Info-Atari16 Digest Tuesday, August 22, 1989 Volume 89 : Issue 401 This weeks Editor: Bill Westfield Today's Topics: Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: DOS 3 Re: Hard Drive Speeds PC-DITTO questions Re: Logo Re: ST X and Ether Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Hebrew wordprocessing Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Loyal Atarians?!? Re: USER BASE Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Atari GEM and GEM/3... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 12 Aug 89 10:41:53 GMT From: unsvax!jimi!otto!rex@uunet.uu.net (Rex Jolliff) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <62828@linus.UUCP> rachamp@mbunix (Champeaux) writes: >Now there's a point to debate. Do you really need memory protection on a >single user multi-tasking computer. On a multi-user computer, memory >protection is a necessity, since if one user's program crashes, you don't >want to bring down the 50 other users. On a personal computer, where cost >is an important factor, is it really necessary? (kind of sounds like the >question "Is multi-tasking really necessary?" doesn't it?) >It would, however, be really nice. >Rich Champeaux (rachamp@mbunix.mitre.org) I don't see why it should cost more than about $20 to implement a reasonable memory management scheme on a personal computer like the Atari ST or the Amiga. It would be real nice to have, especially for software developers. This kind of personal computer really doesn't need it though. I seem to crash each computer equally as often when writing code for them. It takes longer to reboot the Amiga though. Another advantage to a reasonably implemented memory protection/management scheme is that the code to relocate executables before they ran could be eliminated. Rex. -- Rex Jolliff (rex@otto.lvsun.com, convex, texsun, mirror!otto!rex) The Sun Newspaper - |Disclaimer: The opinions and comments in Nevada's Largest Daily Morning | this article are my own and in no way Newspaper | reflect the opinions of my employers. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 89 05:20:29 GMT From: hp-sdd!ncr-sd!crash!fgbrooks@hplabs.hp.com (Fred Brooks) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <1069@philmds.UUCP> leo@philmds.UUCP (Leo de Wit) writes: >In article <1989Aug11.175942.6534@sj.ate.slb.com> greg@sj.ate.slb.com (Greg Wageman) writes: >Processes that are >waiting for some state change like a character from the keyboard >becoming available, or the printer being ready to receive further data, >are marked that way and will only be selected if the state they're >waiting for changes (the test for the changed state is just a simple >index comparision in most cases). Calls that can be safely assumed to >complete within a reasonable amount of time are not marked waiting I intercept the BIOS trap vector and add my own routine to do the BConin call. If nothing is waiting in the buffer then I swapout the current process , if a char is is the buffer it is passed on to the calling process and a countdown variable is set to say 100 so that when then next time the buffer is empty it won't swapout until it has checked the buffer a few times. >|I must admit the idea sounds like it has merit. However it's easy to >|try something like this when blissfully unaware of the pitfalls. The >|biggest one I see is that GEMDOS itself is not written to be >|re-entrant. > >Sure, but a) GEMDOS is not being re-entered and b) in a special way, >GEMDOS IS re-entrant. After these stunning remarks, I'll have to make >myself clear 8-): GEMDOS surely can be made re-entrant. Take a quick look at my MX2 source for an example. I admit my method is not perfect but it works 'sometimes'. >Cheers, > Leo. > >P.S. The current version screamed for job control, signalling etc. so >that's being implemented right now (together with some system calls >like signal() and kill()). I would like a copy if you are giving it away with source. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 22:36:33 GMT From: portal!cup.portal.com!CharlieBrown@uunet.uu.net (Charles F Schieber) Subject: Re: DOS 3 To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu DOS 3 Manual was printed by ATARI INC 1983.the manuel has 100 pages with and errata printed 5/01/84 with about 20 corrections.I would think some Atari Deal ers would still have copies of it.The title is"DISK OPERATING SYSTEM III REFFERAENCE MANUAL".(OPPS manual is spelled wrong!)Regards ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 89 10:12:37 GMT From: cca.ucsf.edu!wet!logic@cgl.ucsf.edu (Henry Kwan) Subject: Re: Hard Drive Speeds To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <676@opal.tubopal.UUCP> alderaan@tubopal.UUCP (Thomas Cervera) writes: >In article <399@wet.UUCP> logic@wet.UUCP (Henry Kwan) writes: > >>[...] Compare a ST506/412's >>5Mbit/sec to something like an Imprimis 94181-702M's 15-24Mbit/sec (ain't >>sure on this one but it's somewhere in that neighborhood). The Imprimis >>will just blow your socks off. > > But doesn't the DMA bus limit such a speed if you solder it to an ST ? > True. Then again, I'm of the school of thinking that overkill is better than underkill. The Imprimis drive will get something like 1,050K/sec on ICD's RATEHD while the ST506/412 drive will get something like 300K/sec. Real-life benchmarks are probably less glaring in difference but should still be quite noticable. I'm curious about the BMS-200 host adapter though. They claim that it supports a 1.6MB/sec transfer rate but I always thought that the ST's DMA bus limit was 1.33MB/sec. Or are they measuring it at the SCSI level? -- Henry Kwan - FWB, Inc. | "Experience varies directly claris!wet!logic@ames.arc.nasa.gov | with equipment ruined." cca.ucsf.edu!wet!logic@cgl.ucsf.edu | claris,ucsfcca,hoptoad,lamc!wet!logic | -- Tech Support ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Aug 89 12:05:46 LCL From: "Gerry Greenberg: 315-443-5378" To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Subject: PC-DITTO questions I do not own PC-Ditto, and to tell the truth...I'm not interested in PC-DittoII, but I tried out a program on a friend's PC-Ditto---and it worked!!(much to my surprise, since this is not a big-time commercial product). Anyway, the problem is that although this program works, it needs ega, mcga, hercules, or vga graphics capability to display special characters. Thus, before I go out and buy PC-Ditto (again, not the new hardware version, but the software version), I was wondering if anyone knows of any software out there in PC land that will fool a monochrome or cga display into thinking it is EGA (or anything higher)? If so, then I'll get it and try it out with my program and DITTO.IF that works,I'll buyPC-Ditto....otherwise, i.e. if I can't get this program to display the characters properly, I have no reason to be delving into the ms-dos world for now. Thanks in advance for any replies---Gerry maxg@suvm (bitnet) ggreenbe@rodan.acs.syr.edu (internet) PS. I have heard rumors that PC-Ditto II might have ega capabilities, but I'd rather not deal with internal hardware if I can help it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 AUG 89 17:27:52 BST From: PT%VIROLOGY.GLASGOW.AC.UK@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU To: info-atari16@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU Subject: Hello From: P. Taylor, MRC Virology, Glasgow My first attempt to post. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 17:01:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Logo To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu LOGO is a play language for children. Use MProlog for an adult equivalent. MProlog has Eagle graphics, which are 3-d rather than 2-d like turtle graphics. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 17:15:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: ST X and Ether To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Byte-Size systems in Oshawa, Ontario claimed last year that they were developing an Ethernet Card for the ST. I don't know what came of it. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 16:59:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu >From what I've heard, Minix is very restrictive with memory. Each program is allowed a maximum of 64k, and there is not VM paging. A cute toy, but useless for anything but learning. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 16:56:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Hebrew wordprocessing To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu There's a font editor from England which allows you to edit the system font and to type from right to left. I don't remember the name, but the ST club in London should be able to help you. The PD version will do what you want, and the commercial version will edit GDOS fonts as well. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 17:28:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu MX2 already does a fairly good job of simple multi-tasking. What we need to be able to do is multi-task in GEM. Right now, the machine will crash because the GEM code cannot be reentred when it is being used (it uses global rather than local variables). To multi-task with real ST applications, you would have to at least save all of the internal GEM variables with every context switch. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 03:58:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Loyal Atarians?!? To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu The ST is the best selling personal computer in free Europe, and second in England. Personally, I'd prefer a Sun, but it's an imperfect world and I'm not rich. Meanwhile, Atari software is powerful, cheap and easy to use. I have not yet seen a DTP program as good as Calamus (I've tried PageMaker on the IBM and Mac), and I like paying ca $100 for Lattice C instead of $500+. If you look to North America, forget it. I read German, so I have the priviledge of being able to use the hundreds of wonderful PD and commercial titles coming out of Europe. Besides, I love the windows and icons. --- * Via ProDoor 3.01R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 17:03:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: USER BASE To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu I have read that the ST is the best selling personal computer in free Europe (an archaic term at best), and in England specifically, it is second in sales to Amstrad. In North America the largest user base is probably around Toronto. A Timeworks sales rep told me that they sell more software in Eastern Canada for the ST than in all of the US. Remember that we have a tenth of the US population... Forget about the US market. They are still debating whether the mouse is a good thing or whether real men should use line interfaces. I'm surprised that they use a crutch like the keyboard, instead of punch cards or dipswitches! Software companies have told me that it is better to deal with Atari Canada than Atari US for help in North America, so tell your friend to give Atari Canada a call (I think it's in Markham, Ontario). --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 89 22:54:45 GMT From: rex!hoang@g.ms.uky.edu (Dzung Hoang) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <89081310545051@masnet.uucp> david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) writes: >From what I've heard, Minix is very restrictive with memory. Each >program is allowed a maximum of 64k, and there is not VM paging. A cute >toy, but useless for anything but learning. >--- > * Via ProDoor 3.0R Minix for the IBM-PC's are restricted to 64K due to the PC's architecture. The 68000 in the ST does not have any such restriction so it can run programs larger than 64K. It is not "useless for anything but learning." Post a message in comp.os.minix and you'll see what I mean. I used to have an ST but now own an AT compatible. I wish I still have the ST (and a big hard drive) to run minix. Dzung Hoang -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- hoang@comus.cs.tulane.edu hoang@rex.cs.tulane.edu hoang@comus.UUCP hoang@rex.UUCP tulane!comus!hoang tulane!rex!hoang ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 89 21:48:05 GMT From: uvaarpa!hudson!astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f@mcnc.org (Greg Lindahl) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <89081310545051@masnet.uucp> david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) writes: >From what I've heard, Minix is very restrictive with memory. Each >program is allowed a maximum of 64k, and there is not VM paging. A cute >toy, but useless for anything but learning. PC-Minix suffers from this feature, because of the design of the 8086. ST Minix has no such limit, and allows you to run a program as large as you have contiguous free memory... ------ Greg Lindahl gl8f@virginia.edu I'm not the NRA. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Aug 89 03:19:22 GMT From: agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!lbl-csam.arpa!antony@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Antony A. Courtney) Subject: Re: Atari GEM and GEM/3... To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <8907030235.AA29001@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> chuck@UMBC1.UMBC.EDU ("Chuck Rickard; ", PC) writes: > From what I remember, >Xerox was sued by Apple (during the sueing days...) for infringing on the >"look and feel" of the Macintosh Desktop. Was this drastic change to GEM a >part of that legal action, or was it voluntary? (The former seems more likely >than the latter...) If the suit did make them change, why didn't Atari have >to change their GEM, considering it was identical to the original IBM GEM? >Allan, would like to explain this one for me? :-) > Well, insofar as I know GEM was(is?) a product of Digital Research Corporation. And yes, I believe Apple did sue them, and they(DR) backed down. I don't know exactly why Atari's GEM didn't change, suffice it to say that Atari has never been one for avoiding lawsuits. :) I find your article rather ironic in that Xerox are the folks who really developed the mouse and windows interface with their Tajo and STAR products. In my opinion Apple really doesn't have any right to be suing ANYONE, given that they really copied the idea from Xerox. And most people agree that Apple is really just whining and trying to make life difficult for other companies. Fortunately Sun has Xerox on their side with their OpenLook product, so Apple won't dare try and sue them. And an extremely high percentage of companies have pledged support for AT&T's System V release 4 of UNIX, which will incorporate the OpenLook Graphical User Interface. ******************************************************************************* Antony A. Courtney antony@lbl.go Advanced Development Group ucbvax!lbl-csam.arpa!antony Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory AACourtney@lbl.go ------------------------------ End of Info-Atari16 Digest ************************** ------- Info-Atari16 Digest Tuesday, August 22, 1989 Volume 89 : Issue 401 This weeks Editor: Bill Westfield Today's Topics: Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: DOS 3 Re: Hard Drive Speeds PC-DITTO questions Re: Logo Re: ST X and Ether Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Hebrew wordprocessing Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Loyal Atarians?!? Re: USER BASE Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Multitasking on the ST Re: Atari GEM and GEM/3... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 12 Aug 89 10:41:53 GMT From: unsvax!jimi!otto!rex@uunet.uu.net (Rex Jolliff) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <62828@linus.UUCP> rachamp@mbunix (Champeaux) writes: >Now there's a point to debate. Do you really need memory protection on a >single user multi-tasking computer. On a multi-user computer, memory >protection is a necessity, since if one user's program crashes, you don't >want to bring down the 50 other users. On a personal computer, where cost >is an important factor, is it really necessary? (kind of sounds like the >question "Is multi-tasking really necessary?" doesn't it?) >It would, however, be really nice. >Rich Champeaux (rachamp@mbunix.mitre.org) I don't see why it should cost more than about $20 to implement a reasonable memory management scheme on a personal computer like the Atari ST or the Amiga. It would be real nice to have, especially for software developers. This kind of personal computer really doesn't need it though. I seem to crash each computer equally as often when writing code for them. It takes longer to reboot the Amiga though. Another advantage to a reasonably implemented memory protection/management scheme is that the code to relocate executables before they ran could be eliminated. Rex. -- Rex Jolliff (rex@otto.lvsun.com, convex, texsun, mirror!otto!rex) The Sun Newspaper - |Disclaimer: The opinions and comments in Nevada's Largest Daily Morning | this article are my own and in no way Newspaper | reflect the opinions of my employers. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 89 05:20:29 GMT From: hp-sdd!ncr-sd!crash!fgbrooks@hplabs.hp.com (Fred Brooks) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <1069@philmds.UUCP> leo@philmds.UUCP (Leo de Wit) writes: >In article <1989Aug11.175942.6534@sj.ate.slb.com> greg@sj.ate.slb.com (Greg Wageman) writes: >Processes that are >waiting for some state change like a character from the keyboard >becoming available, or the printer being ready to receive further data, >are marked that way and will only be selected if the state they're >waiting for changes (the test for the changed state is just a simple >index comparision in most cases). Calls that can be safely assumed to >complete within a reasonable amount of time are not marked waiting I intercept the BIOS trap vector and add my own routine to do the BConin call. If nothing is waiting in the buffer then I swapout the current process , if a char is is the buffer it is passed on to the calling process and a countdown variable is set to say 100 so that when then next time the buffer is empty it won't swapout until it has checked the buffer a few times. >|I must admit the idea sounds like it has merit. However it's easy to >|try something like this when blissfully unaware of the pitfalls. The >|biggest one I see is that GEMDOS itself is not written to be >|re-entrant. > >Sure, but a) GEMDOS is not being re-entered and b) in a special way, >GEMDOS IS re-entrant. After these stunning remarks, I'll have to make >myself clear 8-): GEMDOS surely can be made re-entrant. Take a quick look at my MX2 source for an example. I admit my method is not perfect but it works 'sometimes'. >Cheers, > Leo. > >P.S. The current version screamed for job control, signalling etc. so >that's being implemented right now (together with some system calls >like signal() and kill()). I would like a copy if you are giving it away with source. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 22:36:33 GMT From: portal!cup.portal.com!CharlieBrown@uunet.uu.net (Charles F Schieber) Subject: Re: DOS 3 To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu DOS 3 Manual was printed by ATARI INC 1983.the manuel has 100 pages with and errata printed 5/01/84 with about 20 corrections.I would think some Atari Deal ers would still have copies of it.The title is"DISK OPERATING SYSTEM III REFFERAENCE MANUAL".(OPPS manual is spelled wrong!)Regards ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 89 10:12:37 GMT From: cca.ucsf.edu!wet!logic@cgl.ucsf.edu (Henry Kwan) Subject: Re: Hard Drive Speeds To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <676@opal.tubopal.UUCP> alderaan@tubopal.UUCP (Thomas Cervera) writes: >In article <399@wet.UUCP> logic@wet.UUCP (Henry Kwan) writes: > >>[...] Compare a ST506/412's >>5Mbit/sec to something like an Imprimis 94181-702M's 15-24Mbit/sec (ain't >>sure on this one but it's somewhere in that neighborhood). The Imprimis >>will just blow your socks off. > > But doesn't the DMA bus limit such a speed if you solder it to an ST ? > True. Then again, I'm of the school of thinking that overkill is better than underkill. The Imprimis drive will get something like 1,050K/sec on ICD's RATEHD while the ST506/412 drive will get something like 300K/sec. Real-life benchmarks are probably less glaring in difference but should still be quite noticable. I'm curious about the BMS-200 host adapter though. They claim that it supports a 1.6MB/sec transfer rate but I always thought that the ST's DMA bus limit was 1.33MB/sec. Or are they measuring it at the SCSI level? -- Henry Kwan - FWB, Inc. | "Experience varies directly claris!wet!logic@ames.arc.nasa.gov | with equipment ruined." cca.ucsf.edu!wet!logic@cgl.ucsf.edu | claris,ucsfcca,hoptoad,lamc!wet!logic | -- Tech Support ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Aug 89 12:05:46 LCL From: "Gerry Greenberg: 315-443-5378" To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Subject: PC-DITTO questions I do not own PC-Ditto, and to tell the truth...I'm not interested in PC-DittoII, but I tried out a program on a friend's PC-Ditto---and it worked!!(much to my surprise, since this is not a big-time commercial product). Anyway, the problem is that although this program works, it needs ega, mcga, hercules, or vga graphics capability to display special characters. Thus, before I go out and buy PC-Ditto (again, not the new hardware version, but the software version), I was wondering if anyone knows of any software out there in PC land that will fool a monochrome or cga display into thinking it is EGA (or anything higher)? If so, then I'll get it and try it out with my program and DITTO.IF that works,I'll buyPC-Ditto....otherwise, i.e. if I can't get this program to display the characters properly, I have no reason to be delving into the ms-dos world for now. Thanks in advance for any replies---Gerry maxg@suvm (bitnet) ggreenbe@rodan.acs.syr.edu (internet) PS. I have heard rumors that PC-Ditto II might have ega capabilities, but I'd rather not deal with internal hardware if I can help it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 AUG 89 17:27:52 BST From: PT%VIROLOGY.GLASGOW.AC.UK@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU To: info-atari16@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU Subject: Hello From: P. Taylor, MRC Virology, Glasgow My first attempt to post. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 17:01:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Logo To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu LOGO is a play language for children. Use MProlog for an adult equivalent. MProlog has Eagle graphics, which are 3-d rather than 2-d like turtle graphics. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 17:15:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: ST X and Ether To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Byte-Size systems in Oshawa, Ontario claimed last year that they were developing an Ethernet Card for the ST. I don't know what came of it. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 16:59:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu >From what I've heard, Minix is very restrictive with memory. Each program is allowed a maximum of 64k, and there is not VM paging. A cute toy, but useless for anything but learning. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 16:56:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Hebrew wordprocessing To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu There's a font editor from England which allows you to edit the system font and to type from right to left. I don't remember the name, but the ST club in London should be able to help you. The PD version will do what you want, and the commercial version will edit GDOS fonts as well. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 17:28:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu MX2 already does a fairly good job of simple multi-tasking. What we need to be able to do is multi-task in GEM. Right now, the machine will crash because the GEM code cannot be reentred when it is being used (it uses global rather than local variables). To multi-task with real ST applications, you would have to at least save all of the internal GEM variables with every context switch. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 03:58:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: Loyal Atarians?!? To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu The ST is the best selling personal computer in free Europe, and second in England. Personally, I'd prefer a Sun, but it's an imperfect world and I'm not rich. Meanwhile, Atari software is powerful, cheap and easy to use. I have not yet seen a DTP program as good as Calamus (I've tried PageMaker on the IBM and Mac), and I like paying ca $100 for Lattice C instead of $500+. If you look to North America, forget it. I read German, so I have the priviledge of being able to use the hundreds of wonderful PD and commercial titles coming out of Europe. Besides, I love the windows and icons. --- * Via ProDoor 3.01R ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 89 17:03:00 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote!david.megginson@rutgers .edu (DAVID MEGGINSON) Subject: Re: USER BASE To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu I have read that the ST is the best selling personal computer in free Europe (an archaic term at best), and in England specifically, it is second in sales to Amstrad. In North America the largest user base is probably around Toronto. A Timeworks sales rep told me that they sell more software in Eastern Canada for the ST than in all of the US. Remember that we have a tenth of the US population... Forget about the US market. They are still debating whether the mouse is a good thing or whether real men should use line interfaces. I'm surprised that they use a crutch like the keyboard, instead of punch cards or dipswitches! Software companies have told me that it is better to deal with Atari Canada than Atari US for help in North America, so tell your friend to give Atari Canada a call (I think it's in Markham, Ontario). --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 89 22:54:45 GMT From: rex!hoang@g.ms.uky.edu (Dzung Hoang) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <89081310545051@masnet.uucp> david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) writes: >From what I've heard, Minix is very restrictive with memory. Each >program is allowed a maximum of 64k, and there is not VM paging. A cute >toy, but useless for anything but learning. >--- > * Via ProDoor 3.0R Minix for the IBM-PC's are restricted to 64K due to the PC's architecture. The 68000 in the ST does not have any such restriction so it can run programs larger than 64K. It is not "useless for anything but learning." Post a message in comp.os.minix and you'll see what I mean. I used to have an ST but now own an AT compatible. I wish I still have the ST (and a big hard drive) to run minix. Dzung Hoang -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- hoang@comus.cs.tulane.edu hoang@rex.cs.tulane.edu hoang@comus.UUCP hoang@rex.UUCP tulane!comus!hoang tulane!rex!hoang ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 89 21:48:05 GMT From: uvaarpa!hudson!astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f@mcnc.org (Greg Lindahl) Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <89081310545051@masnet.uucp> david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) writes: >From what I've heard, Minix is very restrictive with memory. Each >program is allowed a maximum of 64k, and there is not VM paging. A cute >toy, but useless for anything but learning. PC-Minix suffers from this feature, because of the design of the 8086. ST Minix has no such limit, and allows you to run a program as large as you have contiguous free memory... ------ Greg Lindahl gl8f@virginia.edu I'm not the NRA. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Aug 89 03:19:22 GMT From: agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!lbl-csam.arpa!antony@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Antony A. Courtney) Subject: Re: Atari GEM and GEM/3... To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <8907030235.AA29001@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> chuck@UMBC1.UMBC.EDU ("Chuck Rickard; ", PC) writes: > From what I remember, >Xerox was sued by Apple (during the sueing days...) for infringing on the >"look and feel" of the Macintosh Desktop. Was this drastic change to GEM a >part of that legal action, or was it voluntary? (The former seems more likely >than the latter...) If the suit did make them change, why didn't Atari have >to change their GEM, considering it was identical to the original IBM GEM? >Allan, would like to explain this one for me? :-) > Well, insofar as I know GEM was(is?) a product of Digital Research Corporation. And yes, I believe Apple did sue them, and they(DR) backed down. I don't know exactly why Atari's GEM didn't change, suffice it to say that Atari has never been one for avoiding lawsuits. :) I find your article rather ironic in that Xerox are the folks who really developed the mouse and windows interface with their Tajo and STAR products. In my opinion Apple really doesn't have any right to be suing ANYONE, given that they really copied the idea from Xerox. And most people agree that Apple is really just whining and trying to make life difficult for other companies. Fortunately Sun has Xerox on their side with their OpenLook product, so Apple won't dare try and sue them. And an extremely high percentage of companies have pledged support for AT&T's System V release 4 of UNIX, which will incorporate the OpenLook Graphical User Interface. ******************************************************************************* Antony A. Courtney antony@lbl.go Advanced Development Group ucbvax!lbl-csam.arpa!antony Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory AACourtney@lbl.go ------------------------------ End of Info-Atari16 Digest ************************** -------