P.O.S.T. issue (was: Looking for Someone with IBM PC (fwd)

From: Fred Cisin <cisin_at_xenosoft.com>
Date: Sun Mar 18 10:51:18 2001

A very reasonable hypothesis. But an unreasonable situation!
This was the SAME MACHINE with different amounts of the same memory!
(with repeatable results)

--
Grumpy Ol' Fred        cisin_at_xenosoft.com
On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Joe wrote:
>   I believe the original PC checked EVERY memory location and the later
> machines checked every 10th(?) memory location.
>     Joe
> 
> 
> At 02:26 PM 3/15/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 11:19:36AM -0800, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft)
> (cisin_at_xenosoft.com) wrote:
> >> Sorry, slipped up on my question.  should read:
> >> Just one remaining issue:  does anyone know why the P.O.S.T. takes longer
> >> WITH 16K (14 seconds) than it does with 64K (9 seconds)??
> >> 
> >> Why would MORE memory take LESS time?

Received on Sun Mar 18 2001 - 10:51:18 GMT