awillis@pro-angmar.UUCP (Albert Willis) (05/13/88)
A good and cheap VT-100 emulator would be DComm. It's shareware, though it's unclear whether or not it's still being supported by its author. I do use other machines besides my GS because I have to, not because I want to. When running software in emulation mode, it runs very quickly; much better that a stock PC clone, besides being much more user friendly. ProDOS shells like ECP and Davex make MS-DOS look very kludgely by comparison. I've heard some rumors from a reliable source that there will be a faster GS, with more memory, and higher vertical resolution. Actually, there will be several new graphics modes, including a 640 x 400 mode. This GS Plus should be available in September. They'll be some sneak previews for the proper people in Boston during AppleFest. Actually, the IIgs has a great deal of potential to become one of the all time greatest personal computers ever. Being able to run any user interface someone would want, with access to LAN's, CD-ROM, laser printers...plus it will run AppleWorks and any other 8-bit software.
GREYELF@WPI.BITNET (04/08/89)
Would anyone happen to have the gs technical reference specs kicking around that could tell me what is different between the IIc mouse card and the s? Daemon likes IIes, IIcs, and Laser 128s, but it chokes on the gs. Is there any device in a gs that generates regular interrupts without having been turned on? -- Michael J Pender Jr Box 1942 c/o W.P.I. I wrote SHELL and Daemon, greyelf@wpi.bitnet 100 Institute Rd. send bug reports, suggestions, greyelf@wpi.wpi.com Worcester, Ma 01609 checks to me. People keep asking me if Shell or Daemon are compatible with the IIc, IIe. YES, I wrote them on my Laser 128. I mean, what would be the challenge to multitasking on a IIgs? I'll start writing dedicated gs programs when somebody sends me one in the mail.
GREYELF@WPI.BITNET (04/08/89)
The gs wouldn't happen to generate interrupts constantly, without having to turn them on, would it? -- Michael J Pender Jr Box 1942 c/o W.P.I. I wrote SHELL and Daemon, greyelf@wpi.bitnet 100 Institute Rd. send bug reports, suggestions, greyelf@wpi.wpi.com Worcester, Ma 01609 checks to me. People keep asking me if Shell or Daemon are compatible with the IIc, IIe. YES, I wrote them on my Laser 128. I mean, what would be the challenge to multitasking on a IIgs? I'll start writing dedicated gs programs when somebody sends me one in the mail.
GREYELF@WPI.BITNET (04/10/89)
Okay everybody, Daemon as of version 2.1 also works on the GS and should work on other machines where it had a problem. A friend (Dave Seah of WPI) has informed me that everybody gets it much sooner if I post to comp.bin.apple first in person, so here goes. -- Michael J Pender Jr Box 1942 c/o W.P.I. I wrote SHELL and Daemon, greyelf@wpi.bitnet 100 Institute Rd. send bug reports, suggestions, greyelf@wpi.wpi.com Worcester, Ma 01609 checks to me. People keep asking me if Shell or Daemon are compatible with the IIc, IIe. YES, I wrote them on my Laser 128. I mean, what would be the challenge to multitasking on a IIgs? I'll start writing dedicated gs programs when somebody sends me one in the mail.
philip.mcdunnough@canremote.uucp (PHILIP MCDUNNOUGH) (02/24/90)
Many people would appear to want the GS to move in the direction of the Amiga. There seems to be quite a few people upset over the lack of a large selection of arcade games.There is another side to all of this. The GS, in my opinion, should not move in this direction. I, for one, do not want my children spending hours playing Nintendo type games. I would prefer to have the GS(as it currently is) regarded as a family computer with the ability to access good games(it needn't be an enormous selection-just a good selection), have non-copyprotected software, have a nice selection of educational and music oriented programs,and have a 640x400 video mode so that the computer can better function as a graphics terminal(a tektronics emulator would be very nice).The recent description of the ROM04 rumoured GS seems great.I see no need to keep up with the arcade skills of the Amiga. I do see a need for a faster cpu,video,640x400 and improvements on the Mac-GS connectivity side. Philip McDunnough E:mail-> philip@utstat.toronto.edu University of Toronto [my opinions] --- * Via ProDoor 3.1R
toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (03/10/90)
philip.mcdunnough@canremote.uucp (PHILIP MCDUNNOUGH) writes: >Many people would appear to want the GS to move in the direction of the >Amiga. There seems to be quite a few people upset over the lack of a >large selection of arcade games.There is another side to all of this. Not really. Read on. >The GS, in my opinion, should not move in this direction. I, for one, do >not want my children spending hours playing Nintendo type games. I would >prefer to have the GS(as it currently is) regarded as a family computer >with the ability to access good games(it needn't be an enormous >selection-just a good selection), have non-copyprotected software, have >a nice selection of educational and music oriented programs,and have a >640x400 video mode so that the computer can better function as a >graphics terminal(a tektronics emulator would be very nice).The recent >description of the ROM04 rumoured GS seems great.I see no need to keep >up with the arcade skills of the Amiga. I do see a need for a faster >cpu,video,640x400 and improvements on the Mac-GS connectivity side. Let me state simply that by 'moving in the direction of the Amiga' we would be creating exactly the computer that you and everyone else here want the GS to be. A lot of people don't realize that many 'Amiga features' are really cost effective performance improvements which have only been used for games because that is where the majority of the Amiga market is. The GS desktop and its associated software would be the ultimate in low end productivity if Quickdraw had a blitter at its disposal. Quickdraw with a blitter would actually deserve the name 'Quickdraw'. Since the O/S and all productivity/educational/music software on the GS already uses Quickdraw, every desktop application gets instant speed improvement. Imagine windows as fast as a Mac IIci for a fraction of the price. This is what a cheap blitter brings, and I know Apple has the resources and the talent to produce one... Their 'low cost mac' depends on it even more than a GS does (a GS with a fast 65816 would be acceptable but not as cheap as a blitter if all you care about is 'adequate' desktop speed). The Amiga is a serious threat to the market you (and I) desire for the GS, because if they ever get any decent productivity software for it then we will be in deep trouble. But Appleworks GS with a blitter-enhanced desktop would knock your socks off. So would your dot matrix output, because the GS Print Manager already uses quickdraw to draw each page in memory for dumping to the printer; if that quickdraw used a blitter then your printer would be slower than the computer again. Other 'Amiga features' many of us want to see (DMA everywhere, programmable video, and a streamlined architecture) are the key to the Amiga's excellent price/performance ratio and are good additions to ANY computer, especially one for the home. These features can all be used for much more than just games and this is a largely ingnored fact which is what keeps the Amiga from being more than just a 'game' machine. It is also the ideal desktop video machine, and the current offerings on the GS can't compete with the video workstations that one can create around an Amiga. This may not be your market, but it fits Apple's grand scheme and the Mac is not the answer when it comes to NTSC video applications. We don't want to follow the Amiga at all... we want to leap frog its technology and nuke the little bugger while remaining true to our own heritage... And it _can_ be done. See my //f paper for details. (I'll email it if you like) Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
asd@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Kareth) (03/12/90)
In article <1990Mar9.205605.2836@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu> toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) writes: >philip.mcdunnough@canremote.uucp (PHILIP MCDUNNOUGH) writes: >The Amiga is a serious threat to the market you (and I) desire for the GS, >because if they ever get any decent productivity software for it then we >will be in deep trouble. But Appleworks GS with a blitter-enhanced desktop Extremely SERIOUS! The Amiga is in my opinion (that of a die-hard Apple//er) to be the NEW hacker's machine (actually, has been for awhile). I've got friends working on TCP/IP networking stuff, and all kinds of groovy stuff for the Amiga. How about this: there is a program called DNET out for the Amiga (public domain I believe) that allows one to mount Unix as a filesystem on the Amiga!!!! So in otherwords, he can edit a file on Unix using software on his Amiga! Copy/move/etc files around between his Amiga and the Unix system. Imagine having your local Unix computer as a volume on GSOS or even plain ProDOS and jumping into Appleworks/etc to do all your file-editing on Unix?? I for one wouldn't find that to be too inconvient. Talk about a little bit of productivity software! Where do you see this kind of innovation and development for the Apple//? Exactly where it is, on the Amiga. Sigh... Each day the Amiga (and NeXT for that matter) look better and better to me and my beloved IIgs looks like an aging relic. It doesn't have to be this way tho! Not with REAL SUPPORT, development, etc. from Apple. -k
jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Darc Tangent) (03/17/90)
> The Amiga is a serious threat to the market you (and I) desire for the GS, > because if they ever get any decent productivity software for it then we > will be in deep trouble. But Appleworks GS with a blitter-enhanced desktop > would knock your socks off. So would your dot matrix output, because the GS > Print Manager already uses quickdraw to draw each page in memory for dumping > to the printer; if that quickdraw used a blitter then your printer would > be slower than the computer again. > > Other 'Amiga features' many of us want to see (DMA everywhere, programmable > video, and a streamlined architecture) are the key to the Amiga's excellent > price/performance ratio and are good additions to ANY computer, especially > one for the home. These features can all be used for much more than just games > and this is a largely ingnored fact which is what keeps the Amiga from being > more than just a 'game' machine. It is also the ideal desktop video machine, > and the current offerings on the GS can't compete with the video workstations > that one can create around an Amiga. This may not be your market, but it fits > Apple's grand scheme and the Mac is not the answer when it comes to NTSC video > applications. > Your remarks about the Amiga's hardware are very accurate, but you seem to not know much about currently available Amiga software. There is far much more productivity software available for the Amiga than for the Apple IIGS. Where are the GS CAD programs? TeX applications? Math programs like Maple and MatLab? The GS doesn't have them because it doesn't have the processing or graphics power for those types of applications. The Amiga does. The Amiga certainly has as many word processors, dtp programs, spreadsheets, and data bases as the GS (not counting all the ancient general Apple II software that is hopelessly behind the times (I'm not talking about the newer Apple II software like DB Master Pro, etc.)). Of course, for graphics and sound processing, there is much more available on the Amiga, as well as for system level things like UNIX type shells and utilities, compilers, text editors, and terminals. Now admittedly if you count all of the old Apple II software, the GS does have more software, but most of those 10000+ packages just cannot compete with modern programs for any machine. Before I get flamed, I would like to mention that I've owned an Apple II for ten years. [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] [] [] [] Darc Tangent d(arctan(u)) = du/(1+u^2) jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu [] [] [] [] "I am made from the dust of the stars, the oceans flow in my veins." [] [] - RUSH, Presto [] [] [] [] "Reading legal mush can turn your brain to guacamole!" - Amiga RKM [] [] "Objective truth is a social disease." - Nietzsche [] [] [] [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (03/17/90)
jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Darc Tangent) writes: > Your remarks about the Amiga's hardware are very accurate, but you seem >to not know much about currently available Amiga software. You're right, I don't. I was working from memory, which is a few years old on that score. > There is far much >more productivity software available for the Amiga than for the Apple IIGS. Fine. But the marketing still sucks. Until Commodore can get the kind of network that Apple, IBM, and Tandy have going they won't be considered by many people because they don't know if Commodore will still be there after the sale. >Where are the GS CAD programs? TeX applications? Math programs like Maple and >MatLab? The GS doesn't have them because it doesn't have the processing or >graphics power for those types of applications. The Amiga does. We're aware of that. We've been flaming Apple for years and they haven't really listened until now, and now they seem to need convincing that it is worth their time and effort to produce a decent GS -- a task so simple that third parties have provided the (sadly) necessary add-ons for years! > The Amiga >certainly has as many word processors, dtp programs, spreadsheets, and data >bases as the GS (not counting all the ancient general Apple II software that >is hopelessly behind the times (I'm not talking about the newer Apple II >software like DB Master Pro, etc.)). Hopelessly behind the times? They still work! Why should I stop using something because it is old, when it still does what I want better than anything else available? > Of course, for graphics and sound >processing, there is much more available on the Amiga, Graphics, yes. Sound, HELL NO. Not until the Amiga has a 32 voice synthesizer on board. You've never heard of SoundSmith, I take it. And when the new sound tools start showing up in applications... >as well as for system >level things like UNIX type shells and utilities, compilers, text editors, >and terminals. That's because Apple's software support (APW) has sucked the big one. Until they invest the man-hours to develop a decent C compiler for the 65816 (and don't try to tell me it can't be done, 68K compilers sucked until the did the same thing; though I admit they did have an easier job of it because the 68K instruction set is nearly C primitives already) it will stay that way. The actual programs we do have are actually pretty good, it's the development systems that are lacking. Apple II software seems to have a better hit rate because most of our developers really care about the machine and not just their paycheck. > Now admittedly if you count all of the old Apple II software, >the GS does have more software, but most of those 10000+ packages just cannot >compete with modern programs for any machine. Why do they have to, if they are more cost-effective at what they do? Which certain examples may or may not be, to be sure. >Before I get flamed, I would like to mention that I've owned an Apple II for >ten years. Good for you. But that doesn't mean you're automatically right about what _we_ see in the Apple II. There are qualities that the Apple II has that the Amiga does not, and probably never will. Until the Amiga has a programming language and a hands-on machine language environment built in I will never buy one. They are what I like most about my Apple II's and I wouldn't give them up for the world. I'd rather see a machine like my Apple //f, that does anything I'd want from an Amiga and still gives me my II. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
nicholaA@batman.moravian.EDU (Andy Nicholas) (03/18/90)
In article <1990Mar17.122507.18534@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu>, toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) writes: > The actual programs we do have are actually pretty good, it's the > development systems that are lacking. Part of this may change for the better in the next 72 hours. > Todd Whitesel andy -- Yeah!
jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Darc Tangent) (03/19/90)
>> There is far much >>more productivity software available for the Amiga than for the Apple IIGS. > > Fine. But the marketing still sucks. Until Commodore can get the kind of > network that Apple, IBM, and Tandy have going they won't be considered by many > people because they don't know if Commodore will still be there after the sale > Commodore's marketing definitely sucks. Commodore is a huge corporation and will certainly be there after the sale, but they fail to project that fact. >>Where are the GS CAD programs? TeX applications? Math programs like Maple and >>MatLab? The GS doesn't have them because it doesn't have the processing or >>graphics power for those types of applications. The Amiga does. > > We're aware of that. We've been flaming Apple for years and they haven't really > listened until now, and now they seem to need convincing that it is worth their > time and effort to produce a decent GS -- a task so simple that third parties > have provided the (sadly) necessary add-ons for years! > Yes, I also flamed Apple for many years about the same problems, but I still haven't seen evidence that they have listened. I hope they have - just a faster processor would be enough to make the GS usable (for GS specific applications). >> The Amiga >>certainly has as many word processors, dtp programs, spreadsheets, and data >>bases as the GS (not counting all the ancient general Apple II software that >>is hopelessly behind the times (I'm not talking about the newer Apple II >>software like DB Master Pro, etc.)). > > Hopelessly behind the times? They still work! Why should I stop using something > because it is old, when it still does what I want better than anything else > available? > If it does what you want, then use it; however, much of the older software doesn't do what I want and newer software provides more capabilities and is generally better supported. What I'm trying to say is that large quantities of old programs are not necessarily better than smaller numbers of newer more capable programs. Number of software packages is not a measure of good software availability. >> Of course, for graphics and sound >>processing, there is much more available on the Amiga, > > Graphics, yes. Sound, HELL NO. Not until the Amiga has a 32 voice synthesizer > on board. You've never heard of SoundSmith, I take it. And when the new sound > tools start showing up in applications... > No, I haven't heard of Soundsmith, and yes, the GS's sound hardware is definitely better (although you really do want a stereo card), but there is a lot of Amiga sound software out there and you did admit that you were several years behind on Amiga software. >>Before I get flamed, I would like to mention that I've owned an Apple II for >>ten years. > > Good for you. But that doesn't mean you're automatically right about what > _we_ see in the Apple II. Who is "we?" I certainly didn't mean to imply that owning an Apple II made me right about everything, but that I knew where I was coming from - and yes, I do still like the Apple II. I think it's a shame the way Apple has abandoned the Apple II. > There are qualities that the Apple II has that the > Amiga does not, and probably never will. Until the Amiga has a programming > language and a hands-on machine language environment built in I will never > buy one. They are what I like most about my Apple II's and I wouldn't give > them up for the world. I'd rather see a machine like my Apple //f, that does > anything I'd want from an Amiga and still gives me my II. By built-in I assume you mean in ROM? Why? ROM languages are difficult to update and modify. I prefer the vareity and choice of non-ROM programming languages. What exactly do you mean by a hands-on machine language environment? I know you are referring to the monitor, but what exactly is it that you want abou it. Will the Apple IIf ever be built? > > Todd Whitesel > toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu -- [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] [] [] [] Darc Tangent d(arctan(u)) = du/(1+u^2) jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu [] [] [] [] "I am made from the dust of the stars, the oceans flow in my veins." [] [] - RUSH, Presto [] [] [] [] "Reading legal mush can turn your brain to guacamole!" - Amiga RKM [] [] "Objective truth is a social disease." - Nietzsche [] [] [] [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (03/19/90)
jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Darc Tangent) writes: > Commodore's marketing definitely sucks. Commodore is a huge corporation and >will certainly be there after the sale, but they fail to project that fact. True, and now that they've hired ex-Apple Marketing people that may change. For better or for worse I really don't know... >>>Where are the GS CAD programs? TeX applications? Math progrms like Maple and >>>MatLab? The GS doesn't have them because it doesn't have the processing or >>>graphics power for those types of applications. The Amiga does. >> >> We're aware of that. We've been flaming Apple for years and they haven't >> listened until now, and they seem to need convincing that it is worth their >> time and effort to produce a decent GS -- a task so simple that third parties >> have provided the (sadly) necessary add-ons for years! >> > Yes, I also flamed Apple for many years about the same problems, but I still >haven't seen evidence that they have listened. I hope they have- just a faster >processor would be enough to make the GS usable (for GS specific applications). True. I'd also like to see a real redone chipset because their are some horrid bottlnecks in the GS that were forced on them by design and budget constraints (that's why they kept the Mega II when it would have been far smarter to scrap it. Now they have the resources to reimplement it so that it is better in every way and still fully compatible, and they will be signing their own death warrant in the low end if they think that a Low Cost Mac is going to uproot Amiga and Tandy -- both will stomp it to death like they have the current GS! >>> The Amiga >>>certainly has as many word processors, dtp programs, spreadsheets, and data >>>bases as the GS (not counting all the ancient general Apple II software that >>>is hopelessly behind the times (I'm not talking about the newer Apple II >>>software like DB Master Pro, etc.)). >> >> Hopelessly behind the times? They still work! Why stop using something >> because it is old, when it still does what I want better than anything else >> available? >> > If it does what you want, then use it; however, much of the older software >doesn't do what I want and newer software provides more capabilities and is >generally better supported. What I'm trying to say is that large quantities >of old programs are not necessarily better than smaller numbers of newer more >capable programs.Number of software packages is not a measure of good software >availability. Point taken. Number of _new_ and _updated_ packages is. The GS is doing miserably in that score and Apple is entirely to blame for that. We've finally got a decent system (5.0) and the big names have decided not to support it! >>> Of course, for graphics and sound >>>processing, there is much more available on the Amiga, >> >> Graphics, yes. Sound, HELL NO. Not until the Amiga has a 32 voice synthesizer >> on board. You've never heard of SoundSmith, I take it. And when the new sound >> tools start showing up in applications... >> > No, I haven't heard of Soundsmith, and yes, the GS's sound hardware is >definitely better (although you really do want a stereo card), but there is >a lot of Amiga sound software out there and you did admit that you were several >years behind on Amiga software. Right. SoundSmith is a 14 track sequencer for the ensoniq and it sounds great! With any luck it will support the new sound tools in its final release (does it already?) and if the code becomes available then we might see some great sound coming from a lot more programs. I want to see an NDA that plays soundsmith songs so I can listen to them while I do other desktop stuff. I wonder if it would work from Prodos 8 stuff too? heh, soundsmith songs in Kermit! What's sad is that the Amiga spent two years figuring out how to do that already, and all Apple has to show so far is Multifinder... >> There are qualities that the Apple II has that the >> Amiga does not, and probably never will. Until the Amiga has a programming >> language and a hands-on machine language environment built in I will never >> buy one. They are what I like most about my Apple II's and I wouldn't give >> them up for the world. I'd rather see a machine like my Apple //f, that does >> anything I'd want from an Amiga and still gives me my II. > By built-in I assume you mean in ROM? Why? ROM languages are difficult >to update and modify. I prefer the vareity and choice of non-ROM programming >languages. I'm talking about good ol' AppleSloth BASIC. More than adequate for many small projects and always there before you even boot a disk. I've written cheap BASIC hacks to do so many things that would be a pain to do with a real development system but the point is that I usually need the convenience far more than the power. The original success of the Apple had a lot to do with the built in BASIC, and until I used another machine I didn't realize how much I appreciate it. > What exactly do you mean by a hands-on machine language environment? I >know you are referring to the monitor, but what exactly is it that you want >abou it. The fact that it is there in ROM. The O/S could be blowing big chunks but I can always get into the monitor and mess around _before_ I reboot. Not that it's that handy, but I want the convenience that the monitor and the BASIC in ROM provide, and the feeling of CONTROL that I never get with any other machine, which can simply lock up and the only option is to power cycle it. > Will the Apple IIf ever be built? God, I hope so. It's Apple's only real hope of competing with the Amiga because the Low Cost Mac won't do it well enough or soon enough. There is a chance: I got a letter from Ed Birss (Senior VP, Product Engineering) and I quote, "John Sculley asked me to reply to your letter. I appreciate your suggestion and have forwarded it to my engineering staff." That's about all I can expect right now. With any luck they'll look past the fuzzy ideas in the video section (they have the second version which wasn't posted here to the net; it's on America Online under AHW New Files). I should look over the third version and try to perfect it, and then ship them a fourth version with justifications for each feature, too much of which was sketchy on the copy they have. Ah well, it's spring break at Caltech so guess what I'll be doing. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Darc Tangent) (03/21/90)
Lines: 82 tech.edu> Followup-To: ech.edu> Lines: 77 In article <1990Mar19.114428.19230@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu>, toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) writes: > >> By built-in I assume you mean in ROM? Why? ROM languages are difficult >>to update and modify. I prefer the vareity and choice of non-ROM programming >>languages. > > I'm talking about good ol' AppleSloth BASIC. More than adequate for many small > projects and always there before you even boot a disk. I've written cheap > BASIC hacks to do so many things that would be a pain to do with a real > development system but the point is that I usually need the convenience far > more than the power. The original success of the Apple had a lot to do with > the built in BASIC, and until I used another machine I didn't realize how > much I appreciate it. I felt that way at first when I first used another machine regularly after using my Apple II+, but I hate BASIC so much and it's difficult to put a C compiler in ROM (and certainly to keep it up to date - I want a C++ compiler! (currently cannot afford one)). > >> What exactly do you mean by a hands-on machine language environment? I >>know you are referring to the monitor, but what exactly is it that you want >>abou it. > > The fact that it is there in ROM. The O/S could be blowing big chunks but I > can always get into the monitor and mess around _before_ I reboot. Not that > it's that handy, but I want the convenience that the monitor and the BASIC > in ROM provide, and the feeling of CONTROL that I never get with any other > machine, which can simply lock up and the only option is to power cycle it. > I do like the monitor, but don't really feel it to be a necessity if I have another software tool that will do the same thing without the ability to mess around before you reboot (it is nice though). >> Will the Apple IIf ever be built? > > God, I hope so. It's Apple's only real hope of competing with the Amiga because > the Low Cost Mac won't do it well enough or soon enough. There is a chance: > I got a letter from Ed Birss (Senior VP, Product Engineering) and I quote, > > "John Sculley asked me to reply to your letter. I appreciate your suggestion > and have forwarded it to my engineering staff." > > That's about all I can expect right now. With any luck they'll look past > the fuzzy ideas in the video section (they have the second version which > wasn't posted here to the net; it's on America Online under AHW New Files). > I should look over the third version and try to perfect it, and then ship > them a fourth version with justifications for each feature, too much of > which was sketchy on the copy they have. > > Ah well, it's spring break at Caltech so guess what I'll be doing. Building an Apple IIf in your garage? :-) > > Todd Whitesel > toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu -- To expand the original topic, do you think the Apple IIGS would have been better if it had been built with a 68000 procesor, with a 6502/AppleII coprocessor board? That is what I wanted with the GS - being free from prior systems as much as possible helps greatly in how far you can go. [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] [] [] [] Darc Tangent d(arctan(u)) = du/(1+u^2) jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu [] [] [] [] "I am made from the dust of the stars, the oceans flow in my veins." [] [] - RUSH, Presto [] [] [] [] "Reading legal mush can turn your brain to guacamole!" - Amiga RKM [] [] "Objective truth is a social disease." - Nietzsche [] [] [] [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (03/21/90)
jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Darc Tangent) writes: [ on the value and convenience of a built-in Basic ] > I felt that way at first when I first used another machine regularly after >using my Apple II+, but I hate BASIC so much and it's difficult to put a C >compiler in ROM (and certainly to keep it up to date - I want a C++ compiler! >(currently cannot afford one)). I can understand that. I happen to like Basic, because in its own ways it is as compact and elegant as C. The way boolean expressions are handled has allowed me to often do in one line of Basic something that would take quite a bit of code in Pascal (or even C). The fact that it is interpreted is what I value the most; if it were possible to put a C interpreter in ROM I would use that instead. A properly updated Basic that was native to the GS would be unbeatable for quickie desktop programming and would open up the machine to a new generation of hackers. > I do like the monitor, but don't really feel it to be a necessity if I >have another software tool that will do the same thing without the ability to >mess around before you reboot (it is nice though). Unfortunately when the full O/S is up and running a monitor-style environment is risky at best. I got used to this fact and found that the //e compatibility box in the GS made an excellent compromise. (You run a Prodos program and it allocates the lower 128K exclusively for your use, minus the memory reserved for Prodos. When you only need the low 48K as I usually do it works great.) After I get my algorithms (Bresenham's, LZW for a giffer, and rapid fill mode drawing is what I'm working on right now) debugged in this 'cradle' environment I can throw them into more serious programs and spend almost no time debugging when debugging really hurts. >> Ah well, it's spring break at Caltech so guess what I'll be doing. > Building an Apple IIf in your garage? :-) I wish. Got a CAD workstation I can design gate arrays on? > To expand the original topic, do you think the Apple IIGS would have been >better if it had been built with a 68000 procesor, with a 6502/AppleII >coprocessor board? That is what I wanted with the GS - being free from prior >systems as much as possible helps greatly in how far you can go. Ouch! Don't ask me this one. I personally don't like working in 68K assembler and Apple assembly is what I like most about the machine. Such as, mere mortals can remember the entire instruction set and even some of the opcodes! (No flames please, I'm biased and I admit it.) The GS was actually very free 'from prior systems', in everything that was specific to it. It's just the gate array implementation that, for non-technical reasons, was forced to handle the compatibility issue in a very inappropriate and performance-sapping manner. I.E. they wanted to scrap the Mega II and do it properly but management wouldn't let them -- budget, probably. Apple also took care to warn everybody to use the toolbox, and "use a read- modify-write sequence when modifying this byte" and so on. The 65816 was, for all its "faults", very well designed from a software perspective. Relocatable code was painless if not trivial. Software emulation of 65832 opcodes should be fairly easy to do (compiler switch at worst) and CPU improvements dealing with on-chip caching and pipeling of direct page & stack would largely address the need for more registers. I agree more modular programming functions would be a good idea (like a stack crash detector that doesn't require a PMMU!!) but what we have now is adequate for GS/OS. It just needs to run faster. After seeing a Transwarped GS running finder I'm convinced that the 65816 isn't what was lacking at all -- it was Mensch an his inability to get the damn mask working at higher speeds. Having a 68000 w/ a 6502 card would have costed far more than having one 65816, especially after all the extra circuitry gets figured in. For that reason alone I am glad they did it the way they did. I just wish Apple had shoved a poker up Mensch's rear end years ago so we wouldn't have any reason to be discussing the question!! Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu