24 May
2000
24 May
'00
10:13 p.m.
In a message dated 5/24/00 10:05:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
richard(a)idcomm.com writes:
I've never encountered that version 6.3. I've
got a few sets of install
disketted for DOS 6.21, which was made up for DELL, specifically without
the
compression support in it or among its utilities. I,
havning spent much
time testing the more popular compression schemes, am an avid user of
compression. I've found it to be no more problem-prone than plain-vanilla
DOS, yet the maintenance tools (scandisk) seem to work better on compressed
volumes than on uncompressed. Compression does seem to enhance disk
subsystem preformance. If you have a solid backup regimen, you should
never
have to worry about data loss just because you use
compression. I found
that DRVSPACE yielded about a 15% performance increase and had no added
risk
of system failure. I also found that the risk of
data loss was actually
lower (based on my substantial but still relatively small data sample)
than
that with uncompressed data, probably due to the more
effective error
management tools.
I use pcdos 6.3 and 7.0. much better than msdos i think, and i prefer the
editor. how in the world can one realise 15% performance increase running
disk compression? logic would indicate a degradation since you are running an
extra task to compress the hard drive not to mention less memory space in the
UMBs to load the compression driver high. i do not use any sort of disk
compression and never recommend it to anyone. i supported end users, and
there were too many times when users compressed their hard drives, and ended
up hosing them. only option to them was fdisk and reinstall. K.I.S.S.
DB Young ICQ: 29427634
hurry, hurry, step right up! see the computers you used as a kid!
http://members.aol.com/suprdave/classiccmp/museum.htm