🚀 go-pugleaf

	I've had a chance to unofficially play with DOS 5.0, and here are my thoughts  
on your questions:


In article <1991May16.174140.26161@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu  
(Jess M Holle) writes:
>   1)  What problems does it solve (this guy said that the 640K limit would
>       go away completely so that any amount of memory could be used and that
>       it would have built in "sturdy" multitasking among other things)?
		NOT!  The guy is on drugs.  The version I saw (5.000.149 Beta) gave me (286 
2MB 12MHz) about 630k RAM free.  It laoded the COMMAND.COM kernel high, which  
sucked becasue I use 4DOS, and 4DOS could not access the XMS memory that was  
reserved for COMMAND.COM.  A bit of fiddling in config.sys was required to load  
4DOS into high RAM.  Multitasking?  I doubt.  At least, not on my 286.  Of  
course, I did not have any docs to help me out...  (As if MS-DOCS would help  
anybody.  :-)  )

>   2)  How good are the actual improvements looking/how important are they?
		The most disturbing thing about DOS-5.0 is it's new HELP command.  The  
command brings up stuff like: 
C:\>HELP DIR
DIR /wp  [d:][filespec]

	Yahoo!  On the other hand, you can't get rid of it, even if you don't load  
command.com.  i.e., HELP overrides 4DOS's internal (and much better) HELP  
command.  Coincidence, or deliberate annoyance of command.com haters? 

> This information is requested solely out of my desire to be better informed
> about MS-DOS.
> 
> Jess Holle

--
Heath Hunnicutt              | X-Wing Pilot: "Ahhh! I'm gonna die!"
heathh@pooh.cco.caltech.edu  | Rebel Command: "Stay on target..."
131.215.48.30                | ... my life at Caltech
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the unlikely event that I might seem to be representing Caltech's opinion on  
any matter, I am not.  In fact, if it is brought to my attention that I share  
any particular opinion with Caltech's administration and other assorted Yahoos,  
I will change that opinion of mine.