mjwargo@athena.mit.edu (Michael J Wargo) (04/11/91)
With all of the informative discussion of Epsilon recently, I thought I'd ask a question I've been pondering for a while. I've used Epsilon for a number of years on DOS based systems. In fact, it's the first program I move over to a new machine I have to work with. The idea of using Epsilon on a *light* and *small* portable is very appealing indeed. Has anyone been able to get it to work on any of the really small machines? I`ve heard that the portfolio is 'sorta' able to run DOS software. Since Epsilon writes directly to screen hardware (as I remember, I'm using a really old version), I would expect this to be a problem. The reason I inquire about the portfolio is that it appears to be both inexpensive and small/light. Any and all comments on this topic are *very* much appreciated. Thanks, Mike Wargo preferred ---> michael@agricola.mit.edu mjwargo@athena.mit.edu
hnridder@cs.ruu.nl (Ernst de Ridder) (04/11/91)
In <1991Apr11.000417.12608@athena.mit.edu> mjwargo@athena.mit.edu (Michael J Wargo) writes: >very appealing indeed. Has anyone been able to get it to work >on any of the really small machines? I`ve heard that the portfolio What about a 4,77 MHz 8088 with only 256 Kb memory and 1 360 Kb disk? It works fine as long as you don't try to load big files; there isn't much swappingroom on such a disk. >is 'sorta' able to run DOS software. Since Epsilon writes directly >to screen hardware (as I remember, I'm using a really old version), You can instruct it to use BIOScalls. CU Ernst -- Qualitas qualitatem inducit. Semper ego qualitatem. popa iret
swansonc@acc.stolaf.edu (Chris Swanson) (04/13/91)
Since the Poqet runs MS-DOS (3.?), and is basically a very compacted clone as far as architecture goes, you should have no problem running any software on it that will run on a conventional PC 8086 clone with 512K of RAM and two floppies. -Chris -- Chris Swanson, Chem/CS/Pre-med Undergrad, St. Olaf College, Northfield,MN 55057 DDN: (CDS6) INTERNET: swansonc@acc.stolaf.edu UUCP: uunet!stolaf!swansonc AT&T: Work: (507)-645-4528 Home: (507)-663-6424 I would deny this reality, but that wouldn't pay the bills...
ab2r@quads.uchicago.edu (Marshall Abrams) (04/13/91)
In article <1991Apr11.093641.390@cs.ruu.nl> hnridder@cs.ruu.nl (Ernst de Ridder) writes: >In <1991Apr11.000417.12608@athena.mit.edu> mjwargo@athena.mit.edu (Michael J Wargo) writes: >What about a 4,77 MHz 8088 with only 256 Kb memory and 1 360 Kb disk? >It works fine as long as you don't try to load big files; there isn't much >swappingroom on such a disk. This is exactly what I wanted to know about--running Epsilon on a 4.77 mhs 8088. Can you give a little more info on how quickly Epsilon runs on a slow machine like this? I've been running Freemacs 1.6, Microemacs 10 (?), and Brief 3.0 on my 8088, and they're all annoyingly slow some of the time. Freemacs is OK for most things, but I have to sit and wait while it switches from one on-screen window to the other. Microemacs doesn't have this problem, but when more than one window is open, what I type doesn't appear on the screen until I stop typing. And Brief is slow doing LOTS of things. Try jumping one word at a time on a 4.77 mhz machine--you'll see what I mean. All of these are things that CAN be put up with, but I'm trying to avoid putting up with them. (Or maybe I should just practice not getting annoyed...) So what I want to know is whether in your experience with Epsilon on an 8088, you find it "just OK" speedwise, with some pretty slow spots, or if it's really fine. (Of course it's not going to be (as they say) "blazingly fast", but that goes without saying on a 5-year old computer. Wait till 1996, when noone will every call a 486 "blazingly fast".) I'll add that I have 512K and a hard drive, so that may help a little with some aspects of Epsilon's operation. Thanks. Marshall Abrams ab2r@midway.uchicago.edu
hnridder@cs.ruu.nl (Ernst de Ridder) (04/15/91)
In <1991Apr13.033116.18916@midway.uchicago.edu> ab2r@quads.uchicago.edu (Marshall Abrams) writes: >In article <1991Apr11.093641.390@cs.ruu.nl> hnridder@cs.ruu.nl (Ernst de Ridder) writes: >>In <1991Apr11.000417.12608@athena.mit.edu> mjwargo@athena.mit.edu (Michael J Wargo) writes: >>What about a 4,77 MHz 8088 with only 256 Kb memory and 1 360 Kb disk? >>It works fine as long as you don't try to load big files; there isn't much >>swappingroom on such a disk. > >This is exactly what I wanted to know about--running Epsilon on a 4.77 >mhs 8088. Can you give a little more info on how quickly Epsilon runs >on a slow machine like this? I've been running Freemacs 1.6, When you want exact timings, just say so and wait a week. (I don't have that computer here). >annoyingly slow some of the time. Freemacs is OK for most things, but >I have to sit and wait while it switches from one on-screen window to >the other. Microemacs doesn't have this problem, but when more than >one window is open, what I type doesn't appear on the screen until I stop typing. Epsilon doesn't suffer from one of these. (I type reasonably fast, though not as a fast a professional secretary might. I don't know about your typingrate) >getting annoyed...) So what I want to know is whether in your >experience with Epsilon on an 8088, you find it "just OK" speedwise, >with some pretty slow spots, or if it's really fine. (Of course it's Well, there are no problems when doing normal (i.e. what I do most: typing, moving the cursor, incremental searching, cut-and-paste, changing window) operations. When you're doing a global reformat or an extensive regular-search-and-replace, you would like an AT. But I don't perform these operations very often and even on faster computers you must wait a moment for it to finish -- be it (a lot) shorter. What does really slow things down is swapping to floppy or a slow harddisk. All together it works "really fine", with few sit-back-and-wait's, in the lesser-used functions. Greetings, Ernst -- Qualitas qualitatem inducit. Semper ego qualitatem. popa iret