Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!smsmith
From: smsmith@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: New DOS(s)    Yes, but WHY upgrade?
Keywords: MS-DOS, DR-DOS, 5.0
Message-ID: <1991Jun13.155214.13053@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 13 Jun 91 15:52:14 GMT
Sender: news@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University
Lines: 67
Nntp-Posting-Host: bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu

>>Can anybody give me a good reason why I should upgrade to DOS 5.0
>>from DOS 4.01???  Getting a measly 5k or 10k more base memory is
>>NOT worth $60!!!
>
>How about an extra 50K+ on a 286 or better! Leaves 630K Free I am told (will
>find out tomorrow when My copy arrives)

Yes, but what about people in my situation?  Sure, DOS 5 can load
itself in high memory, but if you use Desqview then you CAN'T let
DOS 5 use the high memory because Desqview needs that area to load
itself, plus it uses the first 64k of extended memory for HMA which
DOS 5 wants to use too.

Here's a comment from the desqview newsgroup which illustrates what
I mean:

   Well, I've installed IBM DOS 5.0. (Not Microsoft, 
   since they haven't shipped me
   a review copy yet). It's great if you DON'T RUN QEMM/DV!
   The problem is: DOS= command. If you DOS=HIGH to 
   load DOS in the HMA, you get
   something like 630K of conventional memory. 
   Unfortunatly, Desqview now loads,
   and since it can't use the HMA takes conventional 
   ram and your back to SQUARE
   ONE!  Also, if you say DOS=UMB then 
   Desqview can't use any UMBs either!  I
   settled for leaving DOS low and using 
   QEMM for all upper memory operations. Of
   course, you may as well stick with DOS 4.01!

In other words, I'm NOT asking if DOS 5 is an improvement over 
previous DOS versions!  I'm asking if DOS 5 is worth the upgrade
for those of use who use QEMM and DV to multitask.

I've received a couple of email letters that completely missed
this point.

On the other hand, a few people have noted correctly the following
benefits:

  --2.88 MEG floppy support
  --no more need for share.exe (6k savings, though I use noshare.exe
    which only uses 0.2k)
  --10-20k more base ram (for QEMM and Desqview users) 
  --ability to still use Desqview and QEMM (QEMM is a better high
    memory manager)
  --cheap price ($39 from Egghead  1-800-EGG-HEAD)
  --someone noted a slight increase in speed (true?)
  --4DOS-like commands
  --DOS help (with the parameter '?' I believe)

Drawbacks:

  --not compatible with Manifest!!!  Quarterdeck is supposedly 
    writing a compatible version (I use Manifest several times a
    day too  :(  ).
  --someone said that Quarterdeck is writing a new version of
    Desqview that will be totally compatible with DOS 5 (available
    for $10 upgrade fee).   To me this means there are
    incompatibilities; anybody have specifics?

Stephen M. Smith  \  +  /
<smsmith@magnus.  \+++++/    " #*&<-[89s]*(k#$@-_=//a2$]'+=.(2_&*%>,,@
 acs.ohio-state.  \  +  /      {7%*@,..":27g)-=,#*:.#,/6&1*.4-,l@#9:-)  "
 edu>             \  +  /
 BTW, WYSInaWYG   \  +  /                              --witty.saying.ARC