mo@seismo.UUCP (Mike O'Dell) (11/27/83)
Is the "OS-9" system available for the CoCo the same OS-9 which has been around for a while? Is it usable and does it come with a tolerable C compiler?? The earlier OS-9 made some pretence at being Unix-inspired, if not very Unix-like. How does this compare?? Can you really do anything useful with a single 150K flakeydisk? Does the CoCo come with any serial ports and/or a parallel printer interface?? -Mike O'Dell
sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer) (11/28/83)
The CoCo OS-9 seems be to a complete implementation, though some of its interfaces are different from standard OS-9 to prevent SS-50 "mainframe" OS-9 users (who are Microware's bread-and-butter) from purchasing the cheaper R/S OS-9 programs. For example, the CoCo floppy disk format is incompatible with the standard OS-9. We haven't heard yet whether object code is compatible. If it isn't, I'm going to complain strongly to Microware. I would not like to run with one disk, but with two it isn't too bad. Note that you can also hack up a hard disk interface (see microsoft!danm's recent posting) and there are rumors that R/S will announce one too. Microware stated that their C compiler which is K&R will be offered fairly soon (expect 1stQ '84) directly from R/S. CoCo OS-9 as delivered comes only with an assembler, so that has dampened my enthusiasm to "dive in." The CoCo comes with a single RS232 port, and I use this term loosely, since it uses a weird DIN 4-pin connector AND it is strictly a bit-banger using a 6522 PIA. This is one of the major drawbacks of the CoCo. You may be able to buy UART-based RS232 or parallel cards. My playing around with OS-9 so far has made me suspect that Microware has captured much of the sound of UNIX, but not much of the sense. Why, for example, does one need both "LIST" (aka "cat") and "BUILD"? Still, it's hard to beat a UNIX-like system for under $1000. -- /Steve Dyer decvax!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbncca
sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (11/28/83)
References: <425@seismo.UUCP> Relay-Version:version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site duke.UUCP Posting-Version:version B 2.10 5/3/83; site bbncca.ARPA Path:duke!decvax!bbncca!sdyer Message-ID:<355@bbncca.ARPA> Date:Mon, 28-Nov-83 01:50:32 EST Organization:Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Ma. The CoCo OS-9 seems be to a complete implementation, though some of its interfaces are different from standard OS-9 to prevent SS-50 "mainframe" OS-9 users (who are Microware's bread-and-butter) from purchasing the cheaper R/S OS-9 programs. For example, the CoCo floppy disk format is incompatible with the standard OS-9. We haven't heard yet whether object code is compatible. If it isn't, I'm going to complain strongly to Microware. I would not like to run with one disk, but with two it isn't too bad. Note that you can also hack up a hard disk interface (see microsoft!danm's recent posting) and there are rumors that R/S will announce one too. Microware stated that their C compiler which is K&R will be offered fairly soon (expect 1stQ '84) directly from R/S. CoCo OS-9 as delivered comes only with an assembler, so that has dampened my enthusiasm to "dive in." The CoCo comes with a single RS232 port, and I use this term loosely, since it uses a weird DIN 4-pin connector AND it is strictly a bit-banger using a 6522 PIA. This is one of the major drawbacks of the CoCo. You may be able to buy UART-based RS232 or parallel cards. My playing around with OS-9 so far has made me suspect that Microware has captured much of the sound of UNIX, but not much of the sense. Why, for example, does one need both "LIST" (aka "cat") and "BUILD"? Still, it's hard to beat a UNIX-like system for under $1000. -- /Steve Dyer decvax!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbncca
andree@uokvax.UUCP (12/02/83)
#R:seismo:-42500:uokvax:3500016:000:814 uokvax!andree Nov 30 18:34:00 1983 Hi mike, The RS os-9 is indeed the microware os-9 that's been around for a while. It should have the standard microware C compiler, which by all reports is tolerable. The major difference (that I know of) is 35 instead of 40 tracks on the disks. I understand this is because the RS disk zeroxing machines can only copy 35 track disks. This 35 track magic number is wired into the system, and not part of the device driver, so if you buy non-RS drives (highly recommended) you'll have to right new drivers to get more tracks. The system seems tolerable, except for the SLOOW floppy. Don't even bother trying to run with one drive. It will only disgust you. Microware claims that the 68000 version of os-9 should appear on end-user machines sometime early next year. This might be worth waiting on. Luck, <mike
emjej@uokvax.UUCP (12/02/83)
#R:seismo:-42500:uokvax:3500018:000:3523 uokvax!emjej Nov 30 20:35:00 1983 >Is the "OS-9" system available for the CoCo the same OS-9 which has been around for a while? Yes, it's the same OS-9 as has been out; more precisely, OS-9 Level One, version 1.2. They have done some CoCo-specific things, especially w.r.t. the display, and alas, they let schedule distract them from quality concerning the device driver for the disk--it has the stuff to twiddle RS's bozo 5" floppies wired in. (People are already distributing patches to use 40 and 80 track floppies and reasonable step rates, and the folks at Microware say they'll do it right with the next release. The device descriptors are set up so that you can read that kind of info and do the right thing for each device.) Nevertheless, it is the same modulo those things-- a fellow got tired of waiting for BASIC09 to come out for CoCo OS-9 so he copied it over via the serial connection from his Smoke Signal system, and it came right up and ran fine. *Many* things have to work right to pull that off, I'd expect. >Is it usable and does it come with a tolerable C compiler?? That depends on whether you consider C tolerable :-). The C compiler should be the same as the canonical Microware OS-9 C compiler, which is K&R except for bitfields and a couple of annoying preprocessor limitations. As for usability--the problem is that OS-9 shows up the places where RS cut corners in the CoCo design. A decent disk controller would go a *long* way toward fixing this. To be more specific--software does a *lot* of things that hardware should do (vide programmed data transfer for the disk, software emulating a UART/ACIA unless you buy the RS-232 cartridge, and software keyboard polling), so that if you have too much going on at once, things slow down. If performance problems can be overcome (there are rumors of a super-CoCo, and Tano is supposed to come out with a 128K Dragon (running Level Two?), so it might be worth a wait-- even more so, the 68000 version is due out early next year), it will be quite usable. I did/am doing some software development for a fellow with a Level Two Smoke Signal Broadcasting system; it performed quite nicely indeed and was a pleasure to use. >The earlier OS-9 made some pretence at being Unix-inspired, if not very Unix-like. How does this compare?? As mentioned before, this *is* the earlier OS-9. The same shell (primitive compared to the Bourne shell, or even the Mashey shell, but then, how much can you put in 1K?). >Can you really do anything useful with a single 150K flakeydisk? No. Get more than one (non-RS, at that, for decent # of tracks and step size); it is, alas, yet another corner-cutting that the RS controller uses the WD 1793 controller chip, which doesn't know about double-sided disks. (There's a canonical hack, due to Frank Hogg, that makes it think that the other side is another single-sided disk.) (Also, folks have connected hard disks. Come to think of it, an outfit called Green Mountain Micro sells a bubble memory attachment for the CoCo, and I need to pester them about an RBFMAN device driver...) >Does the CoCo come with any serial ports and/or a parallel printer interface?? See the above note about serial I/O; there is a connection for serial I/O on the back of the CoCo, but as noted above it's software emulating a UART, and slows the machine down rather fiercely. There are some outfits that sell parallel ports for the CoCo; check out an issue of *Rainbow* magazine for *lots* of info in that respect. Cheers (to steal a phrase), James Jones
ccc@cwruecmp.UUCP (Case Computer Club) (12/05/83)
We have been running OS/9 on our CoCos for about 2 months. It makes absolutely no difference whether you're using Radio Shack or other drives. We have our device descriptors modified such that the step rate is 6ms instead of 30. This is very simple, and is documented in the manuals. The Radio Shack drives CAN run at 6ms. They are also capable of 40 tracks, although I have read in a previous article that 35 tracks is hard-wired into the driver. I have not verified this myself. Carl Fongheiser ...!decvax!cwruecmp!ccc (Usenet) ccc.Case@Rand-relay (ARPA) ccc@Case (CSnet)
emjej@uokvax.UUCP (12/11/83)
#R:seismo:-42500:uokvax:3500020:000:566 uokvax!emjej Dec 9 11:50:00 1983 More recent info (to me, anyway): the Tano Dragon, for which OS-9 is going to be available, does things right with respect to serial/parallel I/O, to wit they have a real live parallel port and the hardware to do serial I/O right. They're priced the same for a 64K machine as the current RS price, although the latter may come down soon. The catch on the CoCo price, of course, is the $180 expansion box and <price unknown to me, but I think at least a hectobuck> RS-232 cartridge you have to tack on to the CoCo to get it to do stuff reasonably. James Jones
sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer) (12/13/83)
I have heard that the Dragon multiplexes its single parallel port between servicing a printer and scanning the keyboard. It was claimed that this was an ingenious way to save hardware, since "one never uses the keyboard while printing." This may be true in TRSDOS, but most definitely NOT in OS-9. There are probably many ways to do the right thing with this, given smart enough OS-9 drivers, but I worry that there are also LOTS of ways to do the wrong thing, too! Who knows what Tano will deliver? -- /Steve Dyer decvax!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbncca