Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!toddpw From: toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: Modem usage in applesoft basic (sorry) Message-ID: <1991Apr20.054824.22158@nntp-server.caltech.edu> Date: 20 Apr 91 05:48:24 GMT References: <9104200147.AA05353@apple.com> Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena Lines: 51 MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET writes: >The Apple II was originally designed to be used WITHOUT drives. The Mac >can't do a darn thing without'em. Neither can a lot of other machines, and I think it is a symptom of the generally lopsided development the industry is bent on. Everybody struggles to implement NEW technologies and legislate everyone else to gain time -- WHY DOES NOBODY SPEND ANY TIME MAKING THE TRIED AND TRUE TECHNOLOGIES WORK REALLY REALLY WELL?? One of my Mac friends agrees with me heartily on this. Computers in the future should be self-contained out of the box, with the drivers for the built in hardware and the O/S (and a few sample applications) in ROM. When the machine is turned on, it literally starts up the O/S and is ready to go after polling all installed devices. Hard disks or inserted floppies are mounted automatically; system extensions and other stuff is loaded automatically from a volume as it is mounted (unless a key like Option is held down). A CLI and the core of a programming environment (probably a mini-assembler designed to work with the operating system, sort of like the monitor but in a blank process's address space) are available immediately, perhaps a windowing system and finder if they will fit in ROM. A terminal program to use the serial ports (using the drivers and communications tools in ROM) is another must. A small set of HD utilities like the RAMfast's would be a nice touch (as would a simple game!). The point is, not only is the computer self-sufficient, but it's USABLE FASTER than computers that are dependent on system disks just to run. Boot time is substantially reduced, and the system is designed well enough to allow patching of nearly everything and installation of things on the fly. This is the sort of computer I was beginning to concieve of when I wrote the //f papers. It would be vastly more useful to me than a Sparc or a NeXT. I could actually believe that assembly on such a beast would be reasonable, since I don't think it would need an assembly-from-hell RISC CPU to get good performance, with proper lightweight coprocessors for I/O and DMA built in to the system. Better yet, use VRAMs as a high speed access path to the sound and video memory (or the cache even). The main memory would have to be DRAMs to keep the cost reasonable but if that memory is interleaved then DMA could be done between the main RAM and the 'block transfer bus' at the bandwidth of the VRAM serial I/O ... Such a machine could probably afford to have a sane assembly language and would kick butt while remaining a hacker-capable machine, and my life's goal is to get on the development team for one. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu P.S. What I am talking about is the real spirit of the Apple II that Apple and most of the industry have nearly forgotten in their rush to market everything.