>>It's a very workable solution as long as nothing you run is going to need EMS, and we're pretty lucky at this point that there's not much (aside from people still married to FPDOS 2.0) that really depends on EMS to be available. As we move further and further away from old DOS apps that were too big to live in conventional memory, and relied on EMS to make a bigger memory space available, the whole issue of EMS/XMS will become moot.
>
>..and we'll finally be able to forget (but not forgive) the guy who said "640K should be enough for everything".
>

Now, now, I'm willing to forgive him for that - I'm sure he was talking about his hourly rate and not memory...

>>Now if we can just finish the move away from DOS, we'll all be much happier campers...I'd be a much happier camper if I'd just convince my clients that it's time to retire their old DOS apps. It'd make supporting apps easier if people would give up DOS compatibility as an issue (I heard from a client that still runs an app I wrote for them in FoxBase+ last week; they want enhancements made to an application that I haven't looked at in ~8 years now, but don't want to hear about porting it to a Windows environment and a current development environment. And while I'm at it, can I assure them it'll run OK under Win2K?) Of, course, I keep hoping that ISA will go away, too, so that PnP would work better, too.
>
>They'd still have to keep some DOS compatibility, for the sake of old games (and not so old ones) which run awfully slow under Windows. Who'd injoy a slow-motion pinball?

The same people who claimed that Win95 would run on a 386SX with 4MB of RAM? < g >