Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!att!ucbvax!mtxinu!taniwha!paul
From: paul@taniwha.UUCP (Paul Campbell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: 'Dirty' ROMs - A Partial Answer <-- NOT GOOD ENOUGH!
Message-ID: <854@taniwha.UUCP>
Date: 21 May 91 17:53:54 GMT
References: <54183@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Reply-To: paul@taniwha.UUCP (Paul Campbell)
Organization: Taniwha Systems Design, Oakland
Lines: 21

In article <54183@nigel.ee.udel.edu> johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu writes:
>
>Several months ago I posted into one of the first "dirty-ROMS" threads
>with the suggestion that a ROM-patching init would probably solve the
>problem without new ROMS.  That suggestion was batted down and generally
>flamed by several net.experts who offered various technical explanations
>as to why an init-fix wouldn't work.  I believe that some of those people 
>were Apple hardware guys, and some of the explanations were convincing.

But there are at least two proofs that it is possible to do it in software -
Connetix and A/UX (yes the first 32-bit clean Mac system runs on MacIIs
and above and it has a 32-bit clean system - obviously Apple does have the
patches in house already and has had them for years before 7.0)

	Paul

-- 
Paul Campbell    UUCP: ..!mtxinu!taniwha!paul     AppleLink: CAMPBELL.P

My son is now 2 months old, in that time he has doubled his weight,
if he does this every 2 months for the next year he will weigh over 300lbs.