In a message on Wednesday 12-27-15 Daryl Stout said to Holger Granholm:

Hello Daryl,

I have too many programs that I still want to be able to use, without HG>having to register them again.

That is the reason to keep my system, including the Win 10 as 32 bit.

Besides, many of the legacy BBS items work under 32-bit, but NOT
under 64-bit.

I wouldn't even dream of running a BBS under ANY Windows.

Mind you, I have only Win 10 on the laptop I got for XMAS, because it
was there. We have not yet got on talking terms ;o(


Happy New Year!


73 de Sam, OH0NC

aka Holger

___
* MR/2 2.30 * Those who can, do. Those who can't, supervise!


--- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 2
* Origin: Coming to you from the Sunny Aland Islands. (2:20/228)

Hello Daryl,

Hi, Holger,

I wouldn't even dream of running a BBS under ANY Windows.

I've run the BBS under MS-DOS, DESQview, OS/2 Warp, plus Windows 3.1, 95, 98,
XP, and 7. I have no desire at present to upgrade to Windows 10.

However, I realize that everyone is different, and may want or need a different OS for their setup, than what I have.

Mind you, I have only Win 10 on the laptop I got for XMAS, because it
was there. We have not yet got on talking terms ;o(

Maybe you need a bigger hammer, or a stick of dynamite (hi hi).

Happy New Year!

You, too.

Daryl, WX1DER
---
* OLX 1.53 * If you're consonated, maybe you need a vowel movement.
* PDQWK 2.53 #5


--- GTMail 1.26
* Origin: The Thunderbolt BBS - wx1der.dyndns.org - GT Power 20 (1:19/33.0)

In a message on Sunday 12-31-15 Daryl Stout said to Holger Granholm:

GM Daryl,

I wouldn't even dream of running a BBS under ANY Windows.

I've run the BBS under MS-DOS, DESQview, OS/2 Warp, plus Windows
3.1, 95, 98, XP, and 7. I have no desire at present to upgrade to
Windows 10.

Until ", plus" I have done likeways, the rest are territory I wouldn't
trust to run a BBS under.

Of course I've used some versions, starting with v1.03, progressing via
v.286 through v3.1, WfWG 3.11, to finally land at XP pro until I got
this laptop with 10 pro.

Maybe you need a bigger hammer, or a stick of dynamite (hi hi).

Yeah, probably a sledge hammer. Yesterday I checked the XP pro laptop,
and of course found Explorer there. So far I haven't found it in Win 10.

Neither have I found the "Run" command in the startup.

73 de Sam, OH0NC.

CU L8ER,

Holger

___
* MR/2 2.30 * Drive E: not responding.. - Formatting Drive C: instead


--- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 2
* Origin: Coming to you from the Sunny Aland Islands. (2:20/228)

Re: Re: edit in windows 7 64b
By: Holger Granholm to Daryl Stout on Wed Dec 30 2015 09:46 am

I wouldn't even dream of running a BBS under ANY Windows.

I've run my BBS under DOS, OS/2, and Windows. IMO, windows wasn't a real contender until Windows 2000 came around and hardware caught up to even out some of the rough edges with Windows multitasking.

I ran 2 nodes on a 486/66 with 16 megs of RAM in OS/2, but 2 nodes in Windows on a P233MMX with 64 megs ran about the same.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

In a message on Wednesday 01-05-16 Kurt Weiske said to Holger Granholm:

Good morning Kurt,

I wouldn't even dream of running a BBS under ANY Windows.

I've run my BBS under DOS, OS/2, and Windows. IMO, windows wasn't a
real contender until Windows 2000 came around and hardware caught up

I did run my BBS first under DOS, then DOS/DesqView and finally OS/2.
With later versions of PCBoard came also instructions, and sample PIF
files for running the board under Windows, but with my experience of
the reliability of Windows, didn't make me consider that.

I ran 2 nodes on a 486/66 with 16 megs of RAM in OS/2, but 2 nodes
in Windows on a P233MMX with 64 megs ran about the same.

The multitasking under OS/2 was so much faster, that I never again
considered the return to DOS/DV.

Have a nice day,

Holger

___
* MR/2 2.30 * OS/2 ... Opens up Windows, shuts up Gates.

--- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 2
* Origin: Coming to you from the Sunny Aland Islands. (2:20/228)

06 Jan 16 11:46, you wrote to Kurt Weiske:

I ran 2 nodes on a 486/66 with 16 megs of RAM in OS/2, but 2 nodes in
Windows on a P233MMX with 64 megs ran about the same.

The multitasking under OS/2 was so much faster, that I never again considered the return to DOS/DV.

same here... plus i was able to throw up another X number of nodes with no troubles and OS/2 handled it great... with DV i had to make sure that the memory was accessible in a certain way or DV simply would not see and use it...

)\/(ark

"So let me ask you a question about this brave new world of yours. When you've killed all the bad guys, and when it's all perfect, and just and fair, and when
you have finally got it exactly the way you want it, what are you going to do with the people like you? The trouble makers. How are you going to protect your
glorious revolution from the next one?" - The twelfth Doctor

... Sign at Diner: "Breakfast special - scrambled egsg."
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

In a message on Friday 01-07-16 mark lewis said to Holger Granholm:

06 Jan 16 11:46, you wrote to Kurt Weiske:

I ran 2 nodes on a 486/66 with 16 megs of RAM in OS/2, but 2 nodes in
Windows on a P233MMX with 64 megs ran about the same.

The multitasking under OS/2 was so much faster, that I never again considered the return to DOS/DV.

For a long time, I still had DOS/DV as a resrve, but never had to use it
so now it's forgotten history.

with no troubles and OS/2 handled it great... with DV i had to make
sure that the memory was accessible in a certain way or DV simply
would not see and use it...

Yes - but with the help of QEMM 386 the memory problem was solved quite
nicely, even though you had to juggle the values a bit.

My first version of DV was 2.2 of 1989 and the last one v2.4 of 1991 and
with QEMM-386 v6.0 of the same year.


Have a good night,

Holger

___
* MR/2 2.30 * As long as one keeps searching, the answers come.

--- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 2
* Origin: Coming to you from the Sunny Aland Islands. (2:20/228)

08 Jan 16 19:59, you wrote to me:

with no troubles and OS/2 handled it great... with DV i had to make
sure that the memory was accessible in a certain way or DV simply
would not see and use it...

Yes - but with the help of QEMM 386 the memory problem was solved
quite nicely, even though you had to juggle the values a bit.

in my case, it required a special memory board... one that could ""back fill"" the base memory... if i had 512k base memory, then i could back fill with a 512k chunk... that let DV have up to 512k sized tasks... with 4Meg on the board, that gave me eight 512k sized tasks i could run or sixteen 256k ones...

if there was 640k base memory, the back filled hole could only be 384k in size so everything you ran had to run in 384k or less... if there was 384k of base memory, then the hole could be back filled with 640k...

not all memory cards would back fill the base 1024k of RAM, either...

My first version of DV was 2.2 of 1989 and the last one v2.4 of 1991
and with QEMM-386 v6.0 of the same year.

i dont' remember what mine were... i should still have them laying about around
here somewhere... i've been thinking about tossing up a virtual machine and seeing if it will run DV with QEMM... if that back filling of the memory hole thing works, it should be ok :)

)\/(ark

"So let me ask you a question about this brave new world of yours. When you've killed all the bad guys, and when it's all perfect, and just and fair, and when
you have finally got it exactly the way you want it, what are you going to do with the people like you? The trouble makers. How are you going to protect your
glorious revolution from the next one?" - The twelfth Doctor

... We don't attend parties. We just crash 'em! - Calvin
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

In a message on Sunday 01-09-16 mark lewis said to Holger Granholm:

Good morning Mark,

Yes - but with the help of QEMM 386 the memory problem was solved
quite nicely, even though you had to juggle the values a bit.

in my case, it required a special memory board... one that could
""back fill"" the base memory... if i had 512k base memory, then i
could back fill with a 512k chunk... that let DV have up to 512k

I just looked at the MEM report of my first setup for DV, including a
Hitachi CD drive. I had 616 kb memory free (630......bytes).

That CD drive reminds of my trials yesterday to get the operating sys-
tem to recognise all five CD's of my Nakamichi 5-disk changer.

Previously, when that drive was alone, all five disks were recognised,
but now I added a Plexwriter CD/RW drive and since then only one disk
is usable (the first one) of the changer. All five disks do show up at
boot-up, including the CD/RW.

I'll have to open up the box of worms an check SCSI id jumpers, even
though I carefully did that at the mechanical installation.

not all memory cards would back fill the base 1024k of RAM,
either...

I never had any reson to use those memory cards.

i dont' remember what mine were... i should still have them laying
about around here somewhere... i've been thinking about tossing up a virtual machine and seeing if it will run DV with QEMM... if that
back filling of the memory hole thing works, it should be ok :)

Just yesterday I dug up a copy of the QEMM floppy and copied the files
to the "new" BBS machine I'm setting up.


Have a nice day,

Holger

___
* MR/2 2.30 * Aland Islands / 60 degrees North / 20 degrees East


--- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 2
* Origin: Coming to you from the Sunny Aland Islands. (2:20/228)

The multitasking under OS/2 was so much faster, that I never again considered the return to DOS/DV.

same here... plus i was able to throw up another X number of nodes with
no troubles and OS/2 handled it great... with DV i had to make sure that the memory was accessible in a certain way or DV simply would not see
and use it...

I think DV wa great, but you're right you had to allocate exactly whatever resources it could use up front; there was no sharing between. But even so, it was better than Windows at the time and it worked amazingly well if you had the resources to give each process!

OS/2 was by far better than either of them like you guys say, but the issue there was hardware and drivers with incompatibility issues...

There was so much generic PC hardware that running OS/2 then was like building a Hackintosh now, you have to build the hardware specifically for the operating system...

I bought WARP and never got it to work on any hardware I ever owned, from my 486/66 to a friends 486/50 to my P2/300. I spend hours and hours talking with IBM support trying to get it to work, and it just never even installed correctly.

Oddly enough I've still struggled with it with VMware and Virutal Box too, getting eCS to work with a USB drive, or even with networking, so that I
could port Mystic to it.

Maybe its just OS/2 that hates me! :)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A1 (Windows)
* Origin: Sector 7 [Mystic BBS WHQ] (1:129/215)

In a message on Thursday 01-13-16 James Coyle said to mark lewis:

Hello James,

There was so much generic PC hardware that running OS/2 then was
like building a Hackintosh now, you have to build the hardware
specifically for the operating system...

Yes, I agree. It's sad that IBM abandoned the ship when it could by
themselves, have improved the compatibility to modern machines.

I bought WARP and never got it to work on any hardware I ever owned,
from my 486/66 to a friends 486/50 to my P2/300. I spend hours and
hours talking with IBM support trying to get it to work, and it just
never even installed correctly.

The main trick, as I see it, is to install OS/2 first on a clean disk,
with partitions that don't exceed 2Gb. After having installed it, you
can whatever you want with the rest of the HD space.

In 2012 I successfully installed OS/2 Warp4 and FP12 into a machine with
an Intel or AMD 233 MHz(66MHz bus) by installing OS/2 first to one
500 MHz (op.system and GUI), and two 2 Gb partitions, then Win XPp to
the rest of the 40 Gb HD.

Year 2015 I did the same to an ACER AP6200 with a 433 MHz Celeron CPU.

Maybe its just OS/2 that hates me! :)

No, it isn't. Not even I have so far not been able to install Warp4 to
a Thinkpad (Lenovo), with a dual core CPU, even de-activating one core
hasn't brought success, so far.


Have a good night,

Holger

___
* MR/2 2.30 * She takes the pill so she knows what day it is.


--- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 2
* Origin: Coming to you from the Sunny Aland Islands. (2:20/228)

On 2016-01-03 6:23 AM, Holger Granholm -> Daryl Stout wrote:

Maybe you need a bigger hammer, or a stick of dynamite (hi hi).

Yeah, probably a sledge hammer. Yesterday I checked the XP pro laptop,
and of course found Explorer there. So far I haven't found it in Win 10.

Neither have I found the "Run" command in the startup.

Windows 10 uses a Search bar on the taskbar for the traditional Run....

You can type commands in it. Try 'File Explorer'.

I have a File Explorer item in the list on the left of the Start Menu, by the way, on my Win 10 low-end laptop - right above Settings, Power, and All Apps.

---
* Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)

In a message on Saturday 01-22-16 Alan Zisman said to Holger Granholm:

On 2016-01-03 6:23 AM, Holger Granholm -> Daryl Stout wrote:

Hello Alan,

Yeah, probably a sledge hammer. Yesterday I checked the XP pro laptop, laptop, and of course found Explorer there. So far I haven't found it
in Win 10.

Windows 10 uses a Search bar on the taskbar for the traditional
Run....

Yes, some things start to dawn on me.

You can type commands in it. Try 'File Explorer'.

Many times when I have used the search, I get the reply "not found ...."

I have a File Explorer item in the list on the left of the Start
Menu, by the way, on my Win 10 low-end laptop - right above
Settings, Power, and All Apps.

I have now made a recovery stick, as well as a full beckup of the entire contents of C:, and also began the conversion to english, it was swedish.

Everything doesn't change at once, so I have made a couple trips to the
various settings menus.

It will now be easier for me to use the system, since until now I have
had to figure out what the swedish name of programs, can be translated
to in english.


Have a nice day,

Holger

___
* MR/2 2.30 * SYSOP (sys'operator), the guy that laughs at your spelling.

--- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 2
* Origin: Coming to you from the Sunny Aland Islands. (2:20/228)