altman@sbstaff2.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) (05/25/90)
In article <21454@boulder.Colorado.EDU> wallwey@snoopy.Colorado.EDU (WALLWEY DEAN WILLIAM) writes: >Will the current versions of excel run under MS Windows Ver. 3.0??? > No. But there is a free upgrade to version 2.1c. Just call the Windows Hot-line (800) 323-3577 and tell them you are an Excel owner, have upgraded to Win 3.0, and need the Excel Update. You will need to have either your registration number or your original diskettes when you make the call. Shipping and Handling is $5.00. There are no functional differences. >Another big question---When Win3.0 goes into protected mode, does it >stay there? I'm not talking about the 386 mode or the real mode, but the >inbetween mode. It this why you cannot even run behaved programs-like >command.com-in a window in the protoected mode. I am not sure. I think so. But I have yet to read any documentation on the Memory handling of Standard Mode. On some other notes, if you are working on a Novell Netware 286 network. You must upgrade to 2.15 revision C in order to use Windows 3.0 This is again free if you currently own 2.15. There is also a free upgrade of the Network Shell available which allows the shell to be placed in either Expanded or Extended memory. This frees up more conventional memory when using Win 3.0 in either Real or Standard Modes. I am not sure if the new shell is required for the use of Windows, it may be. Cost is $30 for the kit when ordered from Novell After Market Products Division or is available via NetWire on Compuserve in NOVA Lib17. - Jeff (jaltman@ccmail.sunysb.edu)
gpsteffler@tiger.uwaterloo.ca (Glenn Steffler) (05/26/90)
In article <9348@sbcs.sunysb.edu> altman@sbstaff2.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) writes: >In article <21454@boulder.Colorado.EDU> wallwey@snoopy.Colorado.EDU (WALLWEY DEAN WILLIAM) writes: >>Another big question---When Win3.0 goes into protected mode, does it >>stay there? I'm not talking about the 386 mode or the real mode, but the >>inbetween mode. It this why you cannot even run behaved programs-like >>command.com-in a window in the protoected mode. > >I am not sure. I think so. But I have yet to read any documentation >on the Memory handling of Standard Mode. Standard mode will traverse (reflect) between real and protect mode in order to use any DOS or BIOS services. OS/2 can stay in protect mode on a 286 only because all of the services provided by the BIOS and DOS are contained in device drivers and the like which are written expressly for protect mode operation. Windows 286 protect mode switches modes quite often for interrupts including timer and hardisk. If you notice you aren't running as fast as a friends 286 then you probably have an older model 286 machine which doesn't provide a quick mechanism for switching between modes. Newer model PS/2's switch VERY quickly compared to an original AT. Any 386 machine will usually run standard mode much faster than a 286 because of the processors ability to switch modes itself in software and the fact that some device driver (video, etc) code will use 386 code if you have a 386 processor. ---- Glenn Steffler gpsteffler@sunee.uwaterloo.edu <Commodore Amiga 3000 - Amiga DOS 2.0 - multimedia defined>
sl197009@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Chima Echeruo) (05/27/90)
gpsteffler@tiger.uwaterloo.ca (Glenn Steffler) writes: >Windows 286 protect mode switches modes quite often for interrupts including >timer and hardisk. If you notice you aren't running as fast as a friends >286 then you probably have an older model 286 machine which doesn't provide >a quick mechanism for switching between modes. >Newer model PS/2's switch VERY quickly compared to an original AT. >Any 386 machine will usually run standard mode much faster than a 286 because >of the processors ability to switch modes itself in software and the >fact that some device driver (video, etc) code will use 386 code >if you have a 386 processor. >---- >Glenn Steffler gpsteffler@sunee.uwaterloo.edu ><Commodore Amiga 3000 - Amiga DOS 2.0 - multimedia defined> If microsoft developed MSDOS why can't it simply recode the bulk of the OS to run in protected mode instead of switching to real mode to service *DOS* interupts? I hear that the new 32 OS/2 does have such a feature where most of the DOS I/O and services have been ported to protected mode and hence runs DOS applications much better. Since a large portion of the PC market is using '286 processors is there not much need for a revamped MSDOS does utilizies the 286 protected mode while retaining all the functions and services of it's real mode version. The disadvantage would be that 8086 processors would be excluded from the new MSDOS , but then again anyone who is stuck with a PC does not have much need for high-powered computing. Perhaps when MSDOS becomes a protected mode operating system, things such as expanded memory/extended memory will no longer cripple the AT/386 processors. Does anyone have any idea if microsoft is going to rewrite DOS for protected mode operation???? ------------- Chima Echeruo sl197009@silver.ucs.indiana.edu -------------------------------
wjin@cs.purdue.EDU (Woochang Jin) (05/27/90)
In article <45868@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> sl197009@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Chima Echeruo) writes: >gpsteffler@tiger.uwaterloo.ca (Glenn Steffler) writes: > >If microsoft developed MSDOS why can't it simply recode the bulk of the OS >to run in protected mode instead of switching to real mode to service *DOS* >interupts? Because if microsoft did most existing software would not run on such new operating system, as many Window softwares do not run on version 3.0 protected mode. >I hear that the new 32 OS/2 does have such a feature where most of the DOS I/O >and services have been ported to protected mode and hence runs DOS applications >much better. Therefore DOS programs do not run on OS/2. >Since a large portion of the PC market is using '286 processors is there not >much need for a revamped MSDOS does utilizies the 286 protected mode while >retaining all the functions and services of it's real mode version. The >disadvantage would be that 8086 processors would be excluded from the new MSDOS >, but then again anyone who is stuck with a PC does not have much need for >high-powered computing. > >Perhaps when MSDOS becomes a protected mode operating system, things such as >expanded memory/extended memory will no longer cripple the AT/386 processors. Yes. Someday, anyway. CP/M died because it lacked hierarchical directory system. Now, next time it is DOS because it lacks protected memory system. But this does not seem to happen within a short period because there are too many usable softwares despite the lack of protected memory system. >Does anyone have any idea if microsoft is going to rewrite DOS for protected >mode operation???? Well, if microsoft decides that it would throw away all the existing DOS softwares. ------ W. Jin
wallwey@snoopy.Colorado.EDU (WALLWEY DEAN WILLIAM) (05/29/90)
In article <45868@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> sl197009@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Chima Echeruo) writes: >Since a large portion of the PC market is using '286 processors is there not >much need for a revamped MSDOS does utilizies the 286 protected mode while >retaining all the functions and services of it's real mode version. The >disadvantage would be that 8086 processors would be excluded from the new MSDOS >, but then again anyone who is stuck with a PC does not have much need for >high-powered computing. >.......... >Does anyone have any idea if microsoft is going to rewrite DOS for protected >mode operation???? Ya, its called OS/2. Why keep trying to string along DOS? [Windows 3.0 seems to do much better that any of the extenders at extending DOS's life anyways!] It makes sense to change the entire operatating system since any so called DOS-exteneders exclude 8086 or even 80286s depending on which ones you are talking about. Also all these DOS extenders are KULDGES in my opinion, DOS was designed for the 8086 and it always will be!!!! We need a clean break from DOS, with the exception of Windows 3.0. Besides OS/2 is able to handle DOS aps in its compatibility box, and OS/2 vers 2.0 can handle multiple DOS aps in windows----The latest PC Magazine showed OS/2 version 2.0 running Flight Simulator in a Presentation manager window!!!![note OS/2 version 2.0 requires a ~4Megabyte 386 machine!] better than DOS. >------------- >Chima Echeruo >sl197009@silver.ucs.indiana.edu >------------------------------- Dean Wallwey
patrickd@chinet.chi.il.us (Patrick Deupree) (05/29/90)
In article <21454@boulder.Colorado.EDU> wallwey@snoopy.Colorado.EDU (WALLWEY DEAN WILLIAM) writes: >Will the current versions of excel run under MS Windows Ver. 3.0??? > The answer to the million dollar question is, No. There is an update version to Excel (from what I hear) that will run under 3.0. Call Microsoft support and ask them about it. -- "Organized fandom is composed of a bunch of nitpickers with a thing for trivial pursuit." -Harlan Ellison Patrick Deupree -> patrickd@chinet.chi.il.us
philba@microsoft.UUCP (Phil BARRETT) (05/30/90)
Regarding excel for win 3.0: Version 2.1C of excel has been shipping since early this year. It works fine in all modes (including enhanced and standard) of win 3.0. To determine if you have 2.1C, pull down excel's help.about box. Phil
mlawless@qa1.Wichita.NCR.COM (Mike Lawless) (06/01/90)
In article <1990May28.232953.8938@chinet.chi.il.us> patrickd@chinet.chi.il.us >The answer to the million dollar question is, No. There is an update version >to Excel (from what I hear) that will run under 3.0. Call Microsoft support >and ask them about it. Registered users of both Excel and Windows should receive a combined upgrade letter from Microsoft (I did). You get a free upgrade to Excel version 2.1c when you upgrade to Windows 3.0; this is regardless of the version of Excel you currently have. Nice touch, Microsoft. NCR is upgrading Windows through Egghead, which does not have this offer. However, one of our people called Microsoft, and is getting the Excel upgrade free from Microsoft, even though he is not upgrading Windows through them.