Re: Integer BASIC Question

[Linards Ticmanis <ticmanis@coli.uni-sb.de>]

Bryan Parkoff wrote:
> Integer BASIC Question
>
>     Is original Integer BASIC the EXACT same for Apple I and Apple II?  Was
> it revised for Apple II+ before AppleSoft BASIC was added?

No and No. The Apple I is *not* compatible hardware wise with the Apple II.
The system architecture is very different, and the I had no graphics 
modes if I remember correctly. Integer BASIC has commands for doing 
graphics. That proves it couldn't run on the A1 in the state it is in now.

In fact I don't think the Apple I had a BASIC in ROM at all.

As to the second question, the addition of AppleSOFT is exactly what 
makes a II+ into a II+, it is the only hard-and-fast difference between 
the II and the II+. So there is no II+ with Integer BASIC ROMs.
The INTBASIC file on the DOS 3.3 system master is identical in content
with the ROM-based Integer BASIC in the II. The exceptions are the
D800-DFFF area (there's no chip there in the II so you read garbage when you
access this area, the INTBASIC file has the corresponding area from
Applesoft BASIC but it is not used) and the Monitor
area F800-FFFF. The INTBASIC file on the older DOS 3.3 system master has
the contents from the NEW Autostart Monitor ROM of the II+. The INTBASIC
file on the newer DOS 3.3 from 1983 has nothing (it ends at F7FF), 
instead the Monitor code is copied from ROM. Thus this later DOS 3.3 
INTBASIC can run on the 2e, 2c and 2gs without disabling for example 
lowercase input and other additions to the monitor.

--

Linards Ticmanis

 The Master said, "The business of laying on the colors follows the
preparation of the plain ground."