home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
Wrap
Received: from ppsw3.cam.ac.uk (mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.38]) by nacm.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id XAA16691 for <executor@nacm.com>; Tue, 25 Apr 1995 23:56:46 -0700 Received: from mole.bio.cam.ac.uk by mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk with SMTP-CAM (XTPP8.1) as ppsw.cam.ac.uk; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 07:56:28 +0100 Received: from localhost by mole.bio.cam.ac.uk (931110.SGI/MDTG-V1.3@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk) id AA25560; Wed, 26 Apr 95 08:00:36 +0100 Message-Id: <9504260700.AA25560@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk> To: executor@nacm.com Subject: Re: Windows 95 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 Apr 1995 20:00:38 EDT." <950425193613_96144848@aol.com> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 08:00:35 +0100 From: Tim Cutts <tjrc1@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk> Sender: owner-executor@nacm.com Precedence: bulk In your message (Tue, 25 Apr 1995 20:00:38 -0400), you wrote: >I am running the Final Beta of Windows 95 on a 486dx/2-50 with 12 megs of ram >and cannot get E/D 1.99L to find the SCSI CD-ROM drive. Under DOS 6.2 and >MSCDEX.EXE there wasn't a problem at all. I have tried running E/D from a DOS >window as well as running Win95 in DOS mode. Has anyone found a similar >problem? I have an NEC-25 cd-rom drive and a MediaVision ProAudio Spectrum 16 >card. Sounds like Win95's DOS emulation is far from perfect... I've had no problems with E/D under OS/2. >Second, I cannot set the applzone higher than 2048 while running E/D in a DOS >window. I get the message that I have run out of memory and to set applzone >to a lower number. I can only set it higher when I run Win95 in DOS mode. Any >suggestions? Sounds like the DOS Window gets a certain amount of extended memory available to it. If Win95 is anything like Warp, there will be a setting to increase the amount of extended emory available to the DOS window. >Third, I cannot install Word 5.1 under E/D at all. I keep getting GPF errors >and crash back to DOS. Any suggestions? Pass >Lastly, whenever E/D crashes with a GPF in a DOS window, I cannot restart >Executor at all, either from the DOS prompt or when I close the window and >try restarting Executor. I thought I would just pass this on. I have no idea >if there is a bug in Win95 or E/D 1.99L. That is probably because the crash has corrupted some Win95 internal control block, and you'll need to restart Win95. In this respect Win95 is no better than Windows 3.x; many of the internal control blocks are still accessible by programs. By contrast, they are not in NT, which is why NT is so much more stable. Tim.