Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 12:29:31 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
OP (Robert Baer) has repeated stated that he needs to run legacy software
that talks directly to the hardware port.
Doesn't GIVEIO work ?
It essentially maps the hardware I/O pages to the user mode virtual
address space memory map ?
hamilton wrote:
On 2/3/2014 10:01 AM, Robert Baer wrote:
The app is a label printer software that is "hardwired" to the serial
port.
If one takes a blank hard drive and installs Win2000, and then
installs the label printer software, it works.
NOTE: no device manager fiddling, no device needed at COM1 during
boot-up; this is raw stuff.
I know wasting money is not what we want to do very often.
But it seems that going thru all these machinations is costing you more
then the cost of a new USB label printer.
Is there a current label printer that will do what this precious printer
will do ?
Just wanted to know.
hamilton
Have not found one; this one uses label tapes good to 200C.
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 08:06:36 +0200, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 12:29:31 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
OP (Robert Baer) has repeated stated that he needs to run legacy software
that talks directly to the hardware port.
Doesn't GIVEIO work ?
It essentially maps the hardware I/O pages to the user mode virtual
address space memory map ?
Hadn't heard of it before. That is why i was suggesting a whole VM. This
may let OP use his antique software on XP (natural or virtual).
?-)
The software runs in Win98SE, Win2K, WinXP and Win7 (prolly runs inOn Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:01:53 -0800, Robert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com
wrote:
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 01:31:29 -0800, mike<ham789@netzero.net> wrote:
On 1/29/2014 7:22 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Any suggestions along this line?
It should support Windows, ideally Win2K, but Win7 (or XP SP2) if
push comes to shove.
Unfortunately, Win98SE is no longer an option unless a legal version
is available cheap via e-bay (i tossed all my older disks).
Might be helpful to know why you need the rs-232 port.
All usb/rs-232 dongles are not created equal. I can't make any
recommendations, because all mine are noname dongles.
But they do behave differently if you're bit-banging the control lines.
And there are utilities to open the ports on XP and newer to make
old SW run.
If you need accurate timing bit-banging the port, you may be outa luck.
It would help a lot, if the actual requirements would be known.
Unless some real time kernel is used that runs Windows/Linux as the
lowest priority NULL task, bit banging is out of question for any real
data rates above 300 bit/s.
However, if you need accurate data direction control in half duplex
RS-485, at least some Ethernet/serial converters work quite well, but
of course, even those do not exactly handle the Modbus 1.5/3.5
character time issues, but in most cases, it is not even required in
practice.
The app is a label printer software that is "hardwired" to the serial
port.
If one takes a blank hard drive and installs Win2000, and then
installs the label printer software, it works.
NOTE: no device manager fiddling, no device needed at COM1 during
boot-up; this is raw stuff.
I realize that you do not have spare cash to toss around. For me, it
would be time to buy a new label printer. My current one runs nicely in
XP and Win7. Handles lots of label sizes as well.
?-)
josephkk wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:01:53 -0800, Robert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com
wrote:
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 01:31:29 -0800, mike<ham789@netzero.net> wrote:
On 1/29/2014 7:22 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Any suggestions along this line?
It should support Windows, ideally Win2K, but Win7 (or XP
SP2) if
push comes to shove.
Unfortunately, Win98SE is no longer an option unless a legal
version
is available cheap via e-bay (i tossed all my older disks).
Might be helpful to know why you need the rs-232 port.
All usb/rs-232 dongles are not created equal. I can't make any
recommendations, because all mine are noname dongles.
But they do behave differently if you're bit-banging the control
lines.
And there are utilities to open the ports on XP and newer to make
old SW run.
If you need accurate timing bit-banging the port, you may be outa
luck.
It would help a lot, if the actual requirements would be known.
Unless some real time kernel is used that runs Windows/Linux as the
lowest priority NULL task, bit banging is out of question for any real
data rates above 300 bit/s.
However, if you need accurate data direction control in half duplex
RS-485, at least some Ethernet/serial converters work quite well, but
of course, even those do not exactly handle the Modbus 1.5/3.5
character time issues, but in most cases, it is not even required in
practice.
The app is a label printer software that is "hardwired" to the serial
port.
If one takes a blank hard drive and installs Win2000, and then
installs the label printer software, it works.
NOTE: no device manager fiddling, no device needed at COM1 during
boot-up; this is raw stuff.
I realize that you do not have spare cash to toss around. For me, it
would be time to buy a new label printer. My current one runs nicely in
XP and Win7. Handles lots of label sizes as well.
?-)
The software runs in Win98SE, Win2K, WinXP and Win7 (prolly runs in
Win95 and in Win3.11) and the printer handles a number of label sizes.
The minor part is that the computer must have a physical COM1 (or
COM2) port, and i was trying ideas to solve that by use of a cheap,
light (inexpensive to ship) computer.
On 04/02/2014 18:55, Robert Baer wrote:
josephkk wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:01:53 -0800, Robert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com
wrote:
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 01:31:29 -0800, mike<ham789@netzero.net> wrote:
On 1/29/2014 7:22 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Any suggestions along this line?
It should support Windows, ideally Win2K, but Win7 (or XP
SP2) if
push comes to shove.
Unfortunately, Win98SE is no longer an option unless a legal
version
is available cheap via e-bay (i tossed all my older disks).
Might be helpful to know why you need the rs-232 port.
All usb/rs-232 dongles are not created equal. I can't make any
recommendations, because all mine are noname dongles.
But they do behave differently if you're bit-banging the control
lines.
And there are utilities to open the ports on XP and newer to make
old SW run.
If you need accurate timing bit-banging the port, you may be outa
luck.
It would help a lot, if the actual requirements would be known.
Unless some real time kernel is used that runs Windows/Linux as the
lowest priority NULL task, bit banging is out of question for any real
data rates above 300 bit/s.
However, if you need accurate data direction control in half duplex
RS-485, at least some Ethernet/serial converters work quite well, but
of course, even those do not exactly handle the Modbus 1.5/3.5
character time issues, but in most cases, it is not even required in
practice.
The app is a label printer software that is "hardwired" to the
serial
port.
If one takes a blank hard drive and installs Win2000, and then
installs the label printer software, it works.
NOTE: no device manager fiddling, no device needed at COM1 during
boot-up; this is raw stuff.
I realize that you do not have spare cash to toss around. For me, it
would be time to buy a new label printer. My current one runs nicely in
XP and Win7. Handles lots of label sizes as well.
?-)
The software runs in Win98SE, Win2K, WinXP and Win7 (prolly runs in
Win95 and in Win3.11) and the printer handles a number of label sizes.
The minor part is that the computer must have a physical COM1 (or
COM2) port, and i was trying ideas to solve that by use of a cheap,
light (inexpensive to ship) computer.
Why? If it runs on anything WinXP or later then it must handle some
level of abstraction of the prehistoric IBM XT standard addresses and
IRQs. Either that or you have to install some crude IOPL level driver to
permit direct peeky poke access to protected hardware registers.
My recollection (which may be faulty it is so long ago) is that Win98SE
was the last version with archaic direct RS232 peeky pokey support.
Provided the device COM1 exists then it should be happy (but with
potentially hardwired IRQ legacy software this can never be guaranteed).
On 4.2.14 06:09, josephkk wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 08:06:36 +0200, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 12:29:31 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
OP (Robert Baer) has repeated stated that he needs to run legacy software
that talks directly to the hardware port.
Doesn't GIVEIO work ?
It essentially maps the hardware I/O pages to the user mode virtual
address space memory map ?
Hadn't heard of it before. That is why i was suggesting a whole VM. This
may let OP use his antique software on XP (natural or virtual).
?-)
The OP's description of the program behavior suggests that it
is already directly accessing the serial chip ports, probably
with help from GIVEIO.
I think your real problem is that you have something else assigned to a
comport on a machine and your software isn't seeing it..
* NOPE; i SAID it works - and on COM1.
Also, the comport assignment number the OS gives your port, after it
has seen other devices like modems, faxes etc, maybe to high..
* i SAID *no* modem(s), which implies NO fax; in fact i said NOTHING
connected to the com port(s) in the symple-minded initial-from-scratch
case - and the printer worked on COM1.
Lots of older software only understood up to COM4 some only up to
COM2..
You can re'assign these numbers..
Maybe in the OS; no way of telling about repercussions regarding the
printer.
I think your real problem is that you have something else assigned to a
comport on a machine and your software isn't seeing it..
* NOPE; i SAID it works - and on COM1.
It should be fine on a usb dongle then.
If it needed an 8250 on port 0x03F8 and IRQ3 that'd be a problem.
COM1 is just a name and can be assigned to anything serial-port like.
On 4 Feb 2014 06:01:56 GMT, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
I think your real problem is that you have something else assigned to a
comport on a machine and your software isn't seeing it..
* NOPE; i SAID it works - and on COM1.
It should be fine on a usb dongle then.
If it needed an 8250 on port 0x03F8 and IRQ3 that'd be a problem.
Congratulations, you finally get it. It is really an old DOS program
tarted up with windows 3 compatibility.
COM1 is just a name and can be assigned to anything serial-port like.
My client has an old (age, vintage, etc unknown) computer that doesOn 04/02/2014 18:55, Robert Baer wrote:
josephkk wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:01:53 -0800, Robert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com
wrote:
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 01:31:29 -0800, mike<ham789@netzero.net> wrote:
On 1/29/2014 7:22 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
Any suggestions along this line?
It should support Windows, ideally Win2K, but Win7 (or XP
SP2) if
push comes to shove.
Unfortunately, Win98SE is no longer an option unless a legal
version
is available cheap via e-bay (i tossed all my older disks).
Might be helpful to know why you need the rs-232 port.
All usb/rs-232 dongles are not created equal. I can't make any
recommendations, because all mine are noname dongles.
But they do behave differently if you're bit-banging the control
lines.
And there are utilities to open the ports on XP and newer to make
old SW run.
If you need accurate timing bit-banging the port, you may be outa
luck.
It would help a lot, if the actual requirements would be known.
Unless some real time kernel is used that runs Windows/Linux as the
lowest priority NULL task, bit banging is out of question for any real
data rates above 300 bit/s.
However, if you need accurate data direction control in half duplex
RS-485, at least some Ethernet/serial converters work quite well, but
of course, even those do not exactly handle the Modbus 1.5/3.5
character time issues, but in most cases, it is not even required in
practice.
The app is a label printer software that is "hardwired" to the serial
port.
If one takes a blank hard drive and installs Win2000, and then
installs the label printer software, it works.
NOTE: no device manager fiddling, no device needed at COM1 during
boot-up; this is raw stuff.
I realize that you do not have spare cash to toss around. For me, it
would be time to buy a new label printer. My current one runs nicely in
XP and Win7. Handles lots of label sizes as well.
?-)
The software runs in Win98SE, Win2K, WinXP and Win7 (prolly runs in
Win95 and in Win3.11) and the printer handles a number of label sizes.
The minor part is that the computer must have a physical COM1 (or
COM2) port, and i was trying ideas to solve that by use of a cheap,
light (inexpensive to ship) computer.
Why? If it runs on anything WinXP or later then it must handle some
level of abstraction of the prehistoric IBM XT standard addresses and
IRQs. Either that or you have to install some crude IOPL level driver to
permit direct peeky poke access to protected hardware registers.
My recollection (which may be faulty it is so long ago) is that Win98SE
was the last version with archaic direct RS232 peeky pokey support.
Provided the device COM1 exists then it should be happy (but with
potentially hardwired IRQ legacy software this can never be guaranteed).
* Technically, the problem is that the software limits one to a physicalOn 2/4/2014 8:28 PM, josephkk wrote:
On 4 Feb 2014 06:01:56 GMT, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
I think your real problem is that you have something else assigned
to a
comport on a machine and your software isn't seeing it..
* NOPE; i SAID it works - and on COM1.
It should be fine on a usb dongle then.
If it needed an 8250 on port 0x03F8 and IRQ3 that'd be a problem.
Congratulations, you finally get it. It is really an old DOS program
tarted up with windows 3 compatibility.
COM1 is just a name and can be assigned to anything serial-port like.
You said that you have looked for a replacement, but found none with the
specifications of the tape.
So, its not really the machine itself. True ??
The label printer is the Casio KL-8100 and uses their FA-930CPlease post the make and model and maybe someone here would have some
suggestions.
Unless the company is long gone and you have a huge stash of tape, more
eyes would not hurt.
hamilton
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:55:28 -0800, Robert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com
wrote:
I think your real problem is that you have something else assigned to a
comport on a machine and your software isn't seeing it..
* NOPE; i SAID it works - and on COM1.
Also, the comport assignment number the OS gives your port, after it
has seen other devices like modems, faxes etc, maybe to high..
* i SAID *no* modem(s), which implies NO fax; in fact i said NOTHING
connected to the com port(s) in the symple-minded initial-from-scratch
case - and the printer worked on COM1.
Lots of older software only understood up to COM4 some only up to
COM2..
You can re'assign these numbers..
Maybe in the OS; no way of telling about repercussions regarding the
printer.
If you get the same serial bit stream the printer can't tell.
?-)
BUT the software only allows COM1 or COM2.
josephkk wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:55:28 -0800, Robert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com
wrote:
I think your real problem is that you have something else assigned to a
comport on a machine and your software isn't seeing it..
* NOPE; i SAID it works - and on COM1.
Also, the comport assignment number the OS gives your port, after it
has seen other devices like modems, faxes etc, maybe to high..
* i SAID *no* modem(s), which implies NO fax; in fact i said NOTHING
connected to the com port(s) in the symple-minded initial-from-scratch
case - and the printer worked on COM1.
Lots of older software only understood up to COM4 some only up to
COM2..
You can re'assign these numbers..
Maybe in the OS; no way of telling about repercussions regarding the
printer.
If you get the same serial bit stream the printer can't tell.
?-)
BUT the software only allows COM1 or COM2.
Martin Brown wrote:
On 04/02/2014 18:55, Robert Baer wrote:
josephkk wrote:
The software runs in Win98SE, Win2K, WinXP and Win7 (prolly runs in
Win95 and in Win3.11) and the printer handles a number of label sizes.
The minor part is that the computer must have a physical COM1 (or
COM2) port, and i was trying ideas to solve that by use of a cheap,
light (inexpensive to ship) computer.
Why? If it runs on anything WinXP or later then it must handle some
level of abstraction of the prehistoric IBM XT standard addresses and
IRQs. Either that or you have to install some crude IOPL level driver to
permit direct peeky poke access to protected hardware registers.
My recollection (which may be faulty it is so long ago) is that Win98SE
was the last version with archaic direct RS232 peeky pokey support.
Provided the device COM1 exists then it should be happy (but with
potentially hardwired IRQ legacy software this can never be guaranteed).
My client has an old (age, vintage, etc unknown) computer that does
not have RS-232 ports and USB-to-RS232 adapters do not work with the
software.
I bought a RS-232 PCI board for him to install, but that did not
happen; seems he does not know how to do that and knows nobody nearby
that could help.
Recently i found out he has a laptop which would materially reduce
cost of shipping both ways.
Told him to look for a RS232 port and to see if it could read a
home-made CD or DVD (older laptop CD drives were notorious failures in
that aspect).
If it passes those tests, we are good to go.
On 2/4/2014 4:02 PM, Martin Brown wrote:
On 04/02/2014 18:55, Robert Baer wrote:
The software runs in Win98SE, Win2K, WinXP and Win7 (prolly runs in
Win95 and in Win3.11) and the printer handles a number of label sizes.
The minor part is that the computer must have a physical COM1 (or
COM2) port, and i was trying ideas to solve that by use of a cheap,
light (inexpensive to ship) computer.
Why? If it runs on anything WinXP or later then it must handle some
level of abstraction of the prehistoric IBM XT standard addresses and
IRQs. Either that or you have to install some crude IOPL level driver to
permit direct peeky poke access to protected hardware registers.
My recollection (which may be faulty it is so long ago) is that Win98SE
was the last version with archaic direct RS232 peeky pokey support.
Provided the device COM1 exists then it should be happy (but with
potentially hardwired IRQ legacy software this can never be guaranteed).
IOPL was pretty useful in its day. I controlled a lot of instruments
that way, 15 or 20 years ago.
On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 11:24:30 +0200, Tauno Voipio
tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> wrote:
On 4.2.14 06:09, josephkk wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 08:06:36 +0200, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 12:29:31 -0800, josephkk
joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
OP (Robert Baer) has repeated stated that he needs to run legacy software
that talks directly to the hardware port.
Doesn't GIVEIO work ?
It essentially maps the hardware I/O pages to the user mode virtual
address space memory map ?
Hadn't heard of it before. That is why i was suggesting a whole VM. This
may let OP use his antique software on XP (natural or virtual).
?-)
The OP's description of the program behavior suggests that it
is already directly accessing the serial chip ports, probably
with help from GIVEIO.
There was direct access from Win3.0 through Win98 and GIVEIO would not
have been needed. Not sure about Win98 though.
?-)
If _I_ had the computer, that RS-232 PCI daughter board would haveRobert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com> writes:
josephkk wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:55:28 -0800, Robert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com
wrote:
I think your real problem is that you have something else assigned to a
comport on a machine and your software isn't seeing it..
* NOPE; i SAID it works - and on COM1.
Also, the comport assignment number the OS gives your port, after it
has seen other devices like modems, faxes etc, maybe to high..
* i SAID *no* modem(s), which implies NO fax; in fact i said NOTHING
connected to the com port(s) in the symple-minded initial-from-scratch
case - and the printer worked on COM1.
Lots of older software only understood up to COM4 some only up to
COM2..
You can re'assign these numbers..
Maybe in the OS; no way of telling about repercussions regarding the
printer.
If you get the same serial bit stream the printer can't tell.
?-)
BUT the software only allows COM1 or COM2.
IME USB to serial adaptors often install at some high port number like
e.g. COM13, depending on what else is on the machine and how many tries
you had at installing them etc. (I had COM259 once thanks to a demented
bluetooth stack that created ~256 COM ports).
But you should be able to go into device manager and force the COM port
number to e.g. COM1 or COM2. Computer/properties/device
manager/ports. Poke about in UART settings I think.
It will object saying "may be in use" but it usually works. Unless it
really is in use, like by a built-in modem for example.
josephkk wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:55:28 -0800, Robert
Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:
I think your real problem is that you have something else
assigned to a comport on a machine and your software isn't seeing
it..
* NOPE; i SAID it works - and on COM1.
Also, the comport assignment number the OS gives your port,
after it has seen other devices like modems, faxes etc, maybe to
high..
* i SAID *no* modem(s), which implies NO fax; in fact i said
NOTHING connected to the com port(s) in the symple-minded
initial-from-scratch case - and the printer worked on COM1.
Lots of older software only understood up to COM4 some only up
to COM2..
You can re'assign these numbers..
Maybe in the OS; no way of telling about repercussions regarding
the printer.
If you get the same serial bit stream the printer can't tell.
?-)
BUT the software only allows COM1 or COM2.
No, YOU seem to not know how to think.On 05/02/2014 04:00, Robert Baer wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
On 04/02/2014 18:55, Robert Baer wrote:
josephkk wrote:
The software runs in Win98SE, Win2K, WinXP and Win7 (prolly runs in
Win95 and in Win3.11) and the printer handles a number of label sizes.
The minor part is that the computer must have a physical COM1 (or
COM2) port, and i was trying ideas to solve that by use of a cheap,
light (inexpensive to ship) computer.
Why? If it runs on anything WinXP or later then it must handle some
level of abstraction of the prehistoric IBM XT standard addresses and
IRQs. Either that or you have to install some crude IOPL level driver to
permit direct peeky poke access to protected hardware registers.
My recollection (which may be faulty it is so long ago) is that Win98SE
was the last version with archaic direct RS232 peeky pokey support.
Provided the device COM1 exists then it should be happy (but with
potentially hardwired IRQ legacy software this can never be guaranteed).
My client has an old (age, vintage, etc unknown) computer that does
not have RS-232 ports and USB-to-RS232 adapters do not work with the
software.
I bought a RS-232 PCI board for him to install, but that did not
happen; seems he does not know how to do that and knows nobody nearby
that could help.
Do you specialise in having educationally subnormal clients?
Provided he can use a screwdriver it is a five minute job!
Any teenage gamer will know how to swap a graphics card out of a PC or
fit a new PCI card into one (provided there is a free slot).
Recently i found out he has a laptop which would materially reduce
cost of shipping both ways.
Told him to look for a RS232 port and to see if it could read a
home-made CD or DVD (older laptop CD drives were notorious failures in
that aspect).
If it passes those tests, we are good to go.
Again you are making no sense at all. Perhaps you know what you mean.