Re: ProDOS...

[Roy and/or Janet Miller <millers@inetnebr.com>]

Phoenyx wrote:

> There are other work alike's. Most do not have the proper piping and such.
> One really nice implementation is the shell for the Aztec C system, ProDos
> version. Some consider it slow, but any time you make the system do extra
> IO or other processing it will slow down.
>
> For the most part, the C64 OS you mention could be ported. I think it
> would loose some of it's capability. At least at first, until these items
> could be recoded to the Apple's methods. I question the need,

I doubt that there is a "need" for a unix-like 8 bit OS for the II, but it
could be fun.

> unless it
> had a new filesystem with less limitations. Multitasking on the II's does
> not entice me too much. Other than simple print spooling,

Which would be nice, if there were any applications for the OS

> it isn't very
> useful at this cpu clock rate.
>
> My comment about the P8 compatibility is still valid, just as David's is.
> Any new or upgraded OS would loose 80 to 90 percent compatibility with
> system applications due to the way the ProDos/Apple II system is designed.

But would a full implementation of SOS do that? Since P8 is only a cut down
version of SOS? One thing that SOS does that I would like to see in P8 is the
ability to utilize more than 128K as user memory. My /// has 256K, SOS can use
up to 512K in 32K banks, and if I remember correctly, has the theoretical
ability to use up to 1 meg with bank switching. Wouldn't it be nice to see all
P8 programs have that kind of data without having to use RAM disks? Of course,
would current P8 programs be able to use it is the kind of question that I
can't answer. Can P8 be expanded to a full SOS level? There's another question
that I can't answer.  Is the limitation in the OS, or in the memory management
chip on the II e/c motherboard? Did the /// use a memory management chip, or
do it in software? I don't know. But since SOS is around, and P8 is derived
from it, and Apple, as usual, was trying to keep the II from hurting sales of
another machine (///) perhaps it wouldn't be impossible to do. Can any of you
assembly programers give us the answer?

>
>
> I know that many don't agree with the GPL concept for Apple software or
> hardware for that matter.

Just so that I am sure I know what you are talking about, please give a
concise statement of GPL, and why wouldn't people agree with it for the II.

Roy

> I don't know why this is so. If we realistically
> expect any improvements for our systems they will have to come from the
> community. Considering that many folks don't want to support new projects
> economically, a GPL (or similar concept) project is the only other best
> bet. We can't expect a single author to devote his time to such a project.
> Without cause for remuneration, it becomes simply a hobby to be completed
> as time allows. At least a community project has the possibility of more
> than one hobbyist working on it.
>
> --
>
> Thank you for your time and interest. I hope it was helpful
> or at least interesting.
>
> Phoenyx,
>
> Apple2 user since March 1984
>
> Links to Phoenyx's pages:
> preferred..... http://zip.to/Phoenyx_A2
> alternate..... http://www.tinyangeldesigns.com/Apple2