DOS 3.3 vs. 4.0 (or 4.01) partitioning question.

Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc

Article #39830

#39830

From: Finn Markmanrud
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 1989 13:51

11 lines
1069 bytes

I have seen the discussions on DOS 3.3 vs. DOS 4.0, and this may already have
been addressed, but if so, I missed it:
When choosing large partition(s) vs. standard (32MB) partitions, I was left
with about 70K less RAM. Is this taken care of in 4.0 (or 4.01)?

-- 
+=====================+========================+=============================+
|   Finn Markmanrud   |   finn@mojo.nec.com    |   "It can't happen here."   | 
|   (508) 264 8668    |      Boxboro, MA       |                     F.Z.    |
+=====================+========================+=============================+

Technical Details

Message-ID: <229@mojo.UUCP>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!mit-amt!snorkelwacker!spdcc!mirror!necntc!necis!mojo!finn

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!mit-amt!snorkelwacker!spdcc!mirror!necntc!necis!mojo!finn
From: finn@mojo.UUCP (Finn Markmanrud)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: DOS 3.3 vs. 4.0 (or 4.01) partitioning question.
Keywords: DOS 3.3, 4.0, 640k RAM.
Message-ID: <229@mojo.UUCP>
Date: 15 Dec 89 13:51:43 GMT
Reply-To: finn@mojo.UUCP (Finn Markmanrud)
Organization: NEC Information Systems, Boxborough, MA
Lines: 10