🚀 go-pugleaf

In <3n3j7a$12...@bubba.ucc.okstate.edu>, ro...@wentz1.reslife.okstate.edu (root) writes:
>In article <3n1n10$i...@cmcl2.NYU.EDU>, jmw...@is2.nyu.edu says...
>
>>Talk about wasting bandwidth... did you have some new information you would
>>like to impart with that message?  For instance, what is the real story 
>regarding
>
>Hahhaha, I can sniff a OS/2 zealot from a mile away.  Yup, you can run 
>separate DOS sessions with specified or automatically allocated EMS, XMS, or 
>DPMI memory, different environment size, configurable conventional memory 
>amount, separate autoexec.bat and config.sys for each dos app.

Again, this is not an answer to the question that was asked.  I would like to
see a statement, with documented support, saying "In Windows 95 you can
run separate DOS sessions with differing configuration settings CONCURRENTLY."
So far, all anybody has said is that you can have separate configurations for
different programs.  This was not, and is not, the question, and is, in fact,
not very relevant (you could do this with straight DOS).

Perhaps Win95 users don't even understand the question, because they aren't
even familiar with this feature.

Here is the quote from the documentation I have on Win95:

"All 16-bit applications share a single address space - the System Virtual
Machine (VM)."

What the question is, essentially, is if this is true.

//  Jeff Williams
//  NYU UGFTV/Cinema Studies
//  jmw...@is2.nyu.edu