I have an eMachine here with Windows XP SP3 that has a severe time problem.
For instance, it lost 57 minutes in the time it took me to run defrag on it
which was about an hour and a half. I just rebooted it and it lost 10
minutes. There doesn't seem to be any set pattern. I just rebooted it again
and it only lost one minute. It seems to lose or gain randomly whether it
is rebooted or not.
Now I've discovered that in BIOS you can set the time but it does not move.
Presently set at 20:01:01. If you save and reboot to Windows the time shows
8:01PM. If you *don't* save then in Windows the time (like right now)
showed 8:25 PM. Go back into BIOS and it still shows 20:01:01. Actual time
as I post is 8:50 PM.
I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that. It's got a
PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Rlease 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no updates
available. Phoenix led me off to a link at biosagentplus.com which
eventually led me to downloading biosagentplus_752.exe. That eventually
winds you up at http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg which leads to http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough good sense to stop at
that point.
Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios update and even if there was I
doubt seriously it would correct the time thing.
Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
For what it's worth, it was loaded with MyWebSearch, Hotbar, and a few more
similar adware items, but no other types of malware. I doubt if that has
anything to do with it.
Menno Hershberger wrote:
> I have an eMachine here with Windows XP SP3 that has a severe time problem.
> For instance, it lost 57 minutes in the time it took me to run defrag on it
> which was about an hour and a half. I just rebooted it and it lost 10
> minutes. There doesn't seem to be any set pattern. I just rebooted it again
> and it only lost one minute. It seems to lose or gain randomly whether it
> is rebooted or not.
> Now I've discovered that in BIOS you can set the time but it does not move.
> Presently set at 20:01:01. If you save and reboot to Windows the time shows
> 8:01PM. If you *don't* save then in Windows the time (like right now)
> showed 8:25 PM. Go back into BIOS and it still shows 20:01:01. Actual time
> as I post is 8:50 PM.
> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that. It's got a
> PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Rlease 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no updates
> available. Phoenix led me off to a link at biosagentplus.com which
> eventually led me to downloading biosagentplus_752.exe. That eventually
> winds you up at http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg which leads to
> http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough good sense to stop at
> that point.
> Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios update and even if there was I
> doubt seriously it would correct the time thing.
> Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
> For what it's worth, it was loaded with MyWebSearch, Hotbar, and a few more
> similar adware items, but no other types of malware. I doubt if that has
> anything to do with it.
>
You sure know how to have fun. biosagentplus is part of Phoenix, and esupport
has something to do with it as well.
Time keeping in Windows, is done by counting clock tick interrupts. The OS
makes a copy of the RTC (real time clock) and runs independently of the
crystal in the RTC until shutdown. That is why the clock can advance while
you're in Windows - it doesn't care about the RTC once the time is copied
to memory.
When the system is shut down, the RTC is relied on to keep time. It uses
a 32768 Hz digital watch crystal, strapped to the motherboard. That's what
times the ticks there.
The RTC and CMOS RAM block, are part of the Southbridge chip silicon die, and live
in "the well". The well is a semi-independent section of the chip, separated
from other subsystems by transmission gates. They do it that way, so no
leakage current, or backfeed, can move from one section of the chip to another.
After all, when all power is removed from the PC, "the well" runs off the CR2032
coin cell battery (<10uA current draw). The rest of the Southbridge is unpowered,
with the exception of "the well".
So your RTC isn't accepting write cycles, it would appear. Power for the storage
elements, at the time of write attempt, would be 3VSB (which in turn, is regulated
from +5VSB).
Perhaps the PC is set up to do NTP and use an external time server, to set
the correct time, and that's how it is getting moved from 8:01. Since it is
still 8:01 when you return to the BIOS, then it means so far, nothing is able
to change the RTC time setting.
If you didn't have an NTP (network time protocol) process running in Windows, then
every time the PC boots, it should record the time as starting at 8:01 again.
The Southbridge is hard to replace, if that was indeed what was broken.
Could it be the power source for "the well" at fault ? Possibly. Just
for fun, you can stick a multimeter set to volts, across the CR2032 top
surface, and connect the other lead to grounded metal on the chassis. And
see if it is still 3.0V. You say it's new, but batteries can drain pretty
quickly if there is a fault. Very occasionally, someone will report that
their battery drains in a matter of days, which means there is a leakage
path there somewhere. The battery is not charged by the ATX supply, so cannot
be "pumped back up".
*******
I see no reason to change the BIOS at this point, because you don't have
any other anomalies except the clock. You would have noticed an inability
to set the clock, if that had happened when the machine was new. And since
the main body of the BIOS is protected by a checksum, there would likely be
an error message of some sort, if there was "bit rot" in there. The boot block
code, should be computing the checksum of the main BIOS code, before running it.
*******
You left out the most important part - Emachine model number info. Did you
Google the model number, and see if there were any other reports like yours ?
Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in news:j5e7hg$4cp$1@dont-email.me:
> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>> I have an eMachine here with Windows XP SP3 that has a severe time
>> problem. For instance, it lost 57 minutes in the time it took me to
>> run defrag on it which was about an hour and a half. I just rebooted
>> it and it lost 10 minutes. There doesn't seem to be any set pattern.
>> I just rebooted it again and it only lost one minute. It seems to
>> lose or gain randomly whether it is rebooted or not.
>> Now I've discovered that in BIOS you can set the time but it does not
>> move. Presently set at 20:01:01. If you save and reboot to Windows
>> the time shows 8:01PM. If you *don't* save then in Windows the time
>> (like right now) showed 8:25 PM. Go back into BIOS and it still shows
>> 20:01:01. Actual time as I post is 8:50 PM.
>> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that. It's
>> got a PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Rlease 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no
>> updates available. Phoenix led me off to a link at biosagentplus.com
>> which eventually led me to downloading biosagentplus_752.exe. That
>> eventually winds you up at http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg
>> which leads to http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough
>> good sense to stop at that point.
>> Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios update and even if there
>> was I doubt seriously it would correct the time thing.
>> Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
>> For what it's worth, it was loaded with MyWebSearch, Hotbar, and a
>> few more similar adware items, but no other types of malware. I doubt
>> if that has anything to do with it.
>>
>
> You sure know how to have fun. biosagentplus is part of Phoenix, and
> esupport has something to do with it as well.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Technologies
>
> *******
>
> Time keeping in Windows, is done by counting clock tick interrupts.
> The OS makes a copy of the RTC (real time clock) and runs
> independently of the crystal in the RTC until shutdown. That is why
> the clock can advance while you're in Windows - it doesn't care about
> the RTC once the time is copied to memory.
>
> When the system is shut down, the RTC is relied on to keep time. It
> uses a 32768 Hz digital watch crystal, strapped to the motherboard.
> That's what times the ticks there.
>
> The RTC and CMOS RAM block, are part of the Southbridge chip silicon
> die, and live in "the well". The well is a semi-independent section of
> the chip, separated from other subsystems by transmission gates. They
> do it that way, so no leakage current, or backfeed, can move from one
> section of the chip to another. After all, when all power is removed
> from the PC, "the well" runs off the CR2032 coin cell battery (<10uA
> current draw). The rest of the Southbridge is unpowered, with the
> exception of "the well".
>
> So your RTC isn't accepting write cycles, it would appear. Power for
> the storage elements, at the time of write attempt, would be 3VSB
> (which in turn, is regulated from +5VSB).
>
> Perhaps the PC is set up to do NTP and use an external time server, to
> set the correct time, and that's how it is getting moved from 8:01.
> Since it is still 8:01 when you return to the BIOS, then it means so
> far, nothing is able to change the RTC time setting.
>
> If you didn't have an NTP (network time protocol) process running in
> Windows, then every time the PC boots, it should record the time as
> starting at 8:01 again.
Yep... that's what it's doing. Ooops wait. I just checked the BIOS again
and it had advanced to 20:28.xx. But this was after 10 o'clock which should
have been 22:xx:xx. I went ahead and set it right again. Again just now I
looked at the windows time at it said 10:36 and it was actually 10:44. I
went into the time settings and synchronized it with time.windows.com and
it did jump up to 10:44. But if I look back in a few minutes it will be
behind again. There's some place in the registry where you can change the
frequency of the time checks. Maybe I should set it to every 10 minutes!
>
> The Southbridge is hard to replace, if that was indeed what was
> broken. Could it be the power source for "the well" at fault ?
> Possibly. Just for fun, you can stick a multimeter set to volts,
> across the CR2032 top surface, and connect the other lead to grounded
> metal on the chassis. And see if it is still 3.0V. You say it's new,
> but batteries can drain pretty quickly if there is a fault. Very
> occasionally, someone will report that their battery drains in a
> matter of days, which means there is a leakage path there somewhere.
> The battery is not charged by the ATX supply, so cannot be "pumped
> back up".
OK. Just did that. The new one pegged my meter on the 2.5VDC setting. Next
increment is 50... too hard to read. I checked the old battery and it has
less than half a volt left in it.
>
> *******
>
> I see no reason to change the BIOS at this point, because you don't
> have any other anomalies except the clock. You would have noticed an
> inability to set the clock, if that had happened when the machine was
> new. And since the main body of the BIOS is protected by a checksum,
> there would likely be an error message of some sort, if there was "bit
> rot" in there. The boot block code, should be computing the checksum
> of the main BIOS code, before running it.
>
> *******
>
> You left out the most important part - Emachine model number info. Did
> you Google the model number, and see if there were any other reports
> like yours ?
Yep. It's a T2042. It's got a 2.0 GB Celeron processor and over a gig of
memory. There's drivers on the eMachine support site (Gateway actually) for
most everything but under "BIOS" it says nothing available (or something
like that). I also checked on driversguide.com and didn't come up with
anything. The only place that hinted that it might be out of date was that
biosagentplus thing. Then, if you looked at my screenshots, when I clicked
on the bios update thing it wanted me to "register"
-----------------------
HOME OF THE LARGEST BIOS DIRECTORY ON THE INTERNET
* Get instant access to over a million driver files.
* Better PC Performance.
* Improved PC Stability.
* From a trusted source in the computer industry.
------------------------
Sounds kind of spammy to me and I'll bet they want $$$$ to become
"registered". If it's Phoenix and there are upgrades available, then they
should offer downloads for free.
Menno Hershberger <mhersh22@nosuchplace.net> wrote in
news:Xns9F67EBB622DAEbutter@wefb973cbe498:
> Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in news:j5e7hg$4cp$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>> I have an eMachine here with Windows XP SP3 that has a severe time
>>> problem. For instance, it lost 57 minutes in the time it took me to
>>> run defrag on it which was about an hour and a half. I just rebooted
>>> it and it lost 10 minutes. There doesn't seem to be any set pattern.
>>> I just rebooted it again and it only lost one minute. It seems to
>>> lose or gain randomly whether it is rebooted or not.
>>> Now I've discovered that in BIOS you can set the time but it does
>>> not move. Presently set at 20:01:01. If you save and reboot to
>>> Windows the time shows 8:01PM. If you *don't* save then in Windows
>>> the time (like right now) showed 8:25 PM. Go back into BIOS and it
>>> still shows 20:01:01. Actual time as I post is 8:50 PM.
>>> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that. It's
>>> got a PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Rlease 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no
>>> updates available. Phoenix led me off to a link at biosagentplus.com
>>> which eventually led me to downloading biosagentplus_752.exe. That
>>> eventually winds you up at http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg
>>> which leads to http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough
>>> good sense to stop at that point.
>>> Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios update and even if
>>> there was I doubt seriously it would correct the time thing.
>>> Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
>>> For what it's worth, it was loaded with MyWebSearch, Hotbar, and a
>>> few more similar adware items, but no other types of malware. I
>>> doubt if that has anything to do with it.
>>>
>>
>> You sure know how to have fun. biosagentplus is part of Phoenix, and
>> esupport has something to do with it as well.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Technologies
>>
>> *******
>>
>> Time keeping in Windows, is done by counting clock tick interrupts.
>> The OS makes a copy of the RTC (real time clock) and runs
>> independently of the crystal in the RTC until shutdown. That is why
>> the clock can advance while you're in Windows - it doesn't care about
>> the RTC once the time is copied to memory.
>>
>> When the system is shut down, the RTC is relied on to keep time. It
>> uses a 32768 Hz digital watch crystal, strapped to the motherboard.
>> That's what times the ticks there.
>>
>> The RTC and CMOS RAM block, are part of the Southbridge chip silicon
>> die, and live in "the well". The well is a semi-independent section
>> of the chip, separated from other subsystems by transmission gates.
>> They do it that way, so no leakage current, or backfeed, can move
>> from one section of the chip to another. After all, when all power is
>> removed from the PC, "the well" runs off the CR2032 coin cell battery
>> (<10uA current draw). The rest of the Southbridge is unpowered, with
>> the exception of "the well".
>>
>> So your RTC isn't accepting write cycles, it would appear. Power for
>> the storage elements, at the time of write attempt, would be 3VSB
>> (which in turn, is regulated from +5VSB).
>>
>> Perhaps the PC is set up to do NTP and use an external time server,
>> to set the correct time, and that's how it is getting moved from
>> 8:01. Since it is still 8:01 when you return to the BIOS, then it
>> means so far, nothing is able to change the RTC time setting.
>>
>> If you didn't have an NTP (network time protocol) process running in
>> Windows, then every time the PC boots, it should record the time as
>> starting at 8:01 again.
>
> Yep... that's what it's doing. Ooops wait. I just checked the BIOS
> again and it had advanced to 20:28.xx. But this was after 10 o'clock
> which should have been 22:xx:xx. I went ahead and set it right again.
> Again just now I looked at the windows time at it said 10:36 and it
> was actually 10:44. I went into the time settings and synchronized it
> with time.windows.com and it did jump up to 10:44. But if I look back
> in a few minutes it will be behind again. There's some place in the
> registry where you can change the frequency of the time checks. Maybe
> I should set it to every 10 minutes!
>
>>
>> The Southbridge is hard to replace, if that was indeed what was
>> broken. Could it be the power source for "the well" at fault ?
>> Possibly. Just for fun, you can stick a multimeter set to volts,
>> across the CR2032 top surface, and connect the other lead to grounded
>> metal on the chassis. And see if it is still 3.0V. You say it's new,
>> but batteries can drain pretty quickly if there is a fault. Very
>> occasionally, someone will report that their battery drains in a
>> matter of days, which means there is a leakage path there somewhere.
>> The battery is not charged by the ATX supply, so cannot be "pumped
>> back up".
>
> OK. Just did that. The new one pegged my meter on the 2.5VDC setting.
> Next increment is 50... too hard to read. I checked the old battery
> and it has less than half a volt left in it.
>>
>> *******
>>
>> I see no reason to change the BIOS at this point, because you don't
>> have any other anomalies except the clock. You would have noticed an
>> inability to set the clock, if that had happened when the machine was
>> new. And since the main body of the BIOS is protected by a checksum,
>> there would likely be an error message of some sort, if there was
>> "bit rot" in there. The boot block code, should be computing the
>> checksum of the main BIOS code, before running it.
>>
>> *******
>>
>> You left out the most important part - Emachine model number info.
>> Did you Google the model number, and see if there were any other
>> reports like yours ?
>
> Yep. It's a T2042. It's got a 2.0 GB Celeron processor and over a gig
> of memory. There's drivers on the eMachine support site (Gateway
> actually) for most everything but under "BIOS" it says nothing
> available (or something like that). I also checked on driversguide.com
> and didn't come up with anything. The only place that hinted that it
> might be out of date was that biosagentplus thing. Then, if you looked
> at my screenshots, when I clicked on the bios update thing it wanted
> me to "register"
> -----------------------
> HOME OF THE LARGEST BIOS DIRECTORY ON THE INTERNET
> * Get instant access to over a million driver files.
> * Better PC Performance.
> * Improved PC Stability.
> * From a trusted source in the computer industry.
> ------------------------
> Sounds kind of spammy to me and I'll bet they want $$$$ to become
> "registered". If it's Phoenix and there are upgrades available, then
> they should offer downloads for free.
>
> As usual thanks for sharing your knowledge
>
I'm a sucker for punishment so I went ahead and filled out that
registration screen just to see what would happen.
Sure enough, http://mewnlite.com/shurnuf.jpg
$29.95. No thanks.
Menno Hershberger wrote:
> Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in news:j5e7hg$4cp$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>> I have an eMachine here with Windows XP SP3 that has a severe time
>>> problem. For instance, it lost 57 minutes in the time it took me to
>>> run defrag on it which was about an hour and a half. I just rebooted
>>> it and it lost 10 minutes. There doesn't seem to be any set pattern.
>>> I just rebooted it again and it only lost one minute. It seems to
>>> lose or gain randomly whether it is rebooted or not.
>>> Now I've discovered that in BIOS you can set the time but it does not
>>> move. Presently set at 20:01:01. If you save and reboot to Windows
>>> the time shows 8:01PM. If you *don't* save then in Windows the time
>>> (like right now) showed 8:25 PM. Go back into BIOS and it still shows
>>> 20:01:01. Actual time as I post is 8:50 PM.
>>> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that. It's
>>> got a PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Rlease 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no
>>> updates available. Phoenix led me off to a link at biosagentplus.com
>>> which eventually led me to downloading biosagentplus_752.exe. That
>>> eventually winds you up at http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg
>>> which leads to http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough
>>> good sense to stop at that point.
>>> Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios update and even if there
>>> was I doubt seriously it would correct the time thing.
>>> Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
>>> For what it's worth, it was loaded with MyWebSearch, Hotbar, and a
>>> few more similar adware items, but no other types of malware. I doubt
>>> if that has anything to do with it.
>>>
>> You sure know how to have fun. biosagentplus is part of Phoenix, and
>> esupport has something to do with it as well.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Technologies
>>
>> *******
>>
>> Time keeping in Windows, is done by counting clock tick interrupts.
>> The OS makes a copy of the RTC (real time clock) and runs
>> independently of the crystal in the RTC until shutdown. That is why
>> the clock can advance while you're in Windows - it doesn't care about
>> the RTC once the time is copied to memory.
>>
>> When the system is shut down, the RTC is relied on to keep time. It
>> uses a 32768 Hz digital watch crystal, strapped to the motherboard.
>> That's what times the ticks there.
>>
>> The RTC and CMOS RAM block, are part of the Southbridge chip silicon
>> die, and live in "the well". The well is a semi-independent section of
>> the chip, separated from other subsystems by transmission gates. They
>> do it that way, so no leakage current, or backfeed, can move from one
>> section of the chip to another. After all, when all power is removed
>> from the PC, "the well" runs off the CR2032 coin cell battery (<10uA
>> current draw). The rest of the Southbridge is unpowered, with the
>> exception of "the well".
>>
>> So your RTC isn't accepting write cycles, it would appear. Power for
>> the storage elements, at the time of write attempt, would be 3VSB
>> (which in turn, is regulated from +5VSB).
>>
>> Perhaps the PC is set up to do NTP and use an external time server, to
>> set the correct time, and that's how it is getting moved from 8:01.
>> Since it is still 8:01 when you return to the BIOS, then it means so
>> far, nothing is able to change the RTC time setting.
>>
>> If you didn't have an NTP (network time protocol) process running in
>> Windows, then every time the PC boots, it should record the time as
>> starting at 8:01 again.
>
> Yep... that's what it's doing. Ooops wait. I just checked the BIOS again
> and it had advanced to 20:28.xx. But this was after 10 o'clock which should
> have been 22:xx:xx. I went ahead and set it right again. Again just now I
> looked at the windows time at it said 10:36 and it was actually 10:44. I
> went into the time settings and synchronized it with time.windows.com and
> it did jump up to 10:44. But if I look back in a few minutes it will be
> behind again. There's some place in the registry where you can change the
> frequency of the time checks. Maybe I should set it to every 10 minutes!
>
>> The Southbridge is hard to replace, if that was indeed what was
>> broken. Could it be the power source for "the well" at fault ?
>> Possibly. Just for fun, you can stick a multimeter set to volts,
>> across the CR2032 top surface, and connect the other lead to grounded
>> metal on the chassis. And see if it is still 3.0V. You say it's new,
>> but batteries can drain pretty quickly if there is a fault. Very
>> occasionally, someone will report that their battery drains in a
>> matter of days, which means there is a leakage path there somewhere.
>> The battery is not charged by the ATX supply, so cannot be "pumped
>> back up".
>
> OK. Just did that. The new one pegged my meter on the 2.5VDC setting. Next
> increment is 50... too hard to read. I checked the old battery and it has
> less than half a volt left in it.
>> *******
>>
>> I see no reason to change the BIOS at this point, because you don't
>> have any other anomalies except the clock. You would have noticed an
>> inability to set the clock, if that had happened when the machine was
>> new. And since the main body of the BIOS is protected by a checksum,
>> there would likely be an error message of some sort, if there was "bit
>> rot" in there. The boot block code, should be computing the checksum
>> of the main BIOS code, before running it.
>>
>> *******
>>
>> You left out the most important part - Emachine model number info. Did
>> you Google the model number, and see if there were any other reports
>> like yours ?
>
> Yep. It's a T2042. It's got a 2.0 GB Celeron processor and over a gig of
> memory. There's drivers on the eMachine support site (Gateway actually) for
> most everything but under "BIOS" it says nothing available (or something
> like that). I also checked on driversguide.com and didn't come up with
> anything. The only place that hinted that it might be out of date was that
> biosagentplus thing. Then, if you looked at my screenshots, when I clicked
> on the bios update thing it wanted me to "register"
> -----------------------
> HOME OF THE LARGEST BIOS DIRECTORY ON THE INTERNET
> * Get instant access to over a million driver files.
> * Better PC Performance.
> * Improved PC Stability.
> * From a trusted source in the computer industry.
> ------------------------
> Sounds kind of spammy to me and I'll bet they want $$$$ to become
> "registered". If it's Phoenix and there are upgrades available, then they
> should offer downloads for free.
>
> As usual thanks for sharing your knowledge
>
If it's like eSupport, they'll want money for your free upgrade. If
the BIOS file comes from the manufacturer, that would normally be free.
eSupport used to sell generic BIOS of some sort (the people who bought
from them, never made clear to me, whether the BIOS interface stayed the same
or not). And the sales people would actually negotiate price (kinda like
high pressure salesmen). And that to me was the tipoff. Via "chat" somebody
had the salesman convince them to buy at half price.
*******
I see some pictures of the motherboards used in T2042 here.
I'd probably be booting something like Ubuntu, and testing time keeping there,
to rule out an OS software issue.
On one of my Linux VMs, I discovered something called sntp. A command like
sntp -s time.nrc.ca
would set the clock in Linux immediately (as long as Linux uses DHCP to set
up networking for you). In one of my Ubuntu virtual machines,
there is something called "rdate", which doesn't work for me at all. The
date/time application (looks like a calendar) also has access to NTP protocol,
but only seems to update the time from the Internet, once in a blue moon.
Which is why I was investigating other options. For a hardware guy like me,
the sntp one was great, because it worked immediately, and would also print out
some delta information. But it isn't listed in all the package managers, so I
can't guarantee you can easily find it. And compiling it from source, would require
you to find the source for it.
*******
Timekeeping while Windows is running, is done by counting clock tick interrupts.
The clock tick interrupt has a relatively high priority, which is to prevent
other interrupts from affecting time keeping. Servicing of that interrupt
would have to be stopped for more than one tick, in order to lose one, and
make the (software) clock slow down.
There have been chipsets with a hardware problem, where the time wandered all
over the place. And it had to do with a bug in the interrupt logic. I'm not
aware of anything like that for an Intel chipset.
So anyway, give a Linux LiveCD a try, and see if the clock screws up there
or not. If it's a hardware issue, it should be every bit as bad in Linux.
*******
And 2.5V for the battery, isn't that good. If that was the real value,
there isn't a lot of headroom between 2.5V and 2.3V (as low as I'd want to go),
and with the computer unplugged, it might only last a matter of weeks. The
Southbridge is rated for 2.0V, but doesn't get the full battery voltage,
due to 0.3V drop across a Schottky diode. The diode is there, to prevent
the motherboard from pumping charge into the battery (which would cause it
to burst). So the battery has to supply 2.3V, so the Southbridge can see 2.0V
(its minimum allowed for accurate functioning).
Measuring the voltage where it feeds the SB would be nice... But
who can find that junction ? I've only managed it once or twice.
I doubt I could find it on my current motherboard. To find the
BAT45 dual diode (looks like a flat transistor with three legs), you
need a magnifying glass to verify the part number. And some
motherboards have a ton of things that look like that.
> I'm a sucker for punishment so I went ahead and filled out that
> registration screen just to see what would happen.
> Sure enough, http://mewnlite.com/shurnuf.jpg
> $29.95. No thanks.
I'd have dug out my credit card, if only Oprah had approved of it :-)
Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in news:j5ef3e$7ap$1@dont-email.me:
> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>> Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in news:j5e7hg$4cp$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>>> I have an eMachine here with Windows XP SP3 that has a severe time
>>>> problem. For instance, it lost 57 minutes in the time it took me to
>>>> run defrag on it which was about an hour and a half. I just
>>>> rebooted it and it lost 10 minutes. There doesn't seem to be any
>>>> set pattern. I just rebooted it again and it only lost one minute.
>>>> It seems to lose or gain randomly whether it is rebooted or not.
>>>> Now I've discovered that in BIOS you can set the time but it does
>>>> not move. Presently set at 20:01:01. If you save and reboot to
>>>> Windows the time shows 8:01PM. If you *don't* save then in Windows
>>>> the time (like right now) showed 8:25 PM. Go back into BIOS and it
>>>> still shows 20:01:01. Actual time as I post is 8:50 PM.
>>>> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that. It's
>>>> got a PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Rlease 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no
>>>> updates available. Phoenix led me off to a link at
>>>> biosagentplus.com which eventually led me to downloading
>>>> biosagentplus_752.exe. That eventually winds you up at
>>>> http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg which leads to
>>>> http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough good sense to
>>>> stop at that point. Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios
>>>> update and even if there was I doubt seriously it would correct the
>>>> time thing. Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
>>>> For what it's worth, it was loaded with MyWebSearch, Hotbar, and a
>>>> few more similar adware items, but no other types of malware. I
>>>> doubt if that has anything to do with it.
>>>>
>>> You sure know how to have fun. biosagentplus is part of Phoenix, and
>>> esupport has something to do with it as well.
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Technologies
>>>
>>> *******
>>>
>>> Time keeping in Windows, is done by counting clock tick interrupts.
>>> The OS makes a copy of the RTC (real time clock) and runs
>>> independently of the crystal in the RTC until shutdown. That is why
>>> the clock can advance while you're in Windows - it doesn't care
>>> about the RTC once the time is copied to memory.
>>>
>>> When the system is shut down, the RTC is relied on to keep time. It
>>> uses a 32768 Hz digital watch crystal, strapped to the motherboard.
>>> That's what times the ticks there.
>>>
>>> The RTC and CMOS RAM block, are part of the Southbridge chip silicon
>>> die, and live in "the well". The well is a semi-independent section
>>> of the chip, separated from other subsystems by transmission gates.
>>> They do it that way, so no leakage current, or backfeed, can move
>>> from one section of the chip to another. After all, when all power
>>> is removed from the PC, "the well" runs off the CR2032 coin cell
>>> battery (<10uA current draw). The rest of the Southbridge is
>>> unpowered, with the exception of "the well".
>>>
>>> So your RTC isn't accepting write cycles, it would appear. Power for
>>> the storage elements, at the time of write attempt, would be 3VSB
>>> (which in turn, is regulated from +5VSB).
>>>
>>> Perhaps the PC is set up to do NTP and use an external time server,
>>> to set the correct time, and that's how it is getting moved from
>>> 8:01. Since it is still 8:01 when you return to the BIOS, then it
>>> means so far, nothing is able to change the RTC time setting.
>>>
>>> If you didn't have an NTP (network time protocol) process running in
>>> Windows, then every time the PC boots, it should record the time as
>>> starting at 8:01 again.
>>
>> Yep... that's what it's doing. Ooops wait. I just checked the BIOS
>> again and it had advanced to 20:28.xx. But this was after 10 o'clock
>> which should have been 22:xx:xx. I went ahead and set it right again.
>> Again just now I looked at the windows time at it said 10:36 and it
>> was actually 10:44. I went into the time settings and synchronized it
>> with time.windows.com and it did jump up to 10:44. But if I look back
>> in a few minutes it will be behind again. There's some place in the
>> registry where you can change the frequency of the time checks. Maybe
>> I should set it to every 10 minutes!
>>
>>> The Southbridge is hard to replace, if that was indeed what was
>>> broken. Could it be the power source for "the well" at fault ?
>>> Possibly. Just for fun, you can stick a multimeter set to volts,
>>> across the CR2032 top surface, and connect the other lead to
>>> grounded metal on the chassis. And see if it is still 3.0V. You say
>>> it's new, but batteries can drain pretty quickly if there is a
>>> fault. Very occasionally, someone will report that their battery
>>> drains in a matter of days, which means there is a leakage path
>>> there somewhere. The battery is not charged by the ATX supply, so
>>> cannot be "pumped back up".
>>
>> OK. Just did that. The new one pegged my meter on the 2.5VDC setting.
>> Next increment is 50... too hard to read. I checked the old battery
>> and it has less than half a volt left in it.
>>> *******
>>>
>>> I see no reason to change the BIOS at this point, because you don't
>>> have any other anomalies except the clock. You would have noticed an
>>> inability to set the clock, if that had happened when the machine
>>> was new. And since the main body of the BIOS is protected by a
>>> checksum, there would likely be an error message of some sort, if
>>> there was "bit rot" in there. The boot block code, should be
>>> computing the checksum of the main BIOS code, before running it.
>>>
>>> *******
>>>
>>> You left out the most important part - Emachine model number info.
>>> Did you Google the model number, and see if there were any other
>>> reports like yours ?
>>
>> Yep. It's a T2042. It's got a 2.0 GB Celeron processor and over a gig
>> of memory. There's drivers on the eMachine support site (Gateway
>> actually) for most everything but under "BIOS" it says nothing
>> available (or something like that). I also checked on
>> driversguide.com and didn't come up with anything. The only place
>> that hinted that it might be out of date was that biosagentplus
>> thing. Then, if you looked at my screenshots, when I clicked on the
>> bios update thing it wanted me to "register"
>> -----------------------
>> HOME OF THE LARGEST BIOS DIRECTORY ON THE INTERNET
>> * Get instant access to over a million driver files.
>> * Better PC Performance.
>> * Improved PC Stability.
>> * From a trusted source in the computer industry.
>> ------------------------
>> Sounds kind of spammy to me and I'll bet they want $$$$ to become
>> "registered". If it's Phoenix and there are upgrades available, then
>> they should offer downloads for free.
>>
>> As usual thanks for sharing your knowledge
>>
>
> If it's like eSupport, they'll want money for your free upgrade. If
> the BIOS file comes from the manufacturer, that would normally be
> free. eSupport used to sell generic BIOS of some sort (the people who
> bought from them, never made clear to me, whether the BIOS interface
> stayed the same or not). And the sales people would actually negotiate
> price (kinda like high pressure salesmen). And that to me was the
> tipoff. Via "chat" somebody had the salesman convince them to buy at
> half price.
>
> *******
>
> I see some pictures of the motherboards used in T2042 here.
>
> http://www.e4allupgraders.info/dir1/...8/imperial.sht
> ml
>
> I'd probably be booting something like Ubuntu, and testing time
> keeping there, to rule out an OS software issue.
>
> On one of my Linux VMs, I discovered something called sntp. A command
> like
>
> sntp -s time.nrc.ca
>
> would set the clock in Linux immediately (as long as Linux uses DHCP
> to set up networking for you). In one of my Ubuntu virtual machines,
> there is something called "rdate", which doesn't work for me at all.
> The date/time application (looks like a calendar) also has access to
> NTP protocol, but only seems to update the time from the Internet,
> once in a blue moon. Which is why I was investigating other options.
> For a hardware guy like me, the sntp one was great, because it worked
> immediately, and would also print out some delta information. But it
> isn't listed in all the package managers, so I can't guarantee you can
> easily find it. And compiling it from source, would require you to
> find the source for it.
>
> *******
>
> Timekeeping while Windows is running, is done by counting clock tick
> interrupts. The clock tick interrupt has a relatively high priority,
> which is to prevent other interrupts from affecting time keeping.
> Servicing of that interrupt would have to be stopped for more than one
> tick, in order to lose one, and make the (software) clock slow down.
>
> There have been chipsets with a hardware problem, where the time
> wandered all over the place. And it had to do with a bug in the
> interrupt logic. I'm not aware of anything like that for an Intel
> chipset.
>
> So anyway, give a Linux LiveCD a try, and see if the clock screws up
> there or not. If it's a hardware issue, it should be every bit as bad
> in Linux.
>
> *******
>
> And 2.5V for the battery, isn't that good.
But but but.... I said it pegged the needle when set at the 2.5 range. It
clicked at the top actually a little past 2.5. I'm sure it would have hit 3
if there was any more room... :-) It was going where the yellow line is at http://mewnlite.com/plink.jpg - you can see how hard it would be to read
the 50 scale. I can't afford one of those fancy digital meters for no more
use than I would get out of it.
> If that was the real value,
> there isn't a lot of headroom between 2.5V and 2.3V (as low as I'd
> want to go), and with the computer unplugged, it might only last a
> matter of weeks. The Southbridge is rated for 2.0V, but doesn't get
> the full battery voltage, due to 0.3V drop across a Schottky diode.
> The diode is there, to prevent the motherboard from pumping charge
> into the battery (which would cause it to burst). So the battery has
> to supply 2.3V, so the Southbridge can see 2.0V (its minimum allowed
> for accurate functioning).
>
> (ATX plugged in)
> 3VSB ----------------- diode --> ------+
> |
> +----- Southbridge (well)
> | RTC and 256 byte
> CMOS RAM block
> CR2032 --- 1000 ohm ---diode --> ------+
> resistor
>
> Measuring the voltage where it feeds the SB would be nice... But
> who can find that junction ? I've only managed it once or twice.
> I doubt I could find it on my current motherboard. To find the
> BAT45 dual diode (looks like a flat transistor with three legs), you
> need a magnifying glass to verify the part number. And some
> motherboards have a ton of things that look like that.
>
> HTH,
> Paul
>
>
> But but but.... I said it pegged the needle when set at the 2.5 range. It
> clicked at the top actually a little past 2.5. I'm sure it would have hit 3
> if there was any more room... :-) It was going where the yellow line is at
> http://mewnlite.com/plink.jpg - you can see how hard it would be to read
> the 50 scale. I can't afford one of those fancy digital meters for no more
> use than I would get out of it.
They make a model, with slightly better spacing. $22
Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in news:j5empu$ap1$1@dont-email.me:
> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>
>>
>> But but but.... I said it pegged the needle when set at the 2.5
>> range. It clicked at the top actually a little past 2.5. I'm sure it
>> would have hit 3 if there was any more room... :-) It was going
>> where the yellow line is at http://mewnlite.com/plink.jpg - you can
>> see how hard it would be to read the 50 scale. I can't afford one of
>> those fancy digital meters for no more use than I would get out of
>> it.
>
> They make a model, with slightly better spacing. $22
>
> http://images10.newegg.com/NeweggIma...001-522-01.jpg
>
> Since your meter is pegged, that's good enough for now. It's over 2.5V
> but we don't know by how much. It's probably not the problem right
> now.
>
> On with the testing...
"Menno Hershberger" <mhersh22@nosuchplace.net> wrote in message news:Xns9F6816D4C917butter@wefb973cbe498...
> Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in news:j5empu$ap1$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But but but.... I said it pegged the needle when set at the 2.5
>>> range. It clicked at the top actually a little past 2.5. I'm sure it
>>> would have hit 3 if there was any more room... :-) It was going
>>> where the yellow line is at http://mewnlite.com/plink.jpg - you can
>>> see how hard it would be to read the 50 scale. I can't afford one of
>>> those fancy digital meters for no more use than I would get out of
>>> it.
>>
>> They make a model, with slightly better spacing. $22
>>
>> http://images10.newegg.com/NeweggIma...001-522-01.jpg
>>
>> Since your meter is pegged, that's good enough for now. It's over 2.5V
>> but we don't know by how much. It's probably not the problem right
>> now.
>>
>> On with the testing...
>
> Damn, when do you sleep? :-)
>
I don't think Paul needs any sleep. I started thinking a long time ago he's one of the robot overlords we read about in
grade school scifi :-)
--
SC Tom
SC Tom snuck on to your hard drive to scribble:
> "Menno Hershberger" <mhersh22@nosuchplace.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9F6816D4C917butter@wefb973cbe498...
>> Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in news:j5empu$ap1$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>> Since your meter is pegged, that's good enough for now. It's over 2.5V
>>> but we don't know by how much. It's probably not the problem right
>>> now.
>>>
>>> On with the testing...
>>
>> Damn, when do you sleep? :-)
>>
>
> I don't think Paul needs any sleep. I started thinking a long time ago he's
> one of the robot overlords we read about in grade school scifi :-)
I was thinking along the lines of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
--
-There are some who call me...
Jim
"What do you mean?" he said. "Do you wish me a good morning, or mean
that it is a good morning whether I want it or not; or that you feel
good this morning; or that it is a morning to be good on?"
-Gandalf, after Bilbo Baggins says "Good Morning"
--->
> SC Tom snuck on to your hard drive to scribble:
>> "Menno Hershberger" <mhersh22@nosuchplace.net> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9F6816D4C917butter@wefb973cbe498...
>>> Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in
>>> news:j5empu$ap1$1@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>
>>>> Since your meter is pegged, that's good enough for now. It's
>>>> over 2.5V but we don't know by how much. It's probably not the
>>>> problem right now.
>>>>
>>>> On with the testing...
>>>
>>> Damn, when do you sleep? :-)
>>>
>>
>> I don't think Paul needs any sleep. I started thinking a long time
>> ago he's one of the robot overlords we read about in grade school
>> scifi :-)
>
> I was thinking along the lines of Do Androids Dream of Electric
> Sheep
>
On 9/21/2011 11:27 PM, Menno Hershberger wrote:
>> And 2.5V for the battery, isn't that good.
I don't usually delve into the circuitry as deep as Paul does, but I've
dealt with CMOS battery issues for 20+ years. For me, if I see problems
that point at it, I use 2.8/2.9 volts as my cutoff point.
There's too much variance in electronics manufacturing to assume
anything if you have a problem.
One example (where I did do some deep-digging) was specifically on a
CMOS problem. Paul's already shown you the typical diode circuitry used
for the battery feed downthread.
There are 3 basic diode designs:
Early
.... Germanium 0.3 volt drop
.... Silcon 0.6 volt drop
Later
.... Schottky 0.3 volt drop, but can be as low as 0.1 volt drop
As Paul stated, you really can't tell which is which, and they use the
same packaging.
In this case, what were supposed to be Schottky diodes were silicon
diodes instead. I'm guessing the wrong tape-reel (how parts are handled)
was installed in the "board-stuffing" machine.
This meant that there was 0.3 volts LESS available to the CMOS circuitry.
The motherboard had a long history of "general flakyness"(erratic fails
or hiccups in many functions), so I suspect that there were many more
wrong diodes. It wasn't even a fair Frisbee <g>
> But but but.... I said it pegged the needle when set at the 2.5 range. It
> clicked at the top actually a little past 2.5. I'm sure it would have hit 3
> if there was any more room...:-) It was going where the yellow line is at
> http://mewnlite.com/plink.jpg - you can see how hard it would be to read
> the 50 scale. I can't afford one of those fancy digital meters for no more
> use than I would get out of it.
>
Time to change your mind.... you really DO need a DMM for computer
troubleshooting. But don't ditch the analog one, both have their uses.
I'm guessing you paid ~$10 for that GB CMT-18 voltmeter. (I think I have
one somewhere, but paid $2). The ranging/resolution on that is mainly
for electrical work, not electronics. The "GB" brand is aimed at electrical.
There is *no* way I'd use that for troubleshooting electronics.
For a DMM (digital), $10 will buy you a reasonably decent one just about
everywhere. You don't need a $80-400 Fluke for simple stuff. The one
thing about even the cheap digital meters is they are either great or
horrible.
$10 will buy you a "not bad" DMM at Harbor Freight, but it's often free
with a coupon. Just don't forget to turn it off, it doesn't go to sleep.
Just for grins, I did some "Shopping Searchs" for "digital meter"
PS..
If you get stuck working with milk-barn stuff at your sister's farm, you
might find that a DMM is nice when working with a lot of new-generation
dairy equipment.
--
"**** this is it, all the pieces do fit.
We're like that crazy old man jumping
out of the alleyway with a baseball bat,
saying, "Remember me mother****er?"
Jim “Dandy” Mangrum
FWIW this issue could be in the hardware:
I have my BIOS set to automatically boot every morning. When it became
erratic and then stopped automatically booting, I played with the BIOS until
I found 3 bulging capactors running hot near the battery. Swapped and all
was good. The bulging made this easy for me as I might not have thought
about using my ESR meter.
"Menno Hershberger" <mhersh22@nosuchplace.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9F67D7EBF715butter@wefb973cbe498...
>I have an eMachine here with Windows XP SP3 that has a severe time problem.
> For instance, it lost 57 minutes in the time it took me to run defrag on
> it
> which was about an hour and a half. I just rebooted it and it lost 10
> minutes. There doesn't seem to be any set pattern. I just rebooted it
> again
> and it only lost one minute. It seems to lose or gain randomly whether it
> is rebooted or not.
> Now I've discovered that in BIOS you can set the time but it does not
> move.
> Presently set at 20:01:01. If you save and reboot to Windows the time
> shows
> 8:01PM. If you *don't* save then in Windows the time (like right now)
> showed 8:25 PM. Go back into BIOS and it still shows 20:01:01. Actual time
> as I post is 8:50 PM.
> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that. It's got a
> PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Rlease 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no updates
> available. Phoenix led me off to a link at biosagentplus.com which
> eventually led me to downloading biosagentplus_752.exe. That eventually
> winds you up at http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg which leads to
> http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough good sense to stop at
> that point.
> Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios update and even if there was
> I
> doubt seriously it would correct the time thing.
> Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
> For what it's worth, it was loaded with MyWebSearch, Hotbar, and a few
> more
> similar adware items, but no other types of malware. I doubt if that has
> anything to do with it.
>
> --
> -- I'm out of white ink --
>
Menno Hershberger wrote:
>
> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that.
How way back? Because I've had motherboard batteries run down in at
little as a year when they were located right next to the north bridge
chip and kept hot by it because of bad circuit board design.
I've read that one of the diodes that isolates the battery can go bad
and start leaking. Another clock problem is that its 32 KHz quartz
crystal can go into an unstable state and need to be reset by shutting
it off completely, meaning the computer power supply has to be
unplugged from the AC outlet and the motherboard battery removed and
left out for several minutes or even an hour to completely stop the
crystal.
> It's got a PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Release 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no
> updates available. Phoenix led me off to a link at biosagentplus.com
> which eventually led me to downloading biosagentplus_752.exe. That
> eventually winds you up at http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg
> which leads to http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough
> good sense to stop at that point.
> Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios update and even if
> there was I doubt seriously it would correct the time thing.
> Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
> I'm a sucker for punishment so I went ahead and filled out that
> registration screen just to see what would happen.
> Sure enough, http://mewnlite.com/shurnuf.jpg
> $29.95. No thanks.
When I registered but refused to pay to update the BIOS of my
450-466MHz Socket 370 motherboard, they later sent me an e-mail
offering the update for half price. I think they offered a money-back
guarantee. The new BIOS would have added support for newer CPUs (had
to be hardware compatible) and 48-bit LBA for hard disks bigger than
137GB. However any motherboard with SATA ports already has 48-bit
LBA, and the only other major upgrade I can imagine, other than for
new CPUs, would be to convert the BIOS to UEFI, to get around the 2TB
limit of BIOS.
"Nobody > (Revisited)" <usenetharvested@aol.com> wrote in
news:OcNeq.45698$CQ4.16040@newsfe09.iad:
> On 9/21/2011 11:27 PM, Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>> And 2.5V for the battery, isn't that good.
>
> I don't usually delve into the circuitry as deep as Paul does, but
> I've dealt with CMOS battery issues for 20+ years. For me, if I see
> problems that point at it, I use 2.8/2.9 volts as my cutoff point.
>
> There's too much variance in electronics manufacturing to assume
> anything if you have a problem.
>
> One example (where I did do some deep-digging) was specifically on a
> CMOS problem. Paul's already shown you the typical diode circuitry
> used for the battery feed downthread.
>
> There are 3 basic diode designs:
> Early
> ... Germanium 0.3 volt drop
> ... Silcon 0.6 volt drop
> Later
> ... Schottky 0.3 volt drop, but can be as low as 0.1 volt drop
>
> As Paul stated, you really can't tell which is which, and they use the
> same packaging.
>
> In this case, what were supposed to be Schottky diodes were silicon
> diodes instead. I'm guessing the wrong tape-reel (how parts are
> handled) was installed in the "board-stuffing" machine.
>
> This meant that there was 0.3 volts LESS available to the CMOS
> circuitry.
>
> The motherboard had a long history of "general flakyness"(erratic
> fails or hiccups in many functions), so I suspect that there were many
> more wrong diodes. It wasn't even a fair Frisbee <g>
>
>
>
>> But but but.... I said it pegged the needle when set at the 2.5
>> range. It clicked at the top actually a little past 2.5. I'm sure it
>> would have hit 3 if there was any more room...:-) It was going
>> where the yellow line is at http://mewnlite.com/plink.jpg - you can
>> see how hard it would be to read the 50 scale. I can't afford one of
>> those fancy digital meters for no more use than I would get out of
>> it.
>>
>
> Time to change your mind.... you really DO need a DMM for computer
> troubleshooting. But don't ditch the analog one, both have their uses.
>
> I'm guessing you paid ~$10 for that GB CMT-18 voltmeter. (I think I
> have one somewhere, but paid $2). The ranging/resolution on that is
> mainly for electrical work, not electronics. The "GB" brand is aimed
> at electrical.
>
> There is *no* way I'd use that for troubleshooting electronics.
>
> For a DMM (digital), $10 will buy you a reasonably decent one just
> about everywhere. You don't need a $80-400 Fluke for simple stuff. The
> one thing about even the cheap digital meters is they are either great
> or horrible.
>
> $10 will buy you a "not bad" DMM at Harbor Freight, but it's often
> free with a coupon. Just don't forget to turn it off, it doesn't go to
> sleep.
>
> Just for grins, I did some "Shopping Searchs" for "digital meter"
>
> http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?...multimeter&p1=[CommerceSe
> rvice%20scenario%3d%22f%22%20r%3d%22minprice|0%2cm axprice|20%22]&p1=[Co
> mmerceService%20scenario%3d%22f%22%20r%3d%22%2cmax price|10%22]%2c[Comme
> rceService%20scenario%3d%22f%22%20r%3d%22maxprice| 10%22]&FORM=R5FD (
> http://snipurl.com/20dollardmm )
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=digit...utf-8&aq=t&rls
> =org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=digital+meter&hl=en&safe
> =off&client=firefox-a&hs=Wxq&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbs=p_ord:p
> &tbm=shop&prmd=imvns&ei=qZt7ToaYK_HQiALl_c2_Bw&sta rt=10&sa=N&bav=on.2,o
> r.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c6d04ee4771debb8&biw=1084&bih=800 (
> http://snipurl.com/dmmascendingprice )
>
> What the hey.. Craftsman's 31937511
> http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_1...No=1&blockNo=1
> &blockType=G1
>
> ( http://snipurl.com/sears31937511 )
>
> PS..
> If you get stuck working with milk-barn stuff at your sister's farm,
> you might find that a DMM is nice when working with a lot of
> new-generation dairy equipment.
OK, I just bought a Equus 3320 Innova Auto Ranging Digital Multimeter
online from WalMart for $15.56 (including tax). I will pick it up at the
store tomorrow.
On 9/22/2011 10:44 PM, Menno Hershberger wrote:
> OK, I just bought a Equus 3320 Innova Auto Ranging Digital Multimeter
> online from WalMart for $15.56 (including tax). I will pick it up at the
> store tomorrow.
Not bad, (and a killer deal, MSRP is $40!) It's ehh,... about 3 times
the meter compared to the Harbor Freight $10 unit.
A DMM like this would have cost $60-80 5 years ago.
I like the display size. It appears to be as large as my Fluke 87. Bret
for oldfarteyeballs.
If I didn't already have about 12 different multimeters already, I'd be
making a WallyWorld jaunt for one tomorrow. The kicker for me would be
the household battery test ranges WITH LOAD. I've got a homebrew little
load box for that now, but I have to go find it every time i need it.
--
"**** this is it, all the pieces do fit.
We're like that crazy old man jumping
out of the alleyway with a baseball bat,
saying, "Remember me mother****er?"
Jim “Dandy” Mangrum
>
> OK, I just bought a Equus 3320 Innova Auto Ranging Digital Multimeter
> online from WalMart for $15.56 (including tax). I will pick it up at the
> store tomorrow.
>
For the price, it's pretty good. I hope the autoranging doesn't annoy you.
I have a cheapy here that flashes all over the place until you
feed it something stable to read out. My main meter, has fixed ranges
(mainly because I'm old-fashioned).
Range Resolution Accuracy Notes
200.0mV 0.1mV
2000V 1mV ±(0.8% of Input Resistance: 10Megohms
20.00V 10mV reading Overload Protection: 600V DC
200.0V 100mV + 5 digits) or AC 600V RMS.
600V 1V
The other ranges aren't quite as nice, but at least you'll
be making fancy DC volts readings.
On the 10 ampere current measurement range, it says
*A waiting period of at least 15 minutes is necessary between
every 15 second testing period.
Unfused; 15sec maximum
You think they'd just tell you to go home for the day, and
stop working on your project :-) A 15 minute wait ? Take the
back off it, and maybe it cools off faster ? The fact it doesn't have
a fuse for the 10 ampere range is interesting. I guess it uses
Magic Smoke as a relief mechanism. You think they'd at least
put a 15 second timer in it, to tell you when the shunt is
cooked :-)
Measuring current is overrated anyway. I don't measure current
on my main meter - ohms and volts seem to be enough. My meter
also does capacitors, but the input terminals suck and that
takes all the fun out of it (it's very hard to get the capacitor
leads, to make contact with the meter).
Now your 3V CR2032 battery, will be on the 20.00V range. Same
as your car battery :-)
On 22/09/2011 20:32, Thai Guy wrote:
> --->
>> SC Tom snuck on to your hard drive to scribble:
>>> "Menno Hershberger" <mhersh22@nosuchplace.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9F6816D4C917butter@wefb973cbe498...
>>>> Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote in
>>>> news:j5empu$ap1$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>
>>>>> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>>> Since your meter is pegged, that's good enough for now. It's
>>>>> over 2.5V but we don't know by how much. It's probably not the
>>>>> problem right now.
>>>>>
>>>>> On with the testing...
>>>>
>>>> Damn, when do you sleep? :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think Paul needs any sleep. I started thinking a long time
>>> ago he's one of the robot overlords we read about in grade school
>>> scifi :-)
>>
>> I was thinking along the lines of Do Androids Dream of Electric
>> Sheep
>>
>
> Ooh. Blade Runner. I'll have to see that again.
Look for the 'Final Cut' version. Unlike George Lucas, Ridley Scott
has improved ascpects of the film, rather than dumbing it down like
Lucas has done with the Star Wars originals (which you can't buy thanks
to that dumbass.)
List of differences between Blade Runner and the 2 later versions
(Director's Cut and Final Cut): http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/alternateversions
--
Rob
On 9/22/2011 1:27 AM, Menno Hershberger wrote:
> if there was any more room... :-) It was going where the yellow line is at
> http://mewnlite.com/plink.jpg - you can see how hard it would be to read
> the 50 scale. I can't afford one of those fancy digital meters for no more
> use than I would get out of it.
Really using an analog multimeter on a computer isn't the best thing.
The analog meter isn't going to be as accurate and will place a small
load on the circuit you're testing which could throw off your readings.
You can find some good digital meters at reasonable prices, like this
one here:
Roy Smith wrote:
> On 9/22/2011 1:27 AM, Menno Hershberger wrote:
>> if there was any more room... :-) It was going where the yellow line is
>> at
>> http://mewnlite.com/plink.jpg - you can see how hard it would be to read
>> the 50 scale. I can't afford one of those fancy digital meters for no
>> more
>> use than I would get out of it.
>
> Really using an analog multimeter on a computer isn't the best thing.
> The analog meter isn't going to be as accurate
That's true, but then again, how accurate does it really need to be?? If
you have an analog voltmeter with a 5VFS setting, reading 3v on it is just
fine. :-)
> and will place a small
> load on the circuit you're testing which could throw off your readings.
Actually, seeing it under load is better. Oftentimes a battery will show a
good open circuit voltage, but when placed under load, the terminal voltage
drops (due to high internal resistance when a battery is weak or old).
(You can check that out yourself, with some old flashlight cells).
I oftentimes prefer using the analog ones, except for the cases where the 3
digit or more accuracy is warranted. (Checking out a flashlight cell, a car
battery, or a CR2032 BIOS battery doesn't really need a DVM. :-)
> You can find some good digital meters at reasonable prices, like this
> one here:
>
> http://vnnphim.ws/products_info.php?i=B000EVYGZA
>
> For $11 that's not a bad deal, and it does get some good reviews too.
>
>
> --
>
> Roy Smith
> Windows 7 Home Premium 64-Bit
> Thunderbird 6.0.2
> Friday, September 23, 2011 11:14:03 AM
Bill in Co wrote:
> Roy Smith wrote:
>
>> and will place a small
>> load on the circuit you're testing which could throw off your readings.
>
> Actually, seeing it under load is better.
It depends on whether your purpose in using the multimeter, is to
debug the circuit or not. For debugging, you want to "observe" the
circuit, without changing circuit conditions. In this case, the
question we want answered is "is the power source delivering at
least 2.3V at the moment, so that our Southbridge sees 2.0V (or more)".
For that, a high impedance measurement is what we're after (and
what Menno will get, with his new meter).
If, on the other hand, the circuit is working fine, and all you
want to do, is predict remaining battery life, then perhaps a
load test is appropriate to do. But in that case, you also
have to figure out what an appropriate value of load is.
Is it 1 milliamp ? Is it 1 ampere ? Some of those values
are silly and pointless, while others might make sense.
Some batteries have significant internal resistance and
take some time to recover after being abused, and the
mere process of doing the load measurement, disturbs things.
If you wanted to repeat the test a second time, it might
pay in that case, to wait until the next day for when the
battery diffusion has recovered things enough for another
test.
*******
One of my favorite stress tests, is the one my mechanic uses. I
take in the car, to have a hose replaced in the cooling system.
The mechanic "pressure tests" the cooling system, and comes
back to report the radiator just burst, the water pump is leaking,
and will that be Amex or Visa. I'm sure anyone who's owned a car,
has run into that thoughtful and careful stress testing. It's
almost as much fun, as jamming the field coil winding, making the
alternator dump 70 amps into the battery, as a test the
alternator works :-)
The only things they won't stress test, are the things that could
explode and kill them :-)
Paul wrote:
> Bill in Co wrote:
>> Roy Smith wrote:
>>
>>> and will place a small
>>> load on the circuit you're testing which could throw off your readings.
>>
>> Actually, seeing it under load is better.
>
> It depends on whether your purpose in using the multimeter, is to
> debug the circuit or not. For debugging, you want to "observe" the
> circuit, without changing circuit conditions.
Fair point. :-) Although even an analog voltmeter doesn't present all
that much of a load (in directly measuring battery voltages). (For other
in-circuit measurements, it's quite a different story, however)
> In this case, the
> question we want answered is "is the power source delivering at
> least 2.3V at the moment, so that our Southbridge sees 2.0V (or more)".
> For that, a high impedance measurement is what we're after (and
> what Menno will get, with his new meter).
>
> If, on the other hand, the circuit is working fine, and all you
> want to do, is predict remaining battery life, then perhaps a
> load test is appropriate to do. But in that case, you also
> have to figure out what an appropriate value of load is.
> Is it 1 milliamp ? Is it 1 ampere ? Some of those values
> are silly and pointless, while others might make sense.
Indeed. A bit of prudence is called for in these tests. :-)
One test I will do on a flashlight cell that I've had for a bit of time is
to give it a *very brief* short circuit test (directly through an analog
ammeter). I can judge the condition of the cell quite well that way, in
contrast to an open circuit (or even minimally loaded) voltage check, which
is almost meaningless in those cases. :-) As I recall, most of the time I
can get upwards of an amp here; if I get 100 ma (or something like that),
that flashlight cell is pretty worthless (and yet it still may read 1.4V or
more open circuit).
> Some batteries have significant internal resistance and
> take some time to recover after being abused, and the
> mere process of doing the load measurement, disturbs things.
> If you wanted to repeat the test a second time, it might
> pay in that case, to wait until the next day for when the
> battery diffusion has recovered things enough for another
> test.
>
> *******
>
> One of my favorite stress tests, is the one my mechanic uses. I
> take in the car, to have a hose replaced in the cooling system.
> The mechanic "pressure tests" the cooling system, and comes
> back to report the radiator just burst, the water pump is leaking,
> and will that be Amex or Visa. I'm sure anyone who's owned a car,
> has run into that thoughtful and careful stress testing. It's
> almost as much fun, as jamming the field coil winding, making the
> alternator dump 70 amps into the battery, as a test the
> alternator works :-)
>
> The only things they won't stress test, are the things that could
> explode and kill them :-)
>
> Paul
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote in
news:50defe82-b3fd-4eb4-9f98-5254387f90e5@i14g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>
>
> Menno Hershberger wrote:
>>
>> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that.
>
> How way back?
Right after I took the side off, before I tried anything else. Maybe
half an hour... :-)
Because I've had motherboard batteries run down in at
> little as a year when they were located right next to the north bridge
> chip and kept hot by it because of bad circuit board design.
>
> I've read that one of the diodes that isolates the battery can go bad
> and start leaking. Another clock problem is that its 32 KHz quartz
> crystal can go into an unstable state and need to be reset by shutting
> it off completely, meaning the computer power supply has to be
> unplugged from the AC outlet and the motherboard battery removed and
> left out for several minutes or even an hour to completely stop the
> crystal.
>
>> It's got a PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Release 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support
>> says no updates available. Phoenix led me off to a link at
>> biosagentplus.com which eventually led me to downloading
>> biosagentplus_752.exe. That eventually winds you up at
>> http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg which leads to
>> http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough good sense to
>> stop at that point. Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios
>> update and even if there was I doubt seriously it would correct the
>> time thing. Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
>
>> I'm a sucker for punishment so I went ahead and filled out that
>> registration screen just to see what would happen.
>> Sure enough, http://mewnlite.com/shurnuf.jpg
>> $29.95. No thanks.
>
> When I registered but refused to pay to update the BIOS of my
> 450-466MHz Socket 370 motherboard, they later sent me an e-mail
> offering the update for half price. I think they offered a money-back
> guarantee. The new BIOS would have added support for newer CPUs (had
> to be hardware compatible) and 48-bit LBA for hard disks bigger than
> 137GB. However any motherboard with SATA ports already has 48-bit
> LBA, and the only other major upgrade I can imagine, other than for
> new CPUs, would be to convert the BIOS to UEFI, to get around the 2TB
> limit of BIOS.
>
>
Hello,
just by coincidence I fixed a Dell Dimension 2350 computer, which didn't
keep time although I had put in a new battery, by downloading a BIOS update
from Dell.
HTH (Hope This Helps or Happy To Help.
Petrus
"Menno Hershberger" <mhersh22@nosuchplace.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9F67D7EBF715butter@wefb973cbe498...
>I have an eMachine here with Windows XP SP3 that has a severe time problem.
> For instance, it lost 57 minutes in the time it took me to run defrag on
> it
> which was about an hour and a half. I just rebooted it and it lost 10
> minutes. There doesn't seem to be any set pattern. I just rebooted it
> again
> and it only lost one minute. It seems to lose or gain randomly whether it
> is rebooted or not.
> Now I've discovered that in BIOS you can set the time but it does not
> move.
> Presently set at 20:01:01. If you save and reboot to Windows the time
> shows
> 8:01PM. If you *don't* save then in Windows the time (like right now)
> showed 8:25 PM. Go back into BIOS and it still shows 20:01:01. Actual time
> as I post is 8:50 PM.
> I put a new battery in it way back in the game. It ain't that. It's got a
> PhoenixBIOS 4.0 Rlease 6.0 Rev 1.04. eMachine support says no updates
> available. Phoenix led me off to a link at biosagentplus.com which
> eventually led me to downloading biosagentplus_752.exe. That eventually
> winds you up at http://mewnlite.com/biosagentplus.jpg which leads to
> http://mewnlite.com/register.jpg . I did have enough good sense to stop at
> that point.
> Personally I don't believe there *is* a bios update and even if there was
> I
> doubt seriously it would correct the time thing.
> Is there any sense in pursuing it any further?
> For what it's worth, it was loaded with MyWebSearch, Hotbar, and a few
> more
> similar adware items, but no other types of malware. I doubt if that has
> anything to do with it.
>
> --
> -- I'm out of white ink --
>
eMachine won't keep time 
Linear Mode
