Hi Scott, Yes, I agree PCI shares interrupts and xp and 2k can do more sharing, but it still comes down to the computer can only do one thing at a time as far as interrupts go. Of coarse it can split that into a piece of a second so it looks like it is doing more then one thing at a time, and the faster the computer, the more things it can look like it can do at the same time. But if you ask it to do too many things at the same time, I think you could still get into trouble. And when one is having problems, one should not overlook anything, especially when the one having problems has stated that things worked some of the time in the past. Things working some of the time, is a good reason to be concerned about the interrupts. At least in my opinion, whose computer runs only at 350 mhz. Bob Noble www.sonic.net/bnoble ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott McNay" <Wizard@xxxxxxxx> To: "Sandi Neumann" <pcductape@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 8:55 AM Subject: [pcductape] Re: Interrupt usage | | Hello Sandi, | | Saturday, February 8, 2003, 5:05:56 AM, you wrote: | | SN> I don't think the interupt should pose too much of a problem at | SN> this point Bob. Win2K and XP both handle interupts a lot better | SN> than the older OSs. Below is what's on mine. | | Also, my understanding is that PCI handles interrupts differently. | Apparently it can identify which slot an interrupt comes from, and | select the appropriate interrupt handler. | | -- | Best regards, | Scott mailto:Wizard@xxxxxxxx | | | To unsubscribe from this list send an email to | pcductape-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field | OR by logging into the Web interface. | To unsubscribe from this list send an email to pcductape-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field OR by logging into the Web interface.