Article View: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Article #4460Re: XMS vs EMS (performance)
From: Charlap
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 1991 02:39
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 1991 02:39
7 lines
868 bytes
868 bytes
I'd go with XMS, since EMS appears to be slowly on its way out. It seems quite logical that the packet drivers will soon be available in full protected mode, and when that happens, it will be much easier to convert your program over to that format (which, I assume, would be the most preferable in this situation) --- Dave (cd5340@mars.njit.edu)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2184@njitgw.njit.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!csn!ub!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!udel!princeton!njin!njitgw!mars.njit.edu!cd5340References:
<1991Jan30.134859.22160@linus.mitre.org>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!csn!ub!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!udel!princeton!njin!njitgw!mars.njit.edu!cd5340 From: cd5340@mars.njit.edu (Charlap) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer Subject: Re: XMS vs EMS (performance) Message-ID: <2184@njitgw.njit.edu> Date: 31 Jan 91 02:39:51 GMT References: <1991Jan30.134859.22160@linus.mitre.org> Sender: news@njitgw.njit.edu Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology Lines: 7