I normally don't use FDAPM or POWER, but did a little bit of testing after
reading this. If you load FDAPM first and then load my USB drivers, there is
indeed a problem and the keyboard doesn't work properly. If you load the USB
drivers first and then load FDAPM afterwards, everything seems to
Christian,
It basically is related to current system board design and therefore the
dangling question is what aspect of design.
> What if anything has changed since that time?
>>
>
> Are you referring to libraries, the CPU or something entirely else with
> this question?
I'm referring to the
> Seems you're not old enough to ever have worked with one of the 5V
> Pentium CPUs (60/66MHz) for example... LOL
I didn't really care at the time. I can assure you the AMD K-4 (~ 300 MHz)
and Pentium II (~ 250 MHz) boards that I still regularly use do profit
from idling too. But really, thou
At 04:29 PM 9/11/2010, Christian Masloch wrote:
> > I did not observe such overheating.
>
>That was probably because the CPUs at that time had no consumption high
>enough that continuous polling was a problem.
Seems you're not old enough to ever have worked with one of the 5V
Pentium CPUs (60/66M
> Are there Dust-Bunnies inside the power-supply?
> Is the p-s fan working? Is there a CPU fan and is it working?
FYI, I indeed did have a PC (not laptop) with this problem. Removing
all the dust mess not only removed all mysterious crashes but
also the CPU fan noise went massively down :-)
--
I'd suggest to reduce CPU frequency if possible or to
improve the cooling / ventilation. Among other flaws mentioned
above this definitely is a "mechanical / thermal flaw" because
the CPU should NOT be able to overheat even if it is
very busy or executes "flawed code". Imagine compressing
a large f
> I did not observe such overheating.
That was probably because the CPUs at that time had no consumption high
enough that continuous polling was a problem.
> What if anything has changed since that time?
Are you referring to libraries, the CPU or something entirely else with
this question?
At 02:53 PM 9/11/2010, john s wolter wrote:
>Christian,
>
>I must be ignorant of this need to idle a program to prevent
>overheating. First thinking of the 8088/86, 80286, 80386, 80486
>system boards of the 1980's and early 1990's. I can't remember
>overheating caused by looping programs. I w
Christian,
I must be ignorant of this need to idle a program to prevent overheating.
First thinking of the 8088/86, 80286, 80386, 80486 system boards of the
1980's and early 1990's. I can't remember overheating caused by looping
programs. I wrote BIOS calling assembly language routines that woul
All versions of DOS I know require the use of a TSR (like FDAPM, or
MS-DOS's POWER) to idle correctly, or of a program that does the idling
itself (I don't know any COMMAND.COM version that does so). However, as
the flawed call usually will simply be called by idle-unaware software, an
idle
If the processor overheats with other OS's like IBM PC DOS(any version) then
could it be the hardware. I'm guessing obviously. I just can't remember an
old DOS portable(transportable) like an old 15 kg Compaq that would overheat
this way.
I've built power-supplies from parts and I've never seen
> What happened was, I had stopped using FDAPM with the portables
> after finding that it was interfering with Bret Johnson's USB
> keyboard driver. Hence the overheating.
Did you report that to Bret already?
Regards,
Christian
> Marcos Favero Florence de Barros wrote:
> > Thanks a lot for a *very* useful hint.
> But you already knew this. ;-) Just remember your messages from
> December 2009 to this list.
OK, let me explain in more detail, otherwise someone may think I
did not pay attenti
Marcos Favero Florence de Barros wrote:
> Thanks a lot for a *very* useful hint.
But you already knew this. ;-) Just remember your messages from December
2009 to this list.
> And of course thanks to Eric too for having written FDAPM in the
> first place :-)
He also added IDLEHALT to FDCONFIG.SY
Hi Mateusz, Christian,
FDAPM APMDOS solved the problem. It is very efficient. Now the
processor running FreeDOS is just as cool as it was running the
Windows that was originally in the computer.
I'm also experimenting in another portable, a ThinkPad 330 MHz,
and apparently it is working there too
> This is just the opposite of what I expected. I always thought
> that it is easier for a processor to run DOS than Windows.
In case you care about the technical background: DOS is dumb. When waiting
for user input, it (all DOS versions I know) by default just loops forever
until a key was pr
Hi!
On Saturday 11 September 2010 09:45 (CEST), Marcos Favero Florence de Barros
wrote:
> I'm now experimenting with FDAPM and THROTTLE to reduce
> processor speed, with partial success. Corrupted files still
> appear, only in smaller quantities.
No, CPU speed reduction is not the way to go. You
Hi,
I was given two (old) portable computers in which I installed
FreeDOS.
After a few weeks experimenting with them and getting countless
corrupted files, I concluded that processor overheating must be
the reason.
I suspected overheating after noticing that in the first few
minutes after bootin
18 matches
Mail list logo
