pashdown@shotput.es.com@bambam.UUCP (Pete Ashdown) (09/01/90)
I read the following in comp.sys.next: > We just called Insigmnia Solutions, Inc., and asked them if we could >expect any time in the future a version of Soft-PC for the NeXT. >Soft-PC is a program that completely emulates a PC or AT compatible >hardware system in software. It is available for the Macintosh, and >the technology is licensed to a couple of workstation manufacturers. > The answer answer to our question was that we should "call back in a >month or so" because we could then expect "some more solid >information." > So, if you want to influence the decision making process, call them >and ask about Soft-PC for the NeXT at: > Insignia Solutions, Inc. > 254 San Geronimo Way > Sunnyvale, CA 94086 > phone: (800)848-7677 or (408)522-7600 > fax: (408)733-9541 Anyway, being a potential user of SoftPC and also considering the purchase of a bridgeboard for the 3000, I decided to check into the possibility of SoftPC being ported to the Amiga 3000. SoftPC runs at 4.77 mhz on a 16mhz Mac II, so I would imagine that it would give AT like speed on the 3000, as well as being able to multitask a lot better than the Mac version (which does run under MultiFinder). In addition, the "EGA"-like productivity graphic modes would be ideal for this type of emulation. So I called the 800 and they referred me to their Boston office where I talked with Keith Samms. He was very friendly and helpful in my query. He basically stated that the Mac version was a special case where they marketed the product themselves, and they would not go that route again. Instead they do work for the workstation manufacturers themselves. He told me that they HAVE been in contact with Commodore, but that Commodore showed no interest. I stated that it wasn't hard to believe since a software emulator would compete directly with their hardware product Bridgeboards. He didn't deny that, but he urged me to put pressure upon one Lloyd Mahaffey, VP of sales at Commodore. Apparently Lloyd used to be at Apple, and although Keith didn't say so, I'd imagine that he had something to do with SoftPC being done on the Mac. After all, SoftPC is advertised more by Apple than it is by Insignia. This is a pie in the sky idea, but imagine what it would be like if SoftPC was given away with every Amiga 3000. Believe me, I hate the IBM MeSsy DOS world as much as any other Amigan, but still, it sells computers. The cost of doing such a feat would be rather minimal in comparison to giving away AT Bridgeboards with every 3000, and I do believe that SoftPC could equal if not surpass the AT Bridgeboard performance. In addition, Apple is busily working on producing an Apple II on a card for their Mac's. The idea is that they are going to upgrade all the schools to Mac's without losing the Apple education platform. WHAT IF Commodore contacted Laser about licensing their Apple II compatible ROMS and then produced a II emulator as well. Its almost scary to think about how Apple's rug could be pulled out from underneath them. () () -=Adolescent Deformed Karate Lobsters!=- " ( " ) - 'Like Linguini, where's my house slippers?' / ( ) ( ) 'I thot I tol you to shaddup, Ricotta!!' () () /|\ Pete Ashdown pashdown@esunix.es.com ...utah-cs!esunix!pashdown /|\
n350bq@tamuts.tamu.edu (Duane Fields) (09/04/90)
Myself and other early amiga owners may remember the "Transformer", a IBM "soft" emulator like the one you mention. The transformer is dated 1985 or earlier (I believe) and is thus not "up to par" on current programming techniques. In any case, on a 512k machine, it gave you a PC compatible system w/ all your floppys, no graphics card, and 490k. It was kind of slow, running about 1 to 2 mHz I would estimate. This was under the 68000 of course. Could you imagine how well an update would work? Give it 68030 support, HD support, and if possible CGA support. I know many people who would love an amiga, but are forced to do school work on a PC, simply because that is what they use in class. Looking at a $600 bridgeboard doesn't do them any good, since most are on a tight budget. Imagin the potential of a low-cose, say $100 or so, PC emulator. Even a minimal upgrade to say 640k and 4.77 mhz without graphics capabilities would be very usefull. By the way, I have not been able to make "Transformer" run on the 3000. If anyone does, PLEASE tell me what you did! thanks..... Duane Fields
jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) (09/04/90)
pashdown@shotput.es.com@bambam.UUCP (Pete Ashdown) writes: [burp!] >Anyway, being a potential user of SoftPC and also considering the >purchase of a bridgeboard for the 3000, I decided to check into >the possibility of SoftPC being ported to the Amiga 3000. SoftPC runs at >4.77 mhz on a 16mhz Mac II, so I would imagine that it would give AT like >speed on the 3000, as well as being able to multitask a lot better than >the Mac version (which does run under MultiFinder). In addition, the >"EGA"-like productivity graphic modes would be ideal for this type of >emulation. Yeah. SoftPC would be a good idea I think. I played with it on a Personal Iris. It worked great, and even supported VGA graphics with the propper ROM file. And it supported access to the Unix filesystems (and therefore remote NFS mounted filesystems) through an assigned MS-DOS hard drive (I think it was the d: drive). Things could work simalarly (and of course better) on the Amiga. The Amiga 3000 is a fast enough machine for running something like SoftPC, and stable enough now with the MMU. And with a 68040 card, it may even do '386 speeds! Having SoftPC ported would also mean CBM could stop development on new BridgeBoards ('386 and '486.. If they're even in the works), and put those resources back into the Amiga. So just port it, a'ight ? :-) C'ya, Jim -- UUCP: ...!rutgers!faatcrl!jimb Internet: jimb@faatcrl.UUCP Under brooding skys and watchful eyes On convulsive seas of false urgency We walk empty corridors in vain - "No Exit", Fate's Warning
hawk@pnet01.cts.com (John Anderson) (09/04/90)
In response to not being able to run Transformer on the 3000: I have a 2500/030 that I upgraded to with C='s 030 board and wanted to see if the Transformer would still work. Well, it didn't (in 030 mode). I turned off the cache's via SetCPU and it still didn't work. i disables all fast RAM and the extra 512K chip RAM, (I have 1 meg Agnus), and it still didn't work. All i got was a blue screen. So I went to 68000 mode and that didn't work either. But.... I Disabled all fast RAM *and* the extra Chip RAM so all my system had was 512K, and then it worked. People have said that it doesn't work with the 2000's even with a 68000. Try using nofastmem, and a program I got from my A-Max disk called KillChip, which disables the exra Chip RAM, adn then Transformer should work.
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (09/04/90)
In article <2178@bambam.UUCP> pashdown@shotput.es.com@bambam.UUCP (Pete Ashdown) writes: > >> We just called Insigmnia Solutions, Inc., and asked them if we could >>expect any time in the future a version of Soft-PC for the NeXT. > >Anyway, being a potential user of SoftPC and also considering the >purchase of a bridgeboard for the 3000, I decided to check into >the possibility of SoftPC being ported to the Amiga 3000. SoftPC runs at >4.77 mhz on a 16mhz Mac II, so I would imagine that it would give AT like >speed on the 3000, as well as being able to multitask a lot better than >the Mac version (which does run under MultiFinder). I don't know whether Insignia Solutions has anything to do with it (seems not), but in the Old Days we already had the "Transformer" which was a software MS-DOS emulator on the Amiga. "Features": SLOW, not very compatible (though the main applications ran), not any graphics. It was written in a direct-access-to-hardware manner that would make it difficult to port to the A3000 (at least I think so). Commodore and it's customers did'nt get much fun out of it and it was discontinued. For me, it seems nearly impossible to get "AT speed" out of a software emulation, also on an A3000. But if you could show me, I would be pleased. >In addition, Apple is busily working on producing an Apple II on a card for >their Mac's. The idea is that they are going to upgrade all the schools to >Mac's without losing the Apple education platform. WHAT IF Commodore >contacted Laser about licensing their Apple II compatible ROMS and then >produced a II emulator as well. If you had talked about a C64 card for the Amiga, ok. Who wants an Apple II? (Maybe I'm biased, here in Europe Commodore was dominant over these fruits all the time, yes, really!) And remember the C128 with it's CP/M: Those old operating systems are near dead, here it is nearly impossible to still get some CP/M stuff. The big distributors all have discontinued this. I assume same would be true for Apple II software, at least soon. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ rutgers!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz (09/05/90)
In article <4243@crash.cts.com>, hawk@pnet01.cts.com (John Anderson) writes: > In response to not being able to run Transformer on the 3000: I have a > 2500/030 that I upgraded to with C='s 030 board and wanted to see if the > Transformer would still work. Well, it didn't (in 030 mode). I turned off > the cache's via SetCPU and it still didn't work. i disables all fast RAM and > the extra 512K chip RAM, (I have 1 meg Agnus), and it still didn't work. All > i got was a blue screen. So I went to 68000 mode and that didn't work either. > But.... I Disabled all fast RAM *and* the extra Chip RAM so all my system had > was 512K, and then it worked. People have said that it doesn't work with the > 2000's even with a 68000. Try using nofastmem, and a program I got from my > A-Max disk called KillChip, which disables the exra Chip RAM, adn then > Transformer should work. I also had to run KillChip on my A500 Rev5, FatA, 1mb chip, 2 mb fast. Nofastmem is not needed. Transformer can't cope with the FatA, as a friend has a near serial no A500 to mine which hasn't got FatA and he can run it without killchip. Regards Alan
glin@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU (George Lin [900116]) (09/05/90)
Did anybody get SoftPC to run under AMAX or
][ In A Mac (A Apple][e emulator) for the Mac under AMAX???
GLin.n350bq@tamuts.tamu.edu (Duane Fields) (09/05/90)
There were stories here of the transformer working under the 3000???? I was told to use "killchip" to disable the xtra chip ram, but the prg (on the 3000 in any case) did nothing to my chip ram, and of course the transformer didn't work. Any ideas? Duane
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (09/05/90)
In article <117@faatcrl.UUCP> jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes: > Having SoftPC ported would also mean CBM could stop >development on new BridgeBoards ('386 and '486.. If they're even in >the works), and put those resources back into the Amiga. I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! A PC without slots is not really alive, you can do only very limited work with it. The big game starts when you add cards, and this is ONLY possible on an Amiga with a bridgeboard. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ rutgers!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (09/05/90)
In article <7963@helios.TAMU.EDU> n350bq@tamuts.tamu.edu (Duane Fields) writes: >There were stories here of the transformer working under the 3000???? >I was told to use "killchip" to disable the xtra chip ram, but the prg >(on the 3000 in any case) did nothing to my chip ram, and of course the >transformer didn't work. Any ideas? > >Duane I believe that Transformer has problems with illegal instructions on a 68020 or '030. I think there is a patch out there that goes through the xecutable and replaces the illegal instructions with the legal replacement. Also, you would have to disable the cache on the 68030 chip. Then, if you disable all memory except 512K of chip ram, it might work. Only two things might ruin it - if the Transformer uses the emtpty 8-bits of 24-bit addresses to store data (I don't think Commodore would do this?) then it is pretty hopeless, since the 68030 takes the whole 32-bits as the address. The other problem would be if the Transformer goes directly to the hardware to get extra speed. The 3000 is so different in the hardware that anything that goes to hardware on the 500/1000/2000 wouldn't work on the 3000. -- _. --Steve ._||__ DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own. Warren v\ *| ---------------------------------------------- V {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM
swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (09/05/90)
In article <105810@convex.convex.com> swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) writes: >I believe that Transformer has problems with illegal instructions on a >68020 or '030. I think there is a patch out there that goes through the >xecutable and replaces the illegal instructions with the legal replacement. > >Also, you would have to disable the cache on the 68030 chip. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I don't know why I said this (I don't think there is anything that would require this). But you might as well give it a try, maybe the Transformer is doing self-modifying code or something, who knows? -- _. --Steve ._||__ DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own. Warren v\ *| ---------------------------------------------- V {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM
jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) (09/06/90)
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: >In article <117@faatcrl.UUCP> jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes: >> Having SoftPC ported would also mean CBM could stop >>development on new BridgeBoards ('386 and '486.. If they're even in >>the works), and put those resources back into the Amiga. >I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO >Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! A PC without slots is >not really alive, you can do only very limited work with it. >The big game starts when you add cards, and this is ONLY possible >on an Amiga with a bridgeboard. Hmm. Can cards plugged into the AT slots on the A2000 and A3000 be accessed by the 680x0 ? Or is it on a totally separate bus ? If they're accessible by the Amiga side, isn't there a way that SoftPC could make use of the cards ? I was never sure of this... C'ya, Jim -- UUCP: ...!rutgers!faatcrl!jimb Internet: jimb@faatcrl.UUCP Under brooding skys and watchful eyes On convulsive seas of false urgency We walk empty corridors in vain - "No Exit", Fate's Warning
a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) (09/06/90)
In article <H7u2o7w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >Has anyone thought about running AMax II on an A3000 and running SoftPC >on it? I knw, it's dumb, but I am curious. No, that's not dumb. Dumb is when I ran Z80MU (a Z-80 CP/M emulator that runs under MS-DOS) under the Transformer, then ran Microsoft BASIC-80 under that. It took seven seconds to calculate a sine (but it was correct! :-). But I always was a bit warped... Charlie_Gibbs@mindlink.UUCP Intel puts the "backward" in "backward compatibility."
n350bq@tamuts.tamu.edu (Duane Fields) (09/06/90)
I have seen ][ in a mac run under amax, and it works fine... If you wanna run apple programs that it!! Duane
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) (09/06/90)
n350bq@tamuts.tamu.edu (Duane Fields) writes: > I have seen ][ in a mac run under amax, and it works fine... If you wanna > run apple programs that it!! > > Duane Has anyone thought about running AMax II on an A3000 and running SoftPC on it? I knw, it's dumb, but I am curious. -Joseph Hillenburg (Sultan of Asm) INET: joseph@valnet.uucp |MAIL: 1709 West Gray UUCP: ...!iuvax!valnet!joseph |MAIL: Bloomington, IN 47401 AT&T: 1-812-336-2969 |MAIL: United States CompSci BBS: 3/12/24 1-812-876-4407 9:30 pm-7:30 am |Mail replies requested Those aren't bugs! Just undesirable features! st undesirable features!
GWO110%URIACC.BITNET@brownvm.brown.edu (F. Michael Theilig) (09/06/90)
On 5 Sep 90 07:29:13 GMT you said: > >I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO >Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! A PC without slots is >not really alive, you can do only very limited work with it. >The big game starts when you add cards, and this is ONLY possible >on an Amiga with a bridgeboard. > There is also one big advantage to software emulation: when you add memory to your Amiga, you add memory to the PC/Mac. Same goes for processor speed, hard drives, and whatever else. With that situation, much of the need of slots vanishes. I "properly written" version of the Transformer would be real nice, and also real unlikely. >-- >Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to >Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ rutgers!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk -------- F. Michael Theilig - The University of Rhode Island at Little Rest GWO110 at URIACC.Bitnet GKZ117 at URIACC.Bitnet "Magic work much better when there be bullets in the gun, asshole!"
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (09/06/90)
In article <124@faatcrl.UUCP> jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes: > >>I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO >>Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! > >Hmm. Can cards plugged into the AT slots on the A2000 and A3000 be >accessed by the 680x0 ? Or is it on a totally separate bus ? If they're >accessible by the Amiga side, isn't there a way that SoftPC could make use >of the cards ? I was never sure of this... Well, if your bridgeboard is up and running, then you can communicate with all stuff on the PC/AT side by means of the functions provided by the Janus library (on Amiga and PC side). If you don't have a bridgeboard, the busses are completely separated, you have ONLY power supply on the PC/AT slots. But as far as I know there may exist one (some?) Amiga card(s) that connects the Amiga bus with the PC bus and makes the latter accessible for I/O. But don't know any details or producers, sorry. But I'm sure these I/O addresses are in the end different from their situation in a PC, so access by SoftPC wpuld be at least questionable. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet!pyramid!rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
murphy@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu (William J. Murphy) (09/06/90)
In article <382@cbmger.UUCP> peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: >I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO >Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! A PC without slots is >not really alive, you can do only very limited work with it. >The big game starts when you add cards, and this is ONLY possible >on an Amiga with a bridgeboard. While what you say about Mac and Sun is true, what about Apollo? I recall that their machines used the ISA configuration. I don't know anything about the timing issues and mapping/addressing of the cards into the peripheral space, but couldn't one take an off-the-shelf PC card and use it with SoftPC in an Apollo? I am not disputing the Amiga's unique position as regards the PC slots AND the bridgeboard, I am just asking a question about Apollo. Bill Murphy | Turtle Schmurtle, I'm the murphy@gibbs.physics.purdue.edu | Rabbit. Amiga, it's not a religion, it's a lifestyle | B. Bunny
mrush@csuchico.edu (Matt "C P." Rush) (09/07/90)
In article <H7u2o7w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >n350bq@tamuts.tamu.edu (Duane Fields) writes: > >> I have seen ][ in a mac run under amax, and it works fine... If you wanna >> run apple programs that it!! >> >> Duane > > >Has anyone thought about running AMax II on an A3000 and running SoftPC >on it? I knw, it's dumb, but I am curious. You people are sick! Sick!! SICK!!! Using a faster machine to run an emulator so that you can run another emulator... SICK! SICK! SICK! On a lighter note, if anyone tries this how about posting the results and the hardware used. It sounds like an interesting project. -- Matt *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* % "Progress is an up-hill battle % mrush@csuchico.edu % % against backwards compatibility." % mrush@cscihp.UUCP % % -- me % % Now: mrush@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu % *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* This is a SCHOOL! Do you think they even CARE about MY opinions?!
jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) (09/07/90)
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: >In article <124@faatcrl.UUCP> jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes: >> >>Hmm. Can cards plugged into the AT slots on the A2000 and A3000 be >>accessed by the 680x0 ? Or is it on a totally separate bus ? If they're >>accessible by the Amiga side, isn't there a way that SoftPC could make use >>of the cards ? I was never sure of this... >Well, if your bridgeboard is up and running, then you can communicate >with all stuff on the PC/AT side by means of the functions provided by >the Janus library (on Amiga and PC side). O well.. >If you don't have a bridgeboard, the busses are completely separated, >you have ONLY power supply on the PC/AT slots. But as far as I know >there may exist one (some?) Amiga card(s) that connects the Amiga bus >with the PC bus and makes the latter accessible for I/O. But don't >know any details or producers, sorry. But I'm sure these I/O addresses >are in the end different from their situation in a PC, so access by >SoftPC wpuld be at least questionable. Yeah. I guess the only way you could do it if there were address decoding conflicts would be through MMU magic. Of course, if the Amiga/PC cards had address conflics, the machine might not be able to boot anyway. And the only fix I could think of is making the PC bus-Amiga bus connector an Autoconfig card which connects the two busses only on software request, after the MMU is set up. :-) Ridiculous. So forget SoftPC + IBM cards. But who cares ? I still want SoftPC! I can live with using Zorro III cards and the Amiga side of things with SoftPC. ;-) Seriously, if it were reasonable cheap, I think SoftPC might cause a lot of people to reconsider purchasing PC compatibility on the Amiga. There are probably a lot of people who would love to run PC software on their Amigas, but not so much that they'd consider shelling out the cash for a bridgecard (although the effect SoftPC could have on the Amiga business software market makes me a little uneasy about it). With a port of SoftPC, CBM could offer both a high-end, high-compatibility/reliability PC compatibility solution (bridgecard), and a low-end, less-compatible/reliable solution (SoftPC). Each has its plusses and minuses. The BridgeCard does the job far better than any software emulation could, giving you both hardware and software compatibility, but it's expensive. SoftPC would do good job of software emulation, but you couldn't use IBM hardware (cards) with it, but it's cheap. Owell.... Just some thoughts... C'ya, Jim -- UUCP: ...!rutgers!faatcrl!jimb Internet: jimb@faatcrl.UUCP Under brooding skys and watchful eyes On convulsive seas of false urgency We walk empty corridors in vain - "No Exit", Fate's Warning
U3364521@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lou Cavallo) (09/07/90)
G'day, In article <388@cbmger.UUCP>, peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: > In article <124@faatcrl.UUCP> jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes: >> >>>I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO >>>Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! >> >>Hmm. Can cards plugged into the AT slots on the A2000 and A3000 be >>accessed by the 680x0 ? Or is it on a totally separate bus ? If they're >>accessible by the Amiga side, isn't there a way that SoftPC could make use >>of the cards ? I was never sure of this... > [..deleted..] > > If you don't have a bridgeboard, the busses are completely separated, > you have ONLY power supply on the PC/AT slots. But as far as I know > there may exist one (some?) Amiga card(s) that connects the Amiga bus > with the PC bus and makes the latter accessible for I/O. But don't > know any details or producers, sorry. But I'm sure these I/O addresses I don't have the full details either but some company produces a system with a name like "AX-S" which I think allows I/O control of IBM PC boards plugged into the AMiga AT style slots. I believe Dave Haynie responded to a discussion in comp.sys.amiga.hardware on this type of topic. Perhaps you could summarise here a little Dave? > are in the end different from their situation in a PC, so access by > SoftPC wpuld be at least questionable. Is it possible at all I wonder. If so it could be quite popular with a certain subset of Amiga users that would like access to IBM expansion products. This seems to a popular (recurring) question. I wonder if being able to use IBM expansion products without a full h/w emula- tion would somehow create the notion of IBM h/w compatibility ... i.e. could you imagine the selling point you could use yes, you can sell your 386 clone yes, you can then buy our Amiga 3000 yes, you can still keep your VGA cards, HD controllers, sound boards... :-) My gut feeling tells me I'm either dreaming of a product/s that already does/do exist, or, the software can't/won't/hasn't been written for it/them yet. Yeah, I know, that's why the h/w emulator exists ... because s/w already exists. > Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... > Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet!pyramid!rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk yours truly, Lou Cavallo.
p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst) (09/07/90)
In article <382@cbmger.UUCP> peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: >I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO >Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! A PC without slots is >not really alive, you can do only very limited work with it. >The big game starts when you add cards, and this is ONLY possible >on an Amiga with a bridgeboard. Matter of fact. The Sun386i has AT-style slots. But then it does not use SoftPC :-). Regard, -- Michael van Elst UUCP: universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
pashdown@shotput.es.com@bambam.UUCP (Pete Ashdown) (09/07/90)
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: >In article <117@faatcrl.UUCP> jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes: >> Having SoftPC ported would also mean CBM could stop >>development on new BridgeBoards ('386 and '486.. If they're even in >>the works), and put those resources back into the Amiga. >I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO >Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! A PC without slots is >not really alive, you can do only very limited work with it. >The big game starts when you add cards, and this is ONLY possible >on an Amiga with a bridgeboard. How much of a deal would it be to make a cheap "bridge" that SoftPC could access? They were talking about such a bridge when the A2000 was first released, but it never materialized. This would give the Amiga a definite advantage over other SoftPC platforms. I'd think its completely possible to do as well. >-- >Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to >Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ rutgers!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk () () -=Adolescent Deformed Karate Lobsters!=- " ( " ) - 'Like Linguini, where's my house slippers?' / ( ) ( ) 'I thot I tol you to shaddup, Ricotta!!' () () /|\ Pete Ashdown pashdown@esunix.es.com ...utah-cs!esunix!pashdown /|\
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (09/07/90)
glin@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU (George Lin [900116]) writes: >Did anybody get SoftPC to run under AMAX or > ][ In A Mac (A Apple][e emulator) for the Mac under AMAX??? Go buy me a copy , send it to me and I'll try it out and let you know, ok? Seriously. -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (09/07/90)
n350bq@tamuts.tamu.edu (Duane Fields) writes: >There were stories here of the transformer working under the 3000???? >I was told to use "killchip" to disable the xtra chip ram, but the prg >(on the 3000 in any case) did nothing to my chip ram, and of course the >transformer didn't work. Any ideas? The Transformer I have won't even work under WB1.3 on my stock amiga 1000. Matter of fact, I think it only works under WB 1.1 (haven't ran it in quite a while). There was a program out that supposedly patched the Transformer to work under 1.3, but it didn't work when I tried it. -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
vinsci@soft.fi (Leonard Norrgard) (09/08/90)
>>Has anyone thought about running AMax II on an A3000 and running SoftPC >>on it? I knw, it's dumb, but I am curious. > > You people are sick! Sick!! SICK!!! Using a faster machine to run >an emulator so that you can run another emulator... SICK! SICK! SICK! Not at all. Remember that AMax on the Amiga runs Mac software faster than Macs run the same software! So you should actually get better results running SoftPC on the Amiga (if it turns out to work) than on the Mac. > On a lighter note, if anyone tries this how about posting the results >and the hardware used. It sounds like an interesting project. Agreed. In fact, I'd probably by both Amax and SoftPC right away if the setup works together. > -- Matt -- Leonard
billsey@agora.uucp (Bill Seymour) (09/09/90)
In article <4243@crash.cts.com> hawk@pnet01.cts.com (John Anderson) writes:
:
: In response to not being able to run Transformer on the 3000: I have a
:2500/030 that I upgraded to with C='s 030 board and wanted to see if the
:Transformer would still work. Well, it didn't (in 030 mode). I turned off
:the cache's via SetCPU and it still didn't work. i disables all fast RAM and
:the extra 512K chip RAM, (I have 1 meg Agnus), and it still didn't work. All
:i got was a blue screen. So I went to 68000 mode and that didn't work either.
:But.... I Disabled all fast RAM *and* the extra Chip RAM so all my system had
:was 512K, and then it worked. People have said that it doesn't work with the
:2000's even with a 68000. Try using nofastmem, and a program I got from my
:A-Max disk called KillChip, which disables the exra Chip RAM, adn then
:Transformer should work.
Phil Staub's PSTransformer front end (Hi Phil!) allows you to run
Transformer (either 1.0 or 1.2) on most Amigas. I know it works on a 2000
with the 2630 installed, although you do have to turn off FastROM and all
cacheing. On the 3000, it's a little hard to trun off the MMUed ROM, and I
believe that's why I can't get it to work. It comes up and accesses the PC
disk, but just stops after a bit...
Note that even in 68030 mode, Transformer just can't be called very
'fast'... :-} Although, it does a very good job of keeping up with 2400
baud modems now. :-}
--
-Bill Seymour ...tektronix!reed!percival!agora!billsey
=============================================================================
Bejed, Inc. NES, Inc. Northwest Amiga Group At Home Sometimes
(503) 281-8153 (503) 246-9311 (503) 656-7393 BBS (503) 640-0842hgm@ccvr1.ncsu.edu (Hal G. Meeks) (09/09/90)
There is a patch for Transformer, called PSTransfomer. It is on one of the fish disks. I know that, with the patch, it is possible to run Transformer under 1.2 with expanded memory. It also supposedly fixes Transformer's CPU dependency bug. I have not tried it under 1.3, but I suspect it will work. I can't try it myself because I have a 2000 with the "cherry" keyboard. I have a fix for it, but have never gotten around to doing it. --hal -- hgm@ccvr1.cc.ncsu.edu "He was a legendary hero, netoprhm@ncsuvm.bitnet his IQ was zero." Zoogz Rift
charly@brewak.ruhr.sub.org (Andrew Kopp) (09/09/90)
In article <382@cbmger.UUCP>, Peter Kittel GERMANY writes: > In article <117@faatcrl.UUCP> jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes: > [ ... port SoftPC, more Amiga - less bridgeboard devlopment.] > > I think you miss one BIG advantage of the bridgeboards, where NO > Mac or Sun can compete: YOU HAVE PC SLOTS! A PC without slots is > not really alive, you can do only very limited work with it. > The big game starts when you add cards, and this is ONLY possible > on an Amiga with a bridgeboard. > > -- > Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to > Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ rutgers!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk Most popular SW like wordprocessors, databases, all-in-one applications run without additional card (except memory) very well, but slow. For the advantage of VGA (hardware) graphics and speed i prefer the real thing.I agree that a Sun or Mac cannot handle with PC cards - they are more professional ! (hit me, if i`m wrong) I think there is many interesting food also for the Amiga slots avaiable now, perhaps C= ignore these developments a bit ? So the bridgeboard is not a requirement to start `the big game` on Amiga. I like it as it is. -- __ _ <Charly> ala Andrew Kopp - The Software Brewery - // |_ | | |_> UUCP : charly@brewak.ruhr.sub.org // __| |/\| |_> \\ // ------------ CBMnet: ...{cbmehq|cbmger}!brewas!brewak!charly \X/
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (09/10/90)
In article <3070@mindlink.UUCP> a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) writes: >In article <H7u2o7w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) >writes: > >>Has anyone thought about running AMax II on an A3000 and running SoftPC >>on it? I knw, it's dumb, but I am curious. > > No, that's not dumb. Dumb is when I ran Z80MU (a Z-80 CP/M >emulator that runs under MS-DOS) under the Transformer, then ran >Microsoft BASIC-80 under that. It took seven seconds to calculate >a sine (but it was correct! :-). But I always was a bit warped... Reminds me of our game with Wordstar instead of Basic-80. It took 5 minutes for the first character to appear on the screen, We never got to the point of typing in a character ourselves, don't know if we simply should have waited another hour... -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet!pyramid!rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (09/10/90)
In article <127@faatcrl.UUCP> jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes: > I still want SoftPC! I can live with using Zorro III cards and the >Amiga side of things with SoftPC. ;-) >Seriously, if it were reasonable cheap, I think SoftPC might cause a lot >of people to reconsider purchasing PC compatibility on the Amiga. There are Well, one reason why we (in Germany) stopped Transformer was cost. For such a software on the Amiga you need to adapt at least some of the MS-DOS software, say the keyboard driver. So we decided to sell the Transformer only with the complete (and adapted) MS-DOS system. And what happened? The cost advantage was gone! It cost the enduser about 150 to 200 Dollar (300 DM) the whole package! You must consider all the parts, package, DOS license fee, it really amounts to that value. The other way would have been to sell the Transformer without the MS-DOS and tell people to buy it in any shop. (I think it was done in US this way.) But this way you run into several risks that people buy (or steal?) MS-DOS versions that don't go well with your software. All I wanted to say is, don't think it would be SOOO cheap. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet!pyramid!rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
jimce@sssab.se (Jimmy Cederholm) (09/10/90)
I've used version 1.23 of the Transformer on my A1000 with kickstart 1.3 and it works OK. I know V1.2 doesn't, and this should mean that the Transformer suffers from some "sloppy" programming, i.e. it makes calls to ROM directly, without calling through the library-bases. If this is the case, it will probably require large portions of the code to be re-written for OS 2.0.... I don't know if anyone has tested this version under Kickstart 1.3 on the A3000 - I don't think it will work, but it's worth a try. However, as long as it won't run in a window of its own as a part of the multitasking environment, i don't really think it's worth the effort to rewrite it. - Jimmy [jimce@sssab.se]
ifarqhar@mqccsunc.mqcc.mq.oz.au (Ian Farquhar) (09/11/90)
In article <395@cbmger.UUCP> peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: >Reminds me of our game with Wordstar instead of Basic-80. It took >5 minutes for the first character to appear on the screen, We never >got to the point of typing in a character ourselves, don't know if >we simply should have waited another hour... Hmm, not my experience. When I tried WS4, it was almost usable. Also, as WordStar is quite customisable, and is heavily delayed (this being changable in WSCHANGE - WordStar is still the most customisable WP around on *any* machine). By removing the delays, it could be quite fast. I actually ran Norton's SI on the Transformer program (on a 512K A1000). It reported a Processor Rating of 0.2 (as opposed to 1.0 for a 4.77M XT), and a 80286 CPU. Even so, if I were to write an emulator, I would like the virtual machine that the 68030 can provide. It might even be possible to emulate a slow AT (including hardware), or even *gasp* a C64. I find this amusing: a 32 bit Virtual machine running at 25MHz simulating a 8 bit 1 MHz home computer.... -- Ian Farquhar Phone : 61 2 805-7420 Office of Computing Services Fax : 61 2 805-7433 Macquarie University NSW 2109 Also : 61 2 805-7205 Australia EMail : ifarqhar@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz.au
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (09/12/90)
hgm@ccvr1.ncsu.edu (Hal G. Meeks) writes: |There is a patch for Transformer, called PSTransfomer. It is on one of the |fish disks. I know that, with the patch, it is possible to run Transformer |under 1.2 with expanded memory. It also supposedly fixes Transformer's CPU |dependency bug. I have not tried it under 1.3, but I suspect it will work. |I can't try it myself because I have a 2000 with the "cherry" keyboard. I |have a fix for it, but have never gotten around to doing it. I have tried PSTransformer on my stock amiga 1000 with 512K and two floppies. It Gurus. any body have any clues as to why? does PSTransformer only work on Amiga 2000's or something? I tried the PSTransformer fix under 1.2 and 1.3 and both times it Gurus. -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (09/14/90)
In article <4056@newton.physics.purdue.edu> murphy@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu (William J. Murphy) writes: >While what you say about Mac and Sun is true, what about Apollo? I recall >that their machines used the ISA configuration. I don't know anything about >the timing issues and mapping/addressing of the cards into the peripheral >space, but couldn't one take an off-the-shelf PC card and use it with >SoftPC in an Apollo? I think there might have been something weird about the implementation, but the desktop Apollos like the 3000/4000 have ISA slots. That doesn't mean it's all that likely that a program like SoftPC would have direct access to them. The Apollos are attempting to run a protected OS, and should you let something evil like MS-DOS grab hold of your naked hardware on such a system, terrible things could result. I suppose under the right circumstances, they might provide some way for the SoftPC program to be set up with unrestricted access to safe chunks of the ISA bus address. Not surprisingly, the new Apollo desktop machines are supporting the EISA bus. They're the first and so far only non-Intel architecture machines to do so. >Bill Murphy | Turtle Schmurtle, I'm the -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy Get that coffee outta my face, put a Margarita in its place!