> That reminds me of when I phoned IBM here in Ireland looking for software
> support for their VM mainframe operating system not too many years later,
> sometime in the early 1990s. I spelled out every variation of the name
> I could think of but they kept asking me what version of OS/2 I had.
On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
That reminds me of when I phoned IBM here in Ireland looking for software
support for their VM mainframe operating system not too many years later,
sometime in the early 1990s. I spelled out every variation of the name
I could think of but the
On 04/20/2018 03:23 AM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
> That reminds me of when I phoned IBM here in Ireland looking for software
> support for their VM mainframe operating system not too many years later,
> sometime in the early 1990s. I spelled out every variation of the name
> I could think
>
> I remember
> going to the regional IBM sales office (was that on Arques? It's been
> too lnng), purchase order in hand, wanting to pick up 10 of the 5150s.
> Nobody really know what we were asking for--finally, someone showed up
> and told us that the lead time would be 12 weeks ARO. We went d
> On Apr 19, 2018, at 8:55 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 04/19/2018 07:56 PM, Guy Sotomayor Jr wrote:
>
>> As to why IBM entered the PC market, the rumor was (at least at the time
>> within IBM) was that T.J. Watson, Jr. was at an employee’s house and saw
>> an Apple II. He said
On 04/19/2018 07:56 PM, Guy Sotomayor Jr wrote:
> As to why IBM entered the PC market, the rumor was (at least at the time
> within IBM) was that T.J. Watson, Jr. was at an employee’s house and saw
> an Apple II. He said that he wanted to have IBM branded computers in IBM
> employees homes. That
> On Apr 19, 2018, at 4:16 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 04/19/2018 12:14 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>
>> I have no difficulty admitting that I didn't, and don't, have
>> Chuck's level of experience and knowledge. My entire venture into
>> microcomputers was a hobby that got
On 04/19/2018 05:33 PM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
> Someday, the products and software designed and built by the folks in
> this list will be judged by those who follow us. Possibly the rest of
> you have worked in industries where you were allowed to use new
> solutions, you had ample time to
On 4/19/2018 6:16 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
So, at the time, looking at the 5150, it was an overpriced primitive
implementation using a 1970s CPU. Many people at the time thought it
would be less popular than the 5100.
While I won't argue the technical merits of your position, I feel li
I have no difficulty admitting that I didn't, and don't, have
Chuck's level of experience and knowledge. My entire venture into
microcomputers was a hobby that got out of hand.
On Thu, 19 Apr 2018, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
It's not so much expertise, but where you start your investigations
Chuck Guzis pointed out that the PC was built from 8 bit peripheral
chips, which was where the 64KB problem came from.
When I saw the design, I thought it was really cute how they were able
to use one of the timer channels and one of the DMA channels to
implement a DRAM refresh circuit almost "for
On 04/19/2018 12:14 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> I have no difficulty admitting that I didn't, and don't, have
> Chuck's level of experience and knowledge. My entire venture into
> microcomputers was a hobby that got out of hand.
It's not so much expertise, but where you start your investiga
Yes, it was a "beginner" mistake to not already know that the DMA couldn't
span a 64K boundary.
It is obvious. Once you've already run into it.
I have no difficulty admitting that I didn't, and don't, have Chuck's
level of experience and knowledge.
My entire venture into microcomputers was a
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 9:20 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>>>
> You certainly did the right thing, narrowing it down to load address. The
> final conclusion would have been to systematically try many/all load
> addresses, and see whether it was consistent for given
Really? 64K boundary issues cropping up in MS-DOS?
Egad, that would have been known in DOS 1.0. Certainly, for anyone
writing his/her own low-level disk I/O, it was obvious.
Now, I'll add that if you wrote your own specialized device driver, DOS
did not guarantee handing your driver a buffer th
On 04/18/2018 09:20 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>>> I always found it amusing that many programs (even FORMAT!) would fail
>>> with the wrong error message if their internal DMA buffers happened to
>>> straddle a 64K block boundary. THAT was a direct result of failure to
>>> adequately integr
I always found it amusing that many programs (even FORMAT!) would fail
with the wrong error message if their internal DMA buffers happened to
straddle a 64K block boundary. THAT was a direct result of failure to
adequately integrate, or at least ERROR-CHECK!, the segment-offset kludge
bag. Diffe
17 matches
Mail list logo
