J
Joel
Shouldnt a comp still post even if the cmos battery is dead or taken out?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
R
Rod Speed
Joel said:Shouldnt a comp still post even if the cmos battery is dead or taken out?
Yes, most systems can. The only effect is that the bios whines
about a cmos checksum error on a boot after being turned off.
K
kony
Shouldnt a comp still post even if the cmos battery is dead or taken out?
It depends entirely on how the board was designed. Many
will post, but many will not. It is not a safe assumption
to make either way unless you hae direct evidence to make a
conclusion.
P
philo
Joel said:Shouldnt a comp still post even if the cmos battery is dead or taken out?
Most machines I've ever worked on would post without a cmos battery
*however* I've come across a few machines with cmos batteries that were
low...
somewhere around 1.6 volts and did not post unless I either took the
battery out...or else put in a good one
D
DaveW
No, it will NOT POST without the CMOS battery.
R
Rod Speed
DaveW said:No, it will NOT POST without the CMOS battery.
Wrong, as always.
G
GT
Rod Speed said:Wrong, as always.
I believe this is the case with some newer motherboards, but the majority of
older ones do. Based on the various posts I have read in this group over the
last few weeks.
R
Rod Speed
I believe this is the case with some newer motherboards, but the majority of older ones do.
Yes, so his absolute statement is just plain wrong.
G
GT
Rod Speed said:Yes, so his absolute statement is just plain wrong.
His statement says 'it', refering to the OP's question about motherboard
POSTing. We cannot prove his absolute statement either true or false without
knowledge of the motherboard, so the statement was simply unhelpful. It is
potentialy correct, but I agree that it is more likely just plain wrong!
H
HankG
majority of older ones do.
I have an old '386 which I used for a lot of Win 95 and DOS programs. It
finally gave up the ghost (CMOS, that is). Unfortunately, it doesn't use an
easily replaced coin battery, but a module (real-time clock/battery) with 12
or 16 leads.
While I probably could get a replacement, it would be tough to change out.
And, by the way, it will not post.
HankG
I have an old '386 which I used for a lot of Win 95 and DOS programs. It
finally gave up the ghost (CMOS, that is). Unfortunately, it doesn't use an
easily replaced coin battery, but a module (real-time clock/battery) with 12
or 16 leads.
While I probably could get a replacement, it would be tough to change out.
And, by the way, it will not post.
HankG
R
Rod Speed
His statement says 'it', refering to the OP's question about motherboard POSTing.
Yes, and since the OP's question is so general, his absolute statement is just plain
wrong when plenty of motherboards will POST fine without the CMOS battery.
We cannot prove his absolute statement either
true or false without knowledge of the motherboard,
His absolute statement is just plain wrong when he doesnt know what motherboard
is involved, when plenty of motherboards will POST fine without the CMOS battery.
so the statement was simply unhelpful.
Its just plain wrong when stated that absolutely.
It is potentialy correct, but I agree that it is more likely just plain wrong!
You'll end up blind if you dont watch out.
G
GT
Rod Speed said:His absolute statement is just plain wrong
So, if it is definitely wrong to say the motherboard will NOT POST, then you
are saying it definitely will POST. So tell us, what motherboard is the OP
talking about then, so that you can say with such confidence that it will
POST?
K
kony
His statement says 'it', refering to the OP's question about motherboard
POSTing. We cannot prove his absolute statement either true or false without
knowledge of the motherboard, so the statement was simply unhelpful. It is
potentialy correct, but I agree that it is more likely just plain wrong!
No, as stated it was not potentially correct. As stated it
was wrong, only with further qualifiers could be be
considered potentially correct.
G
GT
kony said:No, as stated it was not potentially correct. As stated it
was wrong, only with further qualifiers could be be
considered potentially correct.
His statement is both potentially correct and potentially incorrect for the
same reason - there is not enough information to qualify or prove the
statement either way. What we can say is that it was wrong to post such a
statement without the necessary information to support it.
Just like me saying, "My house rides on a cushion of air" - a statement that
is probably incorrect, but it is potentially true - there is only one person
in this group that has enough information to definitely say it is wrong
(which it is!).
Feel free to shoot me down in gramatical flames - we know what I think, so I
shall leave it there.
K
kony
His statement is both potentially correct and potentially incorrect for the
same reason - there is not enough information to qualify or prove the
statement either way.
Wrong.
The statement could only be correct AS STATED if it were
always true.
Lack of information means it has to be considered true for
all (reasonably possible) cases, which it clearly is not.
G
GT
kony said:Wrong.
The statement could only be correct AS STATED if it were
always true.
You are spot on with that point - the statement can only be correct if it
were always true. The rest of the argument stands that the statement can
only be incorrect if it were always false...
The statement was in direct response to a question regarding one particular
motherboard. The statement AS STATED can only evaluate to true or false and
will always evaluate to the same result as the statement was made about that
1 particular motherboard, NOT ANY motherboard. The problem is that we don't
know what motherboard it is talking about, so we can't say if it is correct
or wrong. In other words, we don't have enough information to evaluate the
statement, so can't say if it is true or false.
If you insist that the statement AS STATED evaluates to false, then you are
saying the statement is definitely wrong and the converse is, by
implication, the truth. You are stating that the motherboard WILL POST
without the battery. The only way your conclusion can be correct is if all
motherboards (including the one particular motherboard in question) can POST
without a battery - can ALL motherboards POST without a CMOS battery, I have
been led to believe in other posts on this group that this is not the case?
R
Rod Speed
So, if it is definitely wrong to say the motherboard will NOT POST, then you are saying it
definitely will POST.
Wrong, as always. ALL I said was that his absolute statement at the top is just plain wrong.
So tell us, what motherboard is the OP talking about then,
The OP is completely irrelevant to whether that absolute statement at the top is just plain wrong.
so that you can say with such confidence that it will POST?
I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.
I JUST said that Dave's absolute statement at the top is just plain wrong.
R
Rod Speed
His statement is both potentially correct and potentially incorrect for the same reason - there is
not enough information to qualify or prove the statement either way.
His absolute statement is just plain wrong.
BECAUSE it is an absolute statement.
What we can say is that it was wrong to post such a statement without the necessary information to
support it.
We can also say that that absolute statement is just plain wrong.
Just like me saying, "My house rides on a cushion of air"
Nothing like. That is a statement about a specific house.
His statement wasnt about a specific motherboard.
- a statement that is probably incorrect, but it is potentially true
The ABSOLUTE STATEMENT is just plain wrong.
- there is only one person in this group that has enough information to definitely say it is wrong
Wrong with that ABSOLUTE STATEMENT.
(which it is!).
Feel free to shoot me down in gramatical flames - we know what I think, so I shall leave it there.
We know you are just plain wrong and arent about to give a damn about what you 'think'
R
Rod Speed
You are spot on with that point - the statement can only be correct if it were always true.
That is all anyone ever said.
The rest of the argument stands that the statement can only be incorrect if it were always
false...
Wrong. The rest of your mindlessly silly argument is flat on its face in the mud, as always.
The statement was in direct response to a question regarding one particular motherboard.
Lie, it clearly was nothing of the sort. Here it is again.
The statement AS STATED can only evaluate to true or false and will always evaluate to the same
result as the statement was made about that 1 particular motherboard, NOT ANY motherboard.
Wrong, as always.
The problem is that we don't know what motherboard it is talking about, so we can't say if it is
correct or wrong.
We do know that Dave's ABSOLUTE STATEMENT is just plain wrong.
In other words, we don't have enough information to evaluate the statement, so can't say if it is
true or false.
We do know that Dave's ABSOLUTE STATEMENT is just plain wrong.
If you insist that the statement AS STATED evaluates to false, then you are saying the statement
is definitely wrong and the converse is, by implication, the truth.
Wrong, as always.
You are stating that the motherboard WILL POST without the battery.
Wrong, as always.
The only way your conclusion can be correct is if all motherboards (including the one particular
motherboard in question) can POST without a battery - can ALL motherboards POST without a CMOS
battery,
Wrong, as always.
I have been led to believe in other posts on this group that this is not the case?
Correct, for once.