[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Woody on 486 problem



On Fri, 2007-02-16 at 16:21 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 02/16/07 15:55, Mike McCarty wrote:
> > Ron Johnson wrote:
> >> On 02/16/07 14:45, Mike McCarty wrote:
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> Why not install Linux and dosemu?
> >>>
> >>> On a machine with 16MB? It fills a need I have as is.
> >>
> >> It would let you run multiple DOS sessions.
> > 
> > I repeat: It fills a need I have as is. I'd need to
> 
> You are sooooo non-geeky.
> 
> > put more disc on it, for one thing.
> > 
> >> OS/2 is also a *definite* option.
> > 
> > Ditto above.
> 
> Really?  I recall installing OS/2 3.0 on a 540MB HDD.

Wow, I remember IBM giving away free upgrades OS/2 v2.0 to previous
large customers of v1.X as it was so horrible to get running and
configured properly. I know this very well.

A big shipping firm I worked for actually ran OS/2 on the HUB machines
that downloaded and updated the tablets the drivers used when delivering
packages. Once you got it running and didn't change anything it ran
fantastically. Problem was, the embedded OS on the tablets had to be
updated so often that many (tablets) would become useless during the
re-flashing process.

It was chased down to OS/2 v1.x (at the time) had horrible handling of
multiple interrupts on "I/O devices" at the same time. In other words,
If the Token Ring card or Parallel Port and the "proprietary tablet
port" all had something to do at the same time, there was a pretty good
chance the "non-interrupt-able" flashing process would choked. It also
came down to the early 386+387 deployment from Intel SUCKED.
-- 
greg@gregfolkert.net

Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's
Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive
product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at
the playfield. -- Thane Walkup

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: