home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!netnews.cc.lehigh.edu!news
- From: David_Conrad@MTS.cc.Wayne.edu
- Newsgroups: comp.virus
- Subject: Re: VSHIELD, VIRSTOP, ... comparison ? (PC)
- Message-ID: <0006.9301051858.AA13030@barnabas.cert.org>
- Date: 23 Dec 92 10:16:52 GMT
- Sender: virus-l@lehigh.edu
- Lines: 18
- Approved: news@netnews.cc.lehigh.edu
-
- In VIRUS-L v5i207 Nemrod_Kedem@f101.n9721.z9.virnet.bad.se (Nemrod Kedem) write
- s:
- > > 3) VShield uses much more memory than VirStop.
- >
- >But may be loaded to high memory, and then needs less then 1K of
- >conventional memory.
-
- Implying that Virstop cannot?! Virstop can be loaded high, and then
- requires no conventional memory.
-
- And still, VSHIELD will use more high memory that Virstop, reducing the
- number of other things you can have loaded high simultaneously.
- Even with loadhigh in DOS 5.0, smaller is still better when it
- comes to memory-resident programs.
-
- Regards,
- David R. Conrad
- David_Conrad@mts.cc.wayne.edu, dave@michigan.com
-