#: 11039 S1/Non-tech service 02-Oct-92 11:54:40 Sb: #10784-UK Dev. Serv CDROM Fm: wiley 70473,1351 To: Mike Walsh (Helsinki) 72557,3170 (X) Mike, Sounds like your are better connected than I regarding this issue. I'll step out and let my UK bretheran (and you Commodore toting relation) work out the issue. Seems all parties are aware. Best, Stu Wiley #: 11046 S1/Non-tech service 02-Oct-92 13:20:29 Sb: WinNT White Papers Fm: Lina Au 76666,46 To: 75300,3143 Could you tell me if MS has written any white papers on NT? If so, can I find any of them on the CompuServe forums (which one?). Thanks. #: 11066 S1/Non-tech service 02-Oct-92 15:58:31 Sb: Fail to Boot NT Fm: LLilley 70541,3044 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Thanks Arther, I will look at the infomation suggested, and get back to you to let you know how i got on. Len Lilley There is 1 Reply. #: 11079 S1/Non-tech service 02-Oct-92 17:17:21 Sb: #11066-Fail to Boot NT Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: LLilley 70541,3044 Len, <> Okay. And good luck. Art PS: If you want to update your name field for this forum you can do it thru the main menu options selection. #: 11090 S1/Non-tech service 02-Oct-92 18:20:05 Sb: #10517-NT Beta Info Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Vipul Mehta 70304,1736 (X) Hello Vipul.... PMJI, but I noticed CAL STATE uses Banyan.... Do all campuses use Banyan? I ask because I am a currently employed Banyan Network Analyst, and have a very dear friend living in North San Diego... Also, since I would rather have my tonsils put back in rather than move to CA, I thought I would probe your brain on how to setup OS/BLECH! to work with Vines... I have both 4.11(5) and 5.00(5) servers, as well as Vines for SCO boxes on my local ethernet segment, but can't get OS/2 2.0 to work even with the LA drivers. Also, just a general comment... As a person who uses Vines and has installed both NT and OS/2, (neither of which work with Vines at this time) All I can say is OS/2 definatelly has to be the SLOWEST OS ever developed for an Intel chip. NT is at least as fast as Win 3.1. ( I realize that is no reason to write home to your mom {or ex-wife}, but it is much faster than OS/2) Anyhow, any help you can give me with OS/2 on vines would be appreciated. And, remember, they don't call me long winded for nothing!!! Karl #: 11055 S1/Non-tech service 02-Oct-92 15:16:32 Sb: Beta Test Fm: Brian M. Dyer 71371,627 To: SYSOP (X) I am interested in being involved with your beta test. I currently operate a site of 130 installed 386/33 computers with 8 meg of ram. We are currently using Windows 3.1, Excel 4.0, and Word 2.0a. Please respond on how I could set up a small number of systems for testing. Thanks, #: 11411 S1/Non-tech service 05-Oct-92 19:37:07 Sb: #11055-Beta Test Fm: wiley 70473,1351 To: Brian M. Dyer 71371,627 Brian, The best method is to send a letter of interest in to the Windows NT Beta Test Coordinator, Microsoft, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052. State your hw and sw configs, reasons and ideas that make you a viable beta site, and any list of previous beta experience you have had, especially with MS. Stu Wiley Developer Service Team #: 11091 S1/Non-tech service 02-Oct-92 18:20:16 Sb: #10840-Developers Network CDRom Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art; Got mine yesterday... VERY impressive!!! All this info for only $30... Plus, it is a very attractive disk, so it can be proudly displayed once the new ones come in!!!!! Good to see your typing again Art!!! Karl There is 1 Reply. #: 11184 S1/Non-tech service 03-Oct-92 17:09:39 Sb: #11091-Developers Network CDRom Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) Karl, <> Thanks. It's good to be back again. I was swamped with work for a while. Now it's time to start all ove again. Art PS: I do agree about the CD. MS has been distributing some very nice looking CD's lately. #: 11126 S1/Non-tech service 03-Oct-92 00:06:22 Sb: #10840-Developers Network CDRom Fm: Otto Fung 76260,631 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Hello, Thanks. Just got mine yesterday. Really impressive work. And the most 'beautiful' computer cd-rom I've ever seen. Better looking than most of my audio cd-rom . Otto Fung There is 1 Reply. #: 11131 S1/Non-tech service 03-Oct-92 06:39:35 Sb: #11126-Developers Network CDRom Fm: Lyle Zumbach 72740,3515 To: Otto Fung 76260,631 The CD is pretty and full of great stuff, but has anyone been able to use Viewer on NT? When I try, the CD-ROM access light flashes for a while but nothing comes up on the screen but the picture of Mr. GUI. Thanks, Lyle #: 11412 S1/Non-tech service 05-Oct-92 19:37:40 Sb: #11131-Developers Network CDRom Fm: Otto Fung 76260,631 To: Lyle Zumbach 72740,3515 (X) >> The CD is pretty and full of great stuff, but has anyone been able to use Viewer on NT? When I try, the CD-ROM access light flashes for a while but nothing comes up on the screen but the picture of Mr. GUI. << No, it doesn't work under NT. And sysop in MSDN forum confirmed this and said that MS NT group are working on this to fix the problem in the upcoming release. Otto Fung #: 11208 S1/Non-tech service 04-Oct-92 04:06:40 Sb: NT approval from MS Fm: Kenneth Nicolson 100113,304 To: Microsoft I've just completed converting a Windows program to NT. How can we get a NT-compatible stamp of approval from MS? We do not have the "Ready to Run" flag for the 3.x version - our software manager got passed all around MS UK and never got anywhere. Can you tell me who to contact in the UK (or even get them to contact me!) so that we can register. TIA, Ken #: 11438 S1/Non-tech service 05-Oct-92 21:03:21 Sb: #11208-NT approval from MS Fm: Todd Needham [Microsoft] 73650,240 To: Kenneth Nicolson 100113,304 (X) I don't the exact contact, but get ahold of Brian Iddon in the UK office. He can put you on the right track. You can email him from CompuServe by addressing a CompuServe mail message to: >internet:brianid@microsoft.com Todd #: 11461 S1/Non-tech service 06-Oct-92 02:58:33 Sb: #10632-NT BETA Fm: Jim Ayson 76300,2074 To: wiley 70473,1351 (X) Hello Stuart. We are also interested in becoming a beta test site for NT. I'm from the Asian Development Bank, and we have recently made a major committment to Windows in the long term for our 1,800 users. Will it be possible to apply through this forum? And who do we address the request to? By the way, we are based in Manila, Philippines. #: 11590 S1/Non-tech service 06-Oct-92 21:13:19 Sb: #11461-NT BETA Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Jim Ayson 76300,2074 Hello Jim. I have been to the Philippines six times with the US Navy... I loved it there... Beautiful countryside, warm white sand beaches, little crime, and, by far the biggest attraction, THE BEST BEER IN THE WORLD!!! How I miss cold San Miguel... The stuff we get over here is terrible... Paper lables even.. Yuck! Send me a couple cases please!!! (I WISH!) Karl #: 11596 S1/Non-tech service 06-Oct-92 21:37:19 Sb: printing problem Fm: Hien Nguyen 71204,254 To: ALL I have an Epson LQ-510 connect directly to my LPT1 port. When I print a file from notepad, nothing happens. NT does not even initialize the printer when I boot up the system as DOS does. Anyone know what is my problem?? I have gone through dos2nt procedure to install NT. #: 11676 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 11:52:32 Sb: #11596-printing problem Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Hien Nguyen 71204,254 (X) Hi Hien, We have support people who specialize in printing under Windows NT in Section 12 (Printing) that should be able to help you out, but you will need to repost your message in that section so they can see it. The more we can keep things in the right sections, the better support we will be able to provide for everybody. Thanks! Steve #: 11328 S1/Non-tech service 05-Oct-92 07:42:17 Sb: Intel EtherExpress Fm: Simon Walker 100023,3042 To: ALL Is there a driver available yet for the Intel ExtherExpress 16 TP LAN Adaptor #: 11660 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 09:58:45 Sb: #11521-Intel EtherExpress Fm: Alexander Holy 100021,3721 To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X) Speaking of drivers... When will there be an expanded HW compatibility list for the September Release? When will the September Release start shipping? Will the installer of the September Releae support Installation from a remote CD-ROM on a LM Lan? There is 1 Reply. #: 11677 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 11:52:40 Sb: #11660-Intel EtherExpress Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Alexander Holy 100021,3721 (X) Hi Alexander, >When will there be an expanded HW compatibility list for the >September Release? I will be posting an update once we have a final list. We should have one relatively soon. >When will the September Release start shipping? The exact ship dates have not been finalized, but we are planning on around the end of the month to begin shipping updates. >Will the installer of the September Releae support Installation >from a remote CD-ROM on a LM Lan? Yes, there will be a way to install (graphical) over the network in the next release. Talk to you later, Steve #: 11571 S1/Non-tech service 06-Oct-92 18:12:51 Sb: Bugs in File Mang. Fm: David England 73700,1367 To: All Hi. I just ran into a bug in the File Manager. I had 862 files in the \system\ folder with 40,170,005 bytes reported and NT said it couldn't display the dir. In the DOS shell I did a dir and it was all there. After del. some files down to 730 and 35,295,875 bytes the dir showed up in the File Mang. Is this strange? or Normal? Also the Fonts installer didn't erase the deleted font when the remove font box is checked. What I've been doing is installing CorelDraw. It put the .TTF files into \system but not the .FON files. I had to manualy install the fonts. I would like to see a \FONTS folder inside of \SYSTEM to help orginise the files a little better. You whould know where to look for your font files. David #: 11573 S1/Non-tech service 06-Oct-92 18:15:03 Sb: Bugs in File Mang. Fm: David England 73700,1367 To: All Hi. I just ran into a bug in the File Manager. I had 862 files in the \system\ folder with 40,170,005 bytes reported and NT said it couldn't display the dir. In the DOS shell I did a dir and it was all there. After del. some files down to 730 and 35,295,875 bytes the dir showed up in the File Mang. Is this strange? or Normal? Also the Fonts installer didn't erase the deleted font when the remove font box is checked. What I've been doing is installing CorelDraw. It put the .TTF files into \system but not the .FON files. I had to manualy install the fonts. I would like to see a \FONTS folder inside of \SYSTEM to help orginise the files a little better. You whould know where to look for your font files. David #: 11709 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 15:05:22 Sb: #11573-Bugs in File Mang. Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: David England 73700,1367 (X) Hi David, Can you fill out the BUGFOR.TXT bug template in Library 3 and upload it to Library 3? Include as much information about the problem as you can. I will pass it on to testing here so they can take a look. Thanks! Steve PS: If this occurs with the next release, please send another report so we know it has not been fixed. #: 11740 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 21:03:44 Sb: Printing problem. Fm: Hien Nguyen 71204,254 To: Steve Fait 75300,3143 (X) Thanks Steve!! #: 11679 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 12:42:19 Sb: mail Fm: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244 To: SYSOP (X) Hello I'm a San Fran. PDC attendee. I have not received the mail re:Next release of SDK and NT beta. I have been receiving other mails , like 3rd party tools, contest, etc. I just would like to check my name is on the list. Jeong Ho Lee Park Scientific Instruments 1171 Borregas Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94089 (408) 747-1600 P.S., Another attendee of my company, Vincent Pham, has not received it either. Thanks There is 1 Reply. #: 11706 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 14:45:02 Sb: #11679-mail Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244 (X) Hi Jeong, Give Microsoft Developer Services a call at 1-800-227-4679 x11771. They should be able to help get things resolved. Thanks, Steve #: 11770 S1/Non-tech service 08-Oct-92 10:15:35 Sb: #11679-mail Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244 (X) I checked the list, and you are on it. I also checked our ordering system to make sure you're updates were entered properly, and they were. -Dwight (MS) #: 11710 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 15:06:08 Sb: Canadian Beta? Fm: Ken Westerback 73547,3520 To: Sysop (X) I read with some excitment the forum news yesterday saying that the new NT SDK will automatically be sent to all registered owners before the end of October. Does this apply to those of use in Canada as well, or will the Canadiand subsidiary be doing it's own thing (i.e. adding a few weeks to the process)? Is the letter mentioned being sent to Canada and does the same two week panic date apply? ---- Ken #: 11769 S1/Non-tech service 08-Oct-92 10:15:29 Sb: #11710-Canadian Beta? Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Ken Westerback 73547,3520 (X) This is something you will want to ask MS Canada. Shipments outside the US are always at least a week or two behind the US, even in the best of scenarios. We build all the SDKs here in the US, then the product starts shipping. We ship directly to US customers, but for international the product ships first to MS Canada (or UK etc) who then distribute it to their customers. I have worked closely with all our subsidiaries with this release, giving them 6 weeks notice to place their orders for their customers, and asking them to update all their customers automatically. MS Canada is usually one of our best subsidiaries, so I think this process should go smoothly. We did not send the letter outside the US, since we are unable to quote a shipping date. I did send the text of the letter to all our subs and let them decide whether or not to send it out. -Dwight Matheny Win32 SDK Product Manager #: 11777 S1/Non-tech service 08-Oct-92 10:20:34 Sb: #11710-Canadian Beta? Fm: wiley 70473,1351 To: Ken Westerback 73547,3520 (X) Don't panic. Arrangements are being made (although with a small time lag) to take care of our Canadians. I believe the same time frames exist for the second release. Please contact the sub for confirmation, and keep an eye up here. Best for now. Stu Wiley Developer Service Team #: 11102 S1/Non-tech service 02-Oct-92 19:26:30 Sb: Win NT/Mouse Fm: - Visitor 71175,2632 To: Customer support I have entered the seriously frustrated zone with the installation process for Windows NT. I think I am going to do my Jimi Hendrix with the thing, take it into the yard, douse it with lighter fluid and set it on fire. It would sure feel great! I have had the preliminary release of NT for the past month and have not been able to get the mouse to work. I have asked for assistance three times and every time I was told the mouse was at fault ( my mouse was not a microsoft mouse but was claimed 100% compatibility ). I just bought a Microsoft serial mouse and it doesn't work either, just what I needed a third mouse! I have to use the dos2nt batch file, my CD-ROM isn't SCSI and dos2nt doesn't install the mouse driver properly. How can I get the thing to recognize my mouse. Using Windows without a mouse is like eating with one chopstick. I would like to get some technical support, I need to know how the installation process works with NT and how to force the mouse driver to be loaded, quickly if possible. I have wasted over one months worth of development time. Greg Smith There are 2 Replies. #: 11136 S1/Non-tech service 03-Oct-92 07:59:17 Sb: #11102-Win NT/Mouse Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: - Visitor 71175,2632 (X) Well I have been through the mouse wars myself. is the mouse serial or parallel and it is free from conflict with other IRQs etc? there is a bug in NT that is somewhat mouse related. If I first go into dos and/or windows & then go into NT, NT may or may not find the mouse. In such cases, control panel shows a com port corresponding to the mouse port. If on the other hand, I do a fresh boot or a push-the-magic button boot, NT usually finds the mouse. have been told that this is a known problem & hopefully will be fixed in the beta release. bob #: 11292 S1/Non-tech service 05-Oct-92 03:48:05 Sb: #11102-Win NT/Mouse Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: - Visitor 71175,2632 Greg, <> The very first thing you'll need to check is do yu have a possible IRQ conflict. This release of NT does not share IRQs. If you have more than 2 com ports, ports you are going to have problems. <> You'll get much better support if you post your messages in the appropriate sections of the forum. Setup related problems sgould be reported in section 3. The message should be addressed to All, or Microsoft, or to a specific MS tech support person. The MS personnel are using a off-line process to retrieve messages. If they are not addresses properly it'll take longer to be noticed and acted upon. I understand your frustratin though. It took me a month and several setup attempts to get a new network card and get the net up and runnning. If you want to get NT up and running today see if you can exchange that MS serial mouse for a MS bus mouse. I've only heard of very old MS bus mice not working with NT. Somewhere pre-78 or so. I have NT using my Graphics Vantage bus port with an MS bus mouse on IRQ2. Works great with DOS/Win 3.x and NT. Art #: 11427 S1/Non-tech service 05-Oct-92 20:13:17 Sb: #11102-Win NT/Mouse Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: - Visitor 71175,2632 Hi Greg, The best thing to do is to post a message in Section 3 - Windows NT Setup and list your hardware configuration with all this information. The support engineers there should be able to get you running (if it is possible with your hardware - see the 0992HW.TXT file in Library 1) in a reasonable amount of time. They will also be able to answer any questions you have about the installation process. I'm sorry that getting Windows NT running has been problematic for you, but hopefully the Section 2 guys will at least be able to shed some light on your problem and find out what is going on. Hardware support will be improving greatly over the next few months as well if that's the cause. Talk to you later, Steve #: 11719 S1/Non-tech service 07-Oct-92 17:40:46 Sb: #11427-Win NT/Mouse Fm: Greg Smith 71175,2632 To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X) I did get the mouse going but it was after posting many messages in the setup section. Posting in this section was out of desparation, I was just trying to get a response from anyone and didn't seem to be getting any help. The problem was the presence of a non 100% bus mouse that was stopping the serial mouse recognition. Thanks Greg Smith #: 11783 S1/Non-tech service 08-Oct-92 10:46:26 Sb: #11719-Win NT/Mouse Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Greg Smith 71175,2632 Hi Greg, I am happy to hear you are up and running now. Thanks for letting me know! Steve #: 11069 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 16:17:15 Sb: #10971-NT on Sparc Fm: John Hall 70750,2341 To: KENNETH R SCHROCK 70621,1521 >> Why then is there so much talk in the unicode docs about testing the first byte of the file to see if it was made on l-end or b-end machines? Who else is using unicode? The consortium developing Unicode does not consist soley of Microsoft, we will just be the first company I know of shipping product on it. >> Why does the names of these other machines keep cropping up in places like MSJ when they talk about the hardware they studied while designing NT? We certainly didn't want to preclude a port to b-end machines. In fact, the original MIPS work was done with the machine in b-end mode. >> Why such absolute boxing off of the hardware translation layer of NT? >> Seems to me the answer to all of these is pretty obvious. I don't understand the above, and I was only supplying a perfectly valid reason (other than resource shortage) for us doing a b-end port. Actually, some MS executives are on record that if a b-end vendor apporached us and was willing to place serious work/resources behind the task we would consider it. #: 11227 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:41:39 Sb: #10248-MEMORY above 16MB on NT? Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) >> They are perhaps something to consider but the one I looked at >> I think at 3 slots and a 65 watt power supply (might have been >> the Compaq, don't remember). You must have been looking at the Compaq; the new model 76s and 77s have a 180 watt power supply; the model 85s have a 480 watt p.s., and model 95s have a 588 watt p.s. (I assume you were discussing the 76s and 77s, though; the Ultimedia model is a 77.) The 76s have three slots and three drive bays; the 77s have five slots and four drive bays. All slots are free as delivered, with onboard 32-bit cached SCSI interfaces, 32-bit non-interlaced XGA-2, dual DMA serial ports, single DMA parallel port, and keyboard and mouse ports built onto the planar. All memory is added to the planar, not to a board on the MicroChannel. The Ultimedia 77 will have one slot of its five occupied by the M/Audio sound board. There is 1 Reply. #: 11242 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:07:42 Sb: #11227-MEMORY above 16MB on NT? Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X) RE: New IBM systems Could have been the compaq. Saw the new IBM and really was not impressed with the new inexpensive line. I prefer all devices internal. Granted we can daisy chain SCSI devices internal & external, but internal is far superior. With a max cable length of about 16 feet, external scsi can be a bear. Again matter of opinion. Non-IBM systems of comparable components are cheaper. bob #: 11273 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 19:55:00 Sb: #10997-Adaptec 1742a for 1542b? Fm: Douglas R. Weil 70143,326 To: Sean O'Farrell 72647,1424 (X) I'd be interested in a swap. I am in Japan and would need to receive the 1742a to replace the 1542 b. I realize this could be a major leap of faith, but if yoiu get no other takers I would be interested in the swap. I definitely need drivers. Do you have drivers for CD-ROM and tape backup (Wangdat)? Regards, Doug-Tokyo There is 1 Reply. #: 11303 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 05:57:46 Sb: #11273-Adaptec 1742a for 1542b? Fm: Sean O'Farrell 72647,1424 To: Douglas R. Weil 70143,326 Doug, Sorry. My 1742a got snapped up last weekend. Thanks for responding, Sean #: 11135 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 07:21:27 Sb: Discussion topics Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) Karl: Just noted your message to Art Knowles under the old "bilge banner". I hold no hard feelings toward Will or anyone else. Even if I thought that his responses were bilge, I am really getting tired seeing the subject matter. We need to change the topic and have a return to rationality in subject choice . Let's stop using the old topic and post fresh under a new banner such as I have suggested. Will have some trouble with Paul C. but will beat upon his head some. Not a criticism of your message to ole Art or anything (and I will ignore your spelling, sensitive area these days ) just a PLEA FOR TOPIC CHANGE. When I read many of the topics posted here I have to fire up the ole CD and play Ray Stevens' "Going Crazy". As I write this I am listening to Cactus Pete and his pet sidewinder. It sometimes reminds of some of the messages I have read here . Just a request! bob There are 2 Replies. #: 11154 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 10:28:49 Sb: #11135-Discussion topics Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) Interesting to think about all the different music in the background of these ASCII threads. Right now I'm listening to His Name Is Alive and Miranda Sex Garden, trying to figure out which one to choose as my corporate standard. There is 1 Reply. #: 11161 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 13:05:48 Sb: #11154-Discussion topics Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) easy choice for me! Would take Miranda Sex Garden in a flash (he says never having heard of it -- the name is fascinating to say the least). bob There is 1 Reply. #: 11231 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 10:00:53 Sb: #11161-Discussion topics Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) Miranda Sex Garden specializes in madrigals, an a cappella song form popular in the 16th century--though their new record sounds more like early Pink Floyd. Go figure. There is 1 Reply. #: 11243 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:07:48 Sb: #11231-Discussion topics Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) RE: Miranda Sex Garden 16th century Pink Floyd, now there is a CD I must here. bob #: 11294 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 04:00:45 Sb: #11135-Discussion topics Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) Bob, <> FWIW: I see that the old bilge topic has 116 new messages added to it. But I've been skipping that thread for a while now. Just don't want to keep reading it. It seems to be getting a bit out of hand again. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11304 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:03:24 Sb: #11294-Discussion topics Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art: Know what you mean. Even bilge water gets pumped out from time to time as every old sailer worth his salt is aware. bob #: 11042 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 12:35:40 Sb: Heeee's Baaaack! Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, Hey I hear you have a column in the next Upside. Is this be an ongoing column? John There is 1 Reply. #: 11072 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 16:22:47 Sb: #11042-Heeee's Baaaack! Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) >Hey I hear you have a column in the next Upside. Is this be an ongoing >column? John, I think you'll see another column from me in the December (but not November) issue. There are no definite plans beyond that at this time. We'll see. Stay tuned... Will There are 2 Replies. #: 11153 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 10:25:51 Sb: #11072-Heeee's Baaaack! Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) I thought Upside went downside. Or was it just a big editorial purge? There is 1 Reply. #: 11213 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 06:09:00 Sb: #11153-Heeee's Baaaack! Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) >I thought Upside went downside. Or was it just a big editorial purge? I don't know. I'm not familiar with their recent historuy. My impression is that Upside was not meeting its business objectives and was, shall we say, rearranged. The October issue just came out and, as far as I know, Upside will continue to be published. They've asked me to do a piece for their December issue. There is 1 Reply. #: 11250 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:29:12 Sb: #11213-Heeee's Baaaack! Fm: bd (coconut computing) 70034,1062 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) In my humble opinion, Upside does not need Windows vs. OS/2 articles, thank you. Once it starts down the PC Magazine road, it's adios muchachos as far as I'm concerned. This Upside subscriber demands something better than the same old PC Magazine filler. (Wow, I wrote a screed.) #: 11308 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:10:18 Sb: #11072-Heeee's Baaaack! Fm: Mike Widseth 71151,1430 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) What's Upside - I thought I knew about (and read) most computing magazines, but I'm unfamiliar with it... From the other messages on this thread, it sounds sort of interesting... Any info would be helpful ! -Mike- There is 1 Reply. #: 11334 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 08:47:38 Sb: #11308-Heeee's Baaaack! Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Mike Widseth 71151,1430 Mike, Upside isn't exactly a computer magazine, though the comuter industry and its technology is the primary focus. It's subtitle tag line is "Interpreting the Impact of Technology for Top Managers." It's a monthly with a U.S. subscription price of $48 ($75 international). The phone number for subscriptions/orders and customer service is 619-745-2809. Headquarters is The Upside Publishing Company, 1159 Triton Drive, Foster City, CA 94404. The phone number there is 415-377-0950. Will #: 11348 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 12:43:15 Sb: #11334-Heeee's Baaaack! Fm: Mike Widseth 71151,1430 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Thanks for the info. I guess that it (Upside) doesn't fit into my reading habits, but maybe I should order a copy for my boss . -Mike- #: 11081 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 17:31:50 Sb: NT BETA INFO Fm: Vipul Mehta 70304,1736 To: All To SYSOP, Hello, I would like to expres my interest in Beta Testing Windows 3.1 NT. I am currently employed by Calfornia State University Long Beach, School of Business, Computer Lab. I function as technical personnel and I provide software and hardware support to over 200 users. The school of Business has over 200 IBM PS/2 that we support. Several of these are running Windows 3.0, IBM DOS 4.0, and IBM DOS 5.0. We also have four 486 network servers that are running under unix and support our banyan network. The school also has a Group Decision Support (GDS) Lab. An IBM model 90 running under OS 1.3 with LAN extension serves as a server for this Lab. Currently we are evaluating about updating the GDS lab and later our network servers to a new operating system. To that end, I have set up OS2 2.0 on one test platform. I was wondering if it would be possible to get a BETA version on NT. I could set up two test platforms. One for OS2 and other for NT and compare the operating systems and ultimately update all our servers to a new operating system. I also work as a partime consultant and make software and hardware recommendations to clients. I am also a registered of the following Windows 3.1, PowerPoint 3.0, Excel 4.0, and Winword 1.1. I would also like to test the NT BETA with these products that I have. I saw software demonstration of NT last saturday at the Orange County PC users Club by of one your representatives and I was very impressed. The presentation was conducted in PPT 3.0. I was wondering If I could get the PPT file or if you could mail me some technical information about NT that I could use in my presentations for NT. I understand that Microsoft also has certified consultant program. I would like to request some additional information about the program. If you have questions, I can be contacted at (310) 985-7996(W) (310) 425-0985(H). I would request any feedback I can get on any of these questions. Thank You. Vipul Mehta 70304,1736 #: 11426 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 20:13:08 Sb: #11081-NT BETA INFO Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Vipul Mehta 70304,1736 (X) Hi Vipul, The best way to apply for the beta program currently is to send a fax care of the Windows NT Beta Program to (206) 936-7329 and include all the info in your message. Thanks! Steve There is 1 Reply. #: 11447 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 22:14:08 Sb: #11426-NT BETA INFO Fm: Vipul Mehta 70304,1736 To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X) Thanks a Lot Steve Vipul. ?EXIT #: 11012 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 09:55:03 Sb: #10844-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Thanks for th info Art. I'm now recommending a client adopt LanManNT for their rather complex but small in nodes LAN. These people won't be able to start their project until January and right now, thanks to me, have adopted an all Windows environment. The 'master' organization has ruled that no net OSes other than NetWare is allowed so me and the head of networking had a semi-public battle royal about me 'subverting' the part of the organization I work with. I won using dirty tactics. I seriously doubt NT will be commercial by the time these people will want to start their project. If not I'll ask MS for a very wide NDA for the purposes of implementing in beta this very interesting install. I'm hoping they go along. Otherwise I can always eat crow and go with NetWare . Paul There are 3 Replies. #: 11031 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 11:17:08 Sb: #11012-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul, Good luck with the lanMan network. From what I have been able to pick up NT and NT Lan Manager will replace MS's current Lan Manager, so it should be an easy upgrade when it's time. I wish I had a bigger and better network to do some *real* serious testing of NT's Lan capabilities though. If/When you get the go ahead from MS (but I don't know why you'd need an NDA since anyone can order the PDK) please let me know how it turns out. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11164 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:19:28 Sb: #11031-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art: I've just asked MS for info about their LanManNT program that give certification like CNE, but naturally for the MS product line. I'm unsure about how MS will want to test LanManNT and guessed they'd want an NDA since leaking about any defects would be picked up by the press and run wild. Perhaps they won't. Naturally my planning for the new NT net will depend upon MS having a reasonable product out by the time the client wants to go. I can't in good faith tie these people to a shakey system. OTOH, we should get great support getting it up if we do so pre-release. The nice thing about this system will be its broadness. It'll give any OS a real workout. Paul #: 11038 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 11:53:38 Sb: #11012-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul I hope that you realize that the methods you have used here will probably keep NT from being adopted by the larger organization EVEN IF IT IS THE BETTER SOLUTION. I don't think this was wise. --Ben There are 2 Replies. #: 11106 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 20:03:54 Sb: #11038-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben, whose to say that NT is the better solution? NT does'nt have routing capabilites built in, that means your going to have to buy external (third party) bridges and routers if you have more than one segment. Microsoft does'nt provide support for multi-vendor platforms. NT does'nt support OS/2 HPFS, MAC, or NFS clients for storage on the server. No SNMP support for NT yet. NT is a general purpose OS, Netware is a server specific OS. Which one do you think is going to provide a better server OS? Remember NT is new, and untried. Novell has been around for a while with 3.11, many companies won't even touch a product that has not had at least one major upgrade/bug fix (mine won't). It's more likly that MS will try to position NT against OS's like Unix, OS/2 and NeXT. That's the type of enviroment where NT will compete best. In the long run it would be far more expensive to do a enterprise network under NT than it is under Novell 3.11. The added hardware costs (in routers, bridges and managment) for third party add-ons make NT less cost effective. Especially in a mixed platform enviroment. #: 11360 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 13:15:23 Sb: #11106-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Tom Johnson [Microsoft] 72370,153 To: Clarke 75470,1676 (X) Hi Clarke, Thanks for identifying your concerns. Some responses to your post below. >Microsoft does'nt provide support for multi-vendor platforms. NT does'nt >support OS/2 HPFS, MAC, or NFS clients for storage on the server. The OS/2 redirector for OS/2 1.x or OS/2 2.0 provided for LM will work with Windows NT. Microsoft is building Services for Macintosh which will allow a Mac to use Win NT resources. Several 3rd parties are building NFS for Win NT. >No SNMP support for NT yet. This is important. It will be there when Win NT releases. -TJ #: 11169 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:28:42 Sb: #11038-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: Oops, I've dropped the thread. What methods have I done here that would block a superior NT from large organization adoption? I'm confused (for a change ). BTW, I didn't start or name this thread if that's what you mean. Paul #: 11041 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 12:00:12 Sb: #11012-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul Oh, forgot. MS also better provide very good NT to Netware interoperation also or EVERY TIME they have a difficulty going from one network to the other it will be NT's fault. I have some experience here, we were the first part of a large corperation to use UNIX instead of an IBM 4300 to run our MRPII system and although we were much cheaper and USING the companies OWN UNIX box we had constant political battles. --Ben There is 1 Reply. #: 11170 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:32:18 Sb: #11041-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: I agree 100% that NT must offer seamless connections to NetWare of there will be heck to pay. And yes, I agree, the onus is on NT since its they who must match the existing standard: NetWare. I've had some experience in downsizing and agree, the political battles are furious. But today with a lot of corps having suceeded, more managment types will at least listen to reason. But it depends upon company. Paul #: 11027 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:47:58 Sb: #10963-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Clarke 75470,1676 (X) Clarke: NT as we have it now isn't in competition with NetWare. To get there we need to add LanManNT which I suspect will add those tools needed to fully support a large (250 node) network. And you are right, I'm not using NT on a large LAN and frankly wouldn't even try to do more with it at this point than resource/file share on a small basis. I plan to implement an NT/LanMan LAN about in January which won't have too many nodes, but will be in all, several LAN's connected into a WAN. Let's get back together then and I'll let you know how it's going . Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11047 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 13:21:36 Sb: #11027-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul I will be very interested in your results on this project. It is my belief that NT's interoperability/connectivity that will be the major characteristic of NT as far as the market is concerned (at least when using NT as a server). The most common request with this sort of stuff is easy connection to (pick some or all of the following) IBM m/f's, HP and Dec mini's (all types) UNIX and other LAN's. --Ben There is 1 Reply. #: 11171 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:34:49 Sb: #11047-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: Well you know where I am . The project's not for a while now and it won't be a LanManNT unless I'm sure that its out and fairly stable even if pre-release and I can get solid support from MS. Otherwise I might end up eating a lot of NT manuals . Part of the must in this net will be connection to NetWare. If its flakey at ALL, the project's a nogo. This is one mission critical part of the LAN/WAN. Well, we got months to worry about this - it ain't something imminant. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11293 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 03:56:52 Sb: #11171-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 Paul, <> I could be wrong here, but I'll add my 2 cents worth anyway. A 250 network is a very small network. Should work right out of the NT box. The LanManNT adds additional administration services (which you might want) and support for adminstrating domains. Each server is a seperate domain. LanManNT is offering the same ability to administer a server as NT does a remote workstation. Art #: 11402 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 17:52:45 Sb: #11293-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art, dnot forget bridges and routers, as LanManNT does'nt support interal bridging or routing... So in a multi-domain network you'll have to add additional HW to handle routing. -Clarke There is 1 Reply. #: 11465 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 03:17:33 Sb: #11402-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Clarke 75470,1676 Clarke, <> Thanks for pointing this out to me. Art #: 11405 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 18:03:31 Sb: #11293-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art, dnot forget bridges and routers, as LanManNT does'nt support interal bridging or routing... So in a multi-domain network you'll have to add additional HW to handle routing. -Clarke #: 11034 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 11:43:19 Sb: #10843-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Glenn Ford 70414,321 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) With the exception of Btrieve for C/S? What about Oracle? What about Ingress? Btrieve is not the only NLM for doing Client/Server (Although this is what I use and love it.).. There is 1 Reply. #: 11152 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 10:25:01 Sb: #11034-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Glenn Ford 70414,321 Are the Oracle or Ingres NLMs really very popular? My impression is that people using those products are much more interested in getting Unix and NetWare to coexist happily than in moving to an all-NetWare environment. Many people using the Btrieve NLM may not be very aware of it, as their accounting software provides all the front-end access. That's why I figure it's the one really significant client-server NLM. #: 11305 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:05:11 Sb: #10817-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Mike Widseth 71151,1430 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 FWIW, I've heard that OS/2 is running in Boca on an RS/6000, done as an experiment. This is (like I said, FWIW) purely a rumor, but it was brought up by someone that I know fairly well who has been pretty close with the OS/2 development folks. Last time I heard, though, it sounded as if IBM was not very interested in running on RISC hardware anymore - mistake on their part, I think. Yeah, the P5/80586/??? processor will outperform most RISC machines, but it could be a good opportunity lost IMHO. -Mike- There is 1 Reply. #: 11310 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:39:20 Sb: #11305-NT vs. NetWare Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Mike Widseth 71151,1430 Mike >if sounded as if IBM was not very interested in running on RISC hardware >anymore. Gee, they seem real interested in the Apple/Moto/IBM PowerPC project to me, and it seems like it has a fairly good shot at becomming a high end standard. --Ben #: 11594 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 21:27:52 Sb: Moving On Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben, I think you have already differenciated the current market situation from the previous climate. Let me also add that the ug path appears to be less painful, unlike many of the earlier attempts that required throwing away good code. As far as backward compatibility goes, well we'll have to wait and see what is done in the final release. Darren #: 11643 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 08:36:08 Sb: #10396-When will NT ship? Fm: Bill Herder 73417,3431 To: James Ferguson 71477,2345 James... I've saved this thread to remind you a year or so _after_ Clinton ((probably)(unfortunately)) gets elected. Should be fun. #: 11595 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 21:27:59 Sb: What's the Cost? Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 See my previous message. Darren #: 11653 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 09:25:51 Sb: #11595-What's the Cost? Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X) What previous message? That appears to be the root of this topic. #: 11585 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 20:08:27 Sb: Win NT Fm: Philippe LAVAL 70441,677 To: sysop (X) As a software developper programming under windows and OS/2, I am more and more interested in Windows NT. The information I have read about it have made me very optimistic about its potential. Is it possible to receive a beta version of NT? How? #: 11674 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 11:52:15 Sb: #11585-Win NT Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Philippe LAVAL 70441,677 (X) Hi Philippe, You can apply for the Windows NT Beta program by either: 1) Sending a letter to Microsoft One Microsoft Way Redmond, WA 98052 Attn: Windows NT Beta Program 2) Sending a FAX to 936-7329 also with the note "Attn: Windows NT Beta Program" on it. In either case you should include your name, company name, hardware configuration and any other relevant information. We prefer typed applications if possible. Thanks! Steve #: 11675 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 11:52:25 Sb: #11585-Win NT Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Philippe LAVAL 70441,677 (X) I should add that since you are a developer, you can order the Win32 SDK for Windows NT. That includes the Win32 SDK, 32-bit compiler ,OS and all updates from here on out. More information is available in the W32SDK.TXT file in Library 1. Steve #: 11680 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 12:55:27 Sb: DOS Games on NT? Fm: Jonathan Villegas 76507,2534 To: All Hi! Win 3.1 is my main environment for my 33 MHz 386. My question is, I always exit to DOS to play games such as Wing Commander or Sierra's adventure games, so will I be able to play these type of games satisfactorily with NT installed on my machine? I'm aware that many (if not all) games write directly to hardware. I would expect some sort of performance hit with NT since all system services would be virtualized. I guess then, my question should be what sort of performance hit can I expect when playing DOS-based games on a 386/486 with NT installed? Thanx! -- Jonathan #: 11062 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 15:40:59 Sb: #10966-Developer Network CD? Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Al Longyear 70165,725 (X) I asked someone to check on your C7 CD order. It shipped today 10/2 via Fed X 2 day so you should see it on Monday. Since you're probably doubtful after waiting for god knows how many months (as I would be) the airbill # is 2320175645. -Dwight (MS) #: 11067 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 16:05:54 Sb: #10886-Developer Network CD? Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: David A. Solomon 71561,3603 (X) Hi David, For information about the Microsoft Developer Network CD releases, post a message in the MSDNLIB forum. There are representatives for the program monitoring that forum that will know the answer for sure. Thanks! Steve #: 11105 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 19:58:11 Sb: #10966-Developer Network CD? Fm: David A. Solomon 71561,3603 To: Al Longyear 70165,725 (X) I have the MSDN CD myself, so I checked first before posting my first note; my question to MS is where to point customers who want the info that was on that original "Green CD" passed out at the PDC... There is 1 Reply. #: 11108 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 20:23:58 Sb: #11105-Developer Network CD? Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725 To: David A. Solomon 71561,3603 (X) Sorry, I mis-understood. Have you tried the MSWIN32 forum? #: 11439 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 21:03:32 Sb: #11105-Developer Network CD? Fm: Todd Needham [Microsoft] 73650,240 To: David A. Solomon 71561,3603 (X) The "Green CD" was published by the Developer Relations Group here at Microsoft. It is updated and distributed at major developer events (the PDC, Novell's Brainshare, etc) on an irregular basis. Most of the content is currently distributed on CompuServe or is available commercially. For instance, the ODBC pre-release SDK that was on the CD is now available as final product. Todd There is 1 Reply. #: 11498 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 08:59:56 Sb: #11439-Developer Network CD? Fm: David A. Solomon 71561,3603 To: Todd Needham [Microsoft] 73650,240 Ok thanks -- just one follow-up then (I realize this is off the topic for this conference!) - where is the proper place to point people to for the following two items that were on that CD? The items are: LSAPI (License Service Application Programming Interface) MAPI (Messaging Application Programming Interface) Thanks! #: 11567 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 17:24:27 Sb: #11439-Developer Network CD? Fm: Al Meadows 70650,2022 To: Todd Needham [Microsoft] 73650,240 (X) Todd, I've not yet reeceived my developer network CD. When should I start to worry about it? Al #: 11655 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 09:31:18 Sb: #11567-Developer Network CD? Fm: PhilD 71650,2154 To: Al Meadows 70650,2022 (X) I've had my developer CD for two weeks. I'd worry now... There is 1 Reply. #: 11714 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 15:49:05 Sb: #11655-Developer Network CD? Fm: Al Meadows 70650,2022 To: PhilD 71650,2154 (X) >> I'd worry now... It came today! #: 11598 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 22:10:50 Sb: SQL Server/Sybase for NT Fm: Rex Wheeler 70712,110 To: All Anyone heard anything about if/when SQL Server or Sybase will be released for NT. (Other then the fact that Sybase has said "We are committed to providing Sybase on NT") Is Sybase going to write/provide/support it or is MS? Rex #: 11720 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 17:47:26 Sb: #11598-SQL Server/Sybase for NT Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Rex Wheeler 70712,110 Hi Rex, SQL server for Windows NT availability is currently targeted for just after Windows NT ships. The SQL Server SDK for Windows NT (which includes Win32 versions of DB-Library, Open Data Services (ODS) and the ISQL and BCP utilties) is available from Microsoft Inside Sales (Systems Software) at 1-800-227-4679 already. Sybase would be the best to talk to regarding Sybase on Windows NT. You may want to check out section 3 of MSWIN32 for more information about the SQL server SDK for Windows NT. Talk to you later, Steve #: 11600 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 22:13:10 Sb: IRQ Sharing Fm: Rex Wheeler 70712,110 To: Sysop (X) Are there plans for NT to share IRQ's? (Can I have multiple COM ports on the same IRQ...) (No, not now. Later.) #: 11749 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 04:29:33 Sb: #11600-IRQ Sharing Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Rex Wheeler 70712,110 Rex, <> If you have an EISA machine you can share IRQs. I have NT up and running now and it is sharing IRQ5 for com2 and lpt1. If you have ISA, well that's not working for me with this release. Maybe a future release will. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11751 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 04:41:17 Sb: #11749-IRQ Sharing Fm: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art, Can you expand a little on why/how EISA allows IRQ sharing? -- my ignorance is showing. Tony. There is 1 Reply. #: 11760 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 07:01:22 Sb: #11751-IRQ Sharing Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634 Tony, <> I'll tell you what little I know... ISA cards use an "edge trigger" to signal an interrupt. This method does not support IRQ sharing. EISA and MCA both support "level triggering" which does support IRQ sharing. A level trigger has a priority associated with it. So it can cascade thru the associated devices. As you can see my ignorance is showing too. For a more detailed response we need some hardware guru to explain it all. Art #: 11768 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 09:01:39 Sb: Event Log Errors Fm: Ken Granderson 76307,3571 To: ALL I have an event log full of error messages which I do not understand. For instance, some of the messages claim that drives D: E: and F: are full. Unfortunately, they have an average of 16MB free disk space apiece. Also, the log reports not being able to find mail slots and other network-related erros, although I am able to run NT as a server without any problems except random "sharing violation" errors on the client. Does anyone know where to find information on the Event Viewer error messages? #: 11730 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 18:55:03 Sb: Help with reading messag Fm: Douglas MacDonald 70760,20 To: Sysop (X) In the "How to Get the NT Preliminary Release" article in the NTFAQ the suggestion is made that more information is available in messages WINNT: #400 & 401 and MSWIN32: #7161 & 7162. When I try to read them Compuserve tells me that they can't be found. I tried playing around with CHANGE to no avail. I take it I can't just do READ NUMBER 400. I have not found Compuserve's user interface to be very friendly. Thank goodness for TAPCIS. Thanks, Doug MacDonald There is 1 Reply. #: 11752 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 04:43:40 Sb: #11730-Help with reading messag Fm: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634 To: Douglas MacDonald 70760,20 Doug, Messages scroll off the board depending on how busy the forum is. Some forums, such as *this* one archive their messages in one of the libraries. Check out lib 5 here. best...Tony. #: 11788 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 11:33:08 Sb: #11730-Help with reading messag Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Douglas MacDonald 70760,20 (X) Hi Douglas, The information you are looking for should be in the W32SDK.TXT file in Library 1. You can just Browse and when you get to that file, type "rea" and the file will scroll across the screen. You could download it also if you want to. This forum currently can contain 1250 messages at a time. When a new message comes in, the oldest message is removed. There are weekly archives in Library 5 if you want to check any of them out. TTYL, Steve #: 11723 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 18:09:03 Sb: Win NT Beta Fm: DAVID BROWN 71165,745 To: All I was wondering when to expect my Beta copy of NT. All recent magagine articles indicate MS is preparing to ship by the year's end and clearly Beta testing must begin soon? David Brown #: 11789 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 11:33:19 Sb: #11723-Win NT Beta Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: DAVID BROWN 71165,745 Hi David, See the BETA.TXT file in Library 1 for more information about the beta schedule. The schedule has been changed since we are expecting a huge amount of feedback from the beta and it will take a long time to get through it all. The beta release is slated for the end of this month and we are targeting early 93' to ship the final product. Thanks, Steve #: 11044 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 12:35:52 Sb: #11008-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, You are forgetting the 9/90 IBM/MS division of labor where it was agreed that IBM would assume sole dev responsibility of OS/2 1.X & 2.X, and MS would assume sole dev responsibility on OS/2 3.0 (and Windows, which always gave me chuckle). For about a ~9 month period the NT kernel was the official basis of OS/2 3.0. I don't disagree that IBM didn't completely buy in to OS/2 3.0 as MS wanted to configure it (the WIN32 susbsystem in particular). They also were disagreeing about how Win16 apps would be supported on OS/2 2.0. As I remember IBM wanted what they eventually did, MS was in favor of a revised WLO implementation. And of course the whole 1.3 thing was interesting. John There is 1 Reply. #: 11070 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 16:22:28 Sb: #11044-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) John, I didn't forget the 9/90 division of labor. Rather, in retrospect, I think it is clear that neither IBM nor Microsoft really expected much to come of that. I *know* that IBM never bought into NT as OS/2 3.0. It was, in effect, a proposed approach by Microsoft that IBM considered briefly but never accepted. Equally clear is that Microsoft never really intended to put the PM API on NT. When they talked about that in early '91, their assumption was that they'd have NT out with WIN32 by mid-'92 and that there would be no need ever to bother to keep the promise of a PM API on NT. Will There are 3 Replies. #: 11150 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 10:18:21 Sb: #11070-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) >>I *know* that IBM never bought into NT as OS/2 3.0. It was, in effect, a proposed approach by Microsoft that IBM considered briefly but never accepted.<< Interesting. All the more reason Microsoft was right to dump IBM and chart its own course. If the two of them were still working together, we'd probably have *neither* Windows 3.1 nor OS/2 2.0. IBM created the PC market by accident and never understood it. At this point they've given up on the app side, and are struggling to stay in the mainstream hardware market. Their systems division is strong, but has an understandable heavy slant toward big corporate customers and big-iron-based enterprise computing. I'm not underestimating IBM's ability to turn things around, just pointing out they've got a tough row to hoe. #: 11195 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 20:02:21 Sb: #11070-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, >>that IBM considered briefly<< Seeing as IBM has only recently ruled out NT as the basis of OS/2 3.0, I don't think you can characterize their consideration as brief. John #: 11323 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:44:42 Sb: #11070-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will (and John Oellrich) It looks to me as an outsider on this as if what you're trying to say is this: Once there was an IBM/MS joint OS.2 development. (this I know) IBM and MS had a disagreement. Both are working on new operating systems. When MS started they hoped the new OS (which we know as NT) would become OS/2 3.0, but this didn't happen. Correct? Andy. There is 1 Reply. #: 11333 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 08:47:30 Sb: #11323-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 >Once there was an IBM/MS joint OS.2 development. (this I know) IBM and MS >had a disagreement. Both are working on new operating systems. When MS >started they hoped the new OS (which we know as NT) would become OS/2 3.0, >but this didn't happen. >Correct? Yes, to the best of my knowlege (and I know quite a bit, though certainly not everything ). #: 11045 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 12:56:18 Sb: #11008-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) So what did NT start out as, other than as a blue-sky research project? Jon There is 1 Reply. #: 11071 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 16:22:35 Sb: #11045-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X) NT started out as a) Dave Cutler's pet project at DEC that DEC didn't want to fund anymore and then became b) Microsoft's answer to Unix. Only later did it become c.) Microsoft's version (never accepted by IBM) of what OS/2 3.0 ought to be [ca. fall '90 until early '91] and finally d) Microsoft's alternative to OS/2 [mid-'91]. That, at any rate, is the charitable interpretation. The sinister interpretation is that BillG & Co. intended all the way back in 1988 to eventually dump IBM and OS/2 and try to rule the world with Windows. I think the charitable interpretation is more plausible. Will There is 1 Reply. #: 11142 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 08:38:13 Sb: #11071-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, Better watch out for Windows. I still remember WAY back in June when everyone laughed at my suggestion that Windows NT be ported to the Sequent Symmetry 7000 server on the ZNT:EDITORIAL forum; no one's laughing now when Sequent demonstrated EXACTLY SUCH A THING at the Downsizing Expo in San Francisco back in August. Raymond Chuang #: 11620 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 04:09:41 Sb: #11142-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Dion Gillard 100026,470 To: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652 Better watch out? Why?? Does Will underestimate Windows NT? What exactly are you predicting??? dIon #: 11603 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 22:31:10 Sb: #11071-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Michael Price 76330,236 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, I started this thread a while back and thats the best answer yet!!!!! I'll keep waching though you never know what will turn up TTYL Michael Price #: 11147 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 10:09:29 Sb: #11008-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) >>The only basis for the claim that NT == OS/2 3.0 (or vice versa) is what Microsoft briefly (and insincerely) said ca. January '91.<< "... the NT development team had its mission--to create Microsoft's operating system for the 1990s. Originally, the plan also called for NT to have an OS/2-style user interface and provide the OS/2 API as its primary programming interface. Midway through the development of the system, however, Microsoft Windows 3.0 hit the market and was an instant success, in contrast to OS/2, which had not caught on among large numbers of users. "Recognizing this marketplace mandate and the complexities involved in enhancing and supporting two incompatible operating systems, Microsoft decided to alter its course and direct its energies behind a single, coherent operating system strategy." --from Inside Windows NT, Helen Custer, Microsoft Press, 1992 (excerpt included with Win32 SDK) There is 1 Reply. #: 11212 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 06:08:55 Sb: #11147-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) What, exactly, is your point in quoting revisionist history from a Microsoft source published in 1992? Of course, that's what Microsoft says now. That isn't what Microsoft said back then, however. If you think you are refuting my statement which you have drawn out of context then you are a more muddled thinker than I thought you were. The statement by me was obviously referring to the [then] contemporary basis for the NT == OS/2 3.0 claim, not to Microsoft's subsequent revisionist history. That statement you quote from Custer's book flatly contradicts what Microsoft folks said in the past. Permit me to quote one of them. Perhaps you've heard of him. His name is Bill Gates: "I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most important operating system, and possibly program, of all time. As the successor to DOS, which has over 10,000,000 systems in use, it creates incredible opportunities for everyone involved with PCs...The goals for OS/2 were extremely ambitious. We wanted to create a system that would set the standard for desktop use for the next decade." (from the Forward to "OS/2 Programmer's Guide" by Ed Iacobucci.) The passage from "Inside Windows NT" which you quote refutes nothing I've said. It merely demonstrates Microsoft's cavalier willingness to ignore the facts and to re-write history into a version that is more convenient to the present party line at Microsoft. It also demonstrates your willingness to believe that revisionist history. There is 1 Reply. #: 11260 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 16:23:04 Sb: #11212-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) If the NT project wasn't going to be OS/2 3.0, then what the hell was it? Perhaps Microsoft never persuaded IBM that OS/2 3.0 should have been portable, but I assume that Microsoft saw it as their next-generation OS. At one point, Microsoft believed the API for the 90s was PM; later, they abandoned PM to put 100% of their efforts behind Windows. Precisely when Bill Gates made that decision is something we may never know. I think it was well after the NT development effort started, but several (perhaps many) months before Microsoft finally stopped talking as if they hadn't given up on PM. Now, why would Microsoft say one thing and do another? There are lots of reasons in this case, but the biggest I can think of is that they wanted to break away from IBM without getting involved in the mother of all lawsuits. From the day in November 1989 when Microsoft and IBM issued that bizarre double-talk joint announcement on the future of OS/2 and Windows, I stopped paying attention to what they had to say on the subject and just watched what they did. #: 11576 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 18:27:33 Sb: #11547-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Posix has always been a publicly-acknowledged IBM goal for OS/2 3.0; this is not new. IBM's stated plans for DCE/DME support guarantee a level of Posix support, even if it had not been explicitly mentioned in their product plans. I'm surprised, frankly, that you don't recall that Posix has been promised for "some future version" of OS/2. What is new, though, is that some IBMers presented a dog-and-pony at a Chicago OS/2 user's group meeting last month including a slide showing "Win32/Win32s API support" or somesuch as a future feature of OS/2. (Is there a distinction between future feature and future fact? ) The IBMers gave lots of disclaimers, etc., about the fact that there were no official commitments being expressed, no dates, etc., but they were talking about it, which is interesting, and I saw other messages several months ago from OS/2 developers discussing the feasibility of supporting Win32 apps on OS/2, so I'm sure the concept is not new within IBM. I am repeating (paraphrasing perhaps wildly) only a miniscule portion of a message posted by John Bridges over in CIS:OS2SUP under the title "OS/2 Direction" which in turn is a repost of a message by Timothy F. Sipples that was found on BIX and FidoNet, then reposted by Bruce Hallberg over in ZNT:EDITORIA. An interesting message, btw, but can hardly be construed as an official IBM announcement. Still, given the way things have been progressing in Personal Systems, I don't discount much if anything that I saw reported. There are 2 Replies. #: 11579 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 18:58:20 Sb: #11576-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: phil hystad 73260,114 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 >>>>IBM's stated plans for DCE/DME support guarantee a level of Posix support... Huh? What do DCE and DME have to do with Posix. These are technology releases from OSF which must be engineered and installed on vendor systems (such as being done by IBM, DEC, and H-P). Neither are part of Posix and I know that both DCE and DME are not POSIX compliant because they were developed largely by contributing groups before even POSIX 1003.1 was complete the first time (1988). Now, there is a little overlap between DCE and 1003.8 and a little overlap between DCE Threads and 1003.4A but this is representative of common technology and not supporting any particular standard. Besides neither 1003.4A or 1003.8 are complete yet. There is some overlap as well between 1003.7 and DME but since 1003.7 is very immature at this time, it cannot be said that DME is posix compliant. DCE also supports aspects of OSI in its name server (i.e. X.500) and RPC which is part of DCE is now a part of OSI, it used to be a part of POSIX but it got moved. #: 11729 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 18:41:19 Sb: #11579-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: phil hystad 73260,114 (X) Ahh, well I could have worded that better. In all the presentations I've seen IBMers give wherein they delineate their DCE and DME plans for OS/2, Posix compliance is shown as a collateral feature. Never identifying spec numbers as you did, however. They have always made the point, btw, that DCE and DME can be implemented on a range of OSs, not just those with **ix roots. Then practically in the same breath they tell us about MVS getting Posix, DCE and DME. #: 11623 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 05:55:48 Sb: #11576-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 Mercer, I know IBM has said they intend to include POSIX support eventually, I just haven't heard anything specific yet so I didn't have anything specific to say about it. I've also seen the whole John Bridges posting. That is, however, second hand information and not very specific. As I said in my previous message, I'm not inclined to comment until I've seen some specifics directly from IBM. If either is in the plan for any time soon, I'm sure IBM will say so directly before long with more details. Without that, however, I don't see how one can comment sensibly. Will #: 11614 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 00:11:27 Sb: #11547-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Bruce Hallberg[Genelabs] 76376,515 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, Check out a thread in OS2USER called OS/2 Directions. In it is a write up of some very interesting comments made recently by an IBMer at a recent Chicago meeting. The thread is also in ZNT:EDITOR, General Info (I posted it last night). It will likely surprise even you. (smallest tidbit contained: as of two weeks ago, 1.4m copies, excluding all electronic sales, internal use copies, or free promotions, have been shipped. IBM estimates over 1 million OS/2 users at this time. More tidbits that directly answer the POSIX and Win32s/Win32 question (answer:yes!). Much, much more. Bruce #: 11791 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 11:34:40 Sb: #11547-NT= OS2/3.0 Fm: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 It's called "Speculation", Will. If IBM was indeed planning on adding a Win32 or Win32s subsystem to OS/2 (whatever future version), what do you think that would mean? Would it be a good thing, or would it simply boost Windows? Why do you think that anyone in IBM is even considering it, considering WinNT isn't even out yet? It's certainly food for thought, and fodder for a wild thread of messages, is it not? #: 11841 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 22:31:07 Sb: Windows filenames Fm: Phil Brooks 70632,1112 To: SYSOP Is it true that Windows NT will only allow 8 character file names? How about multiple displays and or plain ascii terminals? I have read a posting on netcom that states the above, but I can't believe that it is true. Phil Brooks There is 1 Reply. #: 11844 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 03:04:39 Sb: #11841-Windows filenames Fm: James Ferguson 71477,2345 To: Phil Brooks 70632,1112 Phil, If you use the HPFS or NTFS file systems you can use longer names. The 8.3 names will be manufactured for you automatically. -- Jim F. #: 11855 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 04:01:34 Sb: #10878-order now or later? Fm: Rell W. Ambrose 70000,1062 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 >but from the plans I've seen I know ALL end-users will definitely >want to be on the beta program. So How does one get to be in the BETA program? -Rell #: 11827 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 17:51:50 Sb: ATM 2.02 Fm: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246 To: All I have Adobe Type Manager v2.02 running on WIN31. The icon that appears on the startup screen says 2.02 32. Does that mean that it is a 32-bit program? More important, I wondered does it imply that ATM 2.02 is WIN32-compatible, and what would happen if I tried to install it on WINNT? To test this out, I attempted to replace ATM 1.15 that came with WINNT with my 2.02. I first made a backup of my WINNT directories, and then used the ATM control panel dialog to deinstall ATM 1.15. When I clicked the restart WINNT button, WINNT would not shutdown, claiming that the file WINLOGOF.EXE was damaged or could not be found. the other way to logout (e.g. leave ATM Control Panel without restarting WINNT and then select Logoff) gave the same symptom. I had to power off and on to restart. After the restart, I could logoff successfully, and everything seemed normal. Should one be able successfully to deinstall ATM in WINNT? If so, why did I experience the problem with logging off after doing so? If one could get ATM 1.15 deinstalled, is ATM 2.02 compatible with WINNT, and can I install it the same way I did with WIN31? There is 1 Reply. #: 11861 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 05:46:46 Sb: #11827-ATM 2.02 Fm: Bob Chronister 70363,246 To: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246 Robert: I have been requesting type 1 support in NT for so long that I had forgotten it . To get to the nitty-gritty: NT is a protected and protecting product. This means that you can install something or de-install something that violates this protection. ATM configures itself into the win system files, this is an NT no no! To make a long story short, don't know how ATM can exist in NT. Really thing that it needs to be there but that is just my opinion. bob #: 11872 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 07:50:04 Sb: Profiler Setup Fm: Jim McGiness 74160,1270 To: sysop This is for your information. I received the User Beta signup packet and had some problems running SETUP.EXE under RC2 of Windows for Workgroups. Dbl-click on Setup.EXE, Setup would initialize and then nothing. No error, just looked like I never ran the application. I was able to run it under the pre-beta developer copy of NT I have. Just thought I would let you know their may be a problem that others encounter. #: 11569 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 17:45:02 Sb: #10735-Windows NT beta update Fm: Jeff Thomson 71460,3222 To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X) Steve, > Since you do not have to respond unless there is an address change, you > should be OK as far as the letter is concerned. I phoned in a change of address to Developer Services last week. Am I correct in assuming that there's no need for me to respond to the letter if/when I get it ? It may have gone to the address of my former employer, so I have no idea if I'll even get my hands on it. Thanks, -- Jeff #: 11722 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 18:04:39 Sb: #11569-Windows NT beta update Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Jeff Thomson 71460,3222 Hi Jeff, If you contacted Developer Services and they have the address change, that should be all you have to do. Steve #: 11885 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:13:58 Sb: #11722-Windows NT beta update Fm: Centre File 100015,3565 To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 Steve, Any idea when international attendees of the July PDC will receive their ; 1. Developers CD-Rom & 2. NT Beta update. Thanks A.L #: 11803 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 15:41:10 Sb: #11524-Windows NT beta update Fm: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 To: Paul Fletcher [OWL] 72057,703 (X) Hi Paul, You should contact your subsidiary over there to get your address changed. Shipments outside the US are sent to them and they in turn distribute it to their customers. I have been told that we did not send the letter outside the US, since we are unable to quote a shipping date. The subs were sent the text of the letter, however, and it was at their discretion whether to send it our or not. Talk to you later, Steve #: 11822 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 17:30:10 Sb: #11524-Windows NT beta update Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Paul Fletcher [OWL] 72057,703 (X) The only exception to Steve's reply would be if you attended the Win32 PDC in San Francisco. Orders for international PDC attendees are being sent directly from the US. If you are in this situation, you can contact our International Customer Service dept at 206-936-8661 to make the address change. -Dwight (MS) There is 1 Reply. #: 11857 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 05:11:09 Sb: #11822-Windows NT beta update Fm: Paul Fletcher [OWL] 72057,703 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 Thanks to both of you. This "cannot quote a ship date" thing worries me though. Does this mean that the notice about shipping the next release release before the end of October only applies for people in the US? Paul #: 11825 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 17:44:46 Sb: #10735-Windows NT beta update Fm: Mark L. Fendrick 76417,3264 To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X) Steve, I am now running the July WIN 32 SDK and I received no letter of a newer release. Do I have to contact someone to check it out? Mark #: 11271 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 19:33:24 Sb: Basic Information Fm: Ed Tiley 72007,3455 To: All HELP! I'm an author preparing (trying to prepair is more like it) an outline for an upcoming book on NT. This is just in the planning stages at this point, and I realize the preliminary release is meant for development. But I have accepted the King's shilling, and must come up with a preliminary outline this week. I have looked in vain for basic information on NT like features and specifications for the operating system. I've tried MSL and the Knowlege Base but can't find a thing. Can anybody direct me to a source for some of this information? Thanks Ed There are 2 Replies. #: 11298 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 04:39:36 Sb: #11271-Basic Information Fm: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634 To: Ed Tiley 72007,3455 Ed, Try Windows Magazine, it is full of the type of info you are looking for, otherwise look thru the libraries here on Compuserve, there is a lot of useful documentation in WINNNT and MSWIN3. best...Tony. #: 11329 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 07:48:13 Sb: #11271-Basic Information Fm: Robert Reinstein 76270,1541 To: Ed Tiley 72007,3455 Ed, Why not install it and find out? Also, MS has a spec sheet available. #: 11725 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 18:30:30 Sb: #11545-Basic Information Fm: Ed Tiley 72007,3455 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) Robert, Somehow I have missed that. Where in the SDK is the pamphlet? Thanks Ed #: 11771 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 10:15:41 Sb: #11725-Basic Information Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Ed Tiley 72007,3455 (X) The is no pamphlet advertising "Inside Windows NT" in the SDK. Robert must have gotten the pamphlet at the Win32 PDC or somewhere else. -Dwight (MS) There are 2 Replies. #: 11785 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 11:10:06 Sb: #11771-Basic Information Fm: Ed Tiley 72007,3455 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X) Dwight, Yeah, I think I know where he got it. Thanks Ed #: 11834 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 18:56:01 Sb: #11771-Basic Information Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X) Ed and Dwight, I think the pamphlet that is being mentioned is the "Microsoft(r) Win32(tm) Preliminary Software Development Kit for Windows NT(tm) July 1992 Release Notes" (just read it on the cover of my copy). While it isn't the MOST complete document to come out of MS, it did get ME up and running. Tim There is 1 Reply. #: 11887 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:30:00 Sb: #11834-Basic Information Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Tim Jones 70750,701 No, the doucument I'm talking about is "A Special Preview of Inside Windows NT" by Helen Custer. Maybe it was part of the press material that came with the SDK rather than the SDK itself. #: 11849 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 03:20:12 Sb: #11546-MS networking history Fm: Tom A. Hodges 70550,2540 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) Robert, I remember a product called MS-Net in the early days. I'm not sure whether MS wrote it or not, but they sold it as as an OEM product, for vendors to write front-ends for. PC LAN Program 1.2 & 1.3 from IBM were OEM implementations of MS-Net, as was CBIS OS/Network, Performance Technology PowerLAN, and some others (I thind DCAs product was also based on this). I believe that the MS-Net DOS redirector is still pretty much the same one for LAN Server clients, as the original. We did some extensive testing on these products vs. Netware 2.0 & 2.1 back in '88 (or was it '87?). I'm sure that Frank Derfler is an expert on this subject. He was doing a lot of testing of these products back then..... Tom Hodges There is 1 Reply. #: 11864 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 06:54:58 Sb: #11849-MS networking history Fm: John Oellrich 72611,1452 To: Tom A. Hodges 70550,2540 Tom, Just for completeness MS-NET was used with AT&T's StarLAN software as well (the software became known as StarGroup when it went to a LAN Mgr base). John There is 1 Reply. #: 11888 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:31:11 Sb: #11864-MS networking history Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: John Oellrich 72611,1452 Yes, I've seen a whole lot of MS-Net LANs over the years. I just never saw MS-Net itself, or an MS-Net SDK, or anything else with Microsoft's name on it. #: 11010 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 09:47:52 Sb: #10825-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) I think you have more ability to predict ship dates than I do. I have no experience working in a large shop on a project even approaching any of the Win's so I can't see how the shape of the OSes are now and therefore when they can ship. I'm wondering if NT lite can be a parallel project to the full NT. If so, and if it's mostly a truncated NT with some relaxation for ill behaved DOS support included, can't it be shipped almost at the same time as full NT? Am I missing some concept here? Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11036 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 11:53:28 Sb: #11010-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul >I think you have more ability to predict ship dates than I do. Probably just more willingness to stick my neck out, on the other hand I've gotten the ship date for every project that Sheryl has worked on within about half a month. >I'm wondering if NT lite can be a parallel project I think the developement can be done on parallel to some extent but that the bulk of the test (especially the beta) will have to be after NT is pretty stable, that is still going to be 6 to 10 months, wouln't you say? --Ben There is 1 Reply. #: 11167 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:25:59 Sb: #11036-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: Hmm, that's a good point about the beta. To my knowledge, no Lite NDA's are out and that implies at least a nine month beta from start. OTOH, I'm aware of a *very* tight, fast track beta MS did that went from a rough product to a finished one in a few weeks. That too was a derivative product like I suppose Lite will be, so perhaps I"m all wrong on how long it'll have to be in beta. If you've predicted Sheryl's projects that well, how could you escape bmillions in consult fees? . I for one would be happy to have an accurate prediction on just ONE project Paul #: 11011 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 09:50:03 Sb: #10837-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) Oh, I remember Dvorak taking after Tandy (called their computers 'Radio Shack shlock') which was the fire point of his being canned by I_World. Perhaps I remember wrong or that was just a cover for the real reason he left Infoworld. Whatever, I think Infoworld lost. Paul #: 11013 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 09:56:26 Sb: #10845-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) Bob: It's you who beat on me for my Corel comments. OK, let's make a deal, we don't beat on each other, but team up to beat on others . Paul #: 11014 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:02:41 Sb: #10853-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Scott Edgar[COL Systems] 70053,105 (X) I disagree that W4W will be a niche OS. As I wander around I find Netware in its various incarnations often used inappropriately. I haven't formally compliled statistics on this, but my seat of the pants feel is that people are laboring under Netware to do such minor items as email, printer (or other resource) sharing, file sharing. These people often don't even know about Lantasic as a better alternative since they think: network == netware. W4W can and should replace all these overly complex Netware installs. It also should end further inapproriate installs. My guess is Lantastic hasn't done this due to it's lower profile in the market. I also think W4W is a superior product to Artisoft's. Personally I think the world is easily large enough to accomodate OS/2 and NT. What gripes me are people who insist these are directly competitive products and declare OS/2 the winner since it's here & NT ain't. paul #: 11015 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:05:32 Sb: #10859-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 (X) Yah, I saw it and was saddened about his comments that we were being discourteous (well, his implication that we were, anyway). I felt he was including me and some others in that comment. I'm mildly resentful of that since it was he who whacked Bob for Bob's spelling errors and he who called me a MS bigot. If I remember right, neither Bob, I, nor anybody else ever called Will a name. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11117 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 22:43:03 Sb: #11015-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Will has been on the defensive since everybody, including MSFT, is hounding him about his OS/2 comments. Did you read in InfoWorld that Novell is divorcing itself slowly from OS/2 and moving to UNIX rather than NT. A good move for them although I'd like to see NT as the OS base for the 90s. Tom There is 1 Reply. #: 11176 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:45:24 Sb: #11117-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 Tom: Yah, I knew that Novell was moving toward NetWare 4 (a mystery to me) and a new version of Unix called UnixWare (naturally). I'm not hounding Will about his OS/2 comments, but rather what I feel are his biased reporting to anything MS and especially NT. I'm wanting to know why he's on a tear after NT. What's it to him if NT succeeds? Why is he making it a mission to tear it all down? Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11219 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:34:29 Sb: #11176-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) >>What's in it for WFZ if NT succeeds? Why is he making it a mission to tear it all down?<< The only explanation I can think of is that, as a consultant, he's been telling his clients to bet the farm on OS/2, and if OS/2 goes down, his company's going with it. There is 1 Reply. #: 11241 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:05:17 Sb: #11219-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) Oh, good point. I didn't know he did any outside consulting. Geeze, I'd hate to have told my clients to bet the farm on OS/2 or *anything*. I'm obviously a beliver in NT, but I sure haven't told people to put their all behind it - at least before it ships! Paul #: 11016 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:08:26 Sb: #10862-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 (X) I'm expecting a good *IX implementation with UnixWare altho it will hardly be the first. The best derivitive I've ever seen is Mach/Nextstep and that's gone nowhere in the market to my surprise and disappointment. I've always been a Unix fan, but never saw it as practical to business apps my clients need to run. If UnixWare is a success, it would be a fine irony that the *IX that finally succeeds comes from Novell . Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11118 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 22:51:47 Sb: #11016-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) UNIX will explode on the thousands (millions?) of NetWare LANs out there. The systems will be used as high-performance servers and/or workstations. It has only been in the last few weeks that I have realized the market momentum that is coming our way. I had a thought about OS/2 earlier today. If you had such a product that filled a nitch today while users wait for NT, UNIX, or other "big" OSs, wouldn't you do and say anything to hype it as the best OS on the market? Perhaps IBM knows this product won't last, but they can grab a market share for an "intermediate" OS and hang on to it for a long time, sort of like what MSFT did with DOS. Tom There is 1 Reply. #: 11177 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:50:14 Sb: #11118-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 I'll have to think this one out, Tom. I'm unsure what Unix from Novell will bring to servers especially since I know Novell is working hard on something called NetWare 4 which is a radical net product, not a reheat of NetWare 3.x. Given that Novell will be torn between selling its Unix and it NetWare, I'm wondering if it will overcome the diversity of the *IX's that have been their downfall as far as popular acceptance has been. My strong feeling for NT is that by definition it is a one vendor OS. I've felt for years that if one *IX vendor could rise above the crowd, Unix would finally come to the fore. That AT&T never did it indicates to me it can't be done. But nobody can argue the *IX's bring all the needed technology to the table. It's just the politics ain't there. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11190 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 17:53:17 Sb: #11177-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul I would like to point out that all x85 *IX's ARE compatible. UNIX's problem is the COST of the applications. If the NT application folks price their apps. more then 30% more then the DOS version then NT will die the same way. --Ben There is 1 Reply. #: 11235 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 10:42:16 Sb: #11190-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: My clients see the Unix world as the Fragnix world and I've given up on changing their minds. They just don't want an *IX solution. I'm not in agreement with them and in fact if the entire world would accept an *IX solution of one sort or another my life would be simplified mucho. But it won't seem to be. I see NT apps priced right at Win prices and the usual u/g incentives will abound. MS who's arguably the premier Win app maker will surely price their apps within reach for obvious reasons. Paul #: 11017 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:10:46 Sb: #10863-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X) Sorry Jon, I'm having a slow day here. I don't understand your query: >> ...allow a dos machine to connect to a Windows server...>> I don't know I have the answer if I understood the question, but could you please clarify? Thanks. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11048 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 13:27:31 Sb: #11017-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) A dos machine can connect to a Win4Work (or presumeably an NT) machine and treat it just like a server (disc and printer sharing) by using a package that MS will do called Workgroup Connection. These are the dos drivers (effectively a Netbeui package) with a "net" program and they just connect that dos machine into one of these "servers". There is no peer-to-peer sharing of the dos machine's facilities by the other machines, it is just like a Novell-style connection. Funnily enough, WGC comes with the dos client MS Mail 3 software too, so your dos machines can have email accounts too. Sorry, should use the future tense here: it will ship when Win4Workgroups ships - this has been publically discussed at a press briefing here in London, so I'm not treading on any NDAs Jon There is 1 Reply. #: 11172 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:36:15 Sb: #11048-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X) Ah, now I understand you and yah, I agree. As to your press announcements, you just confirm that the UK's somehow treated better... Paul #: 11018 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:17:27 Sb: #10864-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X) Jon: Yah, I'm hitting this too and I"m encouraging companies to become, if not MS exclusive, than at least Win exclusive. One client who's going from DOS to Windows is leaning toward QPWindows instead of Excel but other than that are MS 100%. Frankly given the Windows standard, I don't see they will be hurt if they do go QPW in the mix so I"m not recommending against it at all. NetWare is a nightmare but it wasn't worth addressing until we had a reasonable alternative on the horizon. Now we do. I'm hoping NT/LanManNT and the rest of the family is easier to install and support - gosh it can't be worse! OTOH, if NetWare 4 is a re-think rather than adding another kludge layer, it too might be great. I think you have a great point that MS is now getting in a position to be a one stop software house for every need. I 100% agree that nothing else is even close. Hmm, what'd I do with my stockbroker's phone #? . Paul #: 11019 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:19:37 Sb: #10866-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X) Yah, I'm comfortable discussing stuff to some extent after its been shown. But not 100% comfortable. I'm in a beta project with a product that's been shown regularly now and today learned that the feature set's been unfrozen and the publisher wants to keep that very secret while the spin doctors do their stuff. Besides, the UK is always ahead of we here on this end of the pond . Paul #: 11020 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:23:17 Sb: #10867-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X) I'm in agreement that NT is extremely important to MS, but even if it fails miserably it won't sink MS. AFter all MS is doing great today on apps, not NT. There will be new versions of other-than-NT OSes for MS and u/g's to Excel, Word4Win, etc. A great deal of the ship rests on NT and for that reason I think MS will make sure it works great. My guess is NT will work as anticipated and it will be a marketing effort that will make it suceed or fail, not technology. Paul There are 2 Replies. #: 11035 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 11:53:22 Sb: #11020-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul My first impression was that it could sink MS but a more careful friend and I did some 'back of the envelope' numbers and what is is more likely to do is give them a couple of years where most of the profits will be eaten by NT. --Ben There is 1 Reply. #: 11165 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:22:09 Sb: #11035-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: Yah, I see MS as on such a roll that nothing will sink them. They could be handed a severe face loss if NT fails, but after all, look how great they're doing now with very little net biz. What they might do is, if NT is a tech failure, spend so much shoving it around even so, that *that* might hurt them, but that scenario supposes two highly unlikely events: NT is a bust and MS doesn't recognize it. I'm betting on neither. Paul #: 11122 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 23:04:31 Sb: #11020-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) NT will make it because of the momentum behind Windows There is 1 Reply. #: 11178 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:52:52 Sb: #11122-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 Perhaps, but if the OS/2 folks here are right, the next version of it will bring Win 3.1 support. The only prob for OS/2 for standalone computing, IMHO, now, is its size (too big for 80% of the machines) and its not running Win right. My guess is Win momentum won't mean much to NT. They're dif products. I'm also a bit disappointed that NT has such a, well, Windows like interface. I was hoping for some new sleeknesses. Owell. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11228 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:43:34 Sb: #11178-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) OS/2 2.0 has four problems: too big for much of the installed base, incompatible with many clones, not a better Windows than Windows, and no drivers for most third-party hardware. Five problems, if you count IBM's marketing. There is 1 Reply. #: 11249 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:28:41 Sb: #11228-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) I'm gonna add OS/2's other problem - that it's vended by a hardware vendor. Having spent most of my life fighting IBM bigots in the basement, I'm not a Blue Believer. IBM might be the only HW vendor big enough to try and float an OS, but that they are so, make them not very creditable to me. Paul There are 3 Replies. #: 11255 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 12:48:28 Sb: #11249-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 Seventh problem: sorry guys, but this *is effectively no native software* from the major software houses for this platform. There might be in the future, but they have cut out the whole "normal" (ie non vertical) marketplace. Jon #: 11259 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 16:05:39 Sb: #11249-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 "Hi, Mike? This is Jim over at IBM. Listen, we've got this great new operating system, way better than Windows, and we'd like you to start preinstalling it on all Dell's systems ..." #: 11694 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 14:05:19 Sb: #11259-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Bill Lee 76366,656 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) "Hi, Mike? This is Billy over at MSFT. Listen, we've got this great new toy, heck, we'll call it an operating system, and we'd like you to start preinstalling it on all Dell's systems ... or else ... " ???????????????????? #: 11313 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:43:36 Sb: #11249-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 Of course MS have this problem with NT - It's shipped by an Apps. vendor and that makes all other Apps. companies suspicious.... #: 11880 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:08:29 Sb: #11313-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 (X) Yah, but no more so than them shipping DOS in the past. I think more *users* fear an OS/HW company than an OS/APPS one. And users buy the OS and then ISV's have to develop the programs to run under it. That ISV's might fear MS means little in the market - IMHO. Paul #: 11021 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:31:44 Sb: #10901-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) No, I still disagree. I think SMP will be very important once it's available. Perhaps today users don't see the need for this or even understand it. But in my personal experience, I've been discussing NT's specs with clients and when I explain what SMP is, and what it'll mean for them, they get wildy enthusiastic. These people are now demanding some sort of practical multiprocessor support in their enterprise OSes. As to people associating multiplatform with a lot of overhead, well, again if they do a little education that NT uses a VMS like method to get this done will put that fire out. If excessive overhead is an issue, OS/2 is a prime offender. Much of its size comes from having to run Win apps. Its strength, IMHO, comes from its native support for OS/2 apps and as the BEST DOS multitasker out there. In short, I think a very short course on what NT offers over OS/2 will make a lot of people percieve it as a superior OS, but that's only my guess now. Tomorrow, when I start the educating, I'll *know* . Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11160 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 12:56:37 Sb: #11021-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul, You are correct that Windows causes overhead in OS/2, but it is largely optional. If you don't want it you don't install it. But Win16, DOS, POSIX, C2, integrated networking, SMP, Portability all cause overhead on NT. Here again largely optional, but not quite as much (hence the higher CPU & memory REQ's). If you are so hot on SMP, why wait for NT? I presume you like LAN Manager, otherwise NT wouldn't be so critical. Guess what? You can buy today a full 32-bit SMP OS running Lan Man. Its called UNIX SVR 4 with StarGroup 2.0. You can plop it right on top of a AT&T/NCR StarServer E (up to 4 - 486's) or one of the NCR 3550's (even more 486's) and go to town. And thats just the start. And SMP is far from the only way to skin the mips cat. Sparc, MIPs, ..... NT is a good OS, no doubt about it. But it isn't a panacea. John There are 2 Replies. #: 11166 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:25:05 Sb: #11160-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) John What is the pricing on a StarServer E, say with one and three procs.? -- There is 1 Reply. #: 11331 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 08:18:00 Sb: #11166-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben, Expensive & more expensive? I'll have to check to see if I have current pricing somewhere. John There is 1 Reply. #: 11335 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 09:41:38 Sb: #11331-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 John >Expensive and more Expensive. No need to check, you made my point, it will (IMO) be more cost effective to move to a RISC machine and update your applications (the BIG advantage of NT on multiple CPU's after all) then it will be to move to an SMP X86 machine for the forseeable future. NT (in fact any OS) is better serving the market that needs increments of performance (rather then reliability, recoverability) by being portable then by being capable of SMP. --Ben #: 11429 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 20:24:03 Sb: #11335-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben, >>No need to check, you made my point,<< For the market the StarServer E is intended, Expensive & More Expensive, is appropriate pricing. It essentially blew away any remnant of the original 3B market, and did so very cost effectively, using an architecture that a lot of customers are comfortable with (Intel & EISA). For customers who were more adventurous, we also had the System 7000 SMP (RISC) for ultimate performance. On the otherhand we also had the StarServer FT (Fault Tolerant, can you spell TANDEM?) for those that valued availability above all else. The point being, as much as we would like to, you can't stereotype customers. They all have their individual hot buttons & needs. No one solution fits all. I personally like SMP with reasonable fault tolerance (not full availability, as in SS FT/Tandem, but ECC memory/RAID/hot spare) for server applications. Whether it is running *IX or NT or whatever. While I tend to pooh-pooh for the near term SMP on a client or standalone box, that doesn't hold on the server end. People today are becoming CPU bound on the fastest chips available, be they Intel or Sparc or whatever. In this case SMP is about the only way out of the box. John There is 1 Reply. #: 11454 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 23:15:06 Sb: #11429-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) PMI But......... The point being, as much as we would like to, you can't stereotype customers. They all have their individual hot buttons & needs. No one solution fits all.<< Tell that to the MAC evanglest! There is 1 Reply. #: 11471 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 05:43:54 Sb: #11454-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 (X) Daniel, As an employee of the company that first deified an operating system, I can assure you that the Mac camp has no lock on fantacism ;-> John There is 1 Reply. #: 11492 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 08:04:01 Sb: #11471-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 :) At the risk of repeating my self "tell them that" the Mac camp has no lock on fantacism ;-> Dan :) #: 11182 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 16:05:29 Sb: #11160-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) John: The resistance to any Unix in the my client base is why I don't push these solutions. It seems that the *IX's are big enough to get the attention of the mainframers and they're down on them hard where they just tend to ignore Win/DOS as gnats. Then those who have come up on PC's veiw *IXes as huge monsters with no support. Then too there's the look and feel issue, ease of installation and maintenance, and what programs run under it as important considerations as to what OS is appropriate. I'm hoping NT will bring the best mix of those things to my clients. Naturally I can't know this since its hardly complete yet, but I'm hoping. It's not as if I'm liking NT for SMP only, but rather the entire mix of what it is, and what I think it'll be. I'm hardly married to it tho. If it turns out to be a dog, I'm not gonna use it. Paul #: 11022 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:33:49 Sb: #10903-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) John: Since MS has cheerfully let me out of NDA's for discussing certain projects with certain people, I"m sure Will could sign and still write rather freely. I'm surprised he has that policy (of not agreeing). paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11037 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 11:53:33 Sb: #11022-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul I believe that Will's policy of 'no NDA's' is a result of many years of writting about IBM products. Those guys take NDA's VERY SERIOUSLY indeed. --Ben There is 1 Reply. #: 11168 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:27:16 Sb: #11037-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: I think Will Z once worked for Blue. But that's no reason to avoid all NDA's. After all, I will, tonight cross a street even tho a car once passed right over where I'll be walking. Paul There are 2 Replies. #: 11191 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 17:53:24 Sb: #11168-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul I'm sure Will will correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe that Will ever worked for IBM. H. Ross Perot yes, Will Z. no. --Ben There is 1 Reply. #: 11236 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 10:44:16 Sb: #11191-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: I hope Will pokes in here soon to resolve this. I *think* I remember him being taken to task for IBM bashing with the implication that he does (oops, did) so as an embittered employee. Perhaps he'll come back on the air and settle this for us . Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11262 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 16:43:55 Sb: #11236-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 Paul Will was certainly accused of IBM bashing (and for many years too) but, as he has said he was never an employee of IBM. --Ben #: 11871 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 07:47:09 Sb: #11262-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 Ben: Yah, I got a message from him. Dunno where I got this idea. When he waws accused of bashing IBM i was on his side, but I truly think he's lost proportion when it comes to MS. Well, we'll see how he goes from here. I only see him now in PC Mag so the treat will only be once or twice a month. . Paul #: 11211 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 06:08:46 Sb: #11168-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) >I think Will Z once worked for Blue. Not so. There is 1 Reply. #: 11240 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:03:41 Sb: #11211-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Sorry. I thought I remembered this from years ago. Will let Ben know I remembered wrong. Paul #: 11023 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 10:41:03 Sb: #10956-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will: I agree that what an OS or other program delivers is what counts, not paper advantages. Per my discussion on this will John, I think SMP *will* become advantageous to the OS when users learn what it will do for them. Right now users aren't demanding this, of course. They don't know how much utility it will bring to their installations. A long time ago I read an essay by Cmdr. Grace Hopper about her disappointment that parallel processing seemed to be rather back burnered in the IBM dominated computing world. After that read, I became a parallel fan, but understand one needs to know what it'll do before demanding or even wanting it. As soon as people see it in action, they'll want it. The message que is another (to users) very obscure technical spec. That NT has multiple que's will mean a lot in percieved performance to users even if they don't know or care what a message que is. As to C2, well, here's something that means nothing to me, but others tell me how they yearn for it. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11224 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:41:09 Sb: #11023-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Users aren't demanding SMP because users can't afford SMP. When users can afford the technology, they'll demand it; however, at that point they'll be able to get it in several forms, among them Win/NT, OS/2, and **ix, not to say Taligent or God knows what other OS. As for Grace Hopper's disappointment that parallelism hasn't taken the world by storm, the same argument pertains. IBM didn't quash parallel computers; on the contrary, it's led the way in research on parallelism. The practical uses for it are limited at present, not only by the types of business problems that constitute the bulk of system automation now, but also because of the expense and challenge involved in doing it right. (I assume you are discussing true parallelism and not simply symmetric or asymmetric multiprocessing.) Businesses are much more interested in practical, and cheap, solutions to their problems; chasing a holy grail of parallel computing is thus not a high-priority development strategy for most computer vendors. Yet. As to the multiple message queue question, the OS/2 developers are adding multiple message queues to OS/2. Aside from issues of focus management, that are principally of painful interest to developers, it is not clear to me that the practical advantage to an NT user of multiple message queues will be obvious to that user, compared to a user of OS/2 2.0, who sees the keyboard and mouse unlock after the launch of a long operation *today*, as soon as the user moves the cursor out of the window in the case of non-PM apps, and even with no cursor movement, if the app is native PM. The famous "bad app" that locks the PM message queue and prevents the other apps from receiving key or mouse messages is a rare beast in practice; nobody builds such an app on purpose, unless they wish to demonstrate an OS/2 "weakness," one shared by Windows, btw. There is 1 Reply. #: 11247 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:20:24 Sb: #11224-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X) No, I'm not talking about true parallelism but just the implementation we'll get in NT - SMP. For very little extra money, mfg's can build mainboards with additional sockets for more processors so when a user or a net admin feels the need for more speed, they only need plug and then play. This was Hopper's complaint. She said when our ancestors found a mule didn't have the power to pull up a stump, they didn't go out and breed a bigger mule, but added another one to the team. Whether IBM intentionally quashed parallelism, well, I dunno, but I believe it was her contention that they did so, perhaps unintentionally. And don't we say this today? If a user says his 386/16 is too slow what is the answer? To add a few more 386's or to u/g to a 486/66? Of course due to the nature of most of our OSes, the latter's the only choice. I'm ready for an OS that runs the apps my clients need, has security, built in net support, SMP so I can stop waiting for the bigger mules, and multiple hw support. My guess is NT will deliver these and my other needs with the least compromises. We'll see. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11270 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 19:18:45 Sb: #11247-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 The fallacy in your position is your insistence that adding SMP support to the hardware will be done "for very little extra money." These designs are not trivial motherboard changes, and they will be priced accordingly for several years. The economics of the current situation are that it simply is more cost-effective to move to a faster processor than it is to add additional cpus. One day, SMP motherboards will become available in the sub-$1000 range. Not soon enough to give NT any sort of strategic advantage over the other OSs that will, or do, support SMP when SMP systems finally do become affordable for end-user systems. There is 1 Reply. #: 11320 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:44:24 Sb: #11270-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 Also when SMP HW is that cheap it may be that IBM will have got around to adding it to OS/2 in the form of v3.0. I still think it's mass of apps. that matters. And I still think that with time OS/2 will have an NT emulator and NT and OS/2 - if either become sufficiently important. Pro of multiple OSes - keeps their price down. Con - higher app dev costs! #: 11434 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 21:01:18 Sb: #11320-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 I think you missed one or two of my earlier messages; that was exactly the point I was making to Paul, namely that by the time the SMP hardware is affordable for the desktop end-user, NT and **ix will not be the only SMP OS alternatives. IOW, I agree with you (though I think the NT (or Win32) emulator on OS/2 and OS/2 emulator on NT will be a long time in coming... perhaps even obsoleted by events). #: 11875 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:00:00 Sb: #11270-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 I disgree that my 'insistance' on the bennies of SMP support is fallacious. While I agree that system boards with multiprocessor support won't cost pennies over what we have today, their cost will be well within the cost/benefit return that enterprises can afford. When I mean 'I'll' plug in extra processors, I don't mean me as a standalone user - at least for a few years - but I as providing a solution to a client. Adoption of NT today will mean accessibility to SMP tomorrow. People buy enterprise solution with at least a 5 year horizon (s/b more). That few SMP boxes exist today (plenty do at a price) means nothing. They will tomorrow. Paul #: 11033 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 11:36:04 Sb: #10995-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: James Ferguson 71477,2345 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) re: I very much doubt that Win3.1 will be able to hold the fort until "NT Lite" is ready... Until sales (and even usage) of OS/2 surpass those of Win 3.1 I think it's safe to say that Win 3.1 is "holding the fort." -- Jim F. There are 2 Replies. #: 11049 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 13:27:39 Sb: #11033-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 To: James Ferguson 71477,2345 (X) Quite so. And with a 3.1 run-rate of 1M copies per month, it has some catching up to do. Jon #: 11140 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 08:38:03 Sb: #11033-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652 To: James Ferguson 71477,2345 (X) James, With the VAST majority of major clone makers preinstalling Windows 3.1 with their machines, it'll be extremely hard for IBM to stop this momentum. Raymond Chuang There are 2 Replies. #: 11146 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 09:56:27 Sb: #11140-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652 >>With the VAST majority of major clone makers preinstalling Windows 3.1 with their machines, it'll be extremely hard for IBM to stop this momentum.<< Especially when IBM is preinstalling Windows 3.1 itself! #: 11193 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 20:02:07 Sb: #11140-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652 Raymond, >>it'll be extremely hard for IBM to stop this momentum.<< Preinstall may not represent the same level of momentum. When you get something for 'free' it means you haven't invested anything. So DEL *.* has no pain. John There is 1 Reply. #: 11319 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:44:16 Sb: #11193-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) Umm maybe but it still costs extra. When you buy a car with a radio, you tend to keep it, even though it was 'free', because another has to be enough better than the exisiting one to make you go and buy the new one. Selling your product to someone who has nothing is easier than selling to someone who has something, even if it's not very good (no comment on Windows implied). Andy. #: 11043 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 12:35:46 Sb: #11005-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) Robert, >>Corporations are a very profitable segment of the PC market, but they don't lead the market.<< This is close to being oxymoronic. I assume by 'lead' you mean lead in volume. Which makes one think of the ol' "So what if we lose 10 bucks a unit, we'll make it up in the volume." But in anycase, NT is architected as corporate OS and will need that market. It will wither & die if it doesn't make there. Your average Ma & Pa operation is going to keep chugging on Netware (Lite, 2.X, 3.X,...) or maybe WFWG (Win for WorkGroups, WFW makes me think of Word for Windows) or LANTastic..... John #: 11051 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 13:38:57 Sb: #10958-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Scott R. McKee 76304,723 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will I mainly go (for me) West to Colorado. I 've heard the ice in the East can be nearly as tough as being the subject of CIS threads. Scott There is 1 Reply. #: 11125 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 00:01:04 Sb: #11051-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Scott R. McKee 76304,723 (X) Scott, In fact, the alleged distinction between skiing in New England and skiing in the Rockies is quite a bit overblown. It's one of those standard tourist myths like beer in Germany and wines and perfume in France. As with the above, there is an element of reality behind the myth, but I've seen light fluffy powder in New Hampshire and Vermont and scraped over hardpack in Aspen, too. The contrast isn't nearly as sharp as many folks make it out to be. Anyway, we also expect to drive out to Colorado for a bit of skiing in January, too. We're dropping in on the OS/2 developers conference in Colorado Springs the 3rd week in January and then hoping to spend the following couple of weeks skiing in Aspen. Will There are 2 Replies. #: 11129 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 05:08:19 Sb: #11125-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Scott R. McKee 76304,723 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Have a really good time! Scott #: 11194 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 20:02:15 Sb: #11125-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, Seems we are slightly out of phase, skiing-wise. I'll be hitting Stowe & Vail for my big trips this year again. But we definitely agree on the East vs West. I find the Colorado ice much more dangerous than Vermonts. I came flying down one hill at Vail last year, set an edge, immediately hit an ice patch and liked to split my self right up the middle. Why more dangerous? I wasn't skiing as I would as if I was sure I would hit an ice patch at some point and paid the penalty. John There is 1 Reply. #: 11218 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:26:27 Sb: #11194-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Bruce Biermann [ZiffNet] 72241,261 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) John, For the best in ice skiing, try Whistler/Blackcomb and Crystal Mountain. Both areas test a skier's ability and stupidity. Bruce There is 1 Reply. #: 11332 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 08:18:04 Sb: #11218-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: Bruce Biermann [ZiffNet] 72241,261 Bruce, Nah, you can't beat Vernon Valley/Great Gorge, NJ, for ice skiing on a Sunday afternoon after the hordes have scraped it down to the 'firm granular' ;-> John #: 11092 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 18:20:28 Sb: #10181-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Alexander Holy 100021,3721 IBM is *about* to release OS/2 2.1 very much like MS is *about* to release NT.. Both are currently in pre beta. In my humble, usually wrong, opinion, NT is a far better product than OS/2 2.1...... As far as 3.1 being unreliable and unstable, I have never had as many problems with 3.1, including very early beta versions, as I have had with the commercial release of OS/2 2.0...... I do recall, however, when I used to laugh a dry, synacal (OK, WILL Z. couldn't spell it either) laugh when various other beta testers declared 3.1 to be stable... Then I found that if 3.1 was configured correctly it worked great... Also, I have to admit, using windows apps instead of dos apps is a smart idea! And, WFW doesn't really slow a PC or a person down as much as you would think... Considering the benifits, the pain is well worth it. Karl (just trying to elicit angry letters!) There are 2 Replies. #: 11120 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 22:59:12 Sb: #11092-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) Hey, I sure agree with you on WFWk not slowing a PC much! Load time is a bit slower, but stuff seems to run without much, if any, degradation. I wish I had MS stock - they're doing more things right than wrong, unlike another big company whose initials are close to HAL. There is 1 Reply. #: 11145 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 09:42:23 Sb: #11120-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 (X) Speaking of a big company with those three initials, I called them up to get the OS/2 development CD which is free, with a 15 dollar shipping charge, and they wouldn't ship to me because I don't have a credit card, and they wouldn't even give me an address to send the check to. The next day I called and requested to be on the OS/2 beta, and she said sure, well ship that to you fed-ex... Looks like they are learning from Microsoft slowly. speaking of slow, has anyone but Will Z actually had to suffer through using OS/2?? What a dog. Karl There is 1 Reply. #: 11226 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:41:28 Sb: #11145-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) By your own admission, you had to spend time configuring Win3.1 properly to get it to be reliable and stable. If OS/2 is performing like a "dog" on your system, it must be because it is configured improperly. I could use a dog metaphor for OS/2 on my system, too; the dog I'd use, however, is a greyhound. There are aspects of OS/2's performance that could be improved; for example, ATM font initialization during bootup. On the whole, however, its performance is better than DOS+Win3.0, and with the Win3.1 support and 32-bit GRE, it's better than DOS+Win3.1. There is 1 Reply. #: 11234 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 10:42:01 Sb: #11226-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X) The time I had to spend configuring WIN31 was in creating PIF's to run dos apps. WIN31 running windows apps is faster than OS/2 running windows apps on my system. And, usind TAPCIS in the background, I can download messages in the background far faster under WIN31 than OS/2. Every do app I have run is far slower using OS/2. Perhaps I should spend the five minutes to read the manuals that come with OS/2 and see if there arte any hints on configuring the system. Karl There is 1 Reply. #: 11268 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 19:18:27 Sb: #11234-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) Funny; TAPCIS, as well as FTTERM, have a way of blowing up my Win3.1 DOS box, but they charge full bore ahead under OS/2 at 9600bps; TAPCIS usually achieves around 850-890 cps for downloads, 760 cps for message downloads (late at night). Native Win3.1 is definitely faster than the Win3.0 support shipped with OS/2 so far; however, that is not the final word in Win-OS/2 support. The beta Win-OS/23.1 support, combined with the 32-bit GRE, is faster than Win3.1 (at least in the cases being reported on the OS/2 fora; why don't you go over there and see?), and the interapp protection under Win-OS/2 can't be matched in Win3.1. Of course, you have the option, in OS/2, of running an app using Win3.0 support, Win3.1 support, allowing multiple Winapps to share the same session, or putting each Winapp in its own session. There is 1 Reply. #: 11274 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 20:10:23 Sb: #11268-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 I will definatelly have to look at my settings on my dos window, 'cause I often think my machine has locked up when I am in Tapcis under OS/2... Also, sometimes, at the end of a session it doesn't hang up the phone. Then, about half the time, it doesn't get a dial tone when I try to dial out. Only thing I did in WIN31 to make it run was make the default.pif execute in the background, and change the background priority to around 400. Let me know how you got tapcis to work so well with OS/2 Karl #: 11437 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 21:01:44 Sb: #11274-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) I use the following initialization and reset strings: Init: ATV1E1X4&C1&C3DT Reset: ?2+++?2ATH0^M?2ATZ^M?2 Set HW_TIMER "on" Set IDLE_SECONDS to 0 Set IDLE_SENSITIVITY to 100 #: 11322 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:44:37 Sb: #11092-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) Karl I run windows for Workgroups & I've noticed no slowdown. Main thing is it has smaller RAM occupancy than LANMAN. P.s. - cynical. #: 11093 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 18:20:45 Sb: More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul; I have to agree with you that the OS shoud'nt be compromised for compatability with older programs that don't necessarilly follow the rules.. And, by this, I even include programs that use UNDOCUMENTED features (as if) I think back fondly to that machine that is so well known as a Multi-Media machine, and how the clever folks in the OS programming department decided that they would make an OS that delivered better performance, and if certain apps didn't work, the people responsible for writing those non conformist apps would have to make changes. Before anyone thinks I am bashing a company that has a logo that looks like C=, I should point out that most of what fails on the new Amiga OS are programs that deliberatly used undocumented feartures. Anyhow, if people can't run WordStar 3.11 or whatever with NT, perhaps they should upgrade! karl There is 1 Reply. #: 11173 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:40:23 Sb: #11093-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) Well we agree in principle, but in practice, if a NT/LanMan net won't run what I consider to be a hopless/hapless program like WP51, it'd be seriously compromised in the marketplace. My last holdout for WP is gonna switch to AP or W4W very soon, but there are a lot of dinosaur brains out there who love to F7 their way to heaven. My guess is the talent's in Redmond to catch any calls no matter how weird and return what the calling program wants. My guess is, then, that MS will make a program by program decsion to support this or that misbehaved DOS program. I really miss my Amiga sometimes... Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11203 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 00:06:58 Sb: #11173-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul; You say you really miss your Amiga sometimes.... Don't tell me, you sold it? How could you! Tell me you didn't fall into the same trap I did and buy a Compaq ! I still have my Amiga, just bought it a 68030/68882 combo board with an additional 4MB of 32bit ram, and will probally have to buy it a toaster as well to keep it from being jealous of this Intel box I do most of my playing on... TTYL.. karl There is 1 Reply. #: 11239 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:02:30 Sb: #11203-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) Karl: Yah, the Amiga and the ST are down the road. I got married a while back and acquired a step child age (now) 8. I figured either the Amiga or the ST would be the kid's machine, but not to be. She wanted a computer 'just like me' so she got a 386/33. Then too her mom, my wife is a student so she needs a machine to do homework and its a lot easier for her to be able to use her kid's new 386 or my office / programming machine so we've invested in PC apps for her. A very funny thing happened. Both my wife and s_child were computer illterate when they came here. By having Win auto load and having them run the tutorials (CBT) from MS, they both became quite able to use the computer programs w/o manuals or instructions from me. Karin, the kid, on her own, discovered the spell checker in W4W and uses it to self check her spelling homework. We just didn't have the room for all the computers. These guys want furniture. The place *was* decorated in modern computer and it didn't fly with the new family. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11312 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:43:32 Sb: #11239-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 >>Both my wife and s_child were computer illterate... ..Karin, the kid, on her own, discovered the spell checker in W4W... Computer illterate? Gonna ask her for lessons??? #: 11593 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 21:27:45 Sb: #11173-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 >>...My last holdout for WP is gonna switch to AP or W4W very soon, but there are a lot of dinosaur brains out there who love to F7 their way to heaven.<< HEY!!!!! I TOLD YOU ABOUT THAT BEFORE! Darren #: 11111 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 20:51:54 Sb: #10891-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X) John, I think you are on the right track in taking the position that you do. I get a little tired of the dog and pony shows that come my way from the marketing types. I usually prefer not to be introduced until after I have asked my first series of questions that help me determine if the person giving the demo has the slightest idea what they are talking about. But you are right at the level where you are making major corporate decisions/recommendations you need as much data as possible to make a informed judgement call or risk going belly up. The problem or delema that you face as the OS developer is how to allocate resources (meaning those most intimate with the code) between finishing the project and going out to do dog and pony shows that would help in making informed decisions. It's a tough call for anyone, lose the business because you have to dedicate the resources to completing the project in a reasonable time or letting the project slip to get the word out. I really think forums like this one keep us somewhat abreast and up todate on the latest code and ETA on what in the pileline (when we are told). I have to admire Brad Silverburg, he really rolls up his sleeves and gets into his projects. I see him alot on his beta forums doing the Q&A thing. He really invites a lot of feed back on what the users want. Another one is Stu. Make no mistake about it it really helps when you hear from someone that tell you that this is the *real* direction this is going. Darren #: 11112 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 20:52:00 Sb: #10820-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) You forget DBase, 'dox4Windows... Darren There is 1 Reply. #: 11174 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:41:28 Sb: #11112-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X) Darren: Where you been? Haven't heard from you in months. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11287 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 22:36:21 Sb: #11174-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 I'll e-mail you later this week and give you the saga. Or you can post your number to me again (lost it) and I'll call you. Darren #: 11113 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 20:52:06 Sb: #10776-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) at some point you just have to use the caveman approach (club them and drag them by the hair). Darren #: 11114 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 20:52:12 Sb: #10813-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) thats right announce a e-mail message and keep us all in suspense. I think that's really underhanded of you. Really makes me curious what you have to say. Darren There is 1 Reply. #: 11175 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:43:01 Sb: #11114-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X) Darren: Sorry about that email note. I wrote a column that will go out under my byline Monday reviewing OS/2 2. I pretty much say it's a great DOS multitasker, which, I belive, it is. I'm curious to hear Will Z's response, but haven't yet. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11288 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 22:36:26 Sb: #11175-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 I don't know why you guys can't see that you are saying the same thing. What pub is the article going to be in and when? Darren #: 11115 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 20:52:20 Sb: #10914-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) You miss the point, soon connectivity will be built into the OS's from MS. It is rumored that MSDOS6 will be a client out of the box and WFW seems to be a complete peer-to-peer out of the box, both being able to see the NT server or beeing seen by the server. So you buy WFW instead of WIN31 to get the connectivity. Darren There is 1 Reply. #: 11155 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 10:38:06 Sb: #11115-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X) Winwork will cost more than basic Windows, so my point that you can't compare the cost of one copy of NT with the cost of one copy of NetWare is still valid. I'd be surprised to see Microsoft put client drivers in basic DOS 6--if they were going to do that, they'd put client drivers in basic Windows as well, wouldn't they? More to the point, Microsoft's unlikely to give away free what its competitors charge good money for. Peer-to-peer network software lists for around $100 a node, and Artisoft's selling plenty of copies of LANtastic. #: 11592 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 21:27:39 Sb: #11155-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) >>Winwork will cost more than basic Windows, so my point that you can't compare the cost of one copy of NT with the cost of one copy of NetWare is still valid.<< I'm going to concide part of this to you only because we are talking about unreleased products and don't yet know what the final street prices are going to be. However, Windows for WorkGroups has built-in peer-to-peer so I would expect to pay slightly more for it. The same thinking goes for NT. >>I'd be surprised to see Microsoft put client drivers in basic DOS 6--if they were going to do that, they'd put client drivers in basic Windows as well, wouldn't they?<< I'm not part of the DOS 6 beta so I don't know for sure what will actually show up in DOS 6, I've heard rumors of disk compression and a few other things; but, it seems to me that I heard that these things were being offered in WFW for sure (atleast to LAMMAN). >>More to the point, Microsoft's unlikely to give away free what its competitors charge good money for.<< Seems to me that getting peer-to-peer networking, mail services and the Schedule + products in WFW you're getting a wooping amount, maybe not free, but... >>Peer-to-peer network sftware lists for around $100 a node, and Artisoft's selling plenty of copies of LANtastic.<< Well for me (a dedicated Windows user, and I can only speculate here) spending $100/node for Lantastic plus $45/node for vanilla Windows would be more than the $125/node that I think WFW will actually sell on the street for. Darren #: 11654 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 09:31:18 Sb: #11592-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X) Price considerations will vary a lot depending on what people want and what they already own. In most cases, I don't think people will find that WFW is cheaper than NetWare. On the other hand, I don't think the two will be far enough apart that price will be a major factor in the decision. #: 11123 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 23:14:32 Sb: #10822-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) When you talk about enterprise computering, you must consider SPX/IPX and TCP/IP. NT will have trouble keeping up with NetWare+UNIX networks. SCO and Univels products support SPX/IPX now, and client-server apps are ready to take off. The corporate guys aren't going to wait for NT. Not when what they need on a proven platform is already available. But I'm not saying NT won't make it. Microsoft will just buy everybody's vote on it. Windows products and vendors are behind it. If it's cheap enough, people will view it as a "gotta have." P.S. you like my new word "computering" in first line? Tom There are 2 Replies. #: 11130 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 06:09:35 Sb: #11123-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren Davis 71174,262 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 Just a note on enterprise computing... I work in a mixed Mac and PC environment- one of the curses of being at a major university- and am ver intereseted in connectivity between the two. Unless Novell makes some major changes in Univel I know I will not be putting it on any of our servers. I will argue that NT and OS/2 are taking a much saner approach to networking than Novell. For example, the main protocal on our network is TCP/IP and all of our PCs and Macs support the basics (telnet and ftp) as well as NFS and NIS to bring in the file connectivity that we need. Both NT and OS/2 come with these capabilities out of the box- for OS/2 you have to buy the networking version and NFS on NT is yet to be delivered as far as I know- in fact the NT implementation of TCP/IP is one of the best that I have seen in the micro world. I look at it this way- I buy UNIX for what it offers- Open Systems. Unless Univel and Destiny are an incredible out of the box system, which I doubt in the first release, I have no desire to move to it. I would much rather continue along with UNIX as I know it and love it. Then take advantage of the connectivity options in OS/2, Windows/WinNT, and System whatever to provide me the TCP/IP connectivity I need. Connectivity is the buzzword of the 90s- and I do not think that you will see the DOS of network computing ever appear. Too many users with too many needs. Darren There is 1 Reply. #: 11201 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 21:08:36 Sb: #11130-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Darren Davis 71174,262 Take a look at Vines on SCO.... Very nice product.... Karl #: 11179 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:56:05 Sb: #11123-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 Yah, I'm all for computering. I used the term computist once and wondered if I made it up. So much for English . I'm assuming that MS wouldn't issue a LanManNT w/o support for SPX/IPX and TCP/IP. Sure w/o that MS could sell a few NT's to people who want to remain firmly isolated, but why go to all this development work for such a tiny niche market. My guess is the first LanManNT will have these supports in place and a great deal of beta testing will be compliance and performance. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11314 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:43:42 Sb: #11179-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 Paul, the correct term for one who uses computers is a computor isn't it? It'll never catch on!!! #: 11881 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:09:11 Sb: #11314-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 (X) I don't know. Is it 'computor'? Sounds wrong. Owell. Paul #: 11124 S2/General Discussion 02-Oct-92 23:27:55 Sb: #10814-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) "Novell officials last week acknowledged they see the future in Unix, not OS/2." (Infoworld, 9/28/92). Somebody big just stepped on OS/2s toes. Paul, this is in response to your message to Will Z and the continuing OS/2 debate. Tom There are 3 Replies. #: 11141 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 08:38:06 Sb: #11124-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 Tom, Especially the Univell project going on not far from my workplace. People who have seen it said the combination of UNIXWare and NetWare is a knockout. Raymond Chuang There is 1 Reply. #: 11181 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:59:43 Sb: #11141-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Raymond Chuang 72441,3652 Raymond: Is the combination of Unix and NetWare called NetWare 4 or is that an entirely different product? paul #: 11180 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 15:58:40 Sb: #11124-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 Yah, if Novell's out of OS/2, that must be quite a blow. I'm surprised. Doesn't Novell and IBM have (had?) some sorta strategy? I mean, wasn't IBM gonna sell NetWare? I wonder if they will now. Paul There are 3 Replies. #: 11192 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 17:53:32 Sb: #11180-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul IBM and Novell have been selling NetWare. I heard that the relationship has soured because NetWare was unable to support IBM's large shops in the manner that they had grown accustomed to from IBM (I believe that American Airlines was one of the complainers). AA wanted to upgrade all of their 5000 servers and have it done over a single weekend and Netware couldn't do it. Just a rumor of course. Things like this are what MS has to be getting ready to make work if they want the corp. market for NT. My guess is that they will have to pump $100 to $200 million dollars into NT service for the first three or four years if they are serious about customers like this. --Ben There is 1 Reply. #: 11237 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 10:49:40 Sb: #11192-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Ben: I'm not sure if NT can reasonably made to compete like that AA example you rumor/quote. I'm very surprised IBM backed NetWare in a customer who might want such astounding service as you cite. After all, if IBM had to work on 5,000 seperate servers over a weekend and coordinate it all, I doubt even they could do it w/o a Gen Schwartzkopf on their staff . IBM can u/g a large 'net' using their traditional architechture where they just need to load a tape or two on one or at worst a few mainframes, but 5,000 geographically distant servers at once? I'm not surprised Novell/Netware failed at this. I don't see NT suceeding unless the initial install had this eventuality in mind when it was spec'd. My guess is the NetWare install didn't. Paul #: 11586 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 20:46:17 Sb: #11192-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) BS>> "My guess is that they will have to pump $100 to $200 million dollars into NT service for the first three or four years if they are serious about customers like this." Of course, were MS to decide to do this, it wouldn't be too hard, right? The entire amount could come out of the "petty cash" account at MS.. -Dale There is 1 Reply. #: 11616 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 01:38:14 Sb: #11586-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21 Dale Gee, wasn't their profit something like $500 million last year? Spending half of your profit for the next 3 or 4 years on NT sounds like a fair sized risk (but not a 'bet the company move'). Doesn't sound like petty cash to me, but I'm not sure of the figures. --Ben #: 11705 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 14:44:18 Sb: #11616-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Could be, Ben. I didn't pay attention to what profit was.. had the impression that they had more than that to throw around.. -Dale #: 11225 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:41:20 Sb: #11180-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Novell is not *out* of OS/2; they are going to emphasize the Univel connection, however. But they are clearly not announcing that they have decided to abandon their agreements with IBM; that may come, but it was not announced in the article being discussed. A careful reading of that article simply demonstrates that InfoWorld is not above printing very self-serving vendor press release/public relations propaganda as news. Most of Novell's problems with IBM and IBM customers stem from the inability of Novell's current products to be installed and/or upgraded easily and quickly throughout an enterprise. Changing the Novell platform to a NetWare merged into a Unix base will not necessarily alleviate these problems. Novell doesn't *seem* to appreciate (yet) that their upgrade procedures don't scale well, or at all. Lord knows, they've had enough time to fix most, if not all, the complaints that sites have about mass upgrades. Still, for many sites, the effort involved in moving from 2.x to 3.11 or (shudder) to 4.0 *BY WAY OF 3.11* (the currently announced plan) is enough incentive to cause many to consider the option of installing a new NOS entirely. There is 1 Reply. #: 11248 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:26:13 Sb: #11225-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X) Well, I didn't say Novell was out of OS/2, others did. I missed the article. And I 1000000% agree with you that NetWare u/g's are about the worst nightmares out there other than the initial implementation. Now my understanding is that NetWare 4 *won't* be installable thru 3.X, that this plan's been dropped. The rumor (I have no Novell connections) goes on that 4 won't be a souped up version of 3.x but an utterly new effort aimed at competing with NT. I'm pretty darn confused about all this NetWare/UnixWare merge talk people are all up in arms about. What sort of problems now inherent in NetWare will go away when Novell throws an *IX at the problem? Is this a manifestation of my ignorance? I'm lost at what's to be gained here except another layer of complexity for the hapless net admin who's trying to keep all these layers operating. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11254 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 12:48:19 Sb: #11248-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 Quite so. So the prospect of a NOS that comes on a CD-ROM, takes 15 minutes to install and which sets up sensible sets of user accounts will appeal. I cannot forgive Novell for it's *totally appalling* documentation, for example. On the subject of "will people go for a mixed NOS of Win4Work + NT versus traditional solutions (inc Novell)", I think the answer is "yes". We already see how one NT machine can control another through RPC. Don't forget that MS has done RPC implementations for Win3.1 as well. So remote, net manager control of Win4Workgroup machines shouldn't be too difficult. Remember that MS supposedly has a raft of Win4Workgroup apps and applets coming out during the next 6 months -- maybe they'll do a full package of remote "server" control for NT and Win4Work machines. (I'm totally speculating here, but it would make real sense). Jon #: 11870 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 07:44:44 Sb: #11254-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 I'm with you in thinking (I'm inferring here) that if MS can get a great group of templates out for W4WG soon ( 6 months) it'll mean wonders to promote the product as well as lifting MS as a net solution to the general public. LanMan wasn't (isn't) that bad of a product really but its sales and MS's rep as a net vendor are pretty poor. We'll have to see how good an implementation of W4Wg is (with it's wizards), how well it'll integrate with Netware, hhow difficult it'll be to u/g to NT server, etc. In other words, I see this as the very beginning of a furious horse race. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11889 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:37:07 Sb: #11870-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 >>LanMan wasn't that bad of a product It might be okay today, but the initial release of 2.0 that couldn't run 1-2-3 or Paradox was a dog. #: 11230 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:51:16 Sb: #11180-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) IBM's strategy was LAN Server. They were losing so many sales to NetWare that they eventually gave up and became a Novell VAR. Kind of the way they've given up on Office Vision OS/2 and become a Lotus Notes VAR, kind of the way they dumped their applications division once WordPerfect et al. had ground Displaywrite etc. into the dust, kind of the way they've started selling ISA-bus PS/2s and Ethernet. There is 1 Reply. #: 11251 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:31:57 Sb: #11230-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 (X) Yah, the strategy of defeaaaaaaaaaaa [AWhenever IBM finds itself in a competitive position, they find they can't cut it. I'm actually surprised at how good OS/2 is compared with other IBM efforts like Topview and MCA. OK, MCA is technically OK, but IBM's done such a job on it that even in IBM machines its getting to be a niche buss. If history's any measure, OS/2 2 has about 2 weeks to live. Too bad, really. Paul #: 11196 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 20:08:41 Sb: #11124-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Bruce Hallberg[Genelabs] 76376,515 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 >>"Novell officials last week acknowledged they see the future in Unix, not OS/2." (Infoworld, 9/28/92). >>Somebody big just stepped on OS/2s toes. Tom, Gee, I wonder if they had a vested interest in saying that? Do you think? Gosh, what a surprising comment, coming from them. Bruce #: 11127 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 00:21:54 Sb: #10956-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: David Coffin 76200,674 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, I completely agree with you. It doesn't mean squat to me! I have a ten person company and we have have three PC's. SMP, C2 security, POSIX compliance? Who cares. We don't need SMP or C2 or POSIX. There are a thousand fold more companys OUR size than those who might need the above mentioned feature set. Does Quicken make their money on the Fortune 1000? Hah! Better yet, Does MS make their money on F1000? Not in anyones life they didn't. OS/2 fills a void that MS's Windows and yet to be NT have created. My moneys on that void in the middle. Especially since low end machines today are the solidly in the middle ground. There is 1 Reply. #: 11321 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:44:30 Sb: #11127-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: David Coffin 76200,674 Yeah Posix doesn't mean anything much to 99.9% of all customers. Trouble is the other one is the US Federal Government. And they are big enough to notice even if no-one else ever uses it. Andy. #: 11435 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 21:01:20 Sb: #11321-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: David Coffin 76200,674 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 Well then have they noticed DOS? Is NT being developed for the government or the general public? To whom are all these developers who are jumping on the NT bandwagon going to be selling there products too? Uncle Sam? There is 1 Reply. #: 11472 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 05:45:55 Sb: #11435-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: David Coffin 76200,674 I suspect that they feel that developmnt for NT will easily be handled in the future not only by NT but also by the win32 kernel. Drivers should be similar etc. All the arguments pro & con NT vs OS2 are somehow missing the fact that win 3.1 is currently selling over a million copies a month and that windows apps are now outselling dos. Once NT is up and running, how long do you think it will take MS to throw its energy (& big bucks ) into the successor to 3.1? I do not like to guess or predict the future (hard enough for me to get through a day) but suspect that the buyer is dictating the reality. I talk to a lot of major developers who have told me straight out that, sure they could write for OS2 or NT, if they choose but right now, they are concentrating on win 3.1. Why? simple. An almost guaranteed decent return on their efforts. Claris, the dean of Macdom, is porting apps to windows very quickly. Rumor even has it that hypercard will be ported. Ok, where now? Logical jump -- the window 32 kernel. Makes sense to me, but I could be totally wrong. If I was forced to make a bet, I would probably cast my ticket with MS. If I lose, it will not be the first time. bob #: 11199 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 21:07:42 Sb: #10956-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Bragg 71101,3060 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, PMFJI... >> OSs win or lose in the marketplace [not on promises but on what] they >> deliver On this criteria, both NT and OS/2 lose to Unix for Intel, which delivers far more than either today. Problem is, its software is way too expensive, and DOS / Win-3 has too large an installed base to play off of. >> Like the old Beta vs. VHS This, arguably, is precisely where OS/2 and NT sit, but in reverse order. Beta is like OS/2: there first, low market penetration, marginal technical superiority at an early point in time but no staying power in the long run. A better bet would be to expect Unix on the big servers, NT on big desktops, Win-3 or 4 or NT-Lite on little desktops, and OS/2 hanging on in Blue shops or where interoperability with legacy systems or AS/400s is an issue. >> (POSIX compliance, SMP, and C2 ...) don't matter squat to the overwhelming >> majority of ordinary users True as stated, but this misses a major point. These features are precisely what's required to bid an OS on the Government procurements of $100 M up to close to $2 Billion, of which a *number* will be hitting the street in the next few months (and years). Also, these features make NT eligible as technology insertion in existing contracts where OS/2 can't qualify. The Govt is a major buyer of computer systems; your dismissal of these features is ill-considered, IMO. >> how much memory ... how compatible an OS is with [what they've already >> got] is what counts How much memory is less an issue every day. Plot the average memory density on the desktop over time. The interesting memory issue is this: with NT around, there's no reason to switch a low memory machine over to OS/2 because it introduces yet another operating system to deal with, and because NT provides an upgrade path. IOW, NT makes Win-3 a *viable* placeholder. And compatibility, one would expect, is greater from DOS/Win-3.1 to NT than to OS/2. [More] There is 1 Reply. #: 11200 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 21:07:47 Sb: #11199-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Bragg 71101,3060 To: Tom Bragg 71101,3060 (X) [Continued] Having said all that, and having run the NT prelim release, *and* having followed the trials and feedback of a diverse group of OS/2 users.... I think you're pretty far out on that limb you've constructed! Of course, that's not all bad, look at what it's done for Al Sharpton's visibility, for example. ;-> However, all things are possible. MS could fall on its face. OS/2 could become a winner as the OS of last resort (although it seems debatable whether the marginal cost of moving from Win-3 to OS/2 is worth the marginal benefits of such a move for most users). OTOH, the Unix vendors could finally wake up, price their software intelligently, commit to ABI compatibility, and walk off with the prize, given their _already_ superior technology. None of us really know. I confess: I remember looking at DOS 1.0 and the original PC in 81 or 82, and confidently pronouncing it a loser because CP/M-86 was superior, was here now, ran on much better hardware, had an inventory of applications in the field, etc. etc. I was right technically, but a *lousy* predictor! I think I've learned from that mistake (and from others over my own 21 years in this business ): I think NT is to be taken much more seriously than, say, OS/2. No personal attacks here, just (hopefully) food for thought. FWIW. -Tom. There is 1 Reply. #: 11216 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:16:33 Sb: #11200-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 To: Tom Bragg 71101,3060 (X) >No personal attacks here... On that point, at least, we are in agreement. As I am sure is already apparent, on most of your points we are not in agreement. I do find it refreshing, however, to have someone state their disagreement with me without needing, in the process, to attack me personally or to repeat false allegations about me (like that I supposedly wrote about Windows 3.1 compatibility problems without having installed and run the product myself). #: 11202 S2/General Discussion 03-Oct-92 21:08:45 Sb: #10810-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Paul; I was at the Association of Bayan Users meeting in April, and an editor from a networking mag found out I had beta'd WIN31, and was running Vines 4.10(5) (supposedely verboten) and asked me what I thought of Will Z's column about WIN31 breaking apps. I said I had the magazine in my office, hadn't bothered top read the article, but found it to be total trash. The editor asked me whho I could make an oppinion when I hadn't read it, and I said if certain people can state that they haven't installed WIN31, but didn't like it, I could dislike certain columns! Karl There are 2 Replies. #: 11220 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:37:01 Sb: #11202-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) >>Will Z's column about WIN31 breaking apps The funny thing about that column is that his big example was Superprint, a kind of souped-up third-party printer driver--exactly the kind of program that you'd expect to break from one version to the next. Of course Superprint works perfectly under OS/2 2.0, right? #: 11238 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 10:55:41 Sb: #11202-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 (X) Karl: I'm a bit surprised that Will hisself seems surprised at our outrage about his late columns. As far as I can see, this MS bashing is a new thing with him. He's been around PC Mag and others for a loooong time. In the past I've found him to be a sometimes contrversial guy, but not one who's column is predicatble in advance. Why he decided to make war just about the time that 3.1 and OS/2 2 were release, well, I dunno. I'm gonna speculate tho. I'm gonna guess he felt it was is duty to voice a contra opinion to Windows madness. And madness it seems to be with the entire world of new purchases going over to Win or Win apps. DOS apps sales are falling fast and Win apps rising each period. Rather than cooling down, Win madness is continuing to heat. I've had several clients who know nothing about W4WGroups or NT recently declare they are now all Win shops. Well, it makes me happy, but I'm confused over their sudden conversions. Paul #: 11221 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:40:46 Sb: #10965-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Al Longyear 70165,725 (X) Ben is right, though: Philippe Kahn is on the record over in the ZNT:EXEC forum stating that Borland has no current plans to produce OS/2- or NT-specific versions of their apps (and here I'm talking about Paradox, Quattro Pro, dBase, etc.; the languages are another story), for quite a while, until the market picture stabilizes somewhat. Reason? Both environments will support their current DOS and Windows versions quite well, providing excellent performance. As far as their apps, not language products, go, Borland is putting its efforts into their DOS and Windows versions. For now. Mr. Kahn is open to developing for the 32-bit platforms, but only after it's apparent that the market demand for the apps is there; he's not interested in developing first, in the hopes that a market will be there at some point in the future. Mr. Kahn clearly perceives NT to be oriented at servers and other narrow markets, not at the end-user mass-market that is Borland's traditional base. He seems to believe OS/2 will provide somewhat broader application opportunities, but is not convinced that it will become much of a factor outside of mainframe shops. Until he is convinced otherwise about both OS/2 and NT, Borland's priorities (for apps) will revolve around DOS and Win16. At least, that's what he's saying TODAY. (Actually a couple of days ago.) However, even Borland's language support for OS/2 is lukewarm; Mr. Kahn also reiterated that Borland has no plans to develop a Turbo Pascal for OS/2. I hope he changes his mind on this, but he's turned thumbs down on the OS/2 TP for about a year now, and shows no inclination to change, probably because TP/Win runs so well on OS/2. A mistake, in my opinion, but he knows best where his dollars need to be spent. BC++ is at about the same stage of development for both OS/2 and NT, i.e., in EEP, but TP for OS/2 would be a much bigger seller, based on my admittedly primitive "market research." There are 2 Replies. #: 11301 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 05:00:55 Sb: #11221-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 I am afraid that Ben's statement was logically incorrect. His statement was "there are NO applications for OS/2 in 32 bit mode". That type of statement is impossible to prove. All that it takes is one application to prove it invalid. If you wish to bander about reguarding a definition of what an application is then fine. I'll leave you to discuss that. That type of discussion is of little to no value for me. However, the simple fact of the matter is that there ARE applications for OS/2 2.0 in 32 bit mode. If you don't wish to accept Object Vision then you must accept "Describe version 3.0 for OS/2 2.0". Describe has no "language" vs. "application" group. They only have one application. Their application is for three different platforms. With the mention of one application, the statement is invalid. Accept it or not. The fact of the matter is that I have shown the statment to be wrong. Now, if the statement was that there are "FEW" applications for OS/2 then I would have agreed with him. But I can not accept the "NO" term. OS/2 is very new. Windows NT hasn't been shipped (commerically). If you wish to discuss commerical operating systems then you can say that there are "NO" applications for Windows NT. But you can not say that for OS/2. There is 1 Reply. #: 11306 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:07:49 Sb: #11301-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Al Longyear 70165,725 Al What I said was: >I have been unable to confirm that Borlands application divison (not its >languages group) has ANY native OS/2 applications in development. To refute this you need to name a native OS/2 application in development by Borlands application division. I can't, can you? --Ben #: 11436 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 21:01:31 Sb: #11301-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Al Longyear 70165,725 I think you misread Ben's message; he said that Borland wasn't working on 32-bit OS/2 apps at present, not that *no one* was working on 32-bit OS/2 apps, and he is apparently correct, if Mr. Kahn is to be believed. Since P.K. could leave himself and Borland open to stockholder suits if he's subsequently found to have lied knowingly when making public statements about Borland's development directions (depending on how those directions turn out), I'm inclined to believe him... at present. ObjectVision is the sole exception to the rule here; it and BC++ are acknowledged by Mr. Kahn as the only 32-bit OS/2 products (not apps) that Borland is working on. I think Mr. Kahn indicated that an NT version of OV is in the works too, but I'm not sure; BC++ for NT is a definite yes. OV is produced by the Borland Languages group, though, not the apps group; Mr. Kahn considers OV a tool with which to build apps, rather than an app per se. The distinction is a fine one, but I can see the rationale. There is 1 Reply. #: 11460 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 01:13:10 Sb: #11436-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 Mercer >Mr. Kahn considers OV a tool with which to buld apps. rather than an app >per se. Well I heard a rumor that the reason that OV was moved to the langauges group (it USED to be in the apps group, I believe) was that the Windows products groups were becoming so large that management was cumbersome so they decided to move some folks under another report, OV was the (obvious I think) pick. --Ben #: 11575 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 18:27:15 Sb: #11460-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Yeah, I think calling OV a language is definitely bogus, but it is quite properly an app-building tool, rather than an app in and of itself. So maybe the group should be called Languages and Tools. There is 1 Reply. #: 11584 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 19:37:36 Sb: #11575-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 Mercer I think that Brief (the text editor) is in this group also so it probably is called 'Lanaguages and Tools' or will be soon. --Ben #: 11302 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 05:12:22 Sb: #11221-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 As for Borland, I would hope that they port all of their software to both platforms. Let the market decide which platform they like the best. After that, Borland can decide which platform that the wish to continute to support. I don't know how difficult it is for Borland to offer two code generators. It may be simple (if the two languages -- BCC and TWP) have a common base. Or it may be difficult if the two are totally seperate scanners, analizers, generators. (The answer to the question is not really important and makes little difference to me other than for a curiosity.) As for me, I must write to Windows 3.x. It will work on all three platforms, Windows with MSDOS, OS/2 2.0, and Windows NT. IBM is lacking the tools to allow me to port to OS/2 2.0 PM. Atleast Microsoft offers some help in porting from PM to Windows NT. IBM offers nothing. (I am not an advocate for OS/2. Personally, I belive that Windows NT is a much superior operating system to OS/2. But, I am paid to do a job. The job currently requires Windows.) Is this the same Mr. Kahn who said that his company would never have a C compiler. That C was an "american delusion" (delusion, invention, I don't remember the exact quote). And that "Pascal was the language for the rest of the world." He must have changed his mind to offer only C for his language entry. #: 11587 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 20:46:23 Sb: #11221-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 Mercer.. Kahn's statement (as quoted by you) raises an interesting question: as OS/2 2.0 gets better and better with its Windows 3.1 support, don't you think some percentage of current Windows developers will just not write for OS/2 since "OS/2 runs my app just fine under WINOS231?" -Dale #: 11727 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 18:41:05 Sb: #11587-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Dale Lewallen [PC/C] 76000,21 Gee, was I quoting? I thought I was simply paraphrasing (leaves me more wiggle room, ya know). As to your point, of course; and Kahn made the point himself. Of course, I think the same thing is obviously true wrt Win16 support on Win/NT (except for those unfortunate Win16 apps that require a device driver). #: 11222 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:40:52 Sb: #10830-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 (X) Yes, but the development for the Win base will continue, for quite a few years, to be concentrated primarily on Win16, and not Win32. Just look at the comments by P. Kahn over on the ZNT:EXEC forum. He clearly views NT as *NOT* being a force for application sales for quite a while (he puts OS/2 in this category as well, but seems to believe it will have a larger end-user presence than will NT), because Microsoft is pitching it as a niche product, for servers/SMP/RISC etc. The bread and butter for the app developers will continue to be DOS+Win16 for at least several more years. After that, who knows? But for the immediate future, the fact that both OS/2 and Win/NT will support these DOS+Win16 apps, and provide inter-app multi-tasking if not intra-app MT, only provides the developers with more incentive to place the bulk of their resources on DOS+Win16. Borland and others will develop tools for the new environments, and the odd application, but they are reserving their development dollars first and foremost for upgrades to their DOS and Win16 apps. There are 2 Replies. #: 11246 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:12:20 Sb: #11222-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X) The migration path moving from Win16 to NT is so straightforward that sure, people will continue to develop for Win16 and also in parallel for NT. This is one rarely discussed areas where NT will have it over OS/2. NT, Win, and OS/2 need rewrites from the ground up for proper migration of DOS apps. I know DOS to Win ports can be done, but aren't particularly fine reps of Win apps. But once you have your Win code, porting over to NT is relatively simple. My prediction pretty well matches yours with the addition that I think just about every Win app will have an NT version too. I would guess that few apps will be NT exclusive, but the one mistake everybody seems to make about this industry lately is underestimating how fast power desire moves. I remember that 18 months ago the common knowledge was that only heavy hitters needed any implementation of the i486. Now we all have this and I for one am eyeing the P5. Today the common knowlege is that standalones don't need NT or SMP. I'm predicting this will seem like a silly short horizon look by 1994. Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11269 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 19:18:35 Sb: #11246-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 I agree that it will be fairly easy to get a Win16 app recompiled to run under Win32s or Win/NT. However, to take advantage of the new features in Win32 and Win/NT will require redesign of that app. That's why I think you will see minimal effort expended by most developers towards development of "native" Win/NT apps. And if the apps aren't rewritten/redesigned to utilize such things as threads (and multi-threading support with proper interprocess communication is not a trivial enhancement to an app) and the GDI improvements, they will suffer by comparison to those apps that are written to exploit the new APIs fully. So, eventually, the native NT apps will surface (or perhaps native Win32 would be a better term), but they won't become part of the mass market until there is a Win32 implementation (not Win32s) that has achieved mass market penetration. I could be wrong. But the experience of so many developers that went whole-hog into OS/2 development based on Microsoft's and IBM's promises seems to have left the majority reluctant to pour development dollars into either of the new environments, until there is a market to support them. And NT is definitely not going to achieve mass market status, the way things are going. Win32, perhaps, if we are talking the 32-bit version of Windows that will run on a future version of DOS, but unless NT becomes priced at OS/2 levels, and goes on a severe diet, it won't cut the mustard. So I see at least eighteen months before a 32-bit version of Windows arrives that will sustain mass-market application development for native 32-bit Winapps and not straight ports. #: 11874 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 07:55:56 Sb: #11269-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 Well, we'll have to see here. I think a lot more programs will appear for Win32 and NT due to the great tools MS has. Do you have the NT SDK or the Dev. Network CD? Either will show how easy it is. You will need to add specific code for multithreading of course. But developers want to make their apps run best and adding this tweak will give such rewards I suspect they'll do this without much prodding. OS/2 requires a ground up re-write. Were NT to require this, I think developers *would* be gunshy after the OS/2 mess, but it won't. Then too, I think SMP will come from 'free' with a native NT app. That too will prod people to move apps over to it. But you never know the market. Why aren't we, for example,all using NeXTStep or Unix V? Paul #: 11252 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 11:48:27 Sb: #11222-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: James Ferguson 71477,2345 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X) Mercer, You seem to have an awful lot of faith that P. Kahn is telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth in laying out his company's future marketing plans before the whole world... I'd be amazed if Borland isn't working away furiously on NT apps as we speak. I expect they will also work on more OS/2 apps if they can con IBM into coughing up some more front-end development money... -- Jim F. There is 1 Reply. #: 11309 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:20:41 Sb: #11252-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Brian Moura 76702,1337 To: James Ferguson 71477,2345 Before Gene Wang left Borland, he was raving about Win32s at the Windows & OS/2 Conference in Boston in August. So the talk of Win-16 only work at Borland sound suspicious..... #: 11223 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:41:01 Sb: #10951-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Ladislav Nemec 70732,3207 (X) Have you considered DCF/2? Produced by Proportional Software, Inc., Fort Collins, CO; phone 800-666-4OS2, fax 800-955-4OS2 (phone number supposedly works in Canada, too; if you need a non-800 number, I'll see if I can dig it up). $129 (on special for $99 til end of year, I believe), and supports both FAT and HPFS volumes (but not the SWAPPER.DAT file, yet). Also comes with DOS device drivers. It's my understanding that Stacker-OS/2 won't support HPFS initially. I don't know whether Stacker-OS/2 will include the DOS device drivers, either, or whether you'll have to have the DOS Stacker product as well, to dual boot for example. More info on DCF/2 is available over in the OS/2 fora, but with the recent forum reorg, I don't know where in the libraries the product announcement has ended up. There is 1 Reply. #: 11229 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 09:50:41 Sb: #11223-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ladislav Nemec 70732,3207 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 (X) Thanks for the info, I did not know about that product. I was wondering about Stacker support for HPFS; it is probably the reason why they are still working on it. However, for the time being, I am not switching to HPFS since the bulk of my work on all machines I use is with FAT. I already have Stacker and works without a glitch. But, one should ALWAYS consider alternatives. Thanks, LN. There is 1 Reply. #: 11267 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 19:18:21 Sb: #11229-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Ladislav Nemec 70732,3207 My understanding is that the first release of Stacker-OS/2 will not have HPFS support, but that it will be added shortly. After all, if DCF/2 can do it, Stacker should be able to do so as well. The Stacker-OS/2 product will be a separate product from Stacker for DOS, at least as its been explained on the OS/2 fora; I imagine, but don't know, that there will be some sort of upgrade offered from the DOS version. Since they are working on an NT version as well, and probably NTFS as well as HPFS support for NT, perhaps the non-FAT file system support will show up contemporaneously on both the NT and OS/2 versions. All of this is sheer speculation, however; there haven't been any public official pronouncements from Stacker principals that I'm aware of. I also use pencils with erasers. #: 11281 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 22:35:46 Sb: #10891-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 (X) John, I think you are on the right track in taking the position that you do. I get a little tired of the dog and pony shows that come my way from the marketing types. I usually prefer not to be introduced until after I have asked my first series of questions that help me determine if the person giving the demo has the slightest idea what they are talking about. But you are right at the level where you are making major corporate decisions/recommendations you need as much data as possible to make a informed judgement call or risk going belly up. The problem or delema that you face as the OS developer is how to allocate resources (meaning those most intimate with the code) between finishing the project and going out to do dog and pony shows that would help in making informed decisions. It's a tough call for anyone, lose the business because you have to dedicate the resources to completing the project in a reasonable time or letting the project slip to get the word out. I really think forums like this one keep us somewhat abreast and up todate on the latest code and ETA on what in the pileline (when we are told). I have to admire Brad Silverburg, he really rolls up his sleeves and gets into his projects. I see him alot on his beta forums doing the Q&A thing. He really invites a lot of feed back on what the users want. Another one is Stu. Make no mistake about it it really helps when you hear from someone that tell you that this is the *real* direction this is going. Darren #: 11282 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 22:35:52 Sb: #10820-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 You forget DBase, 'dox4Windows... Darren #: 11283 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 22:35:56 Sb: #10776-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) at some point you just have to use the caveman approach (club them and drag them by the hair). Darren There is 1 Reply. #: 11307 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:07:55 Sb: #11283-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 Darren >at some point you just have to use the caveman approach Well as I said in an earlier message, we have needed this since the 1401 but eveyone who has tried it has been answered with a loud NO by the market. MS's attempt to do it by providing easy (and they hope cheap) upgrades of the popular WinApps. is an interesting attempt and (since the current market IS different in important way then the older markets that had large amounts of in house code) a possiblly successful one, but I think no one should underestimate the risk that MS is taking by not having very high backward compatibility in NT. --Ben #: 11284 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 22:36:03 Sb: #10813-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 thats right announce a e-mail message and keep us all in suspense. I think that's really underhanded of you. Really makes me curious what you have to say. Darren #: 11285 S2/General Discussion 04-Oct-92 22:36:10 Sb: #10914-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 You miss the point, soon connectivity will be built into the OS's from MS. It is rumored that MSDOS6 will be a client out of the box and WFW seems to be a complete peer-to-peer out of the box, both being able to see the NT server or beeing seen by the server. So you buy WFW instead of WIN31 to get the connectivity. Darren #: 11398 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 15:53:45 Sb: #11285-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Lauriston 75300,3205 To: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 (X) I didn't miss your point, I just don't think you're adding up the price correctly. Software to run NT on your server(s) plus WinWorkg on your workstations may well cost more than copies of NetWare for your server(s). I'll believe free DOS client software for NT/WinWkg when I see it. #: 11299 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 04:45:35 Sb: #10697-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Gee ben MS have got to be able to buy these porsche 959's for Bill to drive around in your 55mph limits so they've got to make some profit - don;t be too hard on them.... #: 11300 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 04:45:39 Sb: #10736-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: phil hystad 73260,114 >It is blazingly fast, the overall design of today's capability is 400 MHz >with dual instruction issue (read as 800 MIPS) and these 400 MHz machines >should be out in great number by the end of 93 or beginnning of 94. Today's >chip is 100, 150, and 200 MHz. Don't work for DEC do you? That looks a little like some kind of eulogy! Still, Phil, the DEC alpha has one big thing going against it. We're part of the Fujitsu group, the worlds no. 2 IT company. Dec's number three and we don't want them going past us again!!! #: 11442 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 21:46:54 Sb: #11300-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: phil hystad 73260,114 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 Andy... >>>...don't work for DEC do you... Funny you should say that. No, I don't work for DEC and others at work think that I am too negative on DEC. However, I do appreciate good technology, and despite the fact that DEC is not an Intel or Fujitsu, or whatever, they have come out with some very good products...the best so far have been the PDP-11 and the VAX. I believe that, unless DEC makes some fatal business or marketing mistake, that the Alpha will truely take off. Those that we have inhouse have been everything that DEC has claimed they would be. By the way, DEC can easily make some blunder that will hinder the success and acceptance of Alpha. They have done it many times in the past, though they create some nice technology, they are often dodo-like in the marketplace. Also, I should note, I doubt that the Alpha will upset the Intel market too much, but you will see low-cost (under $5000) desktop systems running the Alpha chip and DEC has even promised a Laptop running Alpha. For a little bit more money on the desk top you can get an Alpha with a FutureBus-Plus backplane. There is 1 Reply. #: 11455 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 23:19:27 Sb: #11442-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 To: phil hystad 73260,114 PMI but.... By the way, DEC can easily make some blunder that will hinder the success and acceptance of Alpha. They have done it many times in the past, though they create some nice technology, they are often dodo-like in the marketplace.<< We have had 13 450st on order for over two months and first they were ordered with 850 SCSI drives then they say "We dont have any 850M drives" now the order is pushed back three more weeks. Thats screwing up if ya ask me! but nobody did so..... #: 11311 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:43:27 Sb: #10783-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 Tom, if MSFT are busily integrating Networking into NT and WFW, and rumoured to be DOS6 (or was it 7?) so that when you buy an MS OS you get networking, how will Novell survive? One answer is to go out with a better DOS than DOS and ship DR DOS with Novell. Looks to me like MSFT are after Novell's market so Novell are going for MSFT's OS market. Fair enough? #: 11582 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 19:06:46 Sb: #11311-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 Yes, it's interesting that MSFT will use W4W to move into desktop networking for small to medium size companies. That's something they didn't pull off with LAN Man. In the mean time, Novell is targeting enterprise networking and the integration of many OSs on one platform. "Platform" is the key word here. Novell is selling more than just a file server OS. They have multiprotocol routers, UnixWare, and other modules that attach to NetWare or runtime NetWare. They want people to view the NetWare LAN as a plug-and-play device for the computing resources of an entire company. NT will probably provide the same, but at a later time. Someone else here mentioned that NT had the best TCP/IP implementation he had seen. I haven't checked into this yet. Timing and marketing is everything right now. If NT is delayed too long, it will have trouble keeping up, but there is momentum from MSFT money and vendors who developed Windows applications. Tom #: 11792 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 11:37:57 Sb: #11582-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 An aside: Am I the only one bothered by the fact that "W4W" translates to both "Windows for Workgroups" and "Word for Windows"? Can't MS even keep it's acronyms straight? There are 3 Replies. #: 11797 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 12:53:52 Sb: #11792-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: PhilD 71650,2154 To: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 (X) Well, if the acronyms weren't vague now and then, what would happen to Man's Quest for Uncertainty? #: 11823 S2/General Discussion 08-Oct-92 17:30:16 Sb: #11792-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 (X) Actually the acronym used at MS for Windows for Workgroups is WfW, not W4W. We love to create acronyms so we always make them unique -Dwight (MS) #: 11863 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 06:54:54 Sb: #11792-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich 72611,1452 To: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 (X) Paul, Too late, I complained about it last week ;-> I am using WFWG for Windows for WorkGroups (I would also grok W4WG, but I don't like typing it because it involves comples use of the shift key). John There is 1 Reply. #: 11866 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 06:59:34 Sb: #11863-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Bradshaw 70003,5145 To: John Oellrich 72611,1452 You're right... WFWG is much better. Looks distinctively different than WfW, and scans completely different. And of course, groks completely different. You should be put in charge of the Microsoft Acronym Development Department! :-) #: 11315 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:43:45 Sb: #10801-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Guess we'd better wait and see what happens! #: 11316 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:43:54 Sb: #10736-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: phil hystad 73260,114 Yeah now I think of it a bit more, Intel have an advantage (as do Motorola, and and Zilog, And MIPS) over DEC in that DEC is definitely a computer manufacturer wherease the others are basically not heavily involved in this end of the business. SO when Intel build a new chip it goes to everyone (I know, expec. IBM who own 10%) whereas with DEC they are sure to have some bias towards their own lines. You can just see it can you? The Alpha becomes a raging success and all new windows machines are using Alphas. There's a six month backlog of orders for processors. Dec chip foundry get an order from us (or IBM, or Dell, or Compaq - it doesn't much matter who) and one from their own computer manufacturing plant. Guess whose orders get filled first? We as IHVs have to be a little careful here! #: 11443 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 21:47:07 Sb: #11316-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: phil hystad 73260,114 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 Andy... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah now I think of it a bit more, Intel have an advantage (as do Motorola, and and Zilog, And MIPS) over DEC in that DEC is definitely a computer manufacturer wherease the others are basically not heavily involved in this end of the business. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< I give up, why do I care who wins the computer chip games. I build software for all of them (on VMS, OSF/1, and eventually NT). I do like the Alpha chip. If you study the Intel architecture, you get sick. If you study the other risc machines you feel a little bit better. But, take a close look at the Alpha, you will start agreeing that they did things right in many areas. They do put a challenge to compiler writers though, the Alpha has so many areas where optimization can be super enhanced or compromised that compilers will be particularly more difficult. DEC has built a great compiler backend called GEM. If you want to build a compiler for Alpha, all you need to do is build the front end, the backend is already done...as a former compiler writer myself, I really like this. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SO when Intel build a new chip it goes to everyone (I know, expec. IBM who own 10%) whereas with DEC they are sure to have some bias towards their own lines. You can just see it can you? The Alpha becomes a raging success and all new windows machines are using Alphas. There's a six month backlog of orders for processors. Dec chip foundry get an order from us (or IBM, or Dell, or Compaq - it doesn't much matter who) and one from their own computer manufacturing plant. Guess whose orders get filled first? We as IHVs have to be a little careful here! <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< If the Alpha takes off and DEC screws up by providing a bottleneck in manufacturing then DEC screws up...they've done it before. But, Intel does the same, they do not graciously grant manufacturing rights to others, often it is taken from them (AMD, Cypress). DEC has licensed the chip to several others but so far, as far as I know, they have not sourced it out to others...I believe they should if they want to make more money. #: 11444 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 21:47:19 Sb: #11316-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: phil hystad 73260,114 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 Andy...(some follow up) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah now I think of it a bit more, Intel have an advantage (as do Motorola, and and Zilog, And MIPS) over DEC in that DEC is definitely a computer manufacturer wherease the others are basically not heavily involved in this end of the business. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< MIPS! How could you include MIPS with the others in your list. MIPS is basically a software house, most of their employees, at one time, were programmers. They never manufactured their own MIPS chip, it was always done by some outside fab house, one of them in the Portland, Oregon area, there are others. MIPS wrote a lot of the software that they sold to other computer vendors who used their chips, they had their own version of UNIX and they specialized in compilers: C, FORTRAN, PASCAL, for their MIPS chip. MIPS did get into the systems business with a workstation and server line but it never really went anywhere. Oh how I wish they would have taken off with that end of the business, You see, I bought lots of stock at the first IPO on MIPS, though I sold most when it bounced back to $22/share a while back, I lost some as well. But, even at $22 a share, I would have been better off putting my money in a interest paying checking account. The MIPS chip though is nice...of the risc chips, I like the Alpha best, but I put MIPS right in there at second place. #: 11317 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:44:00 Sb: #10820-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Paul Cassel 71250,563 NT is at a temporary diadvantage because OS/2 is out and NT isn't. At least not for real apps - too slow as yet, and not likely to be well supported. however I think NT does some things better. It's also got some new facilities - such as SMP, and portability. OS/2 3.0 should have these, but it's not out yet. SO if NT hits the streets in final before OS/2 3.0 that puts MS ahead again. I think NT will make it long term but I won't swear to it. Oh well tomorrow I go on an OS/2 support course (covers head to protect from half-bricks) ....... There is 1 Reply. #: 11336 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 09:41:45 Sb: #11317-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 Andy >covers head to protect from half-bricks Don't think you have to worry. I know of one CIS forum that thinks this is a bit rowdy, but I have to say that I have been involved in OS/2 v. (UNIX NT Window, NeXT etc.) on CIS and ZNT for about a million years (well it seem that long) and on various sides too and this group and discussion has had BY FAR the lowest dis-information, mis-information and the most reasonable discussion with attempts to see what assumptions each of us are making that cause us to come to differenct conclusions EVER. I would like to congratulate just about every one involved. --Ben #: 11883 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:11:19 Sb: #11317-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 (X) NT will hold an edge even if OS/2 3 shipped at teh same time. It's app portablity. You can move from Win to Win32 or NT in a flash. OS/2's of any flavors takes a ground up write. As to my record of predictablity - I thought NeXT was the computer we'd all be using by '92. . Paul #: 11318 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 06:44:08 Sb: #10956-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: William F. Zachmann 76004,3657 (X) Will, over here there were three video tape formats - Phillips Video 2000, Beta, and VHS. Video 2000 had no pre-recorded material, Beta had a little, and VHS a lot. 2000 was 3rd out, Beta 2nd and VHS first. Because of the film libraries lots of people bought VHS systems and the other 2 got locked out - never achieved critical mass. Beta nearly made it, 2000 is dead as dead, and went quickly. Now there's Super VHS which offers passable picture quality - better than PAL broadcast, and knocks spots off Never Twice Same Color - but it's got VHS read/write compatibility. Now the OS guys have learned from this. No DOS & Windows support? No chance. So they've both got it. OS/2 has got slagged for no Seamless Windows, and NT is getting slagged for lateness. Both get slagged for resource hungriness. Which will it be? what will the OS of 1999 be? Really depends on the Apps. guys. So OS/2 may well be ahead of NT at present - as it ships, there's no real argument about this - BUT what matters is the critical mass of Apps. You need a 1-2-3 or a Visicalc on ONE environment only - which is unlikely, nothing is that important anymore - or a mass of apps. primarily on one system to cause the change. The guys in this forum have some of the choice in this, as they are mostly (unlike you and me) apps developers. Enough of them go NT, and NT it is. Enough go OS/2, and OS/2 it is. An even balance and we may get to choose on merits of the systems! My only advice to these guys is - before tying your flag to a mast, be sure it's the right ship or you'll sink with it. (hey looks like I agree with you!) Andy. There is 1 Reply. #: 11337 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 09:41:49 Sb: #11318-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Andy Champ 100064,2267 Andy Beta was first out here was it later there? --Ben #: 11424 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 19:51:22 Sb: #11337-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Graham Welland 70023,1267 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) Beta was out first in the UK too. I think that what tipped the balance was the support of all of the Japanese manufacturers other than Sony & one other I believe. Graham There is 1 Reply. #: 11459 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 01:13:05 Sb: #11424-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Graham Welland 70023,1267 (X) Graham >I think that what tipped the balance was the support of all of the >Japanese manufacturers other than Sony & one other As I remember it RCA(really)/ JVC and Mitsubisia STARTED the VHS project because Sony (who invented Beta and held the patents) refused to license most of them (or kept the license costs too high). I think the same thing will happen with NT and OS/2 in the multi-platforem market (it has already happened to IBM with MCA you may have noticed) and the one that ends up on the most platforms will be the one with the best source code license (they will both have to beat UNIX here) --Ben #: 11615 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 00:32:25 Sb: #11424-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 To: Graham Welland 70023,1267 ISTR that one of the major influences in the UK was that the video tape rental shops refused to doublestock and voted with their feet towards the just-leading VHS. Jon #: 11718 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 17:39:41 Sb: #11615-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Graham Welland 70023,1267 To: Jonathan Honeyball 100031,2732 >> ISTR that one of the major influences in the UK was that the video tape rental shops refused to doublestock and voted with their feet towards the just-leading VHS.<< Once VHS became most popular, this factor hastened the abandonment of VHS. Yet another case of the best technology not becoming the market leader. (Windows vs OS/2????) Graham #: 11346 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 12:33:13 Sb: #10315-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) Sure is great to be a martyr! Funny thing, Dan P. accuses me of checking his spelling & syntax while Will accusses me of not spelling properly. This I find really amusing! Oh, well! On to better and more germaine issues! Hey Bob whats this? This does not put me on the same plane as that baby does it? I look forward to your correctness! Willy will bash you for spelling when he has nothing else bad or condecending <--- spelling? help me out bob! to say. Dan There is 1 Reply. #: 11349 S2/General Discussion 05-Oct-92 12:56:47 Sb: #11346-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 (X) Dan: trust me, no comparisons intended nor implied. bg> bob #: 11552 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 14:37:46 Sb: #11539-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 (X) Tom, There is actually two UnixWares. One is optimized as a client OS on a Netware network, the other as an application server on said same netowrk. John There is 1 Reply. #: 11583 S2/General Discussion 06-Oct-92 19:08:21 Sb: #11552-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 To: John Oellrich [AT&T] 72611,1452 (X) Right you are about client and server versions of UnixWare. One requires 8MB minimum and the other 12Mb minimum. Tom #: 11617 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 01:38:18 Sb: More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Ben Sano 72401,2736 To: Mercer Harz 70431,150 Mercer Sorry Sheryl tells me that 'Brief' is part of the spreadsheet group (go figure). --Ben #: 11728 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 18:41:12 Sb: #11617-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Mercer Harz 70431,150 To: Ben Sano 72401,2736 (X) I'd go into immediate sensory overload and burnout trying to figure that one out! I'll just let it drop. Must make sense to someone. #: 11638 S2/General Discussion 07-Oct-92 07:56:56 Sb: #10851-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Dean Schuh 76424,2455 To: Scott Edgar[COL Systems] 70053,105 No problem, my mistake. I should've re-read my message before sending it...it does sound like I've got the 'NT or BUST' blinders on. I find it interesting that I've got departments in my organization that are already talking about moving applications to NT...and none have even seen it yet. Talk about a good brainwashing..er marketing job my Mr. Gates. #: 11845 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 03:07:35 Sb: #10696-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Tom A. Hodges 70550,2540 To: Scott Edgar[COL Systems] 70053,105 (X) I'm not a regular on this forum, nor have I ever even seen NT, but I am a product evaluator for a large company, and I can tell you this: -Lotus current 123G for OS/2 is far behind Excel in features/functionality/stability. -Lotus cc:Mail OS/2 client is a LOUSY character-based version, where their Windows version is EXCELLENT. -WordPerfect OS/2 version is character based, and far behind their Windows version (version 6) in features/functionality. -Lotus is putting their REAL bucks into products that are now ONLY available in Windows environment. -Borland seems to be putting it's serious bucks into Windows products, not in OS/2. While these companies pay great lip service to IBM, and OS/2 (probably to keep IBM from getting upset - everyone seems to want the 64Billion dollar cash cow on their team), their bean counters, and Boards of Directors tell them to put their serious bucks where the REAL market is..... It seems to me that that market is WINDOWS. Pick up a copy of Computer Shopper, PC Magazine, PC World, etc. How many companies are pre-loading Windows on their Systems? How many are pre-loading OS/2? The USERS (who incidently make the FINAL decisions) are getting VERY used to the Windows interface very fast. Most of them run it on their machines at home. They Aren't going to want to change to something that looks and feels as different as OS/2. There is 1 Reply. #: 11868 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 07:36:47 Sb: #11845-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Chuck Ebbert 76306,1226 To: Tom A. Hodges 70550,2540 Tom, cc:Mail will have an OS/2 WPS-compatible client very soon. The lead developer is quite active in the OS2DF1 forum. And Lotus has announced that they are porting their SmartSuite to OS/2 (Ami Pro included!). Where do you get the idea that their products will ONLY be available in Windows versions????? From Microsoft? And if everyone is using the Windows interface, why did IBM just expand to *four* forums here? #: 11884 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:13:36 Sb: #11539-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 Yah, in truth, and keeping in mind that I'm sorta slanted against Novell, I gotta say that what they say in their marketing hype and what we find when we really gotta use their stuff diverges significantly. So Novell might make nice sounds, but I'll await field experience before saying they have a good product. But I also feel Novell is a compnay that will remain a computing force for a loooooooooooong time. Paul #: 11886 S2/General Discussion 09-Oct-92 08:15:02 Sb: #11540-More bilge from Willy F. Fm: Paul Cassel 71250,563 To: Tom Sheldon 75470,3702 I don't have inside knowledge, but do know MS isn't staffed with either arrogant types or idiots so support for TCP and IPX will, IMHO, be there and working well in V1. Paul #: 11053 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 14:37:50 Sb: #10974-MS ser mouse Fm: Jeff Imber 70732,2205 To: Paul J. Levesque 72621,3477 (X) Paul, My video card has no mouse but... I pulled the bus mouse card and ..PRESTO serial mouse!!! (why didn't I do that before !) One other question - NT says the EISA memory configuration is incorrect and defaults to an ISA config. I can't find any reference to memory configuration in my EISA setup .Any Ideas???? Thanks again for your help Jeff #: 11064 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 15:44:16 Sb: #10688-NT killed UNIX partition Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: john f flanagan 71271,2277 John, Thank you for the report. I'll make sure to forward it to our development team. In the mean time, could you please post a detailed list of your current hardware configuration (motherboard, hard drive controller, display, other controllers, etc ...) Thank you. Sam Karroum [MS] #: 11074 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:14:49 Sb: #10705-NT with WD8003E/A Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: john f flanagan 71271,2277 John, The WD8003EA should work with the updated WDLAN driver. A part of the WDLAN.TXT directions may have been unclear, however. The first set of modifications should be made under "wdlan01->parameters", and not under "wdlan01". Let me know if that wasn't the problem, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11075 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:14:55 Sb: #10780-Windows NT Problem Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Tony Hansen 76570,2763 (X) Tony, If your hard drive controller is not on our hardware compatibility list, that may explain the problem. Note that the default interrupt for the Sound Blaster is IRQ7 which may be in conflict with your lpt1 port. If you had, indeed removed everything but the hard drive controller, of course, this would not be the only issue. We do expect the beta to do a better job of hardware support, exactly how much, of course, remains to be seen. Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11083 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:52:03 Sb: Loading Drivers Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Chris Stuber (US Census) 76244,3321 Chris, For this release, many changes can only be made in the system registry. Support for the Sound Blaster, for example, should be automatically enabled, though the defaults expected by Windows NT may not be appropriate for your system. To modify settings for this board, you would run "regedit" and look under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE->SYSTEM->CurrentControlSet->Services->Sndblst. At this level, the "Start" value determines whether the driver is enabled. 0x1 means the driver loads automatically. 0x4 means the driver does not load. If IRQ, Port, or DMA settings need to be changed, look one level lower to the Device key. If you are looking for some other supported board, simply use the above information as a general guideline. I hope this helps, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11209 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 05:09:55 Sb: #10927-Trap 6 error on install Fm: Neil Rosenberg 75300,3553 To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 Here's the scoop... 1. I did get NT loaded finally, had to abandon the internal SCSI hard disk. Even if it's a supported SCSI controller, the only SCSI devices allowed (it seems) are CDROMS. 2. FYI the FD860 is really an 850 in disguise. The only difference is that it has system-level power supply lines to provide DC power to a connected drive. Logically, and ROM-wise it's identical to an 850. This was a difficult, time-consuming task. Expensive too, considering all of the hardware I had to buy-test-reject before I finally got something to work. Q: Is this true: NT will not let you install to a bootable SCSI drive? Thanks. There are 2 Replies. #: 11214 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 08:53:48 Sb: #11209-Trap 6 error on install Fm: Tom Bragg 71101,3060 To: Neil Rosenberg 75300,3553 Neil, >> is this true, that NT won't let you install to a bootable SCSI No. I (among others, I'm sure) installed it to one. In fact, I have SCSI tape (Archive 150), disk (Maxtor 8760S), and CD ROM (CD Tech Toshiba Porta-drive). The controller is Adaptec 1542. FWIW. -Tom. #: 11244 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 11:07:56 Sb: #11209-Trap 6 error on install Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Neil Rosenberg 75300,3553 Neil: Don't understand your message. I have 2 SCSI drives on an Adaptec 1542b and NT recognizes both of them. Numerous folks here have put NT on a bootable SCSI drive. bob #: 11101 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 19:25:11 Sb: Win NT / mouse Fm: - Visitor 71175,2632 To: Tech support I have entered the seriously frustrated zone with the installation process for Windows NT. I think I am going to do my Jimi Hendrix with the thing, take it into the yard, douse it with lighter fluid and set it on fire. It would sure feel great! I have had the preliminary release of NT for the past month and have not been able to get the mouse to work. I have asked for assistance three times and every time I was told the mouse was at fault ( my mouse was not a microsoft mouse but was claimed 100% compatibility ). I just bought a Microsoft serial mouse and it doesn't work either, just what I needed a third mouse! I have to use the dos2nt batch file, my CD-ROM isn't SCSI and dos2nt doesn't install the mouse driver properly. How can I get the thing to recognize my mouse. Using Windows without a mouse is like eating with one chopstick. I would like to get some technical support, I need to know how the installation process works with NT and how to force the mouse driver to be loaded, quickly if possible. I have wasted over one months worth of development time. Greg Smith There is 1 Reply. #: 11207 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 03:45:15 Sb: #11101-Win NT / mouse Fm: paul mariotti 100064,3331 To: - Visitor 71175,2632 (X) Is your mouse on COM1? I had my (fully) Microsoft mouse on COM2 when I tried to install NT and it did not work. A week later, having tried the lighter fluid bit, I removed my COM3/COM4 IO card, moved the mouse to COM1 and now everything works fine Paul Mariotti There is 1 Reply. #: 11272 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 19:47:08 Sb: #11207-Win NT / mouse Fm: Greg Smith 71175,2632 To: paul mariotti 100064,3331 I finally got the mouse to work and am impressed with Win NT so far. The problem was my bus mouse was left in the bus and NT didn't ignore it when I told it explicitly to ignore the bus mouse and use the mouse on the serial port. I got my Genius mouse to work so I didn't need the Microsoft mouse after all. Thanks to everyone, I appreciate the help Greg #: 11026 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 10:45:00 Sb: #10990-WIN NT Install Problem Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) Moe would say "I'll mordalize ya!" -a. There is 1 Reply. #: 11097 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 18:46:35 Sb: #11026-WIN NT Install Problem Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X) RE: And be proud saying it to boot no doubt. . bob #: 11116 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 20:52:26 Sb: #10915-WIN NT Install Problem Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X) I think it may be the male version of PMS. Darren #: 11286 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 22:36:16 Sb: #10915-WIN NT Install Problem Fm: Darren K. Pearson 71127,2403 To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X) I think it may be the male version of PMS. Darren #: 11050 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 13:33:14 Sb: NT partitions Fm: Paul Dougherty 72750,3452 To: all Where can NT live on disk? I have an "extended DOS partition" that itself is broken into several drives (D,E,F). Can NT be installed in E, a sub-drive in the extended partition, or must NT live on an entire partition of its own? Thanks. ---- Paul There is 1 Reply. #: 11295 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 04:10:53 Sb: #11050-NT partitions Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Paul Dougherty 72750,3452 Paul, <> Nt can be installed on any partition. You should have at least 100 Mb free on the partition you want to install the PDK on however. By default NT will install itself into a subdirectory called WINNT. You could`change this if you wanted, but it might make support for your configuration a bit more difficult. Being non-standard, etc. Art #: 11103 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 19:30:49 Sb: #10928-Win NT Install/ mouse Fm: - Visitor 71175,2632 To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X) I have just bought my third mouse, this one is a Microsoft serial mouse and it didn't work either. I did a complete reformat and install with the mouse on Com 1 ( Irq 4, the only Irq 4 on the bus ) and surprise, it did not work. My bus mouse is on Irq 5, there are no other Irq 5 devices and the mouse works fine under OS/2 and windows. An Irq bus war would jam it under those systems, it works fine. I have reverified all the hardware. I have a CD-ROM on Irq 2, nothing on Irq 3, Com 1 on Irq 4 the bus mouse on Irq 5, the LPT1 on Irq 7. No luck so far. Greg Smith There is 1 Reply. #: 11137 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 07:59:25 Sb: #11103-Win NT Install/ mouse Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: - Visitor 71175,2632 (X) Greg: As a follow up to my previous reply, what happens if you disable the mouse mouse (throw the old jumper so to speak)? NT is very finicky about its environment. Things that we took for granted are no longer valid to NT. With the improved security, there has to be increased precision in system definition (believe me I have learned the hard way ). bob There is 1 Reply. #: 11156 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 11:08:48 Sb: #11137-Win NT Install/ mouse Fm: Greg Smith 71175,2632 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) I'm not sure I understand your question but if I remove the mouse completely there still is a mouse pointer displayed. If I go into the control panel the thing tells me there is no mouse device installed and to use the setup program. The setup program merrily sets up a mouse but nothing happens when the mouse is re-installed and the system power cycled. I can't see that a mouse can be much of a security threat, in the worst case nothing happens or else the mouse jumps around the screen strangely. They will have to get rid of the dependancy on microsoft compatibility, I was really ticked when I had to buy the Microsoft mouse and it not working added insult to pocket book injury. Any suggestions would be appreciated. I am convinced the mouse driver isn't being installed properly and that there is nothing wrong with my hardware. Greg There is 1 Reply. #: 11162 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 13:05:56 Sb: #11156-Win NT Install/ mouse Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Greg Smith 71175,2632 (X) Greg: When I suggested removing the mouse, I was referring to the bus mouse. NT works best with MS serial mouse. I am certain that the beta release will support more mice than MS. As to security, it has to be everywhere hence, all hardware becomes significant. bob #: 11353 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:07:16 Sb: #11103-Win NT Install/ mouse Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: - Visitor 71175,2632 greg, I almost sure the presence of the bus mouse is the source of trouble. Windows NT, actually the same algorithm applies to Windows too, queries the presence of a mouse in the following order: bus, com1, com2. As you can see, if there is a bus mouse in the machine, Windows NT will find that one first (whether a mouse is connected or not), and thus terminate the search for a mouse. try the following, if possible, remove the bus card from the machine and see whether Windows NT can find the serial mouse. Hope this helps. Sam Karroum [MS] #: 11110 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 20:48:38 Sb: #10982-NT Fm: - Visitor 76620,3675 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) I thought that DOS2NT helped bypass the problem with non-supported hardware? Did that just get around non-supported CD-ROM drives? Thanks, Jason There is 1 Reply. #: 11186 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 17:16:20 Sb: #11110-NT Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: - Visitor 76620,3675 (X) Jason, <> Yep. that's all DOS2NT does. It's a means of installing NT from a CD-ROM drive over a DOS compatible network, or DOS itself. You still need to have a supported disk controller, video, motherboard, etc. if you want to be able to boot and use NT. Your best bet is to check the hardware compatability list that was shipped with the CD, or download the latest version from lib 1. Maybe you can replace your unsupported controller with one from the list. Art #: 11354 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:09:10 Sb: #11110-NT Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: - Visitor 76620,3675 The DOS2NT proceedure is used to bypass the need for [the setup portion of] Windows NT to be able to recognize your CD-ROM drive and/or drive controller. However, if setup has problems, odds are very good that the rest of Windows NT will have problems. If the drive controller is the problem and also controls your hard drive, then odds are very good that this release of Windows NT will not work on your hardware regardless of the installation meathod. Regards, -- Terence Hosken #: 11369 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:56:45 Sb: #10654-Waiting... Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Peter Dennett 76470,540 Peter, What is the error that you are getting when trying to install. What is the SCSI adapter card you are using as well as the Network card, machine, HD's and CD player. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11371 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:56:57 Sb: #10425-NCR 3450 w/NT Fm: na 71075,3225 To: - Visitor 70720,602 It almost sounds like there is a video problem. What type of video is in this machine. Do you have an external video board. Let me know, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11372 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:57:02 Sb: NT Hangs w/ No Error Msg Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Dan Brownlee 72461,1321 Dan, What SCSI adapter card are you using? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11373 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:57:11 Sb: NT Installation crashing Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Doug Byrd 71043,725 Doug, What SCSI card are you using? What NIC card are you using? Is there any other card in the system? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11374 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:57:18 Sb: CopySource HD / CD Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Guenther Banholzer 100031,2473 Guenther, This setup proceedure is unsupported by MS. DOS2NT is the supported installation method. I remember another tread of this type from BoB Chanon 72727,2177. You may want to contact him. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11375 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:57:25 Sb: Can't copy ntdetect.com Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Joe DeWitte 73667,325 Joe, It sounds like the 845 driver masks the problem to a certain extent, but not completly (ie.TMC 860)??? Have you tried installing on a drive other than the 1.3GB (maybe something smaller)? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11377 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:57:41 Sb: MoreHELP: THE_DEC_GUY Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Tom Reynolds 72320,2243 Tom, How much memory is in this machine? What is the hardware configuration with IRQ and IO addresses (shared memory addresses if there are any)? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11380 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:58:09 Sb: WinNT install prob Fm: na 71075,3225 To: - Visitor 76424,3161 What SCSI card is in the PS2? Is it on the HCL? If not, we have found the problem. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11381 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:58:15 Sb: Windows NT installation Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Sean Leary 76366,3640 Sean, There has been a few threads about how to get flexboot and multiboot to work together. However, none are supported by MS today. Try putting NTOSKRNL.exe on the boot partition and see if it is recognized. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11378 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:57:48 Sb: WD1009 ESDI Controller Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Louis Bouchard 72301,3565 Louis, How many cylndrs are on the HD. If it is above 1024 we have found the problem. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11389 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:01:02 Sb: #11378-WD1009 ESDI Controller Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, How 'bout if there are > 1024 physical cylinders, but the ESDI controller is doing a translation, so that it tells the system there are < 1024 cylinders? Does this make any difference? Thanks, -a. #: 11391 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:19:27 Sb: NT on Epson 386/25+ Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: Kent Olsen 72360,3035 (X) Kent, What else is in the machine (peripherals, I/O cards, etc...) and their settings? It seems like there is an IRQ or a memory conflict somewhere. Sam Karroum [MS] #: 11392 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:19:35 Sb: Mouse install Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: Mark Vlach 70044,2733 Mark, In the Preliminary release of Windows NT, only mice that are 100% compatible with Microsoft mouse are supported. However, before blaming it all on the mouse, try looking for the following: 1. IRQ conflict between the mouse and some other IRQ driven hardware. 2. Is there a bus-mouse card in the machine? If one exists, make sure to remove the card if you're using a serial mouse. 3. If COM2 is available try using it. Hope this helps. Sam Karroum [MS] #: 11087 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 18:00:18 Sb: Addition. Device Drivers Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 To: Darrell McCombs 70404,3722 Oops! I'm not the one to ask about when the next release is due to ship. I sure would like to know that myself, though! #: 11393 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:21:26 Sb: Addition. Device Drivers Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Darrell McCombs 70404,3722 Darrell, The second release of the SDK will be ready before the end of October and will be sent directly to all registered owners of the first release. (We've just mailed a letter to all registered owners for address confirmation. If you don't receive the letter in the next two weeks, please call the Microsoft Developer Services Team at 800-227-4679.) There is further related information in library 1 in the file: beta.txt. Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11061 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 15:39:33 Sb: #10978-Loading NT Fm: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Hi Art, me again. I phoned ATI this week (local call :->) and was told that there would be an upgrade program for owner of the old card. Also the new card is not even shipping yet. (next few weeks). Since you have a Vantage (ultra - VRAM) you should qualify for the upgrade program as well. Speak to you later Issie There is 1 Reply. #: 11078 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:15:44 Sb: #11061-Loading NT Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344 (X) Issie, <> That's really good to hear. Please let me know (if/when you find out) when the upgrade is available. I'll be waiting eargerly. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11144 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 08:44:54 Sb: #11078-Loading NT Fm: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art, I was told the upgrades would not start until the end of November or early December. I'll let you know if I hear anything Issie #: 11395 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:24:44 Sb: Loading NT Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Steve Cramp - C/Systems 70471,137 Steve, Sorry for the late response. I have been out for quite awhile. Start Values are used to determine what gets loaded when. For example start values of 00 get loaded first (NTLDR) and start values of 01 are loaded after the memory check, and start values of 02 are loaded with the Windows sub system, and start values of 03 are services that can be loaded by the user. And start values of 04 are not loaded at all... Hope this help. Note this is as of the PDC release and not set in stone. Do not change these values. Regards, Scott Suhy[MS] #: 11396 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:24:58 Sb: Fatal error 0x0000006b Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Duffy Mazan 72177,3652 Duffy, The PS/2 90 is on the list, however I am not sure if the SCSI adapter that is in the machine is on the list. The 6b error (phase 1 process initialization failed) will occur if the Hardware is not recognized or there is a conflict--depending on the adapter. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11121 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 23:04:02 Sb: Security Init. Failure Fm: Bill Tierney 70741,3041 To: ALL Well, apparently the "Attempt to acquire low level mutix" error was a fluke. My installation is now failing, quite regularly, before I even get to that part. The message I now get appears immediately after I enter my user name and password (and password verification). The message is in the form of a dialog box stating: -------------------------------------------------------- | Non Critical Error | | | | An error has occurred. | | | | External library procedure SetAccountDomainSid | | reported the following error: | | | | Error opening Local Security Policy | |-------------------------------------------------------| | Ignore Retry Cancel | |-------------------------------------------------------| The Retry option just return the same error, the Ignore option produces the following message: -------------------------------------------------------- | Setup failed to initialize security on your computer.| | Cannot proceed with install! | -------------------------------------------------------- My machine is a Northgate 386-33 (8meg, I know), an Adaptec 1542b SCSI host adapter (200mb Maxtor SCSI hd), and Toshiba TXM-3301 CD-ROM. Bill Tierney #: 11352 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:07:08 Sb: #11121-Security Init. Failure Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: Bill Tierney 70741,3041 (X) Bill, Defining a user at SETUP time is a convenient, but not a required step. Try the following scenarios to see if that resolves the problem. 1. Enter a user name but _nothing_ else. You can always log later and define a password. 2. Don't create a user during SETUP. In other words, leave all fields blank. You can log on as "administrator" later and create a user account. Please let me know how this one goes. Sam Karroum [MS} There is 1 Reply. #: 11404 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 17:57:01 Sb: #11352-Security Init. Failure Fm: Bill Tierney 70741,3041 To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X) Acutally, I was able to bypass the security initialization failure as you mentioned. I am now faced with the following problem. Everything goes great right up until NT is about to create the Groups, and I get the following message: *** FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: 0x00000000D *** Attempt to acquire lower level mutix. I have posted this as a seperate message prior to this reply. Bill Tierney #: 11163 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 13:27:27 Sb: #10879-setup problem Fm: tom lesniewski 73276,41 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) I have tried to logon on as "administrator" as well as my user name I set up I did not modify registry.ini "initial command" section. my machine is a AST Premium II 386/33 with 12 Meg of memory I have tried a reinstall but still NO JOY. Any help would be appreciated #: 11407 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 18:18:06 Sb: #11163-setup problem Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: tom lesniewski 73276,41 (X) Tom, I have seen this happen before. Unfortunately, I have not been able to duplicate the problem... a reinstallation has always fixed things up. The only things I can think of right now are: 1. You may be changing something in the registry.ini that you should not. 2. This may be a manifestation of some hardware incompatibility. (Your base machine is on our list, but you haven't mentioned details like drive controllers, or add-on boards that might cause some form of conflict.) If there is any more information you can provide, it may be helpful. Meanwhile, I'll continue to look into possible causes. Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11414 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:47:38 Sb: FD1800 driver anamoly Fm: na 71075,3225 To: - Visitor 76114,264 You need to copy the fd1800.sys file to the winnt\system\drivers directory on the HD after you do the DOS2NT batch file that copies all of the files to the HD. Regard, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11415 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:47:43 Sb: NT Setup Problem Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Daniel Appleman 70303,2252 Daniel, Send it to me (scott suhy) on this forum as a message. Thanks, Scott Suhy[MS] #: 11096 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 18:41:28 Sb: Mutix? Fm: Bill Tierney 70741,3041 To: ALL OK, here's the deal. My first attempt at installing NT resulted in the TRAP 0000000E Page Fault. This was resolved by following the instructions to "diskcopy" the 5 1/4 inch disk to the 3 1/2 (doing the CMOS stuff). The next attempt seem to go pretty well, to a point. While NT was copying all of the fonts, dlls, and everything else during the graphics setup (after I answered all the user and password questions) I received a STOP dialog box containing the following: |----------------------------------------------------------------------- | lsass.exe - Application Error | | The instruction at "0x00000000" referenced memory at "0x00000000".| | The memory could not be "read". | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| The strange thing was, while the dialog was displayed, the copying was still happening behind it. I click the ok button, and the copying continued. When it reached 100%, I got the following message: *** FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: 0x00000000d *** Attempt to acquire low level mutix. I have a northgate 386-33 with 8 meg memory (I know, more on the way), an Adaptec 1542b SCSI controller (200mb SCSI Maxtor HD, and a Toshiba TMX-3301 CD-ROM. Any ideas? Bill Tierney #: 11418 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:48:06 Sb: #11096-Mutix? Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Bill Tierney 70741,3041 Bill, This is very unusual. lsass is the local security authority subsystem. Let me know if additional memory solves your problem. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11095 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 18:22:15 Sb: NT Install Failure Fm: paul reiner 71411,113 To: sysop (X) I have an AST 486/33TE with an ADAPTEC 1740 controller / seagate 1.3 gig scsi drive. I also have a headland tech (v7) svga card and a nec scsi cdrom, and a scsi bernoulli. The NT boot disk boots ok and proceeds to recognize my adaptec controller and prompts me for express or custom, no matter what I choose, I get the error message, cannot recognize hard drive(s). Check cables... My drive is > 1024 cylinders and the controller is in "enhanced" mode. HELP!!!!. This is no idle plea for assistance. I can find no obvious reasons for failure and I refuse to believe that >1024 cyls arent supported. This topic is as old as the Windows OS/2 debate. Would some kind hearted, overworked, yet severely underpaid demi-god swoop down and provide DETAILED reasons for this insanity and provide a solution (please no more hacks... Ive already got OS/2 2) #: 11419 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:48:13 Sb: #11095-NT Install Failure Fm: na 71075,3225 To: paul reiner 71411,113 Paul, Try the controller in standard mode and see if you get anywhere. The 1024 limit goes as follows: Some controller cards get around this by implementing a translation scheme in the onboard controller BIOS. Windows NT (and other protected mode OS's) must duplicate the code found in these BIOS chips inorder to duplicate this behavior. Unfortunately, there are many ways of performing this translation and thus we must incorporate all of these schemes in our standard AT disk driver. As you have probably guessed by now, we have not included such support for all known translation schemes. Some controllers implement this translation in hardware thus it is totally transparent to the system allowing the standard driver will work unchanged. Consult your controller's documentation to see if such translation is performed by the BIOS or the hardware. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11009 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 09:46:34 Sb: DELL DGX Fm: David J. Plunkett 71163,2122 To: ALL I've got a DELL 486D/66, a 66Mhz 486 with a Super VGA card. I've installed the DELL 256 color windows display driver and setup tells me I'm using "DELL DGX 1280x1024, 256 colors". However, I don't believe I'm running in hi-rez mode, and windows still reports only 16 colors available. I've checked that the two files \winnt\system\drivers\dell_dgx.sys and \winnt\system\dell_dgx.dll exist. What's wrong? Thanks, dave #: 11420 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:48:25 Sb: #11009-DELL DGX Fm: na 71075,3225 To: David J. Plunkett 71163,2122 (X) David, This is what we know, boot from DOS and try to disable the drivers and see if you see a difference. For a Dell machine with the DELL DGX frame buffer, the board will be automatically detected. The drivers used for this device are \winnt\system\drivers\dell_dgx.sys and \winnt\system\dell_dgx.dll. To disable the dell_dgx driver directly from Windows NT or MS-DOS, rename dell_dgx.sys to dell_dgx.old. The standard VGA driver will then be used. Known Bugs: * When going to fullscreen and coming back, the mouse pointer is a big black "blob" until the pointer crosses over a window boundary (which cause windows to repaint the cursor). This is because the pointer is not reinitialized properly coming back from fullscreen. The cursor may also be a large white square instead of an underline cursor (for similar reasons). Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11390 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:18:20 Sb: Setup Toolkit for NT Fm: John Kercheval 70742,3147 To: All Will the NT version of the Setup Toolkit be ready for the SDK release due in October? What is the most direct route to discuss the setup toolkit with its development staff (not evangelists or marketing folks)? How extensively does the NT registration database differ from the Windows 3.1 for DOS registration database? Questions, questions... jbk There is 1 Reply. #: 11421 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:48:35 Sb: #11390-Setup Toolkit for NT Fm: na 71075,3225 To: John Kercheval 70742,3147 (X) John, Repost your question to MSWIN32. They will help you with development concerns. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11366 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:37:39 Sb: AHA-1510, ESDI, co-exist Fm: Lawrence T. Hardiman 74766,1304 To: all Before getting a CD-ROM, I wanted to be sure it would be compatible with WinNT. The NEC 84 drive is compatible with WinNT. That's the good news. The bad news is that I *think* I may have a problem with my base configuration. The machine is a generic 486/33 clone with an ESDI controller, Maxstor ESDI drive, 2 floppy, Colorado 120 tape, ... What I am told is that SCSI and ESDI do not mix; that one can't have an ESDI controller and a SCSI controller in the same box. But there is hope! I was also told that the Adaptec AHA-1510 SCSI controller is made specifically for mixed ESDI and SCSI environments; that it is intended specifically for the CD-ROM in an otherwise ESDI machine. The *real* bad news is that the AHA-1510 controller is not listed in the compatibility lists I have seen. What's the scoop, please. There is 1 Reply. #: 11422 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:48:42 Sb: #11366-AHA-1510, ESDI, co-exist Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Lawrence T. Hardiman 74766,1304 Lawrence, You are correct. The 1510 is not on the current list. It will not work with NT. Try one of the following: Adaptec: AHA-1540b AHA-1542b AHA-1640 AHA-1740 Future Domain: TMC-845 TMC-850, TMC-850M(ER) MCS-700 (7) TMC-1660 (8) TMC-1680 (9) TMC-7000EX IBM: IBM SCSI Host Adapter (10) Maynard: 16 Bit SCSI Adapter (11) NCR: NCR 53C700 I have not heard of a problem with SCSI and ESDI in the same box. I have one here in front of me and it is working fine. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11099 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 18:56:15 Sb: #10979-flexboot - DOS not valid Fm: David Hayden 70444,30 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) The bootsec.dos was bad. The dos2nt.bat file does some strange things with it, so I just deleleted the sec files and copied out part of dos2nt.bat to force the sectors, worked like a charm. I think it safest if you see the bat file go into debug twice. It didn't do that until I erased the saved sectors... Thanks for the reply anyway. There is 1 Reply. #: 11185 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 17:12:10 Sb: #11099-flexboot - DOS not valid Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: David Hayden 70444,30 David, Glad to hear that you worked things out. One thing to bear in mind if you need to reinstall NT again later. All of the NT files and directories should be deleted before reinstalling. This includes the WINNT, MSTOOLS, and the boot files (NTLDR, bootsec.dos, *.nt, etc). Art #: 11430 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 20:28:31 Sb: #11185-flexboot - DOS not valid Fm: David Hayden 70444,30 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) 'fraid I learned that the hard way. Thanks as always... #: 11370 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:56:52 Sb: 6B and 1E Errors Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Tom Gentry 76507,3033 (X) Tom, You are submitting a private message to the WINNT alias. I can help you if you desire, however you must make the message readable. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11468 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 05:22:13 Sb: #11370-6B and 1E Errors Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, I'm not sure what you mean by private. I'll retry. Thanks. Tom G. #: 11469 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 05:25:01 Sb: 6B and 1E Errors Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033 To: Jay Vernon 71075,640 (X) Jay, I'm back in the country now and I have written a narrative of my attempts to install WinNT on my AST 486/33 EISA Tower (and EISA non-Tower). It is fairly lengthy. If it is OK, I can fax it to you. If I need to send via the Forum let me know and I will cut it back a bit. Let me know the fax number if that's OK. Thanks for your help. Tom #: 11470 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 05:25:22 Sb: 6B and 1E Errors Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033 To: Jay Vernon 71075,640 (X) Jay, I'm back in the country now and I have written a narrative of my attempts to install WinNT on my AST 486/33 EISA Tower (and EISA non-Tower). It is fairly lengthy. If it is OK, I can fax it to you. If I need to send via the Forum let me know and I will cut it back a bit. Let me know the fax number if that's OK. Thanks for your help. Tom #: 11085 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:52:14 Sb: #10185-NT ESDI Install Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: derek wade 70604,3002 (X) Derek, No, Windows NT does not support your Ultrastore controller at this time, and yes, there is a problem with more than 1024 cylendars that are not being mapped [by a supported controller]. It appears to me that you won't be able to use your current configuration with the current release. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. The fact that the CD-ROM is not visible is not a problem unless you want to read additional files from the CD-ROM. In that event, the work-around (assuming everything else were working) would be to boot DOS to copy files. Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11386 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 14:51:05 Sb: #11085-NT ESDI Install Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) Terrence, Forgive my dumb fingers. My ESDI controller (WD1007V-SE2) is using the translate facility to tell the system it's _less than_ 1024 cylinders, not more than 1024. Please check with Tom Hazel, Todd Albertson, et al, as I've uploaded a 54 page MSD report and a 481K Registry.txt report so that the developers can figure out what's wrong with my system. So far, after 2 months (or more), nobody knows . -a. There is 1 Reply. #: 11475 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:20:44 Sb: #11386-NT ESDI Install Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 Alex, <.>> So how's the check for an I/O port conflict or overlap looking? Art #: 11387 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 14:53:02 Sb: #11085-NT ESDI Install Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) Terrence, BTW, it's not so much that NT does _not_ see my CD ROM, it shows up as a CD icon in NT's FileMan, and plays audio CDs in the NT CD Player, but even though FileMan sees and shows the CD, it cannot read data. All it does do is ask if I want to format the media in drive "F:" (the CD). Curious, no? -a. #: 11086 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:52:22 Sb: #10243-NT ESDI Install Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X) Alex, The CD-ROM and hard drives are not necessarily directly interrelated, no. However, if the same controller were being used for both, that would be a common denominator. Having an unsupported CD-ROM or controller for the CD-ROM will prevent you from doing the graphical install as well as from being able to access the CD-ROM after a DOS2NT setup. I didn't mean to imply that a separate problem with a separate hard drive controller would hinder access to a supported CD-ROM configuration. I hope that clarifies things a bit, -- Terence Hosken [MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11139 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 08:37:45 Sb: #11086-NT ESDI Install Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) Terence, It does clarify things ... a bit . But my ESDI HD controller and the HD are using a translation routine to tell the system it's > 1024 cylinders. Even Norton's Calibrate says so. That should eliminate the > 1224 cylinders (possible) problem, no? And the CD Tech Porta Drive with FD TM850 SCSI controller are, after all, not only supported, but tacitly recommended by MS, as per the coupons sent to all, both after doing the Win 3.1 and SDK/DDK betas, and with the CD for NT. So all conditions are met properly, and still no success. I know I am not the only one with this particular problem, and there are going to be more when the beta comes out later this month. I just wanted to solve it for me, MS, and the others who come after me. Todd Albertson and I worked together one Friday evening and got it working. Then, like a fool, I backed up the NT setup to tape, wiped it from my E: partition, and tried the Graphical install, since I then had NT "seeing" data on the CD. That didn't work. I felt confident that bringing NT back from tape would allow data reading, but that was not the case. It no longer worked. That baffled me even more, as it did Todd. Nobody seems to know what the problem is. But I did hope that sending the MSD report (54 pages) and the Registry text file (481K) up to you all would provide some insight. Ah well. Thanks anyway for your interest and help. I'll just have to wait and see. -a. #: 11217 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 09:19:25 Sb: Fail to logon Fm: Thomas Huetter 100015,3554 To: SYSOP (X) Hi, folks! I received the SDK CD about 2 weeks ago, installed the whole bundle, and everything seemed to work OK. Had to do the DOS2NT though, cause my CD-ROM drive is not the SCSI kind if thing. Today, however, I ran into the following problem: Booting up NT, I get to the logon screen, enter my user name and my password. The system then gives me the old hour-glass for about 20 seconds and comes up with a "Logon Message: Unable to log you on for some reason. Please consult your administrator." Same thing when trying to logon as administrator. Doing a CHKDSK /F on the drive where NT resides, it said: "D:\WINNT\SYSTEM\CONFIG\SECURITY.LOG Assignment error, corrected file size". (Freely translated from German) Still no go with the NT logon! The only thing I changed since yesterday was to install a QIC-80 streamer drive. But that was a DOS-only install, using the floppy connection, no software drivers, no change in any settings. I don't remember any system crashes that could have caused the file corruption. (Though this might have happened ). For the rest of my config: 486/33-clone with 16 Meg and AMI-BIOS, 200 Meg C: + 120 Meg D: (both IDE), both floppies, ET4000, Mitsumi CD-ROM with its own controller, the tape drive is a Colorado 120/250 Meg hooked onto the IDE-HD/FDController. Any hints or ideas would be really appreciated. Thanks! Thomas #: 11487 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:52:34 Sb: #11217-Fail to logon Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Thomas Huetter 100015,3554 Thomas, This c:\nt\system\config is where your registry lives. It sounds like yours is corrupted. You should reinstall. In future releases there will be an easy way for an administrator to fix this. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11132 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 06:42:34 Sb: UltraStor 14F Fm: Gerald N. Miller 70302,1335 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Great, thanks for the help. GM #: 11409 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:29:41 Sb: #10984-UltraStor 14F Fm: C Straghalis [UltraStor] 71005,1655 To: Gerald N. Miller 70302,1335 Gerald, The 14F driver will be available on the next, "true beta" release (slated for later this month, I hear). Regards, Chris There are 2 Replies. #: 11433 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 20:45:51 Sb: #11409-UltraStor 14F Fm: Chuck MCCorvey 76050,350 To: C Straghalis [UltraStor] 71005,1655 Will there be a driver for the UltraStor 12F as well? Also, will it support the 63-sector mapping option so that I can use all of my >1024 cylinder drive in BOTH DOS and NT? Chuck #: 11493 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 08:09:03 Sb: #11409-UltraStor 14F Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 To: C Straghalis [UltraStor] 71005,1655 Chris - Two requests: any idea on whether this will enable use of a DAT unit (specifically, the Maynard/Archive/Python 2gig) with the 14F/NT? Also, how can I get some info on the 14F, and which national distributors stock it? The ones I deal with most don't carry it. My fax # is (206)827-0148, or email me here. Thank you muchly. (grammatical faux pas noted) #: 11253 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 12:09:50 Sb: Adaptec 152X support???? Fm: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 I didn't see the Adaptec 152X SCSI controllers on the NT supported list. Will they be? Or should I go out and buy a new controller? #: 11423 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:48:49 Sb: #11253-Adaptec 152X support???? Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324 (X) Rod, You may want to call Adaptec. They have an excellent support staff and should be able to answer the question. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11428 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 20:21:27 Sb: #11423-Adaptec 152X support???? Fm: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324 To: na 71075,3225 (X) While Adaptec has an excellent support staff (when you can reach them) I was hoping Microsoft would know more about supported hardware with NT than Adaptec would. Is there a list of hardware that will be supported in the upcoming release?? If I am going to develop using NT I want to know if I need to get a new SCSI card or not. There is 1 Reply. #: 11473 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 05:46:04 Sb: #11428-Adaptec 152X support???? Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324 Having discussed SCSI boards with numerous folks at MS and at Adaptec, will only say that the Apaptec folks are working in conjunction with the MS folks to continue developing strong SCSI support for windows, Dos & NT. (don't know about OS2). I have had not a single bit of trouble getting NT to recognize drivers, cd-roms, tape backups etc. Other systems work well but I am very pleased with the Adaptec. Just a point of view! bob #: 11556 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 14:57:29 Sb: #11515-Adaptec 152X support???? Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Rod Montrose [Proj Tech] 73337,1324 Rod: Am using the 1542B. have 2 harddrives, a tape backup, a cd-rom & a bernoulli removeable on it. Works well even given the fact that i have 2 IDE harddrives as well. . bob #: 11559 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 15:36:35 Sb: #10884-Install wont work Fm: Jochen Ruhland 100023,3147 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) Hey, now it works... There was a wrong jumper on the Adaptec Board, dealing with IRQ's. Now that it is correct, the normal Setup with Disk&CD works fine. Interesting that NT seems to work partialy with the CD-ROM, breaking down in the middle of the Setup. #: 11570 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 18:12:20 Sb: FD TMC-1680 & NT Fm: Steve Dirickson 70313,3252 To: All I would like to hear from ANYONE that has successfully installed NT on a system with a Future Domain TMC-1680 SCSI adapter driving a SCSI hard drive and a SCSI CD-ROM drive. This combination is advertised to work, but so far I (and several others) have had no success. If you have *exactly* this configuration working, I would love to receive (by EMail preferably, to minimize noise) your system configuration: Address, IRQ, etc. settings for the TMC-1680, Hard drive manufacturer/model and SCSI target ID, CD-ROM manufacturer/model & SCSI target ID, plus CPU type, BIOS manufacturer & date, & VLSI chipset manufacturer. Thanks. #: 11572 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 18:13:56 Sb: #10926-Windows NT Fm: Jon Turner 70651,437 To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X) Thanks, I will do it. #: 11397 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:32:43 Sb: NCR 3450 and NT Install Fm: Jim Burks 73627,753 To: 70720,602 Robert, Were you able to get NT to load directly from the CD using the floppy boot diskette included with the NT prerelease or did you have to use the DOSTONT.BAT file? My NCR 3450 (the special package) cannot find any CD-Rom attached using the boot diskette, and I don't have anything else with a CD-Rom driver compatible with the NCR (that I know of). Jim Burks Promus Memphis, TN 901-748-7954 or 800-NET-OPS4 #: 11574 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 18:17:32 Sb: #11500-NCR 3450 and NT Install Fm: Irven Davies [CompuSys] 73500,2746 To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X) I also have a NCR 3450 system where the floppy install disk will not find the SCSI controller even though it is listed in the MCA setup as a 53C700. AS Microsoft had NT operating on NCR 3450 at the PDK I assume the correct drivers exist somewhere ? ILD #: 11446 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 22:12:13 Sb: Error 0x69 on 1st boot Fm: DeVon C Jarvis 71501,2450 To: All I am having this same problem. I have a Zeos 386/33 with Future Domain TMC-1680 & Fujitsu 2624FA (520MB) drive, and a Toshiba 3301 CD drive. I couldn't use the normal setup. Had to use DOS2NT. Now I get the 0x69 and the message 'Phase 1 I/O Init failed'. I have the controller set to all defaults (IRQ 5, CA00 bios address, 140-14f I/O address. Any answers?? Thankx in advance... There is 1 Reply. #: 11480 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:42:27 Sb: #11446-Error 0x69 on 1st boot Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: DeVon C Jarvis 71501,2450 DeVon, <> There error means that there was a "failure to communicate" with your hard drive and or controller. I took a quick look at the hardware compatability list. The 1680 is listed, but mentions that a new driver is needed. I'd suggest you look in lib 2 for the FD1800.ZIP (I think that's the file with all the FD drivers) and see if an updated driver will help you out. Art #: 11578 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 18:37:08 Sb: #11480-Error 0x69 on 1st boot Fm: DeVon C Jarvis 71501,2450 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Thanks for the info. I got the file and I'll let you know how it goes! #: 11151 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 10:21:04 Sb: Win NT Sys Requirements Fm: Norman T Cooper 76600,606 To: Sysop (X) I'm in the process of upgrading my hard drive and want to allow enough disk space for installing Windows NT when it becomes available. Could you tell me the system requirements for Windows NT, and when you might expect to have it on the market? Thanks...Norman #: 11416 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:47:52 Sb: #11151-Win NT Sys Requirements Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Norman T Cooper 76600,606 (X) Norman, First quarter '93. Make sure that your machine is on the supported list. Make real sure that your SCSI card is on the supported list. Try not to get a drive with more than 1024 cylndrs. Make real sure that your network card is on the supported list. It is best to have more than 12 meg of memory for the early release. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11441 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 21:16:26 Sb: #11416-Win NT Sys Requirements Fm: Norman T Cooper 76600,606 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, Appreciate your reply on Widows NT System Requirements. Still need to know the amount of hard disk space needed to install. Thanks...Norman There is 1 Reply. #: 11477 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:30:03 Sb: #11441-Win NT Sys Requirements Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Norman T Cooper 76600,606 Norman, <> You should have at least 100 Mb of free space if you want to install NT and the SDK. if you expect to build all of the sample programs and develop your own applications look to use about a 200 Mb partition just for NT. The NT paging file will dynamically grow in size. If you run out of disk space the system may experiance performance problems. Art #: 11625 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 06:33:19 Sb: #11477-Win NT Sys Requirements Fm: Norman T Cooper 76600,606 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Arthur, Thanks for the info on Windows NT. I'm looking forward to it being released. ...Norman #: 11626 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 06:33:33 Sb: #11507-Win NT Sys Requirements Fm: Norman T Cooper 76600,606 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, Thanks for the info on Windows NT. I'm looking forward to its release, ...Norman #: 11589 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 21:03:21 Sb: in-2000 Fm: richard wadsworth 76447,1673 To: all when are in-2000 cards going to be supported There is 1 Reply. #: 11631 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 06:56:19 Sb: #11589-in-2000 Fm: na 71075,3225 To: richard wadsworth 76447,1673 Richard, A new HCL will be out shortly. Until then read the following: Device Driver Requests: Our standard means of releasing drivers is with our CD releases. We also upload fixed, updated, and new drivers to Forum: WinNT, Lib 2. We are currently making every attempt to keep this library updated with drivers as they become available. If you have hardware that is not currently supported , or does not have a driver posted in WinNT, Lib 2; please make a device driver request by filling out the hwfeed.txt form and mail it to us at >internet:winnthw@microsoft.com. Please be aware that because of our support demands right now, this is a one way alias; we are not likely to respond directly to you to confirm that we have received your request. The hardware compatibility list can be found in MSWIN32, Lib 17. 0692hw.txt. Hwfeed.txt can be found in MSWIN32, Lib 17; or WINNT, Lib 1. In order to send mail to the address mentioned via CompuServe, you have to: * Leave the forum. * At any "!" prompt, enter GO MAIL. * Mail your request to: ">internet:winnthw@microsoft.com" Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11440 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 21:09:11 Sb: Fatal System Error 0x069 Fm: Tron Black 70054,1007 To: ALL I have a 486 33Mhz computer with a SCSI drive on an IN2000 controller. I installed using the DOS2NT. I followed the instructions in the .TXT file. When I boot, I get a Fatal System Error 0x00000069. Then it says Phase 1 I/O Initialization Error. I have pulled all of the cards except the drive controller. Any ideas? There are 2 Replies. #: 11479 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:38:17 Sb: #11440-Fatal System Error 0x069 Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Tron Black 70054,1007 Tron, <> I hate to be the one to break the bad news to you, but the IN2000 SCSI card is not supporved by NT. The 0x69 error is a error msg telling you that NT is unable to access your hard disk drive controller. In this case the IN2000. There is a file in lib 1 called 0992HW.TXT which lists the currently supported hardware. You might want to take a look and see if you can swap or buy a replacement SCSI disk controller. Art #: 11484 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:52:17 Sb: #11440-Fatal System Error 0x069 Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Tron Black 70054,1007 Tron, You must use a SCSI controller that is on the Hardware Compatibility list. If you do not have one then you are limited to the DOS2NT installation. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11562 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 16:00:33 Sb: #11484-Fatal System Error 0x069 Fm: Waterford Inst. 76244,1557 To: na 71075,3225 (X) I have installed Windows NT using DOS2NT. It seems to be accessing my drive up until the point that I receive a Fatal System Error 0x00000069. Does this mean I cannot run NT until the controller is supported. There is 1 Reply. #: 11632 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 06:56:26 Sb: #11562-Fatal System Error 0x069 Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Waterford Inst. 76244,1557 Waterford, Yes, this is true. If there is no driver written, it will not work. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11452 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 23:13:57 Sb: Swap volume Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650 To: All Probably been said before but: For my first install with DOS2NT I set up a 30Mb partition to hold the swap file, which I made nearly that big. When I came to re-install (having copied the 5.25" to 3.5" etc) I found that I could not direct it to overwrite the existing swap file, and (most annoyingly) there isn't a nice friendly 'change swap location' option in the admin tools (or is there? I haven't found one). James There are 2 Replies. #: 11482 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:48:53 Sb: #11452-Swap volume Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: James Mansion 100020,1650 James, <> First things first... limiting the paging file growthPby placing it in a small partition is not a good idea. The paging file grows dynamically. If you limit the size it can grow too you may experiance perormance problems and possible (not likly, but possible) system hangs. Secondly during the DOS2NT install you are supposed to copy a system.drive letter in the winnt\system\config directory to indicate your preference for the paging file location. The paging file is a minimum of 20 Mb in size. If you are not using that particular version of the file just delete it. NT will recreate it where ever you told it to be placed. The DOS2NT also uses a temporary paging.sys file in C:\ of 10 Mb. After the install you can delete this file. Third, there is an entry in the registry which contains the location of the swap file. If you cange it and then rewtart the system the paging file will be created there.PYou can then manually delete the old file. Art #: 11558 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 15:18:29 Sb: #11482-Swap volume Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) OK: I hadn't found the registry or the control panel thing! I'll fiddle with that. Re size: 30MB is quite enough - the manual says to use 20 and the machine has 16Mb physical. I don't want to suffer from accidents with the swapper running away with itself. Too many years OS/2 experience I guess. I did do the DOS2NT thing. The problem was with the second install I wanted to carry on using the same file - but NT noticed that there was not enough space on the volume. It did NOT notice that this was caused by a file that it would be creating for the swap file anyway, which is what I am complaining about. Overwriting the existing file or 'just going ahead anyway' is not an option in the standard install. James There is 1 Reply. #: 11633 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 06:58:00 Sb: #11558-Swap volume Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: James Mansion 100020,1650 Ray, <> The current maximum for the paging file in this release is 50 Mb so it will nt run away on you. Not yet anayway. But this release *really* does need a pretty hefty paging file size. The 20 Mb is the minimum needed if you expect to boot NT. <> I see what you are saying. But it has been noted before that if you reinstall NT you should delete *all* of the previous SDK. This includes the directorys and NT boot files as well as the paging file. Art #: 11483 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:52:12 Sb: #11452-Swap volume Fm: na 71075,3225 To: James Mansion 100020,1650 James, Have you tried the Control Panel | System | Virtual Memory option? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11330 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 08:02:14 Sb: NCR 3450 installation Fm: Jim Burks 73627,753 To: sysop We have an NCR 3450 (dual 486/50DX processors) with 32MB memory, specially configured by NCR for Windows NT (including SCSI CD-ROM drive). The problem is that the Windows NT installation diskette cannot find the CD-Rom drive. I saw NT running on a 3450 at the Windows NT conference in the Microsoft booth. Any ideas on how to get NT loaded on one. #: 11486 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:52:29 Sb: #11330-NCR 3450 installation Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Jim Burks 73627,753 Jim, What SCSI adapter are you using? What error message are you seeing? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11557 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 15:17:31 Sb: #11486-NCR 3450 installation Fm: Jim Burks 73627,753 To: na 71075,3225 (X) The SCSI adapter is an NCR c710. The error message is something to the effect of "No CD-ROM found". This comes from the boot diskette shipped with the MS NT CD-ROM. There is 1 Reply. #: 11644 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 08:39:27 Sb: #11557-NCR 3450 installation Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Jim Burks 73627,753 Jim, The only NCR disk controller currently supported is the NCR53C700. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11560 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 15:36:39 Sb: German Keyboard Fm: Jochen Ruhland 100023,3147 To: all Some strange behavior with NT in Germany. Installed NT via DOS2NT (when ther'll be SB-PRO CD-RON in NT???), used Control to change to German Keyboard. Launched a MS-DOS Prompt from the Main Group. Now I got a 'Z' between the 'T' and the 'U', but I got no German Umlauts (Ae, Oe, Ue) and (probably more annoying) no '\' nor '{'. Maybe someone hasn't finished his homework, doing only half the job? Comments requested Jochen Ruhland There are 2 Replies. #: 11628 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 06:42:22 Sb: #11560-German Keyboard Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Jochen Ruhland 100023,3147 Jochen, Remember that the version released at the Win32 PDC in San Francisco is not an international version; that is there is no support for international devices such as keyboards, etc. Unicode is in there, although there is not a Unicode font in the package yet. I do not see any support listed for German keyboards in this release. As a result the problems you are experiencing can be expected, and they should go away as we add support for more keyboards. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11650 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 09:12:32 Sb: #11560-German Keyboard Fm: Carl W. Brown 71250,1322 To: Jochen Ruhland 100023,3147 Jochen, Only the US keyboards are supported at this time. Other keyboards are unpredictable. Carl #: 11076 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:15:02 Sb: Mouse Problems Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Robert Beaubien 76662,2501 Robert, Since Jay isn't about just now and I can't find any reference to your root problem, could you reply with more details as to what this note is about? I'd like to help, but I'm not sure from this note what the problem is. On the possibility that it is a non-functional mouse, I'd suggest trying other irq settings (possibly removing other, conflicting, hardware as a test.) Note that only 100% microsoft compatible mice are supported with this release. Once again, if there is anything else we can do for you, please give us some more details, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11611 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 23:42:23 Sb: #11076-Mouse Problems Fm: Robert Beaubien 76662,2501 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) The problem is that my MICROSOFT Bus mouse won't work under NT when I use the Bus mouse port on my STB PowerGraph Combo board. It works fine under Win 3.1 but not under NT. If I put in my original bus mouse port and disable the one on the STB card, that works, but that is not what I want to do. I need that other slot. The IRQ's are set up as follows: IRQ2= Bus Mouse IRQ3= Com2 IRQ4= Com1 IRQ5= NE2000 compatible network card IRQ6= Floppy drives IRQ7= LPT1 IRQ11=Adaptec AHA-1542b SCSI controller I am running a 486/33 motherboard with 256k of Cache made by QDI Corp. I have a Maxtor X4380s 340MB SCSI harddrive partitioned as C:=200Mb and d:=115Mb. Any help would be appreciated. Robert Beaubien There is 1 Reply. #: 11651 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 09:12:47 Sb: #11611-Mouse Problems Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Robert Beaubien 76662,2501 Robert, I see. I'm afraid you are not going to like my answer. The use of a Microsoft inport mouse without the Microsoft inport card is not a supported configuration. It is the combination of the two elements that makes it work, and if the combo-board is not 100.0% compatible, Windows NT may not function correctly with it. Since your configuration does work with the Microsoft board, it seems there is a difference between it and your combo-board. Before giving up I would double check to see that there are no configuration options for your STB board that might make a difference. Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11672 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 11:26:23 Sb: PS/2 NT Install Fails Fm: Mike Snowden 100021,3015 To: Jay Vernon [Microsoft] 71075,640 (X) I could just be spreading some FUD here, but I heard somewhere that if you have an original version ps/2 80 motherboard,IBM gives you a free upgrade if you want to do OS/2 - something about a duff switch in/out of protected mode (?). May be worth a check - especially since we have 2 such boxes here! #: 11685 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 13:23:15 Sb: Mess# 11487: Setup Prob Fm: Thomas Huetter 100015,3554 To: Scott B. Suhy 71075,3225 (X) Hello, Scott! Well, I should have guessed it's time for a reinstall... everything went too smooth to be true right from the start. But then again: what's ONE more install, compared to the troubles other people have to go through. Still I'm looking forward to the next release (hopefully coming soon also over here in Germany). By the way, I remember a few messages some time ago concerning support for the Mitsumi CRMC CD-ROM. Would you put me on the list for that too, please. It IS cheap (around my place also), still does a fine job! (I already mailed a HWFEED, but am not sure what happens to all those wishes the kids send to MS.) Anyway, thanx for your response and see you later, Thomas #: 11340 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 11:06:14 Sb: Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: Jeff Roberts 71501,2750 To: ALL I'm trying to run the WinNT install, and the character-based setup is not seeing the CD-ROM. The adapter is an Adaptec 1740 with BIOS version 1.34. I believe the drive is a Toshiba XM330. During the install, the system says "Scanning for Adaptec 174x", followed by "Found Adaptec 174x" in the middle of the screen - it must know _something_ is out there! Right after that, I get the screen saying it can't find the CD-ROM. The CD can be seen both under DOS 5 and OS2 1.3. Any clues!!!! (PS Yes, the CD is in and the drive is on!!! ) #: 11403 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 17:54:02 Sb: #11340-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Jeff Roberts 71501,2750 (X) Jeff, what mode is the 1740 in? If it's in enhanced, I think some of the suggestions I have heard hear are: Make sure sync neg. is off, as well as disconnect. You might try running the card in standard mode as well. -Clarke There are 2 Replies. #: 11448 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 22:24:15 Sb: #11403-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: Tim Smith 70313,1326 To: Clarke 75470,1676 Clarke, You mean to tell me that the toshiba XM3301, a SCSI-2 device, cannot handle sync neg?? If this is true then the drive is NOT SCSI-2 !! since it is a requirment. I was planning on getting one of these drives since is was SCSI-2 as opposed to getting the NEC74 which was not. Now I don't know.. Is the CD Tech Porta-drive any good? tim There is 1 Reply. #: 11494 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 08:11:14 Sb: #11448-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 To: Tim Smith 70313,1326 PMJI, but the CD Tech PortaDrive is an XM3301E, so it's the same thing. #: 11618 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 03:37:59 Sb: #11448-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Tim Smith 70313,1326 Tim, i've lost the beginning of the thread, but the XM-3201 and the TXM-3301 are tested devices. The IN2000 is not on the supported hardware list yet. The debug script is trying to write a new master boot program. If it's getting a write protected error, the only thing I can think of would be Virus protection software? Anybody else have any ideas on this? #: 11687 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 13:43:35 Sb: #11448-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Tim Smith 70313,1326 (X) Tim, my SONY CDU541 is a SCSI-2 CD-ROM and it does not support sync neg. A CD-ROM drive does'nt have a fast enough transfer rate to need sync transfer. Only hard drives and tape drives have supported sync transfer so far that I have seen. -Clarke #: 11474 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 06:59:25 Sb: #11403-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: Jeff Roberts 71501,2750 To: Clarke 75470,1676 Woops!, Sorry - misleading information. Took a closer look at the system. The Toshiba Drive has an Adaptec BIOS, but the SCSI card in an LS2000. Doesn't look like it's supported. I tried the manual installation, DOS2NT (or whatever it's called), and got a write failure when it was running the DEBUG script. Anyone have a clue on this???!!! Thanks for the reply, Clarke. #: 11406 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 18:03:43 Sb: #11340-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Jeff Roberts 71501,2750 (X) Jeff, what mode is the 1740 in? If it's in enhanced, I think some of the suggestions I have heard hear are: Make sure sync neg. is off, as well as disconnect. You might try running the card in standard mode as well. -Clarke #: 11627 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 06:40:27 Sb: #11516-Adaptec 1740/Toshiba CD Fm: paul mariotti 100064,3331 To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X) I had the same problem during NT installation; the problem went away when I reinstalled DOS 5.0 on the boot disk (using SYS.COM) and erased the dual boot files left by the graphic install program. It seems that DOS2NT thinks it is changing a standard DOS start volume and not one that has already been changed by setup. Try it, it should work. Paul Mariotti (CSC Europe) #: 11695 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 14:10:52 Sb: rpc/dce compliance Fm: aslam 70213,45 To: aslam While browsing through the WindowsNT developers guide, I read about the rpc technology based on OSF standards and being DCE compliant. However, I noticed that the function names are not identical i.e. DCE rpc calls and NT rpc calls providing similiar services have different function names. This, of course, raises issues of ease of portability, transparency etc. Am I missing something ? There is 1 Reply. #: 11721 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 17:52:02 Sb: #11695-rpc/dce compliance Fm: na 71075,3225 To: aslam 70213,45 Aslam, Repost your concern to the MSWIN32 forum. WINNT is for usability issues. MSWIN32 is for coding issues. Thanks, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11425 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 20:00:07 Sb: TMC-850M setup problem. Fm: REX DIETERLE 72261,3470 To: SYSOP (X) A problem installing NT in graphics mode. I have a Denon DRD-253 which I purchased from Microsoft 3 years ago. I upgraded from the tmc-840 SCSI card which it came with to a TMC-850M which was listed as supported. However when loading the graphics setup the card is recognized but gives a -Read Request Failed ARC Status 8 Svb Status 0084 error when it tries to read from the drive. The drive reads fine from DOS with the Ver 2.2 drivers supplied with the board. Hope there is a solution to the problem. #: 11658 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 09:32:19 Sb: #11425-TMC-850M setup problem. Fm: na 71075,3225 To: REX DIETERLE 72261,3470 (X) Rex, That card has jumpers W1, W2 and W3 to configure shared memory addressing. Could you be conflicting with another card in your system (ie. network or Video)? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11731 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 18:58:09 Sb: #11658-TMC-850M setup problem. Fm: REX DIETERLE 72261,3470 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott Thanks I will try a new address. I appreciate the help. Rex #: 11736 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 19:47:15 Sb: #10919-WIN32NT for cowards Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701 To: Robert Ira Lewy M.D. 76057,3307 Hi Dr. Lewy, You can actually install Win32s/NT in CONJUNCTION WITH your existing DOS 5.0/Windows 3.1 installation as long as you have the free space available on the disk. I gave NT 12 MBytes of swap space and still had plenty of room on my 250 MByte drive after the install was complete. Just follow the installation instructions for the graphical install (boot the floppy) and select your C: partition (PRIMARY DOS) as the destination partition (the install does not harm your existing system and will let you choose between DOS (previously installed OS) and NT/Win32s at the next boot). BTW - WinANSI works under NT if you remember to copy VBRUN100.DLL to the \WINNT\SYSTEM directory. Just don't try to view the file as the ANSI support in the MS-DOS shell isn't 100% yet. Also, could you please E-Mail me your address so I can forward out a registered copy of the new 1.8 release? We lost a harddrive during the storms that followed Andrew and I can recover my registration database on the temporary low capacity hard drive. Tim Jones #: 11555 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 14:51:46 Sb: #11537-Another Fatal Sys Err 69 Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Eric Kitchen 70662,3433 (X) Eric, You will not be able to use this controller at this point in time. Windows NT requires a driver to communicate with the Controller just as OS/2 does. To insure that the controller is supported in the future please take the following action: At this time, we are not prepared to comment on the availability of support for the devices you mention. When support is ready, we will post information on this forum. During this prerelease program, distribution of new device drivers will be via official CD-ROM releases of Windows NT and the Win32 SDK. We may opt to upload new device drivers to Lib 2 of the WINNT forum but this does not imply a total commitment on our part. Microsoft has established an internet alias to submit support requests for devices not found on the Windows NT Hardware Compatibility List. Please download the file HWFEED.TXT from Lib 1 in the WINNT forum or LIB 17 of the MSWIN32 forum. Complete the information as requested and send it to "winntddk@microsoft.com". Due to our current support demains, this is a one way alias only. In order to send mail to the address mentioned via CompuServe, you have to: * Leave the forum. * At any "!" prompt, enter GO MAIL. * Mail your request to: ">internet:winntddk@microsoft.com" Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11753 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 04:48:22 Sb: #11537-Another Fatal Sys Err 69 Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Eric Kitchen 70662,3433 (X) Eric, <> I have an EasyCache IDE controller w/4Mb cache. It will only work under NT and OS/2 in ISA WD1003 compatability mode. As far as I know all of the PSI controller use a driver. This driver is installed not for DOS but for the CPU on the disk controller card. (SIOS & HSOS [???]). Why don't you see if PSI has anything to say. I thought their BBS had a message staing that they would be supporting NT. But they did not say for which controllers. The BBS number is 9-1-214-954-1856. (opps. drop the 9, I needed that to dial an outside line). Art #: 11158 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 12:29:29 Sb: #10933-Fatal Error after Setup Fm: David Rorabaugh (LTS) 76376,3423 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) I'll check the setup on the SCSI, I know that it is properly terminated, and that the SCSI ID is set to 7, not 0 or 1. Should this be changed to 2 to be sequential, or does that matter? The reason I asked about the next release was that there was a 0892hw.txt posted, but I never got the 0892 shipment, I'm running the 0792 shipment. Things seem to be slipping a bit, and the updates aren't coming as fast as I had expected. Being that we're into 1092, do you think we could see the 0992hw.txt file now? That might answer some questions as to what would be supported in the next release, whenever that happens (this month, I hope?). The big thing I was questioning was the Western Digital cards being included but not the SMC flavours, since SMC bought WD's network card line and most of these are only incremental changes. That's why I was surprised that I couldn't successfully run the SMC card with the WD drivers, and asked about updates. #: 11394 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 15:21:32 Sb: #11158-Fatal Error after Setup Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: David Rorabaugh (LTS) 76376,3423 David, There is a 0992hw.txt in library 1. So far as I know this is NOT the final word for the beta due out by the end of October. A SCSI ID of 7 should be fine. Did you have a chance to check the registry entries I mentioned? If it appears that some piece of hardware is not yet supported and you want it to be, the best thing you can do right now is send in an hwfeed.txt (available in library 1). Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11756 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 05:43:16 Sb: #11394-Fatal Error after Setup Fm: David Rorabaugh (LTS) 76376,3423 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) No, I haven't had a chance to dig into the registry entries, but now I guess I have to. I did find an interesting set of symptoms. When I brought the system back up in NT today, I found that I had SEVEN different CD-ROM drives shown, but that none of them would display a directory of the disc (read fault). I changed the SCSI ID from 7 to 2, and restarted, and then only one came up, and I could read from that. For file access, changing the SCSI ID solved the problem. However, the CD Player recognizes the drive, but won't play the audio CD. It recognizes the tracks, but it doesn't seem to have any control (every function is either non-op or produces an error message. I don't have any CD-audio drivers loaded -- is this normal behaviour? #: 11561 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 15:53:59 Sb: Win16 sys:No response Fm: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104 To: I've had NT installed I've had NT installed for 3 weeks. A week ago, for possibly the first time, I tried to run a Windows 3.x application - Write. However, nothing actually started up. Disk thrashing for 10-15 seconds, then nothing. Much the same if I try to start a Win16 app (ie. ANY - not just Write) from an icon in a program group, in file manager, or even from the command line in an NT cli box. Putting wowexe in the startup group doesn't do anything either. The one indication I have had is if I try clicking an a Windows 3.x app from an icon in a program group for a second or third time - I get a STOP box saying that the Win16 Subsystem is failing to respond - with buttons to Retry or to Cancel. Retry brings up the same box after a few further seconds of disk thrashing. The few NT applications that come with the cd work fine: so do dos applications. Quite robust really. One problem I had on installation was the need to go into the Registry Editor to set up a swap file on my D: partition - no space on C: . This worked fine. I see there are entries in the Registry for Win16 and 'wow' setups. Is it likely that I need to make a change here? Can I pick up individual files from the cd? ie. I'd rather not try a reinstall yet! Any help appreciated. I asked this 3 days ago in winnt/S4, but no response, so I'm hoping this is a more correct forum topic. Gary #: 11657 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 09:32:14 Sb: #11561-Win16 sys:No response Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104 (X) Gary, Are your path's correct in your config.nt and autoexec.nt? Append them and let me take a look at them. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There are 2 Replies. #: 11681 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 13:10:17 Sb: #11657-Win16 sys:No response Fm: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, Thanks for the reply. As requested, autoexec.nt : config.nt :device=D:\winnt\system\keyboard.sys device=D:\winnt\system\mouse.sys device=D:\winnt\system\emm.sys files=128 shell=D:\winnt\system\command.com /p D:\winnt\system Mmmmm, so maybe I need a path statement? Regards, Gary #: 11683 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 13:20:11 Sb: #11657-Win16 sys:No response Fm: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, Apologies for the formatting of that last message! It looked good before I uploaded it anyway... Repeat... autoexec.nt: config.nt: device=D:\winnt\system\himem.sys device=D:\winnt\system\keyboard.sys device=D:\winnt\system\mouse.sys device=D:\winnt\system\emm.sys files=128 shell=D:\winnt\system\command.com /p D:\winnt\system Regards, Gary There is 1 Reply. #: 11759 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 06:29:21 Sb: #11683-Win16 sys:No response Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104 Gary, Put this in your Autoexec.NT C:\winnt\system\redir c:\winnt\system\dosx Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11088 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 18:02:46 Sb: #10981-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) I have the CDR-84 in the middle of the SCSI chain so termination shouldn't be a problem. I'd like to hear from MS to see if they have any ideas. They have supposedly tested out the controller hopefully they will have a hint... There is 1 Reply. #: 11183 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 17:07:53 Sb: #11088-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 (X) Ray, <> I'm no SCSI expert, but as I understand it the SCSI controller has it's own device ID and termination. The other end of the SCSI bus (each periphrial) has to have it's own ID and the final device must be terminated as well. Some OS's will work with improperly terminated SCSI devices, some will not. NT is very picky about this particular aspect. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11197 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 20:51:40 Sb: #11183-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) The SCSI bus (the cable) needs to be terminated on each end. This is usually done via the first and last devices on the bus. The other devices on the bus must be un-terminated. The problemm I'm having with the CDR-84 is something else, and I'm not sure what the heck it is. Some sort of incompatability between the CD-ROM drive and the controller. The system never even completes the initializaion of the controller on bootup. This indicates a hardware problem. I'm hoping the MS has come across this problem and knows how to fix it as both NEC and Future Domain are so busy pointing fingers and each other and don't care to really try to help. I appriciate your response tho...it's more than I have been able to get from MS... There are 2 Replies. #: 11245 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 11:08:01 Sb: #11197-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 (X) Ray: If I remember this cd, it has a termination problem. I would put it last in the chain & terminate it the special NEC device that you can get. Turns out that there are both active & passive termination devices. Sometimes they do not work well together. bob There is 1 Reply. #: 11266 S3/Windows NT Setup 04-Oct-92 19:00:28 Sb: #11245-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) Hmmmm...I guess I'll give NEC another callback and get the terminator I just don't understand the drive setup worked OK on the old TMC1670 controller. The 7000EX must be very picky... Thanks...\ #: 11291 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 03:20:49 Sb: #11197-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 Ray, <> Improper termination can also exhibt this type of behavior. Particularly since you mentioned that this same setup works under DOS. NT is very picky about proper termination of SCSI devices. The NEC-84 seems to be a bit quirky with reward to termination. If you have not already looked in section 8 & 10 for other NEC-84 threads I'd suggest you do so. Might be able to pick up a bit of supporting evidence there. <> I'm sure someone from MS will be getting back to you shortly. Their system of support requires a lot of logging info. Each request is entered into a database, and the request is process from there. They also only work 8 hours a day, seven days a week. I and others here do not follow this same scheme. But then again this peer level of support is being provided because we all know how frustrating it can be. Art #: 11347 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 12:36:35 Sb: #11291-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Just when you think you kwon something...... I had looked into the other message bases and pulled the message archives and looked through them as well. I checked to see if it was having problems with the sync negotiation routine like on the adaptec, so I locked the 7000 into async mode with no effect. I have requested (for the second time) one of the inline terminator connectors from NEC and when it arrives I'll try using it and moving the CD-ROM to the end of the bus, maybe that'll work. Who knows, by the time NEC gets off their thumbs and ships the thing, the next pre-release disk will be out and the Trantor controller that comes with the CDR-84 will be supported making the entire subject a moot point. There is 1 Reply. #: 11466 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 03:20:08 Sb: #11347-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 Ray, <>> Well it seems that Trantor is here and solving problems already. Mark has his up and running. Maybe I'll get mine working today, now that I know what the problems is (for`me at least). I need an IRQ jumper set. Atleast that's what Trantor says. Art #: 11580 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 19:02:58 Sb: #11525-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) I read the message in 10 after I left that one for you. I tried to log on to the BBS and can't manage to get a clean line. I sure wish someone would upload the drivers to CI$ so i'll try leaving a message for the Trantor rep in 10. Thanks for all the help... There is 1 Reply. #: 11649 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 09:02:19 Sb: #11580-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 Ray, <> If it's okay with Trantor I'll upload them. I'll see if I can get permission from them to upload them. Art PS: I do have it working on IRQ5, tomorrow I'll try IRQ7. #: 11659 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 09:46:39 Sb: #11649-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Great! Have you tried a graphical install or do you know if it will work? There is 1 Reply. #: 11668 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 11:06:49 Sb: #11659-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 (X) Ray, <> No. To the best of my knowledge it's impossible. this is an add on driver. Since you cannot change any of the ini files on the cd-rom to tell the setup program how to install the driver and what parameters... But it will work with a DOS2NT install. I suppose you could then try a graphical install afterwards, but I don't know how well that would work. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11724 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 18:27:09 Sb: #11668-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Thats right, I forgot....I had tried doing a graphical with my old Future Domain controller, but the FD controller test logic is already in the INI file. OK, Thanks... There is 1 Reply. #: 11750 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 04:35:27 Sb: #11724-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 (X) Ray, FWIW: I got the T128 and NEC-84 up and running on IRQ7. I had to reconfigure my EISA machine to share an IRQ for com1 & lpt1 to make room for the T128 though. If this had not been an EISA machine I would not have been able to get the CD to work. Also you'll only be able to read data. Audio is out for this driver. no errors, just no response. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11765 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 08:05:23 Sb: #11750-TMC7000EX problems Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) OK, I'm not really all that interested in the audio part anyway. I'd just like to get at the CD-ROM sometimes. Thanks for the info... #: 11457 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 23:30:17 Sb: Tseng ET4000 800x600 Fm: RanDair Porter 70312,120 To: ALL I am not having much luck configuring my system for my tseng video card. I would like it to be configured just like my win 3.1 800x600,large fonts. I have tried... et400_60 -> vga.sys ts_800.dll ->vga.dll which results in a crazy display. and et400_70 ->vga.sys ts_800.dll ->vga.dll still results in a crazy display. finally pdii.sys -> vga.sys ts_800.dll or even ts_1024.dll -> vga.dll using pdii.sys doesn't display crazy but appears to be in 1024x768 mode regardless of ts_800.dll or ts_1024.dll one other thing. Using pdii.sys I always get a dark, almost black desktop background when using the arizona color scheme. Any Help? RanDair #: 11564 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 17:06:23 Sb: #11499-Tseng ET4000 800x600 Fm: RanDair Porter 70312,120 To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X) Sam, The vga card appears to be a generic vga et4000 graphics addapter. The bios is tseng labs vga bios. Also, it has 1 Meg ram. RanDair. #: 11776 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 10:18:08 Sb: #11564-Tseng ET4000 800x600 Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: RanDair Porter 70312,120 (X) RanDair, The "pdii.sys" is specific for the Orchid ProDesigner IIs card. I don't have any explanation to what is happening, except to guess that the card does not support the ET4000 chip as close as it claims. I've tried the configuration on one of my test machines (it has Orchid ProDesigner II card) and it worked without any problems. Do you have access to a different ET4000? If yes, I would suggest tring a different card to double check the results. Please let me know how it goes. Sam Karroum [MS] #: 11637 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 07:14:33 Sb: Fatal System error 69 Fm: DAVID MANNS 100112,2773 To: anyone Whilst installing NT onto my 486 50MHz clone, I get the following error. FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: 0X00000069 PHASE 1 I/O initialisation failed. This happens at step 7 -Create Registry of the install using the DOS2NT batch file after selecting Windows NT from the flexboot menu. The mother board is a JUKO 486dx-50 256kc, the scsi controller is a Future domain 16-bit. There is 16M of memory on the system. Please could you advise me of what to do to overcome this problem. #: 11656 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 09:32:09 Sb: #11637-Fatal System error 69 Fm: na 71075,3225 To: DAVID MANNS 100112,2773 David, What FD controller are you using? What HD's do you have in the system (make and model)? Here are some of the things that cause a 69: Error 0x00000069 This is a phase one initialization error, which happens when Windows NT tries to talk with the HD controller. It can be caused by any number of things. Things to try: * If the card allows, slow down the DMA transfer rate. * Make sure both ends of the SCSI bus are terminated. * Make sure there are no IRQ, or memory address conflicts. * Make sure you're aren't using a faulty or un-supported driver i.e. the FD 1680 SCSI controller is supported, but there is a problem with that driver which will be fixed and posted on WinNT, Lib 2. * Make sure that your card is listed in the hardware compatibiltiy list which was provided with your release notes. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11666 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 11:04:49 Sb: #11656-Fatal System error 69 Fm: Arthur Kreitman 76060,2677 To: na 71075,3225 (X) We're also getting a fatal error 69 on initial install. We have the following configuration dell 486/25 adaptec 1542 with factory default jumpers NEC intersect on 2 quantum 80mb on 0 quantum 100 mb on 1 We do an install. The disks and the 1542 are detected. The files are copied from the cd-rom. a blue screen appears, it waits a few minutes and the fails. There is 1 Reply. #: 11758 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 06:29:16 Sb: #11666-Fatal System error 69 Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Arthur Kreitman 76060,2677 Arthur, Is the 1542 a 1542b? If so read the following: Adaptec AHA 1542B Driver Can Cause Fatal System Error: Summary: There is a known problem with the Adaptec AHA-1542B driver which causes fatal system errors under some circumstances. More Info: The problem is triggered by simultaneous I/O with the floppy and the hard disk. This will be corrected in the next release. To avoid this you may want to use an alternative floppy controller and disable he one on the Adaptec. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11794 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 11:39:28 Sb: #11758-Fatal System error 69 Fm: Arthur Kreitman 76060,2677 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Its a 1542, I tried your suggestion. Still no good. #: 11715 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 16:57:22 Sb: Hive 'Security' not open Fm: David R. Johnson 72717,3617 To: SYSOP (X) I have had very little success installing windows NT with the DOS2NT program. After reformatting and re-organizing my first hard drive several times, I was finally able to get NT to boot. NT seems to demand to be in the first partition on the disk, and will not function if the OS/2 2.0 boot manager is active in ANY partition. Also, I had to run DOS2NT from DR-DOS v6.0 becuase MS-DOS 5.0 won't recognize my hard disk when the drive is in translation mode (Maxtor 4380E & WD1009SE-V2). DR-DOS XCOPY preserves the attributes as it copies, and sees all files as being read-only from the CD. The first time I booted NT, it reported the it couldn't create or open several different 'Hives', and eventually crashed. I re-installed the whole thing, and ran 'ATTRIB -r *.* /s" on the WINNT drive to get rid of the read-only flags. Now, continuing with Step 7 of the DOS2NT instructions, the first boot seems to proceed okay - the system comes up, loads drivers, the WINNT opening banner appeared, and then after a moment, the system rebooted as described. On the second boot, the system comes up, loads drivers, checks the FAT system on C: and the HPFS (OS/2 2.0) partition on D:, and declares them clean. It then reports "Hive 'Security' could not be created/ opened". The boot seems to proceed from there, the Windows NT banner comes up, the hard drive operates for 10 more seconds or so, and then nothing. No further activity after 15 minutes. Any help would be greatly appreciated. System: ALR PowerVeisa 486/33, 17 Mb RAM, ET4000 VGA, WD 1009SE-V2 ESDI controller, Maxtor 4380E (1224 cyls., set for translation to 63 sectors per track and 550 or so cyls.) with 125 Mb DOS partition, CDC 85MB drive with OS/2 2.0 HPFS partition. CD-ROM is an unsupported unit (pinnacle). Thanks. #: 11775 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 10:18:02 Sb: #11715-Hive 'Security' not open Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: David R. Johnson 72717,3617 (X) David, The message "Hive 'Security' could not be created/ opened" is generated by NTOSKRNL during system initialization. It could be due to the Security subsystem not installed correctly, or accounts not created properly during setup. Currently, this is no supported direct way to modify this without re-installing Windows NT. I wonder if the problems you're running into are related to having IBM's MOST utility on the system, or the way Digital Research write their boot record. I have installed and reinstalled the July release and wasn't able to resproduce the error message. As per the release notes, Windows NT is not compatible with IBM's MOST utility. Microsoft does not intend to support IBM's MOST boot scheme with Windows NT's Flexboot, and has no plans to support installation on a drive with MOST installed on it. The only suggestion that I have at this time is to try installing again using DOS2NT running under MS-DOS. Regards, Sam Karroum [MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11795 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 12:06:50 Sb: #11775-Hive 'Security' not open Fm: David R. Johnson 72717,3617 To: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 (X) I have found that WINNT will boot the same if I either disable the IBM MOST partition (by making the DOS/NT partition active), or remove it entirely. This current installation of NT was performed without the OS/2 MOST utility even on the drive. I must however use it to boot OS/2, as OS/2 is installed on my second hard drive, and MOST is the only way I know of to boot from a partition on the secondary hard disk. I have no problem manually activating the various partitions on my primary drive using Fdisk, at least while fiddling with WINNT. Question: What does the OS/2 MultiBoot feature do or not do that makes it incompatible with WINNT? Is there or will there be a way to install WINNT on its own partition without MS-DOS, and boot that partition directly without FlexBoot? In this case, would OS/2's Multiboot work? I suppose that I'm not suprised WINNT has trouble with MOST, as I could not boot ISC Unix with it either (again, I used fdisk to manually activate the needed partitions). Anyway, my reason for DR-DOS 6.0 was that MS-DOS 5.0 had trouble with my hard drive after I switched to translation mode. Originally, I did not use translation, as ISC Unix and NetWare 3.11 recognized the drive out to 1223 cylinders. DOS and OS/2 think the drive is only 200 cylinders though (1224-1024=200), and allow only 50Mb. My next expirement will be to disable translation and just truncate the drive at 1024 cylinders using setup, and then try MS-DOS 5. Question: Am I more likely to achieve success by purchasing a supported SCSI CD-ROM and using the graphical install method? We've discovered that this Pinnacle Micro drive won't work with OS/2, WINNT, or NetWare, and probably won't work with UnixWare or Solaris 2.0, and we are temped to grab a SCSI CD anyway. Thanks for your input. #: 11364 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:27:50 Sb: install error Fm: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 To: sysop (X) When I try to run any DOS program a window appears with the following error: "Function Failure Error Num -1073741583 [D:nt\private\mvddm\softpc\host\src\nt_sec.c[336]]" (I installed on C drive, the D drive is my CD-ROM.) I am installing it on an IBM PS2 Model 70 386 with a Future Domain MSC-600 controller. The hard disk was formatted and only DOS 5.0 and the CD-ROM drivers were installed. I installed WinNT using the DOS2NT method following the instruction in the release notes. I also copy the fd1800.sys driver to the winnt\system\drivers directory to be able to acces the CD-ROM drive. I am unable to run anything in my dos directory, "setup" for Microsoft C 7.0, and even some programs that came with WinNt such as "wowexec". All produce the same message. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated! Michelle There is 1 Reply. #: 11485 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:52:25 Sb: #11364-install error Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X) Bob, Does your config.sys have the correct path to the himem.sys emm.sys and command.com? Does your autoexec.bat have the correct path to redir.exe and dosx.exe? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11636 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 07:10:21 Sb: #11534-install error Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X) BoB, Your shell statement should look like: shell=c:\winnt\system\command.com /p c:\winnt\system If this does not work do the following: Once you try and execute a 16bit app use PVIEW.exe and look at what System processes are running. List them in your next reply. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11646 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 08:44:41 Sb: #11636-install error Fm: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 To: na 71075,3225 (X) I still have the error! PVIEW gave me this list of processes: cmd.exe, crss.exe, eventlog.exe, lsass.exe, os2ss.exe, progman.exe, pview.exe, screg.exe, smss.exe, spoolss.exe, system process, system process, taskman.exe, winlogon.exe. DOSX was not in list list. Should it be? If I try to run dosx from either file mngr or the dos window I get the same error I get with everything else. Thanks for all your help! Michelle (not Bob by the way) #: 11763 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 08:03:57 Sb: #11646-install error Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X) Michelle-not-Bob, Well I was looking for NTVDM.exe and it is not there? Take a look in the registry under: HKey_local_machine|System|CurrentControlSet|Control|WOW Do you have a value for cmdline and wowcmdline? NTVDM should be on each of these lines. Regards, Scott B. Suhy (not Bob by the way) There is 1 Reply. #: 11766 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 08:51:51 Sb: #11763-install error Fm: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 Scott (luckily not BOB!), ntcdm.exe was not listedin pview, but it is in the registry WOW. WOW looked like this LogonSwitch: yes cmdline: ntvdm -f%SystemRoot%\system -a size: 2 wowcmdline: ntvdm -f%SystemRoot%\system -a %SystemRoot%\system\krnl286 wowexec wowsize: 4 SystemRoot is set to c:\winnt. Ok what next? Thanks Again! Michelle (Bob's legs are hairier) #: 11812 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 15:48:55 Sb: #11766-install error Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X) Michelle, You got me! I will get with development and see what I can come up with. I will let you know what this error is caused by. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11816 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 15:49:21 Sb: #11766-install error Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X) Michelle, Development has seen this before. If there is a Tokenring 16/4 card in the machine. Some people have been able to resolve the problem when they moved the ram and rom address of the card. The problem will be fixed in the next release. Let me know, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11376 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:57:35 Sb: Two Drive Speed Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Don Cock 72520,1500 Don, There could be a number of reasons that may explain this. One could very well be that ntdetect.com is building a structure with all the necessary hardware information in it. Since there is more hardware in the machine with 2 drives it is logically going to take longer building the structure. It could be disk speed, how does norton utils rate the harddrives for Average seek, track-to-track seek or data transfer rate. Are any persistant net connections being restored??? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11817 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 15:49:29 Sb: #11526-Two Drive Speed Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: Don Cock 72520,1500 Don, I can understand the Modem lights flashing. NTdetect.com is initializing the hardware. This should occur all of the time not intermittantly. I could also understand the longer boot on the 2 drive system. What I can't understand is the slower compile time on a machine that has features above and beyond that of another machine (CPU cache). Could you boot both of these machines to dos and run Norton SYSINFO CPU speed benchmarks? Let me know, Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11820 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 16:47:12 Sb: Install AHA-1742A CDR74 Fm: James Gildea 73067,363 To: Sysop (X) I have: Dell 450SE Adaptek 1742A SCSI Ctrlr. NEC CDR74 CDROM Reader 1742A in Enhanced Mode Device 1 is Sync Neg. Disabled, Disconnect Disabled Using Dos drivers everything works fine but... When Booting off of NT Boot Floppy, during the scanning for SCSI interfaces it goes right past Adaptek 174x and comes up with a message that it can't find a CD-ROM device. Help #: 11084 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:52:08 Sb: Moving the Paging File Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246 Robert, It is not usual for the system directory to be marked as hidden. Nevertheless, there are a couple ways to get around this. Within the file manager, you can elect to view hidden files. Select "View->By File Type..." from the file manager menu. Check "She Hidden/System Files" and then click "OK". Finally, press the function key F5 to refresh the screen. If you wish to unhide the directory at this point, you can highlight the directory name, and then choose "File->Properties" from the menu. I hope this helps, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11826 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 17:51:22 Sb: #11084-Moving the Paging File Fm: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) Thanks, Terry, for the info. I already figured out that even if the directory is hidden, the RUN command will run something from there if you give its fully-qualified path name. So I have been able successfully to move the paging file location. Bob #: 11829 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 17:54:40 Sb: TMC840 (sob) Fm: Karl Froelich 71171,2247 To: sysop (X) Hi 'dere! I've got a Future Domain 840 (alas) scsi card for my CD. I've set the scsi id to 2 and IRQ to 5, just like it ought to be, but it won't install (I expected that I guess, the docs start with a F-D 845, but heck, hope springs eternal). I've been able to install useing dos2nt; that worked just find. I'm wondering if support for the F-D 840 will happen? Thanx for the shoulder, Karl #: 11837 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 19:11:54 Sb: Diamond Speedstar Video? Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701 To: All Has anyone gotten an old (non-24 bit artwork) Diamond Speedstar II+ TE4000 card working in anything but 640x480x16 mode? I've tried using the method described in the July release notes, but all I get is a blank screen. I go through the proper keystrokes blind to shut down NT and then tried each successive setting from a DOS reboot - still no luck. I have an NEC 4D, an NEC-5FG and a Gateway CrystalScan 1024NI monitor and all give the same result. I've tried both the TS400_60 and TS400_70 files as VGA.SYS and have tried both TS_800.DLL and TS_1024.DLL as VGA.DLL in all combinations on all monitors with no luck. Tim #: 11367 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:56:34 Sb: #10806-Kernel mode except Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Bill Li 76676,14 Bill, There are no DPT SCSI cards on the supported list. This means that there are no drivers currently to support the DPT cards. Have you tried the DOS2NT install? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11476 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 07:24:42 Sb: #11367-Kernel mode except Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, <> FWIW: If there is no support for the DPT SCSI card and that is the SCSI card for the boot disk, DOS2NT is not going to work either. Art #: 11645 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 08:39:32 Sb: #11518-Kernel mode except Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art, I thought that the last time I changed my name on CS all I needed to do was type OPT then go through the menu. Did this change or am I thinking of another system? Thanks for the advice, -Scott There is 1 Reply. #: 11648 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 09:00:01 Sb: #11645-Kernel mode except Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, <> That will work too. I was not sure if you were using a command line or menuing interface. Both work. Art #: 11814 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 15:49:06 Sb: #11648-Kernel mode except Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art, I wanted to thank you for all of the help on the forum. It's people like you that will make this product a success. Thanks from everyone in WINNT support! There is 1 Reply. #: 11848 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 03:17:43 Sb: #11814-Kernel mode except Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 Scott, <> No problem. I know that you all (MS) have a lot to keep up with on the support end. Having had my share of new experiances (software wise) I can relate to people having install problems. So I'll help out where I can. <> Well I have been waiting a long time for the right 32 bit OS. So far I'm quite pleased with the way things are going with the Windows family products. You're all doing a fine job in my book. Now if that new CD would arrive RSN and if I could find ATI or 8514/a support... Art #: 11379 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:57:58 Sb: #10249-NT Install 1E + 6B Error Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31 Neil, FD 885 is not on the list (ie. 845/850/700/1660/1680/700). Are you doing the DOS2NT install? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11757 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 05:51:35 Sb: #11379-NT Install 1E + 6B Error Fm: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31 To: na 71075,3225 (X) I have attempted the install with the: Future Domain 850, 860, 885, 850m, 860m, and 885m boards. Yes, I also attempted to do the DOS2NT install with the same hardware set. The answer: All of these boards work fine, the problem is that WinNT will NOT install if your primary hard disk is also a SCSI device. As soon as I installed an IDE hard disk instead (and removed the SCSI hard disk) the GUI install worked perfectly, first time. Your logic seems to be intolerant of a SCSI hard disk as the boot/install disk. #: 11774 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 10:16:54 Sb: #11757-NT Install 1E + 6B Error Fm: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244 To: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31 >> .. WinNT will not install if your primary hard disk is a SCSI device.. That's not true. I have two Maxtor SCSI hard disk - primary and secondary. GUI setup was working fine for me. I have Adaptec 1542B. Which makes differences ? jLee #: 11819 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 16:09:29 Sb: #11757-NT Install 1E + 6B Error Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31 Neil, Have you tried your configuration with 2 SCSI cards? One for the CD and one for the HD. I have 2 SCSI devices working in a machine here, however they are running off an Adaptec. Let me know. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11850 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 03:27:58 Sb: #11757-NT Install 1E + 6B Error Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Neil Rosenberg 70444,31 Neil, <> That's not quite accurate. NT can be installed on to a primary SCSI drive. But you need to things. First a supported SCSI controler and drive. Secondly the driver also has to support a primary SCSI drive. For instance I have a driver from Trantor. In this release anyway it only supports secondary (non-bootable) SCSI drives and CD-ROM drives as well. Most likely the driver for the FD-850 series does not support bootable drives either. If you have not already checked them out I believe that there is a new FD series driver in the libs. I think it is called FD1800.ZIP. Art #: 11054 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 14:51:35 Sb: #10580-Flexboot Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: David C. Mack 76470,3606 David, I don't really recommend that you try to move Windows NT directly from machine to machine. The proper way to get it on more than one machine is to install it in each location. All of the files I mentioned are involved in the Windows NT boot sequence, and the autoexec and config files are also read, but these two files are of lesser importance. ntldr gets exectuted first. This is the program which asks you if you want to boot to Windows NT or your previous operating system. ntdetect is executed to determine what kind of hardware your machine has. If the hardware detected by ntdetect differs from what had been previously configured in the system registry, you will most likely have problems. Note that the autoexec and config files do not control the boot process, although they can have an effect on what environment variables are set and so on. I hope this helps, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11843 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 23:11:58 Sb: #11054-Flexboot Fm: Ken Granderson 76300,2050 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 I just had to re-install DOS and it appears to have nuked the references to NTLDR in my boot sector, thus I boot straight into DOS. How can I quickly and easily restore the NT boot sector without (shudder) re-installing NT? I am completely comfortable hacking away at my boot sector, partition table and other system areas with wild abandon. There is 1 Reply. #: 11851 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 03:33:57 Sb: #11843-Flexboot Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Ken Granderson 76300,2050 Ken, <> If you take a look at the DOS2NT batch file on the CD-ROM you'll find a debug script to modify the boot sectors. Once you get things up and runing again you might want to take a look in the libs. There is a program which will make/replace the boot sector. Art PS: Aren't you glad that the release is on a CD? At least when you install there is no floppy disk swap required. #: 11847 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 03:14:36 Sb: NT no program manager Fm: tom lesniewski 73276,41 To: microsoft I am having a problem starting NT. At the point where I should be seening progman window I still see only the Microsoft Logo. Taskman appears ok, I can open that and use it to shutdow the system. but when I select task switch, the window shows no tasks running I did not modify anything not specified in registry.ini. My system is a AST 386/33 12MB, W=w/ AST Premium II bios rel 2.03 system bios and AST video bios in Shadow ram. The only boards in system are AST CPUID memory board and a 3COM ethernet board 3c507, bas address 300 hex, interrupt 5, external trxcvr ram base addr. 0D0000 hex, Ram size 64K Rom Base addr 0C6000 hex, zero waite state disabled, data mode turbo. Any help would be appreciated There is 1 Reply. #: 11853 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 03:48:37 Sb: #11847-NT no program manager Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: tom lesniewski 73276,41 Tom, Just curious but do you have enough free space for the paging file to grow? And have you tried to boot NT with all of your speed otptions turned off. Things like bios shadowing, caches, etc? Sometimes little things can make the difference. Art #: 11077 S3/Windows NT Setup 02-Oct-92 17:15:09 Sb: #10714-Error in Event Viewer Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Richard J Fennimore 72760,1701 Richard, Have you followed the steps mentioned by Arthur Knowles? By commenting out all of the LAN drivers in the registry.ini during the DOS2NT installation, you should be able to eliminate this error. Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11821 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 17:22:40 Sb: #11077-Error in Event Viewer Fm: Richard J Fennimore 72760,1701 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) Yes I have commented out all Lan drivers and I still get the error There is 1 Reply. #: 11856 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 04:04:39 Sb: #11821-Error in Event Viewer Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Richard J Fennimore 72760,1701 Richard, <> FWIW: Not only do you have to comment all of the entries for all of the LAN drivers in the registry.ini and there sub-entries, but you'll need to delete all of the WINNT directories before you re-install NT from scratch. A fresh install is needed. Is that what you have tried and still get the error? Or did you just either (1) use regedit to disable the drivers or (2) delete the files in the config sub-directory, copy them back from the CD, and redo the triple boot? Art #: 11858 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 05:13:19 Sb: network help needed Fm: brian ford 75300,2327 To: name I'm having a real tough time getting two WIN NT machines to communicate over an ethernet connection. I set up TCP addresses on both machines but starting the network always results in an error message. These are the only two machines on this network, do you have any idea what I could be doing wrong? can turn to for help? Thanks #: 11497 S3/Windows NT Setup 06-Oct-92 08:59:47 Sb: 1E + 6B Install Errors Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033 To: Scott B. Suhy 71075,3225 Scott, I have a long write-up of my installation woes which I can fax to you. I would really appreciate some help. I am at the end of things to try. Thanks. #: 11859 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 05:19:02 Sb: 1E + 6B Install Errors Fm: Tom Gentry 76507,3033 To: Scott B. Suhy 71075,3225 Scott, FYI. I installed NT on my 486/50 ISA no-name last night. Graphical. No problems that I could see. Wish the ASTs would work that easily! Regards, Tom #: 11368 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 13:56:39 Sb: #10795-LibPath env variable Fm: na 71075,3225 To: neil colvin 71650,3517 (X) Neil, The LibPath Environment Variable is not meant to be changed. This is why the control panel (ie. System) does not give the user the ability to do it. Are you changing it in the registry? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11410 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:34:17 Sb: #11368-LibPath env variable Fm: neil colvin 71650,3517 To: na 71075,3225 (X) The control panel is very happy to let me change it. That is where I did it. If it is not suppose to allow that, then that is a bug. I was told by another MS person on this forum that it was meant to be changed, and that in fact it was the default set of paths to be searched for .DLL files. You people should get your stories straight. I personally prefer the second, since I would like to put my DLL elsewhere than in WINNT\SYSTEM. #: 11815 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 15:49:14 Sb: #11549-LibPath env variable Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: neil colvin 71650,3517 (X) Neil, If Path is set as a System environment variable and you also specify a Path as a User environment variable then it will append the two. If LibPath is set as a System environment variable and you also specify a LibPath as a User environment variable then it will replace the one that was specified in the System environment variable. However, I did notice that with the PDC build you needed to log off and log back on again to get it to accept the change. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11860 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 05:38:25 Sb: #11815-LibPath env variable Fm: neil colvin 71650,3517 To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 I agree with everything you say. However, having done that, it still seems to have no effect, which was where I started. The system still seems to look for DLLs only in the original places. What is the intent of this undocumented environment variable. Also, perhaps it should mimic path, and only append the user value to the system value? #: 11684 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 13:20:28 Sb: UltraStor 24F 0x69 msg Fm: Charles Hoffman 71477,3612 To: ALL I am using a Gateway 486/50DX2 EISA with 16meg ram, 2 half gig drives with an UltraStor 24F controller. Installed WIN NT stuff from the CD-ROM, great! However, I cannot boot up WIN NT. 0x69 message. Have done all the recommended steps listed in the Doc Release Notes for the Ultra Stor 24F. Drives have more than 1024 cyl. What can I do? How do we get past this message? Does a Beta Driver exist now? If not when? Will one be avail in the true beta NT release later this month? Chas #: 11811 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 15:48:50 Sb: #11684-UltraStor 24F 0x69 msg Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: Charles Hoffman 71477,3612 (X) Charles, The support for the 24F will be in the Official Beta release. C. Straghal [Ultrastore] has mentioned this on the forum many times. A number of people have been able to get the 24F to work in ISA mode. There is currently no support for an ESDI drive with >1204 if the hardware does not do the translation. Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11862 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 06:29:12 Sb: #11811-UltraStor 24F 0x69 msg Fm: Charles Hoffman 71477,3612 To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 Scott, Thanks for your reply. I am interested in the prior mentions of UltraStor 24, however after several searches for this info we are still unable to find any referance. We have not been monitoring this forum since there has been no reason since we are unable to do a thing with NT until it is installed. Possibly the messages you refer to have scrolled off the system? We have found mention to many other Ultrastor drivers but not the 24. Thanks, chas #: 11159 S3/Windows NT Setup 03-Oct-92 12:36:10 Sb: Seagate 3283A Fm: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 To: sysop (X) I have been working with NT since San Francisco using a 210 MB Seagate 1239A IDE drive. Disk space was a problem ( two SDK's, two versions of windows, etc. ), so I added a second hard drive - Seagate 3283A IDE (240 MB). I made the 3283A the master and the 1239A the slave partitioned as follows: C: 100MB D: 100MB E: 34MB for NTFS F: 100MB first partition on 1239A G: 100MB The initial setup screen sees all of these partitions. If I try to install on F:, the blue screen after the first re-boot (MmInit) that that examines the file systems, give the message: Cannot determine file system on drives C, D, and E. The graphic install continues until I assume that it is trying to write the boot sector information and aborts with an I/O error. If I try to install on the D: drive, the blue screen aborts with error 0x69 Phase 1 i/o init. failed. I would have added another 1239A but Seagate does not make it anymore; the 3283 is its replacement. This drive works fine with WFW and DOS 6.0. Any suggestions? I need to continue working with WFW and NT? Thanks, --Bill Block #: 11417 S3/Windows NT Setup 05-Oct-92 19:48:00 Sb: #11159-Seagate 3283A Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 What did you use to partition your drives? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11670 S3/Windows NT Setup 07-Oct-92 11:15:49 Sb: #11417-Seagate 3283A Fm: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Scott, I used DOS 6.0's FDISK program. I have tried to use the ST3283A stand alone, and after the reboot, I received error 0x0A. Also, the ST1239A has been partitioned with DOS 6.0 and it works fine. Do you have access to a 3283 so that it can be verified that it does not work. I purchased this drive specifically to run NT and need to determine where to go from here. Thanks for the help. --Bill Block #: 11813 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 15:49:02 Sb: #11670-Seagate 3283A Fm: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 To: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 (X) Bill, We don't have any 3283 drives in our lab. I have also searched the forum to see if anyone else has reported a problem with the drive and came up with 0 hits. Have you tried partitioning the drive with Windows NT rather than DOS 6? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11839 S3/Windows NT Setup 08-Oct-92 19:34:03 Sb: #11813-Seagate 3283A Fm: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 To: Scott B. Suhy[MS] 71075,3225 (X) That was my first thought, but as long as that drive is on by system i can't install NT -- Catch 22. I decided to keep the drive on another node since NT can access files on a Windows for Workgroups server. With MSTOOLS installed on that node I have plenty of room left on my ST1239A to do development in NT. I still hope that NT will be compatible with the 3283 since it is a very commonly available drive. Thanks for the help Scott. --Bill Block There is 1 Reply. #: 11852 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 03:39:04 Sb: #11839-Seagate 3283A Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 (X) Bill, <> I have a couple of segate drives myself, but not the 3283. How large is the drive? I was just curious if it had more than 1024 cyls, and if you were using the translation mode. Also do you know what type of disk controller you are using with that drive? I've had to rearrange my controller/disk combinations a few times to get things working for several OS's. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11882 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 08:10:16 Sb: #11852-Seagate 3283A Fm: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) <> yes it does, the ST3283A is a 240 MB drive that has basically replaced the ST1239A 210 MB drive. I am using the translation mode on both of these drives. The 1239 works and the 3283 does not. The 'A' at the end of the part number indicates IDE, which means that the controller is integrated into the drive itself. Cards that are sold as IDE controllers are really nothing more that a parallel port used to interface with the drive. In any event I am using the same card for both drives and did also substitute a different card with no change in behavior. I am currently using the drive out of a Windows for Workgroups server on which I have installed the MSTOOLS directory. This is an ok work around, but obviously I hope it does not have to be a long term solution, since I would prefer for all of my machines to be running NT. --Bill Block There is 1 Reply. #: 11892 S3/Windows NT Setup 09-Oct-92 08:57:38 Sb: #11882-Seagate 3283A Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Amocams/Modular, Inc. 76260,3666 Bill, <> Ah. I have the 1239A. It also experienced a few problems with NT. I could perform a DOS2NT install, but a modified graphical install failed with a "disk error". As I understand it the translation is performed on the drive in hardware or software (bios) in most instances. NT's device driver only works with drives that do perform this translation in hardware or thru software (device driver). But this translation may not work for all drives. Each vendor may implement the translation a bit differently. So for drives that do not implement a supported (curently) method of translation in hardware will require modification of the NT device driver. If the translation is performed in hardware and is invisible to the NT software it will work. If not well... Art #: 11188 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps 03-Oct-92 17:37:32 Sb: NO Win 16 Subsystem Fm: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104 To: x After 2 weeks of NT use, I'm only just trying to run Windows 3.1 progs ... only problem is I can't. I cannot get ANY Windows 3.1 programs to run. Starting (eg) Write from a Program Group, the disk churns for a few seconds, as if loading the Win 16 Subsystem - then nothing. Click Write icon again, and eventually get a Application Error box saying - '' The Win 16 Subsystem is not responding to your request. Choose RETRY .... or Cancel to Terminate the Win 16 Subsystem ''. Trying to start write from the File Manager produces noting. From a cli / command shell box, that box just locks. Putting Wowexec.exe in my startup group doesn't help either. NT is on my D: partition under \winnt. I had to go into regedit some weeks back to put the swapfile on d:\ - as recommended (with cautions!) in Setup. At a guess, I probably need to go into regedit again uner the local_machine/system/controlset001/control/ windows or wow entry. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Gary #: 11806 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps 08-Oct-92 15:45:48 Sb: #11188-NO Win 16 Subsystem Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454 To: Gary J. Walker 100020,1104 Gary - Could you tell me a little more about your configuration. 1. PC make and model. 2. Memory 3. Disk controller and peripherals. I have tested most Windows 3.1 Accessories, including write on different types of hardware and have not run across this problem. With a little more information I'm sure we can get to the bottom of it. Thanks, Jay Vernon[Microsoft] #: 11807 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps 08-Oct-92 15:45:53 Sb: Function failed Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454 To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X) Bob - This message and 10573 seem very strange. Can you please detail you configuration for me. 1. PC make and model. 2. Memory, disk controller and peripherals. 3. Anything else you thing I need to know. Thanks, Jay #: 11808 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps 08-Oct-92 15:45:58 Sb: Floppy drive Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454 To: Bob Churchwell 70743,3000 (X) Bob - Please see 10571 if you haven't already. Thanks, Jay #: 11809 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps 08-Oct-92 15:46:03 Sb: 16-bit apps under NT Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454 To: Bob Duste 70632,633 (X) Bob - If you're still having this problem. Please try copying the needed files from the diskettes to your Windows NT machine and bypassing the setup for now. Then just run winword (in the case of Word). Thanks, Jay #: 11810 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps 08-Oct-92 15:46:14 Sb: Compatibility Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454 To: Larry J. Seltzer 72241,445 Larry - Very good point. There are obviously programs in the 'Top 100' of the best selling Windows 3.x (or DOS) that will not run under Windows NT's protected subsystem structure. If developers (in the case of Windows 3.x) used the WIN16 api calls to write their programs most should run. However, people who execute system level or hardware calls may hit protection violations, in which case they will have to rewrite their code. Norton is a very good example. Some of the things Norton can do in unprotected DOS, would be a violation of the requirements for C2 security which as you know we've applied for, in addition to allowing a program operating in one subsystem crash the entire operating system or another subsystem. The statement could be 'the top (~)100 DOS and Windows 3.x applications that do not require compromising the basis of Windows NT protected subsystems to operate.' Thanks for the clarification, it is very important. Jay There is 1 Reply. #: 11865 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps 09-Oct-92 06:55:03 Sb: #11810-Compatibility Fm: John Oellrich 72611,1452 To: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454 Jay, >>The statement could be 'the top (~)100 DOS and Windows 3.x applications that do not require compromising the basis of Windows NT protected subsystems to operate.'<< Somehow this doesn't strike me as having the correct marketing pizzazz ;-> John #: 11869 S4/MS-DOS/Win3.x Apps 09-Oct-92 07:43:30 Sb: DOS bios compatability Fm: John Estelle 70674,1510 To: sysop The clock timer overflow flag located at 40:70 (midnight flag) is not getting reset. Is this level of compatability going to be provided for DOS emulation in the future? #: 11289 S5/32-bit Windows Apps 04-Oct-92 23:51:41 Sb: #10796-NT threads/multitasking Fm: Marc C. Brooks 71461,320 To: Rob Tessier 76666,3633 Rob, Earlier on, MS said that the kernal scheduler had some "quirks" in the July release. The swear they have smoothed things out since. Don't judge too much at the moment. Marc #: 11362 S5/32-bit Windows Apps 05-Oct-92 13:20:58 Sb: NT EXE structure Fm: Harald Pitro 100024,2662 To: All Who can helps me to find the new structure of 32-bit-EXE/DLL files for Windows NT? Thanks Harald #: 11082 S5/32-bit Windows Apps 02-Oct-92 17:50:31 Sb: winnt better w/EISA? Fm: Jim Bublitz 72110,2267 To: anyone I have bugeted money for a good 486 computer and I plan to heavily use WIN32 and maybe WinNT. Can anyone who knows what they are talking about tell me if it would be a good idea to buy an EISA machine rather than ISA. Will there be anything you can do with Win32 on an EISA that you cant do on an ISA. The majority of my work on this machine will be Software Development using C/C++./exit #: 11413 S5/32-bit Windows Apps 05-Oct-92 19:42:23 Sb: #11082-winnt better w/EISA? Fm: neil colvin 71650,3517 To: Jim Bublitz 72110,2267 I run WINNT on both a 33 mhz 386 ISA machine and a 50MHZ 486 EISA machine. It works fine on both. There is NOTHING that I cannot do on both machines. The 50mhz 486 machine is about 3 - 4 times faster, thats all. #: 11686 S5/32-bit Windows Apps 07-Oct-92 13:31:36 Sb: Upload IcoShow ? Fm: Harald Pitro 100024,2662 To: Sysop (X) Dear Sysop, I have revised my Shareware program IcoShow so it runs under Windows NT and I had sent it to contest. Would you advise me to upload it in this forum or it's better to wait? Thanks and greats Harald #: 11290 S5/32-bit Windows Apps 05-Oct-92 02:25:25 Sb: '_ctype' values wrong Fm: Richard Spence 100112,304 To: Microsoft Subject: "_ctype" values are wrong From: Kevin Broadey via Richard Spence's CIS account I am building an application on an Olivetti PWS4000 running the July release of Windows NT using the MCL compiler. I linked my application with the following libraries and isdigit('0') returned zero (which it shouldn't). I relinked it with libcmt.lib at the start of the list and isdigit('0') returned a non-zero value (which it should). The libraries were:- win32libs= $(LIB)\gdi32.lib $(LIB)\kernel32.lib $(LIB)\user32.lib \ $(LIB)\userrtl.lib $(LIB)\crtdll.lib $(LIB)\ntdll.lib I ran MCL with -E -C and checked the preprocessor output. The macro version of isdigit() was being used, so I put in a MessageBox call to wsprintf the value of (int)(_ctype+1)['0'] It said 0xE1. The 0x04 bit ought to be set for a digit. So the question is, which of the above libraries defines "_ctype" and gives it the wrong values? #: 11818 S5/32-bit Windows Apps 08-Oct-92 16:07:17 Sb: #11290-'_ctype' values wrong Fm: Azfar Moazzam - Microsof 72370,453 To: Richard Spence 100112,304 (X) Hi Richard, This is a development related issue. Please post this message in the MSWIN32 forum. Our programming gurus in the MSWIN32 forum should be able to help you with this issue. The WINNT forum is for setup and installation related questions. Best Regards. Azfar [MS] #: 11890 S6/OS/2, POSIX Apps 09-Oct-92 08:38:15 Sb: Installing SQL Server Fm: Dan Sullivan 76327,1534 To: SYSOP I am trying to install SQL Server 4.2 on NT according to the release notes SQL Server Programmers Toolkit for Windows NT. When I try to run setup on the OS/2 Setup Disk (Developer's System) I get the error from NT "Cannot connect to OS2 subsystem". What does this mean, how can I fix it. Thanks in advance Dan #: 11450 S7/Utilities/Applets 05-Oct-92 22:57:57 Sb: #10794-How to use Epsilon.ini? Fm: Mark Anders (Inmark) 76506,1112 To: Bob Byron 70107,1734 Bob, I'd check out Slick. I have a copy and it does a very good job of emulating Epsilon, as well as Brief, but since I don't use that, I'm not sure how it compares with the original. Slick does most of the stuff Epsilon does and has the process buffer as well. Mark Anders Inmark Development Corp. #: 11624 S7/Utilities/Applets 07-Oct-92 06:29:02 Sb: #10849-How to use Epsilon.ini? Fm: Bob Byron 70107,1734 To: Cohagan 74375,313 (X) Thanks for the suggesstion, but where do I find MicroEmacs? I did not see it in the WINNT area. Bob #: 11663 S7/Utilities/Applets 07-Oct-92 10:41:09 Sb: #11624-How to use Epsilon.ini? Fm: Cohagan 74375,313 To: Bob Byron 70107,1734 Bob- MicroEmacs is (or at least was) available in Lib 1 of the MSWIN32 forum. The name of the file I downloaded was MEW10E.ZIP. There is another file which contains the MIPS version, but I don't recall its name. Good Luck, Bill #: 11667 S7/Utilities/Applets 07-Oct-92 11:06:46 Sb: #10713-cd player Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Dan Barrett 75070,2231 Dan, Are both CD's audio CD's? Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11802 S7/Utilities/Applets 08-Oct-92 15:37:05 Sb: #11667-cd player Fm: Dan Barrett 75070,2231 To: na 71075,3225 (X) Yes, both CD's are audio CD's. The problem has changed a bit since I posted the message, for some unknown reason, I can't hang NT anymore, but the CD player keeps telling me to insert a CD even though the CD is loaded into the drive. I can retry froever, with no success, but if I select abort or ignore, and then rescan the disk it now loads fine. I did discover 1 thing which might have a bearing on the problem, I noticed that in the cdplayer.ini file, that this particular CD is the only one which whose id starts out with letters instead of numbers. Thanks, Dan #: 11204 S7/Utilities/Applets 04-Oct-92 01:50:08 Sb: xtradrive, IIT Fm: Fankhauser Gerhard 100041,1275 To: Microsoft Will Windows NT work with xtradrive from IIT ? thanks i.a. for the answer #: 11804 S7/Utilities/Applets 08-Oct-92 15:43:37 Sb: #11204-xtradrive, IIT Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 To: Fankhauser Gerhard 100041,1275 I really do not know offhand. Have you asked the vendor yet. Thereare quite a few apps that I may not have firsthand knowledge. Your first best source is the vendor in this case.... Devlin #: 11805 S7/Utilities/Applets 08-Oct-92 15:43:42 Sb: #10664-Losing system font Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 To: Kenneth Nicolson 100113,304 (X) Hmmm...Please fill out the bugrep.txt form in lib3 and upload it to the same LIB so we can process this prob.... Devlin #: 11030 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 11:17:02 Sb: NT Errors Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 To: Alex Howard 73310,2237 (X) I'm sorry that you have continued to have probs. Since you have already sent us the data, I am sure that we are hard at work trying to get it straight. If we come up with a workaround for this build we wil let you know, but we are so close to the general beta release, you may not see the results until then... Devlin There is 1 Reply. #: 11052 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 14:09:37 Sb: #11030-NT Errors Fm: Alex Howard 73310,2237 To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X) Thanks, Devlin. What concerns me is that the general beta will come out and we still won't be able to access data on our CD Tech unit. I certainly hope we can. Again, thank you. -a. #: 11057 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 15:25:50 Sb: My CDU-8012 works Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514 To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X) I was able to install NT using my Sony CDU-8012. This drive is in a Sun Microsystems box. I used an Adaptec 1742 controller and did the full graphical install. It even played music on with the CD controller app. #: 11065 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 15:46:41 Sb: #10712-keyboard lockup Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: Dan Barrett 75070,2231 (X) Dan, I've just tried (with no success) to duplicate this on a Gateway 486/33 ISA with a non-remapping keyboard. Is it possible for you to swap keyboards to try and narrow in on the problem? Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11109 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 20:42:31 Sb: #10872-Plus Hardcard Fm: Anil K. Sodhy 70143,365 To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X) I have managed to get around this limitation. I can now use my Hardcard and my regular IDE drive. I will be testing lots of applications. #: 11128 S8/H/W Compatibility 03-Oct-92 03:13:04 Sb: #10945-Compex ethernet cards Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650 To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X) Thanks - what I will do in the short term is to try a real SMC card (should arrive any minute!) and see if that solves the problem. James Mansion #: 11138 S8/H/W Compatibility 03-Oct-92 08:14:33 Sb: COM PORTS AND WINNT Fm: Don Perry 76676,1127 To: Steve Fait [Microsoft] 75300,3143 (X) I am unable to use my modem under WINNT. 1. I have my modem (Hayes Ultra 14400) configured as COM1 and a serial mouse as COM2. WINNT recognizes the mouse on COM2, appears to recognize the existence of COM1 but neither the TERMINAL.EXE program nor any DOS or WIN31 apps can use the modem. The serial IO card has a NS16550AFN UART chip installed for COM1. 2. When I try to inspect the "advanced" com port settings from the control panel (logged on as administrator) I get a "You do mot have proper IO privilege to save the advanced IO settings. Contact the system administrator" message. My modem works well under WIN31 and OS/2. WHAT GIVES??? How do I obtain "proper IO privilege" to change com port settings in the control panel??? Any information gratefully appreciated!! Don #: 11028 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 11:16:50 Sb: #10992-Fut Domain & NEC Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 To: Robert Chronister 70363,246 (X) och! You are correct. Thanx for catching my typo! Devlin There is 1 Reply. #: 11098 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 18:46:43 Sb: #11028-Fut Domain & NEC Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X) Devlin: Glad to be of help. bob #: 11029 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 11:16:56 Sb: #10145-Fut Domain & NEC Fm: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 To: Jeff Rosen 70034,3554 Have you tried moving around the order of the SCSI devices. Some others with similar probs have reported this to be an effective workaround in some cases.... Devlin #: 11205 S8/H/W Compatibility 04-Oct-92 02:02:25 Sb: #10949-Fut Domain & NEC Fm: Steve Dirickson 70313,3252 To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 >Make sure that you do not have an IRQ conflict? The HAL is being initialized >at that point, and it is seeing all cards on the bus, driver or no driver. I, >ran into that one the other day.... As I mentioned in one of my messages on this (you probably didn't see it--it was a few weeks back) I stripped the machine down to nothing but the TMC-1680 and the video board (Paradise 512K VGA Professional), and still got the same result. Thanks for the consideration though. At this late date, I'll probably just wait until the next release comes out and see how that one does. #: 11233 S8/H/W Compatibility 04-Oct-92 10:39:07 Sb: #10894-SoundBlaster Pro MCV Fm: John Marquette 76064,1037 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 Terence: Thanks for the tip. I've forwarded a copy of the file to the appropriate internet address. I'm anxious to see what Creative Labs is going to do with this problem, as it's a problem for them on the Win31 DOS side as well. Agreed, MCA machines are for all practical purposes orphans, but my sweetheart deal on mine makes me want to milk it for all it's worth. I'll send you a copy of the hardware report via CIS mail. Regards, John #: 11342 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 11:27:31 Sb: #10906-DTC3290AS SCSI Adaptor Fm: Mike Snowden 100021,3015 To: HowieFomby 76645,754 Using the standard driver is so flakey as to be unusable. Our supplier upgraded us to a caching controller on one node that did work - but compiled our large MFC app in 1 hour instead of 20min, so we reverted back. I'm waiting to see whether a controller is included in the Developer Membership kit, since we specified a bus type.... #: 11388 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 14:59:17 Sb: $199 DAK CD-ROM??? Fm: tom campbell 75530,3607 To: All Has anyone trieNT on that $199 CD-ROM machine from DAK? Cheap scum that I am, I'd like to buy one if I can run NT. Yes, I know everything'll take forever. --tom campbell There is 1 Reply. #: 11490 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 07:58:05 Sb: #11388-$199 DAK CD-ROM??? Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: tom campbell 75530,3607 Tom, <> You'll be able install NT from DOSusing the DOS2NT method, but don't expect to be able to use it under NT. The drive/controller is a proprientary interface (as I understand it) so ... Art #: 11591 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 21:13:31 Sb: SCSI II Host Adaptors??? Fm: Karl Mitschke 73650,150 To: all Hello All: Nice to see you all again! I have recently purchased a Toshiba 3201 CD Rom drive for my Amiga, and figure I will put it in an external case, so I can use it both for the Amiga, and NT.. Now my question is... What SCSI Host Adapters work with this drive, and NT? I would really like to end up with an Ultrastor, since they make my ESDI controller, and it is FAST.. talking <10 seconds from power on to a working WIN31 cursor... So, either I need a cheap adapter that works now, or I need to get an Ultrastor now and use dos2nt till beta days (after all, it's only money!) Any comments, thoughts, warnings??? I have been saving for months for this, and sop have literally tens of dollars burning a hole in my checkbook.. Help me spend it!!! Karl #: 11056 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 15:18:14 Sb: #10943-AST 4/33 Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514 To: Devlin Spearman(MS) 71075,645 (X) I succesfully installed NT (July) on my AST Power Premium 4/33. My bios version is 1.05. The only problem I had related to having 16 megs of ram and not having the over 16 mb EISA setting enabled. #: 11345 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 12:23:56 Sb: #11056-AST 4/33 Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 To: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514 I had the guy from AST here.( he is a beta tester for MS also) we for the life of us could not get nt to write / read from the floppys. We even went back to bios ver 1.04 NO GOOD we could not get rid of the error on boot of "ESIA memory information incorrect using isa memopry configuration" have tried every thing we could think of. power premum 4/33 bios ver 1.05 16M mem #: 11551 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 14:17:00 Sb: #11345-AST 4/33 Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514 To: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 (X) How much ram do you have ? When I installed 16mb, I recieved a EISA ram configuration error. I had to change the "allow over 16mb of ram" software switch in the EISA setup menu for NT boot without a error. When you install 16mb in your system, you are given 16.25mb because of memory mapped out of the UMB blocks. Are you using the EISA disks that came with the PP or another AST EISA machine ? One nice thing about buying an AST is that your dealer should be more than happy to declare all the parts in your power premium dead and order new ones for you. Carlen There is 1 Reply. #: 11601 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 22:14:04 Sb: #11551-AST 4/33 Fm: Daniel Peterson 70363,2541 To: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514 I did put 16 megs in and I will check the switch for the setting as I dont remember what I set it to. Dan #: 11621 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 05:04:18 Sb: Bernoulli Drive Fm: Robert Chronister 70363,246 To: Steve Fait (Microsoft) 75300,3143 (X) Steve: Got very surprised yesterday. Added a 90 meg Bernoulli to my system using an Adaptec 1542b. Opened NT and it read the drive without trouble. Thought that the transportable drives were not recognized by NT. NOte: the new Bernoullis are SCSI II. NT is now recognizing my 2 IDE drives, my 2 SCSI drives and the Bernoulli. As they sometimes say, "Doesn't get much more complicated than this" . Anway, curious about the Bernoulli. bob #: 11629 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 06:48:51 Sb: UltraStor 24F Fm: Charles Hoffman 71477,3612 To: ALL I am using a Gateway 486/50DX2 EISA with 16meg ram, 2 half gig drives with an UltraStor 24F controller. Installed WIN NT stuff from the CD-ROM, great! However, I cannot boot up WIN NT. 0x69 message. Have done all the recommended steps listed in the Doc Release Notes for the Ultra Stor 24F. Drives have more than 1024 cyl. What can I do? How do we get past this message? Does a Beta Driver exist now? If not when? Will one be avail in the true beta NT release later this month? Chas #: 11261 S8/H/W Compatibility 04-Oct-92 16:42:25 Sb: Panasonic CD support Fm: Stephen W. Hiemstra 71531,575 To: sysop (X) I am curious whether the beta version of Windows NT will expand on the current list of hardware components supported. In particular, I am concerned about NT support of the Panasonic CD-ROM that comes with the Creative Labs Multimedia Upgrade Kit. I have already invested in this kit and am not anxious to look for a new CD. What's the good word? #: 11673 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 11:29:52 Sb: #11261-Panasonic CD support Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: Stephen W. Hiemstra 71531,575 (X) Stephen, Microsoft's standard means of releasing drivers is with their CD releases. Although Microsoft is not committed to continue this practice, currently all fixed, updated, or new device drivers are being posted on the CompuServe Forum: WinNT, Lib 2. Microsoft is currently making every attempt to keep this library updated with drivers as they become available. If you have hardware that is not currently supported, or does not have a driver posted in WinNT, Lib 2; please make a device driver request by filling out the hwfeed.txt form and mail it to Microsoft at winnthw@microsoft.com. Please be aware that because of Microsoft's support demands right now, this is a one way alias; Microsoft is not likely to respond directly to you to confirm that they have received your request. The hardware compatibility list can be found in MSWIN32, Lib 17 on CompuServe as 0792hw.txt. Hwfeed.txt can be found on CompuServe in MSWIN32, Lib 17; or WINNT, Lib 1. Regards, Sam Karroum [MS] #: 11702 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 14:25:02 Sb: #10921-cd player Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: jim holmes 71507,1346 Jim, Only SCSI-II CD drives are supported for audio output with the July release. This is being looked into to add support for SCSI-I (if the term applies :) for the beta release. Regards, Sam Karroum [MS] #: 11149 S8/H/W Compatibility 03-Oct-92 10:14:54 Sb: #10597-Soundblaster CD-ROM Fm: John A. Gallagher 74216,270 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 (X) I came into this late. Is there a question as to whether there will -ever- be a driver for this CD-ROM? There are an awful lot of people that figured a system developed for Windows 3.X would be -one of the first - supported by Win NT! I am one of them. It now seems like we are being told that we may have to reinvest in other drives and controllers. Can you offer any word of encouragement? Who is the bottleneck - you or Creative Labs? The last time I spoke to them, they suggested that they do plan to support NT -in the future. How come noone can define when/if this will happen? P.S. I have already sent in an HWFEED but feedback only seems to go one way. #: 11703 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 14:28:23 Sb: #11149-Soundblaster CD-ROM Fm: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 To: John A. Gallagher 74216,270 John, I didn't mean to sound discouraging. I would expect any piece of hardware with wide usage and a demand for Windows NT compatibility will get a driver. I just can't promise anything until it actually happens. You never know when lightning will strike! There are two things you can do to encourage speedy driver development, though. 1. Contact the hardware vendor. 2. Send in an hwfeed.txt. Sounds like you've done both. Regards, -- Terence Hosken [MS] #: 11326 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 06:54:36 Sb: winnt Fm: RICH COMEAU 70751,3056 To: sysop BUZZWORDS INTERNATIONAL INC 10-05-92 RICH COMEAU RT. 1 BOX 215 T CAPE GIRARDEAU, MO 63701 PHONE 314-334-6317 FAX 314-334-0794 DIRECT LINE TO MR. COMEAU 314-335-1229 MCI ACCOUNT ID BUZZWORD COMPUSERVE ID 70751,3056 I GET THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE EVERY TIME I BOOT WINDOWS NT INCORECT EISA MEMORY CONFIGURATION WINDOWS NT WILL USE THE IASA MEMORY CONFIGURATION INFORMATION MY OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS DOS, OS/2 2.0, SCO UNIX, INTERNATIVE UNIX, SOLARUS UNIX, UHC UNIX, AND UNIVELL UNIX DO NOT GIVE ME THIS MESSAGE THE VERSION/DATE ON MY WIN32 CDROM SAYS PRELIMINARY VERISION JULY 1992 MY HARDWARE CONFIGURATION FOLLOWS INTERRUPT ASSIGNMENTS: STANDARD DMA ASSIGNMENTS: IRQ 0 System Timer DMA 0 IRQ 1 Keyboard DMA 1 Sound Blaster IRQ 2 [Cascade] DMA 2 Floppy Disk IRQ 3 Etherlink II DMA 3 IRQ 4 NE2000 DMA 4 [Cascade] IRQ 5 InPort Mouse DMA 5 IRQ 6 Floppy Disk DMA 6 IRQ 7 Sound Blaster DMA 7 Adaptec SCSI IRQ 8 Clock/Calendar IRQ 9 Available SCSI ID = 2 WangDAT 3 Gig DAT 1300 IRQ 10 Western Digital Ethernet SCSI ID = 3 MITSHITA CD-ROM CR-5xx IRQ 11 Adaptec IRQ 12 Available IRQ 13 80387 IO ADDRESS 80486 CPU EISA BUS AIR BOARD Disabled Parallel Port(s) LPT1=378h Floppy Drive A: 1.44M(3.5") Disabled COM1=3F8h Disabled COM2=2F8h UART 8250 Floppy Drive B: 1.2M(5.25") NE2000 IRQ 4 IO = 340 NO DMA NO RAM Hard Drive C: = 107M ETHERLINK II IRQ = 3 IO = 300 MEM DC000 SEGATE ST8120A 16MS 3.5" DRIVE ADAPTEC SCSI Adapter 330H SCSI Address 7 Base Memory Size: 640K IDE CONTROLLER Extended Memory Size: 15360K Video Adapter: ATI ULTRA 1.5 MEG VIDEO RAM Supports 64Meg on Mother Board Video Bios Ver 1.1 Clock/Calendar: CMOS Clock Mouse: 2 Button(s) Joystick(s): YES 19 Inch Mitsubishi Diamond Scan PHYSICAL STATION NUMBER 0000:C0EF:C71C Res 1024x768 Non Interlaced 2ND VIDEO ADAPTER HERCULES CPU SPEED 15785 Dhrystones Phoenix Bios Ver. 1.01.03 VIDEO SPEED 17478 Chars/Second BIOS Copyright 1985-1991 MATH SPEED 5640.0K Whetstones CLOCK SPEED 33 Mhz IMPORT MOUSE DRIVER 8.20 XMS VERSION 3.00 DRIVER 3.07 #: 11707 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 14:48:29 Sb: #11326-winnt Fm: Sam Karroum [MS] 71075,642 To: RICH COMEAU 70751,3056 Rich, Run the EISA configuration and double check for a switch or setiing that enables memory above 16-Mb. If such a switch exists, and not set properly, the amount of memory installed and the amount being reported will differ and that's what triggering the memory message. Hope this helps. Sam Karroum [MS] #: 11742 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 21:41:10 Sb: Hardware compatibility Fm: Don Apperson 72700,1042 To: Steve Fait I am getting ready to buy a CAD development computer for WIN32, but I don't know if it will be compatable with Windows NT. It is a Gateway 66MHZ 486DX2 with 32 MB and a 500 MB SCSI drive. I assume this would not have any compatibility problems, but I don't know about the graphics. Gateway ships this computer with a VESA Local Bus ATI Ultra Pro with 1MB VRAM. The hardware compatibility list seems to indicate that the ATI cards are not yet supported, much less a VESA local bus. Can anyone tell me if it will be OK or do I have to get a SVGA card for now to develop on? Don #: 11107 S8/H/W Compatibility 02-Oct-92 20:20:55 Sb: #10985-Toshiba Source Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725 To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 (X) Ain't -- egh scratch that -- Isn't it the truth! #: 11604 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 22:35:50 Sb: #10953-Toshiba Source Fm: Bruce Colwell 100026,1210 To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 Do you have any non 800 numbers for us international guys? They sound like a good deal! #: 11743 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 22:46:25 Sb: #11604-Toshiba Source Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 To: Bruce Colwell 100026,1210 Re: High Technology - every number they list is a 1-800 number, except for their fax - 818-988-6581. They are located at 16539 Saticoy Street, Van Nuys, CA 91409-9277. So far I'm delighted with my setup - just got it all working with DOS and Windows, NT is next. #: 11449 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 22:24:22 Sb: A good CD-ROM drive?? Fm: Tim Smith 70313,1326 To: ALL Greetings, Im looking to get a CD-ROM drive for my PC. My requirements are for it to work with: DOS, OS/2 2.0, NT, the universe :-) Anyway, my picks so far are the following: CD Technologies CD Porta-Drive via the Microsoft offer, which is suppost to be SCSI-2 compatable, but I have heard it will not handle sync negoation (not good). Has anyone else used this drive? How do you like it? is MPC video smooth on it? Would you buy another one if needed? Im alittle worried about CD Technologies staying in business to support the drive since toshiba will not. NEC 74 via plain mail order. This is only a SCSI-1 device but the update to os/2 will support it with DATA and AUDIO, so I assume that NT will also support more fully in time. It much faster than any others on the market. Also it is XA compatable, whereas the toshiba is not. If anyone out there has one, what do you think of it? Would you buy another? And I know NEC will be there to support me. thanks.. tim There is 1 Reply. #: 11495 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 08:18:23 Sb: #11449-A good CD-ROM drive?? Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 To: Tim Smith 70313,1326 Tim - I bought the Toshiba XM3301E (same drive as the CD Tech unit) from High Technology (800-366-6001) for $483 including shipping (vs $475 from CD Tech) ($387 for the internal unit versus $425) and ordered an Adaptec 1542B separately. Service was fast, and buying from this company qualifies you for low$$ 1for1 CD ROMs (the list is 7 pages long). I am very satisfied, and this drive is sold as a Toshiba (case by Tos too), so I have no worries about service. Hope this helps . . . #: 11608 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 23:23:28 Sb: #11449-A good CD-ROM drive?? Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342 To: Tim Smith 70313,1326 > CD Technologies CD Porta-Drive... have heard it does not suppor sync > negotiation, which is not good... The NEC 74/84 also does not support sync negotiation. If you turn sync negotiation on on the host adapter, the NEC will fail about 50% of the time. I solved this problem by turning off sync negotiation on my AHA1542B and turning it ON on my HP C2247 hard drive. As long as your devices that DO support sync negotiation have a jumper to enable it, you can disable it on the host adapter, and this will not interfere with devices that do NOT support it. (BTW, Coretest is reporting about 2.0MB/sec on the HP without sync, 2.7 with. The 2247 has variable sectors/track and runs between 2.5 and 5MB/sec transfer rate. So, I assume the reason it is so "slow" is because I haven't filled it up much yet...) Oh, yes, another NEC84 oddity - despite what has been reported here to the contrary, the NEC 84 has NO provisions for SCSI bus termination! (It was reported by somebody else that switch 5 provides termination.) In my discussions with their technical support, they said that is not true, that switch 5, like switch 6, is intended for use only during testing. They shipped me a little SCSI ribbon terminator, that plugs between the cable and the drive. They INSIST that in the cases where the NEC is the only device on the bus, that terminators at the host adapter end are sufficient. That's not at all what the 1542B manual says, though. And, another little NEC tidbit - the little bus termination adapter they sent me is marked "Trantor". Hint, hint... #: 11746 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 23:00:00 Sb: #11608-A good CD-ROM drive?? Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 To: Jon Tara 76477,3342 (X) Jon - If you don't mind my asking - I'm trying to get my 1542B running reliably, and it only seems to be sensed about half the time on bootup. (Standard settings, other than BIOS and FD disabled - I'm using it only for CD ROM.) Would turning off the sync negotiation help? (I'll open up the box and try this, as well as playing with the wait states, but some advice would be appreciated.) Thanks in advance for the help. There is 1 Reply. #: 11748 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 23:38:35 Sb: #11746-A good CD-ROM drive?? Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342 To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 If you are using a NEC CD-ROM, you definately need to turn off sync negotiation on the controller (this is the way the board is shipped). Also, you can disable the BIOS, since it is used only for hard disks, and will just slow down your boot procedure while it sits there looking for a hard drive. I am using the CorelSCSI CDROM driver that shipped with the 1542B-Plus. For some reason, you HAVE to use the version of MSCDEX that ships with it, NOT the slightly newer one available from Microsoft. If you are using the older Adaptec CD-rom ASPI driver that they sold (still do?) separately, I dunno anything about it. (To clarify - ASPI4DOS hasn't changed. The -Plus model ships with a set of ASPI drivers that you load after ASPI4DOS that support CD-ROM, optical read/write drives, jukeboxes, etc. that were written by Corel.) Also, you should not address the CDROM as device 0 or 1, since these are reserved for hard disks, at least in NT. The NEC drives ship jumpered for device 1. #: 11148 S8/H/W Compatibility 03-Oct-92 10:12:51 Sb: CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 To: all Is it true that NT currently only supports CDROM's on IRQ5? I am about to buy a CD ROM drive and SCSI controller, and I am trying to plan IRQ settings so that I don't run into problems. Unfortunately, I have too much stuff in my system, and IRQ5 is just not available. What is the scoop here? My current plan is to get a NEC CDR84 with a Future Domain TMC885M-DOS kit. ANy help would be appreciated. Steve There is 1 Reply. #: 11187 S8/H/W Compatibility 03-Oct-92 17:23:46 Sb: #11148-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X) Steve, no that's not true. It depends on the SCSI card, some cards like the Future Domain FD-850 are currently supported on IRQ 5 only. Others like the adaptec 1542B are supported on any IRQ the card supports. The NEC 74/84 are not supported yet under NT, It's the FD cards that have the IRQ restriction. Maybe in the next release, NT will support more IRQ's for the FD-8xx series. You should download the 0792 hardware compatibility list, before you buy anything if you want to make it work with NT. There may be a new HW Compatibility list out dated 0992. -Clarke There is 1 Reply. #: 11198 S8/H/W Compatibility 03-Oct-92 20:57:41 Sb: #11187-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 To: Clarke 75470,1676 (X) Thanks for the reply. The FD TMC 850 is listed in that file, but it doesn't say anything about IRQ issues. Also, isn't the support issue with the NEC 74/84 only a problem if you get the NEC controller card? When I ordered the CD with NT on it, the guy I was speaking to said that many people are successfully using the NEC drives with FD controllers. WHat about the SONY CDU-541 with a FD controller? So the TMC 850 will have th IRQ5 restriction, but what about the TMC 885? This is a controller that can be set for IRQs above 7 (10, 11, 15....). It sits on a 16bit bus, even though it has an 8 bit SCSI chip. Any additional comments would be appreciated. Steve P.S. Are any of ou out there using the NEC 84 with an inexpensive controller set for a high IRQ? Please let me know what card and settings have worked for you. There are 2 Replies. #: 11279 S8/H/W Compatibility 04-Oct-92 21:04:46 Sb: #11198-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X) Steve, the same issue holds true for the 885 as does for the 850. All the cards based on that chipset 830/850/885 are (under the current release) supported at IRQ5. As far as the NEC 84 goes, I have heard of problems running the unit under NT, especially with the audio playback, but cannot confirm for sure (as I don't own one...). Also the NEC 84 is not on the current compatibilty list as provided by MS, meaning that they have not sucessfully tested the unit with NT. I have used the 850 with the SONY CDU541 (what I first used to set NT up with). It worked fine, and without problems. -Clarke There is 1 Reply. #: 11327 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 07:37:36 Sb: #11279-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 To: Clarke 75470,1676 The list I downloaded here DOES include the NEC 84, so I am surprised when you say otherwise. As for the IRQ5 stuff, I annot set my system for IRQ5. Are there other inexpensive controllers that will allow me to use a higher IRQ setting? Steve #: 11399 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 16:32:47 Sb: #11327-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X) Oops, your right! The NEC 84 is listed on the list as being tested. my mistake, You might want to take a wander through the Install/Setup forum and read the messages about the 84/74. As for a cheap controller supporting NT, I don't know. The FD 850 is the cheapest that I know of. The next release (due end of this month...) hopefully will support the other IRQ's. -Clarke There is 1 Reply. #: 11400 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 17:11:16 Sb: #11399-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 To: Clarke 75470,1676 Clarke, Thanks for all of the replies. Are you with Microsoft? I assumed not since it didn't say Microsoft neaxt to your name, but you are one of only two CIS members that have responded to my question. Are you saying that the next release might support other IRQ's with any knowledge, or is it just wishful thinking? Steve #: 11619 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 03:38:10 Sb: #11400-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X) Nope, i'm not microsoft... I just had an interest because you had the same card I started with. (plus i've recently started using TAPCIS and am able to spend lots more time doing this stuff) I don't know for sure that they are going to be providing support for more IRQ's than IRQ5, but it seems like a logical step to me. As far as i'm aware none of the other SCSI adaptors have that restriction. Unles there is some reason they (MS) can only code for IRQ5, I would expect support for more to be forthcoming in the next release. But who knows what MS is going to be doing. I guess we will find out at the end of the month eh? -Clarke There is 1 Reply. #: 11622 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 05:54:14 Sb: #11619-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 To: Clarke 75470,1676 Clarke, Thanks for all of your help, and your responses. I think I have decided to go with the Adaptec 1542bk instead of the Future Domain. The TMC885mdos ends up costing about $100 less, but for now, it would be unusable on my system. Now I just have to decide once and for all which drive to get. All along I have been thinking Nec 84. When I called Developer Services, they tried to discourage me on that one, saying that the masses have had better luck with the Sony 541. Some of the vendors are advertising the Toshiba 3301/Adaptec 1542b as an NT kit. Then, another user here told me that he uses the Nec 84 with the Adaptec, and has had no problems at all. Any comments on this? Steve #: 11704 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 14:41:51 Sb: #11622-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Clarke 75470,1676 To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X) Steve, all I can tell you is what I have experianced here. When I first started using NT, I ran with a Sony CDU-541 and the FD-850. I replaced the FD-850 with an Adaptec 1540b (same as 1542 but without floppy drive). I was extremly happy with the 1540b, but when I bought an EISA motherboard, i replaced it with the Adaptec 1740A EISA SCSI. The Sony CDU-541 is SCSI-2, has a 64K buffer, Supports the Kodak Photo-CD format and has worked without flaw since I got it. It's got a great mechanism and I have nothing bad to say about it except that it comes with an external terminator - which is no big deal anyway. I recommend both the 541, and Adaptec products in general, they seem to be the best supported and compatible cards around. -Clarke There is 1 Reply. #: 11734 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 19:42:27 Sb: #11704-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 To: Clarke 75470,1676 Clarke, Thanks again for all of your input. Between your thoughts and those of Alan Paget, I am definately settled on the Adaptec controller. The drive is probably going to depend on the availability and prices I can find. I like the NEC for it's speed, but the Sony is cheaper and more available at this time. Anyway, I will probably make the plunge this week. I will let you know what I decide, and how everything works out. Steve #: 11341 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 11:08:41 Sb: #11198-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553 To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 hi, I have a 83M at irq 7 with TRANTOR T128 but I think that is not what you want. I have a question: I have the above setup and I can not use the CD Player applet in NT to play audio CDs. Is that because my CDROM is not SCSI II compatible? thanks Muzaffer #: 11489 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 07:53:55 Sb: #11341-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553 Mzaffer, <> That'w a rog. Only SCSI-2 drives are currently supported for audio. But trantor has a device driver for the T128. I'm going to install is a bit later and see if I can get ti working. If trantor included the appropriate filtering it will then play audio. We'll have to wait anv see on that one. Art #: 11565 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 17:19:51 Sb: #11489-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Art, I've downloaded Trantor's driver and installed it. It works like a charm when it comes to text but it does not play my audio CDs. It gives an unrecognized command error. Muzaffer #: 11754 S8/H/W Compatibility 08-Oct-92 05:07:36 Sb: #11565-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553 Muzaffer, <> I got it up and running now too. It's even on IRQ7. Ooooh. But I cannot play audio either. No error message (except cd player did say it could not read the TOC). No eject response either. When I loaded my 3.x app. I got an error loading the MCI audio driver. As I understand it non-scsi2 drives will need a filter to translate scsi2 audio commands to the proprietary command. Until this happens we are SOL. I just wonder who is going to write the filter? Art #: 11577 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 18:29:15 Sb: #11538-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 To: Alan E Paget 76620,1707 Alan, Thanks for the reply. Now I am getting the kind of info I needed. What IRQ are you using? Does NT work with the 1542b when it is set for high numbered IRQ's? How do you like the NEC CDR84 in general? I think I can get one for $509, but the Adaptec controller will cost me nearly $290 with the DOS drivers and cable (1542bk). I guess in the long run, it will be worth while though. I just don't want to buy hardware at such high costs, and find out that it isn't going to work afterall. Perhaps you can email me your phone number so I can pick your brain some more. Thanks for any help you can offer. Steve #: 11690 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 13:44:56 Sb: #11577-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Alan E Paget 76620,1707 To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X) Steve, Here is the current settings that are used in by machine for the 1542b, which work for dos/Windows and NT. IRQ #: 11691 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 13:51:56 Sb: #11577-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Alan E Paget 76620,1707 To: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 (X) Steve, Lets try this again (hit the wrong keys) My current settings for the 1542b are: IRQ - 11, DMA - 5, I/O - 330h, Bios - Dc00h, Floppy enabled. This works for DOS 5.0, Windows 3.1, and NT (without audio). These settings are the factory default settings for the 1542b. As for the NEC CDR84, It's great, NT booted and installed just like it should. Still wating for the DOS drivers to enbale the audio. NT is said to support the audio in the beta release... There are 2 Replies. #: 11735 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 19:42:32 Sb: #11691-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Steve Liberty 71450,2341 To: Alan E Paget 76620,1707 Alan, Thanks for your help. Now, I have definately decided on the Adaptec controller. I will probably get the NEC if I can find it at the right price, but I am still considering the Sony 541 as well, and the Toshiba 3301b is not out of the running either. I like the NEC for it's speed, but right now it is a little hard to find. I will be calling you to ask some more questions. Thanks for your numbers. Steve #: 11745 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 22:54:41 Sb: #11691-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 To: Alan E Paget 76620,1707 Alan - Just installed my 1542B. I'm using it only for CD ROM (now) so I disabled the BIOS. I'm calling tech support in the morning - system seems to intermittently sense the presence of the 1542B on bootup - no rhyme or reason. (If you have ideas here, I'd appreciate them. Everything's standard, except BIOS and FD disabled.) Also, what range should be excluded in EMM386/Windows if the BIOS is enabled? You seem to be knowledgable - pardon my asking all this technical stuff. Thanks in advance for the help . . . There is 1 Reply. #: 11755 S8/H/W Compatibility 08-Oct-92 05:40:32 Sb: #11745-CDROM help re IRQs Fm: Bob Chronister 70363,246 To: Waldemar Kowalski 70544,52 have my 1542b in the system in conjunction with an IDE controller. I did not disable the bios. When the card finds C & D already installed, it does not copy its bios to the system. I have not excluded its range in emm386. Dos (5 & 6), win 3.1 and NT recognize all 5 of my harddrives, the tape backup and the CD-Rom (until it died day before yesterday ). Have no problem at all. bob #: 11793 S8/H/W Compatibility 08-Oct-92 11:39:00 Sb: Driver Stuff Fm: H.T. GRIFFIN, II 72340,127 To: ANYONE Hi, I'm asking these questions for an associate that has the Windows NT developers CD and he has some hardware problems. Here his list of questions. Will the next beta release support: Allways IN-2000 SCSI card. Sound Blaster Pro CD-ROM drive. Why do long 100K+ .WAV files play when the small ones will work? Thanks, H.T. Griffin, II #: 11258 S8/H/W Compatibility 04-Oct-92 15:22:36 Sb: R3000 Iris Indigo Fm: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553 To: MS hi, Is NT ever going to run on an R3000 Iris Indigo? If yes, what about October release ? Muzaffer #: 11350 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 12:58:03 Sb: #11258-R3000 Iris Indigo Fm: Alex Madarasz 72537,707 To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553 > Is NT ever going to run on an R3000 Iris Indigo? C'mon, ... this looks like a great excuse to lobby for an Iris Blackjack with Elan graphics! ;-) (altho, I don't even know if the Blackjack will run NT either, I'll just take any excuse to lobby my company for 'em!) --- Alex --- #: 11782 S8/H/W Compatibility 08-Oct-92 10:26:29 Sb: #11258-R3000 Iris Indigo Fm: Jay Vernon[Microsoft] 72370,454 To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553 Muzaffer - The Silicon Graphics R3000 Iris Indigo has not been tested and certified with Windows NT. It is safe to assume it will not be certified for the up comming beta release. The Magnum 4000 Class C Systems will run Windows NT and will be fully supported. We must rely on Silicon Graphics to produce the needed drivers for the R3000 Iris Indigo machines, as you know the graphical base is very different from the Magnum. Thanks, Jay Vernon[Microsoft] #: 11801 S8/H/W Compatibility 08-Oct-92 15:04:22 Sb: R3000 Iris Indigo Fm: Yuri Diomin 75020,404 To: Muzaffer KAL 70324,2553 Muzaffer, I heard two times from sources inside Silicon Grphics that Windows NT is going to work neither on the current machines of the IRIS line (including all Indigos) nor on successors inside the line. However, in addition to the MIPS machines inherited by SGI, the company is going to start a new line (I believe named Sapphire, if I don't mix it up with something esle) which would be R4000 based EISA bus machines with GL graphics, designed specifically for Windows NT. All this was promised to happen sometime 1993. Yuri #: 11828 S8/H/W Compatibility 08-Oct-92 17:51:59 Sb: Floppy recognition Fm: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246 To: All From WINNT I ran a DOS program from Compaq that builds a diagnostic floppy disk. The program failed claiming that no such device is present. I presume that since the program normally writes a 720KB diskette and my drive is dual 720/1440KB, that WINNT's test for diskette drive did not indicate the ability for this drive to also write 720KB. There is 1 Reply. #: 11854 S8/H/W Compatibility 09-Oct-92 03:57:34 Sb: #11828-Floppy recognition Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246 Robert, <> My bet is that the application attempted a system or bios call or attempoted to directly access an i/o port to see if the drive was present. NT's protection scheme might have prevented this call/access. The DOS/WOW is not 100% compatible with the "real thing". And there's so many ways to do things under DOS, which has no protection scheme at all. Art #: 11456 S8/H/W Compatibility 05-Oct-92 23:26:25 Sb: NEC CD-ROM Fm: Ivan Monso 70244,3142 To: ALL ALL, Has anyone gotten NT to work with the NEC CDR-74 CD-ROM. Apparently the 73(M) is an older model and the 74 replaces it. I am looking for the right combo of CD-ROM & controller which will work. I am also looking to get the Adaptec 1540 or 1542 SCSI controllers. Does this combo work? Thanks, Ivan. #: 11554 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 14:50:05 Sb: #11456-NEC CD-ROM Fm: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035 To: Ivan Monso 70244,3142 Ivan, The Adaptec 1542B + NEC CDR-74 work fine for me. I had to install NT with the Dos2NT utility, but after NT is up and running, it recognises the CDR-74 just fine. The NEC drive is self-terminating and must be the last device on the SCSI chain. -Danny There are 2 Replies. #: 11609 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 23:23:35 Sb: #11554-NEC CD-ROM Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342 To: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035 > The NEC drive is self-terminating... Hmmm... is that why their Tech support told me that is has NO provisions for termination and shipped me an in-line terminator for the ribbon cable??? (Like the guy says, "I don't know, I'm just asking!") Incidently, while I was waiting for the terminator, I decided to put the NEC84 FIRST on the chain, and an HP C2247 (1MB 3.5") last. (Didn't really want to do this, since it means I run the cable up to the top of the tower first, where the CD ROM is, and down from there to a (future) DAT slot, and finally to a burried internal "slot" where the HP lives - which happens to be right next to the controller card - so the cable is twice as long as it needs to be...) Anyway, it works just fine this way, so I ain't messin' with it. Make sure to turn OFF sync negotiation on your host adapter. If you have a hard drive that supports it, turn it ON on the hard drive. #: 11698 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 14:21:03 Sb: #11609-NEC CD-ROM Fm: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035 To: Jon Tara 76477,3342 (X) Jon, Adaptec and a NEC rep both told me that the NEC CDR 74 CDRom drives needed to be terminated with a cable plug. That was after I had been using the NEC drive with my other SCSI drives for over two months without any problems, so their credibility went through the floor. I went to a local hard disk wholesaler who said he'd be glad to sell me a $5 terminator plug, but that it just wasn't necessary. The wholesaler is where I picked up the term 'self terminating.' When it works, and works well, I leave it alone. When it doesn't work, I investigate. -Danny p.s. Is a '1MB HP C2247' one of those itty bitty hard disks? There is 1 Reply. #: 11747 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 23:16:10 Sb: #11698-NEC CD-ROM Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342 To: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035 External devices (i.e. the CDR74) are normally terminated with a cable plug, and MOST manufacturers ship their products with one in the box. Internal devices are normally terminated on-board, with termination selected by either removing/not removing SIPs or by plugging/not plugging a jumper. FWIW, my CDR84 worked most of the time without termination, but after a couple of days I started having some failures. They went away when I switched things around so that the CD-rom was first in the chain and the hard-disk last. This isn't the only way in which the NEC drive is a bit odd. The 84's ribbon connecter is upside-down from the norm, which causes an UGLY twist in the cable when chained with devices with the more conventional orientation. Oh, yes, the HPC2247 is, indeed, one of those "itty-bitty" hard drives. I really had to scrounge to find one (I think they're getting a bit more available), but I'l be damned if I was gonna buy a 5 1/4" drive, with so may 3/12" 1GB drives poised for release. Weight, power consumption, speed, and reliability (due in no small part due to the lower mass) make this a no-brainer decision vs. 5 1/4. I'm real happy with it. 2.5-5MB/sec transfer rate, 10mSec access time (though Coretest says it's a bit slower on the average access time), 5yr warranty. Runs a little on the warm size, though. DEC, Maxtor, Hitachi, Micropolis, all have similar drives now or soon shipping, though the HP seems to be the fastest of the lot. (The Maxtor spins faster, at 6300RPM, but doesn't pack the data as tight. All the other drives are 5400RPM, vs. the old "standard" 3600RPM.) #: 11610 S8/H/W Compatibility 06-Oct-92 23:23:40 Sb: #11554-NEC CD-ROM Fm: Jon Tara 76477,3342 To: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035 Oh, yes, also had no problem installing NT from the NEC 84/1542B with the standard install procedure. If you need to use DOS2NT, I suspect there is something wrong. #: 11697 S8/H/W Compatibility 07-Oct-92 14:20:56 Sb: #11610-NEC CD-ROM Fm: Danny Thorpe 76646,1035 To: Jon Tara 76477,3342 (X) Jon, I didn't use the normal setup program because the NT boot disk GP faults immediately after displaying the blue screen and "Windows NT Setup" across the top of the screen. I've got a lot of hardware in my machine and haven't had time to tear it apart to find out what NT doesn't like. OS/2 2.0 installed and runs fine, and the Dos2NT batch worked well enough to get things running. The NEC 74 works fine in NT, and I don't need CD audio right now. -Danny #: 11891 S8/H/W Compatibility 09-Oct-92 08:42:15 Sb: #11610-NEC CD-ROM Fm: David P. Krasnow 71161,551 To: Jon Tara 76477,3342 I recently got a NEC CDR-84J with a Trantor T130 SCSI adaptor. The CD-ROM install says there is no recognizable SCSI CD-ROM device attached. Did anyone have a successful install of this combo? BTW, I have no other SCSI devices attached, and this is my first experience with a SCSI device. I will see if I can figure out whether the problem is one of the following two which I understand are the usual culprits: 1. Device 0 or 1. 2. Terminator problem. However, because of my meagre SCSI experience I thought a simultaneous attempt to get some input from experienced users was in order. thanks, Dave #: 11210 S9/File System 04-Oct-92 05:55:12 Sb: #10491-Floppy Drive Bug Fm: Neil Robinson 100016,2775 To: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 Tom, Could it be that NT checks the DOOR OPEN line on the floppy and only re-reads the directory if the door has been opened since it was last read? If so, all that would be necessary to have this problem on his machine is for the signal indicating DOOR OPEN not to be connected. It probably wouldn't show up as a problem under most circumstances. Ciao, Neil #: 11256 S9/File System 04-Oct-92 12:56:28 Sb: #10491-Floppy Drive Bug Fm: Timothy H. White 75300,1772 To: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 Sorry, it turns out that my floppy drive started going belly-up. What was wierd was that DOS handled it *much* better than NT did, and that's why I initially thought it to be an NT bug. Thanks for checking it out anyway! Timothy #: 11682 S9/File System 07-Oct-92 13:17:42 Sb: More than 26 log volumes Fm: neil colvin 71650,3517 To: Sysop (X) I now have 26 logical devices on my machine (A-Z). If I was running Unix, this would not be a problem, but NT has seemingly adopted the archaic drive letter holdover from CPM. Are there plans to somehow support more than 26 logical devices under NT?? If so, how? If not, help!!! #: 11344 S9/File System 05-Oct-92 11:55:48 Sb: DOS 6? File compression Fm: Mike Snowden 100021,3015 To: all I am NOT on the DOS 6 beta, but the press reports say that DOS6 will contain a file compression utility. I am fast running out of disk space (400Meg!) but am loath to install any compression utility that would prevent NT from reading a partition. Will NT be able to cope with volumes compressed under "standard" DOS 6 utilities? If not, then I don't see much advantage in using DOS 6 over DOS5 and Workgroups Connection. #: 11699 S9/File System 07-Oct-92 14:21:36 Sb: #11344-DOS 6? File compression Fm: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 To: Mike Snowden 100021,3015 Mike, I am told that other third party companies like stacker are working on drivers for compressed drivers for Windows NT. However, disks that are compressed with MS-DOS 6.0's compression feature will be able to be accessed with Windows NT later in the product life. I am certain though that Microsoft will provide a driver that can access MS-DOS 6.0 compressed volumes but that will be after the release of MS-DOS 6.0 and most likely not in product one of Windows NT. If it is possible to include this driver in product one then it will be. However, priorities put this driver at a lower ranking than other functional components of the system. Does that answer your question? Tom Hazel [MS] #: 11453 S9/File System 05-Oct-92 23:14:06 Sb: Photo-CD Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650 To: All IBM are one up - their device driver will read my Kodak Photo-CD disk as a standard filesystem. Drive is an XA spec Toshiba, controller Adaptec. Ideally I'd like 32 bit Photo-CD software, but I'll settle for the 16 bit code working. James #: 11701 S9/File System 07-Oct-92 14:21:47 Sb: #11453-Photo-CD Fm: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 To: James Mansion 100020,1650 James, I am not familiar with this drive system. However, if you would like it to be supported then you should fill out HWFEED.TXT from WINNT Lib 1 and send it to internet:winnthw@microsoft.com. That will let Microsoft know you want your specific hardware supported for Windows NT. You should also contact your hardware manufacture and let them know you want it supported top. Tom Hazel [MS] #: 11737 S9/File System 07-Oct-92 19:51:10 Sb: The Long and Short of it Fm: Gary Byers 76377,205 To: All [This is in the 6/92 developer's pre-release, on an i386.] Try the following, where "x:" is an NTFS-formatted partition: c:\> x: x:\> copy con: a.bbb.ccc.d This is file "a.bbb.ccc.d" ^Z x:\> copy con: a.bbb This is file "a.bbb" ^Z x:\> type a.bbb.ccc.d and, if you're as confused as I was when something analogous happened to me, do: x:\> dir a.bbb* Hmmm. Ok, so "a.bbb" happens to be the short (8.3) version of the longer pathname, and it seems that references to this shorter name are interpreted as references to the longer one. I didn't think that I was asking for this behavior (and was therefore surprized when I got it); if it's something other than a bug in the pre-release version of NTFS, is there some way of avoiding it ? #: 11206 S9/File System 04-Oct-92 02:11:48 Sb: xtradrive, IIT Fm: Fankhauser Gerhard 100041,1275 To: Microsoft Will xtradrive from IIT work with Windows NT ? thanks i.a. for your answer #: 11700 S9/File System 07-Oct-92 14:21:39 Sb: #11206-xtradrive, IIT Fm: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 To: Fankhauser Gerhard 100041,1275 Sorry if I sound dumb regarding this issue but what is xtradrive from ITT? I have not heard of it and is that is the case, it is most likely no. But before I can give you a definative answer, I need to know more about what it is. #: 11830 S9/File System 08-Oct-92 18:40:17 Sb: #11700-xtradrive, IIT Fm: Marc C. Brooks 71461,320 To: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 (X) Tom, XtraDrive is a Stacker-like product. In fact I think Stac has a law-suit pending against them. I would guess the answer is no, but who am I? Marc #: 11840 S9/File System 08-Oct-92 21:18:59 Sb: De-Frag for NT Fm: Carl Byington 74040,1156 To: Terence Hosken [MS] 71075,643 I am just jumping in here, so maybe this has already been discussed. I would like to make a distinction between the HPFS,NTFS, FAT systems as a , and the (current) code that implements these file systems. I define a file system by the data (directories, etc) that are stored on the disk. In this sense, any of these file systems could be implemented by code that reduced fragmentation. There are many ways to do this. One way is to have the application tell the OS how large the file is going to be so the OS can preallocate the space. Another way is for the OS to dynamically determine that this heavily used file is fragmented and automatically start moving things around to defragment it (whenever the disk is not doing anything more important). #: 11060 S10/Device Drivers 02-Oct-92 15:31:49 Sb: #10791-ATI ULTRA Drivers Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) I am waiting for the EISA version of the AST Graphics Ultra Pro. It is available with 2mb for a SLP of $700. A salesperson at ATI said it should be available in November. #: 11073 S10/Device Drivers 02-Oct-92 17:10:13 Sb: #10726-ATI ULTRA Drivers Fm: Darrell McCombs 70404,3722 To: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344 (X) Send it back and get the new one.... There is 1 Reply. #: 11143 S10/Device Drivers 03-Oct-92 08:44:02 Sb: #11073-ATI ULTRA Drivers Fm: Issie Chaimovitch 70621,3344 To: Darrell McCombs 70404,3722 I can't send it back and get a new one, as the new ones haven't even started to ship yet. Issie #: 11058 S10/Device Drivers 02-Oct-92 15:27:09 Sb: I/O MAPPED HARDWARE Fm: Nathan Berg 72350,537 To: SYSOP (X) Just as 640K has become too limiting for applications, so has the 384K become too limiting for custom I/O hardware. There are a few capabilities in NT that would make NT a viable OS for these modern I/O expansion cards. 1. We need the ability to tell NT that 'this range of memory is reserved for hardware, and should not be used for RAM' 2. Since we are developing custom hardware, we will be implementing a custom API to access this hardware, implemented as a DLL/Device Driver combination. Thus there has to be some method for a custom DLL to communicate with a custom Device Driver. 3. For performance reasons, we need the ability to access our memory mapped card directly from an application. I understand the protection/security issues, but forcing an app to ask a device driver for a hardware pointer preserves protection and security, but allows maximum flexibility/performance. How can I find out if these capabilities exist in NT??? Thanks - Nathan There is 1 Reply. #: 11325 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 06:48:19 Sb: #11058-I/O MAPPED HARDWARE Fm: Brian Merson 73330,3573 To: Nathan Berg 72350,537 >> 1. We need the ability to tell NT that 'this range of memory is reserved for hardware ... << I'm not sure on this one, but if you find out let me know, too. >> 2. ... there has to be some method for a custom DLL to communicate with a custom Device Driver. << I believe the primary method for communicating with a custom device driver is going to be the DeviceIoControl() api. Since the DDK is not yet out, I can only assume that this function is conceptually similar to the UNIX ioctl() function. That is, the driver will contain an "standard" entry point for I/O control and will differentiate requests based on the dwIoControlCode parameter to the above function. >> 3. ... we need the ability to acess our memory mapped card directly from an application. ... << I have been assured by MS people that this is possible. It better be, because I have the same need. Basically, the approach that you describe looks like the preferred way to implement this (i.e., the driver provides a mapping function, performs the mapping and returns a pointer to the caller). Since the DDK is not out, this information is real limited. There isn't much here, and what is here has taken quite a while to put together. Hopefully, all will become clear at the DDK conferenct in 3 weeks. Brian #: 11382 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 14:19:32 Sb: #10750-Trantor NT SCSI Drivers Fm: Trantor Systems 72760,1346 To: David Hayden 70444,30 (X) I think you can make it install the 'real' way by renaming the Trantor drivers to the same name as the Adaptec driver. That may do the job. Trouble is, you need to have the driver installed and registered on the disk before you can do the install... a catch 22 if I ever saw one! Hopefully, Microsoft will include the Trantor drivers on a later release, then you should be able to do the install more easily. There is 1 Reply. #: 11431 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 20:31:23 Sb: #11382-Trantor NT SCSI Drivers Fm: David Hayden 70444,30 To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346 If I rename it to (????) Can I thien use the Graphice Setup to do a re-install? #: 11451 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 23:13:54 Sb: Compex ENET/U in WD Mode Fm: James Mansion 100020,1650 To: All Apologies to all who saw this before - and especially to the MS guy who replied. I'm still configuring my OLR and I'm afraid that the replies have gone ... Anyway, to summarise: I have some Compex ethernet cards that I have been happily using in WD emulation mode with DOS, OS/2 1.x and OS/2 2.0 (using the IBM drivers in the latter cases). NT wouldn't start its lan services, and the latest SMC DOS drivers didn't work. I now have a real SMC Combo card and NT works fine. The DOS drivers don't work but that's no big deal. Also, trying to NET VIEW my Lan Server 2.0 beta server will crash the server. I haven't tried with the gold code level - not had any other problems! So - it seems that Compex should be prodded into action. It may be that their latest cards (which like the SMC Combo have all three interfaces) are more compatible. James #: 11104 S10/Device Drivers 02-Oct-92 19:44:22 Sb: Inst Trantor T128 driver Fm: Mark Swinkels 75020,464 To: ALL Has anyone successfully installed the Trantor T128 drivers from the Trantor BBS. I have been unable to get the driver to install. I am suffering from a serious lack of documentation. The documention that came with the NEC T128 card doesn't document the IRQ jumper settings (because the're not needed in Dos). The readme that Trantor includes with the driver says to add the driver name to the registry as explained in the NT documentation, I haven't found any documentation on how to add driver names to the registry. Hopefully someone from Trantor or someone who has successfully installed this driver will be able to give me more detailed step by step instructions on how to get this driver working. Thanks, Mark Swinkels There is 1 Reply. #: 11297 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 04:18:13 Sb: #11104-Inst Trantor T128 driver Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Mark Swinkels 75020,464 (X) Mark, I have the same documentation problems you do as well aspnot being able to get NT to see the SCSI card and work. THough I have edited the registry and added the appropriate (maybe not) entries. If I get it to work I'll let you know. Art #: 11385 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 14:29:04 Sb: #11297-Inst Trantor T128 driver Fm: Trantor Systems 72760,1346 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) For documentation, read the section 2.2 in the Win32 SDK Release Notes, page 12 onwards, for description of how to do the DOS2NT installation. There are 2 Replies. #: 11432 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 20:35:02 Sb: #11385-Inst Trantor T128 driver Fm: David Hayden 70444,30 To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346 I think we just need the documentation on the registry editor, and how this matches the Trantor doc about installing for NT. How about a little re-write of the doc and a re-posting? If we could get a little program to add it to the registry that would be ideal. Count the messages going around the forum concerning this, it's probably worth your time for the goodwill factor, before everyone changes to Apaptec cards. Microsoft - any help? #: 11467 S10/Device Drivers 06-Oct-92 03:25:32 Sb: #11385-Inst Trantor T128 driver Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346 <> I have no problems with the DOS2NT install. It's modifying the registration based on your T128.INI file that was confusing. For instance the Group key was not defined as REG_SZ, and the device subkey (hope it's a subkey under T128) is not clearly defined. Since regedit itself is an unsupported method of modifying the registry there isPno official documentation. But I'll check out my hardware and see if I can get things up and running. Thaoks fo stopping by the forum. Art PS: On another machine I have the MediaVision Pro-16. Any idea of when drivers will be available for it? #: 11671 S10/Device Drivers 07-Oct-92 11:26:21 Sb: Adaptec on DDK? Fm: Mike Snowden 100021,3015 To: sysop (X) Re: Message #10436 Data Technology Corp DTC3290AS EISA caching SCSI Host Adaptor. This card claims to be "almost" an adaptec 154x contoller. 1) What does NT look for to recognize a controller type? (a BIOS copyright string?) 2) If this card is really like a generic adaptec, will there be an adaptec driver on the DDK disk, that we can SIMPLY modify, so that our cards are recognized? This might sway our decision on whether to attend the DDK conference, so we need a reply before the close-out date of oct 23rd. #: 11678 S10/Device Drivers 07-Oct-92 12:42:12 Sb: Graphics Accelerators Fm: Jeong Ho Lee 70253,1244 To: SYSOP (X) Hello, With next release ( Octorber ) of NT, will we be able to use any of graphics accelerators like S3, ATI, TIGA ? NT with VGA has been proved to be just a humour. Thanks #: 11741 S10/Device Drivers 07-Oct-92 21:29:05 Sb: NT DDK Availability Fm: Darryl Nadvornick 72271,243 To: Microsoft Is it possible to get ahold of the NT DDK separately from the upcoming DDK conference in Anaheim, CA? If yes, how? If not yet, when? Is the DDK release included at the conference a one time shot, or does that include future interim releases up to and including the initial production release (ala an NT-style beta program)? Darryl #: 11772 S10/Device Drivers 08-Oct-92 10:15:47 Sb: #11741-NT DDK Availability Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Darryl Nadvornick 72271,243 (X) Yes, we will be making the DDK available separately from the conference. Right now it looks like the end of November. The DDK at the conference (as well as the DDKs folks purchase) will include upgrades and the final version. I'll post a phone number as soon as we are set up to handle the orders. -Dwight (MS) #: 11100 S10/Device Drivers 02-Oct-92 18:59:12 Sb: Trantor T128 Fm: David Hayden 70444,30 To: All If anyone from Trantor see this: I just installed a T128 with a NEC CDR-74. I downloaded the driver from your bulletin board but the directions about using the RegEdit aren't clear to me (Is that documented somewhere?). Anyway, I ended up destoying NT (it failed big-time on the boot), I had to reinstall from scratch. Any help on getting the device to work would be very appreciated. There is 1 Reply. #: 11296 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 04:16:35 Sb: #11100-Trantor T128 Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: David Hayden 70444,30 David, <> I'm working on this myself. I got the same error. but I just renamed the T128.SYS file to another name and NT booted. I did gt NT to boot, but it would not access the drive. I put the Device portion on a seperate level. Did you? When I did I got an unhandled excption in kernel. When I deleted the device key the erros went away. But no access to the CD. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11338 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 10:27:20 Sb: #11296-Trantor T128 Fm: Mark Swinkels 75020,464 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Hello Arthur You replied to me on a different thread re the same problem but I thought I'd move over to this thread and keep things in one place. I'm almost certain that device is a sub-key of T128, I looked around at the other devices and that's the way the others work. I couldn't tell from your message but do you actualy know which pins on J1 on the NEC adapter set the interupt to IRQ5, I think I've tried all the obvious ones (jumpering two opposing pins) but I've seen all sorts of interesting configurations of jumpers for this kind of stuff. I logged on to the Trantor bbs this morning but noticed that you had already left a message. I'll leave the Trantor bbs to you, it takes too long to get through. Didn't you love going in to pick up the driver, 30 minutes to get through, 10 minutes to answer the questionaire, 2 minutes to pick up the driver. Why they didn't just post to WINNT I don't know. Hoping to hear from trantor soon Mark There is 1 Reply. #: 11339 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 11:02:30 Sb: #11338-Trantor T128 Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Mark Swinkels 75020,464 Mark, <> Yeah so was I. But when I installed the driver this way and booted NT I got a system error 0x1e and then an unhandled kernell exception. So m figured I would ask and make sure. After all they did forget to the REG_SZ for the group name, so... I can't open this box that has the T128 (co rules) so I can't check the jumper settings. The default was IRQ5 so I thought I might get lucky. I did have com2 using IRQ5, so I disabled it for the T128 install, but no go. i again had to rename the T128.SYS file so NT would not install it. The interesting thing is that if I delete the device key I do not have the error, but no access to the CD-ROM drive either. I don't know why Trantor did things the way they did. The MS FD driver for the 850 for instance uses the Tag field for the IRQ. (I think anyway) I'm under 3.1 at the moment so can't verify that for sure. <> That's not really a problem for me as long as I start early. being on the east coast and getting in by 6:00 AM local time means that not many people are accessing the BBS. We'll have to see what happens. I'm going to have someone come up here and open this box so I can check the settings for the T128. Maybe then I'll get it goin~. Art #: 11383 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 14:25:42 Sb: #11339-Trantor T128 Fm: Trantor Systems 72760,1346 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) You MUST install the IRQ jumper on the T128 before you try to install it. Otherwise you WILL get an error! The IRQ jumper settings are listed in the T128 manual Appendix. REGEDIT is a clumsy way to install things right now, but hopefully it will be made easier in a later NT version. For those who can't find their manuals, the IRQ settings are: . . . . . . ___ . . . . IRQ 5 . . . . . . . ___ . . . IRQ 7 NOTE: you must install the first time with IRQ 5 enabled There is 1 Reply. #: 11463 S10/Device Drivers 06-Oct-92 03:13:18 Sb: #11383-Trantor T128 Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346 <> Thanks for the info. I thought the T128 (by default) had the jumper for IRQ5 enabled. I'll check into this ASAP. Art #: 11581 S10/Device Drivers 06-Oct-92 19:06:07 Sb: #11383-Trantor T128 Fm: Ray Stevens 76420,3330 To: Trantor Systems 72760,1346 I've tried to get on your BBS and cannot get a clean connect. Is it possible for you upload the driver here?? #: 11384 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 14:26:20 Sb: #11339-Trantor T128 Fm: Mark Swinkels 75020,464 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Yes! Yes! Yes! As you can guess I got it working. It turned out to be that the irq was not set correctly. I called trantor and got the settings, set it to irq5 and poof, it works. Crashing NT if the irq isn't set seems a little drastic, but then I have no idea how NT does these things. T128 irq settings JP1 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Bus Connector | 7 8 9 A B C v v Jumper 1 and 2 for irq3, 7 and 8 for irq5, 8 and 9 for irq7. I don't guaranty any of these settings except that for irq5. Good Luck Mark There is 1 Reply. #: 11464 S10/Device Drivers 06-Oct-92 03:16:16 Sb: #11384-Trantor T128 Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Mark Swinkels 75020,464 (X) Mark, <> Thanks. that's good to know. Now lets see if I can get it all working. Particularly since I will have to use IRQ7. Of course to boot the first time it'll have to be set to IRQ5. <> Yup. Sounds a bit drastic to me too. Art #: 11798 S10/Device Drivers 08-Oct-92 13:20:48 Sb: #11464-Trantor T128 Fm: Frank Waldner 72550,1162 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) How can I get a copy of this T128 drivers? Is there a Trantor BBS phone number and access info ? There is 1 Reply. #: 11846 S10/Device Drivers 09-Oct-92 03:11:03 Sb: #11798-Trantor T128 Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Frank Waldner 72550,1162 Frank, <> Yes. The BBS number is 510-656-5159. The file you want is called NT-TSL.EXE. It's listed in the bulletin and is in the new upload section. I've requested permission to post it here, but we'll have to wait and see what Trantor says about it. Art #: 11361 S10/Device Drivers 05-Oct-92 13:19:41 Sb: Orchid VGA Fm: John Estelle 70674,1510 To: sysop (X) Where can I find support for the Orchid Prodesigner IIs video card in higher resolution than generic VGA It is listed in the Hardware Compatability List. #: 11867 S10/Device Drivers 09-Oct-92 07:34:48 Sb: #11501-Orchid VGA Fm: John Estelle 70674,1510 To: Scott Alexander 76556,557 (X) Thanks for your response on the Orchid VGA question. Discovered the info in the Release Notes just after sending the message. 512K was definitely a colorful alternative.(All Pale green) #: 11133 S11/Network services 03-Oct-92 06:42:48 Sb: RCP problem Fm: Scott Wheeler 100022,2005 To: sysop (X) This may have been reported before as I don't read all the threads in WINNT. I use RCP to pull files off a Sun Sparc 1. Usually this works, but a couple of days back I found that a lot of files were missing the last 1-4 bytes. This may have been the only time I have copied over existing files. I was copying 324 files with the command line rcp bmt_sparc1:/apps/xxx/yyy/src/*.asm . Scott There is 1 Reply. #: 11157 S11/Network services 03-Oct-92 11:55:53 Sb: #11133-RCP problem Fm: Scott Wheeler 100022,2005 To: Scott Wheeler 100022,2005 (X) Sorry, I didn't say, but I'm not worried about a fix for this, its just a bug I thought you might want to hear about. Scott #: 11357 S11/Network services 05-Oct-92 13:11:39 Sb: #10674-NFS availability Fm: WINNT 12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Jon McLane 76500,256 >What are Microsoft's plans for supporting Network File System in Windows NT, >if any? There are some third party vendors who are working with us on NFS. Thanks, -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] #: 11358 S11/Network services 05-Oct-92 13:11:45 Sb: #10527-LM over TCP/IP and NT Fm: WINNT 12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Don Kolva 70610,360 (X) Don, Please look at the response to #10799 Thanks, -Krishnan Paramesharan #: 11359 S11/Network services 05-Oct-92 13:11:52 Sb: #10691-Error2186 Netlogon? Fm: WINNT 12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Jay Marcucci 75300,702 >Help , we've installed NT and its running, Telnet works(TCP/IP) but we can't >start the Netlogon from either Dos prompt or the Network server section. >We're >able to start all other network services(Alerts, TCP/ip, Messages, etc) >without error. We can see other networked servers(IBM's Lan server on OS/2 >1.3 >& 2.0) But other users cannot share our NT resources. You will not be able to do LM based stuff using only TCPIP as your transport. You will have to use NetBEUI to do LanManager based activity on the July release of NT. >We also tried under users profiles to add users to the Login services group >which returned an 9 digit error number. >Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. The July release of NT can not act as a Domain controller to logon users in a LanManager Domain. It can logon user's on your local nt machine. >Jay M. Thanks, -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] #: 11408 S11/Network services 05-Oct-92 18:52:14 Sb: #10615-rpc Fm: Zhacary Smith (MS) 71075,644 To: Christian betrisey 76600,1450 Christian, This is a very good question. However, you will get a faster answer by posting this question in the MSWIN32 section. You can get there by typing GO MSWIN32. Thank you, Zhacary Smith MS Windows NT Support #: 11356 S11/Network services 05-Oct-92 13:11:31 Sb: #10907-TCP/IP for NT Fm: WINNT 12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: HowieFomby 76645,754 (X) Don & Howie: The July build of NT's tcpip support is primarily for UNIX connectivity. You will not be able to LanManager based activity on TCPIP at this time. But later releases of NT should have that capability. What is not shipped, is NBT.SYS, this is the netbios mapping layer for TCPIP compliant to RFC 1001&1002. FileManager is based on LM connectivity. If you need this over tcpip, just wait for the next release. Howie, the same thing holds true for the LMX server. The LMX support is primarily a *IX based SMB server. Server Message Blocks is what LanManger uses. Thanks, -Krishnan Parmeshwaran [MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11478 S11/Network services 06-Oct-92 07:33:34 Sb: #11356-TCP/IP for NT Fm: Don Kolva 70610,360 To: WINNT 12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X) Does later releases mean the October Beta 1 release? Don Kolva #: 11365 S11/Network services 05-Oct-92 13:33:39 Sb: #11007-network startup Fm: Jacob Avital 71172,2722 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) Thanks Art. Using RegEdit is the solotion for starting services. We have to start to use it and to get use to the face that this is not DOS. Koby There is 1 Reply. #: 11462 S11/Network services 06-Oct-92 03:10:39 Sb: #11365-network startup Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Jacob Avital 71172,2722 Koby, <> Regedit is only a temporary solution. Regedit is expected to disapear in later releases. So don't get to used to it. Art There is 1 Reply. #: 11481 S11/Network services 06-Oct-92 07:47:14 Sb: #11462-network startup Fm: Don Perry 76676,1127 To: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 (X) >> Regedit is only a temporary solution... Art: I have mixed emotions about this one. If we do not have some way of modifying configuration files manually, this assumes all programs that do modify the files always do so properly. Experience for me has shown this not always to be the case. I guess we'll be reduced to punching in binary codes from a DOS window DEBUG.COM session :-). Don There is 1 Reply. #: 11491 S11/Network services 06-Oct-92 08:03:52 Sb: #11481-network startup Fm: Arthur Knowles 71041,2613 To: Don Perry 76676,1127 Don, <> Not to worry. Way back in July I and others let out a primal scream or two about regedit and the lack of documentation. We were informed that there would be a much better and supported method of accomplishing the same functionality as regedit in later releases. Art #: 11059 S11/Network services 02-Oct-92 15:29:03 Sb: Changing lan adapters Fm: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514 To: All Do I have to re-install NT to change from a NE3200 lan driver to a WD/SMC Elite lan driver. What would I have to change in the registry ? #: 11496 S11/Network services 06-Oct-92 08:20:51 Sb: #11059-Changing lan adapters Fm: na 71075,3225 To: Carlen Hoppe 72110,2514 Carlen, Since the PDC release did not contain the code to Remove adapters you should install a new adapter using the network icon and then disable the Network Binding to the old adapter (bindings pushbutton on network dialog). Regards, Scott B. Suhy[MS] #: 11265 S11/Network services 04-Oct-92 18:16:36 Sb: #10909-regedit access denied Fm: alex matijaca 76330,2703 To: Louie LaPlant 76600,3523 I had the same problem, but fixed it by leaving TcpipSvc highighted in regedit, then selecting Security then Permissions from the menu bar. I found that Administrators have Read Access to TcpipSvc. Change this to full access, then go back and the modification of Start should work. Regards, Martin (aka Alex) #: 11553 S11/Network services 06-Oct-92 14:40:21 Sb: #10909-regedit access denied Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Louie LaPlant 76600,3523 >I tried to change the start value of tcpipsvc in regedit while logged on as >administrator. However, after I change the value and hit ok, I get an error >which says I don't have the priviledges to do this oporation, access denied. >What gives? 1. start regedit 2. Higlight HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE->SYSTEM->CurrentControlSet->Services->TCPIPSVC 3. ALT-S for Security P for Permission ALT-A for Add 4. Now try to change the start value and it should work. Goodluck, -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] #: 11568 S11/Network services 06-Oct-92 17:39:41 Sb: WinNt -> Lantastic Fm: Paul J. Levesque 72621,3477 To: WINNT 12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X) I'm trying to connect a WinNT worhstation to a Lantastic server, can anyone tel me if this can succesfuly be done using July release. Can I connect to a MS-net server??? Thanks Paul #: 11665 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 10:53:21 Sb: #10975-are requests fail Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Tony Dye 71075,612 >Hi Bruce, >Just another observation. Any comment would be appreciated. >After some long period of time (days), PCs running NT stop responding to arp >requests. This causes name server lookups to fail and also causes connections >to the numerical address to fail. I can't track down any specific condition >leading up to this, but it has happened enough that I believe there is some >real problem. I will check it up. I have some machines running tcpip, not for many days though cuz it keeps going up and down. I try to get our repro-lab to check it out. Question for you is, what do you get when you do 'arp -g' ? The life of an arp cache entry is usually around 9 minutes. I tried to ping a machine after its cache timed out and it responded and created its cache entry. >PCs are generic clone 486/33s with 3Com Ethernet cards. >Thanks, >There is 1 Reply. Give us some more information which will help us debug this problem more. Thanks, -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] #: 11664 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 10:53:11 Sb: Window on NT from Mac? Fm: David Lawlor 71171,1556 To: All Hi all, Does anyone know of a current or future product which will allow a Macintosh get a window on a NT based machine? What I'm thinking of is similar to X servers / clients in Unix, but change Unix to NT andchange X to windows. Any info will be appreciated. Thanks Dave There is 1 Reply. #: 11688 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 13:44:26 Sb: #11664-Window on NT from Mac? Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: David Lawlor 71171,1556 >Hi all, >Does anyone know of a current or future product which will allow a Macintosh >get a window on a NT based machine? What I'm thinking of is similar to X >servers / clients in Unix, but change Unix to NT andchange X to windows. Once you have an X server for Windows NT you should be able to do that with X Windows. If HCL eXceed/W ported their code to NT it would seem that you could run both X Windows and MS Windows clients on that NT machine. >Any info will be appreciated. Thanks Dave -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] #: 11355 S11/Network services 05-Oct-92 13:11:18 Sb: #10910-starting workstation Fm: WINNT 12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Spencer Frink 71461,1001 >I can't get the LanMan workstation service to start. I would appreciate any >insights somebody can give me to get thsi working. If you are trying to start LM services over tcpip, you can not do it in this release. What you need is a file called nbt.sys, which is the netbios mapping layer. This is what provides the netbios functionality over tcpip. It was not shippped with the July PDC. Later releases should have that file. >The error is: The LanManWorkstation could not be started. A system error has >occured. The workstation is in an inconsistent state. Reboot the machine >before restarting the workstation service. If you want lan manager kind of access, use NetBEUI as your transport. >The EventLog has LanManWorkstation error 3113. >TCP/IP, RPC, and Workstation Server all are working correctly over the Lan. >No packets leave the system durring the attempted workstation start. All the TCPIP utilities should work. The tcpip support in the July release was primarily for UNIX connectivity. >Thanks, Spencer Frink Goodluck, -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] #: 11708 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 14:58:55 Sb: #11355-starting workstation Fm: Spencer Frink 71461,1001 To: WINNT 12 [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X) I believe that I am correctly configured for the workstation service to run over NetBEUI, the same as the Server. The Bindings network applet shows both Workstation and Server running over NetBEUI, which is bound to an ELNKII (3COM503) driver. Regeditshows a file, nbf, being one of the dependancies. This is different than the module nbt you describe. Are you saying the Workstation service must be run over tcp-ip? The reason I mentioned the Server and ARPA services was to show that the basic network path was functional, not to imply I wanted to run the worksation service over tcp-ip, though that would be nice too :) Any ideas for further trouble shooting? Thanks, Spencer Frink #: 11445 S11/Network services 05-Oct-92 21:58:10 Sb: network setup Fm: Bob Bogardus 76470,3066 To: Anyone at ms I need basic info on using Control Panel-Network to configure my NT system to communicate via TCPIP with a UNIX workstation (I only need rcp). I have no system administrator to confer with. My workstation is set up w/o yellow pages and successfully links with another UNIX system via TCPIP (etc/hosts...). My NT card is 3COM/Etherlink16 Driver was loaded at setup time, but IP address etc not specified yet. Tried IP address 07.04.76.01/ mask 255.0.0.0/gateway NULL. net start tcpipsvc said "TCPIPSVC service could not be started." I assume configuration is improperly set up. Help. #: 11641 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 08:26:29 Sb: #11445-network setup Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Bob Bogardus 76470,3066 >I need basic info on using Control Panel-Network to configure my NT system to >communicate via TCPIP with a UNIX workstation (I only need rcp). I have no >system administrator to confer with. My workstation is set up w/o yellow >pages and successfully links with another UNIX system via TCPIP You can not use YP or NIS with NT. The options you have are either use the %SystemRoot%\system\drivers\etc\hosts file or use NT as a DNS client. The best way to resolve your problem is try the IP number and then use the %SystemRoot%\system\drivers\etc\hosts file. You can set the search order in the ControlPanel->Networks->TCPIP->Configure->Connectivity dialog box. (Select HostsFile only) >(etc/hosts...). My NT card is 3COM/Etherlink16 Driver was loaded at setup >time, but IP address etc not specified yet. Tried IP address 07.04.76.01/ >mask 255.0.0.0/gateway NULL. net start tcpipsvc said "TCPIPSVC service could >not be started." I assume configuration is improperly set up. Help. Ensure that you have the following files in %SystemRoot%\system\drivers directory: afd.sys, streams.sys, tcpip.sys, telnet.sys also a directory 'etc' under it with the following files: hosts, network, protocol, services. These are in the i386 subdirectory on the CD if you dont have them. Copy them into the respective places and then try to start the tcpipsvc. Goodluck, -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] #: 11712 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 15:11:30 Sb: #11641-network setup Fm: Bob Bogardus 76470,3066 To: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X) net start tcpipsvc still fails. All files you said to check are on the disk. Trace on the net start yielded: .. Using IP address specified in the Registry Inferring subnet maks from IP address class ioctl (248, I_STR, IP_NET_ADDR={mux=5,net=127.0.0.1,sub=255.0.0.0, forwb=0,kalve=0 mtv=0 broadcast type=0}); DOWNSTREAM to arp DOWNSTREAM to sndis open (... ioctl (236, I_PUSH, "arp") Using Network adapter specified in Registry ioctl (236, I_STR, DATAL_IBIND=\Device\Elnk1601) NDIS_DRV s_ioctl failed Announce Service Status Current State 1; Control accepted 0 win32ExitCode 4294967295; serviceSpecExitCode 4294967295, checkpoint 0; waitHint 0 My setup: gatway: (null) adapter: 3Com Etherlink 16 IP: 07.04.76.01 Subnet 255.0.0.0 Connectivity: Hosts file only hosts file: 07.04.76.01 machine1 07.04.76.02 NT networks: test 07 protocol/services unchanged Any ideas? (Why does ioctl(248 use 127.0.0.1???) I am not familiar with Gateway, TCP Domain name from UNIX-are these values relevant? #: 11639 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 08:13:44 Sb: Shared NT on LAN? Fm: Raymond W. Six 70530,433 To: ALL, SYSOP (X) Hi. I don't currently run NT - just Win3.1, but I'm planning a LAN in the future and wan't some idea of how NT will figure into it. Specifically, what I want to know is: is it possible to install a "shared copy on a network server" with NT like you can with Win3.1 (as detailed in the Windows 3.1 resource kit? If so, how would this configuration be setup? (a small portion of NT resident to boot the workstation - then loading the rest of NT from the server? or some other configuration?) #: 11661 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 10:16:59 Sb: #11639-Shared NT on LAN? Fm: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634 To: Raymond W. Six 70530,433 (X) Raymond, NT is both client *and* server, right out of the box. IOW if you install it on one machine, you got yourself a workstation; if you install it on two machines with network cards and some cable, then you got two peer servers that also run as workstations, with the addition of Lanmanager for NT your peer server becomes a full fledged domain controller. Thats the basics, there is much more functionality; You should read up on everything you can lay your hands on, both here and in MSWIN32. best...Tony. There is 1 Reply. #: 11733 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 19:11:52 Sb: #11661-Shared NT on LAN? Fm: Raymond W. Six 70530,433 To: Anthony Murfet 70602,1634 (X) Thanks for the info. I guess its time to start reading.... - Ray #: 11588 S11/Network services 06-Oct-92 20:54:19 Sb: MIPS and Token Ring Fm: John Tarbox 71201,2467 To: All Has anyone tested putting a Token Ring adapter into a MIPS R4000 box running NT? #: 11711 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 15:07:01 Sb: #11588-MIPS and Token Ring Fm: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 To: John Tarbox 71201,2467 (X) John, Token Ring works fine with our tests with the upcoming beta release. However, there were some problems with the Preliminary Release of Windows NT. These problems have been fixed and if you have problems with this with the Beta release, please contact us. Tom Hazel [MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11744 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 22:46:55 Sb: #11711-MIPS and Token Ring Fm: John Tarbox 71201,2467 To: Tom Hazel [Microsoft] 72360,1176 (X) Tom, thanks for your quisk response on Token Ring in MIPS boxes. Can you tell me whose Token Ring card MS has been testing with in the MIPS box and if it is a ISA or EISA card? #: 11689 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 13:44:33 Sb: #10627-NT & win workgroup Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Alan E Paget 76620,1707 >Will WinNT connect up to Windows for Workgroups? You can set the Work Group name in Windows NT to a Windows for Workgroup name. You will be able to see the Windows NT on the Windows for Workgroups machine, you can even browse it. But remember in the July release of NT you have to start the XACTSRV in order to be able to browse the NT server. Goodluck, -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] There is 1 Reply. #: 11767 S11/Network services 08-Oct-92 08:52:43 Sb: #11689-NT & win workgroup Fm: Ken Granderson 76307,3571 To: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 I am having problems running WFW as an NT client. It appears that NT does not realize when files on the WFW client have closed, and as a result I often get "Sharing Violation" errors that render the client unusable. Even after a client process has been closed, attempts to use files which the process had opened will fail. Example 1: My client system loads After Dark (which is located on the NT server) on startup. After an apparent hang on the client, I finally get a system modal "Sharing Violation" dialog box. At this time, if I look at the files in use option of the NT Control Panel server applet, there are two entries for AD.EXE, the After Dark executable. Selecting either Retry or Cancel on the client's error dialog continues the client's startup successfully, and After Dark is loaded. I have had identical problems with TrueType fonts which reside on the server causing this problem. Example 2: I open a DOS box on the client and run PKUNZIP on a file named, for instance, TEST.ZIP. I then close the DOS box. NT Control Panel tells me that TEST.ZIP is open for read access by the client. Refreshing the open file list does nothing, and attempts to delete TEST.ZIP from the server or the client will fail with sharing violation types of messages. Please advise me as to how to fix this problem, as it presently means that when NT is running, my client workstation is essentially useless. Thank you. #: 11652 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 09:21:03 Sb: #10738-DOS Lan Requester(IBM) Fm: Mitch Millar 70700,3307 To: Azfar Moazzam [Microsoft 71075,641 Hello, Azfar. Prior to loading the first Win32 beta - Windows NT on my system, I was able to run the DOS LAN REQUESTOR through an EtherLink II card and drivers. After loading the Win32 beta - Windows NT and booting into my original (DOS) operating system, When I start the Dos Lan Requestor everything runs as per normal until the NET command. Here the response is : Network not loaded. Now I have no access to that network. What happened ?? Can I setup NT to log on to this network? Thanks. -Mitch #: 11781 S11/Network services 08-Oct-92 10:24:40 Sb: #11652-DOS Lan Requester(IBM) Fm: Azfar Moazzam - Microsof 72370,453 To: Mitch Millar 70700,3307 (X) >Hello, Azfar. >Prior to loading the first Win32 beta - Windows NT on my system, I was able >to >run the DOS LAN REQUESTOR through an EtherLink II card >and drivers. After loading the Win32 beta - Windows NT and booting into my >original (DOS) operating system, When I start the Dos Lan Requestor >everything >runs as per normal until the NET command. Here >the response is : Network not loaded. Now I have no access to that >network. >What happened ?? Can I setup NT to log on to this network? >Thanks. >Mitch > Hi Mitch, It seems that your config.sys got messed up. Do you see any error messages when you are loading the DOS LAN Requester drivers in DOS? Do any of the drivers fail to load. Basically, if you boot in DOS and all the drivers load correctly, then you should be able to connect to your LAN Server as you used to. If you are getting a "Network not loaded" error message then that means that the network drivers did not load properly. Make sure that the correct config.sys and autoexec is loaded. Type out your config.sys and see if it is loading the network drivers. Also, make sure that in DOS, the Windows NT subdirectories are not in the path. Best Regards. Azfar Moazzam [MS] #: 11780 S11/Network services 08-Oct-92 10:24:29 Sb: #11001-DOS Lan Requester(IBM) Fm: Azfar Moazzam - Microsof 72370,453 To: April Hope 100034,1047 (X) >Hi Azfar, > >Thanks for replying, yes you're probably right I'm trying to use IBM Dos Lan >Requester drivers which are not written for NT. Any idea if the beta >release >will connect with IBM Lan Server networks. > >April. > Hi April, You do not need to load the IBM Dos LAN requester on Windows NT for LAN Server connectivity. What you need to do is to install the windows NT network drivers and the NetBEUI protocol stack. On the LAN Server, you need to have NetBIOS installed. Once you have these two set up, you can test the connectivity by typing "Net View \\lanservername" from the command prompt on Windows NT. You should see the shares available on the LANServer. If you don't see this, then please tell me what is the error code and error message that you see. The basic things needed for LAN Server connectivity is having NetBIOS on the LANserver and NetBEUI on the machine running Windows NT. Best Regards. Azfar Moazzam [MS] #: 11640 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 08:26:19 Sb: #10925-tcpipsvc startup in NT Fm: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 To: Don Cock 72520,1500 >Ideas? Don, Go into the security pull down menu in regedit and assign 'Full Access' permissions to administrator on TCPIPSVC. >DonC This should do it. Good luck, -Krishnan Parameshwaran [MS] #: 11784 S11/Network services 08-Oct-92 10:55:59 Sb: #11640-tcpipsvc startup in NT Fm: Don Cock 72520,1500 To: Krishnan P [Microsoft] 71075,3222 (X) That did it! Thanks, DonC #: 11799 S11/Network services 08-Oct-92 14:52:20 Sb: Win NT TCP/IP setup Fm: George Halpert 72370,1151 To: UNFORMATTED Windows NT TCP/IP Network Setup We installed Win NT using the express graphical setup and the Network Control Panel was used to install and configure our network adapter and TCP/IP. The adapter card is an EtherLink II (IRQ=5,I/O=300) and the machine name is unique. At "net start tcpipsvc" the result is: "tcpipsvc is starting; tcpipsvc could not be started" (err 3523). When using ping we received the error "ICMP network unreachable". The same errors have been experienced with Western Digital WD8003EP and WD8013EP network adapters. Does anyone have an idea what the problem might be? George Halpert 72370,1151 There is 1 Reply. #: 11835 S11/Network services 08-Oct-92 18:56:15 Sb: #11799-Win NT TCP/IP setup Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701 To: George Halpert 72370,1151 Hi George, While I am not going to offer up as your saviour on this one, I've seen net start invoked successfully on my system (Gateway 386/33 w/12Mbyte RAM, same ELink card and settings). When I ping a known good ip address (our HP 3000), I get the same "ICMP: Network unreachable (maynhp)" message. I am using etc\hosts only. If I ping a bogus ip address, I get 0 of 4 packets returned, instead of network unreachable. HOSTS: 127.0.0.1 localhost 192.6.3.4 maynhp maynhp.maynard.com 192.6.3.11 mayniac mayniac.maynard.com 192.6.3.12 maynodt maynodt.maynard.com 192.6.3.21 maynnt maynnt.maynard.com ### My machine name All of these are talking marvelously amongst themselves except for me and my NT system. Hope this adds info to your situation and gets us a fix. Tim Jones #: 11669 S11/Network services 07-Oct-92 11:14:01 Sb: add adapter wd8013 Fm: Michael R Matson 71461,55 To: MS I can not get NT to recognize my wd8013 or SMC ellite 16 adapter. I booted from the NT floppy and installed as per release notes. I specified wd8013 adapter but it never asked about parameters for the card. After installing I tried the control-panel/network option to add adapter. It tells me the driver is already load, new/current/cancel? It never askes for card parameters. When I exit from network setup it says no adapter found. I got the updated wd from lib2 with the docs to install. I tried the DOS2NT procedure by using regedit to add the driver. Under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE SYSTEM CurrentColtrolSet Service Wdlan01 Parameters I don't have a Wdlan01, just Wdlan, is this significant? also under NBF/Linkage you bind to \Device\WdLan01, should this be \Device\WdLan I'd like to get this on the LAN to start using it, Thanks -- mike #: 11893 S11/Network services 09-Oct-92 09:14:14 Sb: #11669-add adapter wd8013 Fm: Azfar Moazzam - Microsof 72370,453 To: Michael R Matson 71461,55 >After installing I tried the control-panel/network option to >add adapter. It tells me the driver is already load, new/current/cancel? >It never askes for card parameters. When I exit >from network setup it says no adapter found. >I got the updated wd from lib2 with the docs to install. I tried the >DOS2NT procedure by using regedit to add the driver. >Under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE >SYSTEM > CurrentColtrolSet > Service > Wdlan01 > Parameters > >I don't have a Wdlan01, just Wdlan, is this significant? >also under NBF/Linkage you bind to \Device\WdLan01, >should this be \Device\WdLan > >I'd like to get this on the LAN to start using it, >Thanks >->mike > Hello Mike, Did you do a clean install with DOS2NT? Also, did you uncomment the WDLAN driver in the enabledrivers section of the reistry.ini before rebooting. If not then this maybe the problem. In such a case you will need to do a clean install with DOS2NT. You also indicated that you did a graphical install in the begining. Did you see any problems while performing the install? Azfar #: 11739 S12/Printing 07-Oct-92 21:03:41 Sb: Printing problem.. Fm: Hien Nguyen 71204,254 To: All I have an Epson LQ-510 connect to my local LPT1: port. When I print a file from NotePad, nothing happens. NT does not even initialize the printer when I boot up my system like DOS used to do. Anyone know what is the problem??? I install NT using dos2nt procedure. Thanks. #: 11764 S12/Printing 08-Oct-92 08:05:04 Sb: Printing CD Documention Fm: Robert H. Bernard 71210,246 To: All Has anyone successfully printed the PostScript documentation files that come on the Windows NT Developers Preliminary Release CD-ROM? I tried to print the following ones on two different models of the Apple LaserWriter (an older one and a newer LWINT), and get PostScript errors from both. I would appreciate knowing which PostScript printers people have used successfully to print these and other files. OVR32WM.PST OVR32SS.PST OVR32EXT.PST OVR32GDI.PST Thanks, Bob #: 11836 S12/Printing 08-Oct-92 18:56:29 Sb: Printer Problems HP-DJ Fm: Tim Jones 70750,701 To: Sysop (X) As mentioned by others in this area - I also have attached a HP DeskJet to LPT1: and cannot Print to it. If I send a print job from any NT app, nothing appears in the printer manager and the printer never initializes. LPT1: is IRQ-7 and there are no other devices set to that level. Tim Jones #: 11068 S14/Documentation 02-Oct-92 16:07:30 Sb: #10652-NT Docs Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Nick Wagner 75176,1763 (X) Are you asking about the Windows NT end-user docs or low-level kernel, NT executive information??? BTW, the SDK docs are not the same as 3.1. They are substantially different and were written by a different group. You're correct in that the C docs are the same as C7. -Dwight (MS) #: 11119 S14/Documentation 02-Oct-92 22:53:00 Sb: NT Documentation Fm: Nick Wagner 75176,1763 To: Dwight Matheny I am asking about what youmight call end user information. I would like to know at least enough to be able to install and configure NT, including info about major differences fromm 3.1 -- such as the way dr are used, the way configuration is done with the registry etc. I know many of these things are asked and discussed on the forum but some of the important stuff should have been published on the CD or perhaps later as a file on the forum. I really am glad to have the pre-release to play with and don't mean to complain too much, but all the literature seems to suggest that "THE Documentation" is on the CD --7500 paaaages --I expected some of that to be NT documentation.(User Manual) Repeating [Dmy question --- will there be a user manual included with the beta release??? Thanks for your reply --------------- Nick There is 1 Reply. #: 11277 S14/Documentation 04-Oct-92 20:59:34 Sb: #11119-NT Documentation Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725 To: Nick Wagner 75176,1763 User docs???? What user docs?? How to install it came in a pamplet called "Microsoft Win32 Preliminary Software Development kit for Windows NT July 1992 Release Notes". How to operate it?? Gee, if you can find that then let me know. I purchased the documentation in printed format and can not really find how to operate Windows NT in any documentation other than the pamplet. (or its PS copy on the CDROM.) There is the "tools" manual which describes the microsoft tools. But there is no equivalent to the "Users Guide" which came with the _finished_ product called Microsoft Windows 3.1. #: 11264 S14/Documentation 04-Oct-92 17:32:41 Sb: Neet Technical NT Docs Fm: William Verthein 76557,3623 To: ALL I am a CS graduate student as well as a professional developer and I have to do a paper for my Advanced OS class on NT. I was wondering if anyone knows where I can get technical documentation (MS or 3rd party) on the internal architecture of NT. Any articles (ACM, IEEE or symposiums) as well as books would be very helpful. Please pass on any info you know of to me via email: William Verthein [76557,3623] Thanx in advance for ANY help you can offer... wgv wgv There is 1 Reply. #: 11278 S14/Documentation 04-Oct-92 21:01:44 Sb: #11264-Neet Technical NT Docs Fm: Al Longyear 70165,725 To: William Verthein 76557,3623 It is my belief that the Windows NT kernel is loosely based upon the MACH kernel. (Or so I have heard from other people . . . .) #: 11488 S14/Documentation 06-Oct-92 07:53:04 Sb: DOC PRINTING PROBLEMS Fm: Terry Lemons 71033,3114 To: ALL [A/EXIT I'm trying to print the SDK PostScript document on a number of DEC printers (especially the printerSeturbo PrintServer 20 (LPS20) and DEClaser 3250 (LN08). I'm ha notice problems tathat, from what I've heard, are causee d by the printers exhausting virtual memory. I've also heard that this is caused by problems in the application(s) that generated the PostScript, in that they aiddidn't adhere to the PostScript standard regarinddgin page indepencence. Any thoughts on how I can work around these problems? I've heard that these have already been discussed here , so I'm not supplying a lot of details. If you want specifics, please let me know. Thanks! tl/exit #: 11280 S14/Documentation 04-Oct-92 21:43:56 Sb: DEC Alpha HAL Spec? Fm: Randy Wiser 76046,2537 To: all I don't know if this is the right place to ask but: I'm looking for a document I think is called "The 21064 HAL (Hardware Architecture Layer?) Interface Specification for Windows NT" that someone from Digital Equipment Corporation told me was on the July developers CD. Does anyone know the filename of this document or if it's available from Microsoft in some other form? Any leads would be appreciated. Thanks, Randy Wiser There is 1 Reply. #: 11324 S14/Documentation 05-Oct-92 06:44:47 Sb: #11280-DEC Alpha HAL Spec? Fm: Andy Champ 100064,2267 To: Randy Wiser 76046,2537 I don't think there are any HAL specs on the CD - they're all a bit more secret than that. What do you need it for though? (just curious!) Don't you like DEC's HAL code & want to write your own? #: 11605 S14/Documentation 06-Oct-92 22:55:42 Sb: DEC Alpha HAL Spec? Fm: Randy Wiser 76046,2537 To: Andy Champ I did think it somewhat unusual for the HAL spec. to be on the CD, but hasn't DEC been pushing the "openess" aspect of Alpha APX? If they expect others to design this chip into new products, it make sense to provide easy access to this kind of information. I can't be sure the HAL spec. will be of any use to me. But I would certainly like to have a look at it if it's not proprietary. If DEC's HAL code is available and _applicable_ that would be great. This is all pie-in-the-sky thinking at this point. But if anyone at MS can comment publicly or privately on this subject I would appreciate it. #: 11602 S14/Documentation 06-Oct-92 22:20:50 Sb: Real Programmers Fm: Rex Wheeler 70712,110 To: All Real Programmers don't need documentation. They don't write it either. (It's a joke, no *flames*) #: 11787 S14/Documentation 08-Oct-92 11:25:26 Sb: #11602-Real Programmers Fm: Mike Widseth 71151,1430 To: Rex Wheeler 70712,110 Real programmers don't document their programs internally, either. If it was hard to write, it should be hard to understand and even harder to modify . Real programmers don't document. Documentation is for simpletons who can't read listings or the object code from a core dump . -Mike- (that was fun!) (I, too, wish to ward off flames by pointing out that these were an attempt at comedy!) #: 11458 S14/Documentation 06-Oct-92 00:10:23 Sb: NT "End User" Docs Fm: Nick Wagner 75176,1763 To: Dwight Matheny Your confirmmation is as I suspected -- There is no NT documentation. I am confused by reference to the beta end user version of NT. I am anxiously waiting for an a upgrade( the beta version?) in the mail any day. Will that include the same version of NT as the "end user" version. Will it include NT documentation??? -- I think you just said it will not. -- Why not? If not, and if the "End User" version does -- Is it possible to get the "End User Version also? I am still trying to get the compiler to run without crashing so am looking for the beta version to solve that. (The mswin32 guys are working on it). #: 11716 S14/Documentation 07-Oct-92 17:07:10 Sb: #11522-NT "End User" Docs Fm: Scott Alexander 76556,557 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X) Is there any way to request these docs NOW so they can be shipped when ready, or could they be placed on the cd rom like the SDK manuals? ps: Do you really think that most developers do not want to see the end user manuals? I would be surprised, I certainly want to know how Microsoft is telling people to use Windows/NT. I do not need any surprises about how people are accessing, printing, sharing, etc, or about how you are reccomending to adminster security and how I plan to secure my objects, etc. I would think developers, at a minimum would need to see the end user docs related to security and the registry. #: 11773 S14/Documentation 08-Oct-92 10:15:57 Sb: #11716-NT "End User" Docs Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Scott Alexander 76556,557 (X) I found out yesterday afternoon that the end-user doc files made it on the October SDK CD. I was worried that this might not happen, but they made it! You'll be able to print them out and have the same docs as people on the end-user beta program. -Dwight (MS) There are 2 Replies. #: 11796 S14/Documentation 08-Oct-92 12:11:46 Sb: #11773-NT "End User" Docs Fm: Thomas Talley 70353,2003 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X) What format will the docs be in (i.e. Postscript or W4W Doc)?? Tnx. Tom There is 1 Reply. #: 11824 S14/Documentation 08-Oct-92 17:30:21 Sb: #11796-NT "End User" Docs Fm: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 To: Thomas Talley 70353,2003 Postscript and Write. -Dwight There is 1 Reply. #: 11833 S14/Documentation 08-Oct-92 18:53:04 Sb: #11824-NT "End User" Docs Fm: James Ferguson 71477,2345 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X) Write? Has Write been converted to native 32-bit mode? It wasn't even in the July pre-release. -- Jim F. #: 11838 S14/Documentation 08-Oct-92 19:28:06 Sb: #11773-NT "End User" Docs Fm: Steve Siegel 72630,3704 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X) Do these "end-user" docs include architectural overview, detailed system guide, etc.; and will they be available in hard copy at reduced rate to purchasers of the SDK? Thanks, -Steve #: 11717 S14/Documentation 07-Oct-92 17:39:29 Sb: #11522-NT "End User" Docs Fm: Graham Welland 70023,1267 To: Dwight Matheny (MS) 70750,2340 (X) Dwight, Even developers need the basic documentation for setting up network cards/NT commands etc. Will this level of documentation come with the next development beta or not? A pre-lim resource kit would be invaluable to developers, since NT is not just about the win32 API set! Graham