Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!fed!arccs2!m1phm02
From: m1phm02@fed.frb.gov (Patrick H. McAllister)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: 386MAX and Borland C++ 2.0 (really re: bcx problems)
Message-ID: <M1PHM02.91Mar18103541@mfsss1.fed.frb.gov>
Date: 18 Mar 91 15:35:41 GMT
References: <1545@tekig7.MAP.TEK.COM> <559@shograf.COM>
	<M1PHM02.91Mar15112950@mfsss1.fed.frb.gov> <19706@brahms.udel.edu>
Sender: news@fed.FRB.GOV
Organization: Federal Reserve Board
Lines: 20
In-reply-to: danderer@brahms.udel.edu's message of 16 Mar 91 15:52:14 GMT

In article <19706@brahms.udel.edu> danderer@brahms.udel.edu (Dave Anderer) writes:

   [quotes me re: problems with bcx . . .]

   I'm real familiar with this, in a very different hardware environment:
   a 'real' IBM AT, 2.6 Mb RAM, Himem.  I get the same behavior with
   and without windows.

   Borland Tech Support had no ideas.  My experience is it MIGHT depend
   on how much extended memory I allocate to TKERNEL.  It MIGHT be
   the case that giving TKERNEL more memory makes me hang less often.

After a lot of playing around with config.sys, I managed to isolate the 
problem to the Microsoft mouse driver. I called Borland tech support, and
the person there said, "Yes, we know we have problems with the Microsoft
mouse; we suggest that you buy another one. We like Logitech." I plan to
give them back their program, instead. Anyone have any other C compilers
that they like for writing Windows programs?

Pat