HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dwj@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Daniel W. James)
Subject: Re: Using mouse in Win3.1 DOS window?
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix
Distribution: world,local
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 12:47:19 GMT

In <1992Oct9.015710.19902@datamark.co.nz> david@datamark.co.nz (David Rowland) writes:

:)The microsoft mouse driver version 8.20 allows the mouse to be used in
:)a windowed box.  This is not the driver which is the default for
:)windows 3.1 and must be loaded from the dos prompt before loading
:)windows.

My own research has found the answer to this to be no, but I'm hoping
someone here will change this to a yes.

I do want to have the mouse available in most of my DOS windows, however I
often access our Database through Procomm (for DOS), and find the
availability of the mouse to be unnacceptable.  I'm tired of having control
characters embedded in my shell scripts just because I bumped the table too
hard while I was keying in a large command.

Is there any way to disable the mouse for a dos window while maintaining the
other dos sessions access to the mouse driver?  Is there a command line
switch to procomm that disables the mouse?  I have set the mouse
sensitivity to 999 which cuts down somewhat, but I'd like to be able to
shut it off altogether.
-- 
____________________________________________________________________________
Some folks try to multiply from sunrise to  |  ccpoabt!dwj@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US
Sunset--leave behind more of their kind so  |...!pacbell!sactoh0!ccpoabt!dwj
no one will forget             -- Level 42  |          dwj@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US
From: edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: Re: Going from 4MB to 8MB RAM (another ?)
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:07:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: vax1.1992Oct15.140748.1
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <1992Sep30.201147.27082@aus.intel.com>, johne@tule.intel.com (John Elliott) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Sep28.171813.4370@msdhsv.ingr.com>,
> ahmad@norooz.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Ahmad Alavi) writes:
>> 
>> I just added 4 more MB to my computer. I was expecting to see less
>> disk activities from Windows 3.1 but I did not. So I wrote the following
>> test program.
>> 
>> 
>> I ran this program from Run command of Program Manager in a freshly booted
>> machine. If I have 8MB of memory I should not see any disk activity after
>> the initial load. Right? I see disk activities twice. One for each loop,
>> I assume. Is that the way it supposed to work? Am I assuming something
>> wrong? Do I have to run any kind of setup? Have I wasted my $160?
>> 
>> Please help.
>> 
>> MSD shows 8MB of memory.

	Fine question, I have an 2 additional related questions:

1) How should our smrtdrv be set up to handle the disk cache, I know the
default with 8mg is 2mg, will this change depending on windows needs, or is two
mg taken by the cache which doesn't give this up if windows asks for it?

2) before with 4mg my system resources says I have 83% free, now with 8mg it
says 85% free, i thought the % would change up to the 90+% range. However, 
MSD in windows does show the recognition of 8mg and my resources report above
the % free, about around 4kb free. Should the % change with the increased mem?

Thanks!
Eric
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 10:54:54 EDT
From: <C1M@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: Re: SoundBlaster 1.5 recording
Distribution: world

To record from a stereo/vcr/CD to the SoundBlaster you will need to bring
the output audio signal to the level required by the microphone input on the
SB. I did this by wiring an audio cable with a 470,000 Ohms resistor on the
center pin and a 30,000 Ohms resistor between the two wires.
DISCLAIMER: Try this at your own risk!

Carl  C1M@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: cleggp@aix.rpi.edu (Paul Jason Clegg)
Subject: Paradise SVGA drivers for Windows 3.1
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:31:02 GMT

Could some kind soul please point me in a direction to obtain 256 color
drivers for Windows 3.1 for my Paradise SVGA 1024 512k card?  Thanks.

Oh--please answer by email; I don't follow this group at all...

Thanks in advance.

...Paul


Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: neumann@brahms.udel.edu (Brian R Neumann)
Subject: Re: DOSPRMPT.PIF Problems
Organization: U of Delaware
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 22:13:37 GMT

In article <8OCT199208445847@utkvx2.utk.edu> drevik@utkvx2.utk.edu (Drevik, Steve) writes:
>I just received a new Gateway 486 with Windows 3.1 already loaded.d
>However, when I 2-clicked the MS-DOS, I got the following message:
>
>   Incorrect System Version.  Run Windows Setup again.
>
>I examined the icon's attributes and the DOSPRMPT.PIF file.  Nothing
>notable there, all looks well.  I ran Setup and even re-intalled from 
>disk again.  Still does it.  I'm probably missing something REALLY
>simple here... or else some memory conflict.
>
>If anyone has ideas or solutions, please e-mail or post.  Thanks
>
>-steve
>
>

What you need to do is get a newer version of the ATI Ultra video
driver.  I had the same problem with my Gateway that I bought in
August.  I think there's one on Cica.

Brian

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: mfprf@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Paul R. Falzer)
Subject: Re: Who's using Win 3.1 primarily for DOS apps multitasking?
Summary: read Windows Secrets!
Organization: Educational Computing Network
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 16:03:15 GMT

I'd be interested in others' opinions on the subject of how to optimize
Windows for DOS task-switching and multi-tasking, but the best discussion
I've seen is in Livingston's *Windows 3.1 Secrets.*  Look especially at the
sections on pifs and on modifying system.ini entries.

Livington's not an advocate of using Windows as a DOS shell, and he
specifically says not to shell out from one DOS program to another.  (I've
done this on a few occasions with no difficulty, however.)

Since you're now in the Windows environment, you might want to consider
Windows utilities that will do the job of your DOS utilities, and therefore
make it unncessary to move directly between DOS programs.  Again, others may
have different opinions, but I'd suggest that for file management you
consider the new XTree or (my choice) Metz Software's F/X.

  Paul R. Falzer
    Internet: mfprf@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
    Bitnet:   mfprf@ecnuxa.bitnet


Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: Sprague.Wbst311@Xerox.com
Subject: Re: 1 x 3 SIMMS ?
Followup-To: 1 x 3 SIMMS ?
Originator: msprague@superior
Organization: Xerox
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:03:02 GMT

> I'm upgrading my PC to 8 mb from 4.  ...  I need 1 9 1 Mb SIMMS.
> My store has just informed by that they now sell 1x3 MB SIMMS
> instead of 1 x 9.  They say they take up the same physical space
> and are compatible to the 1x9.
>
> Is this true ?  Anyone familiar with using a mix of 1x9 and 1x3
> in a pc.  Or do I have nothing to worry about ?

Don't confuse bits with chips!  Both SIMMS are 1Mb x 9.  Physically, one
SIMM uses nine 1Mb x 1 bit chips, while the other uses two 1Mb x 4 bit
and one  1Mb x 1 bit chips, for a total of three chips.  How your PC
works with them SHOULD make no difference, as the pin out is the same.
I think I have 4 Meg of one type, and 4 Meg of the other type in my 386.

			~ Mike  (sprague.wbst311@xerox.com)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup,comp.os.ms-windows.apps
From: RFowler@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Robert A. Fowler)
Subject: Re: W4W prints 4ppm, not 11ppm as rated for Panasonic 4450i
Summary: Can this print faster?
Keywords: Panasonic 4450i, printing, ppm
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:27:40 GMT

In article <7184@transfer.stratus.com> cbarr@ripple.sw.stratus.com (Chris Barr) writes:

>We've run a few tests on a Panasonic Laser 4450i, rated at 11 pages
>per minute, and find it barely does 5 in the fastest test.  Is there 
>a way to speed it up?

NOTE: The print engine (the photocopier part) of the printer is rated at 
11ppm.  The electronics are segnificantly slower.  

Try printing a midsized text file from dos "copy readme.txt prn:" and it 
will print at close to 11ppm.  Print formated/multifont text from a word 
proccessor (WordStar/WordfW/WordPimperfect) and it will print segnificantly 
slower.  Also, turn off print manager and windows will print faster (you get 
output sooner, but you don't get your computer back as fast).


    _________________________________________________________________
                        
                        HONDA -- The only way to fly
    o          
  _/\_>   -A proud owner (just wish they were made in the USA)
 O,> / O   [with all respects to Ohio MINE were made in Japan]
           
                           CM400T/XL500R/VF500F
                             '79   '82    '84
                           
     Slower trafic keep right (SUCKzukies, HDs, etc.) ->->->->->->->
    _________________________________________________________________

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: mhatz@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Hatz)
Subject: Moving files around
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 16:12:08 GMT


Is there a way to move the locations of bmp files and some of the other files
to a different drive and modify one of the *.ini files to tell win 3.1
where to find them?  Rather than having all the crud in the windows and
system directory???  Thanks.

Mike

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Going from 4MB to 8MB RAM (another ?)
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 18:29:33 GMT

In <1992Oct15.140748.1@vax1.umkc.edu> edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu writes:

>In article <1992Sep30.201147.27082@aus.intel.com>, johne@tule.intel.com (John Elliott) writes:
>> 
>> In article <1992Sep28.171813.4370@msdhsv.ingr.com>,
>> ahmad@norooz.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Ahmad Alavi) writes:
>>> 
>>> I just added 4 more MB to my computer. I was expecting to see less
>>> disk activities from Windows 3.1 but I did not. So I wrote the following
>>> test program.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I ran this program from Run command of Program Manager in a freshly booted
>>> machine. If I have 8MB of memory I should not see any disk activity after
>>> the initial load. Right? I see disk activities twice. One for each loop,
>>> I assume. Is that the way it supposed to work? Am I assuming something
>>> wrong? Do I have to run any kind of setup? Have I wasted my $160?
>>> 
>>> Please help.
>>> 
>>> MSD shows 8MB of memory.

>	Fine question, I have an 2 additional related questions:

>1) How should our smrtdrv be set up to handle the disk cache, I know the
>default with 8mg is 2mg, will this change depending on windows needs, or is two
>mg taken by the cache which doesn't give this up if windows asks for
>it?

If you check the manual, I believe that the current version of
SMARTDRV takes two parameters; one is the size of the cache when
Windows isn't running and the other is the size below which SmartDrive
will not lend memory to Windows.  With 8 MB, I think I would be
inclined to drop the cache down to 1025k or 512k when Windows is
running. 

>2) before with 4mg my system resources says I have 83% free, now with 8mg it
>says 85% free, i thought the % would change up to the 90+% range. However, 
>MSD in windows does show the recognition of 8mg and my resources report above
>the % free, about around 4kb free. Should the % change with the increased mem?

Don't expect this to change appreciably, since it is measuring the
Windows resource area, which is a special region of memory that
Windows uses for various things (like allocating Windows).  You can
run out of resources long before you run out of memory.

-- 
"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.os.ms-windows.setup
From: toma@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Rory Toma)
Subject: SuperStor Pro and win problems
Organization: Not bloody likely around here!
Distribution: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 09:22:43 GMT

We have Windows 3.1 with DOS 5.0 and QEMM386 on a 486SX. We just installed
SuperStor Pro, which seems to work fine, except when I try to run
Windows, it returns an error when trying to execute progman.exe

Any suggestions?
--
toma@tc.cornell.edu - Rory Toma

Opinionated and tunnel-visioned? Darn right. But then, my employer really
doesn't know what I'm talking about anyway...
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: ldlres00@ucs.usl.edu (Lafleur L Dwynn)
Subject: Who's using Win 3.1 primarily for DOS apps multitasking?
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 04:27:16 GMT

I am a newcomer to Windows, having recently installed Windows 3.1 and
accumulating only a few dozen hours working with it.  Although I have no desire
to leave my trusty old DOS applications for the pretty world of Windows
applications, my limited experience with Windows 3.1 itself has convinced me it
is a fine multitasker for DOS apps.  To me it seems no more (perhaps less)
likely than DESQview to fail when running several DOS apps in separate windows. 
And it's windows are so much more convenient to move and resize than DESQview's
that I don't mind the somewhat slower nature of Windows.

I'd like to know if anyone out there has been using Windows 3.1 primarily as a
DOS apps multitasker.  If so, could you give me a few pointers?  For example,

(1) How much of the baggage installed with Win 3.1 were you able to discard
from your hard disk?

(2) Have you found a lightweight shell from which you could conveniently launch
DOS apps using convenient keystrokes instead of pointing and double clicking a
mouse (which for me is more tedious than pressing keys)?

(3) Suppose your are in a DOS app in a window, and that app has the ability to
go to a DOS shell. How do you launch another DOS app in another window from the
DOS prompt in that shell? (In my case, I want to start Windows, then run Norton
Commander in a window and open other DOS apps in other windows from NC's DOS
prompt.  IMHO, File Manager pales in comparison to Norton Commander.)

Thank you in advance for any advice you can offer me on these or any other
related points.


L. Dwynn Lafleur
Professor of Physics
University of Southwestern Louisiana
lafleur@usl.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: dwj@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Daniel W. James)
Subject: Re: : 32 bit disk access
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 12:49:38 GMT

In <MER7ZCF@desert.in-berlin.de> mokler@desert.in-berlin.de (Claudius Mokler) writes:

:)Something about 32 Bit Disk Access     

:)If - and only then - your harddisk/controller is compatible with
:)the famous old wd1003 (any IDE drive is) win can access the drive by
:)it own means - neither using DOS nor BIOS. By this method, the
:)performance is increased 'dramatically' because of omitting the tedious

I have an IDE controller, and tried using 32-bit access.  After I restarted
windows, I got an error message of some sort (it was a while back) which
informed me that I was unable to use this.  Is there a *.drv file that I
might be missing (my installation of Windows was done by the vendor from a
tape).
-- 
____________________________________________________________________________
Some folks try to multiply from sunrise to  |  ccpoabt!dwj@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US
Sunset--leave behind more of their kind so  |...!pacbell!sactoh0!ccpoabt!dwj
no one will forget             -- Level 42  |          dwj@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US
From: sryan@vivaldi.trl.oz.au (Simon Ryan)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: Printing Problem ( Manual Page Feeder)
Keywords: Printer, Mystery.
Date: 12 Oct 92 02:00:41 GMT
Reply-To: s.ryan@trl.oz.au
Organization: Telecom Research Labs

I am having a problem with printing from Windows to a manually fed
printer. When Printing a large document, Windows continually comes
back with a problem requestor, "Printer out of Paper" or "Printer
Not Connected, check...." or similar. Anyway after resuming, the printed
document contains corrupted lines. These lines seem to be divided into
two regions, the first half of the line seems fine, the second half is
split vertically from top to bottom, with the top and bottom halfs of
the line interchanged... (It seems that characters are lost and the graphics
printing mode gets out of sync for that line)

The problem fixes itself at the end of the line.

So Far I have managed to get the same effect using the following components

Windows 3.1 with
	Epson LQ500  or
	Casio BJ10-EX Bubble Jet
running
	Word for Windows II or
	Word Perfect for Windows.

and before you ask, I have the printer set up for Manual feed.
I have also tried increasing the retry delays in the printer setup but
this seems to have no effect....


Any suggestions????

Thanx in Advance
Simon.
----- 
+===============================================================+
|o /      Simon Ryan        \ o|                                |
| /   Telecom Research Labs  \ | Space Left Intentionally Blank |
|/    2/M5 770 Blackburn RD   \|                                |
| Clayton, Victoria, Australia |        (sryan@trl.oz.au)       |
| "Different twisty all a of in maze are you, passages little." |
+===============================================================+
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: troy@cbme.unsw.EDU.AU (Troy Rollo)
Subject: Re: Going from 4MB to 8MB RAM
Organization: University of New South Wales
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:57:21 GMT

From article <1992Oct14.023509.26745@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU>, by zwh@newt.phys.unsw.edu.au (Zheng Weihong):
> For follwing three cases, can anyone tell me which one has
> better windows performance:
> 1) turn off  Swapper

The only effect this will have is to cause you to run out of memory if
real memory gets low, and will actually slow things down in that case.

> 2) put swapfile in ramdrive

Pointless. It would take up as much memory as would be in the swap file.

> 3) copy windows system file into ramdrive, and run windows in
> ramdrive.

Pointless. IF there is enough memory to hold the application in the
ram drive, there is enough to hold it in memory. If there's not enough
to hold it in memory, you should let Windows figure out what needs
memory the most.

A ram drive with Windows simply isn't going to be of any benefit.
If you are looking at ways of speeding things up, the only thing related
to any of your questions that might help is to create a permanent
swap file. IF possible, this should be on a separate drive to data
and Windows. The ideal swap file would be one which took up a fast
20MB drive on its own.
--
__________________________________________________________________________
troy@cbme.unsw.EDU.AU	Overworked, overcommited and always multitasking.
From: cspreck@interceptor.ksu.ksu.edu (Corey A Sprecker)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: Getting Started...
Date: 11 Oct 1992 16:27:23 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: interceptor.ksu.ksu.edu


	Hi all. I have a minor problem, and am new to this group, so bear with me,
I recently purchase Windows 3.1 (the complete set, not the upgrade).  When I go
to set it up by typing SETUP off of the a drive, It goes through the dos portion,
loads 3 of 7 disks, I assume it tries to startup windows to continue, but I don't 
know.  The setup jumps to dos with the following message:

	cannot start windows in Standart Mode :
Make sure you are not running other protected mode software, or
try starting windows in 386 enhanced mode by typing win /3.

Ok, so I go thru and remove my one and only TSR from my autoexec.bat and check
my config sys for any suspicious file calls and what not, and try to install again
(Oh, I forgot to mention, I tried starting in 386 enhanced mode, but I get a 
command not recognized error like it doesn't even have a win.exe or whatever it
is).  Anyway, I get the same error again. over and over.

I would appreciate any help that can be given.
Please email me at my email address below.

thanx a bunch,

Corey
cspreck@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.setup:1656 comp.os.ms-windows.misc:3838
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.ms-windows.setup,comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: ARGHH!-WFW2.0 Sucks big time!
From: Stephen Gibson
Date: 14 Oct 92 17:48:17 PDT
 <1992Oct7.010738.4066@ra.msstate.edu> <1992Oct9.140701.1@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi>
Organization: Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA 


In article <1992Oct9.140701.1@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi> swesterback@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.010738.4066@ra.msstate.edu>, cee1@ra.msstate.edu (Charles Evans) writes:
>> In article <BvBGGL.4o4@NCoast.ORG> brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan Brown) writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep28.084311.18791@a.cs.okstate.edu> saeed@a.cs.okstate.edu (SAEED FAISEL) writes:
>>>>I have a 386/40 compatible & win 3.1.
>>>>
>>>>2. How can I make windows to make most use of the 4 MB ram ?
>>>>   I am currently using the following config.sys
>>>>
>>>>	DEVICE=C:\DOS\HIMEM.SYS
>>>>        DOS=HIGH,UMB
>>>>        DEVICE=C:\DOS\EMM386.SYS 1024 RAM
>>>>        . . .
>Myself i have nothing but DOS itself loaded high. I think Windows can 
>make use of all memory itself. So i porbably don't need the EMM386.
>
>> but the thing is, Borland C++ 3.1 will not load in DOS (at least on
>> my 386/40) with QEMM386 with the NOEMS switch
>
>It should load fine. Just be sure to include the \BORLANDC\BIN directory
>in the PATH! Possibly you will also have to add the /X switch to the 
>BC commandline.
>Anyway i am almost sure that BC will work if you run it from Windows. 
>BC makes use of DPMI memory provided by Windows or its own driver DPMILOAD.
>There is no point to use EMM386 or QEMM to simulate EMS-memory if it's not
>really required. BTW, programs that uses EMS are in my opinion old programs.
>New programs uses eighter XMS, DPMI or VCPI memory management.
>
>> my usuall setyup is device=qemm.sys ram noems .. is there someting
>> wrong with using both switches, well hen i took NOEMS off, BC++ (DOS)
>> workds fine.. and that was also in the little install booklet in the
>> BC++ pacakgae... ? any ideas?  
>Did you try to remove RAM instead of NOEMS?
>
>Sten
>============================================================================
>B.Sc. Sten Westerback         Telephone: +358+0 +5115871(work) +740049(home)
>Address: Mets{purontie  9 B19, SF-00630 Helsinki, FINLAND  Time zone: EET
>Test the utility at WSMR-SIMTEL20.Army.mil::pd1:<msdos.dirutl>swxd303d.zip
>NB! I am working, but not speaking for Nokia Telecommunications!
>============================================================================
You might check to see if you need to add the x=x000-xfff next to the emm386 
line. This is done if you have a network card on your PC
From: s_furrer@irau28.ira.uka.de (Andreas Furrer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: SoundBlaster 1.5 recording
Date: 13 Oct 1992 11:08:32 GMT
Organization: University of Karlsruhe, FRG
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: irau28.ira.uka.de

I have got a Sound Blaster 1.5 and I want to record some
songs from a CD player.
The problem is that the SB 1.5 has only an input for
a microphone. If you use tthis input with the line out
of a CD player (or something else) the quality is not good.

The specs of the SB 1.5 input are:

10mV - 100mV, 600 Ohm

and of a normal line out:

-350mV, 30000 Ohm

Now, does anybody know some little electronic circuit diagramm
to convert the line out signal to the microphone specs?
I think, I have seen one in a german journal but I don't
know where.

Andreas Furrer
s_furrer@ira.uka.de