01659@AECLCR.BITNET (Greg Csullog) (03/10/89)
I have read a mess of specs on TOS 1.4. I also own NeoDesk 2.0 and the UIS-II.
Personally, with NeoDesk and the UIS I cannot see any reason to buy TOS 1.4.
Can someone give me an honest opinion on what advantages 1.4 would provide?
FOLDXXX.PRG fixes the folder limit
DISKFREE.PRG speeds up the slow FAT access
STARTGEM.PRG allows GEM codes to autoexecute
STARTUP.PRG allows system reconfig on boot (my start up screen says:
M=Mac I=IBM A=Atari
to run Spectre, PC_Ditto, GEM
NITE.PRG gives me a screen save
UIS_II.PRG has replaced my need for Crystal for DOS functions from in an appl.
NEODESK.PRG for a hard disk system is essential in my opinion.
(awards of merit should be given to UIS and NEODESK authors)
Why, pray tell, would I want TOS 1.4; my Mega 2 with a Megafile 20 blows away
80286/80287 machines for DTP (average print time from Timeworks DTP to an
SLM804 laser is 43 seconds; average print time from an AT to an HP laserjet
is > 7 minutes for programs like GEM Draw with lots of hash patterns!)
What will I miss out on if I do not get TOS 1.4? Anything?uace0@uhnix2.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) (03/11/89)
The only thing you will be missing by running all those patches to speed up
the old ROMs is the slow bootup time and MEMORY!
NOthing in the new 1.4 could replace UIS II or NEOdesks functionality, but
everything sure runs faster under the new ROMs.
- mike
--
for (;;) : Use ATARINET, send an interactive
do_it(c_programmers); : message such as:
: Tell UH-INFO at UHUPVM1 ATARINET HELP
University Atari Computer Enthusiasts : University of Houston UACEclf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser) (03/11/89)
Why would you want TOS 1.4 instead of UIS or NeoDesk? Because it is in ROM, and doesn't take up 300k like ALL the other hundreds of programs you need. If you have a Mega 2, memory concerns aren't as great as us folks with 520's and a meg upgrade. I'd KILL to have TOS 1.4 in my machine to fix all the nasties I've got now. But I will never see it in my machine (assuming Atari's track record for upgrading older machines doesn't change). That brings up an interesting point. Why doesn't Atari put out a daughterboard so that all of us who have older machines can enjoy 1.4? It only seems fair. We spent our money on Ataris just like you guys with the Mega 2, only we spent it a few years earlier. :^) If the size of the program is too big for the 256k chips we use now, Atari could: 1) Put out a smaller version (if this is possible) to fit into our machines. 2) Write the ENTIRE thing in Assembly (as it should be) to conserve space and speed things up. I'm not ragging on anybody/anything, but it just annoys the heck out of me that I can't get all these new things for the machine I prefer to own. Just be glad you have the POSSIBILITY of getting TOS 1.4! =cf=
jansen@atari.UUCP (Mark O. Jansen) (03/12/89)
in article <418@ultb.UUCP>, clf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser) says: > > I'd KILL to have TOS 1.4 in my machine to fix all the nasties I've got > now. But I will never see it in my machine (assuming Atari's track > record for upgrading older machines doesn't change). Everything I have heard has said that Atari _is_ planning to make TOS 1.4 available to owners of existing machines. TOS 1.4 is a very different animal than the 4/22/87 ROMs. The main point of 4/22 ROMs was the support for the BLiTTER. TOS 1.4, on the other hand, is a significant upgrade even _without_ a blitter; it makes sense to make it available to everyone. -- "Question" Mark Jansen UUCP: ...ames!atari!jansen Atari Corporation BIX/GEnie: mjansen These views do not necessarily reflect those of Atari Corporation. "I want that car. I need the keys. Thank you. Bye."
clf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser) (03/13/89)
Well if you have a Mega or a newer 1040, you have the 4/22/87 ROMS that Mark mentioned. BUT, what about the old 520s (like mine) and the older 1040 machines that have the ORIGINAL ROMS? Sure, the Mega can have the new ROMS because it has the required sockets for them (2 sockets). BUT, my machine has the smaller-capacity 6 sockets, which don't support the 1 meg chips 1.4 will use. A daughterboard is required to interface the chips into the sockets I have now. Now I know that Atari's attitude is changing quite a bit towards the better (something I really like to see). It will be interesting to see if it changes enough to put out this fantastic upgrade for ALL machines. I really don't care about the BLITTER, but 1.4 is almost a necessity (it fixes SO many things and speeds up others). I guess it's a "wait and see" game now. =cf=
rfpfeifle@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Ron Pfeifle) (03/13/89)
In article <418@ultb.UUCP> clf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser (709ITP)) writes: >Why doesn't Atari put out a >daughterboard so that all of us who have older machines can enjoy 1.4? I don't understand? Does this mean that I won't be able to upgrade my 1040 to TOS 1.4? Exactly what machines are upgradeable?
dclemans.falcon@mntgfx.mentor.com (Dave Clemans) (03/14/89)
From article <8903100344.AA03075@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>, by 01659@AECLCR.BITNET (Greg Csullog): > I have read a mess of specs on TOS 1.4. I also own NeoDesk 2.0 and the UIS-II. > Personally, with NeoDesk and the UIS I cannot see any reason to buy TOS 1.4. > Can someone give me an honest opinion on what advantages 1.4 would provide? > > FOLDXXX.PRG fixes the folder limit > DISKFREE.PRG speeds up the slow FAT access > STARTGEM.PRG allows GEM codes to autoexecute > STARTUP.PRG allows system reconfig on boot (my start up screen says: > M=Mac I=IBM A=Atari > to run Spectre, PC_Ditto, GEM > NITE.PRG gives me a screen save > UIS_II.PRG has replaced my need for Crystal for DOS functions from in an appl. > NEODESK.PRG for a hard disk system is essential in my opinion. > > (awards of merit should be given to UIS and NEODESK authors) > > Why, pray tell, would I want TOS 1.4; my Mega 2 with a Megafile 20 blows away > 80286/80287 machines for DTP (average print time from Timeworks DTP to an > SLM804 laser is 43 seconds; average print time from an AT to an HP laserjet > is > 7 minutes for programs like GEM Draw with lots of hash patterns!) > > What will I miss out on if I do not get TOS 1.4? Anything? FOLDRXXX.PRG is a partial patch; it DOES NOT completely fix the underlying memory allocation problems of TOS 1.0 or 1.2. Also, rather than just tromping on memory, TOS 1.4 checks for table exhaustion. My experience with TOS 1.4 is that its FAT access speed is better than TOS 1.0 or 1.2 with the various public domain "patches". TOS 1.4 gives you a cleaner auto-execute of GEM programs (for example, NEODESK comes up much more naturally). dgc
ajy2208@ultb.UUCP (A.J. Yarusso) (03/14/89)
Chris,
My roommate's Mega ST2 has 6 sockets for TOS, but only two are
occupied. We finally got the nerve to open the computer the other night
(he purchased it last August). He has the older motherboard with space
for 2 more banks of 1megabit chips, and as I said, 6 TOS sockets. There
is also an interesting modification to the 68000. A few of the pins on
it are bent UP, with wires running to a 7474 chip (if my memory serves
me correctly). And the 7474 chip was piggy-backed onto another chip!!!!
Interesting, to say the least. The drive came out nicely, easily
detachable from the motherboard to which it is connected via a ribbon
cable and power cable. There is a place to plug another drive in (such
as a hard drive), an internal DMA port, and of course, the expansion
bus. I was surprised to see how much room is really available inside
the Mega case.
Oh yes, it is a Rev. 5 motherboard.
Albert Yarusso,
Bitnet: ajy2208@ritvax
Usenet: ajy2208@ultb.rit.edujulius@yugas.UUCP (Julius OKLAMCAK) (03/14/89)
In article <8903100344.AA03075@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>, 01659@AECLCR.BITNET (Greg Csullog) writes: >I have read a mess of specs on TOS 1.4. I also own NeoDesk 2.0 and the UIS-II. >Personally, with NeoDesk and the UIS I cannot see any reason to buy TOS 1.4. >Can someone give me an honest opinion on what advantages 1.4 would provide? > >FOLDXXX.PRG fixes the folder limit FOLDRXXX.PRG only *raises* the limit on TOS previous to 1.4 (with a cost of RAM). TOS 1.4 actually fixes the problem. >DISKFREE.PRG speeds up the slow FAT access Is a hack (with a bug) that only speeds up the GEMDOS Dfree() function. >STARTGEM.PRG allows GEM codes to autoexecute Is also a hack - that uses undocumented features (the worst programming sin! :-) >STARTUP.PRG allows system reconfig on boot (my start up screen says: > M=Mac I=IBM A=Atari > to run Spectre, PC_Ditto, GEM Very handy! > [...parts deleted...] >Why, pray tell, would I want TOS 1.4; my Mega 2 with a Megafile 20 blows away > [...] >What will I miss out on if I do not get TOS 1.4? Anything? Bug fixes and many other enhancements that AUTO folder and applications programs can't hope to add to TOS. It sounds like you have read a magazine article or two that only skims the surface of what was done to TOS to create version 1.4 Some nice features: CACHEXXX.PRG can be used to increase TOS 1.4's internal buffers - this means that FATs and directories stay in RAM. Dfree(), FAT searchs, directory searchs can now happen in RAM. Much speed increase here. The File Selector can now be passed a string, such as "Load configuration file" no more tacky boxes sitting above, below, or beside the Item Selector. Move file(s) from Desktop with display of destination folder/file name. File copying with time & date stamp retention. The ability to rename folders. Format/Copy disk condensed into one dialog, with disks formatted being MessyDOS compatible. ...and much more... Best off all, it dosen't use up any RAM. :-) -- Julius Oklamcak All views are my own. Atari (Canada) Corp. Just say NO! to the abuse and ...!uunet!nexus!yugas!julius destruction of the environment.
apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) (03/14/89)
In article <418@ultb.UUCP> clf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser (709ITP)) writes: > If the size of the program is too big for the 256k chips we use now, > Atari could: > > 1) Put out a smaller version (if this is possible) to fit into our > machines. TOS 1.4 certainly DOES fit in 192K (the ROM space for all STs), and you CAN upgrade a 520 or 1040 or Mega-2 or Mega-4... I don't know why you think you can't. Some newer Megas have only two ROM chips, but that's because those two parts are cheaper than six parts. The addressable ROM space is the same for all current ST machines: 192K. The six-chip sets have 256K *bits* per chip, or 32Kbytes, and 192K is 32K times six. The two-chip sets have 1024K *bits* or 128Kbytes per chip, 256K total ROM space, but the ST can only address 192K of that. TOS 1.4 will be available in both two-chip and six-chip sets, and can be put in all machines. ============================================ Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt
clf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser) (03/14/89)
I think a little history is needed. The original 520 (which I own) and older 1040 machines used a set of 6 chips for it's ROMS. I believe these are 256k chips. The new ROMS are larger, and need more room. Therfore, Atari used 2 1 meg chips. The pin-outs on these chips differ, so you cannot just stick the 1 meg chips into the 256k sockets. To interface the two (if it can be done), you need an interface board that will plug into the 6 sockets and hold the two new chips. Now this can be done, OR Atari can put out a smaller version of the new ROMS that will fit into the 6 chip arrangement we have. =cf=
clf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser) (03/14/89)
I would guess that the 6 sockets your roomie's Mega 4 has are for 1 meg chips, not the 256k chips I have. Why they are in there, I have no idea. Perhaps for the 68881 co-processor and other goodies. Atari has changed the design of the Mega motherboard quite a few times. =cf=
ajy2208@ultb.UUCP (A.J. Yarusso) (03/14/89)
Chris, I highly doubt that the extra 4 sockets in my roommate's Mega ST2 are for 'future upgrades' as Atari has apparently eliminated them in the latest Mega motherboard redesign. I am almost certain that all six sockets are for TOS chips, and once Atari went to the 2 chip set, the other four sockets were no longer used (hence, that is why they were removed, although I would have liked them to stay for future 'upgrades' that you spoke of). As for the type of chips Atari is using for TOS, I am not sure. If both the 6 and 2 set TOS chips work with the Mega, perhaps Atari was smart enough in the early days that a 2 chip set might work with the older 520 motherboards. Maybe someone at Atari can answer this? Albert Yarusso Bitnet: ajy2208@ritvax Usenet: ajy2208@ultb.rit.edu
01659@AECLCR.BITNET (Greg Csullog) (03/15/89)
One net user replied to my original posting as follows: <Date: 11 Mar 89 02:57:44 GMT <From: rochester!rit!ultb!clf3678@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (C.L. Freemesser) <Subject: Re: TOS 1.4 vs NEODESK and UIS-II <To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu <Why would you want TOS 1.4 instead of UIS or NeoDesk? <Because it is in ROM, and doesn't take up 300k like ALL the other <hundreds of programs you need. If you have a Mega 2, memory concerns <aren't as great as us folks with 520's and a meg upgrade. DISKFREE = 1K UIS-II = 23K NEODESK = 28K (shell while an app is running) While I'm not sure of overhead, these TSRs take < 50K or RAM. I use them on my 1040 (equal to your 520 upgraded) as well as my Mega. Memory is not a problem and no excuse for not getting these codes in lieu of TOS 1.4. Even when I use MULTIDESK and go way beyond the 128K or RAM for ACCs I have no memory shortages on my 1040 and I run apps like Timeworks DTP, dbMAN, LDW.....
pvf@bridge2.3Com.Com (Paul V. Fries) (03/15/89)
So, how will we be able to get TOS 1.4? Am I going to have to wait for it to show up in a store, or will there be a way for me to get it direct through Atari? With all the confusion there seems to be in this area, I really don't want to have to deal with some partially informed dealer.
julius@yugas.UUCP (Julius OKLAMCAK) (03/15/89)
In article <8560@watcgl.waterloo.edu>, rfpfeifle@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Ron Pfeifle) writes: >I don't understand? Does this mean that I won't be able to upgrade my >1040 to TOS 1.4? Exactly what machines are upgradeable? All ST and MEGA product will and can take TOS 1.4 You will probably see two chip sets: 1) a 6 chip set for machines that use 6 ROM chips for TOS. 2) a 2 chip set for machines that use 2 ROM chips for TOS. -- Julius Oklamcak All views are my own. Atari (Canada) Corp. Just say NO! to the abuse and ...!uunet!nexus!yugas!julius destruction of the environment.
clf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser) (03/16/89)
When I said "300k", I was being a bit sarcastic. Still, I would rather have TOS 1.4 and all the free RAM I can get than have to sacrifice memory for programs like UIS and NEODESK. I also don't understand how you can say that NeoDesk only uses 28k. My understanding is that it uses 128k or so. Maybe I'm wrong because I never had any interest in the program. What about the other programs to fix the 40 file folder limit, the time stamp fix, etc? Those add up. =cf=
jpexg@hermes.ai.mit.edu (John Purbrick) (03/16/89)
In article <516@bridge2.3Com.Com>, pvf@bridge2.3Com.Com (Paul V. Fries) writes: > So, how will we be able to get TOS 1.4? > > Am I going to have to wait for it to show up in a store, or will there > be a way for me to get it direct through Atari? With all the confusion > there seems to be in this area, I really don't want to have to deal > with some partially informed dealer. You'll get it the same way you got your blitter.