45624,02,04/28/92,BILL WOLFF,RICHARD HINTON R/4 MEG DRAM'S?, I've heard about 4 meg chips for about three years now... but no I have not see any either. 45625,04,04/28/92,TONY ANTONUCCI,ALL OS/2 ON D:, I have a question. I have plenty of hard disk space but not on drive C: I want to install OS/2 2.0 but the majority will have to reside in D: or E: I have the C: drive partioned as only about 15Meg. Can do? Or must I go t the repartion nightmare. 45724,11,09/15/92,WARD CHRISTENSEN,ALL WELCOME! & THANKS!, It does my heart good to see callers right off the bat when CBBS came back on line - reinforces my gut feel that it should be here! I couldn't believe when, after being down for months, within minutes of going back up, there was a caller! My heartfelt thanks! Please pass on the word - especially to old CBBSers. Any suggestions welcome! I think CBBS will stay kind of as it is for now, but with development going on in C for portability to a native PC environment, or Unix, etc. (*) (*) It is currently running on a PC with a V20 chip that supports 8080 emulation! With a bunch of assembler hacks, I've interfaced between CP/M 8080 code and the 8086 assembler interrupts, etc. 45824,09,10/22/92,ROY LIPSCOMB,ALL 386DX "FEATURE"?, Here's an interesting quote from DATAMATION, September 15, 1992, p. 19: "One problem already turned up in the early prerelease beta version of NT: incompatibility with early 'b1' runs of Intel's 386DX microprocessor, hundreds of thousands of which have shipped...in mid- and high-end machines." The "incompatibility" evidentally was some function that differed from that on later versions of that chip. Anyone know what it was? Anyone know of other functional differences (in 386/486 chips) that affect execution of 8086 machine code? 45924,23,12/02/92,ANDY SHAPIRO,ROY LIPSCOMB R/DJ500 PROBLEM (!), I would suspect the cable -- specificlly, I would suspect the shielding. I had a printer buffer that worked right for years with an OKI'92 printer. Then, when I upgraded to a DJ500, I noticed all sorts of things like you've mentioned -- UGH. Removing the buffer cleaned things up. You don't mention what speed you had the serial connection at; the problem may be that you're now running at VERY high speed: Parallel ports do that, especially given the 16K buffer in the DJ500. At high speeds (like my buffer pumping things ito the DJ on-board buffer), things get dicey. My buffer was hooked to the printer via a (built-in) short ribbon cable. Removing the buffer fixed everything. It may be the case that your cable isn't properly shielding things, and the result is that on high-speed prints (the first 16K or so) you get junk. On reviewing your message, I see the problems occurred later. Since I don't know the DJ as wel as Ward (HEY! WARD!), it seems to me that the DJ could still be getting stuff in "bursts" at that point, and so you could still hav troubles. End of story: try a new parallel cable -- preferrably a nic, high-end, VERY well-shielded one. Bet that solves your problem. (OH -- a thought -- perhaps shielding is more important w/DJ because of the 'spark' (RFI source) used in printing???) 22 45925,07,12/02/92,WARD CHRISTENSEN,ROY LIPSCOMB R/DJ500 PROBLEM (!), Well, I expect you are looking for an answer from me (grin) but I must admit, your "Since problems with the DJ are so rare.." comment applies to me - I've not run into such a thing. Is the printer and computer plugged into the same outlet? (better "relative" grounding that way - to coin a term). Voodoo. Seems appropriate. Gee, I really don't know what to do to help...other than suggesting trying another cable. 46024,06,01/13/93,BENJAMIN COHEN,ALL FOR SALE,NONE For Sale: 286-10 mother board with 1 meg, Intel above board plus with piggy back board and 4 mg RAM, 80 meg Seagate ST-4096 with Western Digital controller card, AT I/O card (2s, 1p, 1game), Stacker 2 co-processor board. Leave message here or call 312-726-3555 days, 708-965-8142 eves, wkends (if no answer, lv message on ans mach at 965-8144). No reasonable offer refused.... 46025,12,01/14/93,WARD CHRISTENSEN,ROY LIPSCOMB R/WHY DO 486'S GET HOT?, It is due to the number of transistors and the speed of on/off switching. The technology is probably CMOS, which means "Complimentary Metal Oxide Semiconductor". Unlike traditional transistors, MOS means that there is an insulator (the oxide) between the controlling signal and the Input and output signals. Like a capacitor, it is inherently an AC device, in that electrons get pushed into one side of the capacitor, but don't cross the insulating barrier. When you turn it off the electronc go back out, when you turn it on again, they get pushed in again, etc. Like DC resistance causing heat, all these electrons moving around cause heat. The big difference is that speed is totally related to the heat - if you clock the chip at 2mhz, it might take forever to get something done, but a 486 would run quite a bit cooler.