I had was running Client 3.2 before I upgraded to Protel 99SE with Win NT.
The only thing I remember is to right click on the Icon for Protel and click run under 
a separate memory space. As long as I had run under a separate memory space checked 
Protel ran without problems. I am not saying it never crashed but mostly ran well.

Jeff Adolphs
Westerville, Ohio



-----Original Message-----
From: Linh Pham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 2:21 PM
To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Client 3.2 Under Win2K?


Hi Rob,

   Yes, I try and have same problem. So I am using Window XP.

lynh



-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Ritchey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 9:31 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: [PEDA] Client 3.2 Under Win2K?


I know this is ancient history to most but I do need this occasionally.
Does anyone know a trick to make Client 3.2 run on Win2K reliably.  It fails
2 out of 3 times to initialize.  I cannot kill it, it takes down WOW and I
have
to re-boot.  A logout and log back in does not work.  I have the service
pack
installed.  Anything in the INIT file?
Thanks,

-Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Ritchey
Quest Engineering & Development
1328 East Cottonwood Lane
Phoenix, AZ  85048-4765
Tel: (480) 460-2652
FAX: (480) 460-2653
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: www.QuestEngDev.com/
WWW: www.Smart-Fly.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------









* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to