Re: ITS TIM!
"TIML" wrote:
>> Oh okay, so you're going back a few years
>> now, OS/2 v1 came out in 1987 (I believe),
>> V2 came out around the time when Windows
>> had evolved into v3.x (if it was 3.0 or 3.1
>> I can't remember, but that was around 1990).
> Yup, I never really had any time with Warp,
> just the old OS/2.
Well it's quite a big OS to manage, of course
I've read a little bit about V1 (from some
ol' computer magazines & to make an OS back
in 1987 which needed at least a 286 was quite
a tall order). It's always been quite big IMO.
Back then the reviewers were comparing it to
some of the Minicomputer OSes & while they
said OS/2 was a tad smaller than the Minis
OSes, it's quite large for a PC system.
When Version 2 came out, I believe they fazed
out the 286 support, which mean't you needed
at least a 386 around 1990 to run it (though
it did support Windows 3.0 programs too!
.
Version 3 (was when they started calling it OS/2
Warp) still needed a 386 (however they
recommended a 486). I got OS/2 Warp onto my 386DX
33Mhz & it wasn't bad (would of had 8Mb
installed). But the biggest problem was the
Web browsers. I found some Web browsers that IBM
made for OS/2 Warp on the 'net, but I wasn't
fully impressed with it. This was when I found
out about Netscape (which was the result from
those other Web browsers) - though it really
needed a 486 - so I took OS/2 Warp over to my
486 DX2 66Mhz with 8Mb & ran Netscape on that,
which was good. Later on I put more memory (16Mb)
& the results were pretty good. This was the
system I used up to the point where the Hard
Disk died & hadn't done anything else about it
since (that was a few years ago).
>> I played a little with OS/2 Warp v3 which I
>> didn't mind (even though it was a bit large
>> & writing some of those CMD files was a bit
>> daunting). But this was before the Hard Disk
>> died, anyway I've still got all the stuff (for
>> if I get things back together - might be a
>> while since there's this space issue).
> I believe there's a relatively large Warp
> following on the net still.
Yes, I believe so, a few years ago there was still
support for OS/2 in that people were interested
in writing games, demos for this OS, as they felt
that OS/2 was capable of doing this (cause lots
of the commercial apps written for it, generally
were for the serious user - I felt they made a
good point, in terms of why can't OS/2 have games).
I did a little programming on it (but nothing
terribly exciting), by using a Beta copy (at the
time) of Free Pascal (which is a 32bit compiler,
which tries to be compatable with Turbo Pascal).
It wasn't bad, but obviously a lot has happened
since I've used it. When my Hard Disk packed in,
I moved over to another machine with a modified
version of CP/M-86 v1.1 for the IBM PC/XT & over
a little while I ported lots of DOS stuff,
basically doing what the OS/2 community are doing
& moving some Games & Demos over to CP/M, just
to show that CP/M can be more than just a serious
OS!
It's a bit unfortunate that some of the
routines I ported tend to struggle a little bit
on my 386 running at 16Mhz. But others have found
them to run quite well on their 486 based system.
>> So they already had the hardware necessary
>> to run the software, is this how they run things
>> do they. Get the hardware before everyone
>> else does. That wouldn't suprise me if hardware
>> was made months (possibly years) before it
>> was release, it may explain why hardware
>> changes all the time. Sorry I haven't explained
>> myself proper, I'm some nut who's frowning
>> upon the way computers are made nowdays! :-(
> RMS is Richard Stallman. He foundd the whole
> Free Software movement. Started EMACS, the FSF
> and GNU. The GNU tools are what makes 'Linux' a
> whole operating system instead of just the kernal.
> He has a large number of essays and campaigns for
> software freedom & freedom of speech on behalf of
> us all, all over the world, yet still has time to
> reply (short & to the point) to emails from us!
Personally, I think Free Software is a great thing,
but occasionally, I'm troubled by peoples views on
Free Software that say that it could be a bad thing
down the track. Personally, I think it's hard to
say what the world would be like without the
commercial software (but I guess for someone who's
been around a lot longer it would be easier to just
go back & say what programs were like for the
earlier systems, like PDP-1). The main issue seems
to be, can Free software eventually replace
commercial software, do you have any thoughts on
this?
Some people say that Commercial software needs to
be around, in order for ideas to progress,
otherwise we'll be stuck on the same ideas. I guess
that's a fair statement, but ideas also came when
computers entered that commercial software stage.
For people like myself, I'm just a small time
bloke, who stumbled into the world of Turbo Pascal
programming. Ideas from myself are on the edge of
simple, in that I've looked at other code &
translated it. For myself, I've been satisfied to
the point where if something is in a way fun
looking or fun to play (but having a simple
concept), then I'd be interested in porting it.
> His excellent website is here:
>
http://www.stallman.org/
Sounds like Mr. Stallman is a VIP.
>> The first time I heard of a computer virus, I
>> thought it was a joke (as it was a game typein
>> ) for my Amstrad CPC (back in the late '80s).
>> Back then, I just thought of it as how could a
>> computer catch a cold!
> Wish it was a joke! They've cost me a lot of
> boring worktime in the past!
It's a pity that Hard Disks are a good thing, but
people out there want to turn it into trash. Or
even worse, get to as maybe people with their
program & reck it. Some viruses I've heard are
designed to access other things off your computer.
For a computer like an Amstrad CPC, unless you were
one of the lucky few who had a Hard Disk viruses
weren't an issue. But the odds on getting a virus
which was specifically designed for a certain HD
for a certain computer like the Amstrad would have
to mean a huge amount of it been unbelivable. It's
a bit like a car. Lots of people here drive Holden
Commodores & the most broken in car is the Holden
Commodore. Replace Holden Commodore with IBM
computer & broken into with Virus, it's the same
thing. Most people use IBMs, which is why people
out there are writing viruses for them. In a way
it's a turn off from the machine.
>> No, well when I saw all those languages, I
>> noticed Pascal was missing. I'm a bit of a
>> Turbo Pascal programmer who's been using
>> it under CP/M (in this senario the last TP
>> compiler for CP/M was TP 3, so I've had a
>> bit of fun interpreting some of the more
>> modern TP programs so they work in TP 3!
> Oh yeah, I did have a little time with Turbo
> Pascal for DOS. My brother in law had a copy
> & passed it to me. Seemed ok. The editor was
> nice (editors are one of my obsessions along
> with OSs!!!)
The thing to remember with TP is the editor
changed when TP 4 (the first copy for DOS only)
came out. The earlier version TP 3 has a much
simplier editor (which means it's harder to use).
However, I don't mind using it, even though it
hasn't got pull-down menus, you need to use your
keyboard combinations to exit the editor (which
is the most important one to remember). Other
keys are somewhat highlighted, so you can see
what does what.
>> Was that Locoscript WP you used on the PCW
>> or Protext? Do you know Protext? (That was
>> one of the main WPs for the CPCs & regarded
>> as one of the best - from most Amstrad users).
>> Protext came in many forms (ROM, Amsdos
>> disk or CP/M disk). ROM was convient if you
>> as you could switch on the computer, type in
>> a Resident System Extension (RSX) & it
>> would come up. AMSDOS was the default
>> OS when you switch on the Amstrad CPCs &
>> to get CP/M you needed to type in another
>> RSX (in AMSDOS) with the CP/M disk in
>> drive.
> No, only Locoscript. That would have been
> interesting!
Never really had the money or hardware to buy
ROMs for my actual Amstrad, lots of programs
came out on ROMs & in some cases you needed a
ROMboard to use the ROM. Accessing them was
quick & easy via RSXs, in fact one such
program (which was someones attempt of a GUI
interface put onto ROM) was so good, they
made the thing start up when the computer
was switched on.
>> Of course you probably used Wordstar or
>> one of those other CP/M specific WPs under
>> a PCW as well.
> No, as above.
Oh well, thought it might of been Locoscript.
I'm not sure if it was CPC compatable (in
particular with the CPC6128), I'm guessing
that it wasn't, cause I don't seem to
recall anyone talking about this on their
CPC!
>>> Did you know you can also run CPM via
>>> simh?
>> I'm not familiar with simh.
> Simh is an excellent software emulator ~
> I'm using it to run ITS under a DEC PDP10 emulator,
> ~ well they have CP/M for the MITS Altair 8800
> (emulator) (CP/M under license provided by Caldera
> Corporation); and an updated kit with 4K Basic, 8K
> Basic, Prolog, and CP/M 3.
> Here:
>
http://simh.trailing-edge.com/software.html
Oh okay. Generally on my main computer, I use DOS
mostly for emulators (because it seems to be the
best thing I can run the Emulators in). Usually
my pick is Caprice (which is an Amstrad CPC
emulator) which is good at running CP/M under.
If I'm using CP/M on my IBM, it would be on my
386 (which I've installed it on) alongside DOS
(that are on two seperate partitions of the
Hard Disk). So I can easily use FDISK to change
the active Partition (hence going into CP/M-86
v1.1) or PC-DOS 5. It's a neat trick that I've
done, cause it also means that I can do some
web browsing or e-mails via DOS (using Arachne).
I've also hooked up a Superdisk (120Mb) which
is in addition handy cause the Hard Disk is only
61Mb, but this way I can use other DOS programs,
which hardly seem to be a Speed issue (cause the
Superdisk is slightly slower than the Hard Disk).
>> Yes, we both know that, but lots of others want to
>> twist the definition of an OS as being a Big
>> Complicated Operating System. Windows is an
>> example where it's just getting bigger & as it
>> seems Microsoft are slowly ironing out DOS.
> I'd say DOS is a broken file system & Windows is
> still a graphical front end to it. Of course XP is
> slightly different, but I'm using Fedora in
> preference to it day in day out at work.
Unfortunatly, I'm not familiar with Fedora at all,
generally I've lost interest in these newer systems.
In a world where Windows XP is running quite easy to
cross paths in terms of using it, regardless. A
while ago, I decided I didn't want to keep on
learning about computer hardware, systems, terminolgy
but it's very hard not to since I've learn a bit
about it in the past. Whatever people want to tell
me what's a typical system for today, I'll take their
word for it. In any event, since my decision to keep
on plugging away on my ol' Win95 system, I've been
exposed to other people's newer systems like XP, but
my impression of it isn't all that great.
Learn about Computer Hardware IMO was a waste of time,
like no-ones going to pay someone to tell them what
the fastest running CPU is at the (unless you're being
interviewed at Intel & they want to know if their
ahead of their competitors AMD or Apple). Knowing what
the fastest CPU is a waste IMO. Same could apply for
Hard Disk Space, Video RAM, largest monitor. Curiosity
was the downside when I used to do this & unless you're
building hardware for some hardware company, it's not
really relevent.
No, I believe you don't need to be in the computer
industry to actually use a computer. Admin work kinda
borders it (depending on who you're working for).
To be honest, I just lost interest due to the changes.
Which is why I've picked something I don't mind doing
with my computers.
>> I've seen for the PCW, some of the serious software
>> runs on either PCW or CPC6128, including some
>> Graphical Adventure games!
> Have you played The Hobbit?
I do know of the Hobbit, but I haven't played it. I'm
sorry, I perhaps forgot to point out that Adventures
weren't my favourite types of games. I've tried
playing adventure games on my Amstrad CPC (not the
Hobbit I must admit), but could never get anywhere
with them. Graphical Adventures a little bit better,
particularly if you can see what's happening, but
most of those I've encountered need a keyboard to
play & if you'll follow the Favourite Input Device in
the Hardware section, you'll see that I'm all for the
Joystick when it comes to games!
>> Hasn't everything?!
>> Not CP/M! :-(
>> Oh wait, I think there might be
>> a version in the CP/M archive.
> Here's a great CP/M site I just found, perhaps you
> know it:
>
http://public.planetmirror.com/pub/cpm/binary.html
Yes, that's a mirror to this site (which I do know
about):
http://www.cpm.z80.de (which is the
Unoffical CP/M website). While it's Unoffical, it's
perfectly legal as the maintaineer Gaby Chandry has
a license from Caldra to distribute the software.
One of the older mirrors (before Tim passed away) I
think maybe still here:
http://cpm.interfun.net/cpm.html which has a collection
of DR software (not only for CP/M, but some that were
written for DOS as well).
> Here's a link to the Micro (not the GNU) EMACS there:
>
http://public.planetmirror.com/pub/cpm/download/me68k.zip
> Perhaps you could help port the GNU EMACS to CP/M ?
AFAIK, EMACs was written in C. While I've learn a bit of
C, I don't know how much help I would be in porting it.
>>> Tell me what you like most about CP/M!
>> Well as you've probably have gathered, I'm
>> somewhat a bit of a games freak who likes
>> CP/M. As I've mentioned earlier I do a bit of
>> TP programming & not only have I done some
>> programming for CP/M 2.2 on the Amstrad,
>> but I've also did quite a bit of porting of
>> Turbo Pascal programs from DOS to CP/M-86,
>> because of the lack of software (& since I
>> quickly found my grips to using Turbo Pascal).
>> Though it hasn't been easy because a lot of
>> programs don't just easily go over, mainly
>> because the bulk of TP programs done for
>> DOS are from later DOS only versions of
>> TP. Like CP/M itself, CP/M-86 v1.1 is a 16bit
>> OS & like CP/M, TP 3 was the last version
>> available to that. But sometimes I was able
>> to suprise myself with what an older compiler
>> could do with some newer code!
But that doesn't really explain what I like most
about CP/M. What I do like about it, is it's
small & with me porting a number of programs to
CP/M-86, I've shown that it capable of doing
more than just been a serious OS, but that has
all depended on the machine & hardware for it.
Most of porting stuff has mean't that I've used
hardware like the VGA which were never around
when CP/M-86 came out. Another person has added
to CP/M-86 to the point where it could take
advantage of the 1.44Mb Floppies (originally
this only supported 160k & 320k 5.25" floppies)
as well as support for newer hard disks &
more hard disk space (even though 8Mb was a lot
for CP/M & still is considered as that), as
well as a program which allows Extended Memory
(above the 640k) to be used as a RAM drive. So
it's been developed well.
> Well done! Is any of it published on the web?
Most of those programs I've spoken of above are
available here:
http://www.seanet.com/~klaw
all of my routines are there, however some
mightn't be downloadable. In the file downloads
section everything should be. Perhaps the most
impressive thing I ported was a Virtual
Landscape (VIRLAND), to TP 3. I'm not sure if
it's currently downloadable though, so just
e-mail the site maintainer (Kirk) on the main
page, he should be able to send you a copy, if
you want a look at it! ;-) I've ported a few
games which should be in the 86GAME.ZIP file &
a couple of other program's I've posted there
are done in other languages, some assembly,
a SmallC program (a graphical bouncing ball
routine). I did a CBASIC program (I'm not sure
if it's there, it maybe) which was a simple
Text demo of moving stars!
I've posted some
graphical star routines (both TP - ones in
2D & the other 3D).
If you ever have some time to play around with
CP/M-86, then goto the Unoffical CP/M website
& download Freek Heites version of CP/M-86
which supports the 1.44Mb system. And if
you're interested in downloading some programs
you should get a copy of 22DSK144 (I think it
is, which is somewhere on the Unoffical CP/M
site) as well, cause CP/M-86 uses a different
filing system to DOS.
Cheers,
CP/M User.
