SPONSORED LINKS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: TP 380 quirk with RAM



My sister received her 380D yesterday from CDW (150 MMX, 12.1 TFT) and
brought it by for me to install the PC Card modem and ethernet cards. I
noticed that Win95 only reported 14MB installed after the Winstone 97
benchmark refused to load. IBM tech support verified that the System
Soft Cardbus drivers take up the additional 2MB of memory. Since the PC
Cards my sister was using were not Cardbus, I just 'remmed out' the
drivers in config.sys and that solved the problem. Everything still
works fine without them. Seems kind of odd that they would use such a
system that would hog that much memory for PC Card drivers (least I
forget my 760ED and its Mwave system).

It is just annoying that IBM makes such nice laptops but will put some
kind of  'non-standard' devices in them that takes away from their full
capabilities.

Just venting some more frustration...

Eric Giles

Jeffrey Schwartz wrote:

> I'm not sure why it reports 4meg less. It should report 2 meg less if
> you
> ahve the cardsoft pc card drivers loaded. They use a memory manager
> that
> takes 2meg or ram and make it unasable.
>
> Hope this helps
>
> At 11:30 AM 6/23/97 -0500, Nick.Rushizky@mail.mei.com wrote:
> >Let me reintroduce myself to the list.. and then I'll start my whine
> o' the
> >day. I support about 250 sales guys and their laptops, and I'm now
> trying to
> >standardize on the new 380 (after a brief and disastrous flirtation
> with
> >Toshiba).
> >
> >So far, so good.. it's got some things that I like better than the
> older
> 760 E
> >that I had. One thing is making people call and ask questions..
> >
> >The ones I have (380 D's) come with 16 M RAM onboard. I bump it to 32
> with a
> >Kingston 16 M DIMM, since RAM is still fairly cheap. However, in this
>
> >configuration, they all read as having just 28 M of RAM! Not the 32
> that my
> >math comes up to.
> >
> >Any ideas? I know these things are new to us all, but I'd like to see
> if
> >there's a logical or at least consistent pattern to this. Thanks!
> >