Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
From: jrobi@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (James Barton)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: New DOS(s)    Yes, but WHY upgrade?
Summary: Even more main memory
Keywords: MS-DOS, DR-DOS, 5.0
Message-ID: <50959@ut-emx.uucp>
Date: 21 Jun 91 14:48:56 GMT
References: <1991Jun12.170655.7003@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> <1991Jun13.074906.8024@monu0.cc.monash.edu.au> <1991Jun20.221531.9977@morrow.stanford.edu>
Sender: news@ut-emx.uucp
Reply-To: jrobi@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (James Barton)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin
Lines: 19

In article <1991Jun20.221531.9977@morrow.stanford.edu> whenry@lindy.Stanford.EDU (homo obsolescensis) writes:
>Has anyone tried 5.0 with QRAM/loadhi?  I am currently (dos 3.3)
>getting as much as 690K on a 286 with 1 Meg ram (a NEAT machine),
>with a bunch of drivers and tsr installed high, and would hate to lose this.
>
>Walter Henry

I've got a 286 NEAT machine and I'm running The Last Byte (which provides
access to UMB's for NEATs).  I picked up another 35K or so of main memory
with DOS 5 because, I think, DOS 5 doesn't just load command.com high, 
it also loads MSDOS.SYS and IO.SYS high.  I get about 641,000 free even
with a whole *load of device drivers.  If you're getting 690 you must not
have a VG, or have I missed some other way the sqeeze main mem from this
board?


-- 
James Barton                      I've never quibbled, if it was ribbald,
jrobi@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu          I would devour where others merely nibbled.