VOGONS

Common searches


Reply 20 of 21, by ripsaw8080

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Author
Rank
DOSBox Author

You may prefer IDLE.COM from VPC for Win3, but it causes some DOS applications to become sluggish, such as the PowerBasic UI, because they don't expect INT 28 to sit around waiting for an interrupt. DOSIDLE works better for such DOS applications because idling only occurs during keyboard input wait states.

Reply 21 of 21, by cyberwalker

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
ripsaw8080 wrote:

You may prefer IDLE.COM from VPC for Win3, but it causes some DOS applications to become sluggish, such as the PowerBasic UI, because they don't expect INT 28 to sit around waiting for an interrupt. DOSIDLE works better for DOS applications because idling only occurs during keyboard input wait states.

You are right about idle.com from VPC. I had found the issue with Turbo C++ IDE. So I don’t put it in autoexec.bat, just run it when I need it. But it works for Windows 3.11 perfectly. I know DosBox has already somehow lowered CPU usage at prompt over years, but it would be great if Idle.ocm like feature also gets added to it.
I just checked DosIdle.exe, it did nothing to decrease CPU usage when BOOT used, weird.

SQLite compiled for DOS/DPMI