Non-tested DOS warning code

From Techrights

Jump to: navigation, search



Date:


Synopsis

Snippet

To: Russ werner
From: Mark Chestnut
Subject: Status Report for April, 1989
Date 5/22/89
The first MS product with the non-tested DOS warning code, Quick Pascal, was released. Tom Reeve and Cindy Kasin have committed to implementing it in all new MS application and language releases from this point forward, including international.
I am also planning to hire an Independent DOS guru to do an in-depth comparative analysis of MS vs DR DOS, with the idea of somehow making those results available to the press. This could be useful ammunition to have against DRI, and will be of value even if we choose not to make it public. I approached Ray Duncan about doing this but he finally said 'no thanks’, so I am now talking to Rick Wilton, another DOS guru who writes for MS Press.

MS tests DR-DOS 6.0

From: tonyka Thu Sep 19 18:44:04 1991
To: tomle
Cc: brentk; dosdev; jefflo; vangard
Subject: DR-DOS 6.0 Testing (9/19)
DR DOS beats us on a 386 system by 12,560 bytes conventional; their EMM386 is a combined XMS provider and expanded memory manager. I don't understand why MS DOS only gives 95kb UMB; maybe I need to include some region on emm386 line.
1) Please include All bugs in DR-DOS that are not in MS-DOS from Intel TESTMEM test suite Boundary test:
Allocating more (expanded memory) pages than available in system
EMM did not return the expected results (returned 12 instead of 9A).
DTK 386 cold boot/hang problem:
After installing DR 6 on this machine, cold boot always results in a "Cannot load file". Press a key to retry." When press a key, the machine will boot fine. Warm boot always work without this problem.
Also there's intermittent hang after exiting EDITOR. It hung on me twice today. Haven't seen these problems happen on another machine.
Warm boot with HIDOS.SYS installed
gives "Warning: Address line A20 already enabled."


1) Please include ALL bugs in DR_DOS that are not in MS-DOS ..
2) Anything you did not like about DR-DOS
3) Anything you like about DR-DOS that we should add to future MS-DOS versions


DR MEM program output looks sharp: layout is clearer and offers more info than ours.
DOSBOOK online help looks pretty fancy and helpful.
DR SETUP lets user tune system after installation. This concept is good but their implementation is not useful enough ..


I hate to say I find more stuff I like than I don't like, but that's looks like it, at least today's testing. Lets find some big bugs tomorrow.


Full Exhibit

http://boycottnovell.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/px00963.pdf

Personal tools
Search entire domain
Stories