Software

1. Reclaiming Memory in the UMB
2. Windows vs OS/2
3. From the Top of the Stack
4. More From the Top of the Stack
5. Never Enough Utilities
6. Getting the Most from Your PC

Reclaiming Memory in the UMB
From Catalog 36, page 54

Until recently, only so called "power users" were usually concerned with "Upper Memory Blocks," "High Memory," and memory management.

Following the leadership of companies like Quarterdeck, Microsoft and others began to produce memory management products that the average PC user could operate efficiently.

The opportunity is there to reclaim memory that was previously wasted or badly used. The problem many users face is that their "High Memory" is crowded with and fragmented by cards with their own memory BIOS's

What can you do? See if the BIOS support on a card is still necessary? Is the card itself still necessary? If the answer to both of those questions is yes, then next look to see if you can relocate the memory addresses of several BIOS's so they can be contiguous without overlapping. The object is to create large open spaces that the memory manager can use.

Can you link the memory area name with its hexadecimal memory segment?

A: High Memory Area

Z: 10000h-FFFFFh

B: Extended Memory

Y: 0FFFFh-0FFFFh

C: Expanded Memory Page Frame

X: 0A000h-0FFFFh

D: Conventional Memory

W: 0D800h-0E7FFh

E: BIOS Memory Area

V: 00000h-09FFFh

Back to the Top

Windows vs OS/2
From Catalog 34, page 63

That's not fair! Comparing Windows, a 16-bit platform built over a 16-bit operating system with backward compatibility to the PC DOS that was released in 1981 shouldn't even be a consideration.

Unfortunately, people do make that comparison, even when they have never used OS/2, and aren't qualified to have a vote. My opinion, for what it's worth, is that OS/2 is a superior 32-bit platform for running OS/2 programs, faster and more flexible for running Windows programs, better for DOS programs, and more crash resistant than either DOS or Windows. Period!

But, what about Windows NT?

Now you have a debate. OS/2 has more native programs written for it than NT, but I suspect that will be a short-lived victory. Pluses for NT are very good built in peer-to-peer networking, support for client networking in a client/server configuration, native multiprocessor support, and very good security which is pervasive throughout the system. NT is aiming for a government C2 security classification. On the down side, NT requires 16 megs of main RAM and at least 70 megs of free disk space which is about twice what OS/2 requires.

Both support preemptive multi-tasking and multiple threads of execution to make the best use of computer resources, and both feature program isolation for better crash resistance and data integrity.

If you know you require the security features of NT, then the choice is obvious. Otherwise, you should make the comparison yourself. Except for the security, OS/2 can be just as effective in a network or isolated desktop as NT, and for a lower cost. And by the way, NT can talk to an OS/2 LAN Server as easily as OS/2 can talk to an NT Advanced Server.

Can you tell that I like OS/2? Suffice to say, I think it is great! I can't wait for version 2.2. The only thing it lacks at this time is support for peer-to-peer networking, and I'm hoping they fix that soon.

Do I know that I am supporting a "dark horse" in the operating system contest? Of course, but my primary interests are in speed and power. If something better comes along, it won't take much to make me switch.

In the mean time, I run a triple boot machine. I use OS/2's boot manager to choose MS-DOS 6.20 with QEMM 7.03, OS/2 2.10, or Windows NT 3.10 each time I boot. The default is set to whichever system I used last, and I can make a different choice whenever I reboot.

Back to the Top

From the Top of the Stack
From Catalog 31, page 11

I'd like to tell you about my favorite software utility. Let's start at the top of the stack, and focus on QEMM-386.

Quarterdeck's QEMM-386 memory manager is a natural start because, aside from portions of DOS, it is the first thing loaded in my CONFIG.SYS.

While MS-DOS 6.0 has an included memory manager, that manager lacks the flexibility, control, and intelligence found in QEMM-386.

With QEMM-386, the eight resident drivers and programs that are always loaded when I boot my machine take no conventional memory from my applications. I have 624K of free conventional memory. Without QEMM, it would be less than 523K, and I would be stuck with a mix of 2 megs of dedicated Extended and/or Expanded memory. QEMM enables me to allocate from a common memory pool either Extended or Expanded memory as my application requests it.

There are other memory managers, but none so easy to install and use. Believe it or not, QEMM can customize itself to your situation while you raid the refrigerator! During the optimize process, it will reboot your machine at least twice, and when finished, tell you how much additional memory you have after installation. QEMM-386 is for 386SX's and above. For 80286's try QRAM, which has many of the same features.

Back to the Top

More From the Top of the Stack
From Catalog 29, page 42

In an earlier column, I described my own CONFIG.SYS that contained a DEVICE= RAMDRIVE command. How that transient drive is used may be of some interest to you.

Frequently, the only program residing in that 2 megabytes of RAM is KEDIT, an editor that particularly appeals to programmers. I load the editor at boot time so that I can load it instantaneously anytime I want it.

The remaining 1.8 megs of RAMDRIVE are my tool for managing my hard disk. I save whole application environments as PKZIP'd files on my hard disk. They consume only 500-550K while they are compressed. Here is how it works:

First, I move the application software onto the RAMDRIVE and look it over for unnecessary stuff like INSTALL, SETUP, and extra drivers that aren't used with my equipment. Making sure I still have the distribution disks, I delete the extras.

Next, I compress the remaining programs and save them back to the hard disk. And last, I create aliases using DOSKEY to decompress and start the application in the RAMDRIVE.

If you decide to give it a try, don't start deleting until you feel comfortable with this new way of doing things. And, by the way, I never erase the data files I create until they are backed up. Recovery tools are nearly useless on compressed files.

DOSKEY is one way to add aliases to DOS. Better choices for providing the same or better power are RETRIEVE, CED a command editor, or 4DOS. If you have never used an alias program, and you like to work from the command line, you should download these programs from a BBS or CD and give them a try.

Because I frequently type DRI when I mean DIR, I even have an alias to DRI that types DIR. Does that make me lazy or smart?

Back to the Top

Never Enough Utilities
From Catalog 26, page 47

I come from the "Old School" that likes the power of the DOS command line. Of course, if I were ever confined to the limits of DOS as it comes out of the box, I would begin pulling my hair out by the handfuls!

Friends marvel at my CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT because they overflow the screen when I type them out. I don't feel bad if they laugh, because I use them all, and they don't prevent me from having 631K of free conventional RAM.

Starting with QEMM-386, I load DOS=HIGH, force NUM-LOCK off, create a RAMDRIVE, load ANSI.SYS, load a SCSI driver high and set up a dozen other things in my CONFIG.SYS.

My AUTOEXEC contains at least 10 environmental variables, a path 127 characters long (128 is the maximum without another special program), a print spooler, PC-KWIK, keyboard command line RETRIEVER and commands to move my favorite editor KEDIT into the RAMDRIVE.

Once the lengthy boot process is complete, everything else is very snappy. PC-KWIK makes disk access seem instantaneous. I never wait for my printer because of PCACHE, and I seldom have to type more than a few characters because of RETRIEVE.

Thank you, and a tip of the hat to all those people working so hard to make my life easier!

Correction: You no longer need a special program to go beyond 128 characters in your path. I don't know which version of DOS added a /X:ON to APPEND, but if you need a longer path APPEND now provides a method to accomplish that task.

Back to the Top

Getting the Most from Your PC
From Catalog 20, page 41

Selecting the best match of hardware for your PC is essential if you want maximum performance, but getting the most from that hardware requires the proper software.

Without exception, if you have the memory capacity, I recommend a defragmenting program to keep disk activity to a minimum, a disk caching program to speed disk access by 2-10 times, and a directory management program to assist in file organization. The first two should require no training to use, just a one time installation, and the third one can probably begin to save time on the first day.

I recently helped a friend install a fax/modem into the 386 PC he uses in his business. He didn't know what he was missing. After installing PC Tools and DOSKEY from MS-DOS 5.0, his CHKDSK times went from two minutes per drive to 10 seconds, and windows seemed at least three times faster getting to the first screen.

He's on a roll now, and has for the first time begun to realize how redundant the files on his hard disk really are. He had some files copied into five different directories, and three different versions of another file. After a cleanup, he went from 80% used to 65% used on a 80 meg disk.

Learning a new editor or data base program is usually a slow process, but tools are almost always obvious in their application. Perhaps you don't need a faster machine, just better tools to use it!

Back to the Top