Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!vaxb.acs.unt.edu!kenc
From: kenc@vaxb.acs.unt.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: TT TOS (and operating systems in general
Message-ID: <1991Jan7.230302.44219@vaxb.acs.unt.edu>
Date: 7 Jan 91 22:57:02 GMT
References: <3203@gmuvax2.gmu.edu> <1991Jan7.005252.10937@bwdls61.bnr.ca> <1991Jan8.003736.13171@cs.olemiss.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: ÿÿÿÿ
Lines: 32

In article <1991Jan8.003736.13171@cs.olemiss.edu>, tony@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Tony Reynolds) writes:
> In article <1991Jan7.005252.10937@bwdls61.bnr.ca> fortinp@bwdls56.bnr.ca (Pierre Fortin) writes:
> 
>>Well, for starters:  The current OS (1.4) fits in 192K of ROM, *BUT* there
>>is only 128K available on the cart port.  If you can figure how to squeeze 
>>the OS into that little cart...  :^)
>>
> 
> Put a kernel OS with RAM jump-tables on the internal ROMS.
> Add 128K of updates to the cartridge port.
> 
> Only problems are: What do you decide to put on the cart?
>                    When do you release a new internal ROM?

Tony,
  Though I myself REALLY like this idea, (ala Macintosh), it goes back to
bringing up the subject of (*yikes*) viruses.  It WOULD however, provide easy
updating, by simply putting out a new 'system' disk, (again, ala Macintosh).
  Atari must have had some valid reasons not to do this, but I can't think of
any.  Since they started out in one direction, it seems that they are stuck
going in that replace-the-complete-ROM-set direction, though It's not NEARLY as
cost effective, or easy to implement.
  Before anyone starts arguing about speed considerations, let me say that I do
program development on the Macintosh, (with a slower hard drive interface), and
the delay in rebooting is not all that bad, especially considering programs
like Pinhead for the ST.  Also, if you're not in an environment that causes
frequent reboots, the reboot speed of loading in such a RAM-based OS would be
negligible.

  Atari people:  I know you're tired of seeing this type of message, but CAN
you pass word to the people that make those type of R & D decisions to at least
CONSIDER something like this?