🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <29405@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@pepsi.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) writes:
>In article <8681@rosevax.Rosemount.COM> marknew@rosevax.UUCP (Mark Newman) writes:
>|From Raymond Chen (raymond@math.berkeley.edu):
>|   There is no way to switch from protceted mode to real mode on a 286.
>
>Of course not. What good is a protected mode if a random program
>can violate it?
>

The way OS/2 switches back to real mode on a 286 is to have the keyboard
controller actually RESET the 286!  The good of it, is so you can still
run you DOS programs, like Lotus and WordPerfect!!!!!

>|From Dean William Wallwey (wallwey@snoopy.colorado.edu):
>|   The 386 and 386SX both have very powerful memory mapping powers which
>|   are used by the new operating systems.
>
>What new operating systems are you thinking of? Unix, perhaps?

OS/2 ver 2.0 which will require a 386, Windows386 ver 3.0
and of course the "real" UNIXs you can run on a PC.

>
>|   calls Virtual 86 mode so you can multitask DOS programs using Windows
>|   or DesqView for the 386. The small amount of money you save by buying
>
>I still don't believe the DV386 uses virtual 86 mode. Does anyone have
>any definitive data? Maybe I'll ask QD.
>

I'm pretty sure DV386 uses the virtual 86 mode of the 386, that's why
you need a 386 to run DV386.  Likewise with Windows 386.  This is the
only way you can reliably multitask regular DOS programs!!!! Most DOS
programs (like WP's and SpreadSheets) think and need complete control of your
system so they write directly to your screen and lots of other "nasty"
things. Vitual mode lets the programs think they are still able to do
this, but actually don't!

By the way OS/2 ver 2.0 is also supposed to support this feature so OS/2
Ver 2.0 can multitask OS/2 ver 1.0 programs, OS/2 ver 2.0 programs, DOS
programs, and if the rummors are right Windows 3.0 programs all at the
same time and on the same screen.  But you will need a 386 to run OS/2
ver 2.0!!!!!!!!!


>|   The new software that is coming around the bend really
>|   needs large flat memory spaces (EVEN the NEW 386 version of OS/2
>|   later this year will take advantage of the 386's powers and really
>|   shine!)
>
>It doesn't seem to me that there is very much software for OS/2.
>I know of Excel and Pagemaker. That's about it.

You should read some more PC magazines.  Not only is Microsoft strongly
commited to OS/2, but so are WordPerfect Corp, as well as Lotus, and
AutoCad coming out with versions of there most popular software for
OS/2 that will make their DOS versions look like they came from the
Dark Ages!!!!!!  Even Excel, is so much better for OS/2 then Winodws!!!

>
>Windows, on the other hand, has a lot of software. And when 3.0
>comes out, it will run in protected mode, allowing 16 megabytes of
>memory, ON A 286.

Granted, but most of the Wonderful software from Lotus, WP, Autocad, and
yes even Microsoft will run much faster, cleaner, and just plan better
on a 386.  Even Windows 386 ver 3.0 will be MUCH BETTER than Windows 286
ver 3.0!!!!!!! By the way most software companies that write
applications for Windows are in the process of rewriting their code for
OS/2, Especially MicroSoft!!!

>
>|   The 386,386SX and 486 will
>|   run OS/2, mulitasking DOS, and UNIX, MUCH MUCH better than the 286
>|   ever will. Even the new Windowing word processors from MicroSoft
>
>Unix does run better on 386 and 486. I don't know what you mean by
>multi-tasking DOS.

See above----Try running a BBS, Word Perfect, and Lotus, and MicroSoft
Windows on a 286 at the same time, and then try it on a 386!  I would be
suprized if you could do it on a 286, and if even if you could, if any one
program locked up, it would take your whole system with it.  Not on a
386 running DV386, Windows386 or the soon to be OS/2 ver 2.0 (386)!!!!
Also Windows 386 offers TRUE multitasking in the sense of Time Slicing,
Windows 286, uses co-operative multitasking.  

>
>|   (WORD for WINDOWS already out) and the future WordPerfect for OS/2
>|   will run so much better on a 386/386SX than the 286.
>
>This is untrue. Word for Windows does not take advantage of the 386.
>Windows 3.0 will take advantage of the 286.

Note I said will "run better on a 386" rather than take advantage of
of the 386.  Windows 386, as will Windows 386 ver 3.0, is still much
faster because of the special memory mapping modes of the 386.  Granted
Windows 286 ver 3.0 will be able to use the protected mode memory of the
286 but it can't map it as powerfully as the 386, and hence will be
slower, not to mention 386 machines are generally faster to begin with.

>
>|   Even if you don't think that you'll need the power of the 386 group,
>|   you will soon see even the simple "home" programs like word pro-
>|   cessing and spreadsheets longing for the 386/386SX. (I guess they
>|   already do with WORD for WINDOWS, and Lotus 1-2-3 ver 3.0 even though
>|   they will "run" on a 286).
>
>I don't think you know what you are talking about.

I don't think you know what you are talking about!  If you read many of
the news groups, people are complaining seriously about how slow Word
for Windows is on a 286.  Many people consider it to slow to actually
use on a 286.  Also what I ment by my prevous comment is, that programs
are getting bigger, and actually requiring more speed due to programs's
complexity, and the higher resolution display's and graphics
environments. The 386 is "better" suited for these. 

Finally I have worked on 386 machines, and own a 286.  I also do 
MsWindows Software Development. I hate my 286!!!!! and I am going to
move up to a 386 as soon as possible.  I DON'T WANT TO SEE ANYBODY ELSE
MAKE THE MISTAKE OF BUYING A 286 WHEN THEY COULD BUY A 386 FOR $100-$200
MORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also if you don't think my opinions
are worth anything, check out some of Charles Petzolds comments in PC
Magazine about how he feels about the 286 vs 386 issue.  He has written
a couple of OS/2 and MSWindows books for MicroSoft and is considered a
great PM and Windows programer by most developers!  He also has a lot
of connections at MicroSoft, and if anybody is qualified to comment
about future software delevelopments and corporate strategy, he is the one.

>
>|From Michael D. Kersenbrock (michaelk@copper.WR.TEK.COM):
>|   The 286 is brain dead primarily because Intel made two major errors
>|   in it's design:
>|     1.) In protected mode (where it can access more than 1 Megabyte),
>|         the chip's MMU-ish architecture is "different" to the point
>|         that DOS can't handle it.  DOS MUST run in "real" mode (1Meg
>
>This seems like a problem with DOS, since the architecture of the 8086
>is inherently limited to 1 megabyte, any improvements would have to
>be different, and it's up to DOS to take advantage of it. In addition,
>MS has said there will be a DOS 5 and DOS 6 (in InforWorld). Perhaps
>by then they will get around to using the power of the 286.
>

Why Wait, even if there is a DOS5 and a DOS6, the 286 can not EVER make
regular DOS programs DIRECTLY take advantage protected mode memory.  The
386 can do it today with DV386 and Windows 386 not to mention OS/2 ver
2.0 and UNIX !!!!!!!!!!! Granted you can use EMS LIM 4.0 emulators to 
use the extended protected memory to emulate exapned memory in DOS, but it is
so slow, that it is usually faster to user an 8088 with real EMS LIM4.0
memory on memory intensive applications.


>|   So, it's not brain dead in the sense of being useless, but brain dead
>|   in the sense that it isn't what it could/should have been had things
>|   been done just a little bit different.
>
>Nonsense. Tell me specifically what you would have done differently
>from Intel? I bet you can't come up with anything.

O' contraire.... All the Things that they should have put into the 286,
they actually put on the 386,  Like allowing DOS to directly use the
extended protected memory by special mapping functions.  Having a flat
address space, so programs can
break the 1982 limit of 64k per data and code segment. When Intel
designed the 8086 and carried over many of its bad traits to 286, the
designers thought that 64K was alot of memory.  Today small windows on 
the screen can take more than that to just display their associated
pixels.  Although it can be done, these limits of changing segments all
the time, make programs considrably slower than they would be if they
used a flat address space!

>
>|From Marc Louis Levinson (gt0159a@prism.gatech.edu):
>|   The 286 is not really brain dead. The problem is that nobody has
>|   ever properly taken advantage of its capabilities. The chip has
>|   available what is called protected mode, which allows advanced
>|   memory handling and multitasking. Chances are slim that you can ever
>|   find a useful DOS application to use this mode.
>
>At last, someone who knows what he's talking about.
>

Not really, see my last comments. To use protected mode, the program must
actually be written specifically for it.  In the case of Windows 3.0 it
will use protected mode because it was written for it, and apllications
that run under it will have to have been written according to MicroSoft's
standards for windows programs-(previous versions of Windows, prior to
Ver 3.0 did memory managment by software and used the nearly same 
memory managment scheme as protected memory.  If a windows program conformed
to MS's standards, it will be able to use the protected mode available
in MsWindows ver 3.0, because we have been writing our programs
basically for it all along, and limited ourselves to 64K datasegments.)
If you don't beleive me, check out some of Charles Petzolds books and
articles again.

>|   If you are not planning to use hi power applications, like LOTUS 3,
>|   Windows [loaded to the max], Autocad and others to maximum perform-
>|   ance abilities, then a 286 is ok. Realize that much of the software
>|   now being developed will not run on a 286 but will run on an sx. Con-
>|   sider the lifetime of your computer before you buy one.
>
>With Windows 3.0, which does run in protected mode on a 286, due to
>come out early this summer, you should consider exactly what the
>extra cost of a 386 will buy you.

A whole lot of headach, I use my 286 with MSWindows, even when Windows
3.0 comes out, it won't be a cure all solution, although I will be very
joyed when it finally does come out.  Windows 3.0 still won't ba able to
truely multitask programs like Word Perfect and Lotus 1-2-3, and a 
whole lot of other "nasty" DOS programs that have no Windows version
counter part!

>
>Also realize that 10 or 20 million 286 machines constitutes a powerful
>reason for software companies to support the 286.
>
>|From John Limpert (johnl@n3dmc.UU.NET):
>|   Many programs
>|   were designed for 32 bit machine like the 80386 and if they will run
>
>Name some, besides CAD packages. I think most people want things like
>spreadsheets, word processors, and games. These will run just fine
>on a 286.

If you like to run the newest programs super slow!!!!!!!!!

>
>|   In the future
>|   there will be a lot of software that will only be available for 80386
>|   class machines. 
>
>Again, there is a very large market for 286 applications and they
>simply will not be left unsupported.

Yeh, right, just like the 8088 isn't being left behind today.  386's
are cheap and getting cheaper.  The Difference between the power of
a 286 and a 386 makes up Many times for the small difference in price!!
>
>|   I am writing this on the 80286 UNIX system I bought several years
>|   ago. I wouldn't throw it out but I wouldn't buy another one today.
>
>Certainly Unix is one program that benefits from a 386. But users
>don't buy PCs to run Unix, they buy PCs to run applications, and
>Unix is one of the worst systems to try to buy applications for.
>What kind of spreadsheets can you get? Anything that comes even
>close to Excel? I hear you can finally get MS Word 5.0 on Unix.
>A character based application, when DOS has Word for Windows. If
>you've got the Unix religion, I guess you'll get a 386. But if
>you want to get work done, you'll stay away from Unix.
>

I agree UNIX "sucks" for applications. If you want to write real
applications, even for OS/2 and Windows, programmers are going to make better
versions of their software for the 386!!!  Just like Lotus announced
123 ver3.0 for 286's and above, and ver 2.2 for 8088's.  You are going
to see software targeted, and greatly enhanced for 386 above the 286. 

>--
>Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com		{uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil
>A PC without DESQview is like Unix without ^Z.

Remember the point of my original reply was not to bash the 286, but
to help someone not to make a mistake.  Also if you think the 286's are
so great, you can stay in '80's for all I care, I'm moving into the
'90's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

	Dean