[Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!

ACKSTABBING! XIDE will remain closed-source and I plan NEVER to do any more open-source work: Too many absolute FREAKS and "MAD Dogs!" to put-up with!! Please do NOT address any further UIDE questions/comments to me. I now regard it as "defunct", and you now know why.

Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!

t;newer" * drivers and report back because they didn't work for me (refused to * boot on Lenovo 2011 ... The above is the first I ever heard of that, as well! Although I was tired of Rugxulo's never-ending "upgrade-Upgrade-UPGRADE" E-Mails, did he really believe I would no

[Freedos-user] Rugxulo IS A FRAUD!!!

Note the following comments by Rugxulo in this post: * If you want to try his latest drivers (Mar-18) [sic], grab them from * his DropBox, but since he doesn't even use FreeDOS (only MS-DOS 6.22), * I'm not sure if they work at all anymore: And note the following comments by Rugxulo in this post

Re: [Freedos-user] Rugxulo IS A FRAUD!!!

To all on this forum who say "Calmaros" [Lets be calm] etc., read THIS: In 1975. 1977, 1979, and 1981, I was declared DEAD by my parents, after a RIDICULOUS and totally WRONG comment from my sister in 1975, and also over my converting from Judaism to Episcopalianism in 1974. They died in 1987 (m

[Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

uot; 512-byte DOS I-O requests, I shall leave UIDE "as is". UIDE thus needs no changes to go above 2-TB, since it does issue all 48 bits of disk LBA address for any hard-disk read or write command. Jack Ellis --

[Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

Sorry, in my comments to Scott about large 4K-sector disk drives, all occurrences of 2-GB should actually be 2-TB (Terabytes)! As I often note, "age 65" is S much fun (i.e. NOT!). -- Xperia(TM) PLAY It's a major brea

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

tem now supports them as well (nor likely ever will)! If the PC industry ever tries making this "mandatory", like they did in "Ramming down our throats!" such things as PCI, PCI-X, and now God-DAMNED AHCI, I plan to PITCH my entire PC system, then go into full retirement [or per

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

Michael, You missed my point about backward compatibility, which has been notoriously ABSENT from the historical events I noted. > PCI was desperately needed by server class hardware ... Fine, let them have it. But why did ORDINARY users have to be forced into buying newer mainboards, which O

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

nishing returns! And if that is any reason for advocating 4K disk sectors, i.e. to save such miniscule amounts of track space, the hard-disk "industry" is now "DUMBER than I thought!!" [Paul Newman, from the 1989 movie "Blaze"]. Jack R. Ellis

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

Scott, My apologies ("age 65" again!); in my last post about disk ECC sizes, I meant to say "10 byte" and "16 byte" ECCs, not "bit". Jack R. Ellis -- Xperia(TM) PLAY It

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

ught NOT, then I did NOT need my "destiny" to be controlled by those a**holes! And I made that decision at only age 23! Your "Forth's Dilemma" is not any sort of "rant" but really a statement of fact. I know, since I have "BEEN there and DONE that!", as

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

hat "diagnosis", I absolutely agree with you. In the U.S. we have a 2-word phrase that in my opinion perfectly describes the current PC industry situation -- "It SUCKS!!" Jack R. Ellis -- Xperia(T

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

> There are so many inaccuracies and distortions in the reply that you > sent, I'm going to assume you are just irritated or in a bad mood. In fact, I was neither, until reading what you post below. Once again you choose only to "pick nits" at the technical examples I mention, but flatly REFUSE

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

>> "One estimate for 4K sector technology puts this at 100 bytes of ECC >> data needed for a 4K sector, versus 320 (40x8) for 8 512B sectors. > > Yes, that's about 5% (5,37% to be exact) you'll gain from 4k sectors. Perhaps a bit more than 5% due to fewer inter-sector gaps. Since they are kept

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

>> ... but on modern hardware we have enough to burn. > > Wasting anything just "because we can afford it" is generally > a bad idea. With which I absolutely agree. But it seems only I wonder how much farther ahead Windows/Linux might be, if their kernels and drivers [as a MINIMUM!] HAD in fact

Re: [Freedos-user] Large drives with 4k sectors presenting as 512b?

> My point in the thread is that YOU do not get to choose what is the > appropriate rate of progress. Either stock up on spare parts, or move > along. Disparaging everybody in the industry who has a different point > of view is ranting. I do not call it "progress" when the PC industry flatly DE

[Freedos-user] UIDE

Hard Disk Power Down Mode > Standby Time Out > Suspend Time Out > > Are these three also involved? Yes. ANYTHING that would cause a hard-disk or CD/DVD drive to appear "not ready" for extended time spans should be disabled! > Currently my pertinent FDCONFIG.SYS

[Freedos-user] UIDE driver help

, it shall not try to "move" itself to upper-memory, and vice-versa.And again, the name after /D: must "match" the name given to UIDE or UIDEJR. My drivers "default" to UDVD1 thus if you give SHSUCDX/SHCDX33E the switch /D:UDVD1 you needn't have a /D: swit

Re: [Freedos-user] UIDE

", and then retry that command when first it fails?? If you can determine a reliable way for ALL disks to "come out of stand-by" mode, i.e. at what point UIDE should have a long time-out value, I can program that. But, it must b

Re: [Freedos-user] Basic question on UIDE

assembly-language (NO wretched "C" here!), with up to a 4-GIGABYTE cache capacity! None of the older caches can get that high! > I poked around in the documentation but did not find this information. Sorry, the source file for UIDE does say that it uses "Write Through" cach

Re: [Freedos-user] UIDE vs drive power management spin down timers

O, not the current 400-msec timeout. Shall "experiment" re: this idea. Might cause some "confusion" among UIDE users, who will now see a 7-second delay in some error handling. But, if UIDE needs only a timeout change to handle "sleeping" h

Re: [Freedos-user] UIDE vs drive power management spin down timers

ter whether it is the driver or just DOS which says reset. If DOS does 5 retries, as you indicate, this would cost the user a maximum of 35 seconds (my 7 seconds * 5 tries) and thus is NOT any sort of an indefinite &

Re: [Freedos-user] UIDE vs drive power management spin down timers

d to spin up. Understood, if in fact DOS issues a drive-reset on any error. Also, note that my drivers do NOT allow "removable" or "hot-pluggable" HARD disks, since I cannot be sure all DOS kernels can handle media-change "events" in their HARD-disk logic! Jack

[Freedos-user] UIDE vs drive power management spin down timers

tions and offers more controllers/drives, HMA loading, and many bugs fixed v.s. XDMA/XCDROM/GCDROM. The new UIDEJR is much better for a small-driver user! Jack R. Ellis -- Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability

Re: [Freedos-user] Problem with UIDE

either. This should allow your "boot" A: drive to go on being used.After users have downloaded all they need from your CD, they can then change UIDE to handle regular files from the CD by getting rid of /N2 and re-adding a /D: device name. Jack R. Ellis

[Freedos-user] New 16-May-2011 UIDE (Etc.) Available.

ivers seem to work O.K., and I agree with Eric and others that a "long jump", etc. will flush a CPU code cache (at least in part!). Nonetheless, I prefer to be SAFE and prevent such possible problems by having correctly-written logic! Jack R. Ellis -

Re: [Freedos-user] Problem with UIDE

ading JEMM386/JEMMEX, or UMBPCI? Although UMBPCI cannot run on "absolutely" all chip- sets and mainboards, it has never "failed" me or others in its memory-test procedures. Might SAVE your CD "boot" scheme, on a system that otherwise cannot use JEMM386/JEMMEX. Jack

[Freedos-user] **NO** Problem with XMGR, **NOR** with UIDE!!

I am getting VERY TIRED of responding to FALSE problems about my drivers!! Last month, an entire thread on this forum was labelled "Problem with UIDE", when that actually was FALSE! The problem was only a device-driver conflict, and it took several posts here to note UIDE was being run WITH som

[Freedos-user] "Test" UIDE Available, For VirtualBox.

ot; net Also, Japheth tells me VirtualBox has been updated, and his XDMA32 "JLM" driver is now O.K. with JEMM386 and the new VirtualBox release.None- theless, I still intend to offer UIDE /E for all users, as there may yet be other "emulator" problems, and since using "

Re: [Freedos-user] Weird UIDE.SYS (FreeDOS 1.1 Test) behavior under VirtualBox

this list!However, if you do want to go on using it, I would seriously "gripe" to Oracle (or its maintainers, whoever they might be!) that if VirtualBox now FAILS a 17-year-old test for the PCI BIOS, they need to DO SOMETHING about it, QUICK! Jack R. Ellis --

Re: [Freedos-user] "Test" UIDE Available, For VirtualBox.

EXT disk operation does not have to re-read them. Having to "discard" DOS directories, to make room for new data files, is the main loss of speed when using UIDE, so users should allocate as large a UIDE cache as possible. Jack R. Ellis --

[Freedos-user] UIDE /E For VirtualBox Now "Officially" Released.

isk I-O. This is much better! Jack R. Ellis -- Magic Quadrant for Content-Aware Data Loss Prevention Research study explores the data loss prevention market. Includes in-depth analysis on the changes within the DLP ma

Re: [Freedos-user] "Test" UIDE Available, For VirtualBox.

ludicrously cheap, why not USE it for a cache? > PS: Best wishes for your speedy operation recovery ... Thanks! I am "up and about", but food with high fat levels still HURTS when I eat it, due to "less" digestive fluids in my system! The Doc says it can take 18 mo

[Freedos-user] Using /E And Other UIDE Options.

However, you SHOULD get "Disk run by the BIOS: 1." or greater if your system uses more than one hard-disk. This means UIDE was told by the BIOS how many hard-disks are present, and UIDE will then "call the B

Re: [Freedos-user] FD 1.1 Bootfloppy Problems

enotes an upper-memory "examination" problem with JEMM386/JEMMEX. You may then need to use specific I= and X= commands in loading the JEMM drivers, to "avoid" memory areas that cause trouble! In any case, do post your actual CONFIG.SYS file, so I and Japheth can see exactly wha

Re: [Freedos-user] FD 1.1 Bootfloppy Problems

Bernd, My apologies -- Hadn't noticed that I was in fact responding to "old news"! Jack R. Ellis -- BlackBerry® DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA The must-attend event for mobile developer

[Freedos-user] IMPORTANT "Off Topic" -- U.S. Medical Costs!!

al bill, for only a gall-bladder removal. One can only wonder what such U.S. WHOREHOUSES charge the uninsured for cancer or a heart-attack!! Jack R. Ellis -- BlackBerry® DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Th

[Freedos-user] UIDE Performance -- Small Caches DO Work O.K.!

But, it now seems that "casual" users of DOS and UIDE need NOT worry re: using only a 25/50/100-MB cache -- They do seem to perform a LOT better than I expected! Jack R. Ellis -- EMC VNX: the world's simple

[Freedos-user] UIDE Drivers Updated, "New" UIDE2.

Johnson Lam has posted an updated 9-Sep-2011 DRIVERS.ZIP file, on his website at , which contains a "new" UIDE2, also updates to the other UIDE drivers. UIDE2 uses old-style "protected mode" caching, that was in UIDE until August, 2010. Try as I may, I simply cannot get the current all-XMS UIDE

[Freedos-user] Upgraded UIDE2 and UIDE-S Available!

Johnson Lam has posted an updated 23-Sep-2011 DRIVERS.ZIP file, with all UIDE drivers improved, on his website at -- UIDE-S now runs 30 BIOS disks/diskettes and 8 CD/DVD drives, and it also sets the "UIDE$" default name when no CD/DVD drives are found, m

[Freedos-user] New UIDE Drivers -- Common "Core" Logic.

Johnson Lam has posted a new 30-Sep-2011 DRIVERS.ZIP file on his website at . The UIDE, UIDE2 and UIDE-S drivers can now be assembled from the UIDE.ASM source file, using a /dPMDVR switch for UIDE2 and a /dMINDVR switch for UIDE-S ("protected" or "mini

[Freedos-user] Tom's "ALWAYS Good" Ideas!

lf is Tom's suggestions in 2003 of (A) using XMS memory as a buffer for UltraDMA I-O which is misaligned or crosses a 64K boundary, and (B) using "free" HMA space to save upper/DOS memory and putting much of my drivers there! Tom is often quiet in the background, but when

[Freedos-user] New 7-Oct-2011 UIDE Drivers, Fixing A "BUG" In The "EDD BIOS"!

Johnson Lam has posted an updated 7-Oct-2011 DRIVERS.ZIP file on his website, at . The site still has a "Last Update" date of 9-30, but the files which download ARE dated 10-07-2011 and have been verified O.K. This update is not more driver improvements

Re: [Freedos-user] FDAPM

I run a 15-year-old Windows/NT V4.0, "backed up" (and restored occasionally!) by a 17-year-old V6.22 MS-DOS. My system is a "flat" desktop (not a "tower") with its power-supply fan and a 13-CFM extra fan, thanks to my old 85-watt AMD 2100 CPU. TOO MUCH, so now I have a 45 watt AMD 3000+, which

[Freedos-user] UIDE Drivers Updated, UIDE-S Eliminated!

Johnson Lam has posted a new 16-Oct-2011 DRIVERS.ZIP file on his website at . In it, UIDE has again been reduced down to a 7.5K-byte file, same as UIDE2, for "boot" diskettes and other systems having limited space.So, UIDE-S is no longer needed, and it

[Freedos-user] Undeserved Comment Re: EMM/JEMM, "A20", Etc.

I am DISMAYED by some of the recent comments on this board regarding "old EMM386" v.s. JEMM386/JEMMEX, the "A20" line etc.! First, I use and recommend JEMM386/JEMMEX with my UIDE and other drivers. I absolutely REFUSE using "old EMM386" by Gates & Co. because it has (A) Never-fixed BUGS in its

Re: [Freedos-user] Undeserved Comment Re: EMM/JEMM, "A20", Etc.

have caused such a problem. In my opinion, you need quite a bit more "evidence", BEFORE you can fault the "A20" line only because your crash appeared to occur "with only XMS"!! Jack R. Ellis ---

Re: [Freedos-user] Undeserved Comment Re: EMM/JEMM, "A20", Etc.

In my previous post about FD-EMM386 being changed to JEMM386, and to be perfectly clear, those "Flat-Ass DISASTERS" I noted are not at ALL in JEMM386 but are in FD-EMM386 and had to be CORRECTED by Japheth! Sorry for any confusion caused by me -- JEMM386/JEMMEX ARE the "EMM" drivers of choice, i

Re: [Freedos-user] Undeserved Comment Re: EMM/JEMM, "A20", Etc.

ite 4-letter word!]. > Note that my suggestion is NOT related to Alain's "I had > vague problems and think A20 changes help". It is more > my GENERAL suggestion - namely that we should stop switching > around a dusty rusty address gate line. Let's just make SURE &

Re: [Freedos-user] Undeserved Comment Re: EMM/JEMM, "A20", Etc.

nel already IS doing part of the work! Try ALL of the >> options on Lucho's "boot" diskette"! You will find that only >> MS-DOS and PC-DOS are not hard-enabling "A20" when they load ... > > So some drivers can't cope with buggy BIOS/kernels with re

Re: [Freedos-user] Undeserved Comment Re: EMM/JEMM, "A20", Etc.

ware" list for FreeDOS, then "You go right ahead!" and use FD-EMM386. As for me and quite a lot of others, I will use JEMM386, which I consider to be FAR superior and always WILL be! Jack R. Ellis -- The

Re: [Freedos-user] Undeserved Comment Re: EMM/JEMM, "A20", Etc.

driver handles allocation/use of that memory. > Are the bugs dependent on hardware? Most are not, but a few are. Read the JEMM ChangeLog, then you can decide which hardware-dependent problems might have affected its "predecessor" FD-EMM386. Jack R. Ellis

[Freedos-user] 4th-Grade English.

It is VERY TIRESOME, having to respond to posts on this board with "I DID NOT say ..." or "I DO NOT agree ...", when one's REAL words are either "misunderstood" or often TWISTED for some other agenda! Many such "replies" would cause their writers to FAIL, QUICKLY, in almost all U.S. High-School "

Re: [Freedos-user] 4th-Grade English.

> [1] Not everybody on the list is a native English speaker. True. But I know enough to differentiate between (A) language problems which I correct, as you can see if you compare Alain's original post to my answer, and (B) "missing" or "changing" THE POINT of posts on boards like this! It was

Re: [Freedos-user] Undeserved Comment Re: EMM/JEMM, "A20", Etc.

he > only A20 work of the kernel are calls to XMS driver functions > number 5 and 6. Maybe an obscure side-effect of something else > distorts your measurement? The boot menu used by Lucho might > enable A20 but the MS / PC DOS kernel then disabled it again? REALLY doubtful, since wh

Re: [Freedos-user] 4th-Grade English.

sh", which did get peoples' attention, but in the wrong way. THANK YOU for your insight, in the same sense as Captain Armstrong [in your 1980s "Anzacs" series], who initially addressed his all-volunteer platoon by saying, "You shall be treated

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDos4Kids (and Kids-at-heart)

ld "pick them up" and run them O.K. If not, only a minor loss, as SSD disks are so fast that they really should not need caching. You can then run UIDE with its /N1 switch which causes it to ignore hard-disks but continue to cache dis

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDos4Kids (and Kids-at-heart)

>> On the topic of wear leveling I would go with the DOM products, as >> they are designed as hard drive replacements. It's pretty easy to >> burn up FLASH so wear leveling is important. > > FWIW, they claim that FLASH has unlimited read capability, but is > limited in the number of writes. So

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDos4Kids (and Kids-at-heart)

cerned about absolute speed (not with UIDE, anyway!) nor power consumption, but I AM still "concerned" over all noted in this thread re: FLASH-disk "cycle limits"! For me, and I expect a LOT of others like me, a "garden variety" $40 hard disk should do just fine WITHO

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDos4Kids (and Kids-at-heart)

their advantages, but at present, the cost of REGULAR hard disks makes SSDs a "niche" market only. Perhaps if SSD costs drop (a LOT!), and most such "reliability" issues go away (COMPLETELY!), they may replace most traditional hard-disks. But, Seagate "et al" keep mak

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS boot problem

of it! This may make FreeDOS overlay the actual Win/XP "boot" sector -- NOT what you want! But it seems the REVERSE, installing FreeDOS followed by Win/XP, might cause THEM to overlay the FreeDOS "boot" sector

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS Memory

>> 1. Would like to ask how much memory does FreeDOS support, e.g. 4 GiB? > > Yes you'll be limited to a maximum of 4GB if you have 4GB or more. In > practice this maximum could be anywhere between 2GB and 4GB (usually > 3.3GB or 3.5GB) due to PCI chipset device mapping into the top of memory. On

Re: [Freedos-user] UIDE.SYS delays boot process in VirtualBox

>> Anybody has an idea how to solve this with free software? Would the >> eltorito.sys driver help? > > Wasn't the solution to enable IO APIC or something like that? So a > different enabled chipset. > > ELTORITO.SYS can help, but only if you configure the VM to start with > booting from CD, aft

Re: [Freedos-user] Re : Support for 4k byte sectors

For what it is worth, my "take" on 4K-byte (or other-than-512 byte) sectors for DOS systems is very-much the same as Eric's and I shall "reply" to some comments from one of his posts -- > Also depending on your BIOS, you could have a limit of at > most 2^28, 2^32 or 2^48 sectors per disk ... Not

Re: [Freedos-user] Re : Support for 4k byte sectors

Eric, >> ... I issue 28-bit commands for up to 28-bit addresses, >> while I issue 48-bitters for larger addresses. Runs >> fine! > > I meant if the BIOS only sees the first 2^N sectors and > the partition table describes more than that, UIDE will > probably not modify the BIOS-reported disk siz

Re: [Freedos-user] Re : Support for 4k byte sectors

Re: 4K sector sizes, I realized today that UIDE, UIDE2, and UIDEJR likely will NOT be affected at all -- 1) DOS has a 64K-byte limit for read/write requests, in fact 127 sectors of 512 bytes (the "UIDE" drivers do accept 128). Since 4K-byte sectors "fit" into this limit, no physical

Re: [Freedos-user] Re : Support for 4k byte sectors

To set the record straight on caches and on UIDE -- >> Can you recommend any free int 13 or block device based delayed/ >> pooled write caching software? As far as I can remember, all >> "modern" (LBA compatible, given disk sizes on current PCs) >> implementations of this are commercial. > > I

Re: [Freedos-user] Re : Support for 4k byte sectors

> I knew this would provoke a comment from you, Jack. Yes, you always were a "provoker", weren't you, Bret? > The purpose of a cache is to put as much data in RAM as it can, so that > the disk is accessed as little as possible. It's true that the cached >

Re: [Freedos-user] USB/ASPI to DOS, 4K sectors.

> Jack has his own private reasons for not being a fan of ASPI, thus his > UIDE driver (PCI IDE/SATA storage and optical disk driver) doesn't > implement nor hook into ASPI. I'm not aware of opensource CD-writing > software that doesn't require ASPI. Not entirely tru

[Freedos-user] UIDE Update Coming -- DISGUSTING Implications!!

A "Heads Up" (warning) message to all users of UIDE and UIDE2 -- Some time ago, I considered "Read-Ahead" for UIDE/UIDE2. But effective Read-Ahead requires knowing file sizes, to prevent reading too FAR ahead and losing time! File sizes demand DOS calls, and I want UIDE/UIDE2 to remain "gener

[Freedos-user] New UIDE Available -- "64K Boundaries" Fixed.

Johnson Lam has posted a new DRIVERS.ZIP dated 24-Feb-2012 on his website at . In it, UIDE and UIDE2 are corrected so that they again handle "64K UltraDMA boundaries" properly. A user I-O buffer which crosses-over a 64K address boundary will cause the d

[Freedos-user] New UIDE -- Website Correction!

In my previous post about the new 24-Feb-2012 UIDE/UIDE2 drivers, I mistyped Johnson Lam's URL with an extra "s"! The correct URL for the new drivers is -- My apologies -- "Age 66 is SO much fun!" as I often say! ---

Re: [Freedos-user] Problem after updating to FreeDOS 1.1 with writing of environment variables.

u may want to use BUFFERS=4, or at most BUFFERS=10, in your CONFIG.SYS file. WIth UIDE present, there is no further need for a large number of DOS buffers. UIDE does a much better caching job than the old DOS buffers, and by reducing your buffer count, you may save enough HMA space to put UIDE &q

Re: [Freedos-user] Problem after updating to FreeDOS 1.1 with writing of environment variables.

eliminates your "Ghost" problem, then (A) you need to disable the "Ghost" I-O logic and run your CD/DVD drives only through UIDE, or (B) vice-versa, i.e. you must load UIDE with /N2 to avoid your "Ghost" errors. NOT any "fun", either way, I know! But, I ha

[Freedos-user] New 7-Mar-2012 UIDE, Etc. -- UIDE2 Under 7K!

Johnson Lam has posted a new 7-Mar-2012 DRIVERS.ZIP file with a much smaller UIDE2, on his website at: The UIDE2 driver, for faster speed with a protected mode system (JEMM386/JEMMEX etc.), is now less than 7K bytes in size! To achieve this, I needed t

Re: [Freedos-user] New 7-Mar-2012 UIDE, Etc. -- UIDE2 Under 7K!

u be more specific about how the driver "breaks"?? Does it display its "title" message and controller/device data, or does it simply crash?? Let me know. Jack R. Ellis -- Virtualization &

Re: [Freedos-user] New 7-Mar-2012 UIDE, Etc. -- UIDE2 Under 7K!

IOSTAR main- board and 1-GB of RAM. Has run perfectly for 5 years. I must conclude that the problems you are seeing, using JEMMEX and UIDE2, are NOT caused by those drivers. Jack R. Ellis -- This SF email is sponsosred by:

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

> Problem (seems to be) solved. Formerly I was using a line: > > INSTALLHIGH=C:\FDOS\BIN\UIDE2.SYS > > ...and this gave problems. When I replaced INSTALLHIGH with > DEVICEHIGH -- there are no problems anymore. > > I thought, that INSTALL and DEVICE keywords are synonyms for > fdconfig.sys file,

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

rnel doesn't make HMA space available to drivers until AUTOEXEC is run, so you must use a DEVLOAD command in AUTOEXEC, if you want UIDE2 to run with FreeDOS from the HMA. Then, you will be able to "amaze" friends with your only 928-byte disk/CD/DVD/ cachin

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

s no FAT32 nor "long filename" logic limiting its HMA! The UIDE driver has no such HMA limits, as it places its binary-search table in XMS memory. Jack R. Ellis -- This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azu

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

uot;Sorcerer"! > > "Wizard" is a better fit ;) - "Sorcerer" means the evil kind. Not always: King Arthur's "Merlin the Magician" is usually portrayed as a "Good Guy", and it is him I usually have in mind. If I want to be seen as a bit mor

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

dinary" word! >> Forgot to mention in my last post that if you do run >> UIDE2 in HMA space with /H, you must limit the cache [..] > > Thanks, I think, that it could be worthy to add this comment to > UIDE's readme.txt. I keep my README.TXT file small, as John

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

>> Actually, it was a bit surprising to me that I still need a software >> cache ... Well, perhaps the NVIDIA SATA isn't the best fit for DOS. > > DOS doesn't use SATA anyways (AFAIK), only IDE compatibility mode. > It would be even slower without UDMA or a software cache. As to > why you need it

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

>> I have saved XMGR for "real mode" users who run UMBBCI first, followed >> by XMGR.   In that case, XMGR is able to "read" UMBPCI's table of UMBs >> and can load there directly, which also uses 0 low-memory like JEMMEX. >> ... > > Unless you need EMS, you don't truly need JEMMEX itself ... JEMME

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

>> DOS doesn't use SATA anyways (AFAIK), only IDE compatibility mode. > > It's still much faster than the hardware, that I was using in > 1991. The HDD itself has quite large hardware cache (16 MB - > incredibly large space compared to 640 KB). Hard-disks have come a long way. In 1994, I paid

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

> I noticed that pauses while using "edit" shipped with FreeDOS > - can it really be that slow when saving edited file? Try using "EDIT" shipped with V6.22 or V7.10 MS-DOS, which I find is "not too bad"! -- This SF email

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

> Unless you need EMS, you don't truly need JEMMEX itself. Last > I checked, I don't think it would let you run XMS only unless > you did "NOEMS", and even that still left you in V86 mode. To test this, I change the first few lines of my CONFIG.SYS file which are -- DEVICE=C:\BIN\UMBPCI.SYS

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

>> Rugxulo, I REALLY think you should check AGAIN running JEMM386 >> without "NOEMS" -- worked fine for me! > > In the past I always had EMM386 enabled, and it worked fine. In fact, > some apps explicitly needed EMS and/or EMM386. But nowadays, FreeDOS > is so good at keep low RAM free that I don't

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

>> Intel "giveth" NOTHING, and followeth only "All we want is MONEY!", >> same as Gates & Co.!   In my opinion, absolutely NO excuse for AHCI >> that a better-written Windows driver could NOT have solved, but for >> Intel as-always wanting to sell-Sell-SELL new chips! > > In fairness, not every per

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

>> JEMMEX/JEMM386 also allow VCPI/DPMI to be used, > > VCPI, yes, but not DPMI, you don't (necessarily) need EMM386 for that. Same for VCPI, I suppose -- There are "subroutine packages" that set up VCPI for a user application, if needed. >> they allow "mapping" of >> upper-memory addresses into U

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

86 is NOT "solely" an "EMS" driver, not as it evolved. You are free to quote its extra features, like VCPI. I hope you see I am NOT-interested in VCPI, or DPMI, or anything but "regular" XMS, as that is the only system feature besides Int 13h on which my run-time driv

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

ely, it seems that nobody listened. I did read Wirth's comments, and he is essentially correct, although he LOST my attention by making his project specific for his needs, e.g. it includes an object-oriented language (YECCH to me, even more than "C"). And I agree, nobody list

Re: [Freedos-user] zbigniew system stability with different shells, kernels and drivers

We need NO more "hardware", CERTAINLY NOT any damned 64-bitters having 64-GB of memory, when in fact Intel/Microsoft never REALLY learned to use 32-bit or even 16-bit systems all that well! ... >>> >>> I agree, but nobody else does ... Perhaps you should read what >>> Niklaus Wirth h

[Freedos-user] VERY Funny "Off Topic" --

VERY funny "off topic", overheard today, which I just HAVE to share -- What does a U.S. Age-20s "Slept Thru High-School" type, too old to say "The dog ate my homework!!", try to tell our apartment manager re: why he cannot help with his girlfriend's 3-week late rent?? "The ATM ate my check!!" A

[Freedos-user] New 23-Mar-2012 UIDE/UIDE2 -- Minor SIze Reduction.

Johnson Lam has posted a new DRIVERS.ZIP file, now dated 23-Mar-2012, on his website at: The UIDE and UIDE2 drivers now use only 912 bytes of upper- or DOS memory with their /H switch!To do this, UIDE now runs 30 BIOS units (was 34) same as UIDE2, an

Re: [Freedos-user] Long-term survival of FreeDOS

> This topic is not about DOS vs other operating systems, or the fact > that users tend to gradually abandon DOS. It's about the survivability > of DOS vis-a-vis hardware ... What will happen with future development > of the hardware architectures? Cannot answer on all subjects, but re: disk/CD/DV

Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos 1.1 install errors...

>> actually I would not even OFFER a boot menu item to skip loading the >> XMS driver at all: You cannot even boot the install CD / USB on old >> pre-XMS PC. > > Probably a bad idea for compatibility reasons, unless you offer multiple > choices for which XMS manager to install. E.g., I have a c

Re: [Freedos-user] Long-term survival of FreeDOS

On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:16:50 -0700, Ralf A. Quint wrote: > At 01:13 PM 4/10/2012, Jack wrote: >> Cannot answer on all subjects, but re: disk/CD/DVD drivers, I am NOT >> overly optimistic! Intel/Microsoft want us all to "buy into" AHCI, >> and they may have start

Re: [Freedos-user] Long-term survival of FreeDOS

... Well, I would say "Saints be Praised"! Perhaps I am not the only one who regards AHCI as a big waste-of-time. Or money -- Is this new Intel chipset intended to be a "low cost" model? I will wait to see if Intel later r

Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos 1.1 install errors...

> ... With my own testing I found JEMMEX more compatible than XMGR or > HIMEMX + JEMM386 in various cases, but on other systems it's different, > as Mike mentioned ... To WHAT "incompatibilities" are you referring?? Be advised of the following -- 1) JEMMEX/JEMM386 use "old" memory-test schemes,

  1   2   3   >