Old software, I know, R12 for Windows on floppies.

Hi all,
I am trying to install AutoCAD R12 for Windows 3.1 on a Celeron 766 with 64M of ram running DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1. The install went ok but when I try to execute the program by clicking on the icon it says:
SYSTEM ERROR Divide by Zero or Overflow Error
Why am I getting this and how do I fix it so the program will run?
thanks, charles.....

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 18:09:16 GMT, "***** charles"
  Quoted Text Here  
I seem to recall that there were a number of programs that did not like high speed processors and needed the processor speed to be throttled back to avoid divide by zero errors.
Do some searching along these lines to see if you can find a solution.

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
This particular computer has no way to underclock even if that is the sollution. The computer that I am trying to "fix" was a DX2486-66 with 16M of ram and a 1.2G hard drive. Turns out that lightning hit it and the ps and mb are fried. I take that the best recommendation it to find another 486? How could companies write code like this?
thanks, charles....

***** charles wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I seem to vaguely remember that in older versions of autocad there were some compatibility issues with non-intel processors. Since the processors are here to stay, this was fixed in subsequent versions.
  Quoted Text Here  
Well, autocad 12 was written long before the processor you're running was made. If you want up top date code for up to date equipement, get an up to date version.

On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 02:17:20 GMT, "***** charles"
  Quoted Text Here  
I used to use Telix for BBS communications and it had a problem with the processors with speeds in the hundreds of MHz. In those days programmers were actually constrained by available memory and unlike today where they tend to write sloppy code, programmers tried to get every last bit out of a system. With speeds around 66 MHZ, it was wasteful to consider speeds in the hundreds of MHz when there were not even a twinkle in the eye of developers.
Unfortunately the best solution is to get another 486 motherboard. It might take some finding but like parts for vintage cars they will be around.

***** charles says:
  Quoted Text Here  
Hello from Italy.
I am really sorry for my couriosity. Are you setting up it because You will use it for work? Isn't it too old?
ciao frank

Once you take away a whole bunch of bells and whistles from newer versions you are still left with a great deal of the capability which does most of the drawing required in my discipline (architecture) in R12, and I have to assume that it uses far fewer resources than some of the later versions. R12 was FAST. R12 for DOS was even *FASTER*.
Because of backwards capability, newer versions will have no trouble with his files. If Frank owns this thing, his cost per drawing is tiny compared to those firms who always have to have the latest version, whether or not it makes sense. Frank could buy himself a very nice new TV for the difference, and still afford to have us all over for the next Superbowl or World Cup, and supply all the beer....maybe even the pretzels

Michael Bulatovich wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
agreed, most of what has been added since R14 has been toolbars and different ways to access what was already there. I guess the learning curve is a consideration if you have 100 seats AND IF the buttons make it easier on a new cad operator. but for me, upgrading the operator takes away time from production.
I'd rather write a little lisp....
but even more important to this old fart is that once I get something set up the way I like it I don't want to change. go figure.

Michael Bulatovich says:
  Quoted Text Here  
Hello and thanks for your answer.
I can understand this point of view. I still use Autocad rel.12 to create IGES models to import into Ansys. I really liked my Autocad 12 when I used it. I think they also add some new good features in new releases, not only superficial things. Unfortunatly I use 3rd part applications that need Autocad in a recent release. And this made me spend more money but made me make some more money too. I just wanted to know what is the pourpose of using a old version of Autocad. No offense.
  Quoted Text Here  
My puor english doesn't put me in the position of understanding the sottile meaning of this. I love soccer, though... :-)
Ciao ciao frank

  Quoted Text Here  
None taken. I didn't say that there were no significant improvements in later versions of AutoCAD, just that the older versions like 12 would still do the majority of what I do typically. My feeling is that many (not all) of the "improvements" of late are superficial.
  Quoted Text Here  
I just tried to say that you can use r12 and others with newer versions can still read your files. (The problem is the other way around.) Also if you don't spend thousands of dollars every year or two for new software because you can still use your old software, you would have more money to spend on other fun stuff.
PS You English is so 'poor' that I didn't know it was not your first language until now ; )

snipped-for-privacy@sbcglobal.net (***** charles) wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I think that you also need to run a utility called 'pharlap' to get R12 DOS to run under Win3.1.

  Quoted Text Here  
my aged memory concurs. but people who trust my memory too far......

Pharlap was not supported in NT4.0. I do not know if it was usable in later versions of windows.
Brian Salt wrote:
  Quoted Text Here