Michael J. Mahon wrote:
Yes but... The 2gs supports HFS so it would likely be required for access to such devices. As a separate OS, it would need to access common usable media.My feeling is that anyone who chooses to routinely use a IIgs file system should have a IIgs. The IIgs has fine "links" to the 8-bit Apple II's and ProDOS.
But what if said person wanted to run the OS on a GS as an alternative to GSOS? I've been know to run a variety of operating systems on practically every computer I've owned or maintained. A 128k OS would be limited but there are still possibilities.
Probably one of the most important issues. I'm sure 64k P8 programs could be executed if the system were designed for it. Likewise a number of binary programs could probably be run as well. There would be a lot of problems trying to use many current P8 system applications.Which would doom it to being a curiosity.
It was a doomed idea from the beginning. Even back in the day, a 128k operating system was not considered worth the problems when it was just as easy to make the applications support 128k or more ram.
One reason why I posted a new thread. We II users, at least some of us, still like to dream about the possibilities even if they never come true.Back in the day, when I got the Zram for my 2c I often wondered how feasible it would be to make an OS which used it. Not that I had the skills to actually do so.I have no problem with dreaming, but it does seem to bring out the kind of "free association" that never results in anything practical. ...Like the approximately annual "Apple II+++++" discussion. ;-(
Yeah, I recall a few what if dreams discussions. Still this one now has it's own thread now. Besides, if practicality were a concern we probably wouldn't be using old hardware. For me this is a hobby or more precisely a diversion.
In reality, P8 got it pretty accurate as the OS kernel. I think of the system as a group of compatible OS's where each system application is actually the rest of the OS.Of course I also like the old adage, I can boot my Apple II into whatever I want it to be.Absolutely--but it would be nice not to be alone. ;-)
Aww, I'm generally alone anyhow. I seem to be a bit anti-social. :) Probably a personality disorder.
However, my point was I still like being able to boot into Dos 3.x, Apple Pascal or P8 floppies and tend to use the large media devices for storage and maintenance of said floppies.
We are too late in the "life cycle" to roll out an OS that isn't 100% backward-compatible with the previous OS.
I don't think any OS has ever maintained 100% compatibility with previous versions. In my experience this has never been the case. Of course said experience is limited to the Apple2 and the PC and compatibles over the past 23 years.
It is still an interesting discussion of ideas and whether these things bear fruit or not they usually spark an idea in someones mind. Occasionally, these ideas are pretty good too.
Cheers, Mike T