2 under FAT for a few months and $ then reformatted to HPFS on the advice from a co-worker. I was *amazed* $ at the difference. I could *feel* the system running faster. Why is $ How do you use your DOS environment ? Boot up a plain vanilla DOS ? With "BUFFERS=20" as your disk cache ? Or do you use thing like SUPERPCK, QEMM etc. etc. ? $ this a fatal flaw? This is the computer industry. You're going to have $ to give up your old nasty DOS 1.x and 2.x apps eventually and look to the $ future. $ Ahhh !! But you have to provide a gradual migration path. Given the current situation (created by the Windows 3.0 menia), it should be okay to ignore DOS 1.x and 2.x. But, I still want to be able to run my DOS based games ! $ Like I said, I haven't seen it running yet. It *is* ready to ship, and $ I've ordered an internal Beta copy (probably get it Monday). The official $ I believe everybody is waiting to see your comment on how it run on Tuesday morning. ;-). Personally, I like the idea of lightweight threads and 32-bit linear address space in OS/2 386. As soon as they fix the problem with the DOS compatibility box, make it capable of running certain DOS extender programs, make it able to run Windows 3 program straight off, make it non-IBM machine specific, make it an open standard, make it cheap and provide a way for me to run those games which demand full control of the 386 CPU, I will switch to OS/2 anytime. .... Be it OS/2 from IBM or OS/2 from Microsoft (anyone else ????). .... Don't forget to include superVGA drivers for ATI VGA Wonder card, and make it work with Sound Blaster, etc. etc. ;-) Regards, ___o``\________________________________________________ ___ __ _ _ Peter Lim. V````\ @ @ . .. ... .- -> 76 MIPS at under US$20K !! --- -- - - /.------------------------------------------------ === == = = >--_// . .. ... .- -> 57 MIPS at under US$12K !! `' . If you guessed SUN, IBM or DEC, your are wrong ! E-mail: plim@hpsgwg.HP.COM Snail-mail: Hewlett Packard Singapore, Tel: (065)-279-2289 (ICDS, ICS) Telnet: 520-2289 1150 Depot Road, Singapore 0410. #include