Thanks for the input Jim. I went back to see what I did. In the Parallel
Port Properties box in Device Manager I set the parallel port for "no
interrupts". I was under the impression that this stopped XP from sharing
the port and when I ran only one program it would access the port and not be
hit with interrupts. Is this correct or am I up the tree again?
Tom, W7QF
-----Original Message-----
From: writelog-admin@contesting.com
[mailto:writelog-admin@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jim Reisert
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 4:44 PM
To: writelog@contesting.com
Subject: RE: [WriteLog] Operating system--followup
--- Thomas Jednacz W7QF <tjednacz@ieee.org> wrote:
> The big difference I believe with XP Pro is that in Pro you can set the
> Parallel port to act like it does in Win 98.
That's not correct, parallel port support is exactly the same (and same as
in
Win2K). Here is a web page showing *some* of the differences:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp
There used to be a much bigger chart, but I can't find it right now.
73 - Jim AD1C
=====
Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863
USA +978-251-9933, <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>, http://www.ad1c.com
PGP Fingerprint: D8E2 3D78 339F A7F1 8C13 1193 B5D1 4FB6 79D1 70DC
_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
|