[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SEUL: hardware detection
William T Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jan 1998, Rick Jones wrote:
> > Windoze 3.x was aware of. Anything beyond that will only be in the
> > registry. Don't ask what the bounderies are, I don't know. I fairly
> Hmm. The one I'm thinking of is network cards, which along with video
> boards are the things in PC's most nonstandard and most unlikely for the
> user to not have a clue about.
I know. I can't tell you for sure since I never ran it, but Windoze for
work groups was networked and should have had references to the net
adapter in the ini files so I would imagine Win 95 would be compatable
with it as well.
> > positive that monitors aren't covered in the ini files, since win
> > previous to 95 didn't give a rat's ass what monitor you used. So it's
> Neither does Win95, really, except to know what resolution it can use and
> whether it has a power-saver mode. Win31 made you figure it all out
That's what I mean.
> > PCI is not always identified. At least not by Windoze. I had to
> It is, it's just that Windows has the same problem as Linux. Sometimes
> your devices are newer than the version of the OS, so it doesn't know what
> to do about it.
That was my point. It get's all it's info from the inf files.
> > properly since they store their ROM at memorey address C000 which has
> Hm, I know on the apple // all cards had to identify themselves at $C000.
> I don't think this is the way with ISA cards, however. Otherwise why are
> they so hard to detect? :)
I imagine it's because vendors weren't very good at actually doing it.
My old TVGA card (ISA) had it's info at C000. I remember wondering why
MSD ID'd my card and Windoze 95 didn't have a clue. I looked at C000 in
MSD and there it was.
> I believe win95 defrag is a graphics application, and it won't run in text
You've never compressed your hard drive and don't remember installing.
Defrag is both GUI and text, ansi, whatever, in Windoze 95.
> All these Win95 applications is making me a little nervous. The more
> Win95 applications involved, the more complicated it is for the user to
> set things up. I know Win3.1 had a scripting tool, but I think Win95 has
> lost this ability...
I assume you mean the recorder? If so, the Win3x recorder does work in