HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: god@hale.cts.com (David J. Calabrese)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: EISA vs. ISA -VESA Local Bus MotherboardsDIR
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 23:34:07 PST
Organization: Hale Telecommunications Inc.

lmebold@csghsg5a.bitnet writes:

> In article <TOMW.92Dec10205510@orac.asd.sgi.com>, tomw@orac.asd.sgi.com (Tom 
> > In article <1992Dec10.232429.13724@rti.rti.org>, rac@rti.rti.org writes:
> > 
> >> I need some help deciding whether to buy a 486DX EISA motherboard,
> >> or a ISA-VESA Local Bus motherboard.
> > 
> >> It is my understanding that the EISA bus is a 32-bit wide bus,
> >> and can therefore process more/larger information chunks than a
> >> 16-bit wide ISA bus. Although the ISA bus is running at (usually)
> >> 8MHz, I've not heard what speed the EISA bus is normally.
> 
> > 
> >> In addition, since the VESA Local Bus standard is for video only,
> >> it is my understanding that motherboards that have additional
> >> local bus slots and /or have the IDE controller on the local bus
> >> are proprietary arrangements which may be incompattable with
> >> some hardware. 
> > 
> 
> I'd be careful when buying a local bus pc. Although der is a VESA standard
> that still doesn't mean that all these pc's will be compatible. If you want
> to go with local bus I would suggest you make up your mind on what you want
> to get and buy that - it's not guaranteed that you can upgrade later on.
> 
> 
> Apart from that EISA has more advantages like IRQ-sharing, DMA-functions
> (with ISA bus you cannot address more than 16MB RAM directly - EISA can),
> easier setup of new cards (you don't need to set any jumbers - at least it
> should be like that; there are still some cards which need to be jumpered).
> Furthermore EISA is a standard and you can use every EISA-card in every
> EISA-system (just like ISA-cards in ISA-systems) whereas with local bus
> that's not possible.
> 
> My suggestion: If you can afford it, get an EISA.
> 
>        - Luke

 
VL-bus (local bus) isn't just for video, but I'd still have to
confer with the Good Side of The Force (Luke).  Buy the EISA,
because let's face it -- any PC you buy is outdated 2 to 3
weeks before you purchase it, so why start off with dated-tech?
 
Also, EISA looks cooler.
 

* david j. calabrese *


H  E  A  D  I  N  G    F  O  R

                       
             __---_                 .
. ..  .  . _-      -        T                              .
... .  .  -  (. .)  =        h 
         =        --          e   E                                     .
. ..  .  .--____--                 D         .
===========================\       G                          .
                             \       E   .                    .
                             \        !
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: v923137@vms.ucc.okstate.edu
Subject: Re: Diamond Speedstar 24X vs. Stealth VRAM
Summary: Diamond 24X is faster than Diamond Stealth VRAM
Organization: Oklahoma State University Computer Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 03:20:14 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.023210.9407@csar.encore.com>, mthompso@csar.encore.com (Mark Thompson) writes:
> mrbill@leland.Stanford.EDU (William Bowen) writes:
> 
>>Which is the faster card, the Stealth VRAM or the Speedstar 24X? Does
>>anyone have benchmarks for these cards, preferably run on the same machine?
> 
>>Thanks for any info.
> 
>>Bill
> 
>>mrbill@leland.stanford.edu
> 
> I just installed a SpeedStar 24X in my 486DX/50 MHz 256kb cache 8MB ram
> system. WinBench reports 12,691,779 WinMarks in 800x600x256 mode. Sorry, I
> don't have any numbers on the Stealth. Maybe someone else with a similiar
> system can post them.

The Diamond Stealth VRAM 1MB accelerator card runs about 8.4 Million WinMarks.
I had a Stealth, and just bought a 24X.  The 24X is faster.  Period. 

> 
> I really enjoy my new SpeedStar.

Likewise.

-Jason 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: hubich@mercury.cs.uregina.ca (Chad D. Hubich)
Subject: FAQ? How to open IBM monitors
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:44:14 GMT
Organization: University of Regina, SK, Canada

How do I open the case on a model 8513-23 monitor.  This monitor has one 
screw on the bottom and two slots at the top back.  Do I need a special 
tool?  
--
Chad 
Xref: sparky comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:33032 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:15761 comp.sys.amiga.misc:18488 alt.activism.d:4330 sci.environment:13467
From: cdj@iti.org (Chris D. Jennings)
Subject: Will Windows crawl on my system?
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:14:13 GMT


Please excuse me if this is a FAQ - I'm new to this group.

I'm considering Windows 3.1 so that my home machine will be more
compatible with the machine my wife uses at her office.  What I need
to know is whether I'd be a fool to try to run Windows on my
hardware.  I have a CompuAdd 316s (386SX at 16Mhz) with a Hyundai
VGA monitor (RAM is 1 Meg but I would increase to at least 4, and
hard disk is only 40 Meg but I would add another or replace this one
for at least a 100 Meg).

I mostly use word processing (will use WinWord if I add Windows).  I
don't have any kind of video accelerator card or anything else
installed to speed up my system.  I'm running DOS 5.0 and PC Tools
7.1, and am happy with the speed of my DOS applications.  From what
I've heard from most sources, a 386 at 25 Mhz seems to be the
minimum machine for Windows.

PLEASE HELP...I'd appreciate anyone's predictions about how sorry
I'd be if I decided to run Windows on this machine.  This is very
important to me right now, as I am nearing the end of my lease on
the PC and will have to decide whether to purchase it for $300 or
upgrade and extend the lease.

Thanks in advane.

- Chris
From: dsmith@dcs.simpact.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: AMD rubbish????
Date: 15 Dec 92 14:45:47 PDT
Organization: Simpact Associates, San Diego CA

>>In article <1992Dec12.032716.16273@sugra.uucp>, ken@sugra.uucp (Kenneth Ng) writes:
>> In article <1992Dec8.093121.89@roads.sa.gov.au: wilsonn@roads.sa.gov.au writes:
>> :I'm thinking of buying a PC, either a AMD386DX40 or an Intel 486SX25 - 33. I've
>> :been told that the AMD chip is unreliable and would appreciate some feedback.
>> :Comments on relative speed between the machines also would be helpful. 
> 
> If the AMD chip did not perform completely like an Intel, you would see Intel
> plastering that all over their advertisements.

This is not exactly true.  The AMD part is exactly the same for most almost
all PC applications. 

We designed a specialized board using the Intel 80386 and the Intel 82380 chip.
The Intel 82380 was a specialized chip that included timers, CPU interrupt 
support, DMA channels, etc.  The AMD part will not work in our design for
some strange reason.  When we mentioned this to AMD, they responded that they
knew that it was not compatible with the 82380.  Intel must use some 
un-documented features.

Dave Smith
From: asc@concurrent.co.uk (Andy Chittenden)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Configuration info for Seagate 4096
Date: 14 Dec 92 14:51:23 GMT
Reply-To: asc@concurrent.co.uk
Organization: Resumix, Inc., Santa Clara, CA

I have just acquired a Seagate 4096 80M MFM drive with no configuration info.  Could some kind soul please send me the configuration information that I can give to prep and to drivparm (in config.sys)?

Thanks in advance

---
Rgds, Andy Chittenden
      __   __   __   
     |\ _\|\ _\|\ _\
     | |  |_|  |_|  |    |   DOMAIN:     asc@concurrent.co.uk
     | | :    :    :|    |   UUCP:       ...!uunet!ukc!concurrent!asc
     | |   ______   |    |   NEM:        asc slough
     | |  /    | \  |    |   Royal Mail: 227 Bath Road    
     | |  |    | |  |    |               Slough SL1 4AX, England 
      \|__|     \|__|    |   

          CASEmate       
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: engwhatt@iti.gov.sg (Toh Eng Whatt (SE))
Subject: SBPro: Can't find DMA
Organization: Information Technology Institute, National Computer Board, Singapore.
Distribution: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 09:02:49 GMT

I have a SBPro board that seems to have an intermittent problem of not being
able to locate the DMA channel.  I am using the factory defaults of address
220H, IRQ 7 and DMA 1.  The testsbp program can detect the address and IRQ
alright, but can only see the DMA channel now and then.  The problem appeared
apparently after I installed the Future Domain TMC850 SCSI board (with the
Floptical BIOS), but stayed on even after I took out the SCSI card.

Windows 3.1 also has problems trying to detect the SBPro and can locate it
only occasionally.

I'd be most grateful if any of you hardware wizs out there can explain what
could possibly be happening here.  Is it a common problem with SBPros or is
it just my card?  Could it be a problem with my motherboard?

Thanks a zillion!

* William

-- 
William Toh Eng-Whatt        | SE Lab, ITI, NCB          |    Tel: (65)778-2211
Assoc. Member of Tech. Staff | 71 Science Park Drive     | Direct: (65)772-0442
engwhatt@iti.gov.sg          | NCB Building, S'pore 0511 |    Fax: (65)779-5966
engwhatt@itivax.bitnet       | Republic of Singapore     |    Tlx: RS 38610 NCB
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: williams@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Kent Williams)
Subject: Re: External case for devices (SCSI)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 15:44:36 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

From article <104479@bu.edu>, by edwong@bu.edu (Edward Wong):
> Does anyone know where I can get external case for some SCSI devices?  I am
> going to buy a new SCSI drive, and I am also running out of drive bay, so I
> am thinking of buying external cases. Thanks.
> 
> --
> 8)
>   _               _     | user's name:  Edward Wong
>  |_ |\ \   / /\  |_) |\ | ARPA:     edwong@acs.bu.edu	
>  |_ |/  \^/ /==\ | \ |/ | UUCP:     acs.bu.edu!edwong	

Buy a cheap case/power-supply combo.  Better yet, buy a humongous tower
case and transfer your system into it.

When I've asked various vendors about an 'external SCSI case' they've
always come back with a price in the 200$ range, which is more than
enough to buy a deluxe tower/PS combo.
--
Kent Williams -- williams@cs.uiowa.edu Work(335-4496) Home(338-6053)
There used to be an inflammatory quote here.


Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen)
Subject: How to properly install ATI Wonder drivers for my GUP?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 02:12:52 GMT

I'm trying to get an MPEG viewer to work on my system.  I have an ATI
Graphics Ultra Pro and was told by someone who also owns a GUP that
installing the Wonder drivers (since the GUP is Wonder compatible I
think) allowed the program to work when it would not under the mach32 drivers.

I downloaded some drivers from wuarchive (ativg3.zip) and tried to
install them but got some sort of error when trying to reenter
windows.  I don't remember the exact error right now.  I had taken the
precaution of making a complete copy of my c:\windows\system directory
before doing this.

First of all, are these the right drivers for the Wonder and what did
I do wrong?  I followed the directions and ran setup from dos, adding
a new set of drivers from OEM disk.  I had the drivers already in a
directory on the hard drive and so did not direct setup to a disk.
The instructions for the drivers say that when setup asks to insert
Windows disks to go ahead and give it the ATI disk location again.
Maybe I should try this again and instead use the Windows diskettes?

Thanks,
Mike
--
Michael Rosen						"Time and space
Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University		 can be a bitch."
mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu					  -Quantum Leap
Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu
From: roger@oit.itd.umich.edu (Roger Espinosa)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: SoundBlaster-compatible drivers for IBM ACPA card?
Date: 16 Dec 1992 22:39:56 GMT
Organization: Office of Instructional Technology, University of Michigan
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: helen.oit.itd.umich.edu


Hi.

My boss and I were musing how much better the pre-school software we
manage sounds with a Disney Sound Source than through the speaker (of
IBM Model 25s), and lamenting how most of the schools he services are
doing exactly that -- using the internal speaker, 'cause the DSS would
be an extra (no matter how slight) cost. 

Plus, DSS isn't compatible with everything, and doesn't allow for input..

The question, though, bringing me here is that all our machines have
an IBM ACPA (Audio Capture/Playback Adapter) card inside, mostly for use
with LinkWay Live! applications. Does anyone know of any driver (or whatever)
that will allow an ACPA card do be compatible with a SoundBlaster or AdLib
card? This would allow all the software to sound as nice as it can, *and*
allow for input (which the schools would like to use more often).

The ACPA's a nice card, but nobody seems to support it...

Email responses would be appreciated, as I don't visit here often.

Thanks!
Roger Espinosa
roger@oit.itd.umich.edu
From: perkins@aludra.usc.edu (Roger Perkins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Wangtek tape Drive Info ???
Date: 11 Dec 1992 14:44:10 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu

In article <47380012@hpscit.sc.hp.com> jimmy@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Jimmy Chua) writes:
>
>   I was given a Wangtek Tape Drive Model#5099EN24 and controller card #30850-
> 008 but no documentation. I knew that it could be used on a AT machine.
>   Can someone tell me what kind of tape/format the tape dfrive use? I would
> also like to konw how to set up the  Dip Switches and Jumper wire settings?
> Can I use PC Tools backup software to drive this thing ?
>    Thank you very much...
>
     The Wangtek Support line is 1-800-992-9916, unforunently, I have found
that they aren't much help unless you have one of their newer tape drives.
I have an old Wangtek Model FAD 3500 AN tape drive and I was able to get
absolutly no information from them other than that the newest version of
Central Point backup is supposed to support it (it is supposed to run off the
floppy cable but I haven't been able to get it to work yet, I haven't spent
the 75 bucks for CP backup yet though).

Xref: sparky comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:33306 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:15838 comp.sys.amiga.misc:18618
From: god@hale.cts.com (David J. Calabrese)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Beef Sandwich - Re: Amiga now kicks PC butt - no way.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 03:03:13 PST
Organization: Hale Telecommunications Inc.

ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:

> In article <ByqLHC.3Ds@newcastle.ac.uk> D.J.Butcher@newcastle.ac.uk (Dave But
> 
> >Every time I've ever used a PC its either locked up, fallen over, 
> >or run out of memory.
> 
> Wow! What do you do with it? Hit it on the monitor with a baseball bat?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
> Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
> Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !

 
Now wait a minute.  PCs do a lot of things, but falling over
is not their specialty.  Most PCs have substantial weights
in them that are designed specifically to prevent them
from tumbling.  To prevent undue suspicion, most of these
weights are cleverly disguised as powersupplies or hardcards.
 
Anyway, if thePC goes a tumblin' every time you approach
it, you either generate a very strong SOUTH magnetic field
(all PCs, as required by FCC regulations are magnetically
aligned NORTH), or you're a clumsy Hurcules (I don't mean
the XT display card, it's time to call Arny here).
 
* david j. calabrese *
 
H  E  A  D  I  N  G    F  O  R

                        
             __---_                 .
. ..  .  . _-      -        T                              .
... .  .  -  (. .)  =        h 
         =        --          e   E                                     .
. ..  .  .--____--                 D         .
============================\       G                          .
                             \       E   .                    .
                              \        !
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: SCSI board question/recommendation?
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:55:35 GMT

In <1gioe8INNlph@male.EBay.Sun.COM> ronr@ateami2.EBay.Sun.COM (RON RICHARDSON - SUN MICROSYSTEMS) writes:


>What are the main differences between SCSI boards?  I've seen prices
>from $100 to $400 and by reading the specs on the boxes can't tell
>much difference.  Are there different speeds of SCSI boards?

There are different widths (8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit), some bus-master
and some don't, some support things like fast SCSI and some don't,
some have cache on the controller and some don't, etc.

>I want to have one SCSI board that will connect a CD-ROM drive and
>hard drive.    Any recommendations?

Depends on what you're planning on running (OS and software wise).
However, I generally like the Adaptec controllers.  They're pretty
much the standard and pretty widely supported by various operating
systems (OS/2, Windows/NT, UNIX).  You might also want to look at
Bustek(?), which are clones of the Adaptecs and can use the same
drivers. 

If you're sticking solely with DOS/Windows, you might want to look at
caching controllers.  However, for most multitasking operating
systems, you're better off putting RAM on the motherboard than on the
controller. 

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: GLO92420@acuvax.acu.edu (Ohlhausen Gaylan Leon)
Subject: ATI Mach 32 Live Video hardware
Organization: Abilene Christian University, Abilene, TX
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 00:35:47 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

I have read several articles (on the net and in print) that state that the Mach
32 chip supports hardware decompression of windows AVI (Audio Video Interleave
- Video for Windows) but I have not been able to find the drivers.  Is this
actually true?  If so, where can I find these drivers?  If the drivers do not
exist, how long until they do?
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.mac.hardware
From: sting@hfglobe.intel.com (Joe Bennett)
Subject: Re: 486SLC chip.... what it it?
Organization: Intel Corporation
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 02:27:43 GMT


As for why the 486SLC by Cyrix will not run NeXTStep, I think
something should be considered:

NeXTStep is the first, to the best of my knowledge, 32 bit
anything for the general PC market since Cyrix and AMD started
their clone operations.  I don't believe that Cyrix could have
possibly tested 32 bit stuff adequately, because there was very
little of it out there, and they were aiming for the entry level
market as well.

My feeling is, they booted up DOS, Windows, probably a flight
simulator and a spreadsheet, and said, "It's compatible" (okay,
I'm sure the tests were more involved than that, but that's the
general idea.)

Now when Next ported their OS to the 486, they probably had to
do some tweaking to their compilers.  This probably meant getting
an Intel 486 programmer's reference manual to do it.  After fixing
a few bugs (either due to something undocumented in the manuals,
documented incorrectly, etc) they got the OS functional.  These
nondocumented/incorectly documented things could be a partial
reason for what's causing NeXTStep not to run on the Cyrix chip.

Two broad assumptions on my part, but I wouldn't be surprised if
that had at least something to do with it.

I really wouldn't be too surprised if other true 32 bit code for
the x86 family also had problems on the Cyrix part.

But we'll have to wait and see.
From: matthias@nsr.hp.com (Matthias Kamm)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: The Death of x86 Arch. ?
Date: 17 Dec 1992 16:38:18 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Santa Clara Site
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpmvd069.nsr.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.2 PL7]

With Windows NT coming out soon, and the huge marketing
effort Microsoft is sure to put into it, is Intel worried?
Win/NT will run DOS and Windows applications, and is
currently being ported to Dec/Alpha, Intergraph/Clipper,
and MIPS/R4000.  If the os is actually well accepted, 
IBM/RS6000 and HP/PARISC won't be far behind.

Will Intel still have any price/performance advantage?
Price definitely for a while, but for any high-end 
application, the newer generation RISC architectures
blow the old x86 chips out of the water.  Are we 
seeing the beginning of the end of the Intel microprocessor
monopoly?

MK

Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.mac.hardware
From: Philip Machanick <philip@concave.cs.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: RISC defined! Was Re: 486SLC chip.... what is it?
X-Xxdate: Wed, 16 Dec 92 09:48:25 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, Wits University
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 07:57:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.002017.3605@mksol.dseg.ti.com> fred j mccall
575-3539, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com writes:
>In <1992Dec11.155653.8469@ptdcs2.intel.com> greason@ptdcs2.intel.com
(Jeff 
>Greason ~) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Dec9.230819.7876@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com 
>(fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>>>They're RISC 386's with a math co. and a cache. 
>>>
>>>Huh?  Nonsensical statement, oh guru.  The phrase 'RISC 386' is a
>>>contradiction in terms.  If the chip accepts the 386 instruction set
>>>(and it does) it is BY DEFINITION not RISC.
>
>>I realize this was not your point, but...
>
>>Aha!  Somebody finally admitted it.  I've long suspected that the RISC
advocate
>>definition of RISC is primarily negative.  Originally, RISC chips had
simple
>>instruction sets, where "simple" was supposed to make it possible to use
>>advanced implementation techniques such as pipelining and caching
because
>>of the reduced transistor budget.  When CISC chips used these, they
claimed
>>that reduced implementation time was the advantage.  Now, it comes down
to
>>just what you stated:
>>  "RISC (adj.): 1) A chip which does not accept the X86 instruction set.
>>   2) A chip which is not manufactured by Intel."
>
>Well, no.  What it comes down to is i386 instruction set is a CISC
>instruction set.  Hence, implementing that instruction set is not
>RISC.  Note that if you implement the Motorola 68k or the DEC VAX
>instruction set, you are also not RISC.

Definitions and what marketing people call RISC don't count. What counts
is how performance is achieved. The major feature of RISC is not saving
transistors, but making instructions as close as possible to similar
complexity so they pipeline easily. This tends to break down somewhat
with floating point.

>The issue with RISC is SPEED.  The issue with most folks buying
>computers who don't need that kind of speed is COST -- and that
>includes throwing away all that software.  So yes, you could say that
>the issue becomes backward compatibility.

If we are in defintion mode:
  backward compatibility = compatibility with things that are backward
--
Philip Machanick
Computer Science Dept, Univ of the Witwatersrand, 2050 Wits, South Africa
philip@concave.cs.wits.ac.za  phone: 27 (11) 716-3759  fax: 339-7965
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: moore@oracorp.com (Sally Moore)
Subject: Help upgrading 286
Organization: ORA Corporation, Ithaca, New York
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:48:11 GMT


Apologies in advance for asking a FAQ.
I have three 286 clones and want to upgrade them enough to 
have extended/expanded memory (if possible) so that they can
run Windows 3.1.  Unfortunately, I'm clueless how and where
to begin.  Do I need new boards?  New chips?  New computers? :-)
Thanks for all help.

Sally Moore
Unix SysAdminType who has been given some DOS machines to care for
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware