No POST

[meow2222]

Hi


Just wanted to check I hadnt missed something before I bin this.
Machine powers up but doesnt POST. Monitor stays on standby, never
wakes.

K6-233 cpu, 64M RAM. Pci video, onboard sound, serial mouse.

CMOS battery was 1.8v so renewed it.
replaced ram, still no post
checked psu lines, ok
checked cables in connectors, all ok
removed the only card, video card, still no post
disconnected hdd, cdrw,
looked for cmos reset on mobo, but oddly I'm pretty sure there isnt
one.
checked cpu seated ok

The DIMM RAM socket is a horror, takes major force to get RAM to seat
in there, and looking at the design I'm surprised it ever worked. Tried
each of the 2 sockets just in case.

Its due for the bin, just wanted to check I hadnt missed something.
Thank you.


NT

 

[Gerard Bok]

The DIMM RAM socket is a horror, takes major force to get RAM to seat
in there, and looking at the design I'm surprised it ever worked. Tried
each of the 2 sockets just in case.

A ram socket should never take force.
It is designed with notches to prevent insertion of incompatible
devices. Sounds like you attempted to 'increase compatibility'.
Bad try, the computer always wins

 

[pck920]

you should have SD-ram...

if that is the case.. there should be two grooves..
don't force it.. those memory are expansive now =)

[Thundersha 278850]

Games that I like to play
<a href=http://www.gamestotal.com/>Multiplayer Online Games</a> <a
href=http://www.gamestotal.com/>Strategy Games</a><br><a
href=http://uc.gamestotal.com/>Unification Wars</a> - <a
href=http://uc.gamestotal.com/>Massive Multiplayer Online
Games</a><br><a href=http://gc.gamestotal.com/>Galactic Conquest</a> -
<a href=http://gc.gamestotal.com/>Strategy Games</a><br><a
href=http://www.stephenyong.com/runescape.htm>Runescape</a><br><a
href=http://www.stephenyong.com/kingsofchaos.htm>Kings of chaos</a><br>

 

[kony]

A ram socket should never take force.

Generally true, but in practice there were plenty of old
boards, especially the PCCHips ones of that era, that
practically took a hammer to get the memory in the slots.

It would have enough potential to flex the board onto
damaging it that I often took a pencil and slid it under the
board to keep it from flexing during the extreme insertion
force necessary.

 

[kony]

Hi


Just wanted to check I hadnt missed something before I bin this.
Machine powers up but doesnt POST. Monitor stays on standby, never
wakes.

K6-233 cpu, 64M RAM. Pci video, onboard sound, serial mouse.

CMOS battery was 1.8v so renewed it.

Did you unplug the AC and clear CMOS after that point?
If not, do it now.

replaced ram, still no post
checked psu lines, ok

I'd still try another PSU if you had one available, a PSU
can partially fail but still show acceptible voltages in
some situations.

checked cables in connectors, all ok

Disconnect all non-essential things, leaving only 1 memory
module, CPU, heatisnk/fan and video. This includes the
front panel wiring, short the two power-on pins with a
screwdriver tip to try it.

removed the only card, video card, still no post

It will never post without a video card, though if you had a
different card lying around you might try it.

You failed to mention the specifics of the system. Always
important to do, regardless of whether a brand new or old
system.

disconnected hdd, cdrw,
looked for cmos reset on mobo, but oddly I'm pretty sure there isnt
one.

With AC disconnected, pull out the battery for a few
minutes.

checked cpu seated ok

The DIMM RAM socket is a horror, takes major force to get RAM to seat
in there, and looking at the design I'm surprised it ever worked. Tried
each of the 2 sockets just in case.

Its due for the bin, just wanted to check I hadnt missed something.
Thank you.

Is it in a case or out? If out, make sure it's on a
non-conductive surface, not anti-static packaging. If newly
placed in a case, be sure there is nothing shorting out the
back of the board. Check capacitors, fans, etc., too. A
failed fan might suggest the part it cooled had failed.

 

[meow2222]

On 7 Aug 2006 05:56:42 -0700, (e-mail address removed) wrote:

A ram socket should never take force.
It is designed with notches to prevent insertion of incompatible
devices. Sounds like you attempted to 'increase compatibility'.
Bad try, the computer always wins

Heh, no its the right type, 2 notch sdram. The socket design is just
grim, mobo bends badly under the excessive install force. Looks like
another pcchips mobo, but forgot to confirm mobo type before leaving
it.

The bad news is theres a chance of more pcchips machines possibly
turning up at some point.

Thanks for the input. I expect the machines a deadun.


NT

 

[paulmd]

Hi


Just wanted to check I hadnt missed something before I bin this.
Machine powers up but doesnt POST. Monitor stays on standby, never
wakes.

K6-233 cpu, 64M RAM. Pci video, onboard sound, serial mouse.

CMOS battery was 1.8v so renewed it.
replaced ram, still no post
checked psu lines, ok
checked cables in connectors, all ok
removed the only card, video card, still no post
disconnected hdd, cdrw,
looked for cmos reset on mobo, but oddly I'm pretty sure there isnt
one.
checked cpu seated ok

The DIMM RAM socket is a horror, takes major force to get RAM to seat
in there, and looking at the design I'm surprised it ever worked. Tried
each of the 2 sockets just in case.

Its due for the bin, just wanted to check I hadnt missed something.
Thank you.


NT

Here's the thing: it's old, AND it's a problem child. Even if you DO
get this thing alive again, I wouldn't trust it. The older a machine
is, the less effort you want to put into it to make it live. On the
other hand I HAVE seen my monitor die at exactly the wrong time, too.

 

[meow2222]

(e-mail address removed) wrote:

Here's the thing: it's old, AND it's a problem child. Even if you DO
get this thing alive again, I wouldn't trust it. The older a machine
is, the less effort you want to put into it to make it live. On the
other hand I HAVE seen my monitor die at exactly the wrong time, too.

Sounds like you think I should quit working on these machines. I know
why I do it, whereas you dont.

I've done as much as I'm willing to and its now waiting for the bin.
Cheers for the feedback.


NT

 

[paulmd]

Sounds like you think I should quit working on these machines.

Not in general, Just that particular one.

 

[meow2222]

Not in general, Just that particular one.

but why that one and not the similar others?


NT

 

[kony]

but why that one and not the similar others?

Because the value of your time exceeds the value of the
parts.

That's how it goes with really old sysetms that weren't so
hot even when brand new. C'mon now, consider it's not just
about how slow the CPU was. Even in contrast to other
systems of that era there were notible drawbacks like;

PCI Video
Onboard sound (though arguably, some were better than
today's integrated sound so far as actual sound quality
goes).
Serial mouse - yuck, that system is years newer than PS2
mice, it never should have had a serial mouse.

Some old systems are more usable than others. Take a
Pentium 2 from that era, it had reasonable memory bandwidth
(for the bus speeds at least), AGP video, and larger
cachable memory support and even L2 cache on the CPU.
Further, with a $10 slotket adapter they could run a Celeron
500 which is fast enough to run Win2k or XP for *basic*
tasks and not too much nodding off while waiting on the
system.

 

[meow2222]

Because the value of your time exceeds the value of the
parts.

I havent spent much time on this one at all. Maybe an hour so far,
maybe less.

That's how it goes with really old sysetms that weren't so
hot even when brand new. C'mon now, consider it's not just
about how slow the CPU was. Even in contrast to other
systems of that era there were notible drawbacks like;

PCI Video

I cant think how that would be an issue, it does everything I need it
do just fine.

Onboard sound (though arguably, some were better than
today's integrated sound so far as actual sound quality
goes).
ditto.

Serial mouse - yuck, that system is years newer than PS2
mice, it never should have had a serial mouse.

and ditto.

FWIW serial mice and PS2 mice are the same system, just a different
connector. I know because there are one or 2 running with connector
adaptors.

I've found the ancient serial mice to be on the whole much better than
the PS2s. I guess by the time PS2 came along the price and quality had
dropped considerably. Many PS2 mice are truly carp, but the older
serials have been much better. I gather they were more premium products
in their time (I wasnt using ibm clones then).

Some old systems are more usable than others. Take a
Pentium 2 from that era, it had reasonable memory bandwidth
(for the bus speeds at least), AGP video, and larger
cachable memory support and even L2 cache on the CPU.
Further, with a $10 slotket adapter they could run a Celeron
500 which is fast enough to run Win2k or XP for *basic*
tasks and not too much nodding off while waiting on the
system.

Theres hardly any waiting on these machines, because all software is
picked for efficiency, the OS is tuned and so on. If we ran software
picked at random it would be different, but as it is theyre fine.

The only remaining question is whether 98 or 2k would be better on some
as yet undeployed 64M RAM ones. I favour 98 as it'll be running with
resources aplenty, and 2k stores huge amounts of crap and theres only
2G hdds to play with on many of them. (Last time I looked at a 2k file
system it had over 1G of crap stored).

I'm aware that you dont really know what I'm doing or why. This is all
part of a bigger project which I'm happy is worthwhile, and is now
almost finished anyway. In fact a quick look at the pile shows this was
the last machine Hurray!


NT

 

[kony]

I cant think how that would be an issue, it does everything I need it
do just fine.

Ok, but more to the point, how hard would it be to find a
system even better, for free or very very cheap, that does
everything even better?

ditto.

If the system worked, was already set up to do what you
wanted and was reliable at it, that's quite different than
the present situation.

and ditto.

FWIW serial mice and PS2 mice are the same system, just a different
connector. I know because there are one or 2 running with connector
adaptors.

The mouse itself is made to support both, but you're
overlooking something more important, that mouse tech
evolved just like everything else and the better mice for
the past few years were dual mode USB-PS2, not
USB-PS2-Serial. A pin adapter won't work with them. I'm
all for getting extra miles out of old systems when possible
but (only my preference I suppose...) I don't want to use
crude old interface devices like mouse or monitor to do so.

I've found the ancient serial mice to be on the whole much better than
the PS2s. I guess by the time PS2 came along the price and quality had
dropped considerably. Many PS2 mice are truly carp, but the older
serials have been much better. I gather they were more premium products
in their time (I wasnt using ibm clones then).

You're obviously ignoring that today's brand new mice work
on PS2, practically all of them, and even the $10 Logitechs
run circles around anything from the serial era.

Theres hardly any waiting on these machines, because all software is
picked for efficiency, the OS is tuned and so on. If we ran software
picked at random it would be different, but as it is theyre fine.

The only remaining question is whether 98 or 2k would be better on some
as yet undeployed 64M RAM ones. I favour 98 as it'll be running with
resources aplenty, and 2k stores huge amounts of crap and theres only
2G hdds to play with on many of them. (Last time I looked at a 2k file
system it had over 1G of crap stored).

A working win2k including drivers (but not "much" else yet)
can fit entirely in 512MB of disc. I've done it with some
room to spare on a 512MB CF card, then put the swapfile on a
ramdrive since windows insists on swapfile even with ample
memory reserves, and win2k can't easily disable the swapfile
(oops, pagefile) as on XP.

I'm aware that you dont really know what I'm doing or why. This is all
part of a bigger project which I'm happy is worthwhile, and is now
almost finished anyway. In fact a quick look at the pile shows this was
the last machine Hurray!

Yes, I don't know what you're doing, and I'm assuming it
can't be too hard to get ahold of a newer, more reliable
system for practically nothing. "IF" it were a matter of
reducing landfill that'd be one thing, but if you reject a
better system and IT goes into the landfill while you keep
an older slower less reliable system I can't understand that
at all.

 

[meow2222]

On 10 Aug 2006 12:07:12 -0700, (e-mail address removed) wrote:

Ok, but more to the point, how hard would it be to find a
system even better, for free or very very cheap, that does
everything even better?

It would be yet more work and time for nothing. This has been enough
work already.

If the system worked, was already set up to do what you
wanted and was reliable at it, that's quite different than
the present situation.

Indeed. But re sound, I have yet to find any problems with old
soundcards or onboard sound. Some have no sound, and thats not a
problem either.

The mouse itself is made to support both, but you're
overlooking something more important, that mouse tech
evolved just like everything else and the better mice for
the past few years were dual mode USB-PS2, not
USB-PS2-Serial. A pin adapter won't work with them.

I dont see how this is relevant to what we're doing here.

I'm
all for getting extra miles out of old systems when possible
but (only my preference I suppose...) I don't want to use
crude old interface devices like mouse or monitor to do so.

theres nothing wrong with them, there isnt a problem, hence I'm not
worried.

You're obviously ignoring that today's brand new mice work
on PS2, practically all of them, and even the $10 Logitechs
run circles around anything from the serial era.

but again I cant see the relevance to what we're doing. A $10 mouse
just isnt a useful proposition.

A working win2k including drivers (but not "much" else yet)
can fit entirely in 512MB of disc. I've done it with some
room to spare on a 512MB CF card, then put the swapfile on a
ramdrive since windows insists on swapfile even with ample
memory reserves, and win2k can't easily disable the swapfile
(oops, pagefile) as on XP.

I hadnt thought of swapfile size, 2k installatoin plus swapfile and
over half the discs gone before any app software goes on there, let
alone documents. I'm still leaning towards 98 for the 64M 2G ones. 200M
for the OS, and 64 RAM is plentiful for 98. The downside is 98 falls
over so often.

Yes, I don't know what you're doing, and I'm assuming it
can't be too hard to get ahold of a newer, more reliable
system for practically nothing.

If newer machines were available at the same cost and with the same
practical arrangements I'd be choosing them instead. I've picked the
best of what we've got. We had everything from 486 up, and W3.1 up.
Only 2 of those older machines remain in use.

"IF" it were a matter of
reducing landfill that'd be one thing, but if you reject a
better system and IT goes into the landfill while you keep
an older slower less reliable system I can't understand that
at all.

I'm not doing that. This isnt America, and we dont find P3s on street
corners. It'll be a few more years before that happens. When it does we
might use them, but we should have moved on to new machines well before
then.


NT