1. RE: Any Ideas what might be wrong here?
- Posted by Bernie Ryan <xotron at bluefrognet.net> Sep 04, 2003
- 362 views
Al: XP is based on NT OS. Older windows OS's were built on Top of DOS. XP maybe over writing 0x400 memory area or make that area unaccessable due to security .If you want to uses the com ports you will probably need to go throught calls to the OS. Bernie
2. RE: Any Ideas what might be wrong here?
- Posted by dm31 at uow.edu.au Sep 05, 2003
- 331 views
>Bernie Ryan wrote: >> >> Al: >> XP is based on NT OS. Older windows OS's were built on Top of DOS. >> XP maybe over writing 0x400 memory area or make that area unaccessable >> due to security .If you want to uses the com ports you will probably >> need to go throught calls to the OS. >> Bernie > >Thanks Bernie. >It appears to work in .ex format though... >Any ideas? > >Take care for now, >Al I think that by using ex(run by windows in its own little dos emulation memory section) windows lets the program believe that it is accessing those memory address, but shunts it though the windows system. When you use exw, Windows runs the program normally, and hence doesn't try tricking it by pretending it is a dos system. ... if that makes any sense to you
3. RE: Any Ideas what might be wrong here?
- Posted by Bernie Ryan <xotron at bluefrognet.net> Sep 05, 2003
- 359 views
AL: I don't run XP. If you are running a DOS program security is probably not in effect. Try making a simple exw windows program that JUST PEEKS at the 0x400 address and see if it fails, that will tell you if it is because of the XP OS in the windows mode. Bernie