Thanks Ed. Well, I'm not hardware-savy enough to go to that detail, but this group has their own ideas about just about everything anyway. They are convinced they can do terminal-type connectivity to save money rather than putting .EXEs on the workstations, but I've been trying to explain the benefits of their type of application running locally. They are a long way from COM, C/S, etc. because of their code base and legacy applications. But, "the customer's always right" - right? (yeah right!). Anyway, I will suggest to their network people to look into what you have suggested. I know a hardware guy that could probably dig into it, if they will let him.

...and yes, they have a tendency to find great [expensive] ways to creatively hurt themselves! :)

>There is if the processor or chipset don't handle it properly; if it's a Slot 1 or Socket 370 processor, there are potential problems when the physical address space is >512MB, at least with the PII and chipsets priot to the 440GX. I don't know anything about the hardware they're running, but it sounds likely that they've chosen a new and interesting way to hurt themselves in a creative fashion. You'll need someone who can discuss the chipset and processor architecture in detail, but my pwn best guess is that if it's not using SLot2, the memory bus isn't being handle properly.