bradley.grigor@canremote.uucp (BRADLEY GRIGOR) (11/03/90)
a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) writes:
aP>I am finding that Microsoft Flight Simulator seems to be fundamentally
aP>incompatible with Windows 3.0. Can anyone shed light on the
aP>following two problems:
You're right! Flight Simulator -IS- fundamentally incompatible
with Windows 3.0 and I believe you'll find a statement to that
effect in your Windows README file.
...bag bradley.grigor@canremote.uucp Newmarket, Ontario, Canada
PCRelay public key: 7596 11-03-90 at 2:16am
---
%a #4613 a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) (11/12/90)
> bradley.grigor@canremote.uucp writes: > > a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) writes: > > aP>I am finding that Microsoft Flight Simulator seems to be fundamentally > aP>incompatible with Windows 3.0. Can anyone shed light on the > aP>following two problems: > > You're right! Flight Simulator -IS- fundamentally incompatible > with Windows 3.0 and I believe you'll find a statement to that > effect in your Windows README file. > As the original complainant, I feel an update is in order. Several people have pointed out a warning in the Windows readme.txt file about Flight Simulator. However, the warning does not say that you cannot run the Flight Simulator from Windows 3, but merely that you cannot run it as a background task. It also warns you against switching away from the Flight Simulator (as opposed to terminating it) when running in real or standard modes. My original complaint was that Flight Simulator was extremely slow in 386 enhanced mode (screen updates every 10 seconds, instead of several per second). I have just discovered that Flight Simulator seems to run fine in standard mode, with no obvious degradation of performance over running without Windows. I had not previously tried this because until a day or so ago, a typing error I made in modifying one of the ini files had prevented me from running DOS programs in standard and real modes. I have also found that standard mode offers noticibly faster scrolling and other operations in Winword than does the 386 enhanced mode. The 386 enhanced mode has some definite advantages, but it seem that these come at the price of a noticible speed difference for some (although certainly not all) applications. -- Bruce Dunn Vancouver, Canada a752@mindlink.UUCP
spolsky-joel@cs.yale.edu (Joel Spolsky) (11/13/90)
In article <3792@mindlink.UUCP> a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) writes: > I have also found that standard mode offers noticibly faster scrolling and >other operations in Winword than does the 386 enhanced mode. The 386 enhanced >mode has some definite advantages, but it seem that these come at the price of >a noticible speed difference for some (although certainly not all) >applications. This is a function of the 386 chip, not Windows. The 386, in protected mode, takes *significantly* longer than real mode to load segment references (because they have to go through a page table and they might page fault). That is why it is so important to try to use near pointers wherever possible, which makes programmer's lives significantly more confusing than using 32 bit pointers everywhere. Joel Spolsky spolsky@cs.yale.edu Silence = Death
ballerup@diku.dk (Per Goetterup) (11/13/90)
bradley.grigor@canremote.uucp (BRADLEY GRIGOR) writes: => a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) writes: => aP>I am finding that Microsoft Flight Simulator seems to be fundamentally => aP>incompatible with Windows 3.0. Can anyone shed light on the => aP>following two problems: => You're right! Flight Simulator -IS- fundamentally incompatible => with Windows 3.0 and I believe you'll find a statement to that => effect in your Windows README file. I know but apparently my Flight Simulator IV doesn't know it because it works fine under Windows 3.0, running in 386 Enh. mode, including switching between applications etc. Strange & funny - but convienient! -- | Per Gotterup | "The most merciful thing in the | | Student, DIKU (Inst. of Comp. Sci.) | world, I think, is the inability | | University of Copenhagen, Denmark | of the human mind to correlate all | | Internet: ballerup@freja.diku.dk | its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft - |
ashing@polari.UUCP (Al Shing) (11/14/90)
In article <3792@mindlink.UUCP> a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) writes: >> bradley.grigor@canremote.uucp writes: >> >> a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) writes: >> > My original complaint was that Flight Simulator was extremely slow in 386 >enhanced mode (screen updates every 10 seconds, instead of several per second). >I have just discovered that Flight Simulator seems to run fine in standard >mode, with no obvious degradation of performance over running without Windows. >I had not previously tried this because until a day or so ago, a typing error I >made in modifying one of the ini files had prevented me from running DOS >programs in standard and real modes. I've run mine in 386-enhanced mode, and it ran at near real speeds. Do you have the "Monitor Ports" box selected in your PIF? If so, this is your problem. Everything runs slower if this box is selected. If you are running some program in the background, this will also contribute to slower execution of FS, and any other application. If FS runs slowly in 386-enhanced mode, and it is the only application loaded, you probably have some tuning to do. > I have also found that standard mode offers noticibly faster scrolling and >other operations in Winword than does the 386 enhanced mode. The 386 enhanced >mode has some definite advantages, but it seem that these come at the price of >a noticible speed difference for some (although certainly not all) >applications. Same comments as above. All of my apps run at near real speed, unless I am running something in the background. I agree that standard mode is faster, but not enough to outweigh the benefits of running in enhanced mode. I have noticed that task switching on my system is a *lot* slower in standard mode than in enhanced mode. I only have a 386/16 MHz, so my CPU is not anything to write home about. Al Shing
spolsky-joel@cs.yale.edu (Joel Spolsky) (11/14/90)
In article <2731@polari.UUCP> ashing@polari.UUCP (Al Shing) writes: > >I've run mine in 386-enhanced mode, and it ran at near real speeds. Do you >have the "Monitor Ports" box selected in your PIF? If so, this is your >problem. Everything runs slower if this box is selected. > Not if you have a VGA. If you have a VGA card "Monitor Ports" is ignored. Flight simulator is still molases when I uncheck these. Joel Spolsky spolsky@cs.yale.edu Silence = Death
jls@hsv3.UUCP (James Seidman) (11/15/90)
In article <27267@cs.yale.edu> spolsky-joel@cs.yale.edu (Joel Spolsky) writes: >In article <2731@polari.UUCP> ashing@polari.UUCP (Al Shing) writes: >>I've run mine in 386-enhanced mode, and it ran at near real speeds. Do you >>have the "Monitor Ports" box selected in your PIF? If so, this is your >>problem. Everything runs slower if this box is selected. >Not if you have a VGA. If you have a VGA card "Monitor Ports" is >ignored. Flight simulator is still molases when I uncheck these. Why do you say that they're ignored for VGA? I have a VGA, and I've seen *tremendous* differences between having "Monitor Ports" set for "Text" and "High Graphics." I haven't tried Flight Simulator, but other graphics games (SimCity, Krynn, etc.) are all unplayably slow when MP is set for HG. Set it for "Text," and there's only about a 10% performance hit. (This is running them in exclusive mode in 386 Enh.) -- Jim Seidman (Drax), the accidental engineer. "There's a certain freedom to being completely screwed." - The Freshman UUCP: ames!vsi1!hsv3!jls Internet: hsv3.UUCP!jls@apple.com
mikew@proton.LCS.MIT.EDU (Michael B. Williams) (11/16/90)
In article <5780@hsv3.UUCP>, jls@hsv3.UUCP (James Seidman) writes: |> In article <27267@cs.yale.edu> spolsky-joel@cs.yale.edu (Joel Spolsky) writes: |> >In article <2731@polari.UUCP> ashing@polari.UUCP (Al Shing) writes: |> >>I've run mine in 386-enhanced mode, and it ran at near real speeds. Do you |> >>have the "Monitor Ports" box selected in your PIF? If so, this is your |> >>problem. Everything runs slower if this box is selected. |> |> >Not if you have a VGA. If you have a VGA card "Monitor Ports" is |> >ignored. Flight simulator is still molases when I uncheck these. |> |> Why do you say that they're ignored for VGA? I have a VGA, and I've seen |> *tremendous* differences between having "Monitor Ports" set for "Text" |> and "High Graphics." I haven't tried Flight Simulator, but other graphics |> games (SimCity, Krynn, etc.) are all unplayably slow when MP is set for HG. |> Set it for "Text," and there's only about a 10% performance hit. (This |> is running them in exclusive mode in 386 Enh.) |> -- |> Jim Seidman (Drax), the accidental engineer. |> "There's a certain freedom to being completely screwed." - The Freshman |> UUCP: ames!vsi1!hsv3!jls Internet: hsv3.UUCP!jls@apple.com I've brought this subject up before when I was using 386 Enhanced mode, but on my system, DOS programs run SIGNIFICANTLY slower in 386 mode, *regardless* of whether "Monitor Ports" is checked. (BTW, I do believe the manual states that it is ignored if you have a VGA.) For example, Norton's SI returns 15.3 from a DOS window in Standard mode, and 4.6 from a full-screen DOS window in 386 mode. That's more than a 10% performance penalty. I have found that switching to Standard mode is my only choice for ru nning DOS apps. However, my friend's IBM Model 70 doesn't experience the same slowdown when running DOS apps in 386 mode; it's more like the 10% penalty that you suggest. (In real usage, I don't even notice a slowdown.) Now, does anybody know why I suffer a such a tremendous penalty, while my friend does not? Can anyone link it to the fact that I have an SX and he has a DX? ________________________________________________________________________ Michael B. Williams \ 1-2-3-4, KICK THE LAWSUITS OUT THE DOOR MIT NE43-532 \ 5-6-7-8, INNOVATE DON'T LITIGATE Laboratory for Computer Science \ 9-A-B-C, INTERFACES SHOULD BE FREE 545 Technology Square \ D-E-F-0, LOOK AND FEEL HAS GOT TO GO! Cambridge, MA 02139 -------------------------------------- (617) 253-6015 Internet: mikew@athena.mit.edu CompuServe: 73667,3264