CompuServe Thread

CDROM Forum · General

#MSCDEX V2.21

10 messages in this thread

#21476From: Peter RobinsonMay 18, 1992 4:05 PM

I use MSCDEX V.2.10 with 386MAX (V. 6.0) and Windows 3.1 in a 386 clone equiped with a Sony CDU 535 CDROM drive. The V.2.10 is loaded high by 386MAX. Everything works just fine, which, if conversations here are anything to go by, is something to be thankful for. My question is this:-What is the advantage, if any, of upgrading to MSCDEX V.2.21? Peter

#21490From: Bill McHughMay 18, 1992 11:37 PM

Good question, Peter. I run mscdex v2 with 386max v 6 and have no problem. Did have to use setver=3.3 but that only takes a few bytes of high memory. I have been hesitant to go to mscdex 2.1 just to save those few bytes. The upgrade from 386max 5 to 6 did add about 25 K. That was worth it. If you come across any good reasons please let me know.–Bill

#21502From: Peter RobinsonMay 19, 1992 8:19 AM

Bill. If I find any good reason to upgrade I'll tell you. Thanks for your comments. Peter.

#21494From: John HaysMay 19, 1992 6:29 AM

Peter, The only reason I know of for upgrading MSCDEX is if it's needed for the software – such as Windows 3.1. Win3.1 requires 2.20 or higher, and 2.20 needs Setver to run under MSDOS 5.0. There was a bad version of 2.21 on the MSL a while back, so keep a good copy of your current stuff if you upgrade. It didn't really hurt anything, but it didn't work. Hope it helps, John

#21503From: Peter RobinsonMay 19, 1992 8:19 AM

John. Thanks for your comments. I'm using MSCDEX V.2.1 with Win 3.1 with no problems. I guess that "If in aint broke…." is good in this case. Peter.

#21542From: John HaysMay 20, 1992 7:37 AM

Peter, Especially when dealing with Win3.1 and CD's!<g> Glad I could help. John

#21529From: Andrew J. GlassMay 19, 1992 11:13 PM

John: My version of MSCDEX 2.2 does not need SETVER to run under MS-DOS 5.0. – Andy

#21545From: John HaysMay 20, 1992 7:58 AM

Andrew, Is that version 2.20 or 2.21? And probably more pertinent, is it from the drive mfg, or MS? Just curious, as all I had heard as the reason for getting MS version 2.21, was so as not to need Setver. TIA, John

#21509From: Thomas LichtebergerMay 19, 1992 2:14 PM

Your advantage is not having to use SETVER with Dos 5.0.

#21514From: Peter RobinsonMay 19, 1992 3:51 PM

Thomas. Thanks. I've stripped down Setver to 160 bytes anyway so there does not seem to be an advantage in V.2.21 to me. Peter.