rfellman@ucsd.edu (Ronald D. Fellman) (01/01/90)
I am in charge of setting up a computer engineering lab and am thinking of getting about 20 MacPluses. However, I am a bit concerned that they may not be able to run System 7.0. The MacPluses will not have a local hard drive but will use the file system on an SE30 running appleshare. If I went with SEs rather than Pluses, I could only set up 12 stations instead of 20. Will I be sacrificing important networking capability that may be available with system 7 by buying Pluses? (Or, can I even run system 7 on a MacPlus?) (Apple has informed me that they "ran out of donation money" and cannot supplement my institutional grant. Since we need at least 20 stations to support the large number of students for the courses that this lab will support, I'm afraid that we may be forced into buying nearly obsolete equipment. Tell me this isn't so, and that the MacPlus will be upgradeable! :-( ) Thanks, -ron fellman (rfellman@ucsd.edu)
jmunkki@kampi.hut.fi (Juri Munkki) (01/01/90)
I wonder how much it would cost to build a ROM SCSI drive. You would need a very simple processor, an SCSI chip and a big ROM. I guess the ROM would be the most expensive part. Apple could then put most parts of the system file to that ROM. I guess all fonts (outline versions!) and most system and finder code resources could be put in a 512K or 1024KB ROM. It would have to cost about $150 or less to be interesting to schools and floppy-only users. Macintosh Portable users would also benefit, if a ROM-slot version of the same ROM would be available. I guess anyone with a distribution Apple System Software license might have the right to sell something like this. Apple doesn't license the ROMs, but developers can license the system software with some limitations. EEPROM would probably be too expensive, but a large ROM series would bring the price down to something reasonable. An option to add 256KB SIMM memory for RAM disk would make it even more popular. There will be a lot of spare 256KB SIMMs once people start upgrading to 1MB SIMMs. I wouldn't mind having a system ROM disk and a 1MB RAM disk even though I have a hard disk. You can't beat ROM/RAM seek time. (Transfer rates might not be all that great with a simple 8-bit processor.) Nah...they'll never do this. The people who make hardware development decisions never listen to us anyway. This might solve the problem of forcing users to buy hard disks. Most users would prefer the hard disks, but wouldn't it be great to be able to say: "System 7.0 doesn't require a hard disk, if you get our ROMDrive product for only $150. AND you can use the 512KB from your 1MB MacPlus." _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._ | Juri Munkki jmunkki@hut.fi jmunkki@fingate.bitnet I Want Ne | | Helsinki University of Technology Computing Centre My Own XT | ^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
nilesinc@well.UUCP (Avi Rappoport) (01/03/90)
In article <7645@sdcsvax.UCSD.Edu> rfellman@ucsd.edu (Ronald D. Fellman) writes: >I am in charge of setting up a computer engineering lab and am thinking >of getting about 20 MacPluses. However, I am a bit concerned that they >may not be able to run System 7.0. The MacPluses will not have a local >hard drive but will use the file system on an SE30 running appleshare. >If I went with SEs rather than Pluses, I could only set up 12 stations >instead of 20. Will I be sacrificing important networking capability >that may be available with system 7 by buying Pluses? >(Or, can I even run system 7 on a MacPlus?) > >-ron fellman (rfellman@ucsd.edu) The problem with System 7 is not the Plus, it's the lack of a hard disk. The System file looks like it will be rather large, and will not fit on an 800K floppy. It might fit on a 1.4MB floppy, so the SE would be better in that way. The only known problem that the Plus (and the SE) will have with System 7 is that they won't run virtual memory. However, the RAM can be upgraded to 4MB, which will probably be acceptable at least for a while :-). Therefore, the Pluses will be upgradable, in that you could buy hard disks and they would run System 7 Hope this helps. -- -- Help me justify my online bills: ask me EndNote questions, please! -- Avi Rappoport nilesinc@well.UUCP, Niles.Assoc on AppleLink 415-655-666 2000 Hearst, Berkeley, CA 94709
dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) (01/03/90)
In article <1990Jan1.015227.11586@santra.uucp> jmunkki@kampi.hut.fi (Juri Munkki) writes: > I wonder how much it would cost to build a ROM SCSI drive. You would need > a very simple processor, an SCSI chip and a big ROM. I guess the ROM would > be the most expensive part. Apple could then put most parts of the system > file to that ROM. I guess all fonts (outline versions!) and most system > and finder code resources could be put in a 512K or 1024KB ROM. Today, perhaps. Tomorrow? I've heard reports that many System 7.0 configurations won't fit on an 800k floppy. > It would have to cost about $150 or less to be interesting to schools > and floppy-only users. I imagine it could be done for somewhere in that price range, if the volume was sufficiently high. > Macintosh Portable users would also benefit, if > a ROM-slot version of the same ROM would be available. How many people do you know who can afford a Mac Portable, and are so cash-poor that they cannot afford a hard disk to go with it? > I guess anyone with a distribution Apple System Software license might > have the right to sell something like this. Apple doesn't license the > ROMs, but developers can license the system software with some limitations. It could probably be arranged. However, I'm not sure you'd really like the result. Quite a few things in the Mac environment don't work very well if you boot from a locked volume... which is how a ROMdisk would appear. For instance, you'd be unable to use the Chooser to select a printer, since this requires changing the System file (to select the printer driver) and frequently requires changing the driver-file as well (to record the printer name, options, and so forth). You'd be unable to use the Scrapbook, since the Scrapbook file lives in the System folder on the boot disk. You'd be unable to save your Clipboard file, for the same reason. You'd be unable to run any third-party INITs, cdevs, drivers, etc. You'd be unable to add any fonts or desk accessories, either to the System or via Suitcase or the Font/DA Juggler. Many applications would refuse to run, as they'd be unable to create temporary working files on the boot volume, save preferences, and so forth. In effect, the vendor of a bootable ROMdisk would be saying "Hey, this isn't Burger King. You *CAN'T* have it your way! You can have it the way we want to configure it for you, and no other. Don't like it? Tough... see Figure 1." How many users do you know who'd be willing to accept this? > EEPROM would probably be too expensive, but a large ROM series would > bring the price down to something reasonable. An option to add 256KB > SIMM memory for RAM disk would make it even more popular. There will > be a lot of spare 256KB SIMMs once people start upgrading to 1MB SIMMs. > I wouldn't mind having a system ROM disk and a 1MB RAM disk even though > I have a hard disk. You can't beat ROM/RAM seek time. (Transfer rates > might not be all that great with a simple 8-bit processor.) A combination ROMdisk/RAMdisk could make sense... but only if the contents of the ROMdisk wasn't cast in silicon. For example, one might use an EEPROM coupled with a decent-sized (2-4 meg) RAM bank. At power-on, the EEPROM would be copied into the RAM bank... in effect, preinitializing the RAM as a bootable RAMdisk. This volume would then be booted over the SCSI bus, and would become your "startup" volume. You'd be able to use the Chooser, Scrapbook, etc. without difficulty. The EEPROM would be initialized via a special downloading utility. You'd use the Installer, Finder, etc. to create a bootable floppy that was configured according to your tastes... and then download this image into the EEPROM. > Nah...they'll never do this. The people who make hardware development > decisions never listen to us anyway. Sigh. This is one of those sweeping statements that can be disproven by a single counterexample. I'll leave it as an "exercise to the reader" to decide whether you agree with this condemnation or not. Why, pray tell, is "they"? Apple? Perhaps they'll do this, perhaps not. They do have something to gain by doing it, but not all that much... and it is NOT a risk-free proposition! From Apple's point of view, doing it badly would be much worse than not doing it at all. Consider... if they implement a ROMdisk according to your proposal, then HOW do they decide upon the configuration of the ROMdisk? Which printer would be pre-selected... ImageWriter? AppleTalk ImageWriter? LaserWriter? What printer name would be pre-chosen? What desk accessories do they include? Which do they exclude? What applications, if any, do they bundle onto the ROMdisk? Which common, popular applications will refuse to run if the startup disk is locked? How do they handle upgrades? Will Apple dealers be willing to provide a free ROM-swap service, or will they charge users (at $50/hour or more) to swap ROMs? There have already been quite a few flames directed at Apple for having a closed machine architecture (in the classic Mac), for making it difficult to add certain new features, and for being "fascistic" (however one defines that). This is as NOTHING compared to the poolpah which would break loose if Apple were to start pushing a pre-configured ROMdisk as the "appropriate" solution for low-end/hard-disk-less users. I expect that Apple would IMMEDIATELY be accused of attempting to lock third-party vendors out of the low-end market... after all, you'd be unable to install ANY third-party INITs, fonts, printer drivers, cdevs, or ANYTHING ELSE on an Apple ROMdisk. Perhaps some third-party vendor will decide that this is an appropriate niche market. It's entirely possible... but I don't expect it to happen. There was at least one RAM-based floppy-disk emulator available a few years ago; I don't recall seeing it lately, or having heard that it ever made a big splash in the market. Inexpensive hard disks eliminated the niche, pretty much. > This might solve the problem of > forcing users to buy hard disks. Most users would prefer the hard disks, > but wouldn't it be great to be able to say: "System 7.0 doesn't require > a hard disk, if you get our ROMDrive product for only $150. AND you can > use the 512KB from your 1MB MacPlus." You can do something very much like this today, with off-the-shelf hardware and software. Add a couple of megs of memory to an existing machine. Configure a boot-floppy with the System as you prefer it, and with a RAMdisk-installer as the startup application. Boot the floppy; it'll initialize the RAMdisk, copy the System files over, switch-launch the Finder on the RAMdisk, and eject the floppy. I did this back in the days of the 512k, two-floppy-and-no-hard-disk Mac. It's still quite feasible today. You get to run the environment (INITs, fonts, etc.) that YOU have chosen... not the "vanilla" least-common-denominator environment that somebody at Apple decided was "appropriate" and had masked into 10,000 ROMs. You can buy a low-end 20-meg internal hard disk for as little as $390 these days. If I had the choice of spending $150 on a pre-canned, nonconfigurable ROMdisk with an Apple-standard set of software, or saving my pennies for a few months and spending $400 on a low-end hard disk, I know which I'd choose. Maybe other people would choose differently. If so, somebody somewhere will figure out how to produce and market such a device at a reasonable cost, and do so profitably enough that they can stay in business and support it. I'm not about to hold my breath. -- Dave Platt VOICE: (415) 493-8805 UUCP: ...!{ames,apple,uunet}!coherent!dplatt DOMAIN: dplatt@coherent.com INTERNET: coherent!dplatt@ames.arpa, ...@uunet.uu.net USNAIL: Coherent Thought Inc. 3350 West Bayshore #205 Palo Alto CA 94303
jmunkki@kampi.hut.fi (Juri Munkki) (01/03/90)
My description of the System ROMDisk was not clear enough, since Dave Platt misunderstood an important part of the idea. I didn't suggest that you could fit a complete System disk in just 512K or 1MB. You wouldn't want to do that for many of the reasons that Dave just mentioned. You could instead put a lot of stuff that is common to all and that doesn't change often (like WDEF, CDEF, LDEF, PACK, FONT, ' snd', ...) in the ROMdisk and open it at startup time. The mechanism should be built in to the system and should work the way SuitCase currently does. From what I have read, I gather that SuitCase functionality will be in System 7.0 anyway, so moving a few resources to a ROM disk and keeping the main system file on a regular floppy sounds like a relatively easy thing to do. This way you could fit a stripped System and Finder on a 800K disk. You would have 800K+the amount of ROMDisk for the total system. You could use most of that 800K for your printer drivers and any international or personal stuff that you want in your system. If you had 512K or 1MB of RAM in addition to the ROM, your startup floppy could be copied to this RAM and then ejected so that a data/document disk could be inserted in the disk drive. I don't think that a RAM disk is safe enough for work data, but it would be fine for applications and system software that was just copied from a floppy. BTW: I have noticed that the first directory track is almost always the first to fail on a diskette. Most people keep a "boot disk" with their favorite (small) word processor and printer drivers. They also keep all their latest files on that disk and never copy these files to new disks. Eventually the directory track just wears out and they bring the disk to me for recovery. Having a ROM/RAM combination disk on public macs would change the habits of these people and make them use one disk for booting and others for data. I know it's not fair of me to say that "_they_'ll never do it", but it's just my way of teasing Apple. If it bothers people, just let me know and I'll stop posting these funny suggestions... Saying that Portable users have hard disks anyway is like saying that Apple doesn't sell Portables without a hard disk. In theory you can get a Portable without the hard disk. I don't know if people are doing that, but it would be funny of Apple to introduce something that no one would buy. (Ok, this Portable does have a hard disk...) _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._ | Juri Munkki jmunkki@hut.fi jmunkki@fingate.bitnet I Want Ne | | Helsinki University of Technology Computing Centre My Own XT | ^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) (01/04/90)
In article <1990Jan3.014720.8959@santra.uucp> jmunkki@kampi.hut.fi (Juri Munkki) writes: > My description of the System ROMDisk was not clear enough, since Dave Platt > misunderstood an important part of the idea. > > I didn't suggest that you could fit a complete System disk in just 512K or > 1MB. You wouldn't want to do that for many of the reasons that Dave just > mentioned. You could instead put a lot of stuff that is common to all and > that doesn't change often (like WDEF, CDEF, LDEF, PACK, FONT, ' snd', ...) > in the ROMdisk and open it at startup time. The mechanism should be built > in to the system and should work the way SuitCase currently does. You're correct... I didn't realize that you were suggesting that the System and Finder resources be split between the startup disk and the ROMdisk. > From what I have read, I gather that SuitCase functionality will be in > System 7.0 anyway, so moving a few resources to a ROM disk and keeping > the main system file on a regular floppy sounds like a relatively easy > thing to do. Doing it for the System resources doesn't sound terribly difficult... as you say, it's not all that different from what Suitcase does. I believe it could prove to be _much_ trickier to move resources from the Finder, or any other application, into a separate file. You'd have to play some additional tricks with the Resource Manager... the ROMdisk Finder-resource file would have to be kept immediately behind the "real" Finder file on the resource chain. There could be some other, rather hairy implications... in any case, I don't think that this sort of added functionality would come for free. I'm not sure whether Apple's resource/Finder changes for System 7.0 are of the Suitcase variety (adding additional files to the Resource Manager chain), or whether Apple is simply integrating some of the Font/DA Mover functionality into the Finder. I hope it's the former... > This way you could fit a stripped System and Finder on a 800K disk. You > would have 800K+the amount of ROMDisk for the total system. You could > use most of that 800K for your printer drivers and any international or > personal stuff that you want in your system. Hmmm. It sounds as if it could work, at least in the short term. There could be some serious version-sync problems, though... you'd have to be sure to use the stripped-System-and-Finder combination which goes with the ROMdisk version you're using. If Apple upgraded the System, you might have to have your ROMs upgraded before you could boot the new version. And we KNOW how eager Apple is to hand out new ROMs! > If you had 512K or 1MB of RAM in addition to the ROM, your startup floppy > could be copied to this RAM and then ejected so that a data/document > disk could be inserted in the disk drive. I don't think that a RAM disk > is safe enough for work data, but it would be fine for applications and > system software that was just copied from a floppy. Agreed. This is a very viable approach for people who need a system that has no hard disk. > I know it's not fair of me to say that "_they_'ll never do it", but it's > just my way of teasing Apple. If it bothers people, just let me know and > I'll stop posting these funny suggestions... A "smilie" would help... I'm afraid that I failed to distinguish between your poke-in-the-ribs tease and a serious flame at Apple. Sorry about that... :-( > Saying that Portable users have hard disks anyway is like saying that > Apple doesn't sell Portables without a hard disk. In theory you can get > a Portable without the hard disk. I don't know if people are doing that, > but it would be funny of Apple to introduce something that no one would > buy. (Ok, this Portable does have a hard disk...) Well, one might buy a Portable without a hard disk, and then install a third-party hard disk (using the same Connor drive that Apple uses, for significantly less $$). I just can't see using a Portable without a hard disk, though. -dave- -- Dave Platt VOICE: (415) 493-8805 UUCP: ...!{ames,apple,uunet}!coherent!dplatt DOMAIN: dplatt@coherent.com INTERNET: coherent!dplatt@ames.arpa, ...@uunet.uu.net USNAIL: Coherent Thought Inc. 3350 West Bayshore #205 Palo Alto CA 94303
ADAM.FRIX@f200.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG (ADAM FRIX) (01/07/90)
Dave Platt writes:
DP> I just can't see using a Portable without a hard disk, though.
I can't see using _any_ Mac without a hard disk. That there are people
out there who are quite productive with only floppy drives (or, heaven
forbid, drive) is a testimony to good ol' Yankee ingenuity. :-)
--Adam--
--
ADAM FRIX via cmhGate - Net 226 fido<=>uucp gateway Col, OH
UUCP: ...!osu-cis!n8emr!cmhgate!200!ADAM.FRIX
INET: ADAM.FRIX@f200.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG