dorourke@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (David M. O'Rourke) (05/30/89)
Over the years I've noticed that apple is moving more & more of the Mac's OS from the ROM's to RAM installed routines. I don't know what the figures are but you'd be hard pressed to find a manager that doesn't have patches installed in RAM. And with system 7.0 coming out it might even be that there's more OS in RAM than in the ROM's. I realize there are advantages to RAM vs. ROM routines and this posting wasn't intended to start that sort of discussion. I just wonder what the point is about those "magical macintosh ROM's" when most of the OS is being installed into RAM. It seems all the ROM's are good for these days is booting the system. Anyone at Apple care to comment?? Are there any figures on what percentage of the ROM's are still used in system 6.0, or the up and coming system 7.0?? -- \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\|///////////////////////////////////////// David M. O'Rourke____________________|_____________dorourke@polyslo.calpoly.edu | It's only 1's & 0's, so how difficult can Computer Science be? | |:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|
d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) (05/30/89)
--[ Line eaters are extinct, so what am I doing here ? ]--
The figures for ROM/RAM (on the Mac IIx I use at school):
ROM 256Kb
RAM 570Kb
which, with a bit reduction for fonts and DAs and such in memory (all
of them aren't) gives the ratio ROM:RAM 1:2. This gets worse when you
consider that much of the RAM OS REPLACES the Rom OS... But nowadays,
the ROM OS is on RAM SIMMS, capable of storing up to 16Mb ROM (this
comes from a TechNote) so there should be no big deal updating the
ROMs, now, sould it, Apple ? :-)
--
h+@nada.kth.se <>,, Picture this recording studio somewhere far far away
Jon W{tte (:))))=- Brrrrreeeee, you bugger! (Piano in)
Oh NO! A bug! <>'' Say kids, what time is it ? It's time for a house.
Dizco me to XtaC! OOOOH LAAAH LAAAAA ! (c) HitHouse -- No More --phil@vaxphw.dec.com (Phil Hunt) (05/30/89)
In article <1111@draken.nada.kth.se>, d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) writes... } } }The figures for ROM/RAM (on the Mac IIx I use at school): } }ROM 256Kb }RAM 570Kb } }which, with a bit reduction for fonts and DAs and such in memory (all }of them aren't) gives the ratio ROM:RAM 1:2. This gets worse when you }consider that much of the RAM OS REPLACES the Rom OS... But nowadays, }the ROM OS is on RAM SIMMS, capable of storing up to 16Mb ROM (this }comes from a TechNote) so there should be no big deal updating the }ROMs, now, sould it, Apple ? :-) } }-- }h+@nada.kth.se <>,, Picture this recording studio somewhere far far away }Jon W{tte (:))))=- Brrrrreeeee, you bugger! (Piano in) }Oh NO! A bug! <>'' Say kids, what time is it ? It's time for a house. }Dizco me to XtaC! OOOOH LAAAH LAAAAA ! (c) HitHouse -- No More -- At the Apple Developers Conf in San JOse 2 weeks ago, Apple said they WOULD be replacing the ROMS 'on future machines that have ROM SIMMS' to put more/corrected system code in ROM, freeing RAM. ================================================================== Phil Hunt "Wherever you go, there you are!!!" Digital Equipment Corporation Phone: (508)486-2164 ENET: VAXPHW::PHIL USENET: phil@vaxphw.dec.com MOREUSENET: phil%vaxphw.dec@decwrl.dec.com EVENMORE: ....!decwrl!dec-vaxphw!phil
svc@well.UUCP (Leonard Rosenthol) (05/30/89)
In article <11315@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>, dorourke@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (David M. O'Rourke) writes: > > Over the years I've noticed that apple is moving more & more of the Mac's > OS from the ROM's to RAM installed routines. I don't know what the figures > are but you'd be hard pressed to find a manager that doesn't have patches > installed in RAM. And with system 7.0 coming out it might even be that there's > more OS in RAM than in the ROM's. I realize there are advantages to RAM vs. > ROM routines and this posting wasn't intended to start that sort of discussion For what it's worth - Apple commented during the developers conference that there would be NEW ROMS (upgrades) available with System 7.0 so that you would have MORE in ROM and LESS in RAM (so you can use your RAM for something useful like running applications :-) -- +--------------------------------------------------+ Leonard Rosenthol | GEnie : MACgician Lazerware, inc. | MacNet: MACgician UUCP: svc@well.UUCP | ALink : D0025
gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu (06/02/89)
> For what it's worth - Apple commented during the developers conference > that there would be NEW ROMS (upgrades) available with System 7.0 so that you > would have MORE in ROM and LESS in RAM (so you can use your RAM for something > useful like running applications :-) This sounds like a bad idea for Apple. Won't dealers turn around and resell the "old" ROMs, providing a slew of color quickdraw Mac clones?
rang@cpsin3.cps.msu.edu (Anton Rang) (06/03/89)
In article <126900023@p.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes: [ new ROMs available with System 7.0 ] This sounds like a bad idea for Apple. Won't dealers turn around and resell the "old" ROMs, providing a slew of color quickdraw Mac clones? As I recall, when Apple started the 64K -> 128K upgrades, dealers were required to return the old ROMs.... +---------------------------+------------------------+ | Anton Rang (grad student) | "VMS Forever!" | | Michigan State University | rang@cpswh.cps.msu.edu | +---------------------------+------------------------+
ching@pepsi.amd.com (Mike Ching) (06/03/89)
In article <3262@cps3xx.UUCP> rang@cpswh.cps.msu.edu (Anton Rang) writes: >In article <126900023@p.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > > [ new ROMs available with System 7.0 ] > > This sounds like a bad idea for Apple. Won't dealers turn around and > resell the "old" ROMs, providing a slew of color quickdraw Mac clones? > >As I recall, when Apple started the 64K -> 128K upgrades, dealers were >required to return the old ROMs.... > My IIcx has ROMs soldered into the motherboard and a SIMM style socket for new ROMs to be added so there won't be old ROMs to be returned or falling into the hands of clone makers.