yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) (05/12/89)
Okay. I give up. Why did Micro Soft (skull) call windows/286 what they did when the beast doesn't use the protected mode of the 286 to provide pre-emptive multitasking? It runs just the same on a '86 machine? This is truly annoying (hence the mind flame). For my purposes 'cuz the '386 laptops are too heavy and pricey. They should change the name, it's misleading. Peaved. PS: Isn't there a law against this?
news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (news) (05/13/89)
the minimum acceptable platform upon which to run Windows/286. If you have ever run it on an 8088 (I have) I think you would agree. Besides, even if they changed the name, 386 laptops would still be too heavy and pricey. From: mcmillan@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu (Harold McMillan) Path: boa.cis.ohio-state.edu!mcmillan -=- Hal McMillan | mcmillan@cis.ohio-state.edu | "Open the pod bay doors, HAL". CompuServe 72627,642 |
bobh@hpcuhb.HP.COM (Bob Headrick) (05/13/89)
Why did Microsoft change the name to Windows/286? Because no one would have the patience to run it on anything slower... Bob Headrick hpda!bobh <<my opinions are not shared by anyone>>
yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) (05/13/89)
In article <48213@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Harold McMillan <mcmillan@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: >the minimum acceptable platform upon which to run Windows/286. If you have >ever run it on an 8088 (I have) I think you would agree. Besides, even if >they changed the name, 386 laptops would still be too heavy and pricey. > >Hal McMillan Yes, but I'm getting a NEC ProSpeed 286 and it would have been nice if Windows/286 did as it's name would have one think. PS: I've run Windows/286 on a 8MHz 8086 box (att 6300) and it wasn't so bad. Davin
paulc@microsoft.UUCP (Paul Canniff 2/1011) (05/16/89)
In article <89May12.000432edt.19614@me.utoronto.ca> yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) writes: >Okay. I give up. Why did Micro Soft (skull) call windows/286 what they >did when the beast doesn't use the protected mode of the 286 to provide >pre-emptive multitasking? It runs just the same on a '86 machine? To differentiaite it from Win386, of course. >This is truly annoying (hence the mind flame). For my purposes 'cuz >the '386 laptops are too heavy and pricey. Ouch! I hate mind flames, they really hurt. Would you be happier if I attached helium balloons to the 386 for you? >They should change the name, it's misleading. > >Peaved. > >PS: Isn't there a law against this? No, you can post anything you want, no matter how trivial. By the way, how does WordPerfect get away with selling a word processor that isn't perfect? Very misleading in my book. And did you know you have to by a PRINTER to even use the darn thing! Cost me a lot more money than I first thought it would, by the time you buy that sort of accessory. None of the reviewers caught this either. Sheesh! DISCLAIMER: These are my opinions, not those of Microsoft. Flame via email. That way, half of it won't go through, and my email reader is much more powerful than RN, so I can filter the junk easier. Thanks.
philba@microsoft.UUCP (Phil Barrett) (05/16/89)
In several articles, people raised objections to calling it Microsoft Windows/286. The basic gist of the complaint(s) is that since it doesn't use *any* features of the 286, its false advertising. MS Windows/286 Versions 2.10 and 2.11 (current version) *do* use features of the 286. While it does not run in protected mode, it does take advantage of the the first 64K of extended memory for the resident portion of User. This yields some significant performance improvements in several specific cases since it increases the memory available to MS Windows applications by 10% to 20%. In addition, drivers are included to use extended memory for a RAMDrive and disk caching. Granted, this doesn't take 100% advantage of the 286 but the statement "doesn't use at all" isn't true either. No false advertising ... Phil Barrett Microsoft Corp Of course, the above opinions are mine and are not representitive of Microsoft Corp
pwt@otter.hpl.hp.com (Peter Toft) (05/18/89)
I think that the name Windows/286 was chosen because this version of windows was written to take sensible advantage of the 'High memory area'. This is 64k of memory at the top of the 1Mb address space, which is obviously only available to '286 processors and above, but which can be accessed by DOS if an appropriate driver is used. Windows/286 will run on 8086s, but Himem is unavailable, so it doesn't run as well. In order to use Himem on 286/386 machines, you obviously need some memory in the 1Mb plus range (i.e. extended memory). =============================================================================== Peter Toft, ARPANET pwt@hplb.hpl.hp.com Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, JANET pwt@lb.hp.co.uk Filton Road, UUCP ...!mcvax!ukc!hplb!pwt Stoke Gifford, CSNET pwt%hplb.csnet@relay.cs.net Bristol. HPdesk Peter TOFT / HPC600 / 05 BS12 6QZ. Phone UK (0272) 799910 ext 24245 United Kingdom. Int'l +44 272 799910 ext 24245 ".....my opinions are my own, etc. etc...."
allbery@ncoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery) (05/20/89)
As quoted from <5723@microsoft.UUCP> by paulc@microsoft.UUCP (Paul Canniff 2/1011): +--------------- | In article <89May12.000432edt.19614@me.utoronto.ca> yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) writes: | >Okay. I give up. Why did Micro Soft (skull) call windows/286 what they | >did when the beast doesn't use the protected mode of the 286 to provide | >pre-emptive multitasking? It runs just the same on a '86 machine? | | To differentiaite it from Win386, of course. > ... | >PS: Isn't there a law against this? | | No, you can post anything you want, no matter how trivial. +--------------- (miscellaneous bleating deleted) Every time I start to regain some faith in the Usenet, some jerk comes along and flames it away. Sigh. It's called "Windows/286" because it's Microsoft's contention that an 8088 doesn't have the speed to run it properly. I tried it on an 8088 once. Guess what? They're right. It's faster to do it with pencil and paper. If you want to multitask an 8088, use Desqview or something else that isn't a graphics environment. Graphics is *always* the killer. (The machines that avoid this have blitters or similar dedicated graphics hardware: Suns, Atari ST, Amiga (I think), Next, etc. [And, for the curious: the Mac *doesn't*. Which is why Apple is pushing 68030 boxes now.]) ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery, moderator of comp.sources.misc allbery@ncoast.org uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu Send comp.sources.misc submissions to comp-sources-misc@<backbone> NCoast Public Access UN*X - (216) 781-6201, 300/1200/2400 baud, login: makeuser