conklin@eecae.UUCP (Terry Conklin) (10/29/88)
[Is there really such a thing as a line-eater? I mean, -I- haven't seen it]
Am I mad? I suppose not. Disappointed, definately.
My local store FINALLY got their 1.3 Enhancer package (only 10 of the 25
ordered) and called us personally so that we got the first of them tonight.
So I excitedly clear off the monitor and dig into the package to find -
NO ROMS!
I guess the question is - Hey CBM, is this the 1.3 PACKAGE or not? If you're
a 1000 owner it is. But if your a 2000/500 owner, you're "s@#t out of luck."
Ok, so we're off now in search of ROMs. How does one GET ROMs? Will they take
yet another umpteen days? And a little part of me asks, "Why did we shell out
$27 for a REVISION of the OS???" The other part replies, "'Cause you shelled
out $70 for PukeCity-DOgS%$# upgrades...
Also, lets get this autoboot situation down, once and for all.
A.) You need the Kickstart 1.3 to be able to autoboot from hard disk
B.) You need the 1.3 Enhancer/OS package (come on, you NEED FFS...)
C.) You *NEED* a partitioned disk, where DH0: is an OLD-STYLE, "slow format"
partition. You dont need much, but enough such that the autoboot
controller can load FFS, so you can get to FFS partitions.
The above assumes that, like myself, you find it vile and repulsive to have
a machine that needs a floppy to got to the hard disk. Perhaps the PCs have
set the standard here. I find it really assinine to have a hard disk that
you cant boot off of.
I think this package lays down for good any rumors that the 1000 support is
being dropped - hell, with this the 1000 is getting BETTER support!
It is noticeably annoying to have to have an OFS partition. I'm a big fan of
huge, monolithic drives. (One of the MSU machines has 1.5 Gig) I dont like
splitting it up into "logicals." That's what subdirectories are for.
(Actually, some MSU machines are a lot bigger than that, but those are those
nasty pay-for computer services, whereas that is a nice, open Unix box.)
Oh well. We still dont have a controller to go with our hard disk here anyhow,
so why complain?
Does ANYONE have data on:
The TRUMPCARD from Interactive Video Systems, SCSI, $190, A2000 short-card
HardFrame/2000 from Microbotics, SCSI, $330, A2000 short w/mount for 3.5"
I saw a reference (so impersonal) that the individual who wrote HardFrame
drivers is here. It doesn't seem -too- farfetched that that individual might
actually -have- one. If so, how 'bout running the "standard" diskperf test
that people have been running (OFS, FFS with varying degrees of buffers)
In Aviation, we use the ISA, the International Standard Atmosphere, as a
measure to figure out what kind of air we're flying in. Does anyone
object to using the CBM 2090A card (due to its being the most likely thing
available) as a standard to reference against?
The ISA is good because it gives you a solid model to compare your atmosphere
against, even though there are a large number of variables.
Likewise, while any given individual A might get controller Q and drive Z
(speed = Fq(Fz)) and run FFS, if he took that same drive/machine/etc,
and ALSO ran the tests with the 2090A, you would be able to accurately
define any given controllers performance in terms of 2090As (Sort of like
(gads) Peter Norton's "PC XT" System P{erformance. "This controller is
as fast as 1.4 2090As. This one is .6 2090As.")
The 2090As strengths as a measuring stick (is that like a doorjamb? ;->)
are A.) numbers, B.) stability, C.) versatility (since you can compare
both SCSI and (future) ST-506 controllers against it.)
Oh well, more needlessly wasted netbandwidth...
Terry Conklin "Caress into oblivion"
conklin@egr.msu.edu -Celtic Frost
{msudoc|frith}!conklin
The Club (517) 372-3131 3/12/2400 (call me here)
The Club II (313) 334-8877 3/12/2400 Amiga filz & moremanes@xanth.cs.odu.edu (Mark Manes) (10/29/88)
In article <12839@eecae.UUCP> conklin@eecae.UUCP (Terry Conklin) writes: > >Am I mad? I suppose not. Disappointed, definately. > >My local store FINALLY got their 1.3 Enhancer package (only 10 of the 25 >ordered) and called us personally so that we got the first of them tonight. > >So I excitedly clear off the monitor and dig into the package to find - >NO ROMS! > >I guess the question is - Hey CBM, is this the 1.3 PACKAGE or not? If you're >a 1000 owner it is. But if your a 2000/500 owner, you're "s@#t out of luck." Well, first off, if you read the back of the Enhancer Manual it clearly says, and I quote "This package includes 3 diskettes and a manual". Did it say it has ROMS? No... Secondly, the packaging was smart. ALOT of Amiga 500/2000 (and of course 1000 owners) do not have hard disks, and do not have enough memory to make effective use of RAD: so why include ROMS in every package so that the price of the Enhancer software is higher to all? One should not assume the world has a hard disk... > >Ok, so we're off now in search of ROMs. How does one GET ROMs? Will they take >yet another umpteen days? And a little part of me asks, "Why did we shell out >$27 for a REVISION of the OS???" The other part replies, "'Cause you shelled >out $70 for PukeCity-DOgS%$# upgrades... You shelled out a measly $27 for a very nice upgrade to our operating system. It costs money to produce the things, and I doubt that Commodore made any money on these. > >Also, lets get this autoboot situation down, once and for all. > >A.) You need the Kickstart 1.3 to be able to autoboot from hard disk >B.) You need the 1.3 Enhancer/OS package (come on, you NEED FFS...) >C.) You *NEED* a partitioned disk, where DH0: is an OLD-STYLE, "slow format" > partition. You dont need much, but enough such that the autoboot > controller can load FFS, so you can get to FFS partitions. > >The above assumes that, like myself, you find it vile and repulsive to have >a machine that needs a floppy to got to the hard disk. Perhaps the PCs have >set the standard here. I find it really assinine to have a hard disk that >you cant boot off of. I admit one of the nicest things is autobbot, but many other upgrades and fixes were made that we needed. BTW, you never release part of a operating system upgrade, think of the problems, of the non-programmer types (hey, like your friendly dealer :-) ) who could not handle a complicated installation of FFS. > >I think this package lays down for good any rumors that the 1000 support is >being dropped - hell, with this the 1000 is getting BETTER support! It has been made clear in recent postings that Commodore is NOT going to drop support for the 1000. I do not think that the Enhancer package was designed with the 1000 owner in mind, but with idea that MOST people do not need the ROMS. > >It is noticeably annoying to have to have an OFS partition. I'm a big fan of >huge, monolithic drives. (One of the MSU machines has 1.5 Gig) I dont like >splitting it up into "logicals." That's what subdirectories are for. >(Actually, some MSU machines are a lot bigger than that, but those are those >nasty pay-for computer services, whereas that is a nice, open Unix box.) The reason that the OFS must be used has to do with the fact that the FFS is not in ROM yet. This is a 1.4 change. Btw, I hate large subdirectory trees. > >Oh well, more needlessly wasted netbandwidth... > Agreed (sigh..) >Terry Conklin "Caress into oblivion" >conklin@egr.msu.edu -Celtic Frost >{msudoc|frith}!conklin >The Club (517) 372-3131 3/12/2400 (call me here) >The Club II (313) 334-8877 3/12/2400 Amiga filz & more --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark D. Manes "In Amiga We Trust" Programmer of Fortune, have compiler will travel "C is the Only programming Language that would compile a Ronald Reagan Speech" - the masked programmer ===========================================================================
vkr@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) (10/31/88)
In article <6531@xanth.cs.odu.edu> manes@cs.odu.edu (Mark Manes) writes: > [...] I do not think that the Enhancer package was >designed with the 1000 owner in mind, but with idea that MOST people do not >need the ROMS. Also there are some of us who will put up booting off df0: (especially if you have df1: :-) so that only one ROM change is needed. I mean EVERYBODY needs 1.4 right? Of course if there aren't too many of us, let me know. I will just buy 1.3ROM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ P.S. The poster/mailer here has been saying that my email address is vkr.osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu.UUCP. The trailing .UUCP is of course (?) wrong.
mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Portuesi) (10/31/88)
conklin@eecae.UUCP (Terry Conklin) writes: > So I excitedly clear off the monitor and dig into the package to find - > NO ROMS! > > I guess the question is - Hey CBM, is this the 1.3 PACKAGE or not? If you're > a 1000 owner it is. But if your a 2000/500 owner, you're "s@#t out of luck." Well, it does make sense in a way. As a 1000 owner, I don't want to have to pay extra for the ROMS when I don't need them. > I think this package lays down for good any rumors that the 1000 support is > being dropped - hell, with this the 1000 is getting BETTER support! Well, after you install the ROMS in your 2000, you'll get to avoid the floppy entirely. Us 1000 owners are still stuck with Kickstart. There are advantages and disadvantages with both machines. It's really not worth complaining about. > > It is noticeably annoying to have to have an OFS partition. I'm a big fan of > huge, monolithic drives. Of course, you do know there are technical reasons why the OFS partition is necessary for autoboot, like the fact FFS isn't in ROM and it has to be bootstrapped from somewhere. --M Michael Portuesi / Information Technology Center / Carnegie Mellon University ARPA/UUCP: mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu BITNET: mp1u%andrew.cmu.edu@cmccvb "my friends say she's a dumb blonde, but they don't know she dyes her hair"
pds@quintus.uucp (Peter Schachte) (11/03/88)
In article <12839@eecae.UUCP> conklin@eecae.UUCP (Terry Conklin) writes: >So I excitedly clear off the monitor and dig into the package to find - >NO ROMS! The 1000 has write-controlled RAM for the kernel, so it's easy to update with just a floppy disk; unfortunately you need to use the floppy every time you power up the machine. The 500/2000 have ROMs so they don't need to load the kernel from floppy on power up, but they have to swap chips to upgrade. So why not compromise for the 3000: EEPROMs? The kernel would be distributed on disk, and you'd run a special program to load it into the EEPROMs, but thereafter you wouldn't need the floppy to power up. Just a thought. -Peter Schachte "Clean water? I'm for clean water." pds@quintus.uucp -George Bush ..!sun!quintus!pds
dbk@fbog.UUCP (Dave B. Kinzer @ Price Rd. GEG) (11/03/88)
In article <622@quintus.UUCP> pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: |In article <12839@eecae.UUCP> conklin@eecae.UUCP (Terry Conklin) writes: |>So I excitedly clear off the monitor and dig into the package to find - |>NO ROMS! | |The 1000 has write-controlled RAM for the kernel, so it's easy to [deletions] |So why not compromise for the 3000: EEPROMs? The kernel would be |distributed on disk, and you'd run a special program to load it into |the EEPROMs, but thereafter you wouldn't need the floppy to power up. I LIKE it!!!! (to be said like Chevy Chase in Modern Problems) | |Just a thought. |-Peter Schachte "Clean water? I'm for clean water." |pds@quintus.uucp -George Bush |..!sun!quintus!pds -- | // You've heard of CATS and DOGS, I'm from GOATS, Dave Kinzer | | // Gladly Offering All Their Support! noao!nud!fbog!dbk | | \X/ "My employer's machine, my opinion." (602) 897-3085 |
bell@unc.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) (11/04/88)
In article <622@quintus.UUCP> pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: >So why not compromise for the 3000: EEPROMs? The kernel would be >distributed on disk, and you'd run a special program to load it into >the EEPROMs, but thereafter you wouldn't need the floppy to power up. >-Peter Schachte "Clean water? I'm for clean water." Aren't you going to have incredibly horrible virus problems if you do this sort of thing? A malicious program could infect your machine to the point that you couldn't disinfect it yourself. You might survive by only having part of the kernel replaceable (so the ability to load a new kernel does not depend on this replaceable code), but then you have a considerable chunk of unmodifiable kickstart. ------ Andrew Bell, living a double life at bell@cs.unc.edu and acb@cs.duke.edu "Why can't we ever attempt to solve a problem in this country without having a 'War' on it?" -Rich Thompson, talk.politics.misc
rchampe@hubcap.UUCP (Richard Champeaux) (11/04/88)
In article <5053@thorin.cs.unc.edu>, bell@unc.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) writes: > In article <622@quintus.UUCP> pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: > >So why not compromise for the 3000: EEPROMs? The kernel would be > >distributed on disk, and you'd run a special program to load it into > >the EEPROMs, but thereafter you wouldn't need the floppy to power up. > > >-Peter Schachte "Clean water? I'm for clean water." > > Aren't you going to have incredibly horrible virus problems if you do this > sort of thing? A malicious program could infect your machine to the point > that you couldn't disinfect it yourself. So, make it a hardware switch. :-) You could pop a cover off somewhere and flip a switch to enable the EEPROMS to be written. I know, its a kludge, but thats what kludges are for. > Andrew Bell, living a double life at bell@cs.unc.edu and acb@cs.duke.edu Rich Champeaux Clemson University
joe@dayton.UUCP (Joseph P. Larson) (11/04/88)
Question: Are the contents of my 1.2 ROMs in my 500 derivable from someone's kickstart disk for their 1000? Or actually, can I make 1.3 ROMS from the 1.3 kickstart disk? Maybe CATS would be willing to provide some clues on this, given the technical capabilities and resources of the people on The Net. How many chips are involved? In article <622@quintus.UUCP> pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: >In article <12839@eecae.UUCP> conklin@eecae.UUCP (Terry Conklin) writes: >>So I excitedly clear off the monitor and dig into the package to find - >>NO ROMS! > >So why not compromise for the 3000: EEPROMs? The kernel would be >distributed on disk, and you'd run a special program to load it into >the EEPROMs, but thereafter you wouldn't need the floppy to power up. Yeah. I want my computer able to erase its basic operating system in one fell digital signal! Naw, maybe not! But the idea is getting close. If CA used EPROMs (not EEPROMS!) instead of ROMs, then you could at least trade in your old chips for new ones. But I don't wanna pay extra bucks for real hardware in the machine to reprogram the proms. That's what prom burners are for. -- UUCP: rutgers!dayton!joe (Feed my Dayton Hudson Department Store Company ATT : (612) 375-3537 picture Joe Larson/MIS 1060 (standard disclaimer...) collection) 700 on the Mall Mpls, Mn. 55402
bader+@andrew.cmu.edu (Miles Bader) (11/05/88)
bell@unc.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) writes: > In article <622@quintus.UUCP> pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: > >So why not compromise for the 3000: EEPROMs? The kernel would be > >distributed on disk, and you'd run a special program to load it into > >the EEPROMs, but thereafter you wouldn't need the floppy to power up. > > Aren't you going to have incredibly horrible virus problems if you do this > sort of thing? A malicious program could infect your machine to the point > that you couldn't disinfect it yourself. You could make the eeproms have a write lock that get's flipped to "writeable" only by some button you use (in conjunction with power up) to load new releases. Since it's very, very, very unlikely that a "kickstart" type disk would become infected (because it's always used before there's any other software loaded, so there can't be any viruses waiting around), this would basically make a virus in your kernel impossible. -Miles
ditto@cbmvax.UUCP (Michael "Ford" Ditto) (11/05/88)
In article <5053@thorin.cs.unc.edu> bell@unc.UUCP (Andrew Bell) writes: >So why not compromise for the 3000: EEPROMs? The kernel would be >distributed on disk, and you'd run a special program to load it into >the EEPROMs, but thereafter you wouldn't need the floppy to power up. >In article <622@quintus.UUCP> pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: >Aren't you going to have incredibly horrible virus problems [ ... ] ? How about a safer and cheaper (maybe) method: Have the OS in ordinary ROMS, but if a kickstart disk is in df0: it is loaded into some ram which is made read-only. That way, developers and such could test new releases at the expense of having 512K less RAM, and if new OS releases are available on floppy before they come out on ROM, those people who really need the new featuers can live with floppy-kickstart until the ROMs are available? This could even be done right now on systems with MMUs (like the 2620). -- -=] Ford [=- "The number of Unix installations (In Real Life: Mike Ditto) has grown to 10, with more expected." ford@kenobi.cts.com - The Unix Programmer's Manual, ...!sdcsvax!crash!elgar!ford 2nd Edition, June, 1972. ditto@cbmvax.commodore.com
ejkst@cisunx.UUCP (Eric J. Kennedy) (11/05/88)
In article <0XQTTpy00UkaICgRhk@andrew.cmu.edu> bader+@andrew.cmu.edu (Miles Bader) writes: >bell@unc.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) writes: >> Aren't you going to have incredibly horrible virus problems if you do this >> sort of thing? A malicious program could infect your machine to the point >> that you couldn't disinfect it yourself. >You could make the eeproms have a write lock that get's flipped to >"writeable" only by some button you use (in conjunction with power >up) to load new releases. Since it's very, very, very unlikely that >a "kickstart" type disk would become infected (because it's always >used before there's any other software loaded, so there can't be any >viruses waiting around), this would basically make a virus in your >kernel impossible. Really? How about "Introducing 'nifty-patch'! This program will make a small patch to your kickstart disk which makes it possible to (insert favorite nifty thing here). Simply run 'nifty-patch' and insert kickstart disk when requested." This apparently mild-mannered program then proceeds to infect your kickstart. There are already several kickstart patch programs floating around. (For 1.2, mostly, but I have no doubt that they will be updated for 1.3, 1.4, etc.) NoKLICKstart, sumkick, kickbench, and something that lets you change the workbench disk prompt. And probably some I haven't heard of. -- +-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+ Did you know that the Eric Kennedy | Bush & | Soviets would rather ejkst@cisunx.UUCP | Bentsen '88 !! | Reagan be president than +-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+ either Bush or Dukakis?
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) (11/10/88)
I like the idea of a nonvolitile Writable Control Store a la the Amiga 1000. EEPROMs to hold 256K of code would probably be cost prohibitive, but maybe using battery backed CMOS might be workable. Even that much CMOS is sort of expensive. Battery replacement would be no big deal; if the CMOS ever got dumped, you'd only need to reboot from the kickstart to restore normality. The downside is that the nice friendly ever-warm memory could be a potential breeding ground for viruses and worms, etc. --Bill "Thermonuclear what?"
david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) (11/11/88)
Hey guys ... just *buy* the ROM's, they're *cheap*.
$40 for a ROM or two is not very much at all.
--
<-- David Herron; an MMDF guy <david@ms.uky.edu>
<-- ska: David le casse\*' {rutgers,uunet}!ukma!david, david@UKMA.BITNET
<--
<-- Controlled anarchy -- the essence of the net.dillon@POSTGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) (11/21/88)
:Peter Schachte pointed out that 500 and 2000 owners have KickStart in ROM :while 1000 owners must load it into Read Only RAM with every cold boot. He :suggests that future machines use EEPROM to get the best of *BOTH* worlds. :I wonder if there isn't a fairly simple hardware hack that would preserve :the contents of the KickStart RAM between cold starts. The power could come :from one of those calculator-style battery chargers that plug into the wall :if there was no better way to supply the trickle current. How about it, guys? :Can it be done? Is it worth it? What do we lose in the way of power-on :tests? EMail responses to me and I'll summarize them. : :Dana (no fancy pun, no quotes. That's in the NEXT rev.) Unfortunetly, dynamic RAM takes a *lot* of power, even when you aren't doing anything... the refresh that is. Not only would you need to isolate the power bus, but you would also have to add some kind of refresh generator. At the temperatures expected inside the case you would not be able to get a way with a slow refresh to keep the contents alive. And, as everyone has pointed out, 512K+ of EEPROM costs $$$$$. -Matt
thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) (11/24/88)
Re: Philip Staub's comments ... Sure, the A1000 is conducive to "EPROMization"; a lot of us have done that and programs to read one's Kickstart disk (or the "WCS" RAM area) and create files of either Motorola S-record or Intel hex format suitable for a variety of EPROM burners are quite common (at least in this (Silicon Valley) area). HOWEVER: the original question to which Dana alluded concerned an A2000, and its ROM's data path is 16-bits wide; to the best of my knowledge, there are NO EPROMs with such a data path width (and I use a LOT of different kinds of EPROMs in my commercial products). CBM has its own "silicon foundry" and makes its own custom ROMs for the Amiga. In the (present) absence of 1.3 Kickstart ROMs, the technique chosen by many has been to fabricate an EPROM adapter card for their A2000 systems. Thad Floryan [thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ...!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad]
scotty@ziggy.UUCP (Scott Drysdale) (11/28/88)
16-bit EPROMs do exist - though i don't think they go up to 4 megabits (16x256K) which is what the 2000 and 500 require. --Scotty