vDos-lfn / vDoxXy comparison

[James Woolley woolleyj@xxxxxxxx]

For what it's worth, I've compared vDos-lfn with the December 2014
vDosXy (Kari's v. 1.0), running Nota Bene 3.0. This is under Win7.


With vDos-lfn, I had to comment out the line "UMBLoad = Yes" in
4dos.ini; otherwise I got the dreaded "DOS MCB list is corrupt" the
second time I tried to shell to DOS (that is, to 4DOS).


On the plus side, I can now see LFNs when I shell to DOS. Task
Manager shows memory use of about 12,850K with vDos-lfn as opposed to
73,850K with vDosXy. I was happy to see that vDos-lfn permits
underlining to be displayed (in contrast to vDosXy 1.1). So far, my
keyboard redefinitions and XPL programs seem to work.


On the minus side, vDos-lfn takes longer to load Nota Bene (with my
setup, 3.3 seconds vs 2.0 seconds). Key-repeat rate is noticeably
slower in vDos-lfn. More annoying, vDos-lfn doesn't permit the
blinking cursor that is a vDosXy option. I'd love to see that option restored.


Your mileage may vary, of course. Cheers to Wengier Wu and you others
who are involved.


James




At 29.4.16 10:28, you wrote:
> I haven't tried it extensively, but Wengier Wu's vDos-lfn includes
> keyboard support similar to that in vDosXy, and is based on the
> current vDos codebase. It's possible that it might be worth trying
> in place of vDosXy for testing its reliability, etc. with XyWrite.
>
>
> As vDos-lfn demonstrates, the current code of vDos can easily be
> modified and patched; it is absolutely not closed off to patching
> and revision, as was suggested in messages here a few months ago.
>
>
> A description of vDos-lfn with links to executable files and
> replacement source code is here:
>
>
> http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/dosbox-vdos-lfn.html#vdos