dragonkn wrote:

Do i need to found another mouse driver?

Hmm.. Hard to say. CuteMouse often works, but some systems may don't like it (I had some MediaGX chipset that didn't like it).
Also, Windows 2.03 doesn't seem to like CuteMouse lurking around. If CT is loaded, it crashs or the mouse pointer goes away.
For testing, I recommend this mouse driver. It often worked for me when other drivers failed.

Can confirm that MediaGXm chipsets have issues with CuteMouse 1.9 and 2.1, giving delays in some software. 2.0 seems to work without issues though, it bypasses the BIOS. You can try that, and perhaps try out a different mouse to see if that helps.

I've tried Cute Mouse 2.0 and once per few boots there is freeze on loading driver.
I will pass Cutemouse and search for very light another driver. I will report back if i found something good.
EDIT. PROBLEM SOLVED
I downloaded A4Tech driver , its only 7kb on memory and working ok! It's from 1990 for ps/2 mouse.

Thanks for reporting back. Are you using version 8.5 of the A4Tech driver? I will try it out.

A4mouse Mouse Version 5.01
Copyright (C) A_FOUR_TECH Corp. Ltd. 1988 - 1990 All Rights Reserved.

Edit
A4Mouse is unusable... sensitivity is way too low... I'm Using some 1988 Microsoft driver. 10kb in ram memory is i think too much for my build. Anyone can give me idea about some ( not ctmouse) driver that's use 3-7kb?

Here's another mouse driver to try. ~4KB, I think.
Hope it works for you! Good luck! 😀

^+1
This driver is working perfectly! And its very small , thanks 😀

It is 1kb smaller than ctmouse.exe 😀

Jo22 wrote on 2018-10-28, 14:00:

Here's another mouse driver to try. ~4KB, I think.
Hope it works for you! Good luck! 😀

This driver worked to solve my issues with CTmouse misbehaving with some games also. Solved the problem and even loaded high- gravy on top of its already small footprint.

About two dozen games I tried absolutely hated CTMouse including Cruise for a Corpse, Jagged Alliance, etc. so to me, it's all about having options - a good boot menu lets you have several options and CTMOUSE can be unloaded from memory if a game acts up. I'll need to try PMOUSE though - see if it's as compatible as the standard Microsoft Mouse drivers.

I think the same. CuteMouse is surely nice to have, but some older programs may prefer, say, MS-Mouse 6.24BZ (Win 2.x) or MS-Mouse 9.0.
The latter is a memory hog but solved latency issues and jerky mouse movement. It also added features, like graphical mouse cursors and such.
In the past, I used to use GMouse, which was the Genius Mouse driver. But this was on a 286 system were I didn't load smartdrive,
so my free memory was a bit below 600KB (~560-580KB ?) which most programs could still work with.
These days however, things might be different. Stuff like MTCP and network card drivers also require some memory.

JoeCorrado wrote on 2020-03-12, 04:24:

Jo22 wrote on 2018-10-28, 14:00:

Here's another mouse driver to try. ~4KB, I think.
Hope it works for you! Good luck! :)

This driver worked to solve my issues with CTmouse misbehaving with some games also. Solved the problem and even loaded high- gravy on top of its already small footprint.

I'm glad it works and that I could help. ^_^

I use CPMOUSE from 1989. Just as small as CuteMouse but works much better.

derSammler wrote on 2020-03-18, 06:56:

I use CPMOUSE from 1989. Just as small as CuteMouse but works much better.

Link?

Included in the attached archive.

Jo22 wrote on 2020-03-18, 01:18:

Stuff like MTCP and network card drivers also require some memory.

Everything network I tie to a BAT file. I simply have to type NETWORK and everything for MTCP is loaded including the drivers for my 3COM Etherlink III card. Then I type FTP and up goes FTP server to transfer files. Even with Microsoft Mouse driver, CD ROM & sound, I have 590k left for games.

mTCP is a set of programs - they take no memory unless they are actively loaded and running ...

Packet drivers take a few KB of space. They have the code for talking to your Ethernet device. They don't have any buffers or TCP/IP in them so their memory footprint is very minimal.

Packet drivers are by far the lightest approach for DOS networking.

Jo22 wrote on 2020-03-18, 01:18:

[..] In the past, I used to use GMouse, which was the Genius Mouse driver. But this was on a 286 system were I didn't load smart […]
Show full quote

[..]
In the past, I used to use GMouse, which was the Genius Mouse driver. But this was on a 286 system were I didn't load smartdrive,
so my free memory was a bit below 600KB (~560-580KB ?) which most programs could still work with.
These days however, things might be different. Stuff like MTCP and network card drivers also require some memory.

Huh, seems I touched a raw nerve. Sorry then. Well, I was pointing out that things may be different now. 😀
I was working entirely on the assumption that the demand for more hardware/drivers has increased since then, rather than decreased.
Things like VESA VBE TSRs, CD-ROM drivers, Anti-Virus TSRs, network stacks, ZIP drive drivers, radio-clock drivers etc. were a peculiarity in 286 days.
So it made sense to me to name the network stack as one example here, especially since we're living in an always-on digital age.
Furthermore, I proceeded from the assumption that in reality, a network stack is one of the things that is left running at all time.

That's the problem ... mTCP doesn't leave a network stack in memory.

Go run chkdsk to see your available memory, load a packet driver, and the run checkdsk again. You'll see a few kilobytes of RAM being used. That's it. It's just the code needed to send or receive packets. No buffers or networking code at all.

If you run a WATTCP or mTCP program the program includes all of the networking code that it needs. When the program ends, the memory is released. Nothing stays resident.

The networking stacks that work like TSRs (Microsoft, Trumpet) stay resident, leaving the network stack in memory. Which allows them to work in the background, but also consumes a lot more RAM. mTCP has never been designed like that, hence the correction.