Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!shurr
From: shurr@cbnews.att.com (larry.a.shurr)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Video wrap-around at 800x600x256
Message-ID: <1991Mar11.143957.688@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 11 Mar 91 14:39:57 GMT
References: <1991Mar8.154238.28637@cbnews.att.com>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, OH (actually an AGS consultant)
Lines: 28

In article <1991Mar8.154238.28637@cbnews.att.com> I wrote:
>[I have a strange video wrap-around problem at 800x600x256 resolution.]

The over-the-weekend consensus is that Windows or the Windows 800x600x256
driver wants 1MB of RAM, even though this is not strictly required for 
800x600x256.  

David Dwiggins (dd2x+@andrew.cmu.edu) mentions that the driver wants more 
than video one page in order to speed up the video (through some kind of 
double-buffering?).  One would think that this restriction would be 
documented, and it well may be - it's always possible I overlooked it.

James Singer (james@chimayo) and Phil Wong (sun!techbook.com!pkwong) both
told me that they had the same problem until they upgraded to 1MB of video
RAM.  Phil also mentioned that he has a Diamond SpeedStar as mine I do.

Sounds like 1MB is the answer.  I will upgrade as soon as I can and will
follow-up with a verification.  Don't hold your breath awaiting my veri-
fication, "as soon as I can" is still at least a week away :-).

My thanks to David, James, Phil and any other respondents whose messages
have not yet arrived for the information.

Larry
-- 
Larry A. Shurr (cbnmva!las@att.ATT.COM or att!cbnmva!las)
The end of the world has been delayed due to a shortage of trumpet players.
(The above reflects my opinions, not those of AGS or AT&T, but you knew that.)