Zbigniew B. wrote:
I want to replace a DOS installation on quite old computer - it is
386SX25 - which I'm keeping around just because it's s.c. booksize
PC. It has no ACPI, not even APM. I understand, that the FDAPM is
most recommended method, but - from the other side - using this very
old
On Sunday 13 of March 2011 at 10:20:51, Robert Riebisch wrote:
It's very unlikely that a 386SX will overheat ever. No need to play
around with IDLEHALT or FDAPM.
Maybe. But it's still nice to lower the temperature of the chip, to make it
last longer, and not warm up components that are around
Hi!
Yes! The good news is that newer FreeDOS kernels even have a simple
version built into the kernel itself. [..]
Good news! Well, I should have googling for FreeDOS idle CPU,
instead of DOS idle CPU. ;)
:-)
However, the normal way to let the CPU idle while DOS is idle is to
load a
2011/3/13, Mateusz Viste:
Maybe. But it's still nice to lower the temperature of the chip, to make it
last longer, and not warm up components that are around it. Plus, it's
always
a little more electricity saved. Running FDAPM costs nothing, and provides
cool advantages. There's no reason to
I read, that the source of CPU (over)heating problems under original
MS/PC-DOS was the fact, that its waiting for key-loop (or however it
is called) didn't set CPU idle, when user (or application) was idle.
For example: when the computer has been left with the cursor blinking
in the command line.
Hi!
On 12.03.2011 21:44, Zbigniew B. wrote:
I read, that the source of CPU (over)heating problems under original
MS/PC-DOS was the fact, that its waiting for key-loop (or however it
is called) didn't set CPU idle, when user (or application) was idle.
You need a driver for that, it is not
2011/3/12, Eric Auer:
I'm wondering, whether this misfeature has been fixed in FreeDOS?
Yes! The good news is that newer FreeDOS kernels even have a simple
version built into the kernel itself. [..]
Good news! Well, I should have googling for FreeDOS idle CPU,
instead of DOS idle CPU. ;)