DOS vs. Memory

  • Thread starter Thread starter radio848
  • Start date Start date
R

radio848

Let's start off by saying: I DO love messing around.
Now, I have XP_Home, and man, am I curious.
For my needs, memmaker worked pretty good in 98 & 95.
Now for XP. I find that you can mannually ADJUST some memory alocation in
XP. "Similar to DOS"
I haven't tried it yet, but maybe someone has. Please give me some feed back
before I get myself into trouble.
has anyone tried using "memmaker" to configure XP memory at the command
line, BOOT,..?
I changed the file= setting from 40 to 150 and some things started working a
lot better.
Waddya think
Wayne
(e-mail address removed)
"Friendship through radio"
 
radio848 said:
Let's start off by saying: I DO love messing around.
Now, I have XP_Home, and man, am I curious.
For my needs, memmaker worked pretty good in 98 & 95.
Now for XP. I find that you can mannually ADJUST some memory alocation in
XP. "Similar to DOS"
I haven't tried it yet, but maybe someone has. Please give me some feed back
before I get myself into trouble.
has anyone tried using "memmaker" to configure XP memory at the command
line, BOOT,..?
I changed the file= setting from 40 to 150 and some things started working a
lot better.
Waddya think
Wayne
Click to expand...

Wayne,

Windows XP and MS-DOS are significantly different.
The previous operating systems you refer to (Windows 95 & 98) still had some
"dependence" on MS-DOS and MS-DOS based technologies and practices.
Windows XP is based on the Windows NT product line (a true 32-bit operating
system family). We no longer have any dependence on MS-DOS and many of the
practices and techniques you are familiar with are no longer relevant. One
such reduced is the use of tools like "memmaker".
There is no "boot" to DOS, and DOS is no loner part of the boot process,
i.e. no config.sys or autoexec.bat to load drives etc before the rest of the
GUI.

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups
 
radio848 said:
Let's start off by saying: I DO love messing around.
Now, I have XP_Home, and man, am I curious.
For my needs, memmaker worked pretty good in 98 & 95.
Now for XP. I find that you can mannually ADJUST some memory alocation in
XP. "Similar to DOS"
I haven't tried it yet, but maybe someone has. Please give me some feed back
before I get myself into trouble.
has anyone tried using "memmaker" to configure XP memory at the command
line, BOOT,..?
Click to expand...

Memaker related to the optimisation of the basic conventional DOS memory
in days when a lot of things got loaded in it to make systems work.
Optimisation of this is completely irrelevant to XP which does not use
any DOS underpinning even to boot with, and does not permit loading of
real mode drivers and the like in support of DOS programs. Such
optimisation for DOS programs as is possible is limited and does not
need such a program. For best DOS conventional memory, edit the
windows\system32\config.nt and autoexec.nt files.

In config.nt have (apart from the large number of REM lines) just
EMM = B=4000 RAM
(note the exact spaces - either side of the first = and before RAM,
none next to the second =) and

dos=high, umb
device=%SystemRoot%\system32\himem.sys
files=40
(or higher files= if needed)

and in autoexec.nt have

REM Install DPMI support
lh %SystemRoot%\system32\dosx

with other earlier lh lines REM ed out, and then any SET or PATH lines
that may already be present at the end.

This should give about 612K for a program, run from a shortcut made to
its .exe file. R-click the shortcut, Properties and on the Memory page
you can set an explicit value - rather than Auto - for any EMM or XMS
memory it may need, and for initial environment space
 
Alex:
As I said to another in this group; "Logic usually works."
I thought there was a way to manually configure resources in XP, and now you
have helped me a bunch.
Thank you.
 
Back
Top