binder@dosadi.DEC (10/15/84)
I purchased a copy of ProDOS this weekend, and I have a question for the net. Will ProDOS really work only on a real Apple ][+ or //x with a real Apple disk controller? It fails to boot on at least some other makers' "compatible" computers (mine among them). As nearly as I can test the failure, it is that ProDOS looks for something in the monitor ROM when it boots, and it hangs with its Apple copyright message on the screen if all isn't to its liking. There may also be other checks - I think I recall someone's having said something about the ROM in the disk controller, but mine is authentic. Now why would Apple display such a stupid turn of mind as to make ProDOS behave in this way? Sure, there have been copyright infringements on the Apple ][ series, but making ProDOS refuse to boot on competitive machines is the surest way to guarantee a loss of sales. With the easy availability of PROM blasters, it's nothing for a "compatible" owner to borrow an Apple monitor ROM and get it copied, which is what I did to solve the problem, but I'd venture a guess that a lot of owners will do so only if there is a FREE copy of ProDOS waiting, with the net result that Apple loses sales and causes ill will, too. The bottom line is, does anyone know of any patch I can make to ProDOS so that it will boot on a non-Apple machine? Cheers, Dick Binder (The Stainless Steel Rat) UUCP: { decvax, allegra, ucbvax... }!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-dosadi!binder ARPA: binder%dosadi.DEC@decwrl.ARPA Posted Monday 15th October 1984, 11:06 EDT by DOSADI::BINDER
dudek@utcsrgv.UUCP (Gregory Dudek) (10/19/84)
Well, my sources indicate (although I HAVE NOT VERIFIED IT) that ProDOS goes & looks in Monitor ROM for the word "APPLE ][". If it does not find it, it fails to boot. This rumor comes from a guy who works at a store that sells apple ][ "clones", so I think it's pretty reliable. Given this fact, the patch is pretty obvious; just check the ref. manual for the address & find the reference to it in ProDOS. I agree it it seems strange of Apple to protect their software this way. It was my understanding that most of the bad old clone makers had been run out of business. In that case, would it not be reasonable of apple to try & make ProDos as generally acceptable as possible? Even to those people who had purchased those distasteful copies. Or was it just that they couldn't resist the chance to punish the people that had bought rip-off machines. [I don't begrudge people for buying the cheapest product, but I think it is/was a pity that the clone-makers were able to do as well as they did with such obviously unethical copies. I think the legal system did not show itself very well on this one.] BTW, I had heard earlier that ProDOS looked at the disk controller. Maybe it checks both for authenticity. Greg Dudek -- Gregory Dudek {cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo,uw-beaver}!utcsrgv!dudek