feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) (04/16/91)
Does anyone know whether there exists an HP48sx simulator that runs on dos? I'd like to get one that uses the full display and also (optionally) the floating point coprocessor. Source would be nice. Thanks. -- David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631 EMAIL: netcom.com
feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) (04/17/91)
Someone ponted out that I was asking for a Saturn Chipset simulator. What I'm actually looking for is 48sx functionality on a pc, only with a full screen and a lot more speed, memory and disk space. -- David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631 EMAIL: netcom.com
TDSTRONG%MTUS5.cts.mtu.edu@VM1.NoDak.EDU (04/17/91)
> >Does anyone know whether there exists an HP48sx simulator that runs on >dos? I'd like to get one that uses the full display and also >(optionally) the floating point coprocessor. Source would be nice. >Thanks. >-- >David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631 >EMAIL: netcom.com A file on Wayne's Mail server called hardware/sim1 says its a simulation of saturn code and a debugger. I haven't used it myself. ====================================================================== ___ I__) _ _I _ _ Tim Strong <TDSTRONG@MTUS5.cts.mtu.edu> I \ (_I (_I (_I I Michigan Tech. Houghton, Michigan, U.S.A. ======================================================================
s2499576%techst02.technion.ac.il@TAUNIVM.TAU.AC.IL (Yaniv Shaya) (04/18/91)
> Does anyone know whether there exists an HP48sx simulator that > runs on dos? I'd like to get one that uses the full display > and also > (optionally) the floating point coprocessor. Source would be > nice. Thanks. > -- Well, I don't know of any such thing, but would too love to have one. Maybe HP would develop one - it would be much better than the PDL. --
rdippold@lajolla.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) (04/20/91)
In article <1991Apr17.032238.4258@netcom.COM> feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) writes: >Someone ponted out that I was asking for a Saturn Chipset simulator. >What I'm actually looking for is 48sx functionality on a pc, only with >a full screen and a lot more speed, memory and disk space. Good luck... the most valuable part of the HP48sx are the ROMS. It's the code in there that lets them do all the algebraic manipulation, solving, menuing, etc. that makes it so valuable; you could have the same screen, memory, keyboard and processor and still have a run-of-the-mill calculator if it weren't for those programs. What I'm meandering around to getting at is that it would be illegal to copy the ROMS so that you could run them on your PC, and that I can't imagine anyone doing a clean-room version of the HP48sx roms any time in the near future.
kenr@peabody.iusb.indiana.edu (Ken Rawlings) (04/20/91)
In article <1991Apr20.012113.27024@qualcomm.com> rdippold@lajolla.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes: >In article <1991Apr17.032238.4258@netcom.COM> feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) writes: >>What I'm actually looking for is 48sx functionality on a pc, only with >Good luck... the most valuable part of the HP48sx are the ROMS. It's the code > >What I'm meandering around to getting at is that it would be illegal to copy >the ROMS so that you could run them on your PC, and that I can't imagine >anyone doing a clean-room version of the HP48sx roms any time in the near >future. Are you sure about this? If _I_ copy my ROM to a PC file and use a saturn emulator to emulate a 48SX, would I be violating copywright infringement? This is assuming that _only_ I use the program and do not give copies of my ROMs to another soul. Any legal eagles out there? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ken Rawlings / kenr@peabody.iusb.indiana.edu / Indiana University, South Bend My life is Chemistry. Chemistry is Hell. Draw your own conclusions. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) (04/21/91)
One more time - what I'm looking for is the HP48sx FUNCTIONALITY. I want to be able to use my pc AS IF it were a 48sx. I could care less how it gets done (maybe someone has written a 48sx simulator for the 68K which I could simulate on my pc :-) ). -- David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631 EMAIL: netcom.com
hysky@polaris.utu.fi (j.h.husgafvel) (04/21/91)
kenr@peabody.iusb.indiana.edu (Ken Rawlings) writes: >>What I'm meandering around to getting at is that it would be illegal to copy >>the ROMS so that you could run them on your PC, and that I can't imagine >>anyone doing a clean-room version of the HP48sx roms any time in the near >>future. > Are you sure about this? > If _I_ copy my ROM to a PC file and use a saturn emulator to emulate >a 48SX, would I be violating copywright infringement? > This is assuming that _only_ I use the program and do not give copies >of my ROMs to another soul. > Any legal eagles out there? I think that this was discussed earlier here (concerning hp28s) and it seemed at that time that there is nothing illegal doing that. It is however painfully slow to emulate Saturn on PC (at least everyone told so ;-). If someone happens to have an emulator I'd like to get my hands on that too! /hysky hysky@olaris.utu.fi May the Farce be with U ;-)
madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) (04/22/91)
j.h.husgafvel writes: >> at that time that there is nothing illegal doing that. It is however painfully >> slow to emulate Saturn on PC (at least everyone told so ;-). If someone Doesn't have to be, especially on a modern, fast processor. I have a 286/287 emulator running on my 25 MHz 68040, and it's speed is equivalent to a 10 MHz 286/287! Pretty impressive. (It's called SoftPC from Insignia.) Since the 2 MHz, 4-bit processor in the 48 is far slower thatn a 286, I'd venture to say that it is well within the realm of possibility to write a Saturn emulator that runs *faster* that the real one on, say, a 25 MHz 386. Mark Adler madler@pooh.caltech.edu
jpser@cup.portal.com (John Paul Serafin) (04/23/91)
madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) writes: >Doesn't have to be, especially on a modern, fast processor. I have a >286/287 emulator running on my 25 MHz 68040, and it's speed is equivalent >to a 10 MHz 286/287! Pretty impressive. (It's called SoftPC from Insignia.) >Since the 2 MHz, 4-bit processor in the 48 is far slower thatn a 286, I'd >venture to say that it is well within the realm of possibility to write >a Saturn emulator that runs *faster* that the real one on, say, a 25 MHz >386. If an 8088 is a 16 bit processor and an 80386sx is a 32 bit processor, the Saturn processor is 64 bits. The Saturn was designed to crunch numbers and has several 64 bit registers. The only thing 4 bits wide is the bus. It is a smart bus is addition; in the HP-71 most devices on the bus kept their own copy of the instruction pointer. This significantly reduced bus traffic. On number crunching benchmarks, a 600kHz HP-71 runs as fast or faster than a 4.7MHz 8088 running interpretive Basic (the HP-71 runs interpretive Basic). The 8088 will smoke an HP-71 on empty loops and integer trivia, but when was the last time an empty loop did any good? They certainly cause a lot of harm in software written for an 8088 running on a 286, not to mention 386 or 486. This is not to say that a BCD HP48SX emulator on a 386/387 or 486 wouldn't be very nice to have. There is a company that markets Rocky Mountain Basic for MS-DOS but I don't know much about it. John Serafin jpser@cup.portal.com
rob@ireta.cynic.wimsey.bc.ca (Rob Prior) (04/25/91)
> madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) writes: > >Doesn't have to be, especially on a modern, fast processor. I have a > >286/287 emulator running on my 25 MHz 68040, and it's speed is equivalent > >to a 10 MHz 286/287! Pretty impressive. (It's called SoftPC from Insignia. > >Since the 2 MHz, 4-bit processor in the 48 is far slower thatn a 286, I'd > >venture to say that it is well within the realm of possibility to write > >a Saturn emulator that runs *faster* that the real one on, say, a 25 MHz > >386. But don't forget that SoftPC isn't a 286/287 emulator. It is an 8088/87 (i forget which, specifically) emulator that runs at excessively high speeds. You will find that you can't run programs that specifically look for a 286 or higher processor. +------------ | rob@ireta.cynic.wimsey.bc.ca | Rob Prior, President, Still Animation Logo Design +------------------------------------------------------------
kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael L. Kaufman) (04/29/91)
madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) writes: >I have a 286/287 emulator running on my 25 MHz 68040, and it's speed is >equivalent to a 10 MHz 286/287! Pretty impressive. This may seem impressive in the Mac world, but on my PC, I have a program that allows me to run 286/287 programs with a speed equivalent to a 85 MHz 286 with a 250 MHz 287. Just one more proof that PC are better then Macs. ;-) On the other hand, I have a Apple 2 emulator that works by being a 6502 emulator with the Apple Roms. (I know it's illeagal.) If someone wrote a saturn emulator, then we could work from there. Michael -- Michael Kaufman | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on kaufman | fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in @eecs.nwu.edu | the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be | lost in time - like tears in rain. Time to die. Roy Batty
TDSTRONG%MTUS5.cts.mtu.edu@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (Tim Strong) (04/29/91)
> >But don't forget that SoftPC isn't a 286/287 emulator. It is an 8088/87 >(i forget which, specifically) emulator that runs at excessively high >speeds. You will find that you can't run programs that specifically >look for a 286 or higher processor. There is a new version which does run 286/386. ====================================================================== ___ I__) _ _I _ _ Tim Strong <TDSTRONG@MTUS5.cts.mtu.edu> I \ (_I (_I (_I I Michigan Tech. Houghton, Michigan, U.S.A. ======================================================================