home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!lib!oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu!jmaynard
- From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Subject: Re: Mix of 3-chip and 9-chip simms with OS/2
- Message-ID: <8168@lib.tmc.edu>
- Date: 17 Dec 1992 11:19:34 GMT
- References: <BzDMF3.4F9@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <8163@lib.tmc.edu> <BzE1Kz.A8F@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
- Sender: usenet@lib.tmc.edu
- Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston
- Lines: 22
- Nntp-Posting-Host: oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu
-
- In article <BzE1Kz.A8F@news.cso.uiuc.edu> nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:
- >Well, if you first say that the RAM is fine even for heavy duty diagnostics,
- >but not for OS/2, then say the problem is with RAM, there is ome kind of
- >contradiction. It is not like most RAM out there is "mortal" RAM, and there
- >is some very privileged, select few RAM chips that are the ultimate in RAM
- >chips. All RAM that is in perfect condition are pretty much the same, and getting
- >RAM that happens to "work" with OS/2 is pure luck.
-
- No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that it's been known to happen that
- the RAM had defects that only OS/2 had uncovered; the diagnostic programs are
- not as good a diagnostic as simply running OS/2. I don't know why OS/2 is such
- a stress test, but it's generally agreed that OS/2 is a better diagnostic for
- memory than diagnostic programs.
-
- If replacing RAM would make software errors go away, with no changes to the
- software, then there can be no other conclusion but that the RAM was bad. The
- converse is not true simply because all software is different and does not
- access memory in the same way.
- --
- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
- jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu | adequately be explained by stupidity.
- "Brought to you by the letters O, S, and by the number 2." -- Mike Levis
-