Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Article #416Re: help : which is better MSDOS 5.0 or DRDOS 6.0
From: Eric Scoles
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:15
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:15
47 lines
3011 bytes
3011 bytes
In <Jim_Johnson.0600@abcd.Houghton.MI.US> Jim_Johnson@abcd.Houghton.MI.US (Jim Johnson) writes: >I have installed MSDOS 5.0 on several machines and DRDOS 6.0 on one (mine). >I can't give you an all inclusive - "choose this one" type of response. >Both are significantly better than their predecessors. I would like to >make a point though - both versions of DOS are aimmed at 386/486 machines. >They both give you much more conventional memory if you can stuff code into >all the nooks and crannies available to remappable memory (386/486). On a >286 machine or an 8086 with expanded memory, I think DRDOS 6.0 has a bit >more flexibility for memory useage than MSDOS 5. I'll just comment that my personal opinion is the opposite -- for most 286s, DRDOS is not as "good" -- you can only use UMBs if you have LEAP or NEAT chipsets, and you can't load that super disk cache high without EMS. >I've heard that MSDOS 5.0 is a bit faster, but I haven't installed both >DOSes on the same machine running the same applications, so I really can't >say whether or not this is true. For some reason, the DRDOS update seems to boot a _lot_ faster than the fiels it replaces. >DRDOS 6.0 comes with a much better set of utilities (I removed many of the >little PD .COM files from my hard drive that I've have used for years), but >keep in mind that BASIC in whatever form is useful for a lot of quick and >dirty tasks and MSDOS 5.0 comes with QBasic and DRDOS has no included >programming language. From what little I have used DRDOS's graphical >shell, it appears to be a stripped down version of GEM - which was quite >popular. Re. the shell -- Mr. Johnson probably didn't try to do anything with it ( 8-) ), 'cause you more or less can't. He's probably got a real shell. So if a bundled shell matters, IMHO, that's a strike versus DRDOS. But the task switcher is quite nice -- _very_ stable! It has a nice feature set, too. And it uses XMS (the DOS task swapper doesn't). I think the task switcher is the best bonus, and hardly anybody mentions it. I do feel the lack of a BASIC from time to time, though. >-- Via DLG Pro v0.995 >Jim Johnson- >*** Remember, they're only tools - Not a way of life! *** -- Eric Scoles : <<insert witty, pithy comment scls_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu : here >> University of Rochester --------: ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Jul29.161508.10404@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!wupost!udel!rochester!galileo.cc.rochester.edu!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!scls_ssReferences:
<Jim_Johnson.0600@abcd.Houghton.MI.US>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!wupost!udel!rochester!galileo.cc.rochester.edu!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!scls_ss From: scls_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Eric Scoles) Subject: Re: help : which is better MSDOS 5.0 or DRDOS 6.0 Message-ID: <1992Jul29.161508.10404@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> Sender: news@galileo.cc.rochester.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: uhura.cc.rochester.edu Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York References: <Jim_Johnson.0600@abcd.Houghton.MI.US> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 16:15:08 GMT Lines: 47