nicky@cup.portal.com (07/09/88)
Any more information about incompatibilities between sys 6.0, the DOVE upgrade and SCSI disks would be appreciated. I recently connected my SuperMac DataFrame XP60 to a friend's upgraded 128K (128K -> 512K,128k ROMS -> 1M, as far as I can tell). A few days later the disk ceased to work. I did not originally think the problem was with software but I'm anxious to find out if anyone else has had similiar problems. Another disturbing thing was to be told by the person at ComputerWare that a bunch of DATAFRAMEs had just recently come in for repairs.
c60a-6dd@web7c.berkeley.edu (Rob Pfile) (07/10/88)
In article <3265@polyslo.UUCP> dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David M. O'Rourke) writes: > System 6.0 does not run on a 512Ke!!! The sound manager, and hence the >sound CDEV make use of the extra bytes that are present in the clock chip's of >the new computers, i.e. the Mac Plus, SE, & II. > System 6.0 also contains a new Serial Driver that uses the some features of >the *SLIGHTLY* different serial hardware present from the plus on. > So the bottom line is that you can't use 6.0 on a 512Ke, even if you have >the memory to do so. Well, Even though I knew that the System 6.0 was not supposed to work with my Dove 1meg 512e, I went ahead and tried it anyway... It seems to work fine, although as I expected, my Dollars & Sense 4.1b does not work any more. That's OK, I just have not had my father send the update up to me. As I have heard, Excel does not work either... If the problem is the Sound Manager itself, then there is nothing I can do about the missing memory, however, my Sound CDEV seems to be working just fine as it is. I was under the impression that it was only the Sound CDEV that used the extra bytes, but I guess not... On a side note, I reformatted my HD20SC under System 4.3 (the last release) with the second release of the SCSI accelerator at a 2:1 interleave factor. The read time (DiskTimer ][) was improved from 158 down to 96, but I suppose that since the Accelerator does not patch the write code in the driver, the write time skyrocketed to 388 for the usual 100 24Kb writes. Oh well... According to the docs it was not even supposed to work with the hardware in the HD20SC... And, of course, it bombs out at boot time when running system 6.0 with the accelerator... Rob ________________________________________________________________________________ Rob Pfile //|@ @|\\ Domain: c60a-6dd@web.berkeley.edu JAEG- \ \ ) / / UUCP: {ucbvax | lilac}!web.berkeley.edu!c60a-6dd just another | |0| | Internet: c60a-6dd%web.berkeley.edu@ucbvax.berkeley.edu eecs geek! \_/ "You never know, you know?"
bill@procase.UUCP (07/13/88)
In article <3265@polyslo.UUCP> dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David M. O'Rourke) writes: > ... > System 6.0 does not run on a 512Ke!!! The sound manager, and hence the >sound CDEV make use of the extra bytes that are present in the clock chip's of >the new computers, i.e. the Mac Plus, SE, & II. > System 6.0 also contains a new Serial Driver that uses the some features of >the *SLIGHTLY* different serial hardware present from the plus on. > So the bottom line is that you can't use 6.0 on a 512Ke, even if you have >the memory to do so. > >***Flame on!!!!!!! > ... (flames deleted) Well, I've been on both sides of this issue now (having spent most of my career working for hardware manufacturers and now being the owner of an apparently obsolete 512KE). There are a lot of good arguments on both sides. There are many good reasons why a manufacturer may want to cease support of an old machine; these reasons may not always be known or understood by the user community, they may even be secret. Anyone who has worked for a computer manufacturer knows this. As the number of different old machines increases, the effort to support them all becomes increasingly burdensome. Old machine support takes time and manpower, sometimes lots of time and manpower. Obviously, owners of those old machines want support forever. Owners of old Macs can also justifyably claim some extra credit for supporting Apple in the bad old days of the 128K. It seems churlish and mean to cut them off now that the Mac is doing so well. Its a trade-off. The manufacturer makes the decision. He must weigh the benefits of putting his engineering effort into new stuff for new machines versus continuing support for old machines. There is never enough engineering staff or budget to do it all. Users must understand that their old machines can not be supported forever. The trick, it seems to me, is choosing a psychologically appropriate time to cut off the old machines. And making it clear to the users why it was necessary and what the benefits to the community as a whole are. In this particular case, I'm not sure what Apple's reasoning was. I'm willing to withhold judgement. Can comments, Apple? -- Bill Arnett {ucbvax!tolerant,hplabs!hpda}!procase!bill proCASE Corp., Santa Clara CA 408/727-0714