HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kbowles@den.mmc.com (Mac)
Subject: Re: SMARTDRV read retrys on Zenith 386/16
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics, Denver
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:23:05 GMT

In article <6520@oval.BOEING.COM> tecslm1@sdc.boeing.com (Shamus McBride) writes:
>On my machine at home I'm running SMARTDRV and Windows 3.1 on a Zenith
>386/16 (4x1Meg memory) with 2 MFM hard drives. From DOS (i.e., without
>Windows running) I've noticed that I seem to be getting some kind of
>recovered errors reading the "D" drive. The machine will pause and I
>hear the D drive doing read retrys a half dozen times, then the system
>continues. I've never had any kind of a unrecovered failure.  I can use
>GDU to go in and find the sectors causing the read retrys. However,
>when I disable SMARTDRV, GDU (nor any other software) causes any
>retrys.  Re-enable SMARTDRV and the retrys resume.  Any ideas?
>
>--
>#include <standard.disclaimer>
>Shamus Mc Bride           | tecslm1@sdc.boeing.com      
>Boeing Computer Services  | tecslm1%sdc@atc.boeing.com
>(206) 865-5047            | uw-beaver!bcsaic!sdc!tecslm1

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: SMARTDRV read retrys on Zenith 386/16
Summary: Got new proms yet? 
Expires: 30 Aug 1992 
Followup-To: see below 
Distribution: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics, Denver
Keywords: SMARTDRV Zenith 386/16 ROM Windows 3.1  

In article <6520@oval.BOEING.COM> tecslm1@sdc.boeing.com (Shamus McBride) writes:
>On my machine at home I'm running SMARTDRV and Windows 3.1 on a Zenith
>386/16 (4x1Meg memory) with 2 MFM hard drives....


I suspect you have an old ROM BIOS. When I got MSDOS 5.0 and Windows 3.1 from
Zenith for my 386/16 they said the software would work very well unless I got
a new ROM BIOS. Cost me about 30 bucks through IMS in Aurora, CO.  

____________________________________________________________________________
"Times are hard, but when were they not?"
____________________________________________________________________________
Standard personal disclaimer.        Mac
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:22:35 +0200
From: Martin_Schloeter@eurologic.fido.de (Martin Schloeter)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
X-Comment-To: tguez@jade.tufts.edu (Name)
Organization: Die ersten 100.000 Jahre... 

N > >   >>        Windows intercepts and virtualizes:
N > >   >The way the sentence is phrased makes one think that windows
N > >   >virtualizes like an operating system virtualizes.  Yet, this is all
N > >   >nothing more than a layer of primitives.  You have to use window's
N > >   >primitives to fell this "virtualization" try accessing any of these
N > >   >things you mention directly and see how much of virtualization
N > windows
N > >   >truely provides.
N > >        Ok.  If you directly access the DMA controller under
N > >   Windows, you get a GPF.  (This assumes a 386, and enhanced mode,
N > >   the only hardware that this is possible with, running under the
N > >   appropriate software.)  If, however, you access the UART directly,
N > >   and are the first to do so, you will succeed, but an OpenComm on the
N > >   same port by another app willl fail.  That is virtualization.
N > >   Furthermore, Windows even handles DOS apps doing hardware I/O,
N > >   and controls which task gets the access.
N > Let me see....  Virtualization, in my mind (with reference to this
N > discussion), is that the OP makes each application think it has a
N > certain resources all to itself without concern of other applications.
N > For instance, the IBM CP/M (I think this is the one) works on the
N > concept of virtual machines, each application feels like it has a
N > machine of it's own, memory of it's own, cpu of it's, tape drives of
N > it's own and so on.  Now stopping an application from accessing a
N > resource-- controling a resource-- is not virtualization.
Windows does exactly what you are describing for "IBM CP/M" (whatever this is). 
The UART was no good example, because there is no reasonable way to virtualize 
a UART for concurrently accessing processes, because of timeout problems on the 
other side of the line. The only reasonable reaction is to block the second 
accessing process one.

Greetings Martin
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: mikeh@microme.uucp (Michael L. Hasenfratz)
Subject: Re: HELP: packet driver bombs windows 3.1 - solved
Organization: Micro Memory Inc., Chatsworth, Ca.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 15:52:50 GMT

In article <3SEP199213024557@zeus.tamu.edu> sam4628@zeus.tamu.edu (MCCLUNEY, STEVEN ALEXANDER) writes:
>Thanks to everybody for the advice - the main fix involved setting
>the RAM base address to E000 (for some reason D000 froze the system).
>The memory chart in my ethernet card manual implies that the range
>c800- is free, but when I used this value DOS slowed down to a snail's
>pace, and Windows still locked up.  BTW, what is the syntax for
>excluding a memory range with EMM386?  My DOS and Windows manuals
>don't mention this option.  Thanks a lot!
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>| Steven A. McCluney                 |"Strange women lying in ponds    |
>| sam4628@zeus.tamu.edu              | distributing swords is no basis |
>| I'm a grad student, so my opinions | for a system of government!"    |
>|    are worthless anyway            |          Dennis, to King Arthur |
>------------------------------------------------------------------------

	My MSDOS 5.0 Manual (pg. 607) tells me to use 'x=mmmm-nnnn',
where 'mmmm' is a beginning address and 'nnnn' is an ending address
(inclusive) ie: 'x=c800-c9ff' will exclude that range.


Mike Hasenfratz - WA6FXT * mikeh@uMEM.COM or uunet!microme!mikeh
Micro Memory Inc.
Chatsworth, Ca. 91311
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: fmag9694@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Fouad M. Abdel-Rahim)
Subject: Re: Shareware Statistics Program
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 23:18:54 GMT

edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu writes:

>In article <1992Aug27.180840.27771@news.iastate.edu>, LB.NKA@isumvs.iastate.edu (Nubi Achebo) writes:
>> Does anyone know if there is a shareware statistics out there?  I
>> will appreciate information about the site and file directory.
>> 
>> lb.nka@isumvs.bitnet
>> lb.nka@isumvs.iastate.edu
>> 
>> Nubi Achebo

>	Nubi, there is some available. They are if I can remember at
>wuarchive.wustl.edu (where else!). They are in msdos/stat if I remember
>correctly. At any rate they are in a subdirectory called stat.
>They have both categorical and continuous tests there.
>Been a while since I looked at them.

>Hope this helps

>ERic



     You will find both  " STATS.ZIP " and "STATS10B.ZIP"
     at CICA UPLOADS dir.
	     ^^^^^^^

-- 
	 Fouad Abdel-Rahim                              | _<  .
	 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign   \ |  o__o
	 School of Art and Design                     / | _/
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:28:30 +0200
From: Martin_Schloeter@eurologic.fido.de  (Martin Schloeter)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
X-Comment-To: tguez@jade.tufts.edu (Name)
Organization: Die ersten 100.000 Jahre... 

N > >        As I said, Windows 3.1 lets you do this.  If having malloc
N > >   makes it an OS, why not just do this:
N > >   #define malloc(size) GlobalLock(GlobalAlloc(GMEM_NODISCARD,(size)))
N > >
N > >        Ta,da!  I turned Windows into an OS with just one #define!
N > It's not the five letter combination m-a-l-l-o-c.  Malloc supposedly
N > get's memory from DOS.  Now, if ms-windows was an operating
N > system,i.e., taking over the system as an operating system and
N > releaving dos from it's duties, then it would of been able to juggle
N > with malloc memory blocks too.
Sigh...
OK Simply take the MSC Compiler and write a Windows app which use malloc! This 
will work! malloc well be automatically translated to the sequence "LocalAlloc 
- LocalLock".
If you write a DOS app with MSC malloc will be translated to "intr( XXX) - 
blabla (additional stuff)".
malloc-call on whatever OS will ALLWAYS be translated to underlaying memory 
managemant calls. There is no conceptional difference!

Martin 
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: blakeco@microsoft.com (Blake Coverett)
Subject: Re: Win 3.1 in real mode
Date: 02 Sep 92 01:56:50 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Canada Inc.

In article <198e481c@p3.f67.n245.z2.fidonet.org> Martin_Schloeter@eurologic.fido.de (Martin Schloeter) writes:
>Hmmmm, very interesting. I have just an idea. May be, that it is possible to 
>incorporate a XMS-Driver into an EXE-File. Then SETUP would launch a kind of 
>basic XMS-Driver. But this is only a theory!

Bingo, you will find XMSMGR.EXE on disk 1 of your Windows install set.

-Blake
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Date: Friday, 4 Sep 1992 12:43:32 EDT
From: <SASTPH@vm.sas.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Old English style font

The MS TrueType Font Pack that was being sold (and is still available, for
all I know) along with the original Win 3.1 upgrades contains a font called
Lucida Blackletter, which is an very nice looking "Old English" style font.
At least it looks like Old English to me - I'm not a font specialist.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: mikeh@microme.uucp (Michael L. Hasenfratz)
Subject: Re: HELP: packet driver bombs windows 3.1
Organization: Micro Memory Inc., Chatsworth, Ca.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 17:26:19 GMT

In article <2SEP199209034434@zeus.tamu.edu> sam4628@zeus.tamu.edu writes:
>Hi,
>   I'm trying to use NCSA telnet and QVTnet on my system.  The problem is
>that if the packet driver is installed, windows locks up on the logo screen.
>Since QVTnet is a windows program, this is somewhat inconvenient.  I've
>tried two different drivers with the same results, and the problem also
>seems to occur for Win 3.0. I'm using the 8003 packet driver, int 0x0A,
>mem base address 0xb000, int vector 0x300.  Any help would be appreciated!
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>| Steven A. McCluney                 |"Strange women lying in ponds    |
>| sam4628@zeus.tamu.edu              | distributing swords is no basis |
>| I'm a grad student, so my opinions | for a system of government!"    |
>|    are worthless anyway            |          Dennis, to King Arthur |
>------------------------------------------------------------------------

	I would would check if INT Vector 0x300 is valid. I thought they
stopped at 0xFF. My packet driver is normally loaded with settings:

	Base addr. = 0xce00 (I exclude ce00-cfff in the config.sys also)
	Int 0x3 or 0x5 (8 bit card in my system)
	Int 0x7e (as the software interrupt)

	If your system is anything other than a HERC style card, I think the
0xb000 address will trash your display.

	I hope this helps.

Mike Hasenfratz - WA6FXT * mikeh@uMEM.COM or uunet!microme!mikeh
Micro Memory Inc.
Chatsworth, Ca. 91311
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: bmakuch@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Brian A Makuch)
Subject: Help! Windows Apps Load Own Executables
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 20:58:40 GMT


Help, all of my windows apps try to load their own 
executibles when they start. Windows Write, Notebook, even
Turbo Pascal all try.

Can I remedy this without reinstalling windows? Does anyone
know what causes this?

Thanks in advance.
From: z_kupkams@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: while(Windows != OS );	Was Re:	Windows == OS
Date: 3 Sep 92 04:58:09 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <714807912.1@ttlg.ttlg.UUCP>, Monroe.Thomas@ttlg.UUCP (Monroe Thomas) writes:
> AN>From article <714728840.0@ttlg.ttlg.UUCP>, by
>   >Monroe.Thomas@ttlg.UUCP (Monroe Thomas):
>   >>
>   >> <Sigh...  here we go again!>
>   >>
>   >> The definition of an operating system is that it manages
>   >>
>   >>     1) memory   (I know, a special case of #2)
>   >>     2) resources
>   >>     3) processes
>   >>     4) file system
>   >>
>   >> [and then makes the case that these criteria are mostly met].

What the Heck, why didn't Microsoft call the basic interpretter an operating
system as well? Actually I thought that Microsoft called Windows an operating
environment. What about Desqview? is it an operating system? While the subject
was brought up of running an operating system on top of another OS, Like IBM's
VM, what wasn't mentioned is that the operating systems that are running on top
of VM, can run without it as well. Comparing MS-DOS to VM is ludicrous at best,
Dos is not even re-entrant, and windows certainly is not. Try running 2
instances of windows 3.1 on top of DOS. You could easily run multiple copies
of AIX on top of VM.

Windows 3.x still is not an OS, NT is Microsoft's 1st OS, they bought (stole)
 DOS, for $50,000.
perhaps the newsgroup should be renamed comp.oe.ms-windows
                                             ^^
                                             Operating Environment.
From: twbrown@PE-Nelson.COM (Tom W. Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: ** NORTON'S DESKTOP FOR WINDOWS!! **
Date: 23 Aug 92 20:29:14 GMT
Organization: PE-Nelson

In article <1992Aug21.065034.26236@lugb.latrobe.edu.au>, CSC9017984R@LUST2.LATROBE.EDU.AU (M.C. Freddy!!) writes:
|> 
|>                **    NORTON'S DESKTOP FOR WINDOWS !!!    **
|>                                version 1.0
|> 
|>                                Brand new !!
|>                                 Unused !!
|>                            Still in Plastic !!
|> 
|>                         Won at PC-Show last week !!
|> 
|>                                $150.00 !!
|> 
|>                           Or make me an offer !!
|> 

OK, you send me $150.00 and the software and I'll take it off your hands :-)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Brown               |  "Strange women, laying in ponds, distributing
PE Nelson Systems       |   swords is no basis for a system of government."
twbrown@pe-nelson.com   |                    Monty Python and the Holy Grail
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: stangel@sparc8.cs.uiuc.edu (Mike Stangel)
Subject: Re: Platforms for NT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 21:35:00 GMT

In <1SEP199213251543@elroy.uh.edu> elee969@elroy.uh.edu (Brown, William J.) writes:

>I've heard talk that windows NT will run on platforms other than intel.  If so,
>will it run on an HP 9000?

>William Brown
>Applied Electromagnetics Group
>Univ. of Houston

Because it is written mostly in C, the operating system can be compiled
on just about any system, including the Mac!  I understand that there
are one or two self-contained modules which are hardware-dependent, 
though, and would have to be rewritten in the native assembly of the
new platform.  As always, I welcome corrections to my marginally-informed
opinions.  =)

Mike
-- 
 Mike Stangel		| "I can't kill the man I love."   
 stangel@uiuc.edu	| "Then kill the one you're with." 
 Chairman, ACM at UIUC	|                   -Crow, MST3k   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: hippo@sonoma.edu (Michel Davidoff)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: MSD.EXE Documents ??
Summary: Documents for MS Diagnostics program ?
Keywords: MSD, Diagnostics
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:52:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: sonoma.hippo.22.0
Organization: Sonoma state university

In article <1992Aug31.062023.14309@jyu.fi> mpj@jyu.fi (Markku Jaatinen) writes:
>Subject: MSD.EXE Documents ??
>From: mpj@jyu.fi (Markku Jaatinen)
>Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 06:20:23 GMT
>Keywords: MSD, Diagnostics
>Summary: Documents for MS Diagnostics program ?
>Hello !
>
>Has anybody seen documentation (written) about Microsoft Diagnostics program 
>(MSD.EXE) that comes with Windows 3.1 version ??
>
>Thanks !
>
>Markku Jaatinen
>University of Jyv{skyl{
>Finland
>E-mail: mpja@tukki.jyu.fi
>
>
>
There is the Microsoft Reource Kit, in it I think you can find documentation.

Good luck

Michel
From: john.will@satalink.com (John Will)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: WINSPEED DRIVERS LOCA
Date: 1 Sep 92 20:53:00 GMT
Reply-To: john.will@satalink.com (John Will)
Organization: Datamax/Satalink Connection * Ivyland, PA (215) 443-9434

IT.Adding to the confusion there are also the Binar WndSpeed drivers 
  .distributed with Diamond Speedstar cards, which are _not_ the same 
  .as Panacea's Windspeed drivers which are commercial. Confused yet?

Not the same, but DAMN close. :-)  They're from the same company, and
have the same performance, the difference is I got the Diamond ones
free, you have to pay for the Panacea drivers!
---
 . KingQWK 1.05 # 97 . TANSTAAFL. BUMMER. What about dinner ?
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Emm386 Execption error #12 P
From: hippo@sonoma.edu (Michel Davidoff)
Date: 4 Sep 92 13:26:30 PDT
Organization: Sonoma state university

When I run marknet and relnet I often get the message 
Emm386 Execption error # 12 P
And then my system halts. I think that the p is the begining of 
a parity error.
I looked in the DOS 5.0 manual and there is no clue to 
what the error is.
Help ????

Michel Davidoff
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: tony2@prefect.uucp (21131-gozdz)
Subject: Speeding DOS graphics in Windows
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 15:56:29 GMT

This may be a FAQ, but here it goes:

One of my DOS graphics programs (FastTrack) loads and
runs extremely slowly in a DOS window in Win 3.1
(Compaq 386/25, 9MB, 387, 110MB, VGA). I do not think
it uses XMS or EMS, but it does a lot of disk I/O.
What are the best tricks to try to speed it up, 
other than to buy a faster machine?
I am already using Smartdrive 1/0.5 MB, nothing else is
running, and have a foreground priority value set to 150/10.

Tony

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Antoni S. Gozdz                tel  (908) 758-2931  |  Bellcore  NVC 3X-261
tony2@prefect.cc.bellcore.com  FAX  (908) 741-2891  |  Red Bank, NJ 07701, USA
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
From: mlowery@npg-sd.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Mike Lowery)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Password protection
Date: 26 Aug 92 22:41:43 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Corp., Network Products - San Diego


Does anyone out there know of a method for password protecting
Windows 3.1?  I know about the password for the screen savers,
but what I want is one for the whole system.

By the way, I was shocked to learn that the easiest way to 
defeat the screen saver's password protection was to re-boot,
re-start Windows, and simply reset the password in the Control
panel.  Some security.

----Mike


Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: wai@csuvax1.csu.murdoch.edu.au (Julian Wai)
Subject: Smartdrv /UNLOAD
Organization: Murdoch University
Date:  3 Sep 92 02:57:24 GMT

Hi,

Is there a way to unload Smartdrv ?  Would Smartdrv be useful under DOS.?

Thanks
julian
wai@csuvax1.csu.murdoch.edu.au
From: jliukkon@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Juha-Matti Liukkonen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Smartdrv /UNLOAD
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:55:55 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In <wai.715489044@csuvax1> wai@csuvax1.csu.murdoch.edu.au (Julian Wai) writes:

>Hi,

>Is there a way to unload Smartdrv ?

No. Irritating IMO.

> Would Smartdrv be useful under DOS.?

Definitely, if you use a disk with it :)

-- 
               Juha Liukkonen, aka jliukkon@cc.helsinki.fi
       University of Helsinki, Dept. of Paranormal Investigations
           "Trust me, I know what I'm doing." - Sledge Hammer
From: Monroe.Thomas@ttlg.UUCP (Monroe Thomas)
Sender: postmaster@ttlg.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Date: 25 Aug 92  21:32:02 mst

AN>From article <714728840.0@ttlg.ttlg.UUCP>, by
  >Monroe.Thomas@ttlg.UUCP (Monroe Thomas):
  >>
  >> <Sigh...  here we go again!>
  >>
  >> The definition of an operating system is that it manages
  >>
  >>     1) memory   (I know, a special case of #2)
  >>     2) resources
  >>     3) processes
  >>     4) file system
  >>
  >> [and then makes the case that these criteria are mostly met].

AN>My $.02: that's fine as far as it goes, but I think a classic OS should
  >*stop* after providing these services.  The shell, or GUI, or what have
  >you, should then be applications using the services of the OS.  Windows
  >provides too much of an applicationy feel for me to consider it a real
  >OS.  What they should do is move all of the 4 things above into DOS, and
  >then run Windows as an application, a la X.  But then I'm a UNIX type.

I agree 100% with you...  the GUI *should* be a separate entity from
the OS.  Windows, up until 3.x has certainly inter-related OS and
GUI...

*However*, can we make assumptions about the types of terminals
attached to our OS?  Unix doesn't.  I think what is falling out is
that there should be hooks in the OS to make GUI apps easier to
produce.  After all, perhaps one of the resources that often gets
neglected in the definition of an OS is the graphical monitor.
Screenspace deserves to be managed too, IMNSHO.  The question is, can
the OS provide general enough screen managemnt tools so that the GUI
flavour remains unaffected???  I dunno.

From my *limited* knowledge of Win NT, it seems that this is more or
less the case, where POSIX, Win32, OS/2, and Win16 modules all share
the same screenspace.  But I could be dreadfully wrong on this
point... anyone care to enlighten me?

-Monroe

 * OLX 2.2 * "The male sheep was cut badly," Tom rambled.

 * Origin: Through the Looking Glass (42:100/14)