Really weird question 2

[PaulTEG]

Hi Folks,

I have recieved an obscure request from a potential client, and I'm not sure that the request is feasible.

The request is to run Win 3.11 on a P4 motherboard, to take advantage of legacy ISA boards, with drivers only for Win 3.11.

My question is - is this possible/feasible?

;P

 

[gargouille]

Are they prepared to pay someone to write the drivers?

 

[Win98User]

I am a simple person;
Windows 3.11 for workgroups
ISA Cards
Pentium 4 Motherboard.

gargouille question is certainly the most relevant, though the cost would be extortionate.

What I am interested in, is, what sort of application utilising ISA cards and Windows 3.11 would benefit from use of a Pentium 4 motherboard (with only Windows 3.11 drivers)? Bearing in mind the performance that was expected from those products when they were at the cutting edge.

Next thing you'll hear about is Rolls Royce fitting engines to Sinclair C5's.

Regards.

 

[Mulga]

Where are you going to get a P4 mobo with ISA slots?
If such does exist then I suspect Win 3.1 would run on the system, you would not have USB support and would have to stick to FAT 16 partitions (2GB limit) but everything else should work.
BUT WHY!!!!!!! All things are possible except skiing through a revolving door.

 

[PaulTEG]

There are P4 mobos with up to 3 ISA slots available,
What I really wanted to know was would this generally be a good idea?

Thanks for the input

;P

 

[gargouille]

I mean no invective, here, but get a clue, PaulTEG, these ppl are saying it's dead, dead DEDOUBLE-D.

No, wait, your customer also wants the Windows language to be Latin!

Great! We can phinally use Phil's latin pronouncements by having him code it!
LOL

 

[ceh4702]

This might be a good idea if a person had mission-critical ISA cards that were too expensive to replace. If you do not like my post feel free to point out your opinion or my errors.

 

[edfair]

Nah, not dead.
Should run like nothing else ever seen. Just don't blink because the job will be finished. Or the screen display will cause seizures in those susceptable to flashing lites. Ed Fair
unixstuff@juno.com
Any advice I give is my best judgement based on my interpretation of the facts you supply. Help increase my knowledge by providing some feedback, good or bad, on any advice I have given.

 

[gargouille]

So, Ed, why aren't more ppl doing it?

 

[mudskipper]

IMHO, edfair is right. The P4 board should work to run windows itself, but find out more about any critical software before doing this!

We had a guy that insisted on having 3.11 on his high end P3. We did not install any chipset drivers--there were other little issues. Bottom line was that the thing FLEW through everything. He was a happy camper until he realized that it was a pain in the butt to try to slow some of those programs back down. In fact, one of the programs that he HAD to have would not even attempt to run due to timing differences. Mudskipper
___________________________________________________________________________________

Groucho said it best- "A four year-old child could understand this! Quick! Run out and find me a four year-old child: I can't make heads nor tails out of this!"

 

[Win98User]

Hi,
Just did a search for the hell of it;

http://www.technoland.com/tl_mb8000.htm

So someone is doing it, but I suspect they are not using windows 3.11 for workgroups.

Because if they are, "people with mission critical ISA cards that they can't afford to replace", I suspect they would be scouring the flea markets for an old socket 7 motherboard and a Pentium 200 processor.

I may be wrong but, it appeals to my sense of humour - it sounds just like the company I work for.

lol.

Regards.

 

[roamer1]

I'm with ceh4702 and Mudskipper- If it is mission critical, then you are stuck with it. Otherwise, the benefits in memory management, 32bit access, FAT32 or better, PNP,large drive access, program and driver availability, et cetera, is well worth the learning curve.

In my experience, in general, Win3x stuff can act weird due to "running TOO FAST" and can have timing problems. I would say that a 300-500 CPU is as high as I would try- and 3.11 SAILS on a 300 k-6. Also Win32s 32bit interface is really hokey- don't rely on it.

 

[JimInKS]

PaulTEG,
Can you tell us what the application is?
Is it really going to benefit from running 100X faster?

My opinion is that you are asking for lots of problems. Since these are some kind of custom ISA cards you are probably interfacing to something. That means TIMING and HANDSHAKING.
Many older programs cannot handle the faster speed.

Why not just get an older Pentium MB and be safe?

 

[fatmander]

I think it will function okey-dokie paultegs,
If you use a P4 3Ghz PE Chip, running 1024MB PC2800 DDR RAM,Ge -Force 4 Ti 4600 G-Card or anything else can't you still boot it to DOS,(win3.11)?
and wont everything work in DOS- graphics(VGA), ram, chip, -all on 16 bit code.

If the cards worked in old machines, they used the same southbridge design thats been around since the sixties.
I notice that the chipset on the mobo(MB800) contains standard winbond southbridge chipsets- ancient ones
Winbond 83628/9
Winbond 83877
Winbond 83627HF
And DOS uses standard addressing from the BIOS to address all com ports,so unless the makers of the MB800 have re-written the PCI to ISA southbridge(which they havent as it supports win9x, my GUESS is that it will work.
However there is onlt one way to know for sure......
Giz a job and I'll build it for you real cheap

Check out the technical

http://www.voxtechnologies.com/SBCs/vt800.htm

http://www.ibase-i.com.tw/mb800.htm

http://www.dtk.com.tw/product/mb/mb800.html

 

[fatmander]

I hate to edit posts,
I think I missed the point roamer1 made about clock speeds and win 3.11,
The timing of the ram and the FSB could be an issue, If the Bios allows you to clock down the FSB......(eg. 33 Mhz)

The chip shouldn't matter as it has always been running on a multiple of the FSB since 33Mhz 486 chips or so.
apart from that I think it's okey-dokie paultegs
P.S.
Is the 'okey-dokie paultegs' starting to get on your nerves?
I hope not, its got a great ring to it...
Regards Fat

 

[PaulTEG]

Thanks all,

Looks like it might work after all
Thanks for your input.

A special mention to gargouille, that's real encouraging, keep up the good work!!!

Best Regards
PaulTEG

 

[Win98User]

If you meant it you'd give him a star, wouldn't you?

It's a real shame you couldn't put us out of your misery by telling us what the ISA card/s where for and what the application/s were.

But you will have your secrets and we will have our opinions. ;-)

Regards.

 

[Grenage]

I'm curious, a little while ago when we were trying to install windows 95 on a P4 machine (dont ask it wouldn't install at all, only win98 and above would install.

I assumed it was something to do with bits but anyhow, would 3.1 even install and run with a P4 ?

 

[Win98User]

An interesting question. Not enough time to justify it with a "good" answer.

The thing to remember about 3.1 is that it wasn't a "real" operating system - It was just a big utility programme.

It relied on DOS, it sat on dos, you could turn it off by exiting from it.

But yes is the answer to your question.

The difference between "old" operating systems and "new" operating systems are the drivers that you need for the additional functionality eg. USB, fire wire, power management etc.

Which, coming back to gargouille's point about drivers, is what it is all about.

The question at the top of the page is about using ISA cards on a P4 system - with only windows 3.11 drivers for the ISA cards, which acknowledges that there are no other drivers for it (otherwise they would be using them, would they not!).

The issue of drivers is critical. How many times have you heard of programmes or add ons that have been working fine until x.y.z. happened. The first thing you are told is update the drivers etc. etc.

Being able to mount ISA cards onto any board is no guarentee that you will be able to get them to work how you want them to work. Also, just because you have no problem at the moment doesn't mean that you won't have it in the future.

The point about drivers, to my mind, was the most important one.

Companies should be looking to advance their technologies whilst they are in control - not putting themselves in the position of being dropped in the doo dar when they run into problems with old technology.

Said a little more than I intended. Sorry.

Regards. The author reserve's the right to blame someone else for things he gets wrong. However, responsibility for receiving praise can never be shirked.

 

[PaulTEG]

I'll be back with full details after I get a working prototype up and running ... or not. Around Mid Jan'03

The application is the equivalent of sub judice, as there are competitors looking to provide the same.

How do you give someone a star?

Your points about advancing with technology are valid, but in some organisations where PCs have multiple uses, some are bound to get overseen, because the IT department doesn't know of their existence, the suppliers move to a different field of business without informing customers, a different department doesn't think their PC has anything to do with the IT Domain. The list is endless...

In a perfect world, none of us would have jobs.

As a wise old man once said, "Excrement invariably occurs". An equally wise old man once said, "Where there's muck, there's brass".

To paraphrase the two, when the sh!t hits the fan, somebody's going to capitalise, I just hope it's me! B-)

Best Regards
;P