[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: What exactly WAS Apple Pascal?
- Subject: Re: What exactly WAS Apple Pascal?
- From: Martin Doherty <martin.doherty@undisclosed.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:52:42 -0400
- In-reply-to: <40f7d453$1_5@corp.newsgroups.com>
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
- References: <cd7lc2$q52$1@ottoman.cs.fiu.edu> <cd8bk7$1sjg$1@merope.saaf.se> <40f7d453$1_5@corp.newsgroups.com>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113
- Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.sys.apple2:2132
exegete@nunya.biz wrote:
The last version (1.3) utilized the 128K of the //c and IIe. It also
supported 3.5" disk drives. That 800K of storage was a big improvement
over 1-4 140K drives.
Roy
I have version 1.2, and it also supports 128K. This is the first
version that came after the release of the //e (but unfortunately for
me, before the release of the 800K drives).
The standard package out of the box is for use on a 64K Apple, as for
the previous versions 1.0 & 1.1. It will also run fine on a 128K Apple
but will ignore the extra RAM.
However, on the APPLE3: volume there are two files, 128K.APPLE and
128K.PASCAL. Users have to create a new 128K system startup disk by
copying these files and renaming them to SYSTEM.APPLE & SYSTEM.PASCAL,
plus copying all the other needed files (SYSTEM.LIBRARY etc).
A Pascal 1.2 128K startup disk will not function on a 64K Apple. I
wonder if 1.3 did away with this fiddle faddle and just delivered a 128K
system as standard? Probably not, since this would have cut loose all
][+ owners.
Martin