Forget all the crap about being able to run Windows on a 486 with 8 or
16 meg of RAM .... the problem is not the serial port speed; its the
tremendous memory overhead needed for Windows (any version) that
causes the bottleneck. I have an ancient 486 DX2-66 box bought for 20
bucks at a computerfest. It came with only two memory slots and 8 megs
of RAM. It crawled along. A friend donated a pair of (ancient) 32 meg
IBM-type simms and I dropped them in instead. With 64 megs of RAM the
old 486 runs Windows 98, including 4 serial ports (and a parallel port)
very nicely.
A local ham was also struggling to run Windows with 8 megs of RAM, in
an old Pentium P75 box; he had two spare slots so we dropped in a pair
of 8 meg (cheap, second user) simms to give him 24 megs. The
difference was amazing. He has decided not to buy a new machine ...
I would not now waste time trying to run Windows in less than 32 megs of
RAM. Memory is probably still cheaper than a new machine. Over here
nobody seems to want the smaller, slower simms (8 megs, or even 16
megs) these days. (70ns is fast enough for a 486). Borrow some and try
it before going to the computer mall.
John G3JAG
On 20-Nov-99 Steve Ellington N4LQ wrote:
>
> You know, it seems strange that something running off the pokey
> serial port takes so much computer power. Maybe someone can enlighten
> us about this.
> Steve N4LQ
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Riley Grieb <rpghome@vlmcons.com>
> To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 8:19 PM
> Subject: [TenTec] Pegasus and a PC question
>
>
>>
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> I have no experience with the Pegasus, but yes, you can run Windows
> 95 on a
>> 16mb 486/66. However, performance could be disappointing due to the
>> machine's slow speed and minimal RAM. I just left my 16mb 486/66 as
> with
>> Win3.1 as an "occasional use" machine (OK for my PK-232) and bought
> the
>> whole enchilada (new mobo, cpu, ram, hd) when I went Windows 95/98.
>>
>> I know this can tax the budget, but it really is much better to have
>> improved hardware for the newer Windows. My "at home" Win98 PC is a
> 32mb K6
>> (AMD) cpu @233mhz which you should shoot for (or better) with Win98.
>>
>> At work, the slowest Win95 machine is a 16mb 486/100 and it is real
>> ssslllooowww. It has the menial job of grabbing data off of an IBM
> 3480
>> tape drive. I'm a support specialist (hardware, operating systems,
>> networking) so that's where my advice is coming from. I'm kind-of a
> loner
>> but have a Paragon II / Hercules II combo I enjoy.
>>
>> Riley
>> KC9OP
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
>> Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
>> Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
>> Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
>> Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
> Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
----------------------------------
E-Mail: John - G3JAG <patents@dx0man.prestel.co.uk>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: 20-Nov-99
Time: 10:35:48
This message was sent by XFMail
----------------------------------
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|