HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: frisk@complex.is (Fridrik Skulason)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Can software be 486-specific?
Date: 12 Nov 92 09:15:28 GMT
Organization: Frisk Software International, Iceland

spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:

>: Will NeXTSTEP 486 run on 386 machines?
>: No. NeXTSTEP 486 uses several 486 specific features that enhance
>: the performance of NeXTSTEP. NeXTSTEP 486 will support any true 
>: 486.
>: 
>: Will NeXTSTEP 486 run on the Cyrix 486SLC?
>: No. The Cyrix chip not a true 486.

>IMHO, if there are in fact processor-specific advantages to requiring  
>a 486, doing so makes sense.

Yeah, but I don't see any sensible reason for not making 386+387 the
minimum requirement - the differences between a 486 and a system with 386+387
are not exactly major, from a programming point of view.

No, I would guess that something else is going one here.  This actually
reminded me of something - what seems a long time ago, some programs checked
the PC ROM, and refused to run, unless they found an IBM copyright message
there.  Of course, other BIOS manufacturers found a way around this - one
BIOS even contains the text "Some software expects to find Copyright IBM here"
with "Copyright IBM located in exactly the right position"

Well, the only benefit I can see for making the software 486-specific is that
it would help selling '486 processors.  And who would benefit .... right,
Intel.

Letting the program to run on only true 486's does not help the end-user much,
but it is sure to hurt Cyrix and AMD....time to sell their stock :-) I guess.

Now, I am not suggesting that Intel may actually have paid for having them
make the software '486 specific...it wouldn't be nice to say that, but........

-frisk
From: chen@cithe1.cithep.caltech.edu (Mark Chen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: QUESTION: How many wait states?
Date: 6 Nov 1992 11:19 PST
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: cithex.caltech.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.42    

Hey net dudes,

Here's a simple question:

486-33 MHz, how many wait states should be used (for 70 ns memory)?
How about for 60 ns, 80 ns, etc.?

(AMI BIOS 1990)
Main memory read wait states: ???
Main memory write wait states: ???
Cache memory: 0 wait states, right? (for 20 ns SRAM)

What is the effect is you choose too low a value?
How much does it slow you down if you select too high a value?

Thanks in advance,
- Mark
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: 486's and NeXTSTEP
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:36:26 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <kb13877@pro-storm.cts.com> brogers@pro-storm.cts.com  
(Brian Rogers) writes:
> In <1992Nov10.195924.21529@leland.Stanford.EDU>
> spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:
> 
> >One good reason that you may want to go the 486 way (as long as  
you  
> >also go the LocalBus etc way; which may not be possible on a  
limited  
> >budget) is that you can then use cool things like NeXTSTEP 486  
rather  
> >than xxxx things like Windows.
> 
> I've often wondered about NeXTSTEP for 486.  How much does it cost?   
Is it
> affordable for a Joe Schmoe like me?  For that matter, hearing you  
mention
> NeXTSTEP in the context of fast, LocalBus, ectc. 486's is rather  
discouraging
> at times -- My wallet cringes.

The user's edition of NeXTSTEP 486 is $1000, which is 10 times
the cost of DOS/Windows.  Although I like NeXT (and am using a
NeXT right  now), I just don't see that the interface is worth
10 times the cost for software alone (not to mention the better
hardware you need to run it).  And that's just for the user's
edition; the Developer's edition costs something on the order
of $2500.

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: GJAMES@HUSKY1.STMARYS.CA (GJames)
Subject: SBPRO and win 3.1
Organization: Saint Mary's University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:50:18 GMT

A friend lent me his SB-pro . I am trying to install it in a 386/40 running 
dos 5.0 and win3.1. The card works fine with my system bells, chimes etc. 
When I try to run the Jukebox program that came with the SBPro it says 
playing but nothing comes out of the external speakers. I have read the 
readme file in the win31 subdirectory. Still no luck.

Any Ideas???????????????????????????????????????????????????

Thanks
From: lectro@stein.u.washington.edu (Jonathan Maier)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Recommendations for a public domain assember sought...
Date: 6 Nov 92 02:29:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov6.022938.29902
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

Hey all,

   I'm looking for a good assembler to get started in assembly language
on the 80386 (I'm new to 80*86... was using a 6502 based sytem).  Could
I have some recommendations, along with where they are available via
anonymous ftp, for complete packages?

Much thanks,
Jonathan Maier
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas)
Subject: Re: 486 vs. 386
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 04:50:34 GMT

In article <134@complex.complex.is> frisk@complex.is (Fridrik Skulason) writes:
>jregehr@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (John David Regehr) writes:
>
>>I think you are correct that the Pentium is a solution waiting for a problem
>>that few people have yet.
>
>Don't worry.  I have full faith in Microsoft to come out with something
>that will slow any Pentium-based machine down to AT speed.  :-)

Yeah, it's called "Windows".  :)  :)

-- 
John Mechalas                                          "I'm not an actor, but
mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu                                 I play one on TV."
Aero Engineering, Purdue University                     #include disclaimer.h
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: moncrg@marcus.its.rpi.edu (Gregory Donald Moncreaff)
Subject: Re: 486 vs. 386
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 02:14:20 GMT

article <1992Nov9.200839.27999@exu.ericsson.se> exuhag@exu.ericsson.se writes:
>
>Not to mention that very few people actually need a 586 (aka Pentium).
>How many people--excepting ray-tracing fanatics and people who do
>serious number crunching--have had any speed problems with a 33 MHz
>486?  
>
does any one remember when they asked us, "who really needs a 486?"

Xref: sparky comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:14600 comp.os.ms-windows.apps:4785
From: pmacfar@eis.calstate.edu (Paul MacFarlane)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.apps
Subject: Re: PC Tools 8.0-No Windows apps!
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:39:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: eis.BxKMt5.C9E
Organization: Calif State Univ/Electronic Information Services

rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard M. Warner) writes:
> 
> I received two upgrade notices for PCT.  Both EXPLICITLY stated that this
> was a DOS only upgrade and that there would be no more Windows support in
> PCT for DOS.  Get out your upgrade notice and read it again.  You will see
> it there in black and brown (bad color combo).  Your failure to fully
> read and comprehend the upgrade off is not shabby "treatment" by Central
> Point.
> 
I had just read this, and then, while clearing out my pile of last month's
junk mail, I ran across the single upgrade notice that I received. 
Although the product IS titled "for DOS" it is not so titled on the page
where you actually send in your order.  I haven't been able to find any
place on my notice where it mentions that the windows applets would not be
included, nor that they explicitly would not be supported in the future.
 
Although it does seem logical that CP would eventually split
their product line into two, this particular notice gives no indication
that they were going to do so at this point.  Since their previous product
was a DOS product, and included the Windows applets, it seems to me a
reasonable assumption that they would appear in the upgrade, particularly
since 'for DOS" was not consistently used in the title of the program.

I have a feeling that the two people who have been disputing the point in
this thread received different upgrade notices from CP.

Paul MacFarlane
Danville, California
pmacfar@eis.calstate.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: fast binary file transfer between Unix - PC?
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:16:35 GMT

In <RFINCH.92Oct31154317@venice.water.ca.gov> rfinch@water.ca.gov (Ralph Finch) writes:

>I'm looking for a fast binary file transfer program which will work
>with both Unix (Sun Sparc) and DOS/Windows (either/both).

>On the DOS/Windows side I've tried all sorts of [xyz]modem transfer
>routines that come with various modem utilities.  But the only one
>I've found to work with Unix is the kermit that is part of the Windows
>3.1 terminal emulator.  It seems slow, I'd like to get something
>faster.

You need to get ZModem software for the Sun.  

-- 
"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.
From: sciamanda@edinboro.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Equation Writer for Win31
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:06:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Edinboro University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Nov5.015500.29206@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, mboone@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael B Boone) writes:
> Hi all.
> 
> I'd like to know if there's a PD/Shareware program available that will let
> you compose equations like Word Perfect does.  I want to put the equation
> together and paste it into Word or Excel.
> 
> Please email me if you know of any solutions.
> 
> Thanks.
> Mike.
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> mboone@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mike Boone) Ohio State Aero/Astro Eng.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------


Word for Windows includes an Equation Editor (excellent).
-Bob Sciamanda
Edinboro U of PA
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: wiegand@rtsg.mot.com (Robert Wiegand)
Subject: Re: Parity error - HALT - a better NMI handler?
Reply-To: motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:45:16 GMT

chuck.colford@synapse.org (Chuck Colford) writes:

>To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
>From: chuck.colford@synapse.isis.org

>Alas; I am not alone.  I am plagued by the occasional parity error too.
>Chris Granitz recently recanted his story & it sounds all too familier.
>I'm a H/W engineer, so I've gone through most of what I can check (mem
>speeds, cache data/tag ram speeds, bus speeds, looked for "pushed
>parts", etc).  Still they persist, but I hate to turn off checking.

>Speeds of 33 MHz and up are challenging & require good design & layout
>practice.  Perhaps all the clone designs do not all allow adequate
>margins.

>What I would really like to see is a program (TSR or config.sys driver)
>that would intrcept the NMI and report the address & byte where it
>thinks the error occurred.  This should be a protected mode program &
>windows compatable.  This would be more inspiring than PARITY ERROR -
>SYSTEM HALTED.

>Does anyone have such a program?  If so, I would appreciate an email
>copy.

>...Chuck
>                              

I don't think this is possible. This would require hardware to latch the
address on the bus when the error occures. There is no way to do this
with just software. Software may be able to give you help sometimes
by looking at the processor state, but it can't catch errors that
occur during DMA and will give incorrect information.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Wiegand - Motorola Inc.
motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net            uunet!motcid!wiegand
Disclamer: I didn't do it - I was somewhere else at the time.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: yuri@amath.washington.edu (Yuri Yulaev)
Subject: Font creation software
Keywords: printer fonts and drivers
Organization: University of Washington, Applied Mathematics, Seattle
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:28:39 GMT

	Hello,
does anybody hear about asm/c/c++ shareware programs to create/update
fonts for printers? i am interseted in plain old FX-80, Panas KX-1524
and HP lazer writer. I'd appreciate any help. 
Yuri.
 

Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: chuckc@fc.hp.com (Chuck Cairns)
Subject: Gateway 2000 how to get thru?
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:32:14 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Keywords: Gateway, VL-BUS, ATI, Ultra Pro

Oh Gateway Gateway,

 Well they have gotten too big for their own good. I have had one heck
 of a time getting through to them ! I just had a typical example:

  Phone call to Gateway: ( this is not just ONE call but a "standard" GW call)

	 Get GW recording .... wait wait wait :
	 Person "How may I direct oyur call"

	 I "Sales please"
	 Person "Govt, Business or personal ?"
	 I (dumbly) "Personal"

         Hold .... wait .... wait ... wait

	 Recording "All sales reps are busy please wait for the 
			  next available"

         Hold .... wait .... wait .... wait ... Loooong time.

	 Person: I'm sorry but all our reps are busy now:
	  I can take a message or you can try back later.

         (Here I have WISED up !, If they take a message ...
	 FORGET it Gateway NEVER (at least for me) calls back! )

         Here I want to CURSE ... but what's the use ... not her fault.

         I: "I'll call back later ... (sweetly)"


	 Now you may say "Don't you kave a "direct no" ?
	 Yeah, but it's NO better.  Maybe worse!

	 Steam rolls from my ears:
	 *!#$%$#* Gateway. $^&&$%^!!! em 

	 My $.02
	 cc
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Vesselin Bontchev)
Subject: Re: Macafee
Keywords: Virus
Reply-To: bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de
Organization: Virus Test Center, University of Hamburg
Date: 10 Nov 92 12:44:13 GMT

powlesla@acs.ucalgary.ca (Jim B. Powlesland) writes:

> OK, I tried connecting to mcafee.com, ftp.mcafee.com, and
> mcafee@netcom.com to no avail. How about posting the EXACT
> Internet addresss and the EXACT location of the files at that
> address?

Their network was down these days. The EXACT information is:

mcafee.com (IP=192.187.128.1), directory /pub/antivirus.

Regards,
Vesselin
-- 
Vesselin Vladimirov Bontchev          Virus Test Center, University of Hamburg
Tel.:+49-40-54715-224, Fax: +49-40-54715-226      Fachbereich Informatik - AGN
< PGP 2.0 public key available on request. > Vogt-Koelln-Strasse 30, rm. 107 C
e-mail: bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de    D-2000 Hamburg 54, Germany
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: linstee@dutecaj.et.tudelft.nl (Erik van Linstee)
Subject: Re: More Ram = Faster machine
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 11:28:40 GMT

csg021@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Micky J.) writes:


>I recently upgraded my 25Mhz 386 from 2MB to 4MB, using 3-chip SIMMS
>(it now has four 3-chip SIMMS).

>Why, according to two seperate programs, has my machine slightly increased
>in speed? One used to say my machine was 22Mhz, now it says it's 30Mhz
>(a program simply called 'speed'). Another only says a slight increase
>in speed, about 1Mhz.

You now have four banks filled, which enables the memory controler
to do page interleaving, allowing faster access to consecutive addresses.


-- 
Erik van Linstee   |   Delft University of Technology   |   I'll be back ... 
----
   We are god, 'cause only we can create the idea of his existence
   in our holy brains...  (Yello)
Xref: sparky comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:14431 comp.sys.ibm.ps2.hardware:2022
From: chan@acsu.buffalo.edu (lipchen alex chan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,comp.sys.ibm.ps2.hardware
Subject: high memory usage problem.
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:55:49 GMT
Organization: SUNY Buffalo
Originator: chan@simpkin.eng.buffalo.edu


Hello,

I have an IBM PS/2 model 50 with total RAM of 7 mega and connected
to a LAN network. I use IBM DOS 5.0 now and I want to free-up as much
conventional memory as I can. But even with the DEVICEHIGH= commands in
config.sys and LOADHIGH commmands in autoexec.bat, none of the programs
(e.g. mouse.com) seems to leave the conventional memory. What should I
do in order to force as many programs to run in high memory as I can?
Does the loadhigh command work in 286 machines? Please advise!

Alex


-- 



  +----------------------------------------------------------------+
From: bprk_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Brian Park)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: help me out with LHARC (.LZH) - pleeze!
Summary: anybody know where to find a new version of LHARC?
Keywords: lharc lzh
Date: 13 Nov 92 02:33:19 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

Hello all,

   I recently ftp'd a few files which ended in the .LZH extension.  I'm
almost positive that this specifies compression by LHARC, but when I ran
LHARC on these files, I kept getting

   (filename) : unknown compression method (or something like that)
   (filename) : unknown compression method
   ...

   At first I thought it was a fluke, maybe a bad data transfer or wrong
CRC or something.  But I've been having this problem now with a lot of LZH's.
I never used LHARC that much, so my best guess is that I just have an older
version of the program.  After all, it's not like my LHARC doesn't recognize
the new LHARC at all - it knows (what I assume) are the filenames in the
archive.

   So I went looking for LHARC around the usual ftp sites, but the only thing
I've found so far is (I believe) a Unix LHARC (?!?).  It's usually in a
directory called "lharc", but it consists of three files called "part01.Z",
"part02.Z", and "patch_sb.doc" (or something like that).  I uncompressed the
files with no problem, but I can't figure out what to do from there - it
mentions something about a Unix LHARC in the program, and there are a bunch
of C files...

   HELP!!!  I was looking for a nice 'n easy fix - I've been able to get
PKUNZIP, ZOO, ARJ, and all those other progs with just a simple .EXE or .COM
extension!  Can anybody help me out?  Do I have to learn C to put together
LHARC?

   Thanks in advance for any advice,

   Brian Park
   bprk_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu

ps.  BTW, I think I'm using v1.14B right now (I think...)  If that means
anything...
From: cw21219@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Crying Freeman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: How to handle memory?
Date: 5 Nov 92 06:42:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.Bx8DA6.CI1
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

Hi,
 I'm having some trouble manipulating my extended memory, etc.
Could someone help me out and tell me the exact difference
between "normal" total memory, expanded (EMS) memory, and extended
memory?
 My computer has 640K base memory and ~2 Mbytes extended memory.
My problem is that I basically want to run a program above 640K and
I can't seem to do it. I have fiddled around with EMM386 and himem,
but I'm pretty clueless. Thanks in advance... 
 Please respond by email.
				--Yuan


-- 
 Kenneth C. Wang	| University Of Illinois Champaign-Urbana	
 			| Internet: c-wang@uiuc.edu
From: alex@coombs.anu.edu.au (Alex Stivala)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Emulators
Date: 8 Nov 92 00:32:01 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2

Andrew McCallum <andrewm@zooid.guild.org> writes:

>From jmarkus@electrical.watstar.uwaterloo.ca
>>What other computers can be emulated on the PC via software?
>>
>>Are there Apple ][ and Amiga emulators out there?

>    I've seen an Apple// one arround, but I haven't tried it out.

I FTPed it recently from a SIMTEL-20 mirror.  It seems to work, and comes with the (assembler) source code. There is also a Spectrum emulator and several CP/M emulators.
--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Alex Stivala
        B.Inf.Tech.(Eng.) student, Australian National University
From: wai@mackinac.ecn.purdue.edu (Benjamin Wai)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: fast binary file transfer between Unix - PC?
Date: 5 Nov 92 18:29:15 GMT
Reply-To: wai@ecn.purdue.edu (Benjamin Wai)
Distribution: na
Organization: School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University
Disclaimer: as usual...


 In article <gordon.720979045@tramp.Colorado.EDU> gordon@tramp.Colorado.EDU (GORDON ALLEN R) writes:
>>--
>One way of speeding up the transfer is to use 'set receive packet-length 1024
>or set send packet-length 1024 to reduce overhead.  Also use the highest baud
>rate that you can set.
>
>
	I have a related problem using Kermit...
	I am able to download items from the host at packet size 2000, but
	I am not able to upload anything properly at size down to around 500.
	(the problem is that the transfer most of the time hang at the 4th or 
	 5th packet, and then only the retry counter go up until aborted.) 
	Even at size 500 uploading, a lot of retries occurs.

	The Kermit verion used at the host is: C-Kermit 5A(179) BETA, SUNOS 4.1 
	(BSD), and I am using MS Kermit 3.12 for my PC. Data transfer is made 
	under DOV through phone line at 9600baud.

	I tried cross-referenced the settings at both status menus and made
	trials, but nothing seemed to have been improved.
	I appreciate any help given.

	I also noticed that the host's kermit program can set the send packet 
	size up to 9024. Is there any version of comm program for PCs that 
	can receive up to that size?

	Many thanks.


	- Benjamin Wai  < wai@cn.ecn.purdue.edu > < wai@sage.cc.purdue.edu >
---
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: goyal@utdallas.edu (Mohit K. Goyal)
Subject: Re: Can software be 486-specific?
Organization: Univ. of Texas at Dallas
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 15:55:33 GMT

>>IMHO, if there are in fact processor-specific advantages to requiring  
>>a 486, doing so makes sense.
>
>Yeah, but I don't see any sensible reason for not making 386+387 the
>minimum requirement - the differences between a 486 and a system with 386+387
>are not exactly major, from a programming point of view.
>
Actually, a 386+387 wouldn't be the minium requirement, since word is that
NeXTSTEP 486 will run on a 486SX!


Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: looking for config selector utility
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 04:19:42 GMT

hello all,

i wondered if someone could help me. i am looking for some kind
of a utility which will come up at boot time and let me select
between different versions of config.sys and autoexec.bat. right
now i (and i would assume many others) have to keep multiple versions
of these files and copy them back and forth depending on what i
need to run.

any help would be greatly appreciated.
please respond by e-mail.

thanks

--
charles
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: msfuller@cc.utah.edu (MARC S. FULLER)
Subject: AMI BIOS ext. cache
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center
Date:  6 Nov 1992 09:23 MST  

I have a 486 EISA computer with an AMI 1991 bios.  One of the options in the 
advanced CMOS setup is external cache on or off.  My dealer tells me this cache 
is similar to the cache programs like smartdrv, ncache, etc. only in BIOS.  If
this cache is on and I also have a DOS cache my computer will invariably crash 
in windows.  Any info on this feature? Is the dealer correct? Thanks for your 
comments.

Marc S. Fuller fuller@cardio.med.utah.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc