jsavage@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (Julian Savage) (11/18/90)
I am considering buying a DTK brand motherboard, mainly because the price is right, but I would like to find out from anyone with first-hand experience just how reliable they are, and also what brand the relevant chips on the 286@16 and 386@16 boards are. Please either Email me or post to this newsgroup. thanks -=- Julian Savage jsavage@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca or ..!van-bc!jsavage
jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) (11/19/90)
jsavage@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (Julian Savage) writes: >I am considering buying a DTK brand motherboard, mainly because the price is >right, but I would like to find out from anyone with first-hand experience >just how reliable they are, and also what brand the relevant chips on the 286@16 >and 386@16 boards are. Please either Email me or post to this newsgroup. I would not buy a DTK motherboard because of the problems documented in going in and out of protected mode on the 386. Their 286 boards aren't that great because some of the later versions only support expanded memory. Makes things really nice if you want to run MicroPort Unix or SCO Xenix 286. The problem with DTK's 386 motherboards is so well documented that Novell has an official patch to make Netware run on a DTK 386 motherboard. Not good, if Novell acknowledges that there's a problem, then there's a series problem! Look into another manufacturer of motherboard please! You'll thank yourself later. // JCA /* **--------------------------------------------------------------------------* ** Flames : /dev/null | Small memory model only for ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil | Unix? Get the (*bleep*) out ** INTERNET: jca@pnet01.cts.com | of here! ** UUCP : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca **--------------------------------------------------------------------------* */
hoepfner@usun01.UUCP (Andreas Hoepfner) (11/20/90)
In <5714@crash.cts.com> jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes: >I would not buy a DTK motherboard because of the problems documented in going >in and out of protected mode on the 386. Their 286 boards aren't that great >because some of the later versions only support expanded memory. Makes things >really nice if you want to run MicroPort Unix or SCO Xenix 286. Shure, but it is possible to fix the problem by changing the keybord- controller *AND* the BIOS from DTK to PHOENIX ! I've just done this and the board works fine...... Andreas +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Andreas Hoepfner | | | | paper mail: e-mail: | | Siemens Nixdorf Informations | | Systeme USA: hoepfner.kd@nixdorf.com | | Abt. PU 2222 !USA: hoepfner.kd@nixdorf.de | | Heinz Nixdorf Ring | | D-4790 Paderborn | | tel.: (+49) 5251 10-7479 | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
fcr@saturn.wustl.edu (Frank C. Robey ) (11/21/90)
In article <5714@crash.cts.com> jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes: >jsavage@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (Julian Savage) writes: >>I am considering buying a DTK brand motherboard, mainly because the price is >>right, but I would like to find out from anyone with first-hand experience >>just how reliable they are, and also what brand the relevant chips on the 286@16 >>and 386@16 boards are. > >I would not buy a DTK motherboard because of the problems documented in going >in and out of protected mode on the 386. > I have had a DTK motherboard for almost a year now and I have been very happy with it. I use windows 3.0 and a memory manager that use protected mode and have not had any problem with going in or out of protected mode. Since DTK make 5 or 6 386 motherboards are there certain ones which have a problem? I did not do anything special for installation. I have the 386-25MHz PEMM board with 64k cache memory and it has run everything that I have tried to run on it. Just a satisfied customer. Frank Robey fcr@saturn.wustl.edu fcr@wuee1.wustl.edu Electronic Systems and Signals Research Laboratory Washington University- St. Louis
fac7@dayton.saic.com (Steven Poling) (11/22/90)
In article <1990Nov20.180552.3474@cec1.wustl.edu>, fcr@saturn.wustl.edu (Frank C. Robey ) writes: > In article <5714@crash.cts.com> jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes: >>jsavage@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (Julian Savage) writes: >>>I am considering buying a DTK brand motherboard, mainly because the price is >>>right, but I would like to find out from anyone with first-hand experience >>>just how reliable they are, and also what brand the relevant chips on the 286@16 >>>and 386@16 boards are. >> >>I would not buy a DTK motherboard because of the problems documented in going >>in and out of protected mode on the 386. >> > I have had experience with DTK motherboards for the past 4 years now and have had some problems with some of their 286 boards during the first part of 1989 but after that I have sold many DTK motherboards and know of one business here in Dayton that will sell only DTK motherboards. Just remember, if you are going to buy a clone motherboard..... know the people that you are buying it from or buy it from someone else who knows the company/people. Steve -- _____________________________________________________________________________ ____ ____ ___ Steven Poling /___ /___/ / / Science Applications International Corporation ____// / / /__ Dayton, Ohio ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet: poling@dayton.saic.com
jdb@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Brian W.K. Hook) (11/22/90)
I have worked on and used a plethora of DTK boards, and to be honest, I don't like them. The DTK BIOS is not too wonderful (as a matter of fact, the last time I checked it couldn't run OS/2). The board has had bus-timing problems and synchronization problems with some video cards, and it has a hard time with certain hard drives getting up to speed (specifically the DTK 286-16 and ST277R 65MB RLL Seagate). On another note, here in Gainesville (a rather small town) there are FIVE DTK dealers. DTK used to be pretty big back in the mid-Eighties, but have since lost their technical edge. Thus they are trying to undercut and sell quantity at low prices. Quality control has DEFINITELY suffered. And the reason I mentioend that FIVE dealers are in town shows that DTK does not really deal with big manufacturers. They sell all their equipment at dirt prices to distributors, who in turn indiscriminately sell to retailers that are going simply for bottom dollar. As far as replacement motherboards, price and performancer wise Jameco and JDR Microdevices are supposed to have rather nice boards. But the best in the industry have got to be either Micronics or Mylex.
ssingh@watserv1.waterloo.edu (The Sanj - ISman (iceman)) (12/05/90)
I have a question on DTK 386sx boards. I have a PPM 1630. I bought it
in August of last year. I asked for 80 nanosecond RAMs. The board
is supposed to take 120 nanosecond RAMs. I was hoping for zero-wait-states.
When I saw that the Landmark rating was only 16 Mhz (not 18 or so), I started
asking questions.
I was told that the motherboard couldn't handle it.
Then I was told that I could get zero-wait-states by changing to the
latest BIOS. Supposedly DTK has only changed the BIOS to allow for
zero-wait-states.
Which brings me to the next question. I looked in Que's "Computer User's
Dictionary" (highly recommended) for the definition of wait state. It
said that these were "programmed into the system" to allow slower memory
to keep up with the CPU.
Presumably this means programmed into the BIOS. But it wouldn't work to
simply insert NOP (do nothing) instructions in the BIOS because the CPU
would be trying to execute the NOP instrutions themselves without any
slowdown. Finally, I came to the conjecture that since I have heard of
the idea of ROM shadowing on video cards to copy video BIOS into RAM for
faster execution, probably how wait states are implemented is that
using ROM chips causes enough of a slowdown to prevent timing problems.
This would cohere well with the idea of BIOS-shadowing offered by many
vendors of PC-compatibles.
First, is my reasoning correct?
Second, would using the latest version of DTK BIOS on a PPM 1630 with
80 nanosecond RAMS increase throughput? Does the latest version of
DTK BIOS allow BIOS shadowing? Does anyone have benchmarks available?
Lastly, what about operating systems like UNIX that bypass the BIOS
entirely, since all operations would be done in RAM, does this mean that
running UNIX would automatically yield better performance? If so, what
about timing problems, if I had used 120 ns. RAMs?
I know this is a barrage of questions, but I need help in this rather
important decision, and opinions, as you know are often contradictory.
Any assistance would be appreciated.
Ice.
--
"Weapon systems are L[+]CKED on you, Johnny-cake..."
$anjay $ingh Provost-Hunter ssingh@watserv1.[u]waterloo.{edu|cdn}/[ca]
jwwong@a-provost: "I Come In Peace." ssingh@watserv1: "You Go In Pieces."
"If this alt stuff makes you feel like shit, go to the john."-ssingh@watserv1daly@ecs.umass.edu (Bryon Daly, ECE dept, UMass, Amherst) (12/06/90)
In article <1990Dec5.015847.21620@watserv1.waterloo.edu>, ssingh@watserv1.waterloo.edu (The Sanj - ISman (iceman)) writes: > I have a question on DTK 386sx boards. I have a PPM 1630. I bought it > in August of last year. I asked for 80 nanosecond RAMs. The board > is supposed to take 120 nanosecond RAMs. I was hoping for zero-wait-states. Sadly, I don't think 80ns DRAMs could give you zero wait states, anyway. If your 386SX is running at 16MHz, that means 16 million cycles per second, or 62.5 ns per cycle. If the machine is capable of generating an access to memory every clock cycle --- (I imagine that a NOP only takes one cycle, so a series of NOP's would generate a series of reads to memory for the next instruction, one read per clock [Note this ignores such concerns a pipelining and word size]) --- then it would want to read memory once every 62.5 ns. If the DRAM speed rating is 80 ns, they could not keep up with this peek access rate. If the CPU tries to access memory, but the RAM is not fast enough to respond before the end of the cycle, a wait state must be added (maybe more than one if the CPU is fast enough and the RAM slow enough.) to the CPU cycles to give the memory a chance to catch up. Note that the wait states are not in the form of an executed instruction such as a NOP; they occur at the deeper, hardware level. On the Intel microprocessor I worked with (8085), there was a wait line on the chip itself ( I think the 8086 is the same). If, after the CPU tries to access memory, the wait line is asserted (presumably by the motherboard memory logic), the CPU will just sit and idle away clock cycles (ie; wait) until the wait line is unasserted, (and thus the data is ready for the CPU to read.) Note also, I don't think that the DRAMS themselves have any capability of saying that they need more time; too slow DRAMS in a motherboard expecting faster ones will probably just not function correctly. Thus it is up to the motherboard to decide when wait states are needed. The motherboard of my 12MHz 286 has a jumper on it which decides how many wait states the CPU will run at. I once placed the jumper in the wrong setting and saw my Norton SI drop from 13.7 to 11.9 or so. > > When I saw that the Landmark rating was only 16 Mhz (not 18 or so), I started > asking questions. > > I was told that the motherboard couldn't handle it. > > Then I was told that I could get zero-wait-states by changing to the > latest BIOS. Supposedly DTK has only changed the BIOS to allow for > zero-wait-states. I've never heard of BIOS deciding on a system's wait states; but that may be the newest thing. Still, check your motherboard for undocumented jumpers (or even documented ones: did you check out the system's manual (for the motherboard) completely? Another thought: talk to DTK themselves, instead of the people you got your system from - they won't know as much about the motherboard (and wait states) as DTK itself would. > > Which brings me to the next question. I looked in Que's "Computer User's > Dictionary" (highly recommended) for the definition of wait state. It > said that these were "programmed into the system" to allow slower memory > to keep up with the CPU. "wired into the system" would probably be a better term > > Presumably this means programmed into the BIOS. But it wouldn't work to > simply insert NOP (do nothing) instructions in the BIOS because the CPU > would be trying to execute the NOP instrutions themselves without any > slowdown. Finally, I came to the conjecture that since I have heard of > the idea of ROM shadowing on video cards to copy video BIOS into RAM for > faster execution, probably how wait states are implemented is that > using ROM chips causes enough of a slowdown to prevent timing problems. > This would cohere well with the idea of BIOS-shadowing offered by many > vendors of PC-compatibles. ROMS are just plain ol' slower than RAMS (for reasons I have yet to discover) The benefit they offer is permanent storage for the BIOS routines (we wouldn't want to load them off a floppy, would we?, especially when the boot up sequence that reads the disk initially is stored in ROM.) The BIOS routines are sometimes copied into RAM, which is faster, to increase the performance of the system. > > First, is my reasoning correct? > > Second, would using the latest version of DTK BIOS on a PPM 1630 with > 80 nanosecond RAMS increase throughput? Does the latest version of > DTK BIOS allow BIOS shadowing? Does anyone have benchmarks available? > > Lastly, what about operating systems like UNIX that bypass the BIOS > entirely, since all operations would be done in RAM, does this mean that > running UNIX would automatically yield better performance? If so, what > about timing problems, if I had used 120 ns. RAMs? Programs not using the BIOS might run faster (since they don't rely on the slow ROM BIOS routines), but actually now, many programs avoid using the BIOS as a matter of course. I.e.: the Turbo C routines for displaying text and graphics default to NOT using the BIOS (in other words, they use direct access to the hardware to perform tasks). > > I know this is a barrage of questions, but I need help in this rather > important decision, and opinions, as you know are often contradictory. > > Any assistance would be appreciated. > > Ice. > Well, I've said my piece. If any hardware guru's out there notice any flaring dicrepencies (or outright untruths) please do correct me. Good Luck, Bryon Daly, ECE grad student at-large daly@ecs.umass.edu --- DISCLAIMER: I tried to speak for my employers, but they told me to shut up!
loc@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM (Leigh Clayton) (02/07/91)
There's just been **another** post claiming that DTK motherboards are to be avoided. I have only one connection with DTK .. I own one of their motherboards. I have had no trouble with it to speak of, and I have several times asked this group to give an actual instance of a DTK motherboard problem. I've never received a response. The recent post said their motherboards are 'incompatible'. If this is referring to the BIOS, all I can say is that I've run Windows 3, Excel, Corel, Norton, Fastback, QEMM, and some other homebrew stuff and never seen any problems. I've never tried booting my Unix system on that box, but short of doing that I can't imagine what else I could do to it to give it a chance to fail. Please, if you post incriminating remarks, post some some specifics. Passing along 'urban legends' isn't doing anyone any good. ----------------------------------------------------------- loc@tmsoft.UUCP uunet!mnetor!tmsoft!loc loc@ipsa.reuter.COM (Leigh Clayton)
jdb@swamp.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) (02/07/91)
In article <1991Feb7.012557.13458@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM> loc@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM (Leigh Clayton) writes: > > There's just been **another** post claiming that DTK motherboards are to >be avoided. I have only one connection with DTK .. I own one of their >motherboards. I have had no trouble with it to speak of, and I have several >times asked this group to give an actual instance of a DTK motherboard >problem. I've never received a response. > > The recent post said their motherboards are 'incompatible'. If this is >referring to the BIOS, all I can say is that I've run Windows 3, Excel, >Corel, Norton, Fastback, QEMM, and some other homebrew stuff and never >seen any problems. I've never tried booting my Unix system on that box, but >short of doing that I can't imagine what else I could do to it to give it >a chance to fail. Please, if you post incriminating remarks, post some >some specifics. Passing along 'urban legends' isn't doing anyone any good. > >----------------------------------------------------------- >loc@tmsoft.UUCP uunet!mnetor!tmsoft!loc >loc@ipsa.reuter.COM (Leigh Clayton) The specific instances that I had referred to in one of my previous posts were: DTK BIOS will not run OS/2 (according to Byte magazine). DTK bus caused WD-1006SRV to fry, taking the other peripheral boards with it. This was attributed to the WD not being able to sync with the bus. The WD worked fine in a VIP machine. DTK bus would not work with a clone EGA card with 120ns video ram chips. Had to use a Paradise with 100ns chips. EGA card with 120s worked fine in all other systems we tested (About 5 others). Brian PS Sorry if this is a little accusatory, but I've also had a bunch of small problems with them, too small and frequent to post about.
nem@hare.udev.cdc.com (neal e meyer x2257) (02/07/91)
I have a DTK motherboard (386SX 20mhz) and I have had no problems. I've run MS-DOS 4.01, Windows 3.0, Flight Simulator, Quattro Pro ...
leoh@hardy.hdw.csd.harris.com (Leo Hinds) (02/08/91)
In article <26767@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> jdb@swamp.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) writes: >DTK bus caused WD-1006SRV to fry, taking the other peripheral boards with >it. This was attributed to the WD not being able to sync with the bus. >The WD worked fine in a VIP machine. Please explain this one in technical terms ... what you describe does not make sense. >PS Sorry if this is a little accusatory, but I've also had a bunch of small >problems with them, too small and frequent to post about. Please email if you do not want to post ... we have an opportunity of getting DTK boards here at a good price, so we would like to know ALL problems encountered by other people. Thanks leoh@hdw.csd.harris.com Leo Hinds (305)973-5229 Gfx ... gfx ... :-) whfg orpnhfr V "ebg"grq zl fvtangher svyr lbh guvax V nz n creireg ?!!!!!!? ... znlor arkg gvzr
jdb@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) (02/08/91)
In article <2274@travis.csd.harris.com> leoh@hardy.hdw.csd.harris.com (Leo Hinds) writes: >In article <26767@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> jdb@swamp.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) writes: >>DTK bus caused WD-1006SRV to fry, taking the other peripheral boards with >>it. This was attributed to the WD not being able to sync with the bus. >>The WD worked fine in a VIP machine. > >Please explain this one in technical terms ... what you describe does not >make sense. Well, as far as I can remember, here was the sequence of events: 1. We had a DTK 286-16 w/ 1MB of RAM and a 1:1 MFM 16-bit controller and a Seagate ST251-1 40MB MFM drive. This machine was functioning perfectly the time we had it (about 1 month at that time). The user who was using the machine requested that we upgrade the system so that she could store larger Ventura files. This required moving to an RLL controller and drive that we had in stock. 2. We took the computer, backed it up on Bernoulli, then removed the current controller (non-descript, generic I belive....possibly DTC?) and hard drive. We installed the new ST277R-1 and a WD1006SRV2 (Not sure exact model....16-bit RLL 1:1 controller) that we had taken from a VIP 286-16 which we in turn had given the old controller and drive. We checked jumpers, wires, etc. and were expecting a routine swap out and when we turned on the motherboard, it just plain died. No fanfare, smoke, or anything. The fan came on, but there was no video and the hard drive wasn't spinning. Machine gave no post-mortem beeps. 3. We double checked all connections then inserted a brand new WD1006SRV2 in its stead. Same thing. We then tried the old controller and drive. Etc. etc. etc. Same thing. MB was DEAD. 4. Called tech support at Southern Electronic Distributors (our DTK supplier). They informed us that "well, um, we think there might have been some timing problems on our motherboards where early cards such as the WD you're using caused system failures. We'll give you an RMA number and send you some other new motherboards. This applies only to the 286-16, 286-20, and the 386-20 that uses SIPPS." We ended up shipping the dead board and five other good boards back for the 'new and improved' models. Of course, SED was not particularly willing to replace the now dead I/O card, EGA card, and bus mouse card. Luckily hard drive was still functional. 5. Finally, we got the new motherboards, we reinstalled them, and everything worked just fine - until.... 6. We replaced a Paradise EGA480 with a generic Paradise chipset based EGA card. The only visible difference was that the generic used 120ns ram chips and the Paradise used 100ns. We installed this in a DTK 286-16 or possible 386-20, can't remember. We got a nice blue band about 3/4" wide on the left hand side of the monitor. We swapped monitors, nothing worked. We then swapped back the old card. Worked. We then put the old card back. Worked fine. We tried the generic card in another system. Worked fine. Basically, we had a system that did not like this one video card, which other PCs had no problem. We called SED once again. SED this time stated that we were getting the blue bands because the memory chips were being attempted to be overloaded on screen refreshes. Ie. the card's RAM was too slow for the DTK's bus. We asked if the bus could be slowed down to 8mhz, and they said "no." 7. Finally, let me point out that when I worked as a technician at the University of Florida Law School (where all this happened) we had between a 15 and 20% return rate on equipment from SED in particular. And of that, about 50% was DTK related components. Whew! I hope this was concise enough! One last thing....DTK does not give direct end user support much like COMPAQ and IBM. This is a serious problem, since the DTK support will only be as good as the company you purchased the DTK equipment from. SED was helpful and knowledgable, and most of the problems were related to the DTK. Some people who buy from "Mom and Pop" mail order houses will get into a lot of hot water when they try and get their defunct equipment repaired. Hope this helped, Brian PS DTK may have improved since last summer, but I'm not taking any chances. I have a Micronics, BIOS flaws and all, and am damned happy about it! :)
AVP100@psuvm.psu.edu (02/08/91)
I second that remark.. I own a DTK myself and have ran everything on the market
with no problems/conflicts. I've even written my own EMS drivers which ran w/
o any hitch. I don't know about other series boards, but the model 2503 is FUL
LY compatible with DOS and OS/2 environments Yes.. even OS/2)
A.P.AVP100@psuvm.psu.edu (02/08/91)
Brian,
I've gotten OS/2 v1.2 to operate on my DTK 2503 w/minor mod's to the softwar
e drivers. In fact, I'm using it in a dual boot setup now. I don't to what By
te magazine article you're referring to or what system they used, but you can g
et OS/2 to work. btw, this is an IBM OS/2 not MS or manufacturer version.
A.P.
p.s. the minor mod's were for device drivers which I could not acquire and had
to write one or 'hack' an existing one.jdb@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) (02/08/91)
In article <91038.231119AVP100@psuvm.psu.edu> AVP100@psuvm.psu.edu writes: >Brian, > I've gotten OS/2 v1.2 to operate on my DTK 2503 w/minor mod's to the softwar >e drivers. In fact, I'm using it in a dual boot setup now. I don't to what By >te magazine article you're referring to or what system they used, but you can g The magazine was either Byte or Pc MAG, and the quote was something like: "...and I am running a 386-20 DTK motherboard. As readers will recall, I had to remove the DTK BIOS and replace it with a Phoenix since OS/2 would not run with the DTK BIOS...." Brian
bgeer@javelin.es.com (Bob Geer) (02/08/91)
loc@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM (Leigh Clayton) writes: >... I've used my 2-yr-old DTK 386-20 ma-board w/ no problems at all. I have 5Megs ram, RLL disk, run DOS4 & Win3, & fairly common software. My vendor said their bios may not work very well on a network & suggested if I needed to network it (which I don't) I could substitute either an AMI or Phoenix bios. I've read elsewhere that DTK does a reasonable job of supporting their customers. A bios upgrade from either DTK or one of the other bios vendors might solve problems you might be having running less common software like (one of the many flavors of) unix, OS/2, etc. A Nov. '90 post listed their address: DTK Computer, Inc. 15711 East Valley Blvd. City of Industry, Ca. 91744 (818) 333-7533 (voice) (818) 333-5429 (fax) -- <> Bob `Bear' Geer <> bgeer@javelin.sim.es.com <> <> Alta-holic <> speaking only for myself, one of my many tricks <> <> Salt Lake City, <> "We must strive to be more than we are, Lal." <> <> Ootah <> -- Cmdr. Data, learning schmaltz <>
djnelso@PacBell.COM (David J. Nelson) (02/09/91)
In article <26767@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> jdb@swamp.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) writes: >In article <1991Feb7.012557.13458@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM> loc@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM (Leigh Clayton) writes: >> >> There's just been **another** post claiming that DTK motherboards are to >>be avoided. I have only one connection with DTK .. I own one of their >>motherboards. I have had no trouble with it to speak of, and I have several >>times asked this group to give an actual instance of a DTK motherboard >>problem. I've never received a response. >> >DTK BIOS will not run OS/2 (according to Byte magazine). > >DTK bus caused WD-1006SRV to fry, taking the other peripheral boards with >it. This was attributed to the WD not being able to sync with the bus. >The WD worked fine in a VIP machine. > >DTK bus would not work with a clone EGA card with 120ns video ram chips. >Had to use a Paradise with 100ns chips. EGA card with 120s worked fine in >all other systems we tested (About 5 others). I have a DTK 386-20 mother board and have had problems with it. As long as I had only 1 Meg of ram it ran fine. As soon as I installed the Ram Card and more Ram ( 2 megs, 4 megs or 5 megs, tried all), it reports with a criptic error message Parity Error Segment not found Press any key to continue Most of the time the machine is locked now and require a reboot. This has happend with almost every program I have. Ihave tried diffrent ram cards and chips on both the card an MB. Still same problem. DTK doesn't really admit to a problem, say they have never heard of this before, but will fix for a small $160 fee. On the NET I have corresponded with three others with the same problem. Seems to be more common than DTK wants to Admit. Still looking for a solution. Dave Nelson
bgeer@javelin.es.com (Bob Geer) (02/09/91)
djnelso@PacBell.COM (David J. Nelson) writes: >I have a DTK 386-20 mother board and have had problems with it. As long as >I had only 1 Meg of ram it ran fine. As soon as I installed the Ram Card >and more Ram ( 2 megs, 4 megs or 5 megs, tried all), it reports with a >criptic error message >Parity Error Segment not found >Press any key to continue >Most of the time the machine is locked now and require a reboot. This has >happend with almost every program I have. Ihave tried diffrent ram cards >and chips on both the card an MB. Still same problem. DTK doesn't really >admit to a problem, say they have never heard of this before, but will fix >for a small $160 fee. I incurred this error only when using Win3's SmartDrv.sys; no occurance after I removed it (running Win3 without it). I have 4 Meg of 80ns ram on their 32-bit add-in board. I'm currently looking for a copy of Checkit or QARam ram checking program to make a thorough test. Will post results. Please post any info you find on this problem...I'm not getting any e-mail yet. Thanks. -- <> Bob `Bear' Geer <> bgeer@javelin.sim.es.com <> <> Alta-holic <> speaking only for myself, one of my many tricks <> <> Salt Lake City, <> "We must strive to be more than we are, Lal." <> <> Ootah <> -- Cmdr. Data, learning schmaltz <>