PICHER@MAINE.BITNET (Michael W. Picher) (02/04/88)
Dave B.,
By offering a free RTX it would be possible for you to sell the
information reguarding it. Such as programmers guides, user docs,
etc...
Also, maybe developers could pay to use the shell in their
applications. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about (I usually
don't). How about a shareware type RTX.
Michael W. Picher
----------------------------------------- /-----------------------^
** ******* Michael W. Picher ! Robotics/Vision Lab !
*** *** ** Bitnet: PICHER@MAINE ! Barrows Hall !
************* COS30204@MECAN1 ! University of Maine !
** *** ** Genie : M.PICHER ! Orono, Maine 04469 !
** ** ** Maine Decnet: ROBOTS::PICHER ! Phone: (207) 581-2248 !
VISION::PICHER ^-----------------------/
-----------------------------------------cyliax@ea.ecn.purdue.edu (Ingo Cyliax) (02/05/88)
I'm all for a free or inexpensive RTX, as long as we can get enough docs and information to be able to port/run our application. Does this operating system imply that it will be TOS compatable, i.e. will compilers and things that we have accumluated still run under it ? If it does it certainly seems a better solution that os9 or waiting for Minix. I don't mind spending a little money for this, say < $75 bucks, but if it's more than that, I probably wouldn't bother with it. Considering you could get real UNIX for PC's for less than $200 from Microport, I would probably just sell the Atari and by a PC (yuck....) with UNIX. So I guess my point is that if it's < $75 or so but you charge enough to provide good docs. and support, I would probably buy it. I would even pay more, if it comes with a decend "C" development system and other tools. -- /* Ingo Cyliax * * ...!ihnp4!pur-ee!cyliax ECN, Electrical Engineering Bldg. * * cyliax@ecn.purdue.edu Purdue University, W. Lafayette,IN 47907 * * ing@cc.purdue.edu (317) 494-3473 / (317) 463-1747 after 5pm */
lharris@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Leonard Harris) (02/06/88)
One question - is RTX any good ? Do we really want it in the public domain or will it end up a dog like GEM ? /leonard
rnss@ihuxy.ATT.COM (Ron Schreiner) (02/12/88)
In article <1988Feb6.153216.3628@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> lharris@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Leonard Harris) writes: > One question - is RTX any good ? Do we really want it in the public domain > or will it end up a dog like GEM ? > /leonard Good Q, Maybe someone could post a review or summary of RTX. Some things I would like to know is how big is it? how much ROM code is still used? are there any new sys-calls provided? -- Ron Schreiner AT&T Bell Labs ...ihnp4!ihuxy!rnss
preston@felix.UUCP (Preston Bannister) (02/15/88)
>> One question - is RTX any good ? Do we really want it in the public domain >> or will it end up a dog like GEM ? A good question. I bought the first version of the MT C-shell (that is built on top of RTX). At the time I didn't have a hard disk, and the shell hit the disk fairly often in normal operation. As a result it was way to slow to be useful. Beckmeyer sent out an update notice several months ago, and I bought the MT C-Shell update (version 1.10), the Micro C-Shell, and the Hard Disk Accelerator. The hard disk accelerator seems to do a fairly good job of eliminating all those extra disk accesses that TOS usually makes. It is always installed on my hard disk and is generally fairly ignorable :-) The Micro C-shell is also a fairly good product. I tend to switch between it and Gulam about equally. (Gulam doesn't do pipes, among other things). After David Beckmeyer's posting I tried running the MT C-Shell software in a previously empty partition on my hard disk. I ran it for a short while. - Screen (text) output seemed a bit slow. - Interaction response is slow and jerky with programs running in background. To be fair, this may be due to the ST BIOS implementation. - The whole thing crashed after about 5-10 minutes of use. I don't know why and didn't try to find out. My \auto\ folder installs, in order, a 100K 'eternal' ramdisk, the beckmeyer hard disk accelerator, and Gemboot (a 40 folder bug workaround). I'd be interested in hearing experiences from other people who have tried RTX and/or the MT C-Shell. ----- Preston L. Bannister USENET : ucbvax!trwrb!felix!preston BIX : plb CompuServe : 71350,3505 GEnie : p.bannister -- Preston L. Bannister USENET : ucbvax!trwrb!felix!preston BIX : plb CompuServe : 71350,3505 GEnie : p.bannister
david@bdt.UUCP (David Beckemeyer) (02/17/88)
In article <2383@ihuxy.ATT.COM> rnss@ihuxy.UUCP (Ron Schreiner) writes: >Good Q, Maybe someone could post a review or summary of RTX. Some things >I would like to know is how big is it? how much ROM code is still used? >are there any new sys-calls provided? If there is interest and approval I could post the technical information regarding RTX internals. I think I'm the only one that really knows; and I have seen a lot of mis-information thrown around here. Of course, it would not be a product evaluation good or bad, simply a description. I would try not to hype. I won't post this if It's gonna raise flames. -- David Beckemeyer | "To understand ranch lingo all yuh Beckemeyer Development Tools | have to do is to know in advance what 478 Santa Clara Ave, Oakland, CA 94610 | the other feller means an' then pay UUCP: ...!ihnp4!hoptoad!bdt!david | no attention to what he says"
Thomas_E_Zerucha@cup.portal.com (02/18/88)
>I would be interested in others who use MT C Shell...
I use it all the time. I am using it now. Since I have programs that run
in the background to do the file transfers and dialing (for PC Pursuit),
and they don't kill the foreground, I start them and do other things on
my ST while waiting. Very few programs crash, and I have found alternatives
that don't. I only have a meg (and a LOT of auto folder stuff), so I can't
run a lot of stuff in the background. I do have things that will allow me
to break out of a program from anywhere (like control-c, but without waiting).
I use Micro C Shell when I am not using MT.martin@lakesys.UUCP (Martin Wiedmeyer) (02/18/88)
David, I'd like to see the technical info about RTX that you spoke of. I'm sure many others would be interested as well. If you have seen mis-information, I think it would be the best to have the info straight from the source. Marty -- | Marty Wiedmeyer | | Lake Systems, Milwaukee, WI | | UUCP: {ihnp4,uwvax}!uwmcsd1!lakesys!martin | | Disclaimer: I take the heat for my own (mis)statements..... |
wolf@csclea.ncsu.edu (Thomas Wolf) (02/19/88)
In article <138@bdt.UUCP> david@bdt.UUCP (David Beckemeyer) writes: > >If there is interest and approval I could post the technical information >regarding RTX internals. I think I'm the only one that really knows; >and I have seen a lot of mis-information thrown around here. Of course, >it would not be a product evaluation good or bad, simply a description. >I would try not to hype. I won't post this if It's gonna raise flames. >-- I for one would really appreciate an authoratative description of RTX in this newsgroup. If, for some incomprehensible :-) reason, no one agrees with this, could you e-mail me a copy? Thanks in advance, Tom Wolf ARPA (I think): tw@cscosl.ncsu.edu or wolf@csclea.ncsu.edu
preston@felix.UUCP (Preston Bannister) (02/23/88)
From article <914@xn.LL.MIT.EDU>, by singer@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Matthew R. Singer): > Another amusing issue: > I find it truely fascinating all this discussion about David Beckmeyer > releasing RTX into the public domain. I can't believe how few people > even knew it existed. They want it free, but are willing to pay a > small amount for the docs. Well I have news for you all, its never > NEVER been that cost prohibitive. All of 69.95 list and its been around > for about 2 years... How can you expect him to support it for less? My take on this is a little different. I've known about RTX for about as long it's been around. I even bought the original (?) version of the MT C-shell. My problem with RTX was why write software for it if only people who had RTX (a very small group) could run it? If DavidB makes RTX (the runtime module...) free, then he might see more widespread _use_ of RTX. With a critical mass of users his sales of documentation (?) might well bring in more dollars than he has seen so far. It's a gamble, but probably a good one. You could draw analogies from the histories of Unix and the UCSD P-system. The P-system spread very rapidly when it was cheap, and I understand it brought in a surprising amount for money for UCSD. Then they sold it to SoftTech, which charged large amounts of money, and put in very little work (at Western Digital we did about the same amount of work with two people part-time). Not surprisingly, the P-system practically died. ----- Preston L. Bannister USENET : hplabs!felix!preston BIX : plb CompuServe : 71350,3505 GEnie : p.bannister -- Preston L. Bannister USENET : hplabs!felix!preston BIX : plb CompuServe : 71350,3505 GEnie : p.bannister
crash@calgary.UUCP (Glen ) (02/23/88)
> RTX technical info
Post it, no one flamed me about my excessive verbage about ram disks
Glen Stone