use ibm model 9518 with vga card?
Josh Rusko
+--------+-----------+----------+--------+------+--------+--------+-----------+
|PS | Type |Screen | Dot |Video |Line |Frame |Resolution |
|Display | | Size | Pitch |Bandw |Rate (H)|Rate (V)| |
| | | (in.) | (mm) |(MHz) |(KHz) |(Hz) | |
+--------+-----------+----------+--------+------+--------+--------+-----------+
|9518 ** |Colour VGA | 14 | 0.28 | 35.5 | 39.4 | 88 NI | 720 x 400 |
| | | | | 31.5 | 39.4 | 75 NI | 640 x 480 |
| | | | | | | | MFI 2 |
+--------+-----------+----------+--------+------+--------+--------+-----------+
oops...it says right there..."Colour VGA". I guess just 640x480 resolution (not gonna use 720x400...). Anyone know what color depths this monitor supports? probably not 16 bit because it's pretty old but at least 256-color?
Peterwendt
Hi Josh !
Sorry to destroy your hopes, but the 9518 is a 640 x 480 capable *XGA-2 only*
monitor. See the sync rate of 88Hz in text- and of 75Hz in graphics mode is
typical for XGA-2 monitors. This monitor is not capable to run with other
resolutions / sync rates other than shown in your list. Can only be used on IBM
PS/2 95xx-machines or those 85xx models equipped with XGA-2 videocard.
The 720 x 400 refers to the number of pixels used while displaying 80 x 25
characters in a 9 by 16 pattern. This is the screen-resolution in the
alphanumeric Textmode only - cannot be used for graphics, which are the
APA-modes (APA = All Points Adressable).
Try selling it, if it is in good shape and has no visible burn in spots on the
screen.
Very friendly greetings from Peter in Germany
http://members.aol.com/mcapage0/mcaindex.htm
Jim Shorney
> Sorry to destroy your hopes, but the 9518 is a 640 x 480 capable *XGA-2 only*
> monitor.
Interestingly enough, I have successfully used the 9818 on certian
S3-based VGA cards. There is a trick to it, though, and it's not
recommended for the faint at heart.
--
Jim Shorney
jsh...@binary.net
nu...@amsat.org
NU0C
Lincoln, NE, USA
EN10KA
Peterwendt
Hi Jim !
>Interestingly enough, I have successfully used the 9818 on certian
>S3-based VGA cards. There is a trick to it, though, and it's not
>recommended for the faint at heart.
It will surely work with cards that offer free programmable features for all
modes, text and graphic as well and allow to use these as startup defaults. But
"normal" VGA and SVGA cards cannot and the monitor runs out of sync all the
time, which is frustrating and -finally- damaged the monitor.
I know that you can do almost everything with the appropriate hardware ... you
can as well build a flying pig if you use a strong enough motor.....
Another example -or a different story- in this respect is the S3-928 used in
the "Lacuna" 76 and 77: they have an IBM-modified BIOS, which uses XGA-2
defaults in case a XGA-2 monitor is detected. So the 951x-line of monitors will
run with that SVGA computer as well.
Jim Shorney
> Another example -or a different story- in this respect is the S3-928 used in
> the "Lacuna" 76 and 77: they have an IBM-modified BIOS, which uses XGA-2
> defaults in case a XGA-2 monitor is detected. So the 951x-line of monitors will
> run with that SVGA computer as well.
>
I learned all about Lacuna's when I picked up a couple at a surplus
auction. I found out they don't work real well with an M-Motion/A. Of
course, there doesn't seem to be much that does, and I'm not going to
swap my 9517 for an 8514 just so I can use the M-Motion. When I got my
95, it became the "ham radio apps" machine and the Lacuna got relegated
to the workbench for testing monitors. The other Lacuna I will probably
eventually sell, but I really hate to turn lose of it because they are
such cool little machines.
Speaking of 95's, I'm thinking that I should just borrow the digital
camera from work and snap a couple of pics of that side fan assembly.
If they turn out all right, I'll send them to you for inclusion on your
site.
Peterwendt
Hi Jim !
>Speaking of 95's, I'm thinking that I should just borrow the digital
>camera from work and snap a couple of pics of that side fan assembly.
>If they turn out all right, I'll send them to you for inclusion on your
>site.
:-) Give it a try.
Most likely my page area will lack the room for more pictures - but Louis has
focussed on the 95 - and has a good page about it.
Guess he will gladly take them.
(You know: the members of the MCA Mafia have already divided the "areas" a
bit...and I am focussed on ADFs and "hardcore hardware reworks")
Jim Shorney
>
> Most likely my page area will lack the room for more pictures - but Louis has
> focussed on the 95 - and has a good page about it.
> Guess he will gladly take them.
I'll keep that in mind. I've seen his pages, and got a good chuckle out
of the title.
On another subject, would you have any idea why a Boca parallel port
card won't work properly in a server 720? I tested it in my 95, and it
passed wrap tests under DOS, but my friend can't print to it from OS/2
in his 720. He's net admin & hardware support, so he knows what he's
doing, but it's got both of us baffled. My acquisition of his ATI
Graphics Ultra Pro hinges on getting a working 2nd printer port in his
machine. :)
Bob Eager
> On another subject, would you have any idea why a Boca parallel port
> card won't work properly in a server 720? I tested it in my 95, and it
> passed wrap tests under DOS, but my friend can't print to it from OS/2
> in his 720.
Which driver is he using? If it's PRINT02.SYS, has he got the /IRQ
switch on? If so, it would need to be at IRQ 5 as far as I recall.
Perhaps there is a clash there (shouldn't be on an MCA machine but it
does depend on a few things).
If he's using the PAR1284 driver, then the printers are constrained to
be on 7 (LPT1) and 5 (LPT2) as that's hard wired into the driver.
Have you any more info about IRQ settings, port settings, etc (or the
MCA equivalent words like Printer 1 etc).
--
Bob Eager
rde at tavi.co.uk
PC Server 325; PS/2s 8595*3, 9595, 9595A (P60!), 8535, 8570, 9556,
8580*5,
8557, 9556, 8550, 9577, 8530, P70, PC/AT..
Peterwendt
Hi Jim !
>On another subject, would you have any idea why a Boca parallel port
>card won't work properly in a server 720? I tested it in my 95, and it
>passed wrap tests under DOS, but my friend can't print to it from OS/2
>in his 720.
Ahem ... I would say the BOCA is too slow.
Remember that the "target" machines for these cards were the Mod. 50 - 80 with
the MCA Stage 1 / Stage 2 layout. The 720 is not even "real MCA" but a
Corollary system, which uses 80MB/s data streaming mode on all MCA-slots.
Therefore only a very limited number of adapters has ever been announced for
it. The "normal" adapters *may* work in the 720 ... or may not. Most worked
though - but there was a number of adapters that did not. The Boca cards use
very large, very cheap ASICS -as the most of the Multi-I/O card do- which are
known to be slow and I got reports that they even fail on faster Mod. 80 (and
76/77, 85, 90 and 95 as well).
The Mod. 95 also may handle them good or not - but the "True MCA" machines have
a slightly different mechanism / arbitration to handle slower cards than the
Corollary MCA bridge - obviously this implementation is not 100% compatible
with the MCA Stage 4 of the Mod. 9595 or the Stage 3 of the older
8595-machines.
(Historical Information Footnote: The IBM never called its MCA "Stage x" or so.
This was an informal technicians method to define about which stage of
implementation we were talking at all. Here's what is what.
- MCA Stage 1 was the 16-bit "Local Bus" (hehe) version which can be found in
Mod. 50 and 60 with the 80286. Bus and CPU run at 10MHz - therefore the odd
Local-Bus-joke.
- MCA Stage 2 was the 32-bit variation as used in the Mod. 70 and 80.
Introduction of "Matched Memory Cycles" for better memory performance.
- MCA Stage 3 came with the Mod. 90 / 95 and "Bermuda" 76 / 77. Same as S-3 but
doubled speed. Capable to run data at 40MB/s in 64-bit burst mode. Matched
Memory not suppported on this stage.
- MCA Stage 4 is that of the Server 9595A, 500 and -partially- the "Lacuna" 76
/ 77. Basically a Stage 4 with optimised protocols. It supports the
"Synchro-Stream" architecture with up to 80MB/s at 64-bit burst access. The
adapters communication protocol works asynchronous - the data transfer after
negotiation in synchronous burst mode. Concepted was 160MB/s in a 128-bit mode
- but as far as I know not realized. Not even the Pentium 90 platform supports
this mode.
- MCAStage 5 should have been developed for the RS/6000 with the PowerPC
chipset and should have supported full 128-bit access. Project has been
"stabilized" before announcement. Which means: it was dead.)
>My acquisition of his ATI Graphics Ultra Pro hinges on getting a working
>2nd printer port in his machine. :)
Yet another person that did not understand what "Printer Servers" are for - and
how to install a printer pipeline on a server which (physically) prints
somewhere else.
Whatever. Mind trying another manufacturers printer-card ? That from AMS or
Alert Technology UK for example. Sometimes it even helps to set the systems LPT
to LPT2, I/O 378h, IRQ3 and install the additional card as LPT1, I/O 3BCh, IRQ4
..... some cards show a strange misbehaviour when trying to run them at I/O 378
with IRQ3 (The LPT1-port on compatibles uses I/O 378 with IRQ4 ...)
Might be worth a shot.
Robert E. Watts
• Hello Peter •
<snip>
> - MCA Stage 3 came with the Mod. 90 / 95 and "Bermuda" 76 / 77.
Same as S-3 but
> doubled speed. Capable to run data at 40MB/s in 64-bit burst mode.
Matched
> Memory not suppported on this stage.
> - MCA Stage 4 is that of the Server 9595A, 500 and -partially- the
"Lacuna" 76
> / 77. Basically a Stage 4 with optimised protocols. It supports the
> "Synchro-Stream" architecture with up to 80MB/s at 64-bit burst
access. The
> adapters communication protocol works asynchronous - the data
transfer after
> negotiation in synchronous burst mode.
<snip>
It's fascinating to continue to learn more about these machines. It
appears that the very last PS/2's, the 95A, and "Lacuna" 77's have
more in common with a high performance server that a "home computer".
bobwatts
Ian Brown
<wats...@one.net> writes
>
>
>
>It's fascinating to continue to learn more about these machines. It
>appears that the very last PS/2's, the 95A, and "Lacuna" 77's have
>more in common with a high performance server that a "home computer".
>
history to the server type machine. Including it's name.
And even the 'Stage 1' offered vastly superior performance as compared
to anything else on the market at the time.
It's also interesting to note that the last bastion of MCA was not a PC
type machine, but the RS6000 series.
If only 'Big Blue' hadn't gone and screwed it up with the licensing of
their proprietary technology. <Big sigh>
--
Ian Brown
Jim Shorney
> > card won't work properly in a server 720?>
>
> switch on? If so, it would need to be at IRQ 5 as far as I recall.
> Perhaps there is a clash there (shouldn't be on an MCA machine but it
> does depend on a few things).
>
> If he's using the PAR1284 driver, then the printers are constrained to
> be on 7 (LPT1) and 5 (LPT2) as that's hard wired into the driver.
>
> Have you any more info about IRQ settings, port settings, etc (or the
> MCA equivalent words like Printer 1 etc).
Bob,
What folloes is his response to your questions:
==
The onboard port is set to address 3BC, IRQ 7. The second card shows
"Parallel 2" (I don't know what address or IRQ since the MCA Config
program
doesn't list this info.) I am using PRINT02.SYS and have tried it with
the
/IRQ setting and without. The help file does not list any additional
information about actually setting an address. I have not tried the
PAR1284 driver, however, that has raised my curiosity. Oddly enough,
when
the second parallel port card is in the machine, I cannot use either
port
at all. When I remove the second parallel card, the first port returns
to
opporable status. When I query the system, it shows only one physical
parallel port in either case. Additionally, if I set the onboard
parallel
port to "Parallel 1" and the secondary parallel port to "Parallel 2" or
"Parallel 3," I get no conflicts, but if I set it to "Parallel 1," I get
an
asterisk stating there is a conflict.
==
I'm starting to suspect that Peter's anser is the closest to what is
happening.
Now if I can just get this darn ATI card figured out...
Thanks for the help!
Jim Shorney
>
> Hi Jim !
>
> >On another subject, would you have any idea why a Boca parallel port
> >passed wrap tests under DOS, but my friend can't print to it from OS/2
> >in his 720.
>
> Ahem ... I would say the BOCA is too slow.
> Remember that the "target" machines for these cards were the Mod. 50 - 80 with
THis doesn't surprise me.
> (Historical Information Footnote: The IBM never called its MCA "Stage x" or so.
> - MCA Stage 3 came with the Mod. 90 / 95 and "Bermuda" 76 / 77. Same as S-3 but
> doubled speed. Capable to run data at 40MB/s in 64-bit burst mode. Matched
> Memory not suppported on this stage.
> - MCA Stage 4 is that of the Server 9595A, 500 and -partially- the "Lacuna" 76
> / 77. Basically a Stage 4 with optimised protocols. It supports the
> "Synchro-Stream" architecture with up to 80MB/s at 64-bit burst access. The
> adapters communication protocol works asynchronous - the data transfer after
> negotiation in synchronous burst mode. Concepted was 160MB/s in a 128-bit mode
> - but as far as I know not realized. Not even the Pentium 90 platform supports
> this mode.
OK, another unrelated question: How much of this is dependent on the
planar, and how much on the processor complex? My planar is an 8598-OKF
that I upgraded to a type 3 complex. If I were to get a type 4 P90
complex, would I still have stage 3 on the bus, or would some or all of
the stage 4 features be available? Or would it even work in this
planar? This may seem like a dumb question, but I'm still learning.
(Tonight's lesson is ATI graphics cards... :) ).
> Yet another person that did not understand what "Printer Servers" are for - and
> how to install a printer pipeline on a server which (physically) prints
> somewhere else.
Actually, we discussed that as an option. I think he's just trying to
find the path of least resistance. It looks like the Boca card isn't
it. Do you know of any PCI parallel port cards that will work in the
720 and be recognized by OS/2? I looked into the SIIG card, but there
tech department doesn't want to talk to me about OS/2.
> Whatever. Mind trying another manufacturers printer-card ? That from AMS or
> Alert Technology UK for example.
I'm not familiar with those. I'll try to look into it, though.
Thanks very much for the help.
Jim
Peterwendt
Hi Jim !
>I'm starting to suspect that Peter's anser is the closest to what is
>happening.
Errr .. I loused it up anyway - and no one seems to have taken notice of it.
*Serial* ports use IRQ3 and 4 ... *Parallel* ports use IRQ7 and 5...
The base-adress is 3BCh on a PS/2 but 378h on most compatibles.
So if you set the 720s parallel port to LPT2 it must be I/O 378h, IRQ5 - that
of the additional printer card must be 3BCh, IRQ7.
But I think there was something different for the 720 parallel port anyways,
that did not allow to use it with IRQ other than 7 as I vaguely remember (or
was it another machine ? Grrr. I don't know).
Peterwendt
Hi Jim !
>OK, another unrelated question: How much of this is dependent on the
>planar, and how much on the processor complex? My planar is an 8598-OKF
>that I upgraded to a type 3 complex. If I were to get a type 4 P90
>complex, would I still have stage 3 on the bus, or would some or all of
>the stage 4 features be available? Or would it even work in this
>planar? This may seem like a dumb question, but I'm still learning.
>(Tonight's lesson is ATI graphics cards... :) ).
Wonder how far this thread may go. It is hard to beat the "flourescent lamp
explosion" thread ...
Seriously: the 8595 planar is stage 3 and does not support the stage 4 "synchro
stream mode", which is turned off then. It supports the normal 64-bits burst
mode with up to 40MB/s. So a Type 4 platform will be significantly slower in an
old 8595-type planar than in a Server 95A planar (the one with the two serial
and two parallel ports). The systemboard controller on the "single-LPT" planars
does not return the proper values on trying to start up the synchro-stream -
therefore it is not used. The only advantage left over is the faster CPU and
higher calculation data throughput - and the ability to run Pentium software
(if required). The overall performance is of course higher compared with e.g.
the DX-50 platform - but it does not even come close to the values achieved
with the same processor card in the 9595A "double LPT"-planar. At least not in
a cumulated / weighted application which includes combined calculation and I/O
traffic loads.
For information again: The "small" 9595s model -xLx (Type 2) and -xMx (Type 3)
had the old planar - all others usually had the 9595A-planar (Type 4 -xNx,
-xPx, -xQx).
Bob Eager
> I'm starting to suspect that Peter's anser is the closest to what is
> happening.
I think you're right...
Jim Shorney
> Seriously: the 8595 planar is stage 3 and does not support the stage 4 "synchro
> stream mode", which is turned off then.
Thanks, Peter, that is most helpful. I've learned that, yes, I do need
another 95, and now I know which 95 to look for at surplus auctions....
:) It's a toss-up as to which addiction is more powerful right now; MCA
computers or Drake ham radio gear.
To move to yet another subject (and keep this thread alive a while
longer), I'm not having any luck getting this ATI GUP to work right in
my 95. I've followed all the instructions and suggestions that I've
found, but the best I can get out of it is nice test patterns with the
DOS config utility, and (depending on how I set the card jumpers) either
very scrambled screens or XGA-2 pass-through. I downloaded the latest
Warp drivers from ATI, but they refuse to install. Have you (or anyone
else in the group) successfully used an ATI Graphics Ultra Pro in a
Model 95, cohabiting with an XGA-2 card and driving a 9517 XGA-2
monitor?
I'm starting to wonder if the reason I get this stuff from this guy
(same person that gave me the M-Motion/A) is because he can't get it to
work right in his 95 or 720... :)
Peterwendt
Hi Jim !
>Thanks, Peter, that is most helpful. I've learned that, yes, I do need
>another 95, and now I know which 95 to look for at surplus auctions....
So it was at least of some use. :-) Good luck. I will have to wait a bit until
I get some 9595 machines. Those in the company are now on a "one year honour
round" as I recently found out - and my customers did not (yet) want to part
from theirs.
Original quote:
"As long as a 486DX2-33/66 Mod. 95 with 64MB RAM under OS/2 2.0 and Token Ring
is faster responding than a Double Pentium-II 333 Netfinity 5000 with 256MB
under Win NT 4.0 we ain't kicking out the 95 !"
Judge yourself.
>To move to yet another subject (and keep this thread alive a while
>longer), I'm not having any luck getting this ATI GUP to work right in
>my 95.
Must pass over to someone else. Because a) I have no ATI GUP, b) never used one
and c) have a personal dislike on ATI-products. There are however several
people in this group with own (better) experiences.
Anyone willing to jump in here ?
Louis Ohland
>
> Must pass over to someone else. Because a) I have no ATI GUP, b) never used one
> and c) have a personal dislike on ATI-products. There are however several
> people in this group with own (better) experiences.
>
> Anyone willing to jump in here ?
>
That's me! Jack of all trades and master of none!
The Warp v.3 manual has a section on known installation problems.
The ATI GUP is there. I can't find the manual right now...
Louis Ohland
> To move to yet another subject (and keep this thread alive a while
> longer), I'm not having any luck getting this ATI GUP to work right in
> found, but the best I can get out of it is nice test patterns with the
> DOS config utility, and (depending on how I set the card jumpers) either
> very scrambled screens or XGA-2 pass-through. I downloaded the latest
> Warp drivers from ATI, but they refuse to install. Have you (or anyone
> else in the group) successfully used an ATI Graphics Ultra Pro in a
> Model 95, cohabiting with an XGA-2 card and driving a 9517 XGA-2
> monitor?
>
> I'm starting to wonder if the reason I get this stuff from this guy
> (same person that gave me the M-Motion/A) is because he can't get it to
> work right in his 95 or 720... :)
Well, the v.3 book sez:
If you have an ATI Graphics Ultra Pro, you must run the
INSTALL.EXE utility program provided by ATI before you install
OS/2. Note that this is a DOS program and you must, therefor,
start DOS before you run the program.
Start DOS on your computer
Insert ATI disk into A:
Type a:install and press enter. The set power-up configuration
menu appears.
Select custom for monitor type.
Make sure that VGA Memory Size is set to Shared for 1MB video
memory boards.
Make sure that the refresh rate for 640x480 resolution is set to
IBM Default or 60 Hz.
P. 318, version 3 Looser's manual.
Peterwendt
Hi Louis !
>That's me! Jack of all trades and master of none!
Or "King of Unimportant Decisions" ...
>The Warp v.3 manual has a section on known installation problems.
>The ATI GUP is there. I can't find the manual right now...
Time to turn the shack upside down the 26th time this month :-)
At least here it were the case then.
Maybe *I* can jump in here since *I* know where my (german) Warp 3.0 Manual is
...
Two passages can be found. As first:
----------
Black Lines over OS/2 Logo
(refers to Gateway 2000 with 486DX-66 and GUP however. System hangs after the
OS/2 logo with black stripes over it.)
1. start DOS
2. Type CD \MACH32 at DOS prompt, press [ENTER]
3. Type install, press [ENTER]
4. in the main menu select option "Set Power On Configuration", press [ENTER]
5. select monitor type, press [ENTER]
6. select "1572 Monitor with 72Hz Refresh Rate", press [ENTER]
7. select "IBM Default (or 60Hz)", press [ENTER]
Remark: after installation proceed the above steps and select the 1572 Screen
again
---------
Second found:
---------
ATI Graphics Ultra Pro Adapter
ATI makes several adapters, which are compatible with the IBM 8514/A. The
adapters ATI Graphics Ultra, 8514 Ultra and Graphics Vantage can be treated as
8514/A during installation. If the ATI Graphics Ultra Pro is used the following
steps must be carried out. The utility program "INSTALL" is used to set up the
screen to be used as VGA screen. After installation of OS/2 the INSTALL can be
used to set up the screen to a different setting.
How to prepare the ATI Graphics Ultra Pro for the use with OS/2:
1. Start up the system with DOS (preferably from a floppy). After installation
of OS/2 the DOS must be restarted, since the ATI "INSTALL" run under DOS only.
2. Type "INSTALL" at the DOS prompt
3. If the adapter comes with only 1MB of VRAM you have to use "SHARED". If te
adapter comes with 2MB of VRAM make sure you are using the proper
configuration.
4. Select "Monitor Setup"
5. Select "Custom"
6. Set the refresh rate for 640 x 480 to 60Hz or "IBM Default"
7. Set the refresh rates for the other resolution to the values corresponding
with the type of monitor attached.
8. Save the configuration
9. Install OS/2. During configuration "8514/A" must be used as primary display
type
-----------
So far from the (rude) translation of my german users manual.
This -however- does not tell if you have to use the video terminator on the XGA
/ VGA or other hardware oddities.
But maybe it helps a bit. Hope you have the original ATI GUP floppies ... :-)
Jim Shorney
Louis Ohland wrote:
> If you have an ATI Graphics Ultra Pro, you must run the
> INSTALL.EXE utility program provided by ATI before you install
> OS/2.
I've done that, from a DOS partition, but I'm trying to install this on
an existing OS/2 partition.
> Select custom for monitor type.
Did that.
> Make sure that VGA Memory Size is set to Shared for 1MB video
> memory boards.
This option didn't show on the menu, but I have a 2 Meg card.
> Make sure that the refresh rate for 640x480 resolution is set to
> IBM Default or 60 Hz.
My 9517 doesn't like that. It needs 75-ish Hz at 640x480. Am I going
to have to run dual monitors with this crazy thing?
I more or less have the card working under NT 4.0 (which is where I
needed HiColor anyway), but I'm stuck at 640x480; My 9517 won't sync
properly at any refresh rate at 1024x768. The screen is overly tall and
narrow, with severe pincusioning. I haven't tried my spare 9517 yet,
but my XGA-2 card runs this monitor flawlessly, so I doubt it's a
monitor problem.
When I try to install the drivers in Warp, SVGA bombs out with "Unable
to Determine Hardware Configuration" and the install won't proceed.
I've tried both DSPINSTL and Selective Install, to no avail.
Did anyone make REAL Microcannel HiColor video card that you don't have
to stand on your head while reciting the first three chapters of "War
and Peace" to configure?
Jim Shorney
>
> Original quote:
> "As long as a 486DX2-33/66 Mod. 95 with 64MB RAM under OS/2 2.0 and Token Ring
> is faster responding than a Double Pentium-II 333 Netfinity 5000 with 256MB
> under Win NT 4.0 we ain't kicking out the 95 !"
>
> Judge yourself.
That works for me.... :)
>
> Must pass over to someone else. Because a) I have no ATI GUP, b) never used one
> and c) have a personal dislike on ATI-products.
Thanks, Peter. ATI is definitly a bit on the odd side. They work well,
if you can just figure out how to properly configure the darn things.
It's a love-hate relationship for me.
Well, the 9595 works with the XGA-2 card in Warp, and the ATI under NT
4.0, so I may leave it there for a few days. I just need to build
myself a monitor switchbox that doesn't degrade the signals (much). On
the bright side, I have some new Drakes to play with when the computer
gets too frustrating.