Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [midatlanticretro] OS/2 on a Toshiba lapmonster

Expand Messages
  • madodel
    ... Is this a 486 or 386? Warp 4 required a 486/33 minimum. And a Pentium/75 for VoiceType. Also Warp 4 requires a minimum of 12MB, and 16MB would be
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 1 7:18 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Sridhar Ayengar wrote:
      > Jim Scheef wrote:
      >> Mark,
      >
      > I'm not Mark, but I've run OS/2 a lot, so I thought I might be able to
      > take a swing at this.
      >
      >> What version of OS/2 might you recommend for my "new" Toshiba T6600C
      >> lapmonster (cira 1993)? It has 8M RAM. I have yet to run a diagnostics
      >> program on it so I don't know what the video chip is. It has a built-in
      >> Adaptec SCSI interface that runs the CD-ROM, which might affect reading
      >> a setup CD. Also, I installed an NE-2000 network card, so it would be
      >> nice if that worked as well. Any thoughts?
      >
      > Anything newer than Warp 3 would probably do just fine. There's a bunch
      > of new capabilities that would make Warp 4 very convenient. One is that
      > it's very easy to install a late-model web browser.
      >
      > Peace... Sridhar

      Is this a 486 or 386? Warp 4 required a 486/33 minimum. And a Pentium/75
      for VoiceType. Also Warp 4 requires a minimum of 12MB, and 16MB would be
      better. Warp3 is leaner and I seem to recall installing it in as little as
      6 MB of RAM, but more is better, as anything less then 12MB I think used a
      lot of disk caching so it ran slow. Both versions of Warp required a 3.5"
      floppy to do the initial install boot. I think Warp 3 should recognize an
      Adaptec SCSI but you can find a complete 3.5" diskette version, but I
      think that was 20+ diskettes to swap out. Its been almost 15 years since
      I installed Warp3 and all the copies I have are at the Museum now. I'm not
      sure if OS/2 2.1 will work with the Adaptec/CDROM combo. I think I have a
      copy of OS/2 Unleashed, 2.1 here unless I took that to InfoAge as well. If
      I can find it I will look to see if it mentions a SCSI CDROM. That release
      had both CDROM and floppy disk versions also. I'm pretty sure I have a
      couple copies of 2.1 all diskette version at InfoAge.

      Mark

      --

      From the eComStation Desktop of: Mark Dodel

      Warpstock 2007 - Where?, http://www.warpstock.org
      Warpstock Europe - http://www.warpstock.net


      For a choice in the future of personal computing, Join VOICE -
      http://www.os2voice.org

      "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the
      growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their
      democratic State itself. That in it's essence, is Fascism - ownership of
      government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private
      power." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Message proposing the Monopoly
      Investigation, 1938
    • Sridhar Ayengar
      ... I ve run Warp 4 on a 386DX-33 w/4MB. It s painfully slow, but it runs. I don t think it s a case of minimum requirements, but more of a case of minimum
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 2 5:34 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        madodel wrote:
        > Sridhar Ayengar wrote:
        >> Jim Scheef wrote:
        >>> Mark,
        >> I'm not Mark, but I've run OS/2 a lot, so I thought I might be able to
        >> take a swing at this.
        >>
        >>> What version of OS/2 might you recommend for my "new" Toshiba T6600C
        >>> lapmonster (cira 1993)? It has 8M RAM. I have yet to run a diagnostics
        >>> program on it so I don't know what the video chip is. It has a built-in
        >>> Adaptec SCSI interface that runs the CD-ROM, which might affect reading
        >>> a setup CD. Also, I installed an NE-2000 network card, so it would be
        >>> nice if that worked as well. Any thoughts?
        >> Anything newer than Warp 3 would probably do just fine. There's a bunch
        >> of new capabilities that would make Warp 4 very convenient. One is that
        >> it's very easy to install a late-model web browser.
        >>
        >> Peace... Sridhar
        >
        > Is this a 486 or 386? Warp 4 required a 486/33 minimum. And a Pentium/75
        > for VoiceType. Also Warp 4 requires a minimum of 12MB, and 16MB would be
        > better. Warp3 is leaner and I seem to recall installing it in as little as
        > 6 MB of RAM, but more is better, as anything less then 12MB I think used a
        > lot of disk caching so it ran slow. Both versions of Warp required a 3.5"

        I've run Warp 4 on a 386DX-33 w/4MB. It's painfully slow, but it runs.
        I don't think it's a case of minimum requirements, but more of a case
        of "minimum requirements".

        > floppy to do the initial install boot. I think Warp 3 should recognize an
        > Adaptec SCSI but you can find a complete 3.5" diskette version, but I
        > think that was 20+ diskettes to swap out. Its been almost 15 years since
        > I installed Warp3 and all the copies I have are at the Museum now. I'm not
        > sure if OS/2 2.1 will work with the Adaptec/CDROM combo. I think I have a
        > copy of OS/2 Unleashed, 2.1 here unless I took that to InfoAge as well. If
        > I can find it I will look to see if it mentions a SCSI CDROM. That release
        > had both CDROM and floppy disk versions also. I'm pretty sure I have a
        > couple copies of 2.1 all diskette version at InfoAge.

        I can tell you without hesitation that Warp 3 is leaner than 2.1. I was
        actually pleasantly surprised when I bought my first copy of Warp 3 and
        found that out. Warp 3 was faster than 2.1 on nearly every machine I
        tried it on.

        Peace... Sridhar
      • John Allain
        ... This sentence reads to me as absurdly obtuse, Absurdly Obtuse. Care to try a second phrasing for us dense people? My painfully slow experience
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 2 6:13 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          > I don't think it's a case of minimum requirements, but more of
          > a case of "minimum requirements".

          This sentence reads to me as absurdly obtuse, Absurdly Obtuse.
          Care to try a second phrasing for us dense people?

          <classiccmp>
          My painfully slow experience was Java ?1.1 on a 486/33.
          Something like 90 seconds to process a mouseclick. This was
          actually trying something below the stated minimum requirements.
          </classiccmp>

          > I can tell you without hesitation that Warp 3 is leaner than 2.1. I was
          > actually pleasantly surprised when I bought my first copy of Warp 3 and
          > found that out. Warp 3 was faster than 2.1 on nearly every machine I
          > tried it on.

          Very interesting,

          John A.
        • Sridhar Ayengar
          ... I didn t think anyone remembered that one. 8-) ... What I meant was that is it wasn t actually a minimum requirement. It was a bullshit requirement to
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 2 6:33 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            John Allain wrote:
            >> I don't think it's a case of minimum requirements, but more of
            >> a case of "minimum requirements".
            >
            > This sentence reads to me as absurdly obtuse, Absurdly Obtuse.

            I didn't think anyone remembered that one. 8-)

            > Care to try a second phrasing for us dense people?

            What I meant was that is it wasn't actually a minimum requirement. It
            was a bullshit requirement to cater to some marketroid's subjective
            impression of what "acceptably fast" means.

            Peace... Sridhar
          • madodel
            ... Perhaps, but I tried running Voice Type on a 486DX33 and it didn t work at all, so for VT I think even a Pentium 75 was probably just barely usable. The
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 2 8:26 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Sridhar Ayengar wrote:
              > John Allain wrote:
              >>> I don't think it's a case of minimum requirements, but more of
              >>> a case of "minimum requirements".
              >> This sentence reads to me as absurdly obtuse, Absurdly Obtuse.
              >
              > I didn't think anyone remembered that one. 8-)
              >
              >> Care to try a second phrasing for us dense people?
              >
              > What I meant was that is it wasn't actually a minimum requirement. It
              > was a bullshit requirement to cater to some marketroid's subjective
              > impression of what "acceptably fast" means.
              >
              > Peace... Sridhar
              >

              Perhaps, but I tried running Voice Type on a 486DX33 and it didn't work at
              all, so for VT I think even a Pentium 75 was probably just barely usable.
              The Warp4 box says 486DX33 minimum for installation, and like I said it was
              RAM for both Warp3 and Warp4 that made it usable, and was one of the major
              reasons for its demise since RAM was always at a premium in those days.
              OS/2's memory requirements were always at the high end of what was standard
              back then. And the more the better it ran. Now I have 2 GB and rarely get
              even close to using it all, and then only when I run XP from a VirtualPC
              under OS/2. So maybe it would install on a 386, but if its not really
              usable what is the point?

              Mark


              --

              From the eComStation Desktop of: Mark Dodel

              Warpstock 2007 - Where?, http://www.warpstock.org
              Warpstock Europe - http://www.warpstock.net


              For a choice in the future of personal computing, Join VOICE -
              http://www.os2voice.org

              "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the
              growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their
              democratic State itself. That in it's essence, is Fascism - ownership of
              government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private
              power." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Message proposing the Monopoly
              Investigation, 1938
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.