To: 386users@TWG.COM Subject: 80386 mailing list, vol 4 #22 Date: 28 Mar 89 10:03:47 EST (Tue) From: "Wm E. Davidsen Jr" 80386 User's mailing list vol 4 #22 Mar 28, 1989 In this issue: 386^MAX (and others) experiences (was Re: 386^max questions) 386^max questions [ 3 msgs ] Re: Buying a 386 clone -- want advice [ 2 msgs ] Re: C-compilers for the 386? First Report on My Experiences in Buying a 386 Clone Re: Gateway 2000 - problems update Hi-res VGA, Windows 386 ? Re: Interactive (was uport death rumors) / terminfo AT386 bug MS Windows /286 + 386-to-max [ 2 msgs ] PC Brand 386 review Re: Poor AT&T support practice VGA Cards (Specifically the FastWrite VGA) Who knows about Dell 386 systems? Windows performance Re: looking for a 386 box to run AT&T Unix The addresses for the list are now: 386users@TWG.COM - for contributions to the list or ...!uunet!TWG.COM!386users 386users-request@TWG.COM - for administrivia or ...!uunet!TWG.COM!386users-request P L E A S E N O T E If you want to get on or off the list, or change your address, please mail to the 386users-request address, or the message will be delayed by having to hand forward it (for your convenience, not mine). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson) Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR. Subject: 386^MAX (and others) experiences (was Re: 386^max questions) Date: 26 Mar 89 21:52:33 GMT In article alanr@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COM (Alan Rovner) writes: > >I've been using 386 to the Max and 386load for a couple months now and >would recommend them to any 386 users. So far I have my mouse driver, >Ramdisk driver, disk cache programsand other goodies out of base memory >giving me almost 600K of free base memory. Everything seems to work fine >and I enjoy the extra space. I have a SCSI drive and have had less than magnificent luck getting 386^MAX to cooperate with either a WD7000ASC SCSI controller card or with an Adaptec AHA-1540 SCSI controller card. If I boot up from a floppy that contains the config.sys (and the drivers it loads) and an autoexec.bat that subsequently transfers to the hard disk, I can get 386^MAX to work, mostly. Occasionally my machine (an Intel 301-based 386AT) will simply stop, requiring either a soft or hard reboot. There are some other complicating factors, including the desire to have PCTools desktop loaded resident. All in all I'd like to have a SCSI drive work with 386^MAX because I want to load the PC-NFS drivers and PCTools desktop into high DOS memory (640k-1M range) and run the MKS Toolkit init/login system. In a word: hah! The most troublesome of which is the MKS Toolkit initialization scheme, which I'll have to abandon if I keep up with all this. And because the PCTools Desktop "loads big" and then releases (sort of) the memory it wanted both 386^MAX and MKS Toolkit break when they try to load it resident. And just for grins, I really want to fold VM/386 into all this; I' _like_ to run the networking in one virtual machine, MKS in another, and maybe PCTools stuff in another. But VM/386 uses a special driver to share the hard disk among the virtual machines which doesn't cooperate with PC-NFS's remote file system. Aaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!! Any of the special add-ins work if they're used singularly; two or more are problematic; three require some real work; and four means you're porbably going to have to give up something to get them all to work together, if they work at all. kEITHe ------------------------------ From: alanr@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COM (Alan Rovner) Tektronix Inc., Beaverton, Or. Subject: Re: 386^max questions Date: 24 Mar 89 03:05:29 GMT In article <200020@hpmcaa.HP.COM>, marco@hpmcaa.HP.COM (Marco Dalla-Gasperina) writes: > I've got a 386 machine with 3Mbytes of Extended Memory and 2Mbytes of Expanded > Memory. I develop windows apps, I'm on a network... blah,blah,blah. > > I'd like to be able to use part of my extended memory to load some of > my drivers and TSRs. I understand that 386^max will do this for me (or > a related Qualitas program called 386 load, which I know nothing about). > marco@hpmcaa I've been using 386 to the Max and 386load for a couple months now and would recommend them to any 386 users. So far I have my mouse driver, Ramdisk driver, disk cache programsand other goodies out of base memory giving me almost 600K of free base memory. Everything seems to work fine and I enjoy the extra space. 386^max only works with TSR's and other memory resident programs, however. In order to move device drivers (DEVICE=xxx.SYS) out of base memory you need 386load which is sold as a separate program. For some odd reason, before they will sell you 386load they want to know your serial number for 386^max. I guess this is because 386load can't run without 386^max already loaded. All in all, it's a good product. Al Rovner, Tektronix Inc. Vancouver, Wash. ------------------------------ From: raymond@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov (Eric A. Raymond) NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA Subject: Re: 386^max questions Date: 24 Mar 89 23:23:34 GMT How much memory does 386^max and 386load take up (from your 640k)? Are they compatible with programs that backfill low memory into your 640K? (i.e. memory below video adapter is added to 640k). -- Eric A. Raymond (raymond@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov) Nothing left to do but :-) :-) :-) ------------------------------ From: marco@hpmcaa.HP.COM (Marco Dalla-Gasperina) HP McMinville Division Subject: 386^max questions Date: 20 Mar 89 16:31:10 GMT I've got a 386 machine with 3Mbytes of Extended Memory and 2Mbytes of Expanded Memory. I develop windows apps, I'm on a network... blah,blah,blah. I'd like to be able to use part of my extended memory to load some of my drivers and TSRs. I understand that 386^max will do this for me (or a related Qualitas program called 386 load, which I know nothing about). The problem is, I have expanded memory so I don't need an EMM emulator and I'd still love to use my extended memory as a cache to improve my windows performance. (Windows works much better with Expanded memory and a disk cache). My current config is to let windows use all 2M of expanded memory for its own use (i.e. nothing else is using it) and 2M of extended as SmartDrive (+ the 64k used by HIMEM.SYS). Can I still use 386^max? Does 386^max come with a windows compatible disk cache? Comments and suggestions please. marco "cursing dos and 640k limits" dalla gasperina marco@hpmcaa ------------------------------ From: randy@chinet.chi.il.us (Randy Suess) Chinet - Public Access Unix Subject: Re: Buying a 386 clone -- want advice Date: 25 Mar 89 14:23:58 GMT In article <13420@steinmetz.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: ]In article <7956@chinet.chi.il.us> randy@chinet.chi.il.us (Randy Suess) writes: ] ]| Baloney. We run IBM OS/2 1.0 and Presentation Manager on ]| IBM AT's, Compaq's of all sorts, AST's of all sorts, ITT Xtra's ]| and I run Presentation Manager on a 4 year old Korean AT klone ]| prototype. The BIOS rom's play a *big* part. Took 3 different ]| BIOS's (Phoenix finally worked) to get the klone to work. ] ] Randy, most people do not have access to alternate versions of ROMs, ]particularly legally. And there are really people who can't change a ]ROM... most people would rather buy something that works the first time. ] I think you mistook me.... The original article said that the ROMS played no part in the operation of OS/2. I was just demonstrating that it did, in that the same hardware would or would not work depending on the ROM. There was another article wondering if Compaq OS/2 only worked on Compaqs. Well, Compaqs will work on any AT klone that IBM's will. As I mentioned before, just about any decent klone will run OS/2 1.0 or 1.1 if it has a decent ROM. The biggest problem is the display card, as OS/2 seems to really munge around with it. If someone wants to know if their OS/2 will run on a particular piece of equipment, and they have access to that equipment, just boot the first install disk. If it gets all the way to where it wants you to do things to the hard disk, the hardware probably works ok. -- Randy Suess randy@chinet.chi.il.us ------------------------------ From: burton@mitisft.Convergent.COM (Philip Burton) Convergent Technologies, San Jose, CA Subject: Re: Buying a 386 clone -- want advice Date: 23 Mar 89 21:28:06 GMT In article <3511@ima.ima.isc.com>, johnl@ima.ima.isc.com (John R. Levine) writes: > In article <7956@chinet.chi.il.us> randy@chinet.chi.il.us (Randy Suess) writes: > >In article <1309@bucket.UUCP> leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) writes: > >]The prime factor is this: OS/2 *doesn't use* the BIOS ROMs!! > > Baloney. We run IBM OS/2 1.0 and Presentation Manager on > > IBM AT's, Compaq's of all sorts, AST's of all sorts, ITT Xtra's > > and I run Presentation Manager on a 4 year old Korean AT klone > > prototype. The BIOS rom's play a *big* part. ... > > Only partial baloney. Microsoft's OS/2 doesn't know anything about devices, > so it's up to each vendor to add device drivers. IBM defined a protected > mode BIOS and made OS/2 talk to that. Other vendors go straight to the > hardware. I don't know how IBM OS/2 works on an AT, since the AT's BIOS > wasn't written for protected mode, but it certainly does work. > I just glanced at a recent artcle in MIPS magazine, which is a new one to me, and it mentioned that OS/2 benchmark tests for some no-name 386 systems used the Compaq version of OS/2 if the vendor didn't provide one. Anyone care to speculate on how this was technically possible. If we knew the "rules", we could safely buy no-name 386 boards or systems, and still have OS/2 available. Phil Burton Convergent Technologies ------------------------------ From: mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: C-compilers for the 386? Date: 17 Mar 89 15:57:00 GMT >I am thinking of buying a 32-bit C-compiler to take >full advantage of the speed of the 80386 chip. I >know of 2 compilers, the HIGH-C (Metaware), and NDP-C >(Microway). Does anyone have any experience with either >of these compilers, or any other 32-bit C-compilers >for the 386? I have experience with the MicroWay NDPC compiler. It is basically a good-to-excellent code generator, but "not ready for prime time". That is, it benchmarks quite well, for most programs somewhat faster than Microsoft C5.1, notwithstanding that it makes "ints" 32 bits, even for very int oriented tests. Its floating point optimizer is not quite as good at common subexpression elimination and register allocation, but in other ways is better, so it sometimes beats MSC. There are two ways it is "not ready for prime time". First, the manual - the manual is a horrible mishmash describing some subroutines as C others as Fortran (!!!!). The information is there, but I find it odd to have to read Fortran in a C manual! Second, it is neither fish nor fowl. Neither Ansi C, nor a BSD C clone nor a Sys V C clone. There are missing include files, missing functionality that has to be done with bios calls, etc. The good news is that they are promising to release a new version "any day now" that will remedy the latter problem. The final good news is that it really works well. It is truly amazing how well it works. Very few if ANY bugs. Somehow they really make MS-DOS work as a 32 bit OS. Actually, it works better than as a 16 bit system! I have NEVER crashed the computer when running a finished 32 bit program (and, with buggy ones, get very few crashes). A bug that would crash the computer under Microsoft C just generates a run time error message, and the command prompt reappears. It appears that the protected mode really is doing protection. Be warned that there is a severe problem that is not of MicroWay's doing: Phar Lap's runtime system licsence problem: IF you intend to distribute a program compiled with NDPC either 1: Your users are going to have to fork over $500 to Phar Lap for a runtime system. OR 2: You are going to have to fork over $1500 (!!!!!) (to Phar Lap) to distribute programs written using NDPC. There would be no limit to how many you could distribute. This seriously limits their audience. No other compiler manufacturer I am aware of has this problem (except maybe Metaware!). Doug McDonald (mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu) ------------------------------ From: forrest@sybase.com Sybase, Inc. Subject: First Report on My Experiences in Buying a 386 Clone Date: 19 Mar 89 21:24:45 GMT I just joined the crowd and ordered a 386 clone. Since I haven't gotten it yet this posting will just describe what I ordered. Future postings will describe how (and if) it works. I talked to a guy at work who does a lot with 386 machines and he recommended that I talk to a clone house called HQ Computer's (408-245-5836, in Sunnyvale CA) that he and some friends had dealt with. I did and I got the following deal: "DataExpert" motherboard with a 386-20 running at 25Mhz. All the circuits on the motherboard except the 386 are rated at 25Mhz, including the Chips and Technology chipset. The motherboard can accept either a 387 or a Weitek chip. This is a Taiwan-made board. 4 megabytes of memory consisting of 36 80nsec 1 megabit chips. These chips will allegedly be either Seimens or Motorola and go on a 32bit memory board. The extra 3 megs appears as extended memory so I'll have to buy QEMM. Adaptec 1:1 ESDI controller. (I don't know the model number. Does this matter?) Fujitsu 150 Megabyte 23 msec hard disk 1.2 Megabyte floppy disk 1 serial port Maxiswitch 101 key keyboard I deliberately didn't get any video stuff because I'm going to stick with the Hercules clone board and monitor I already have until either VGA gets cheaper or until > 1000x1000 (mono) gets really cheap. Anyway, now for the good part. I got all this for $3079 which seems like a pretty good price. Since everything except the motherboard is from a known manufactorer I'm pretty confident that everything will be OK. I've also seen a working system using the same motherboard and it looks good to me. My main concern is that, in spite of the year warentee, if something happens to the disk I may have trouble getting it replaced since HQ got it on some kind of special deal and says they won't have anymore for a couple of months. I'm going down to get it next weekend. I'll post a summary of what happens and how well it works. Jon Forrest forrest@sybase.com {pacbell,pyramid,sun,{uunet,ucbvax}!mtxinu}!sybase!forrest 415-596-3422 ------------------------------ From: mac@mcc.com (Mac Michaels) MCC VLSI CAD Program Subject: Re: Gateway 2000 - problems update Date: 20 Mar 89 23:09:56 GMT I too own a Gateway 2000 system. I have a 386 in a "tower" case. My hard disk failed after about 4 hours of use. It recovered after being turned off overnight. The problem is that the top of the "tower" case does not get any airflow. All the heat rises to the top of the case and cooks the disk drive. Check the temperature of your disk drive after it has been running for a while. If it is too hot to leave you hand on it is not being cooled enough. I solved my problem by cutting another hole in the back of the "tower" case near the top and installing another fan. It works great now. Gateway told me that no one else had that problem. I find that hard to believe. USPS: Mac Michaels, 3500 W.Balcones Center Dr., Austin,TX 78759 ARPA: mac@mcc.com UUCP: {uunet,harvard,gatech,pyramid}!cs.utexas.edu!milano!cadillac!mac ------------------------------ From: dan@rna.UUCP (Dan Ts'o) Rockefeller University - Neurobiology Subject: Hi-res VGA, Windows 386 ? Date: 24 Mar 89 20:12:41 GMT I know this has been hashed out before. Perhaps someone could send me a summary... I would like to use Windows 386 with a Hi-res VGA board and monitor (at least 800x600, maybe 1024x768). My understanding is that Window 386 requires special drivers for this and that many VGA manufacturers don't have the necessary drivers. - Which Hi-Res VGA boards will work and have the required drivers ? - What monitor should I get ? Multisync XL ? others ? for 1024x768 ? - What happens to standard apps when Windows 386 is running in Hi-Res mode ? Is Windows 386 smart enough to switch in and out of a standard mode for a standard app that is hogging the entire screen ? Please email responses. Thanks. Cheers, Dan Ts'o 212-570-7671 Dept. Neurobiology dan@rna.rockefeller.edu Rockefeller Univ. ...cmcl2!rna!dan 1230 York Ave. rna!dan@nyu.edu NY, NY 10021 tso@rockefeller.arpa tso@rockvax.bitnet ------------------------------ From: noel@ubbs-nh.MV.COM (Noel Del More) uBBS-NH (New England Unix Archive) - Nashua, NH Subject: Re: Interactive (was uport death rumors) / terminfo AT386 bug Date: 19 Mar 89 20:45:16 GMT In article <93566@sun.uucp> williamt@sun.UUCP (me) writes: > > Maybe interactive will provide an upgrade to those people who >are stuck with the microport software... Seems they would gather a >large number of clients that way. > At one time SCO was offering a trade-in deal, turn in your Microport Disks and get 50% off Xenix. I got the whole SCO Xenix 386 package for under $800. That was last September, so I don't know about the current status of the offer. I won't tell you what I think of Interactive, but if you want a copy cheap send mail. Noel -- Noel B. Del More | {decvax|harvard}!zinn!ubbs-nh!noel 17 Meredith Drive | noel@ubbs-nh.mv.com Nashua, New Hampshire 03063 | It's unix me son! `taint spozed tah make cents ------------------------------ From: dennis@se-sd.sandiego.NCR.COM (Dennis Foster(AEP)) NCR Corp. Systems Engineering, San Diego Subject: Re: MS Windows /286 + 386-to-max Date: 23 Mar 89 15:37:18 GMT In article <9067@netnews.upenn.edu> harnyo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Suwandi Harnyo) writes: >I would like to know if there's anyone using the combination of >MS windows /286 together with 386-to-max from Quintus. Is it true >that this combination has the same capability as the MS windows/386. I am using the setup you describe. (BTW: 386-to-max is from a company call Qualitas, not Quintus). You do get the same EMS capabilities using Windows/286 and 386MAX but you DO NOT get the same capabilities when running old applications. With Windows/386, most non-Windows applications can be run in a window right along side all your Windows apps. With the Windows/286, 386MAX combination, you have the same restrictions/problems running old apps as you would under just plain Windows/286. What 386MAX does give you is the ability to load your TSR programs into high memory (freeing more of your lower 640K for other things). Using a product called 386LOAD (also from Qualitas) you can also load device drivers into high memory. By high memory, I am referring to memory between 640K and 1Meg. With my configuration (an NCR PC-916, EGA, 4Meg memory, Novell v2.12 over ARCNet, and the software to access an MS Programmer's library CD-ROM through the network), I can have all my networking software and CD-ROM software loaded and still have 540K of memory available while sitting at a DOS prompt. ------------------------------ From: harnyo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Suwandi Harnyo) University of Pennsylvania Subject: MS Windows /286 + 386-to-max Date: 22 Mar 89 19:59:22 GMT I would like to know if there's anyone using the combination of MS windows /286 together with 386-to-max from Quintus. Is it true that this combination has the same capability as the MS windows/386. Any information is much appreciated. -Andy harnyo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu ------------------------------ From: stratton@mrsvr.UUCP (Ninja Programmer) GE Medical, MR Center, Milwaukee Subject: PC Brand 386 review Date: 24 Mar 89 21:40:20 GMT >From article <4128@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, by rezac@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu: > Does anyone have experiences - good, bad, or indifferent - with PC Brand > hardware? I'm considering the purchase of a PC Brand 386-20. > CHARLES REZAC bitnet: REZAC@UKANVAX internet: rezac@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu Dear Charles, I just bought the PC Brand 386-20 system. ( Ok it was bought back in November ) My experiences with PC brand is as follows: Hardware - Excellent. I bought a fully blown system from them 80 meg hard disk, Sony monitor, 1.44, and 1.2 meg floppies, tower case, 2400 baud modem (the vga I bought somewhere else.) and all of the equipment has worked flawlessly. Performance - When I got the system I noticed that it was running a little slower than advertised. I got out the setup software that came with the system and within 10 min. I had the baby screaming at a much faster rate, but it was still a little slower that what I was expecting. (see next section for more info.) From the moment I started using this babe though I new I was in for a treat. ( I was not disappointed) This machine is great It has run all the software I have put into it with no complaints. Everything from games to buisness. I have had no problems. Service - If I have one complaint with this company it is in this area. Their customer support SUCKS. I ordered the machine in early november, I told them I needed the system in 3 weeks. ( I am a contractor, and I had a job that was paying big bucks for me to get the job done quickly) They told me that there was no problem in getting me the system in that time. Well obviously the system did not make it in time. ( and this cost me big bucks in bonuses :-{ ) Everytime I called the place I got this bullsh*t run around about what the status of my order was. Finally 3 weeks late I get the system and what does it come with, an ega video cable. ( Boy was I pissed. I had ordered the sony monitor remember the one that has the vga resolution, and I even told the salesman that I already had a VGA!!!!) Now I was just about ready to send the thing back. I called the company to tell them about the cable problem, and the tell me it will take 2 weeks for me to get the cable. ( I just about broke a blood vessel. I thought there would be no way I can finish my contract with any hope of cashing in on the bonus bucks :-{ , and it was too late to send this junk back and get another machine.) So I asked them if I bought my own cable would they reimburse me. They said they would that was back in January, and here it is march!! Still no cash. I called them about the speed discrepancy, they had no clue as to what was wrong. When I told them that I had sped the system up by changing the setup they suggested that my norton program was lying, and that I needed another newer version. I asked them what version I should be using, and that was the version I was had. Finally the asked me how much memory I had, and when I told them one meg they said that was the reason. It turns out that in order to run at full speed the entire memory board must be populated. When I asked them why they didn't tell me that up front, they said I didn't ask. !!! :-{ !!! (can you believe that?) Well I am sorry this is so long, but I hope you find it informative. Overall I think the hardware is great, but if you have to deal with tech. support, or customer service, I hope you are VERY patient. -- My address is stratton@mrsvr.uucp {uwvax, rutgers}uwmcsd1!mrsvr!stratton Thanx alot in advance Greg S. ------------------------------ From: rbradbur@oracle.UUCP (Robert Bradbury) Oracle Corporation, Belmont CA Subject: Re: Poor AT&T support practice Date: 24 Mar 89 03:26:17 GMT In article <25052@ism780c.isc.com> darryl@ism780c.UUCP (Darryl Richman) writes: > ... comments about whether AT&T UNIX is supposed to run on just the AT&T 6386 > or everyone's clone ... > >ISC is working hard to try to make this run on every machine we can >find. The sad truth is that many clone manufacturers have "fixed" >parts of the AT design that they consider "broken". Whatever your >opinion on this, it makes it very difficult for generic software to >figure it all out, especially when then manufacturer doesn't even seem >to know what they changed. I have to differ with Darryl's comments. I ordered ISC UNIX 2.0 and got my floppies in early Feb. I reported to ISC support that 2.0 would not boot on a Wells American Compustar 386 the 2nd week in Feb. I was sent the 2.0.1 update which failed to boot as well. Uniforum arrives so I take my complaints to the show where I get assurances from the sales people that the problem will be addressed. Well after repeated calls to support expressing my extreme displeasure at having paid for a system which did not work, today (3/22) I finally get a call from Wells American support informing me that they are sending a mchine to ISC and ISC is sending them floppies. When it takes a month for exchanges like this to start one has to wonder how serious the vendors are about fixing the problems. Now, in the meantime I've also verified that ENIX 3.2 and Microport 3.0 will not boot on this machine. The machine does run ISC UNIX 1.0.6, DOS and NetWare so the hardware is not entirely at fault. (ISC support indicates that there are no plans to fix/upgrade 1.0.6 so that isn't a viable solution for me.) At this point I've concluded that UNIX System 5.3.2 has some compatibility problems and may in fact be less portable across PC clones than earlier releases of UNIX. People seem not to have noticed the files in /etc/initprog which setup the PC for running UNIX during the boot sequence. The 3 versions of these programs (att, compaq & at386) are all different. So much for the claims of clone compatbility! So far my experience doesn't seem to indicate that ISC support is much better than Microport support is/was. The feeling I get from my Everex/ENIX distributor is that it is unlikely that I will get much support from them in getting ENIX to boot on the Wells American as well. Now, would anyone like to take a guess at whether Xenix based on 3.2 will run on the Wells American when it is released? (Are you listening SCO???) The surprising thing is that UNIX vendors haven't tested this machine. It can support 13 AT bus devices or 7 AT bus devices + 5 MCA bus devices; has the VGA,COM1,PAR1 and MOUSE built into the mother board, has a plug-in CPU/memory module which can be traded-in (with full purchase price credit) for more powerful modules (like the 486 when it becomes available). It also received very good reviews in most of the popular magazines. Robert Bradbury Oracle Corporation (206) 782-9474 hplabs!oracle!rbradbur ------------------------------ From: c60c-4ec@web-1a.berkeley.edu () University of California, Berkeley Subject: VGA Cards (Specifically the FastWrite VGA) Date: 25 Mar 89 10:23:47 GMT I am currently looking for a VGA card for my 386 system. The final decision has come down to two cards, the Paradise VGA Pro and the Video-7 Fastwrite VGA. What I'm worried about is the Fastwrite's compatibility. Does anybody out there have a Fastwrite that is willing to tell me what he/she thinks of the card? Please e-mail me your thoughts. If there are enough responses or enough interest, I'll summarize on the net. Thanks. George Voon c60c-4ec@web.Berkeley.edu ..!ucbvax!web!c60c-4ec ------------------------------ From: rkh@mtune.ATT.COM (Robert Halloran) AT&T ISL Middletown NJ USA Subject: Who knows about Dell 386 systems? Date: 21 Mar 89 15:23:18 GMT A friend is looking to upgrade to a '386 system for his small business. He's looking hard at the Dell 310. He's especially interested in finding out whether the service they tout in their ads lives up to the claims, as he will be relying on the box, and if it breaks, he'll need it back on-line ASAP. Anyone out there have reports pro or con on this? Please reply by e-mail; if people are really interested, I'll post a summary. Thanks to all in advance. Bob Halloran ========================================================================= UUCP: att!mtune!rkh Internet: rkh@mtune.ATT.COM USPS: 17 Lakeland Dr, Port Monmouth NJ 07758 DDD: 201-495-6621 eve ET Disclaimer: If you think AT&T would have ME as a spokesman, you're crazed. Quote: "Well, if it wasn't Buckaroo Banzai, I'd say 'commit the man.'" - where else? ------------------------------ From: davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) GE Corporate R&D Center Subject: Windows performance Date: 22 Mar 89 08:00:55 EST (Wed) Andy Holyer writes: > This isn't my only grouch against Windows - the memory >allocation freaks me a bit too - and in general I must say I find it >preferable to DOS (big deal.. :-)), but for multi-tasking, as far as I >can tell, it's a dead loss. Someone prove me wrong - PLEASE??? For multitasking I highly recommend DesqView. It eliminates most of the problems you mention. I regularly run Procomm dowloading a file while doing other things in foreground. You will want their QEMM memory manager, too. You will find that the machine runs better in proportion to the memory installed. 2MB is fair, 4MB is much nicer. You can have up to (I think) 610k per DOS virtual machine. -- bill davidsen (wedu@crd.GE.COM -or- davidsen@crdos1.uucp) {uunet | philabs}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon ------------------------------ From: jr@frog.UUCP (John Richardson) Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA Subject: Re: looking for a 386 box to run AT&T Unix Date: 25 Mar 89 05:47:00 GMT In article <9092@alice.UUCP>, debra@alice.UUCP (Paul De Bra) writes: > In article <2437@sbcs.sunysb.edu> cchen@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Chyouhwa Chen) writes: > >Hi, > > > >I need information about 386 machines that can run AT&T Unix, > >specifically 20M hz machines. I understand that AT&T 6386, Everex, > >Dell, ALR, and AST are OK. But what about those boxes at the lower > >budget end, like Micro Express, Proteus, Gateway, CompuAdd, SIA, etc. > >Are they a good idea to run Unix at all? Any compatibility problems? > >This is going to be a major investment, so any information that can > >help me avoid later regret will be MUCH appreciated. Thanks a bundle. > I have had good luck with Micronics motherboards which are used in a lot of no-name systems. Another good feature is that they work correctly with bus-master controllers. (Like the Western Digitial SCSI board) JR ------------------------------ End of 80386 M/L Vol 4 #22 **************************