jsm@vax1.UUCP (02/08/87)
My father is considering buying a PC's Limited AT clone for his office, but is a bit worried about support and reliability. Can anyone share experiences with this machine?
geller@eli.UUCP (02/10/87)
In article <269@vax1.ccs.cornell.edu>, jsm@vax1.ccs.cornell.edu (Jon Meltzer) writes: > My father is considering buying a PC's Limited AT clone for his office, but > is a bit worried about support and reliability. Can anyone share experiences > with this machine? The founder of PC's Limited, a young fellow of age 23 or 24, was just featured in an article in Forbes or Business Week - maybe it was Newsweek. Anyhow - the company has grown within two years to 50+ million a year and plans to grow beyong 500 million dollars a year in business. Success is do largely to their selling such a successful PC clone. Everyone I know who has delt with the firm has been quite pleased. David Geller Electric Logic, Inc. Washington, D.C.
stever@tekgen.UUCP (02/12/87)
The several reviews that I have read on PC Limited's machines always seem to include the reviewers having to send the review machine back a couple of times (re: Feburary 9, l987 Infoworld review on the PC Limited 286/12). They must be doing something right though, since they seem to be growing even with the various controversies they have had. I personally would be reluctant to depend upon them if its your only machine and you need it urgently during the break in phase of ownership. However, I think PC Limited is the type of innovative PC business that we all need as counterweights to IBM, etc. I hope they make it on the long term! I may succumb to one of their 286's yet once they show me 286-DOS running on their machines. ---Steven D. Rogers
jl42#@andrew.cmu.edu (Jay Mathew Libove) (05/04/87)
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 1909
X-Trace: MS Version 3.24 on ibm032 host media, by jl42 (1909).
To: outnews#ext.nn.comp.sys.ibm.pc@andrew.cmu.edu
I have dealt with PCs Limited of Austin Texas a number of times, all
of which were very happy - I am using one of their original models of
their "PC's Limited AT" - have owned it for about 18 months now, no
problems (it is a little finicky about being turned back on less than
5 seconds after it gets turned off, but hey- that's normal!)
As far as ordering from them goes - YES! Have lots of questions ahead
of time; as with any mail order house it is easier to decide you
really don't want it BEFORE you order it! Their tech support people
are very good, but there is one circumstance in which they don't work
real well - if you have PCs Limited equipment with another vendor's
equipment installed, and you have a question that could deal with
either the PCs Ltd stuff OR the other stuff, you they will tell you
that they can't be sure - which is quite true. I therefore recommend
ordering all the major components from PCs Limited if you order the
system unit from them - i.e. the drives and major expansion cards
(like Memory and ports) should all come installed with the unit, to
avoid interesting problems at startup.
This all comes from: My system came without a hard disk - I saved
about $100 by ordering the hard disk from someone else - of coures, I
plugged it in and it failed shortly after I got it. I sent it back to
the factory after calling PCs Limited and doing what they suggested
which indicated a bad drive, the factory said yup - bad drive and
sent me another - which failed a week later. I began to wonder where
the problem was. In the end it was because I did not buy the hard
disk from PCs Limited that it took us a long time to figure out where
the fault was (turned out it was in the Controller Card that had come
with the unit, but could not be detected until tested with a drive
installed - and then standard diagnostics thought it was a drive
fault - yuck!)
So the long and the short of all of this is, as I said before, I like
PCs Limited - I recommend them - and I strongly suggest that anyone
ordering from them ask loads of questions (their sales staff knows
what they're talking about!) and you should have no trouble.
Jay Libove
Arpa: jl42@andrew.cmu.edu
Bitnet: jl42@drycas.bitnet
UUCP: ...!{seismo, ucbvax, harvard}!andrew.cmu.edu!jl42#
Hey! I know who -you- are! You're another one of those crazy people who uses
SCO Xenix!mellon@mit-prep.ARPA (Ted Lemon) (05/14/87)
Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.44 of Tue Apr 14 1987 on prep (berkeley-unix) I don't think it's legitimate for a company to expect you to only buy their hardware. If they can't handle the concept of alien hardware, they shouldn't claim to have an IBM compatible. Most people need things that PC's limited can't provide - graphics, large disks, et cetera. A PC's limited AT should come with a hard disk controller if it's AT compatible, and the controller should have been tested prior to shipment. I don't know how bad they really are about foreign hardware, but when I buy a computer, I don't want to feel that I can't be creative with it. Of course, this is a great argument against IBM ATs as well. Go, Compaq!!! _MelloN_ -- Ted Lemon _______________________________________________________________________________ |UUCP: {}!mit-eddie!mit-prep!mellon | New Media Graphics Corporation| |INTERNET: mellon@prep.ai.mit.edu | 279 Cambridge St. | |Project GNU, Free Software Foundation | Burlington MA 01803 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Be all you can be; work for peace.
dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) (05/23/87)
In article <98@mit-prep.ARPA> mellon@mit-prep.ARPA (Ted Lemon) writes:
I don't think it's legitimate for a company [like PC's Limited]
to expect you to only buy [its] hardware...
When I needed a 3 M memory board for my PC't Limited AT, I telephoned the
company. The salesman I talked to said he only had one with 1.5 M on it.
But, he said, many other vendors sell 3 M boards, and encouraged me to buy
any of them.
--
Rahul Dhesi UUCP: {ihnp4,seismo}!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesimellon@mit-prep.ARPA (Ted Lemon) (05/25/87)
Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.44 of Tue Apr 14 1987 on prep (berkeley-unix) That's good. I hope that PC's limited does that as a general policy, and that they'll back the recommendation that you use an outside vendor's board if your system should someday fail. I was commenting on another person's statement that it wasn't unreasonable for a company such as PC's limited to expect you to buy all of your system components from them, which I disagree with strongly. _MelloN_ -- Ted Lemon _______________________________________________________________________________ |UUCP: {}!mit-eddie!mit-prep!mellon | New Media Graphics Corporation| |INTERNET: mellon@prep.ai.mit.edu | 279 Cambridge St. | |Project GNU, Free Software Foundation | Burlington MA 01803 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Be all you can be; work for peace.
wek@point.UUCP (Bill Kuykendall) (09/14/89)
We recently tried to install Lotus 1-2-3 Release 3.0 on a 2.5 year old PCs Limited 286 (the 8mz model with smartview). No combination of memory configuration switches for the base 1 MB could be made to work. We added an Intel Aboveboard with 2 MB and tried various combinations as well (This model can be configured with different amounts of base memory and extended in the first meg via dipswitches). No luck. Next we tried another identical machine. Same results. It will load and run on a 386 that we tried and a 286 from another manufacturer. All machines were attempted from the same set of install disks. Has anyone else tried to use Release 3 with an older PCs Limited? If so, and it worked, what revision is your motherboard, and the approximate date of manufacture? Please tell me we don't have a major problem here... Bill Kuykendall ...ddsw1!point!wek
karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) (09/14/89)
>Item 5506 (0 resps) by wek at point.UUCP on Wed 13 Sep 89 22:02 >[Bill Kuykendall] Subject: PCs Limited (Dell) 286's & Lotus 3.0 >We recently tried to install Lotus 1-2-3 Release 3.0 on a 2.5 year old PCs >Limited 286 (the 8mz model with smartview). No combination of memory >configuration switches for the base 1 MB could be made to work. We added an You may have a VERY big problem. If 1-2-3 Release 3 wants to see extended memory, and your processor can't hack it (or your BIOS doesn't know how to deal with it right) then you are screwed. If it's looking for EXPANDED memory then you should be ok -- but from what I understand R3 wants Extended -- not expanded. Try changing the BIOS for a Phoenix of recent origin. That _may_ work. If it doesn't then you have other problems, such as a processor that is at least a little buggy. I'm not sure if 1-2-3 is using the "go to protected mode/reset" scheme to get to the extended memory, or the "loadall" trick. Both are somewhat dangerous in that they rely on items that are not guaranteed to work. "Loadall" isn't even supposed to be in a '386, so I would bet on the "go to protected mode/reset" game, or else Lotus got smart and uses '386 protected mode if it senses the 386 processor. -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl) Public Access Data Line: [+1 312 566-8911], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"
cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn) (09/15/89)
In article <[250fb546:5506.1]comp.ibmpc;1@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes: >>[Bill Kuykendall] Subject: PCs Limited (Dell) 286's & Lotus 3.0 >>We recently tried to install Lotus 1-2-3 Release 3.0 on a 2.5 year old PCs >>Limited 286 (the 8mz model with smartview). No combination of memory >>configuration switches for the base 1 MB could be made to work. We added an >If 1-2-3 Release 3 wants to see extended memory, and your processor can't >hack it (or your BIOS doesn't know how to deal with it right) then you are >screwed. If it's looking for EXPANDED memory then you should be ok -- but >from what I understand R3 wants Extended -- not expanded. Yes indeed, 1-2-3 R3 will only run if you have at least 1M of extended + conventional memory, although once it's running, it will use expanded and/or extended memory (although there may be some restrictions on what types of data it will put into which sort of memory, just like there are in Symphony). I only got to play around with R3 for about 15 minutes on someone else's PC, and was unable to solve some problems he was having: 1. On his EGA system, all screens were done in graphics mode. This isn't that much of a problem (except that it's slower), except that the character set it was using was pretty lousy - it looked only marginally better than CGA characters. 2. We were unable to re-run the Install program to change the installation options. Running it from the hard disk resulted in Install informing us that it had to be run from the floppy, and running it from the floppy (an exact duplicate of the original, I believe) resulted in some other error which I can't remember. Any comments on these problems are welcome and I'll pass them along to my friend - please e-mail, though, and I'll mail summaries of any responses I get to anyone who requests a summary. -- Stephen M. Dunn cs4g6ag@maccs.McMaster.CA ********************************************************************** <std_disclaimer.h> = "\nI'm only an undergraduate!!!\n"; "VM is like an orgasm: the less you have to fake, the better." - S.C.
aland@infmx.UUCP (Dr. Scump) (09/15/89)
In article <[250fb546:5506.1]comp.ibmpc;1@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes: |>Item 5506 (0 resps) by wek at point.UUCP on Wed 13 Sep 89 22:02 |>[Bill Kuykendall] Subject: PCs Limited (Dell) 286's & Lotus 3.0 | |>We recently tried to install Lotus 1-2-3 Release 3.0 on a 2.5 year old PCs |>Limited 286 (the 8mz model with smartview). No combination of memory |>configuration switches for the base 1 MB could be made to work. We added an |You may have a VERY big problem. | |If 1-2-3 Release 3 wants to see extended memory, and your processor can't |hack it (or your BIOS doesn't know how to deal with it right) then you are |screwed. If it's looking for EXPANDED memory then you should be ok -- but |from what I understand R3 wants Extended -- not expanded. | |Try changing the BIOS for a Phoenix of recent origin. That _may_ work. If |it doesn't then you have other problems, such as a processor that is at |least a little buggy. | |I'm not sure if 1-2-3 is using the "go to protected mode/reset" scheme to |get to the extended memory, or the "loadall" trick. Both are somewhat |dangerous in that they rely on items that are not guaranteed to work. |... |-- |Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl) I'm almost certain that Lotus 1-2-3 Release 3.0 uses Rational's DOS/16M for protected-mode operation. If so, then Lotus 3.0 is built on a DOS extended which uses straight protected mode (AKA "286 Protected Mode") as opposed to 386 native mode. Therefore, the product runs the same on 286s and 386s (although Rational adds 386 specials such as support for VCPI-compliant virtual 8086 mode software such as DESQView 386). Anyway, back to the original question. On 286s, many older clone BIOSes cannot properly handle the protected-mode calls. DOS/16M provides several compatibility modes to handle those older BIOSes that have trouble when an IBM AT is assumed but can work with a little trickery. See if Lotus included Rational's PMINFO and EXAMBIOS utilities (and any documentation for same). You can choose a compatibility mode by setting the DOS16M environment variable to the mode identifier before loading Lotus (or running PMINFO). The most common alternate modes are 4, 7, and 10; the default is mode 9 for 286s. 10 is the best-performing mode of all (better than the default); if it works, stick with it. Test procedure: (I would have hoped that Lotus documented this) 1) reboot 2) set DOS16M=10 3) run PMINFO, or load Lotus if PMINFO not included if your machine hangs: 1) reboot 2) set DOS16M=7 3) run PMINFO, or load Lotus if PMINFO not included if your machine hangs: 1) reboot 2) set DOS16M=4 3) run PMINFO, or load Lotus if PMINFO not included if your machine hangs: 1) you're sunk. Get an updated BIOS or buy a real machine. It's possible (though rare) that PMINFO can work but the product fail later on. In that event, experiment with the above settings and see if the problem goes away. Also, are you sure that your extended memory is configured properly and unflawed? -- Alan S. Denney @ Informix Software, Inc. {pyramid|uunet}!infmx!aland "I want to live! -------------------------------------------- as an honest man, Disclaimer: These opinions are mine alone. to get all I deserve If I am caught or killed, the secretary and to give all I can." will disavow any knowledge of my actions. - S. Vega
wek@point.UUCP (Bill Kuykendall) (09/16/89)
>If 1-2-3 Release 3 wants to see extended memory, and your processor can't >hack it (or your BIOS doesn't know how to deal with it right) then you are >screwed. If it's looking for EXPANDED memory then you should be ok -- but Lotus 1-2-3 R3 is indeed looking for *extended* memory and using protected mode. >Try changing the BIOS for a Phoenix of recent origin. That _may_ work. If I didn't mention it, but we did try an Award bios in the first machine, to no avail. Dell is shipping us their latest bios, but we don't have it yet. >I'm not sure if 1-2-3 is using the "go to protected mode/reset" scheme to >get to the extended memory, or the "loadall" trick. Both are somewhat Interesting. I'm not familiar with either of these schemes, but I had noticed that 1-2-3 seems to use protected mode differently than another "extended" application that we have (which works). The protected application which works is using RT's DOS16M extender. It loads an 83k kernel in conventional memory, and loads the remaining 2 megabytes of code and buffer space above the 1 meg boundary. Lotus is supposed to work with a single meg of memory, utilizing additional segments between 640k and 1 meg. If you have additional extended memory, it will use that also. As I said earlier, we haven't been successful with either configuration on the PCs LTD 286 machines. Bill Kuykendall ...ddsw1!point!wek
wek@point.UUCP (Bill Kuykendall) (09/21/89)
Final Resolution of Problem: A combination of the latest bios chips from Dell, and setting the environment variable DOS16M=10 did the trick. (It needed *both*) Thanks much to the responders, especially Dr. Scump for the info on the DOS16M variable. I haven't extensively searched the full documentation, but this info was not in the installation booklet. --