dalegass@dalcsug.UUCP (08/07/87)
At work, we're having some problems regarding Sperry's Implementation of DOS... Although generic MS-DOS 2.11, 3.1, and 3.2 will boot and run perfectly on the sperry PC-HT and PC-uIT, problems occur when using diskettes written under sperry DOS with MS-DOS. I'm interested in finding out just what differences Sperry made in their version of DOS. This only one I really could see and expect was a CLOCK` driver which kept the real time clock correct. Here are some of the symptoms: o Diskettes written with Sperry DOS 2.11 will not read under MS-DOS 3.2 I believe normal MS-DOS 2.11 diskettes will read fine. o When Sperry DOS 3.1 for the Micro IT is booted on a Sperry HT, problems occur. First of all, the clock does not get set right, which is to be expected, as the RTC accessing address is wrong. A patch has been written to fix this problem. However, the disk reads are *extremely* slow. Sperry's version of 3.1 for the PC-IT involves a BIOS ROM exchange!?!? What is it that Sperry has done to it's DOS to make it so dependant upon the specific machine it's running on? Is this a ploy to force you to buy DOS from them (since a ROM upgrade is needed)? I don't know why they'd make these silly incompatibilities, when MS-DOS 2.11, 3.1, and 3.2 all run on the Sperry perfectly, with no disk speed problems. The only hassle is the RTC on the HT, but as I said, we've patched this. MS-DOS 3.2 does set the clock right on an PC-uIT, since it has the AT-compat- ible RTC. -dalegass@dalcsug.uucp
feg@clyde.ATT.COM (Forrest Gehrke) (08/09/87)
In article <116@dalcsug.UUCP>, dalegass@dalcsug.UUCP (Dale Gass) writes: > At work, we're having some problems regarding Sperry's Implementation of DOS... > > Although generic MS-DOS 2.11, 3.1, and 3.2 will boot and run perfectly on > the sperry PC-HT and PC-uIT, problems occur when using diskettes written under > sperry DOS with MS-DOS. > > I'm interested in finding out just what differences Sperry made in their version > of DOS. This only one I really could see and expect was a CLOCK` driver which > kept the real time clock correct. Here are some of the symptoms: I am replying on the network in hopes of eliciting information from others, but will email to you directly with further questions and information more detailed. First of all, the Sperry HT (I believe also known as model 100) is identical to the Leading Edge Model M (both made by Mitsubishi). The current L.E. PC is the Model D made in Korea and is not the same at all. The major difference of the DOS versions between the Sperry HT and the IT are that the boot record for the IT version was placed in the same location in sector 0 as it is in all other ms-dos versions, instead of immediately after the jmp instruction at the beginning of the boot loading program. This, among other things, requires a ROM BIOS change. The other major change, is the one you noted: the RTC coding is different. I also noted the extremely slow floppy disk accesses of the IT version of DOS when run on the L.E. Model M and have guessed this is due to some coding differences involving the 1.2 mb floppy drives, but this is only speculation. I welcome any other inputs from people on the net who may have found a solution to the excruciatingly slow floppy disk read problem. Forrest Gehrke
jons@islenet.UUCP (Jonathan Spangler) (08/13/87)
In article <12055@clyde.ATT.COM> feg@clyde.ATT.COM (Forrest Gehrke) writes: >In article <116@dalcsug.UUCP>, dalegass@dalcsug.UUCP (Dale Gass) writes: >> sperry DOS with MS-DOS. >> >> I'm interested in finding out just what differences Sperry made in their version >I am replying on the network in hopes of eliciting information from others, but >will email to you directly with further questions and information more detailed. >First of all, the Sperry HT (I believe also known as model 100) is identical to the Leading Edge Model M (both made by Mitsubishi). The current L.E. PC is the Model D made in Korea and is not the same at all. > >I welcome any other inputs from people on the net who may have found >a solution to the excruciatingly slow floppy disk read problem. > >Forrest Gehrke This doesn't surprize me on the Sperry HT & LE Model M problem. Try this: take IBM PC-DOS 3.2 in one computer, and put in an LE MS-DOS 2.11 It will NOT read the directory correctly! Bunch of friendly garbage on the screen. Moral of the story: Keep native DOS's with native machines. The way we got around the problem was to format a blank PC-DOS 3.2 under 3.2 and then copy the files on the LE to the newly formatted disk. What a pisser, though! Thankful for my Clone... Aloha, -- Jonathan Spangler {ihnp4,vortex,dual}!islenet!jons OR jons@islenet.hawaii.edu
samperi@magpie.UUCP (Dominick Samperi) (08/19/87)
I've been using a LE Model MH (AT compat.) for about a year, running LE DOS 3.1
and Microport's UNIX. I've always assumed that this machine is the same as the
Sperry/IT (don't know for sure). There were a few problems when I installed
a second floppy drive, which motivated me to try to run PC DOS 3.1, or 3.2,
but using these operating systems caused too many other problems (although
they did control the second floppy drive nicely). So I was forced to return
to the native DOS. I'd like to run some version of DOS 3.2 or 3.3, and perhaps
to install a faster CPU as well. Anyone have any experience either of these
on this (Mitsubishi) machine? (Leading Edge doesn't support it anymore.)
--
Dominick Samperi
Manhattan College
...!{ihnp4|seismo|rutgers|philabs}!cmcl2!manhat!samperi
...!{ihnp4|seismo}!{pur-ee|iuvax}!bsu-cs!magpie!samperi