HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows
From: edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:22:01 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <1992Aug28.222436.7248@wam.umd.edu>, macole@wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole) writes:
> In article <CMM.0.90.2.714995016.terjeh@maud.ifi.uio.no> Terje Holmboe <terjeh@ifi.uio.no> writes:

How to speed up windows?

> I was sadly in your shoes...I did all of the above and more..
> I installed Win 3.1...increased to 8 megs...and install a 387 (for Falcon 3.0's
> High Fidelity Mode)...but the best addition was my Diamond Stealth card (gee,
> this sounds very familiar!)  Other pointers...don't put Windows on a Stacker
> drive, trash Himem.sys, don't blame Smartdrv for everything, and most 
> important of all...give Windows every bit of memory you can spare.
> 
> Or...buy a 486/66! :-)
> 
> Good luck
> Mario
> 
> -- 
> Mario A. Cole			     |  HJ Ford Associates Incorporated

	Well, now I'm confused. I've heard "buy more mem" and also as Mario
pointed out, "Get a better video card like Diamond Stealth or Orchid".
I have a 486/33. Now I was under the impression that adding another 4 meg
would have a much greater impact on (admitedly an already fast windows) than
adding a new card. 
Can anyone give hints as to which would be better?

Eric
From: cfrank@zia.uucp (Colin A Frank)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: WorkShift 1.5. Multiple screen desktop.
Date: 29 Aug 92 15:48:52 GMT
Reply-To: cfrank@zia.UUCP (Colin A. Frank)
Organization: Boyz in the Hood

In article <1992Aug28.142944.49.comp.os.ms-windows.announce@pitt.edu> karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen) writes:
>
>WorkShift version 1.5.
>----------------------
>
>Requires Windows 3.1 or higher.
>
>WorkShift is highly graphical virtual desktop program, that treats the
>desktop NOT as a very large virtual screen, but rather as multiple screens.
>
>-	Graphical preview of each screen.
>-	Workshift restarts and resizes programs just as you left them.
>-	Naming of screens, for quick identification.
>-	Allows cut and paste between screens.
>-	Quick Access to shifts via system menu.
>-	Always on top feature.
>-	Plus more.
>
>WorkShift is a Shareware product. Registration is $20 (large volume discounts).

Where do we get it from?

==========================================================================
Colin... H (408) 229-2025  amdahl.com!zia!cfrank  or (UUCP: zia!cfrank)
 \|/     W (408) 737-5361  colin@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com  (amdahl.com!colin)
  *==>   One Nation! Under... no-no that's taken.  Never mind.
=------------------------------------------------------------------------=
From: ken@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: WinQVTNet and PC-NFS?
Date: 1 Sep 92 13:20:46 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Thomas Beagle (thomas@datamark.co.nz) wrote:
: Is it possible to run both programs such as WinQVTNet and PC-NFS
: together on the same ethernet card?

Why on earth would you want to? PC-NFS includes telnet, FTP, etc, etc,
running under windows. Best of all, it includes a DLL interface to the TCP
software to let you write your own TCP client programs..

--
Ken Tindell             Internet      : ken@minster.york.ac.uk
Computer Science Dept., Local FTP site: minster.york.ac.uk
York University,        Tel.          : +44-904-433244         
YO1 5DD, UK             Fax.          : +44-904-432708
--
"Mr Bush, what do you say to allegations of blatant electioneering?"
"Vote for me!"
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: ** NORTON'S DESKTOP FOR WINDOWS!! **
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:18:19 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.162821.7325@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>Let me get this straight.  You want $150 for an old version of Norton
>Desktop for Windows that could be bought for less than that when it
>was new?

Well, whatd'ya expect from an Amiga persson?  9-)

Mebbe he can run it on his 286 emulator card.. the NTSC video
will look horrible though  9-)














-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: del@hawk.adied.oz.au (D Elson)
Subject: Re: Problems with WinFax Pro 2.0
Organization: Australian Defence Industries
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 07:36:28 GMT

demillo@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Robert DeMillo ) writes:

>I have been using WinFAX pro 2.0 since it came out...I've used it with 
>both Win 3.0 and Win 3.1 and its never given me one day of trouble,
>let alone the problems you have described. I have a Hayes knock-off
>2400 baud modem with 9600 boaud fax send/receive ability. 

>This may be God's way of telling you to buy a new fax modem.

Or an old one.  The M7F is the latest release from netcomm, and I
haven't had any trouble with it running two other fax/modem programs
with it (except that niether of them run under WinDoze).

Of course, because of the phone situation here, most modems for sale
in Australia are made in Australia, so Robert wouldn't have known this.
The netcomm M7F is a V32/V32bis/12000/14400/etc modem with 9600
baud fax capabilities, FYI.  Are there any other users of WinFax Pro
in the USA with modems of similar speed?

As I mentioned, there is a known problem with WinFax Pro and high speed
modems, some of the Windows archives have a patch for this, you get
a replacement MOD.EXE and some doco.  Anyone tested this patch (I have
it, but I use my modem as a fax fairly rarely, so I haven't tested
it).

Del.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: WinSpeed Drivers Discontinued?!
From: edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 03:39:15 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City
Summary: Winspeed drivers are being discont. by compusa

Hey all, I found out some distressing and mysterious news concerning the
WinSpeed drivers. I called CompUsa here in Kansas City about them and was told
they were discontinued!?
Does anyone have any info on what's going on? Were they faulty, or is it
just CompUsa that is discontinuing? The guy at the store didn't know
why they were.

Mario any ideas?..............................

Eric Dowdy

 ___________________________________________________
		Peer Pressured sign off:

Do you want me to rush the rush job I'm rushing now,
or rush the rush job you want me to rush, before I 
rush the rush job I'm rushing now, or rush the rush
job I was rushing before?
-----------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Say hello
From: Min Tom Tang <MTANG@NDSUVM1.BITNET>
Date: Sunday, 23 Aug 1992 16:52:10 CDT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computer Network


I am a newer into this net. I just found how to post a news onto the net. I am
very happy that I can do so. It is a test. I will have many questions about
ms-windows. Please give me the courage to do so. Thank you.
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: WinDock registrations
Date: 31 Aug 92 17:39:58 GMT
Organization: Indiana University

In article <1992Aug22.014033.12886@microsoft.com> briancap@microsoft.com (Brian Capson) writes:

>internet: briancap@microsoft.com
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Oho! This explains the address changes 9-)

The headline should read "Windows Programmer Makes Good!"




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
From: tguez@jade.tufts.edu (Name)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Date: 31 Aug 92 04:04:20 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

>   N > True.  Yet these are specifics that you'll have to check in the source
>   N > code for windows.  The fact that MS says in their manuals that each
>   N > application has a stack does not mean that this is literally true.
>   Meanwhile only speculating or what? There are different stack. I know it a
>   you can believe it.
>   On the other side - did you really see the code of Unix with the different 
>   stack. Have you ever seen that earth is a ball. Do you really believe, 
>   that earth is not the center of the universe...
Ha, I love this, I really do.  Yes I do believe the earth is not in
the center of the universe, and if you wish we can talk a little
philosophy about the universe it's location, size and if it makes sense
to talk about the center of the universe (this comes from a discussion
about the supposed size of the universe, if it does justice to say
"the size of the universe," it may not be so clear according to
Stephen Howken's (sp?) theory of the expanding universe.)

I don't understand, "Have you ever seen that earth is a ball?"  Do you
mean have I ever seen the shape of earth, i.e., it's egg-like shape
(it has a very big name that I would probably not spell right). 

   N > About the heap there is no problem there at all, all window's
   N > appliation and DOS applications share one single huge heap which is
   N > exactly the DOS's heap starting at the end of the DOS code+data (I
   N > think at the beginning of physical memory) and end at the end of the
   N > real memory.  
>   No! NO! Every Windows app has an additional Local Heap. And the Windows 
>   NOT the DOS heap. The DOS heap is real mode only with max. 640K size (t
>   would be 1MB possible, but the architecture of the PC..blabla).
>   The Window
>  heap is protected mode and uses all physical available memory plus virtual 
>   memory on disk. There are different adressing mechanisms and so on.
Ok, this was supposed to be an example like malloc, and I don't feel
like typing anymore to explain this one also, and since we are on the
right track and this example really was intendent to show a small
issue.  I withdraw it for the sake of argument which finally starts to
go on the right tracks.

 >  Martin

Tomer
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: timvih@polaris.utu.fi (Timo Vihersaari)
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows... again...
Organization: Turun Yliopisto
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 04:58:07 GMT

In article <CMM.0.90.2.715255575.terjeh@maud.ifi.uio.no>
 Terje Holmboe <terjeh@ifi.uio.no> writes:

>
>   Hmmm... There is no use for a 387. What I now am wondering is this :
>   Why cannot Windows use the 387 ( if installed ) for some of the more
>   painstaking labour of graphics ? Is this to complicated a task ?

The usual graphics does not need calculations. But some programs using
vector graphcis need lot of calculation power! Of course spreadsheets
and similar mathematical programs use math processor!

Many WIN users does not think, that the size of memory does not speed
windows in WIN 3.0. When you have some 3 MB of ram, you can use standard
mode, that is better than enhanced mode! In WIN 3.1 (and SMARTDRV with
it) the size of memory seems to be more important. If you have 8 MB of RAM,
use 2 MB of cache and don't win allow to swap! The use of virtual memory
makes win to slow down. And if you have enough memory, you may use a ram
disk and load some parts of windows there.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: macole@wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole)
Subject: Re: Procomm/Windows & Zmodem
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 22:12:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.072412.16718@hparc0.aus.hp.com> doug@hparc0.aus.hp.com (Doug Parsons) writes:
>Well, another update... I've tried this on a 486/33U and have the same
>problem.  Of course, I moved the stacker card into it, so that may be the
>common denominator.  I'll try removing it when I can and try again.
>
>Just seems plain stupid that Windows wouldn't temporarily halt the flow of
>data through the serial ports when it does a disc io.  I'd a thought that's
>why you tell it to use h/w and/or s/w handshaking.
>
>douginoz.

Try getting a serial card with a 16550 UART chip(s).  With your 486, you 
shouldn't lose anything at all during disk read/writes.  I use to lose a few
characters until I increased my RAM to 8 megs...so now I don't have as many
disk read/writes...but I still lose some because my machine can't keep up...
but with a 486...you should be able to launch a couple of applications (at
least one) without losing anything...(of course, I've only seen the 16550 
used on my 386 and on a 486-50...but I think a 33 MHz machine can handle the
itself quite nicely).

of course...I could be completely off-base since I don't remember what the 
original poster was whining...er...commenting on. :-)

Mario

-- 
Mario A. Cole			     |  HJ Ford Associates Incorporated
macole@wam.umd.edu		     |  1111 Jeff Davis Hwy Suite 808
University of Maryland College Park  |  Crystal City, Arlington, VA 22202
(301) 868-9249 		             |  (703) 553-5580
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows... again...
From: edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:55:51 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <1992Sep1.222054.10521@wam.umd.edu>, macole@wam.umd.edu (Mario A. Cole) writes:
> In article <1992Aug31.144856.1@vax1.umkc.edu> edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu writes:
>>In article <CMM.0.90.2.715255575.terjeh@maud.ifi.uio.no>, Terje Holmboe <terjeh@ifi.uio.no> writes:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    Hello again, and thank you ! I have had a lot of replies to my
> I load everything (and the kitchen sink) into high mem...I'm a dos memory
> miser...since I run games that need as much base mem as possible (e.g.,
> Falcon 3.0, Wing Commander I & II, etc.) so I have less mem available for
> Windows...therefore, I use a 3 meg Swapfile to make up for the lost space.
> 
> Gee, I guess 8 megs isn't enough...not for me anyways...hmm...I wonder how
> much it costs for 4 meg SIMMs... 
> 
> Mario
> 
> -- 
> Mario A. Cole			     |  HJ Ford Associates Incorporated


	$132 for 4 mg simms.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows... again...
From: edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 20:48:56 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <CMM.0.90.2.715255575.terjeh@maud.ifi.uio.no>, Terje Holmboe <terjeh@ifi.uio.no> writes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>    Hello again, and thank you ! I have had a lot of replies to my
>    request for tipson how to speed up windows.
> 
>    This posting is hereby to be considered a general THANK YOU !
> 
>    The conclusions, just to make myself boring, is this :
> 
Excellent summary of steps deleted for space
> 
. 
>    Step 3 : Use a permanent swap file. 
>             ( All I have to do is convince windows that my disk is NOT 
>               fragmented... *sigh* )
> 
> 
>      Any better ?   :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
>               ||
>              /  \
>            /      \               ***********************
>          /----------\             *    Terje Holmboe    *
>         |   Matrix   |            ***********************

  I had heard that if ya had enough ram (say 8mg) it is faster not to have
any swap file at all running. 
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: blakeco@microsoft.com (Blake Coverett)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Date: 27 Aug 92 23:35:43 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Canada Inc.
Followup-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy

Grr... I promised myself half a dozen wildly erroneous articles ago
that I wouldn't get involved, but here I am.

tguez@jade.tufts.edu (Name) writes:
>Well it was my guess that there is something like malloc underneath.
>You put it nicely, "internal abstraction," everythig in windows API
>seemed to be aimed at an "internal abstraction." (I might add that
>they done a pertty good job at that).  However, this is nothing more
>than the definition of over 600 primitives-- My point will be come
>clearer as you read ahead.
[and many other comments about how Windows' memory management is not 'real']

You started this tirade explaining that these opinions were based on your
experience programming for Windows.  May I suggest that your experience
is rather dated?  If you want to use malloc, then by all means, go ahead
and use it.  It will work just fine in protected mode Windows 3.x.  Windows
will shuffle the physical memory around behind your back to its heart's
content without breaking the pointer it gave you.  (Obviously this will not
work in real mode, but that is a hardware limitation.)
Is there something else you would like?


>The way the sentence is phrased makes one think that windows
>virtualizes like an operating system virtualizes.  Yet, this is all

Probably because it does.

>nothing more than a layer of primitives.  You have to use window's
>primitives to fell this "virtualization" try accessing any of these
>things you mention directly and see how much of virtualization windows
>truely provides.

Great Idea!  Why not try it yourself, you will find that Windows does
indeed virtualize the hardware.  How do you suppose when a DOS app running
under Windows writes directly to the video hardware it manages to come out
in a DOS window and not directly on the screen.  For an even better example
how about if you do an int 14 (from a Windows app or a DOS VM) and Windows
emulates the harddrive BIOS for you.  (In a queued, reentrant fashion
even.)

The even more important point here is that Windows provides a complete
enought interface that you don't need to access the hardware directly.
That is what one expects of a 'real' OS.

-Blake
From: thompson@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Possible TrueType bug?
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:18:21 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

Here is a possible bug that was discovered at my work:

This occured on a Zenith 386-25 ISA machine with 4 megs or RAM.
The video card is a Zenith Z649 TIGA card.  Windows 3.1 is running
in high res (1024x768x256) TIGA mode.  No swapfile.

I don't know if this can be reproduced on a non Zenith machine.

To see if the bug occurs, do this:

--Turn your machine on and start Windows 3.1.
--Start Write
--Choose a True Type font (have True Type enabled beforehand) like
  Ariel and choose a big size (72 points)
--Type out every letter in the alphabet

When 'x' is typed on the Zenith here at work, it doesn't appear.  It
is there (there is a gap between the w and the y), but it doesn't show
up.  Any 'x' typed after doesn't appear either.

I this a True Type bug?  Anyone have any ideas or have this happen to 
them?

Thanks,

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Charles A. Thompson               |  thompson@ukanvm.cc.ukans.edu         |
|  University of Kansas              |  thompson@ukanvax.cc.ukans.edu        |
|  _Avid_ SkiBum                     |  OS/2 2.0 is for YOU!!!               |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Look for Recipe Pro(tm), an interactive recipe database, coming soon...   |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Speeding up Windows
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 03:36:10 GMT

In article <bzln4z@lynx.unm.edu> jfreter@triton.unm.edu (The Myth) writes:

>Well, Stacker/Superstore/etc. don't always slow down disk I/O.  In some
>cases it actually speeds things upCertain data file types (like
>ascii, database, wordprocessing, and bit maps) get compressed up to 16:1
>by these programs.  Decompression takes very little time to do, all the
>computer has to do is replace short pieces of "code" with the real data.

One of the really interesting ways of speeding up Corel Draw and
other programs that do similar things is to create a small RAMdisk,
stack it, and do SET TEMP = to that drive. Apparently Corel Draw 
stores images as graphics metafiles as it works, and these go to 
the TEMP subdirectory. The file compresses about 12:1 or so so the
speedup is supposed to be dramatic.




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
From: sammy@anagld.analytics.com (Sam Blackburn)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: NT on a Mac???
Date: 3 Sep 92 01:28:11 GMT
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation - Systems Engineering Division

din@gradient.cis.upenn.edu (Clarence Din) writes:

>Anyone know if Microsoft has any plans for putting NT on a Mac?
>Now that would be neat!

Microsoft isn't planning it but there's nothing preventing Apple from porting
it over to their hardware. :-)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: ergo@netcom.com (Isaac Rabinovitch)
Subject: Re: Windows 4.0
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:59:31 GMT
Organization: UESPA
Distribution: na

In <5100@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> wct1+@pitt.edu (William C Tom) writes:

>In article <92234.123756ACPS0974@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca> ACPS0974@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca (Marc Zimmermann) writes:

>For most users, getting NT up to speed would require a new
>computer system.

That may be more true than you think.  Supposedly NT will run on a
386/33, but I've heard that the x86 version is behind schedule.  NT
might lay an egg if it spend too much time as a MIPS-only OS!




-- 

	ergo@netcom.com 			Isaac Rabinovitch
        {apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!ergo	Santa Cruz, CA
	
	You will be assimilated.  Resistance is futile.
From: ibacon@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Ian Bacon)
Subject: Re: Mine Sweeper cheating
Organization: University of Western Australia
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:03:10 GMT


OK, OK I have heard about it, just what is this "cheating" method used
by some in minesweeper?
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: malcolm@muir.demon.co.uk ("Malcolm S. Muir")
Subject: MSD.EXE Documents ?? 
Distribution: world
Organization: Muir
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 00:09:20 +0000


In article <1992Aug31.062023.14309@jyu.fi> mpj@jyu.fi writes:

>Has anybody seen documentation (written) about Microsoft Diagnostics program
>(MSD.EXE) that comes with Windows 3.1 version ??

I've seen it somewhere - Possibly in the Windows 3.1 SDK or one of the
readme type files supplied with the SDK ?

--
===================
Malcolm S. Muir                       EMAIL: malcolm@muir.demon.co.uk
Sunderland, England                   CIX: mmuir BIX: mmuir CSERVE: 100012,31
===================
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: calendar starting on monday?
Keywords: calendar,microsoft,ms-windows,sunday,monday
Date: 31 Aug 92 16:51:52 GMT
Organization: Indiana University

In article <1992Aug24.181155.4971@wraxall.inmos.co.uk> des@frogland.inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd) writes:
>In article <1992Aug20.140949.6631@jet.uk>, jpj@jet.uk (Jean-Paul V Jeral) writes:
>>Hi netters!
>>
>>The OSI standard specifies that a week starts monday,
>>i.e monday is defined as the first day of the week,
>>sunday the 7th (there is no zeroth).
>>
>>So why is Microsoft so obstinate in starting its
>>'calendar' Window program on Sundays? I thought that would
>>be corrected in 3.1 but nothing has changed (I mean this
>>should be an option). I otherwise find the program useful.
>
>since each year i have to look round several shops
>before i find the filofax diary pages that have weeks 
>starting on sunday and not monday this sounds
>quite interesting.

Hmmm...

Get someone here to send them to you across the Atlantic.. all calendars 
in the US start weeks on Sunday without exception. So do out pay periods
9-)

Don't know what filofax pages are though  9-)






-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc