bahn@sunset.sedd.trw.com (06/07/90)
I tried to load an application using WINDOWS 3.0, however the application required `protected mode' and would not load. How do I load this software?? thanks ann
patrickd@chinet.chi.il.us (Patrick Deupree) (06/08/90)
In article <322.266cfea5@sunset.sedd.trw.com> bahn@sunset.sedd.trw.com writes: >I tried to load an application using WINDOWS 3.0, however the application >required `protected mode' and would not load. How do I load this >software?? You'd have to run windows in real mode (win/r) to run any protected mode application under it. Either that, or don't run the application in Windows. -- "Organized fandom is composed of a bunch of nitpickers with a thing for trivial pursuit." -Harlan Ellison Patrick Deupree -> patrickd@chinet.chi.il.us
phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (06/09/90)
In article <1990Jun7.150839.21981@cbnewsk.att.com> markg@cbnewsk.att.com (mark.r.gibaldi) writes: |Windows 3.0 runs your 386 in protected mode. There can only be one protected |mode on a 386. In order to run protected mode software under Windows 3.0, |you have to run Windows in real mode like so "win /r". This is a limitation |of the processor. Until there are "virtual *protected* mode machines" |available on an Intel Processor, things will be this way. Not so, once DPMI is approved and implemented, everything will work together. The history of the previous standard, VCPI, indicates that it's in everyone's interest to have a good standard and vendors will quickly comply. -- Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil
markg@cbnewsk.att.com (mark.r.gibaldi) (06/12/90)
In article <1990Jun8.181622.16005@bach.amd.com> phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <1990Jun7.150839.21981@cbnewsk.att.com> markg@cbnewsk.att.com (mark.r.gibaldi) writes: >|Windows 3.0 runs your 386 in protected mode. There can only be one protected >|mode on a 386. In order to run protected mode software under Windows 3.0, >|you have to run Windows in real mode like so "win /r". This is a limitation >|of the processor. Until there are "virtual *protected* mode machines" >|available on an Intel Processor, things will be this way. > >Not so, once DPMI is approved and implemented, everything will work >together. The history of the previous standard, VCPI, indicates >that it's in everyone's interest to have a good standard and vendors >will quickly comply. > >-- >Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil Phil is correct DPMI will take care of multiple programs requiring protected mode. DPMI had slipped my mind when I wrote the article. The work-around is valid however until DPMI is available. Mark R. Gibaldi AT&T Bell Labs mrg@cblph.att.com