Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > grrr, stupid old hardware <rant>

Reply
Thread Tools

grrr, stupid old hardware <rant>

 
 
Dave - Dave.net.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005
so I get a phone call this morning saying that a computer wont go, and
they can't give me the asset number to check it remotely, so I bugger
off into work, and discover that not only are there two of them, but
they're running DOS 6.21, on 486s, with no network connection, and no
data backed up(that I can tell) in the life of the PC's... gah...

I rang a few of the older IT guys and discovered that they(the dept)
were told to get a replacement system ~5 years ago, and that I had to
"try to fix it the best you can".

Anyway, I got it going with a little help from google, but it appears
that something is wrong with the Hdd/serial/print controller in one, and
the other has Hdd issues.

Both are now backed up(took a ghost), but the software fails to run on
new hardware(runs on hardware of similar age) giving a Runtime error.


So, where would you guys go from here?

Oh yeah, software company no longer exists, and so software is
un-supported, it interfaces to a serial port, comm 2, but even giving it
the same address in the bios as on the old machine, it kicks up an error
saying "error: port: config" or similar, but of course no-one has any
documentation of this software, including the net.

/rant, Im going home.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rider
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005

"Dave - Dave.net.nz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> so I get a phone call this morning saying that a computer wont go, and
> they can't give me the asset number to check it remotely, so I bugger off
> into work, and discover that not only are there two of them, but they're
> running DOS 6.21, on 486s, with no network connection, and no data backed
> up(that I can tell) in the life of the PC's... gah...
>
> I rang a few of the older IT guys and discovered that they(the dept) were
> told to get a replacement system ~5 years ago, and that I had to "try to
> fix it the best you can".
>
> Anyway, I got it going with a little help from google, but it appears that
> something is wrong with the Hdd/serial/print controller in one, and the
> other has Hdd issues.
>
> Both are now backed up(took a ghost), but the software fails to run on new
> hardware(runs on hardware of similar age) giving a Runtime error.
>
>
> So, where would you guys go from here?
>
> Oh yeah, software company no longer exists, and so software is
> un-supported, it interfaces to a serial port, comm 2, but even giving it
> the same address in the bios as on the old machine, it kicks up an error
> saying "error: port: config" or similar, but of course no-one has any
> documentation of this software, including the net.
>
> /rant, Im going home.


"Its broken ... you need a new one"




 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Shane (aka froggy)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005

>>
>> So, where would you guys go from here?
>>
>> Oh yeah, software company no longer exists, and so software is
>> un-supported, it interfaces to a serial port, comm 2, but even giving it
>> the same address in the bios as on the old machine, it kicks up an error
>> saying "error: port: config" or similar, but of course no-one has any
>> documentation of this software, including the net.
>>
>> /rant, Im going home.

>
> "Its broken ... you need a new one"
>
>


yeah.. time to give someone the ..this is costing more to keep than
to replace.. speech
--

Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked


 
Reply With Quote
 
Matty
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005
Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:

> Both are now backed up(took a ghost), but the software fails to run on
> new hardware(runs on hardware of similar age) giving a Runtime error.
>
>
> So, where would you guys go from here?
>
> Oh yeah, software company no longer exists,


Can you give any clues about the name of the software or the company, or
what the application is?
I have a system here that will run on 486's but not Pentiums.

 
Reply With Quote
 
wogers nemesis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 17:33:12 +1300, Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:

> so I get a phone call this morning saying that a computer wont go, and
> they can't give me the asset number to check it remotely, so I bugger
> off into work, and discover that not only are there two of them, but
> they're running DOS 6.21, on 486s, with no network connection, and no
> data backed up(that I can tell) in the life of the PC's... gah...
>
> I rang a few of the older IT guys and discovered that they(the dept)
> were told to get a replacement system ~5 years ago, and that I had to
> "try to fix it the best you can".
>
> Anyway, I got it going with a little help from google, but it appears
> that something is wrong with the Hdd/serial/print controller in one, and
> the other has Hdd issues.
>
> Both are now backed up(took a ghost), but the software fails to run on
> new hardware(runs on hardware of similar age) giving a Runtime error.
>
>
> So, where would you guys go from here?
>
> Oh yeah, software company no longer exists, and so software is
> un-supported, it interfaces to a serial port, comm 2, but even giving it
> the same address in the bios as on the old machine, it kicks up an error
> saying "error: port: config" or similar, but of course no-one has any
> documentation of this software, including the net.
>
> /rant, Im going home.


Something like this thread may help:

http://www.experts-exchange.com/Appl..._21048162.html

You probably will have to **** around with the bios settings for the com
port to get the irq settings etc the program actually likes.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dave - Dave.net.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005
Matty wrote:
>> Both are now backed up(took a ghost), but the software fails to run on
>> new hardware(runs on hardware of similar age) giving a Runtime error.
>> So, where would you guys go from here?
>> Oh yeah, software company no longer exists,


> Can you give any clues about the name of the software or the company, or
> what the application is?


it no longer matters anyway, I came in today and found an email(from
CIO) telling them to replace it as IT will no longer support it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dave - Dave.net.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005
Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
> Matty wrote:
>
>>> Both are now backed up(took a ghost), but the software fails to run
>>> on new hardware(runs on hardware of similar age) giving a Runtime error.
>>> So, where would you guys go from here?
>>> Oh yeah, software company no longer exists,

>
>
>> Can you give any clues about the name of the software or the company,
>> or what the application is?

>
>
> it no longer matters anyway, I came in today and found an email(from
> CIO) telling them to replace it as IT will no longer support it.


heh, this morning on a "monday brain" I gave it another go... had a few
reads through some google results, and fond some sites mentioning about
disabling CPU cache...well I did it, and it seems to be working, but
I'll have to take it back up there and test it.

heh, P4 2.8GHz, 512MBram, 120GB SATA Hdd, and it's running an old dos
program from a 425MB partition on the Hdd, nice.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dave - Dave.net.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005
Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
>>>> Both are now backed up(took a ghost), but the software fails to run
>>>> on new hardware(runs on hardware of similar age) giving a Runtime
>>>> error.
>>>> So, where would you guys go from here?
>>>> Oh yeah, software company no longer exists,


>>> Can you give any clues about the name of the software or the company,
>>> or what the application is?


>> it no longer matters anyway, I came in today and found an email(from
>> CIO) telling them to replace it as IT will no longer support it.


> heh, this morning on a "monday brain" I gave it another go... had a few
> reads through some google results, and fond some sites mentioning about
> disabling CPU cache...well I did it, and it seems to be working, but
> I'll have to take it back up there and test it.
> heh, P4 2.8GHz, 512MBram, 120GB SATA Hdd, and it's running an old dos
> program from a 425MB partition on the Hdd, nice.


Just to give credit where it is due...
http://members.aol.com/bretjohn/

This is where I got the program to slow down the PC, not that I
mentioned it above, but this was the first thing I tried, and it didn't
work, but neither did disabling the cache either(by itself).

I needed both.

The CPU spped slow down was needed to get around an apparent software
glitch, I can't find the reference for it, but I think it was something
about Pascal and timing, but anyway...

And the cache thing is something about referencing registers directly or
something, and the cache just gets in the way... as you can tell,
programming just isn't my forte.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rider
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005

<Snip>
> The CPU spped slow down was needed to get around an apparent software
> glitch, I can't find the reference for it, but I think it was something
> about Pascal and timing, but anyway...
>
> And the cache thing is something about referencing registers directly or
> something, and the cache just gets in the way... as you can tell,
> programming just isn't my forte.


I used to work worth cash registers linked to computers for stock tracking
and sales etc etc. We had a program that on modern computers (modern meaning
P233- LOL), would send the instruction to connect to the cash register via
com1 too fast and create an error, because the cash register wasnt fast
enough to accept it.

Rider


 
Reply With Quote
 
Dave - Dave.net.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-13-2005
Rider wrote:
>>The CPU spped slow down was needed to get around an apparent software
>>glitch, I can't find the reference for it, but I think it was something
>>about Pascal and timing, but anyway...


>>And the cache thing is something about referencing registers directly or
>>something, and the cache just gets in the way... as you can tell,
>>programming just isn't my forte.


> I used to work worth cash registers linked to computers for stock tracking
> and sales etc etc. We had a program that on modern computers (modern meaning
> P233- LOL), would send the instruction to connect to the cash register via
> com1 too fast and create an error, because the cash register wasnt fast
> enough to accept it.


yeah, we use these things call "workabout"s here at work in some dept
for ordering/stock tracking or something, and when we gave them new
Dells(P4 ~2Ghz) from IBMs(P3~600Mhz) they had a problem with them...
this was solved by adding "pause" to the batch file scripted to do the
transfer
The actual problem was that the batch file was set to copy the data from
the device, confirm it was there, and then transfer a blank template
back to the device, the problem occured where the batchfile was too
being executed too quickly, and it was trying to confirm and copy the
blank template back prior to finishing the initial copy.

Later on, rather than using "pause", we used "set" so that it waited for
a variable to be set.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
stupid question...waiting for a stupid answer Brandon McCombs Java 4 08-28-2006 06:57 PM
Stupid question. Please, only stupid responders. If you're not sureif you're stupid, you probably aren't. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?= Computer Support 6 07-18-2005 05:11 AM
stupid stupid stupid kpg MCSE 17 11-26-2004 02:59 PM
stupid test questions and stupid awnsers in Measureup 70-320 test john MCAD 0 10-13-2004 11:43 PM
Stupid is as Stupid Does! Michael P Gabriel Digital Photography 3 06-26-2004 12:49 PM



Advertisments