FAQS! FACTS! FAX! 028 (15/10/96)

UPGRADE OR REPLACE?

Four years ago we purchased an IBM PS/1 computer for general use by all the family. It cost us over £1000 but now we’re finding that a lot of recent software -- including Young Telegraph diskettes -- won’t run on the machine, despite changing the operating system from DOS 4.0 to DOS 6, adding a mouse and joystick card. Could our system be updated with a CD ROM drive? We would like our children, aged 9 and 16, to use it for school work. Now that I’ve taken early retirement I want to use it more for letter writing, and perhaps a book. I’m also considering starting a retail franchise, and would like to use the computer for the accounts.

D.R.B., Ormskirk

A

Without knowing which model you have it’s difficult to be specific, but in general it is possible to upgrade most PS/1 machines with extra memory, a larger hard disc drive and in some cases, a faster processor. Due to the nature of the machine, which uses a proprietary motherboard and BIOS (internal control software), some components can be quite expensive, difficult to locate, and set up, compared with a regular IBM ‘clone’ PC. There is plenty of information and advice contained in the PS/1 Aptiva forum on CompuServe. It will be worth your while investing in a modem and signing up to CompuServe, just type GO IBMPS1. If it is an older model, based on a 386 processor, you will find that it’s simply too slow to run a lot of software, and you will be disappointed with the performance of a CD ROM drive.

Maybe you should be thinking about buying a Pentium multimedia machine for the kids. Keep the PS/1 for word-processing and book-keeping, two jobs it can easily handle, without you having to spend any more money on it.  It might sound like an expensive solution but upgrading an older machine, to keep up with the latest software developments can be an costly, and ultimately fruitless exercise. You’ll be forever chasing a moving target. Usually it’s better to cut your losses, and resign yourself to the fact that PCs and the software they use, have a finite life.  

PHONE PHOBIA

I’ve been reading a lot of reports lately about the dangers of mobile phones, and the possible injurious effects. Can you state categorically, one way or another, whether or not they’re safe, or if the various gadgets claimed to reduce their emissions actually work?

F.L.D, Newcastle

A

The concerns are mostly based on the fact that high radio frequency (RF) radiation causes a heating effect in human and animal tissue. It’s used to beneficial effect in such devices as microwave ovens and hospital diathermy equipment, which generate several hundred watts of concentrated RF energy. It’s widely accepted that prolonged exposure to high-level emissions can cause a range of ill-effects, ranging from cataracts in the eye, and possibly tumours. However, the energy output from mobile phones is very low, in the order of a few hundred milliwatts (thousandth’s of a watt). The energy is dissipated by the antenna, so localised heating effects are virtually eliminated, moreover exposure times are comparatively low.

Bear in mind that personal and portable two-way radios -- usually a lot more powerful than a normal cellphone -- have been in use by many hundreds of thousands of people, including the police and emergency services, for several decades, apparently without raising any health issues. On the evidence so far it appears the risk is very low indeed, but it’s impossible to say that it does not exist. The most common injury attributed to mobile phones is from people poking themselves in the eye with the aerial... The devices we’ve seen, that purport to protect mobile phone users from RF radiation, use a metallic foil to shield the signal, and must, to some extent affect the handset’s range or efficiency.