31 Dec
1997
31 Dec
'97
3:49 a.m.
[[[ snip ]]]
The XT came with a 4.77MHz 8088, but it's not
hard to find a 8MHz version.
OK so far...
[[[ snip ]]]
you can run Windows, up to 3.1. You can also run OS/2
(earlier
versions) and many of the smaller OSes made during the early 80's.
I'll have to reserve judgement on Win 3.1 as I've never tried to run it on
an 8088 (I thought Microsoft dropped support for the mode required by the
8088 in Win3.1, though), but OS/2 is right out. It's entire reason for
being is to run on the 286, so an XT won't cut it.
In addition to Xenix, CP/M-86, Minix, and a variety of Forths, there are
other Unix clones (Venix, for exmaple), the UCSD P-system, and MP/M-86 (if you
can find it!). I don't know offhand whether Concurrent CP/M-86 requires a
286, but I do not believe it does.
> yes, minix would work, but i dont think it's
free.
The lastest version of Minix _is_ free for personal use.
Roger Ivie
ivie(a)cc.usu.edu
31 Dec
31 Dec
3:58 a.m.
At 10:49 AM 12/31/97 -0700, you wrote:
I'll have to reserve judgement on Win 3.1 as
I've never tried to run it on
an 8088 (I thought Microsoft dropped support for the mode required by the
8088 in Win3.1, though), but OS/2 is right out. It's entire reason for
being is to run on the 286, so an XT won't cut it.
Now if you want to see something really fly, load up Windows 1.03 or 2.0 on
it. Those'll run like lightning on any x86 with 512k or more. I have 1.03
running off a DD 3.5" floppy on a GRiDCASE 3 laptop (XT class, no HD, Gas
Plasma CGA, 512k, DOS in ROM)
In addition to Xenix, CP/M-86, Minix, and a variety of
Forths, there are
other Unix clones (Venix, for exmaple), the UCSD P-system, and MP/M-86 (if
you
can find it!). I don't know offhand whether
Concurrent CP/M-86 requires a
286, but I do not believe it does.
Anyone know of a free source for x86 CP/M? or forth? Am I missing
something? Isn't forth a language, not an OS?
- John Higginbotham
- limbo.netpath.net
4:30 a.m.
I'll have
to reserve judgement on Win 3.1 as I've never tried to run it on
an 8088 (I thought Microsoft dropped support for the mode required by the
8088 in Win3.1, though), but OS/2 is right out. It's entire reason for
being is to run on the 286, so an XT won't cut it.
Now if you want to see something really fly, load up Windows 1.03 or 2.0 on
it. Those'll run like lightning on any x86 with 512k or more. I have 1.03
running off a DD 3.5" floppy on a GRiDCASE 3 laptop (XT class, no HD, Gas
Plasma CGA, 512k, DOS in ROM) In addition to
Xenix, CP/M-86, Minix, and a variety of Forths, there are
other Unix clones (Venix, for exmaple), the UCSD P-system, and MP/M-86 (if
you
>can find it!). I don't know offhand whether Concurrent CP/M-86 requires a
>286, but I do not believe it does.
Anyone know of a free source for x86 CP/M? or forth? Am I missing
something? Isn't forth a language, not an OS?
- John Higginbotham
- limbo.netpath.net
Jeff
5:48 a.m.
At 12:30 PM 12/31/97 -0600, you wrote:
Yes, Win 2.0 was quick; code bloat in those days
wasn't merely the
inconvienience it is today-- back then it was FATAL! We had a small,
minimalist programming ethic back then.
It was nice to be able to run a program off one floppy, and never worrying
about running out of memory, even if you only had 128k/256k. But, memory
prices got cheaper, shoot, everything got cheaper, and now we need a
supercomputer just to run a word processor like Word 97. I can understand
utilizing more system resources for new and better (not to mention useful)
features, but it looks to me like people these days are just throwing in
options because they can.
- John Higginbotham
- limbo.netpath.net
1 Jan
1 Jan
4:47 a.m.
On Wed, 31 Dec 1997, John Higginbotham wrote:
It was nice to be able to run a program off one
floppy, and never worrying
about running out of memory, even if you only had 128k/256k. But, memory
prices got cheaper, shoot, everything got cheaper, and now we need a
supercomputer just to run a word processor like Word 97. I can understand
utilizing more system resources for new and better (not to mention useful)
features, but it looks to me like people these days are just throwing in
options because they can.
That is one special aspect of this hobby. We can marvel at the technical
brilliance of machines made just 10 years ago that were a fraction of the
speed and had a fraction of the memory and storage of today's computers
yet provided the same functionality. This is a realization that only
those who lived through that era of computing or those who enjoy this
hobby can share.
Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
Coming Soon...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0
See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
10:27 a.m.
Sam Ismail wrote:
On Wed, 31 Dec 1997, John Higginbotham wrote:
> It was nice to be able to run a program off one floppy, and never worrying
> about running out of memory, even if you only had 128k/256k.
FWIW, I've got a DEC PDT-11 (Haven't touched it in years, due to space
constraints)
that didn't have enough memory to load BASIC off floppy.. (no clue off'a the top
of
my head what it's memory size is...) Gawd, I gotta get that thing out, hitch it up
to a terminal, and see iff'n it'll still boot...
Happy New Year to all the
subscribers to the list!
Will
31 Dec
31 Dec
6:10 a.m.
At 12:58 PM 12/31/97 -0500, you wrote:
Anyone know of a free source for x86 CP/M? or forth? Am
I missing
something? Isn't forth a language, not an OS?
- John Higginbotham
- limbo.netpath.net
Yes, it's a language but like IBM APL it has (is ?) it's on evironment
and OS. Both require a IBM with the ROM BASIC.
Joe
4:19 a.m.
At 02:10 PM 12/31/97, you wrote:
Yes, it's a language but like IBM APL it has
(is ?) it's on evironment
and OS. Both require a IBM with the ROM BASIC.
That's out then. I want something truly bizarre to run on my GRiDCASE 3.
- John Higginbotham
- limbo.netpath.net
12:17 p.m.
New subject: operating systems: FORTH
On Wed, 31 Dec 1997 14:10:20, you said:
At 12:58 PM 12/31/97 -0500, you wrote:
I've run FORTH on TI-99, C-64, and Atari-800. (sans IBM/ROM Basic)
_______________
Barry Peterson bmpete(a)swbell.net
Husband to Diane, Father to Doug,
Grandfather to Zoe and Tegan.
Anyone know of a free source for x86 CP/M? or
forth? Am I missing
something? Isn't forth a language, not an OS?
Yes, it's a language but like IBM APL it has (is ?) it's on evironment
and OS. Both require a IBM with the ROM BASIC.
3:28 p.m.
New subject: operating systems: FORTH
At 02:17 AM 1/1/98 GMT, you wrote:
On Wed, 31 Dec 1997 14:10:20, you said:
I'm sure you have, there are lots of versions of Forth. This discussion
was originally discussing Poly Forth by Forth Inc. and it requires IBM
BASIC ROM. I made both the original comment about the availability of
Forth OS/languge and the reply about it and APL requiring ROM BASIC.
Joe
At 12:58 PM 12/31/97 -0500, you wrote:
I've run FORTH on TI-99, C-64, and Atari-800. (sans IBM/ROM Basic) Anyone know of a free source for x86 CP/M? or
forth? Am I missing
something? Isn't forth a language, not an OS?
Yes, it's a language but like IBM APL it has (is ?) it's on evironment
and OS. Both require a IBM with the ROM BASIC. _______________
Barry Peterson bmpete(a)swbell.net
Husband to Diane, Father to Doug,
Grandfather to Zoe and Tegan.
9620
days inactive
9621
days old
9 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
bmpete＠swbell.net -
dastar＠wco.com -
higginbo＠netpath.net -
IVIE＠cc.usu.edu -
Jeff.Kaneko＠ifrsys.com -
rigdonj＠intellistar.net -
wpe＠interserv.com