HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: Comparison of ARJ 2.3 and PKZip 2.04 and 1.1 (Was: pkzip 2.04c upl
From: Spartacus/CUNY LC NY <LENBC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Friday, 22 Jan 1993 14:31:12 EST
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

In article <1jono1INNsf8@shelley.u.washington.edu>,
rkimmel@stein.u.washington.edu (Robert Kimmel) says:
>
>In article <s0522457.20.0@let.rug.nl> s0522457@let.rug.nl (L.E. Plat) writes:
>>>Subject: Re: Comparison of ARJ 2.3 and PKZip 2.04 and 1.1 (Was: pkzip 2.04c
>uploaded to w)
>>[STUFF DELETED]
>>
>>>Mr. Jung has some speed to address, but PKWARE may address their bug
>>>problems also.  For some reason, the copy I got from them seems to be
>>>missing some of these bugs, but I'm also running a real straight setup.
>>>
>>
>>I'd rather have a slow, but correct ARJ file than a fast, but sloppy
>>ZIP file. Especially when I've only got one copy.
>>
>>Just my $.02.
>>
>>Bert Plat
>>mail to: bplat@rugrcx.rug.nl
>
>Just my $.02 worth, I prefer to use arj when time is critical (or space), oh,
>and thats uploading time, and I was impressed with Pkzips 2.04c speed, and
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>compression, but the as I'm usually in OS/2, i want something that works.  But
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You might wanna try InfoZip 5.1 which has been release recently for OS/2.
From what I read off the announcement, 5.1 is now compatible with Pkzip 2.04c
I'm still not sure if Pkzip2.04c other features have been ported to InfoZip
like the multiple volume compression.

I'll stay out of the ARJ vs Zip debate :-) just adding some info. peace

>until,
>either Pk makes a working pkzip 2.xx or info zip is able to specifiy what
>directory you want to uncompress the stuff into, I'll probably stick with arj.
>
>
-------
------------------------------+             All The Best,
Reply To:                     |
     LenBC@CunyVM.Cuny.Edu    |             Edward Galarza
     LenBC@CunyVM.BitNet      |             Brooklyn College Of The
     IRC: Spartacus           |             City University Of New York
------------------------------+             "Que viva el OS/2! v2.1"
Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.misc:7196 comp.os.linux:25486 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:37167
From: richb@jti.com (Richard Braun)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.os.linux,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: SCSI performance / Adaptec vs Seagate
Date: 26 Jan 93 02:33:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: jti.C1FwFo.G63
Organization: Jupiter Technology Inc. / Waltham, MA

Using a simplistic disk performance test program provided by a drive
manufacturer, I came up with the following surprising result:

	The 8-bit Seagate ST02 is nearly 3 times faster than the
	16-bit bus-mastering Adaptec 1542A.

The program measures transfer rate, average seek time, track-to-track
seek time, and a so-called "performance index".  With the drive
low-level formatted for the Seagate's disk geometry, I get 3.5ms
track-to-track time and a 30 performance index.  Reformatted for the
Adaptec, the numbers are 4.9ms and 11.6.

Why might this be?  Is it the different head/sector mapping (64 vs. 63
heads, I think), or is the Adaptec just plain slower?  Is it possible/helpful
to optimize the controller/device driver to match the physical disk
characteristics (15 heads, 1632 cylinders)?

-rich
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: OS/2 campaign in PC rag/PC computing
From: ghdai@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: 27 Jan 93 11:30:39 CST
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City
NNTP-Posting-Host: vax1.umkc.edu

Dear DOS users:

The newly published "PC Magzine" (Feb.9, 93, pp. 319-340) and "PC Computing"
(Feb. 93, pp. 213-234) have a special collection (20 pages) of "OS/2 100 Ways."
This is part of a whole new campaign before IBM introduces OS/2 2.1 in the very
near future (probably around March/April).

It clearly explains the endless possibilities of using OS/2 to improve
productivity, including
thorough explanations of the advantage of OS/2 as an operating system for your
PC and plainty of OS/2 usage, tips, and tricks, many of which I myself didn't
know until I read it although I have been using OS/2 since last June.

I highly recommend that you find a copy and read through the story.  It will
help you raise productivity when using the computers.
After reading the articles, I believe, you'll be definitely sure that OS/2 is
really the operating system for your PC in the '90s.

Best regards,

Guohuan H. Dai/2
-- 
GHDai@VAX1.UMKC.Edu |** Happy user of only OS/2 !!! / HPFS on 2 entire HD's **|
|* OS/2 2.1beta includes MMPM/2, Fax/PM, Win3.1 enhanced mode, TT fonts, etc.*|
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: LJ01066@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: STACKER question
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 11:35:25 PST

I believe I have read, as I use stacker also, that you are not supposed
to put the swap file on software created drives and I believe that's
correct. Before installing a swap file you should run a disk optimize,
i.e. norton speed disk to unfragment files and compress them all so their
is room on the drive. Then you can install the swap file as it will only
let you install it in a contiguous space anyway. BUT DO NOT INSTALL ON
A STACKER DRIVE, I don't think you can anyway, it's not compatible.


Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: richb@jti.com (Richard Braun)
Subject: Repairing motherboards:  is it doable?
Organization: Jupiter Technology Inc. / Waltham, MA
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 16:29:08 GMT

A week and a half ago, I bought a new SCSI disk drive for my 386/25
PC (to replace an RLL).  This 'upgrade' has proven to be my most costly ever.

During all the power-cycling required to determine that neither of the
SCSI controllers at my disposal would work properly for me, I blew out
the old monitor *and* the motherboard.

The motherboard actually still works, partially, and I'm wondering if
it might possibly be repaired.  It has a 1989-vintage AMI BIOS containing
standard and extended setup screens.  One of the bits in the extended-
setup screen is "memory interleave".

No matter how I try to set this bit, the BIOS configuration report displayed
at boot time says "Memory interleave: disabled".  The failure happened
suddenly after a reboot on Thursday evening, and it seems permanent.
Without interleave, this 386 performs like an old 286 machine.

This led to a decision to replace the computer, but I'd still like to
be able to use the old one (at its normal speed) for word-processing
and such.  Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

-rich
From: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (Sunbird a la 400ci)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: Comparison of ARJ 2.3 and PKZip 2.04 and 1.1 (Was: pkzip 2.04c uploaded to w)
Date: 20 Jan 93 23:19:31 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Richardson TX
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson.
              Any opinions expressed are strictly those of the
              user and not necessarily those of Ericsson.

In article <1993Jan18.095526.12886@mfltd.co.uk> sts@mfltd.co.uk (Steve Sherwood) writes:

>Quite right, +/- 1% is irrelevant for most people, and arj is slow.  This is 
>something that the author should address.  ZIP is fast and it compresses well,
>but it is horribly full of bugs.  I can't even use it in a DOS window without
>adding -) on the end on the command line.  It's multi-volume (in)capabilty
>is pretty bad, and it is rather limited in functionality.

>All in all, functionality and freedom from bugs makes me use arj.  It is
>a pity that it is rather slow.  Ok.. Mr Robert K jung, if you are reading,
>this is this weeks chalange.

On the other hand, I could tolerate the slowness of arj if it were a windows 
app.

Mr. Jung has some speed to address, but PKWARE may address their bug 
problems also.  For some reason, the copy I got from them seems to be 
missing some of these bugs, but I'm also running a real straight setup.

You wouldn't be using QEMM by any chance?
 -----------Visit the SOUNDING BOARD BBS 214-596-2915, a Wildcat! BBS--------
 ObQuotes:
 "Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand..."
 "Ignorance and prejudice, and fear go hand-in-hand..."

    Patrick Taylor, Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                    "Don't let the .se fool you"
From: pjc90@ecs.soton.ac.uk (CHERRIMAN PJ)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: EMS and UMB's under EMM386?
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:11:24 GMT

In <1993Jan21.182428.4485@dcatlas.dot.gov> joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) writes:

>shtmar04@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:

>>I've never understood,  (or pretended to understand) the ins and outs of PC
>>memory control - and now I'm stumped.  Could someone please tell me if I can
>>allocate some memory to EMS (not all) and still have UMB's?  Sorry for the
>>ignorance!

>>My system: 4dos4.01,  486DX,  8megs RAM, using smartdrv with 2megs of it!
>>If I try giving EMM386 a number it fetches me that amount of EMS but doesn't
>>give me UMB's - ergo little conventional memory left.

>>CONFIG.SYS contains : DEVICEHIGH=EMM386  noems i=E000-EFFF

>>What should I change the noems to?

>Make sure you have the line : DOS=HIGH,UMB  in your config.sys.  Then you can
>take out the  noems i=e000-efff  parameter.  Replace it with the amount of
>ems you need, e.g. :

>device=himem.sys
>device=emm386.exe 4096
>dos=high,umb
>...

>..will load DOS in the HMA, will make 4096K (4mb) available as ems, and will
>give you access to UMBs for devicehigh and loadhigh statements.

I think this is wrong, on my system I have:

emm386 i=e000-efff ram

The ram or noems switch is required for UMB's

SO for 1M of EMS use:

emm386 1024 i=e000-efff ram

Peter Cherriman - pjc90@uk.ac.soton.ecs


Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: S_KRUSEMARK@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de (Krusemark Michael)
Subject: Win31 and DRDOS 6.0
Organization: University of Ulm, Germany
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 13:23:47 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.25beta

Some time ago, I tried to run Windows 3.1 under DRDOS 6.0 but I failed.
I got I message like that I am using the wrong memory manager.
What shall I do?

Please send a mail to S_KRUSEMAR@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de
Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.misc:7238 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:4055 comp.os.ms-windows.misc:6660 comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.misc:5448 comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32:3134
From: d89-mta@nada.kth.se (Mns Tnneryd)
Subject: Latvian font
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:16:34 GMT

Where can i find a Latvian font for DOS or Windows ??

/Mns
Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.misc:7161 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:17009
From: pierce@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Info about EMM386 and DOS=HIGH wanted!!!
Summary: dos=high means just that!
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:46:28 PST
Reply-To: pierce@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us

In article <1993Jan7.081002.1841@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>, S_BUCK@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de (Buck Martin) writes:
> I need some information about Mess-DOS 5.0's EMM386-driver and the
> DOS=HIGH feature.
> 
> I'd also like to know, if there is any (shareware) expanded-memory-
> manager for the 386 that doesn't switch the CPU to virtual mode (if
> this is possible at all). If such an emulator exists, where can I get
> it from?

Uh, unless you have a motherboard chipset that supports hardware EMS,
no way.  Virtual mode is the only way you can enable the paging feature
needed to emulate EMS on a 386.

 
> Does anybody know, how to force DOS into low memory though there is a
> DOS=HIGH statement (it must be possible; I've seen 2 multi-configura-
> tion-programs doing this)?

Uh, DOS=HIGH means just that!  It tells DOS to load HIGH.  If you don't
want DOS to load HIGH, don't use DOS=HIGH!  The HMA is still available
to other software as long as HIMEM.SYS is loaded and DOS is not loaded
high.

As far as I know, EMM386 only uses the memory you tell it to use.  However,
it allocates this memory from the XMS pool (which HIMEM.SYS manages).  OLD
programs that try and access extended memory directly without using XMS
services won't see any if HIMEM is loaded.  New software uses HIMEM
to manage extended memory as "XMS" memory and all is happy.

-john r pierce
hacker at large

Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: tom@vpnet.chi.il.us (Tom Hansen)
Subject: PC --> Sharp Wizard
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 05:30:25 GMT

I'm looking for the PC link cable to connect my PC serial port to the
Sharp Wizard so I can download all my phone book info.  The catch is -
I don't want to buy the whole kit from Sharp - it includes the
software, and costs $125.  All I need is the cable - my current
software supports downloading to the Sharp.  

Any ideas where I can get just the cable?  Thanks.

Tom
-- 
| Tom Hansen           || "My beard grows to my toes.  I never wears no     |
| tom@vpnet.chi.il.us  ||  clothes.  I wraps my hair around my bare, and    |
| "I yam what I yam"   ||  down the road I goes."    - Shel Silverstein     |
|______________________||___________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.os.linux,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: drew@romeo.cs.colorado.edu (Drew Eckhardt)
Subject: Re: SCSI performance / Adaptec vs Seagate
Organization: University of Colorado at Boulder
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:58:44 GMT

In article <C1FwFo.G63@jti.com> richb@jti.com (Richard Braun) writes:
>Using a simplistic disk performance test program provided by a drive
>manufacturer, I came up with the following surprising result:
>
>	The 8-bit Seagate ST02 is nearly 3 times faster than the
>	16-bit bus-mastering Adaptec 1542A.
>
>The program measures transfer rate, average seek time, track-to-track
>seek time, and a so-called "performance index".  With the drive
>low-level formatted for the Seagate's disk geometry, I get 3.5ms
>track-to-track time and a 30 performance index.  Reformatted for the
>Adaptec, the numbers are 4.9ms and 11.6.
>
>Why might this be?  Is it the different head/sector mapping (64 vs. 63
>heads, I think), or is the Adaptec just plain slower?  Is it possible/helpful
>to optimize the controller/device driver to match the physical disk
>characteristics (15 heads, 1632 cylinders)?
>

Seek tests done via BIOS for IDE and SCSI disks are completely 
bogus.  A track->track seek may not go off of the current track if 
the logical # of sectors per track > the real #.  

SCSI supports a seek command, but a disk doesn't have to do ANYTHING when 
it sees it.  The BIOS on the controller doesn't have to do ANYTHING.

As far as transfer rate, not using the hardware handshaking on the 
Seagate (enabled with the 0ws jumper), being "safe" and checking 
the SCSI status bits, you won't be able to transfer at > ~600K/sec.

I know the adaptec has no problems above those speeds.

Benchmarks need to be taken with a grain of salt, and need to 
be relevant.  

Finally, the Adaptec has more intelligence than the seagate, so you 
won't waste serious amounts of time in the kernel manually twiddling 
the SCSI bus.  This will leave more time available for user processes,
and your interactive performance on a real OS will be VASTLY superior
to what the Seagate can give you.

-- 
Boycott AT&T for their absurd anti-BSDI lawsuit. | Drew Eckhardt
Condemn Colorado for Amendment Two.		 | drew@cs.colorado.edu
Use Linux, the fast, flexible, and free 386 unix |  
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: fox@rei.com (Fuzzy Fox)
Subject: Re: EMS and UMB's under EMM386?
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:10:55 GMT
Organization: Recognition Equipment, Inc.

joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) writes:

>>Could someone please tell me if I can allocate some memory to EMS
>>(not all) and still have UMB's?

>>CONFIG.SYS contains : DEVICEHIGH=EMM386  noems i=E000-EFFF

>>What should I change the noems to?

>Make sure you have the line : DOS=HIGH,UMB  in your config.sys.  Then you can
>take out the  noems i=e000-efff  parameter.  Replace it with the amount of
>ems you need, e.g. :

>device=himem.sys
>device=emm386.exe 4096
>dos=high,umb
>...

>..will load DOS in the HMA, will make 4096K (4mb) available as ems, and will
>give you access to UMBs for devicehigh and loadhigh statements.

NO!  This will take away your UMB access because this tells EMM386 to
only provide EMS.  You need this command line:

device=emm386.exe 4096 ram i=e000-efff

Essentially this is the same as the original command line, only changing
"noems" to "ram", and giving the desired size of EMS.

-- 
#ifdef TRUE        | Fuzzy Fox (a.k.a. David DeSimone)       fuzzy@netcom.com
#define  TRUE   0  |
#define  FALSE  1  |         "S-O-C-K-S ?   Wow, Spanish *is* easy!!"
#endif             |
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: hausutzu@chamber.in-berlin.de (Utz-Uwe Haus)
Subject: Help on 2nd HD (Maxtor and Quantum okay???)
Keywords: HD 2nd HD Maxtor Quantum
Organization: Zombie's Burial Chamber, Berlin, West Germany.
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 18:38:15 GMT

Hello,
 
I'm planning to add a 210 MB Maxtor drive (IDE) to my system as "slave" 
drive. The primary disk is a 105 MB Quantum. A friend of mine told me that there 
would sometimes occur problems when using the Maxtor drive as slave, for
example with a Seagate as primary drive. Does anybody out there use a 
Quantum/Maxtor configuration ??? Problems??
Any replies (except flames for not using the right group :>) welcome
(including general remarks about HD-expansion or applicable FAQ's - sorry, my
host doesn't allow for ftp :<)
 
Utz-Uwe Haus
root%pse@chamber.in-berlin.de
From: scjones@thor.sdrc.com (Larry Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: Need ASPI4DOS.sys real bad PLEASE
Date: 23 Jan 93 17:42:36 GMT

In article <1993Jan18.210352.12364@sj.ate.slb.com>, poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) writes:
> I find that a little difficult to believe, since it would require intimate
> knowledge of the Adaptec hardware, which I don't know how available it is.

Believe it.  Adaptec is one of the "good guys" who believe that telling
people how to use their hardware might actually allow them to sell more.
Complete programming details for all their SCSI adapters are available to
anyone *free* on their BBS.  That's probably the main reason that the 1540
family is so widely supported.
----
Larry Jones, SDRC, 2000 Eastman Dr., Milford, OH  45150-2789  513-576-2070
larry.jones@sdrc.com
You should see me when I lose in real life! -- Calvin
From: CALT@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: need utility to unpack ZIP files
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:32:13 GMT
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

I got some ZIP files. Could someone tell me where to get
a utility to unpack them? Thanks in advance!

Ching Shih
shih@cithex.caltech.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: ee90dhg@brunel.ac.uk (Dominic H Goode)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Rombo Media Pro Plus
Date: 28 Jan 93 13:19:08 GMT
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]


A friend of mine recently bought a Cardex hi-colour 1Mb graphics card,
using the Tseng ET-4000 chipset.

Having access to this 24 bit colour, he then bought a video digitising card -
the Rombo Media-Pro Plus.

Unfortunatly, after installing the card and the Windows 3.1 software, he found
that the card only worked in standard 16 and 256 colour modes. Furthermore,
he could no longer use windows AT ALL in the high colour modes, as most of the
colours become black or white.

Whilst the digitiser does not need a hi-colour mode, (it chroma-keys its output
into the pc's VGA video signals), it is rather a waste of a hi colour card!

Also, the software supplied with the digitiser refuses to save 256 colour BMP
files. It reports a sofware failure, followed by a windows AE message, which
closes down the program.

The software only works at all in the 386 enhanced mode - otherwise the
sotware is completely unable to access the card's on board ram.

24bit bmp files are (Slightly) more sucessful, but only a very small number
of windows and DOS programs will load them in correctly (if at all). So much
for a standard file format!

Does anyone know how to solve (or improve) either of the above problems?

Thanks. 
Dominic Goode (ee90dhg@brunel.ac.uk)
.
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: cwatters@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Coyt D Watters)
Subject: Re: Help needed using comm3&4 ports
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 13:48:19 GMT

In article <727752980snx@essence.demon.co.uk> prh@essence.demon.co.uk writes:
>In article <93021.35673.LJ01066@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM> LJ01066@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
>
>>I need information on how to use comm ports 3&4 if I already have devices
>>on 1&2.  What I really want to know is if I can put two modem cards in
>>my system one on port 1 the other on port 2 and assign my mouse to be on
>>comm 3 or 4.
>
>Almost.  Put the modems on ports 1 and 3 or on ports 2 and 4.  That way, 
>as long as they aren't in operation at the same time, you shouldn't get 
>interrupt clashes.  Keep the mouse on its own interrupt.
> 
>COM1, COM3 share INT3
>COM2, COM4 share INT4

Check your modem's manual.  You may be able to assign it to a different 
interrupt, and be able to use the both modems and a mouse at the same time
(in theory).  I'd use the mouse on COM1 or COM2, since that's where most
programs look for it.  Put the modem cards on the different COM/INT.  Procomm
Plus can be configured to use the "different" com/irq.



Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: cmick@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Baldy)
Subject: Spell Check/Dictionary at the DOS prompt?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 11:32:22 GMT

Hello,  I've been searching for a spell checker that works at the DOS prompt.
Something like:  C:>webster dicttonary
		    dicttanary not found try: dictionary, ...

I could use the source code too, but if there is anything like this out
there please let me know.

Thanks.
-- 
Later,
	Craig
cmick@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
cmick@acoma.ucs.indiana.edu
From: walver@kielo.uta.fi (Ville V. Walveranta)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: Low-Level format utility for IDE drives
Date: 23 Jan 93 22:40:38 GMT
Reply-To: walver@uta.fi (Ville Walveranta)
Organization: University of Tampere, Finland
In-reply-to: johnboyd@ocdis01.UUCP's message of 21 Jan 93 21:16:19 GMT

kumarr@hfglobe.intel.com (Kumar Ranganathan) wrote in comp.os.msdos.misc:

>> Can any low-level format utility be used to format an IDE disk ? Or does
>>     ^^^

johnboyd@ocdis01.UUCP writes in

> No.  Many tools are specific.  I've accessed some, on Winchester
> controllers, thru debug (PC platform, obviously).  Many commercial disk
> tools disallow this type access when they recognize an IDE drive.  It's a
> situation with any possible number of solutions.

        OnTrack's DiskManager is capable of initializing (low-level
        formatting) an IDE drive. As their commercial version (not the
        one that comes with some hard drives) contains built-in specs
        for hundreds of drives from different manufacturers, I'd say
        it's able to format the IDE drives from different manufacturers
        as well (I haven't upgraded to the latest version, yet, so this
        is just based on a discussion with their sales rep on COMDEX a
        few months ago).

        -- Willy
--

 ***********************************************************************
  ***   Ville V. Walveranta      Tel/Fax.....: (510) 420-0729       ***
   ***  96 Linda Ave., Apt. #5   From Finland: 990-1-510-420-0729  ***
    *** Oakland, CA  94611, USA  (FAXes automatically recognized) ***
   ***  GET MY PGP KEY FROM MY PLAN -> Email.: walver@kielo.uta.fi ***  
  ***        "Reality is subject to change without notice"          ***
 ***********************************************************************
From: franks@hpuamsa.neth.hp.com (Frank Slootweg CRC)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 08:42:02 GMT
Subject: Diskette read errors and data loss.
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, The Netherlands