Re: TI Graph Link Errors
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
At 08:05 PM 7/30/96 -0700, you wrote:
>Eric P. Anderson wrote:
>>
>> At 12:16 AM 7/30/96 -0700, you wrote:
>> >Rodger D. Miller wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I am currently running a Cyrix p-120+ system with 16 MB of ram. I own a
>> >> TI-92 and a TI-95, and recently purchased a TI-Graph Link. When I run the
>> >> software for the TI-92 under Windows 95, the mouse freezes on the screen,
>> >> but works fine when I exit the program. Also, I get "Communication
>> >> timeout" and "Transmission Error" messages in both the TI-92 and the TI-85
>> >> software when I try to send or receive to the appropriate calculator.
I am
>> >> using my only free com port, which is com port 3. Anyone have any ideas
>> >> why?
>> >
>> >Com 1 and Com 3 under Windows 3.1X (I assume thats what you are using)
>> >share the same IRQ, which means for all practical purposes that you can't
>> >have both running at the same time. I ended up putting my mouse on com 1,
>> >my calc cable on com 2, my modem on com 3 with a different IRQ than com1,
>> >etc. Its a hassle, but there should be enough IRQs to go around.
>>
>> First of all, the guy says he's using Windows 95. Also, IRQs have nothing
>> to do with the operating system. They exist the same in Win95 as they do in
>> Win3.1 or dos or whatever. Besides Win95 still is not a true operating
>> system. It is dos 7 with Win95 running on top of it, just like
Win3.1/Dos 6.22.
>
>First of all, who appointed you chief jerk to ride my ass?
I was simply replying to a public message in a public mailing list. Who
appointed you chief jerk to ride MY ass?
>I was trying
>to help the guy, and misread one line. As for the OS not being an
>issue, check your facts; OS/2 and Linux can handle two devices sharing a
>IRQ, without locking one out while the other is in operation. So yes,
>brainiac, the OS is entirely the issue. Besides, where did I say
>anything about Win95?! Since you were kind enough to repost my
>article, read it over very carefully and find the line that says
>"Win95 is a true OS in everbody's definition". Keep looking; I know
>its there! Or, try taking your beef to
>alt.hate.bill.gates.and.his.loser.os; don't jump down my throat because I
>tried to help a guy.
I'm not trying to flame Bill Gates or Microsoft at all. How I jumped down
your throat I don't know. Before you flame me for no reason whatsoever, you
should get your facts straight. IRQs are HARDWARE related; they have
nothing to do with your operating system. And, I'm sorry, but Win95 is no
more a real operating system than Win3.1 is. Gosh, the way you jumped on
top of me I wonder if you're related to Bill Gates. Do you own stock in
Microsoft? Get your facts on HARDWARE and your facts on OPERATING SYSTEMS
straight and then we can talk.
>Oh, by the way, get your OS facts straight before you hurt yourself.
You think that Win95 doesn't have IRQs? What a loser. Then you try to
flame me when I correct you.
>Did I mention you don't know what the heck you are talking about in
>regards to IRQ conflict dependance on OS? Or am I using too many big
>words?
Maybe you should try to learn something yourself instead of sulking when
someone corrects the incorrect information which you posted to a public
mailing list.
************************************************************
* Eric P. Anderson "Who is General *
* crusader@mo.net Failure and why *
* http://walden.mo.net/~crusader/ is he reading *
* Finger for PGP public key. drive C?" *
* Fprint:3E 3C 52 A2 C1 3F 61 B5 71 7F 10 F1 09 B4 D4 D7 *
* This is a public notice that all unsolicited and/or *
* commercial emailers will be charged an archival and *
* downloading fee of U.S. $500. Emailing me signifies *
* agreement to these terms. *
* "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Jefferson *
************************************************************
References: