operating systems - test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

31 Dec 1997

...
 > >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) 
 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.
 > >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. 
I have a copy of Concurrent.  The version I have will ONLY run on a
PC or XT!  Hell, I don't think it even supports hard disks!  (But I
can check).

 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  Well, would someone dare offend the MS EULA and send me one of:
a)Windows 1.x/2.x
b)Concurrent CP/M
c)Xenix
d)Forth