To: 386users@TWG.COM Subject: 80386 mailing list, vol 4 #24 Date: 12 Apr 89 10:21:28 EST (Wed) From: "Wm E. Davidsen Jr" 80386 User's mailing list vol 4 #24 Apr 12, 1989 In this issue: 386 machines [ 2 msgs ] 386 memory 386 windows 386max Re: 386s and implied OS support 6386 WGS extra RAM/Windows 386 CAF 386 & AMI bios ESDI controller and MS Window/386 v2.1 Help needed with Compaq 386/16!!! 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: twolf@homxb.ATT.COM (T.WOLF) AT&T BL Holmdel NJ USA Subject: 386 machines Date: 7 Apr 89 23:10:25 GMT I'm thinking of acquiring a '386 machine and have seen plenty of ads for "off-brand" 386'ers that go for around $4000. In particular, I just saw an ad for a 25mhz 386 with 4Mb RAM, 1.2 Meg 3.5'' fd, 1.44 5'' fd, 150Mb ESDI (16ms) harddisk, and VGA color monitor --- for $4,495!! This seems awfully tempting, considering that an equivalent system by Compaq would run over $10K.... Now for my question: Do these machines actually work? If yes, do they run anywhere near as fast as the "NAME-BRAND" machines? Can you trust them? And, last but not least, have any of computer magazines come up with comparative benchmarks that include not only the name-brand 386 machines, but also these "generics"? Any info is, as usual, appreciated. Tom P.S. The ad I spoke of, was on page 8 of the April 1989 BYTE. The company's name is "Gateway 2000". Anyone have any dealings with them? -- +---------------+-----------------------------+ I don't remember, | Tom Wolf | Phone: (201) 949-2079 | I don't recall, | Bell Labs, NJ | E-mail: twolf@homxb.att.com | I have no memory, +---------------+-----------------------------+ No memory at all. -P. Gabriel ------------------------------ From: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth Subject: Re: 386 machines Date: 10 Apr 89 12:33:28 GMT In article <3295@homxb.ATT.COM> twolf@homxb.ATT.COM (T.WOLF) writes: I'm thinking of acquiring a '386 machine and have seen plenty of ads for "off-brand" 386'ers that go for around $4000. In particular, I just saw an ad for a 25mhz 386 with 4Mb RAM, 1.2 Meg 3.5'' fd, 1.44 5'' fd, 150Mb ESDI (16ms) harddisk, and VGA color monitor --- for $4,495!! This seems awfully tempting, considering that an equivalent system by Compaq would run over $10K.... I have just received the catalogue of WarehouseDATA, a mail order house. They list an impressively large selection of wares, and they have some offers that I reckon to be pretty good on AT&T WGS machines. They list the 20Mhz Tower with 135MB for $4395. I think it is with just 2megs of RAM, and one 3.5" floppy, but it still looks like a good buy, especially if you want to run AT&T unix and not get could shouldered by the AT&T hotline. They also sell AT&T Unix 3.2 for $719 (or $559, if I understand it, for the OS only). Another supplier that does not have bad prices is Dell. They are also selling now a version of Unix 5.3.2. Finally, have a look at many mail orders that sell Everex machines and software. The 386 Everexes often come heavily discounted, and usually get rave reviews. Also, I am currently using Enix 5.3.2, which is very cheap (buy the manuals from P-H) and works very well. -- Piercarlo "Peter" Grandi | ARPA: pcg%cs.aber.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth | UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!aber-cs!pcg Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: mg32+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Ginsberg) Class of '92, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Subject: 386 memory Date: 4 Apr 89 18:33:43 GMT When 80386 MS-DOS clones advertise 1 Megabyte, expandable to 16 Megabytes on motherboard, what type of memory is this? Are there several different types that could be found, and if so, which is better/best? Is this the type of memory products like SideKick Plus say they can run in (all but a small kernal)? --Michael Ginsberg, mg32+@andrew.cmu.edu ------------------------------ From: BENEDIK Subject: 386 windows Date: Wed, 5 Apr 89 14:46:13 CDT Does anyone know if Windows 386 will work on a Hercules video card or not? Second question, what are the relative advantages of Windows 386 vs. 386 to the Max, vs Deskview? Mike Benedik MJB0363@venus.tamu.edu or MJB0363@tamvenus.bitnet ------------------------------ From: steinmetz!uunet!cunyvm.cuny.edu!MMKOISTI@FINKUO.BITNET Subject: 386max Date: Tue, 11 Apr 89 02:57 N Hello everybody and others, I read the discussion about 386max and load. They seem to be very pretty. But where i can get them and what do they cost. thanx, Mika Koistinen * Kraftwerk : I program my home computer Lataajanpolku 1A6 * Dire Straits: That ain't working thats the way you do it 70460 KUOPIO * decnet: kylk::mmkoistinen BITNET: MMKOISTI@FINKUO FINLAND * internet: mmkoistinen%kylk@opmvax.kpo.FI ------------------------------ From: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth Subject: Re: 386s and implied OS support Date: 1 Apr 89 11:09:32 GMT In article <3806@geaclib.UUCP> daveb@geaclib.UUCP (David Collier-Brown) writes: From article <18250@gatech.edu>, by ken@gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii): > I thought about that, but it is my understanding (which surely could > be wrong) that multics is based on dynamicly allocated, variable size > segments of potentially large size. Certainly, the 80286 doesn't fit > this criteria with its fixed size, 64K segments. The multics segments were 2^18 words, i.e. 1meg; to build lareger files one could have multisegment files. This would not be difficult with engineer with 64k segments. I know of another operating system, supporrting segments sizes from 64k to 256k, that did the same, without problems. Also, in most cases 64k is a sufficient size for mapping a file; 95% of files on a tipical Unix machine are < 64k, and the rest can be accessed with a windowing, multisegment scheme. Also, both 286 and 386 have varying size segments, that can grow either upwards or downwards. Only the 8088/8086 has fixed size segments. >Also, doesn't > Multics use more than 4 rings of protection? The Multics hardware has 8 rings, but I am hard pressed to think of any case where more than 4 would have been really needed. This is a non-issue, I reckon. > The 80386 *IS*, however, Multics-on-a-chip... > > ...ken seefried iii > ken@gatech.edu Well, its a "superset of Unix on a chip", but it falls a bit short of a good target machine for Multics. Even the 286 is a sufficiently large subset of a Multics machine, byt the way. One of the big wins with Mutlicks was the integration of the file system managment with the active segment managment, which allows one to fold about three very large special cases into one (possibly overcomplex) function. This implies: ^^^^^^^^^^^ No, actually a memory mapping operating system, that has no files but only persistent (or not) memory segments can be vastly smaller and simpler than one based on files, and also quite a bit faster (if properly implemented). There is no good reason I believe to have traditional file management on a machine that can support persistent segments. a "known segment" table of large and variable size a large number of segments (ie, not four) a simple mapping from segments to pages (to cut down redundant descriptor information) This is, in my humble opinion, HARD on a 386. Not impossible, but not a shoe-in by any means. I beg to differ, this is remarkably as easy on a 386 as on a Multrics machine. The 386 can support a VERY large number of segments, not four; the four you mention are merely the current segments, that can be changed without problems. Also, on a 386 I would use the paging mechanism, not the segmentation one (small model, 32 bit addresses, not large model 48 bit ones) for implementing segments, defining as segment the group of pages that can be mapped by a page table (four megs of addressabiloity). LAST NOTE: the 286 (and 386) large model is segmented and has the bizarre features it has (ring number in the middle of the address instead at the high end, four current segment registers, etc....) because the 286 was designed as a Pascal machine, not a C machine. While C almost mandates a flat address space and the ability to do pointer arithmetic easily, both are irrelevant to Pascal, whose memory model indeed is a 3+1 model. e.g. in Pascal pointers can only be created by new, and deleted by dispose, and there can be no pointers to static or auto data, or procedures, etc... If you think of it, the 286 (and 386) large model architectures fit the bill for a Pascal based Multics like system perfectly. The 386 now has the pageing mode, that does provide the flat, pointer arithmetic favoring, addressing that C likes. Indeed Unixes on the 386 do run with segmentation virtually ignored, in the small model, and use the paging mechanism almost exclusively. -- Piercarlo "Peter" Grandi | ARPA: pcg%cs.aber.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth | UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!aber-cs!pcg Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: msewil@ecsvax.UUCP (Charles R. Ward) UNC Educational Computing Service Subject: 6386 WGS extra RAM/Windows 386 Date: 2 Apr 89 23:09:16 GMT I own an AT&T 6386 WGS and would like to add 1 or 2 Meg more of RAM to the system. The memory card currently in the computer uses 256K SIMMS (120ns). None of the documentation that came with the computer mentions how to install the RAM and set the DIP switches for a total of 3 or 4 Meg. Any help out there? Also, when I turn on the computer I frequently have to press the reset button to get it to boot properly. Otherwise, the screen is just garbage and the hard disk is never accessed. The system consists of a 1.2M floppy (AT&T's), a 1.44M Mitsubishi floppy, a 40M Seagate FH HD w/WD HD controller, and a Paradise Pro VGA card w/Princeton Ultrasync. Has anyone else experienced this problem? Finally, under Windows/386, floppy access is VERY slow. I'm using the floppy controller on the mother board. Is there a way to defeat the on-board floppy controller and use one from a dual HD/FD controller like the WD? ------------------------------ From: steinmetz!uunet!cunyvm.cuny.edu!MMKOISTI@FINKUO.BITNET Subject: CAF 386 & AMI bios Date: Tue, 4 Apr 89 21:51 N Hello, I have a question about CAF 386 Master && AMI bios. In setup i can define that numeric coprocessor is emulated. But when i try to use this emulation (with turbo c or pascal) it produces full carbage.... Do I need external software or what ? thanx Mika Koistinen * Kraftwerk : I program my home computer Lataajanpolku 1A6 * Dire Straits: That ain't working thats the way you do it 70460 KUOPIO * decnet: kylk::mmkoistinen BITNET: MMKOISTI@FINKUO FINLAND * internet: mmkoistinen%kylk@opmvax.kpo.FI ------------------------------ From: htc@m10ux.ATT.COM (Hyun-Taek Chang-- MHx ) AT&T Bell Laboratories Subject: ESDI controller and MS Window/386 v2.1 Date: 2 Apr 89 03:47:33 GMT I have an 20Mhz, 80386 clone computer. Its motherboard is made by Unitron Technology, built around Chips & Technologies' 386 Chipset with Phoenix 80386 BIOS PLUS Version 1.10 02. I recently upgraded harddisk from Miniscribe 6053 MFM disk to CDC Wren III 150MB ESDI disk. Since then, I got in trouble with running MS Window 386 v2.1. (Of course, there was no problem with my old Miniscribe disk) I have a fairly long story about this problem. Actually, new disk come with Western Digital's WD1007A-WA2 controller with no on board BIOS ROM. Since my clone BIOS didn't have a right parameter for my new disk, I wrote a simple utility for altering hard disk parameter table and successfully modified the table on BIOS ROM. It worked O.K. except some applications invoked inside MS Window/386 v2.1. If I invoked any application encasulated by PIFEDITOR (even COMMANDW.PIF), Window/386 cannot read disk properly. Sometimes, it generated a "Drive C: not ready" error message or disk access was *extremely* slow. I claimed it to dealer and they replaced my disk controller with DTC 6280. Since DTC controller has on board BIOS ROM, I reinstalled my original Phoenix BIOS. After I installed the DTC controller, I encountered another problem, "optional ROM checksum error". After I talked with technical support person in DTC, I found out that the problem was caused by my Video 7 VRAM VGA card. I set the VGA card's ROM access mode as 8-bit mode and I switched BIOS address in DTC controller to D800h. It indeed solved checksum error problem, but I couldn't even invoke MS Window/386. As soon as I invoked it, system got hung. Also, system was frequently got hung even for invoking DOS command. I complained this problem to DTC tech person. He said the firmware and BIOS ROM in my disk controller were older versions and he sent the latest firmware and BIOS ROM of DTC controller to me. After replacing these stuffs, alas, I encountered exact same problem happened with Western Digital controller. What's wrong? Is this problem caused by disk controller or Window 386, or something else? My tolerate dealer asked me to try another disk controller (Adaptec AD2322). Is there any person having similar problem? Is ADAPTEC controller woking fine with Window 386? Although I've tried to talk with tech support person in both Microsoft and Adaptec, I cannot get through the busy signal so far. Please reply me either direct mail or post it on the news. Thanks in advance. Hyun-Taek Chang ...!research!m10ux!htc htc%m10ux@research.att.com ------------------------------ From: asplund@castor.usc.edu (Daryl Asplund) University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Subject: Help needed with Compaq 386/16!!! Date: 5 Apr 89 04:18:51 GMT Can someone PLEASE help me? I posted a message about 3 months ago regarding my Compaq 386/16. A few responses came in, and I learned a great deal, but nothing to fix the situation. My problem is this: I purchased a Compaq 386/16 about a year ago and have never been able to access any of the extended memory in the machine! The computer came with 1024K (1 Megabyte). --Of this 1 Meg. the Compaq Operations Guide, and Technical Reference say: (1) "The first 640K (addressed from 0 to 640) is assigned to base memory for use by DOS" (2) "The next 128K (addressed from 16000 to 16128) is set aside for internal reserved functions" (e.g. ROM shadowing, Video, etc.) (3) "The last 256K (addressed from 16128 to 16384) is set to extended for use by the customer" --The **ONLY** programs that recognize the extended memory are the Compaq setup program from the "users" disk and my Advanced Diagnostics v 6.02. (See listing of programs below) When I run the Advanced Diagnostics it checks ALL the memory and completes the tests without ANY error messages! --Again, when I run any other program, (i.e. install (see run below)) WHETHER FROM COMPAQ OR A THIRD PARTY, it says that I just have 640K in the machine! MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY TOLL calls to Compaq and misc. advice from my dealer has not solved (or even helped in any way) the situation. Compaq still claims that the machine should be able to access the extended memory, BUT my dealer tells me that it's hopeless! Does ANYONE have ANY help/advice/suggestions/etc? --By the way, I have opened the machine and have VISUALLY seen ALL 1024K worth of memory so I DO know it is there. --Lastly I have removed ALL my expansion boards (except for the Compaq VGA card and drive controller, of course), deleted my autoexec and config.sys, and rebooted thinking that there might have been a memory conflict. Again, NOTHING has worked! PLEASE, if anyone can help in anyway please send a response TO ME DIRECTLY: ASPLUND@CASTOR.USC.EDU. Again, ANY responses are welcome and my thanks in advance! Daryl Asplund ========================================================================== Here are the runs of Install (version 3.0) and Setup (version 5.05): -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current Configuration Information Your current configuration file (CONFIG.SYS) is kept on the system drive (C:). To modify your configuration, select Configure from the Action Bar (F10). To change the system drive, select Options from Action Bar (F10). Press F1 to obtain additional information. Base Memory Expanded Memory Extended Memory Total installed: 640K Total installed: 0K Total installed: 0K CACHE: 0K CACHE: 0K CACHE: 0K VDISK: 0K VDISK: 0K DOS+RESIDENT: 118K CEMM: 0K ------- ------- ------- Total allocated: 118K Total allocated: 0K Total allocated: 0K Amount free: 522K Amount free: 0K Amount free: 0K Enter Esc=Cancel F1=Help F3=Exit F10=Actions -------------------------------------------------------------------------- SETUP Version 5.05 (C)Copyright COMPAQ Computer Corp. 1985, 86, 87 Options have been set as follows: 1 - Current date and time - 04-04-1989 - 18:29:51 2 - Diskette Drives A: - 1.2 Megabyte B: - 360 Kbyte 3 - Fixed Disk Drives C: - Type 17 D: - Not Installed 4 - Numeric Coprocessor - Not Installed 5 - Memory size Base (addressed between 0 and 640 Kbytes) - 640 Kbytes Additional Built-In User memory - 256 Kbytes COMPAQ Reserved memory - 128 Kbytes Extended (addressed above 1 Megabyte) - 0 Kbytes OR 0 Mbytes 6 - Primary monitor is: - the current monitor -------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: If I manually place CEMM in the config.sys file, upon bootup I receive the message: "CEMM not installed - Insufficient memory" --The same holds true with VDISK.SYS with the /E option. P.S. The memory jumpers and switch settings are set to the factory position and have never been altered. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks again, Daryl Asplund@castor.usc.edu ------------------------------ End of 80386 M/L Vol 4 #24 **************************