rlk20269@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Leon Kapusta) (03/02/91)
Recently, I've read on this newsgroup that people have been having problems with Windows 3.0 using AMI BIOS. I am about to upgrade my motherboard to one with AMI BIOS and I was wondering what exactly these problems were and if they were corrected. I'd also like to know which version of AMI BIOS was creating these problems. Thanks for your time! Rich rlk20269@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
wilson@cssmtf.ccs.csus.edu (Joe Wilson) (03/03/91)
In article <1991Mar2.052414.914@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> rlk20269@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Leon Kapusta) writes: >Recently, I've read on this newsgroup that people have been having >problems with Windows 3.0 using AMI BIOS. I am about to upgrade my >motherboard to one with AMI BIOS and I was wondering what exactly >these problems were and if they were corrected. I'd also like >to know which version of AMI BIOS was creating these problems. >Thanks for your time! > >Rich >rlk20269@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu > Rich, I have a 286 with AMI BIOS dated 4/9/90 and run Windows 3.0 all the time with no problems. My previous version was dated in 1987 sometime and it caused mucho crashes. Joe Wilson wilson@addvax.llnl.gov
rreiner@yunexus.YorkU.CA (Richard Reiner) (03/03/91)
wilson@cssmtf.ccs.csus.edu (Joe Wilson) writes: > rlk20269@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Leon Kapusta) writes: >>Recently, I've read on this newsgroup that people have been having >>problems with Windows 3.0 using AMI BIOS. >Rich, I have a 286 with AMI BIOS dated 4/9/90 and run Windows 3.0 all the >time with no problems. >caused mucho crashes. I run Win3 on a 386-33 with AMI (non-diagnostic) BIOS of 4/9/90. No problems in any of win3's modes. In fact, I usually run Win3 under DESQview (using QEMM), with no trouble at all. --richard
aaron@cavebbs.gen.nz (Aaron Roydhouse) (03/04/91)
In article <1991Mar2.052414.914@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> rlk20269@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Leon Kapusta) writes: >Recently, I've read on this newsgroup that people have been having >problems with Windows 3.0 using AMI BIOS. I am about to upgrade my >motherboard to one with AMI BIOS and I was wondering what exactly >these problems were and if they were corrected. I'd also like >to know which version of AMI BIOS was creating these problems. The recent discussion has mystified me. We have a variety of machines with six (6) different customised version of AMI BIOS's. All machines run Windows 3.0 8-14 hours a day without problem. The only supporting argument I can think of is that these are all 386 machines - perhaps the 286 versions have a problem. Otherwise it might just be people picking the wrong cause for their effect :-) >Thanks for your time! >Rich >rlk20269@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu Aaron. -- _ Aaron "The Entity" Roydhouse / Ph: +64 4 726-363 A/H: +64 4 850-988 / \ -=[ The Cave MegaBBS ]=- / Fax: +64 4 4996301 BBS: +64 4 643-429 |@/ aaron@cavebbs.gen.nz / Mail: P.O. Box 11-704, Wellington, N.Z. \__ aaron@comp.vuw.ac.nz / Quote: "Death: To stop sinning suddenly"
als@bohra.cpg.oz (Anthony Shipman) (03/05/91)
In article <1991Mar2.184700.21483@csus.edu>, wilson@cssmtf.ccs.csus.edu (Joe Wilson) writes: > Rich, I have a 286 with AMI BIOS dated 4/9/90 and run Windows 3.0 all the > time with no problems. My previous version was dated in 1987 sometime and it > caused mucho crashes. I have a 386 board with AMI BIOS. The board uses the Chips&Tech chip set and the BIOS is old (it's setup program doesn't support extended chip registers). Is it simple to just replace the BIOS with a later version (for the same chip set) or might there be board dependencies? -- Anthony Shipman ACSnet: als@bohra.cpg.oz.au Computer Power Group 19 Cato St., East Hawthorn, Melbourne, Australia D
john@DRD.Com (John Horeth) (03/06/91)
I have an 386 based machine with an 1988 version of the AMI bios, and for the
most part I am not having any problems. One thing I just came across in
"Inside DOS" by the The Cobb Group is that even though I am running MS-DOS 3.3
and do not normally use SHARE.EXE (I am not on a network), they advise that
I start using SHARE.EXE when using WINDOWS 3.0. Something about multiple
accesses to the same file (SHARE supposedly handles this).
Guess what, I find no mention of the SHARE.EXE in the WINDOWS manual index.
"Inside DOS" does mention that SHARE.EXE cannot be in memory if you are
installing some new Windows applications, but even MS-DOS 3.3 users will
benefit from SHARE.EXE. I wonder if this might be the case in some of the
AMI problems, since a lot of those people are probaly running under 3.3.
NOTE: The Issue of "Inside DOS" is February 1991. Vol 2 No. 2
john@DRD.com | John M. Horeth, II
{uunet,rutgers}!drd!john | Horeth Programming Services, Inc. - (918)622-9232
| c/o DRD Corporation (918)743-3013raster@itsgw.rpi.edu (Jerry D Bain) (03/07/91)
There are known problem with versions of AMI BIOS before 1988. The general rule of thumb is that you should have a BIOS dated during or after 1988, preferably something on or after 4/9/90. This is no big deal. Most people who have worked with AMI know of other compatibility issues that occurred before 1988. These issues have been resolved (to my knowledge) in all current versions. IMHO: If you have _ANY_ compatibility problems with an AMI BIOS prior to 1988, run, don't walk, to get a newer version. Anything after 1987 should be OK.