Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!uwvax!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!ihlpf!stuart
From: stuart@ihlpf.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: SIMM RAM for the MacII
Message-ID: <2085@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Date: Tue, 1-Sep-87 13:27:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihlpf.2085
Posted: Tue Sep  1 13:27:17 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Sep-87 00:49:18 EDT
References: <20389@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: The Sage Hovel
Lines: 28
Summary: reliability questions

In article <20389@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, korn@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) writes:
[a nice intro about SIMM RAM speeds needed for Mac II]
> just upgraded our Mac+ to 2 Meg via the DOVE 2H board, and I decided to
> put the 256K SIMMs into my MacII.  Trouble was, these SIMMS were the 
> older 150ns SIMMs.  But, lo and behold, THEY WORKED.  I haven't had a 
> chance to benchmark 'em, but as far as I can tell, they're causing no
> problems.
> 
> So, it seems that 150ns DRAMs are perfectly kosher for a MacII.  When
> I get a chance, I'll run some timing benchmarks, and re-post those
> findings.
> 

Yes, they may work, but this is the same argument as with single-side
floppies being used as double-sided ones.  They may work, but there is
a question of reliability.  It would be REALLY nasty if you were doing
your taxes in EXCEL and some memory glitch  changed your results and sent
you into IRS-AUDIT land.

So its not just *DO* they work, but HOW RELIABLY.  How does one test that?

Stu

-- 
Stuart Ericson		USnail:		AT&T Bell Laboratories
USENET: ..!ihnp4!ihlpf!stuart		IH 6M-313
voice: (312) 979-4152			Naperville-Wheaton Rd.
"A fool knows everything and nothing"	Naperville,  Il 60566