Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!claris!krazy From: krazy@claris.com (Jeff Erickson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: GS/OS and programming standards Message-ID: <8997@claris.com> Date: 5 Mar 89 07:27:51 GMT References: <8903041451.aa16786@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> Organization: Claris Corporation, Mountain View CA Lines: 108 From a recent article by "David A. Lyons": >From: "Jeremy G. Mereness" >>[...] I still don't consider GS/OS a "real" operating system for the >>GS because of many of these issues: it is too volatile, standards are >>too new and are all too often ignored, and for some reason (and I can >>only assume that this is because the OS doesn't cover its tracks) a >>great deal of software crashes under it. > > I disagree strongly. > (1) It is not "too volatile": programs that don't do anything stupid > [some examples] will continue to work under future system disk releases. > (2) How can you blame ignorance of standards on the OS? That's the > fault of application programmers when it occurs. The problem with David's statement is that GS/OS occasionally does some of the stupid things he describes, or at least seems to. During development of the most recent project I worked on, GS/OS caused the death of my hard drive on about seven different occasions, over the space of three months. I have the drivers/FSTs installed correctly. Other people working on the same project who stuck with P16 did not have the problems I did. Admittedly, you can't expect a program under development to be free of random memory writing, but as I said, P16 was MUCH more tolerant. The standards used by GS/OS are, by and large, not new. There are some things which always worked under ProDOS which will no longer work, (like assuming devides named .d1, .d2, etc.) , but haven't always been warned against. A conservative programmer never makes assumptions about what the system will do, but it's not always easy to tell the difference between an assumption and an accepted standard. >>[...] as well as the mess of device drivers (I am still having hell >>with my Unidisk). Most of the GS users here at Carnegie-Mellon avoid >>GS/OS entirely preferring Prodos16 when it's necessary. > > Did you install the UniDisk 3.5 driver onto your boot disk using the > Installer? I (unfortunately) sometimes have to use a GS with only a > Profile and a UniDisk 3.5. I have not had any problems (other than > being annoyed at the drive's speed). If Jeremy has JUST a UniDisk on his system, I can see one source of his problems. The system disk has no room for anything else. Despite David's claims, the TOOLS expect the system disk to be online at all times. If you expect to USE your IIgs with only one floppy drive, and you have GS/OS, expect to swap disks a lot! For the most part, (ie, to the best of my knowledge), the tools know when to either ask for the system disk or return an error to the application if the disk isn't there. >>My biggest complaint is that GS/OS does not check the disk drives... >> ... And there has to be a better way for Finder to handle >>its drives than polling them all the time. > > Uhhh...HOW is GS/OS supposed to know when to eject a disk? The > application has to figure that out (it's trivial for an application > to ask GS/OS to eject a disk; not so under ProDOS 16). > [...] > There is currently no better way for the Finder to always notice > when you insert a disk than to poll the drives.... The Mac OS ejects disks; there isn't any reason Apple couldn't do the same thing with GS/OS. And as far as I know, there is no GS/OS call to eject the disk. I know the Finder does it; that was a hack that Dan Oliver (the original author) put in. I once asked Apple's Developer Tech Support why the standard file dialogs didn't have an "Eject" button. They said they'd ask the engineers. The engineers must not have told them. (Presumably it has something to with 5 1/4" disks, which can't be software-ejected, but that doesn't explain why they couldn't add an extra button.) As for polling the drives, that's a hardware/firmware constraint of the UniDisk. But the GS also polls Apple 3.5's (the gray ones that work on the Mac, too), even though the Mac doesn't. I'm not certain, but I belive it is possible to tell the two apart from software. >>and it is viscousy slow. > By the way, if you want speed, WHY are you using a UniDisk 3.5? Agreed. At least get Apple 3.5's. They run anywhere from half-again to twice as fast as the "smart" UniDisks. Apple pushed GS/OS out before it was ready; likewise with the set of tools (System 4.0) that go with it. The support from within Apple for the development (if not the survival) of the IIgs has been, in my personal opinion, abysmal (sp?). The system is buggy. VERY buggy. After having worked on the machine for two and a half years (I started with an Apple II Gumby at StyleWare), I honestly can't say that I expect things to get better. My personal advice regarding the Apple IIgs is this: if you NEED an Apple II, by a IIc+. Otherwise, BUY A MAC!! Better yet, Jeremy, since you're at CMU, maybe you can get access to a NeXT. For legal reasons, I need to spell this out: THESE ARE MY OPINIONS, AND ARE NOT THE OPINIONS, OFFICIAL OR UNOFFICIAL, OF CLARIS OR ITS DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. MINE, MINE, MINE, ALL MINE! In fact, these are about as far from Calris's opinions as you can get. -- Any opinions you read here are only opinions in my opinion. Jeff Erickson krazy@claris.com "I'm so heppy I'm mizzabil!" -- Krazy Kat ------------------------------------------------------------------------------