Speed Dos, Dolphin Dos etc
Fenrir
Is there any problem to run Speed Dos or Dolphin Dos (best to run with
Speed Dos cos it has a paralell through port) together with Super Cpu,
Ramlink etc???
these paralell disk systems must be better then Jiffy right?
(speed dos and Dolphin dos is 2 hardware addons for the c-64/128, disk
turbos.... that has 2 parts
one that you put in the floppy drive and has a paralell cable to the
user port, (the speed dos has as stated
a through port so you can use other user port things att the same
time,) and a rom replasement with a switch,)
????
Fenrir
Thomas Pinto
Fenrir (md1...@dredd.swipnet.se) wrote:
: Is there any problem to run Speed Dos or Dolphin Dos (best to run with
Never heard of those before....ya have any info on 'em?
David Wood
Fenrir wrote:
>
> Is there any problem to run Speed Dos or Dolphin Dos (best to run with
> Speed Dos cos it has a paralell through port) together with Super Cpu,
> Ramlink etc???
> these paralell disk systems must be better then Jiffy right?
>
> (speed dos and Dolphin dos is 2 hardware addons for the c-64/128, disk
> turbos.... that has 2 parts
> one that you put in the floppy drive and has a paralell cable to the
> user port, (the speed dos has as stated
> a through port so you can use other user port things att the same
> time,) and a rom replasement with a switch,)
>
> ????
>
> Fenrir
Aack! Ptbhtbhbth! Nothing tops JiffyDOS! NOTHING! Since JD is
included in your RAMLINK _and_ SuperCPU, spend the mere $15-20 to get
JiffyDos for your disk drive. Using some advanced technique, CMD has
increased the transfer speed by up to 15X. (Faster than 1571 & c-128
together!!!)
Don't consider parallel loaders when using SuperCPU. You'll have to
re-write the delay system for the loaders. (I have a friend who's been
there...)
-David Wood
George Taylor
David Wood wrote:
>
> Fenrir wrote:
> >
> > Is there any problem to run Speed Dos or Dolphin Dos (best to run with
> > Speed Dos cos it has a paralell through port) together with Super Cpu,
> > Ramlink etc???
>
> included in your RAMLINK _and_ SuperCPU, spend the mere $15-20 to get
> JiffyDos for your disk drive. Using some advanced technique, CMD has
> increased the transfer speed by up to 15X. (Faster than 1571 & c-128
> together!!!)
Ha! I don't think so. When I first read the ads for jiffy dos,
I thought, gee this is such a ripoff! A parrallel transfer system
should in theory reach up to 21k/sec, but it never is optimized that
well. Even software only 2bit serial loaders can be up to 30x faster,
blowing away jiffy dos. So what is the point of JD anyhow??
My supersnapshot has a turbo 25 loader, and 15x fast load is the
normal option. The 30x speedup is available on one of the utility
disks of one of the cd roms, I forget now but I have the file here...
(might only work on pal though).
Todd S. Elliott
George Taylor wrote:
> Ha! I don't think so. When I first read the ads for jiffy dos,
> I thought, gee this is such a ripoff! A parrallel transfer system
> should in theory reach up to 21k/sec, but it never is optimized that
> well. Even software only 2bit serial loaders can be up to 30x faster,
> blowing away jiffy dos. So what is the point of JD anyhow??
>
most compatible one on the market and is still supported! In fact, I've
tossed programs away if they did not work with JiffyDOS, when it should
be the other way around, eh? Shows the true value of JiffyDOS.
Secondly, the parallel transfer between a CMD HD and the c128 via the
RAMLink approaches 50Kb per second, easily blowing off any fastloaders
on the market ever. With the right hardware, you can enjoy fast,
compatible disk access. JiffyDOS is somewhat a compromise solution,
enabling the user to enjoy compatible disk access at a very reasonable
price.
Todd Elliott
CMD Nirvana Enthusiast!
ey...@erols.com
http://ubmail.ubalt.edu/~telliott/genesis.html
bill m howland
Rapidos Pro is the only parallel loader I've seen in print that is faster
than jiffydos. This is because it does a hardware level GCR conversion AND
buffers whole tracks. So Jiffydos may actually be an upgrade to some parallel
systems.
--
: Crimson Knight : "The power of good will not be shown by :
: cri...@sirius.cs.pdx.edu : conquering fear." :
:---------------------------: :
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: - Fates Warning 1986 :
Radioactive Warrior
Todd S. Elliott wrote:
>
> George Taylor wrote:
> > Ha! I don't think so. When I first read the ads for jiffy dos,
> > I thought, gee this is such a ripoff! A parrallel transfer system
> > should in theory reach up to 21k/sec, but it never is optimized that
> > well. Even software only 2bit serial loaders can be up to 30x faster,
> > blowing away jiffy dos. So what is the point of JD anyhow??
> >
> While JiffyDOS may not be the best serial fastloader, it is sure the
> most compatible one on the market and is still supported! In fact, I've
> tossed programs away if they did not work with JiffyDOS, when it should
> be the other way around, eh? Shows the true value of JiffyDOS.
No! Jiffydos IS NOT superior because it is most compatable... It is a
poor attempt at implmenting a widespread software hack... The fact that
it is widespread makes it "compatable" but not efficent. I personally
don't give a crap if the software in a drive is slow or fast as if it
really bothers me so much I will eventually write my own and implement
the 30X plus rates that George was talking about. My qualm about the
jiffydos system is how you people kneal down to it, money in hand...
Get a clue- read a book and spend your efforts to implement an efficent
fastloader rather than perpetuate this Microsoft ideology of compatable
inefficiency over brilliant quality. Go figure... They make c64 emulators
for people like you- With your super-dooper cpu and 30meg ram links and
200gig hard drives... I have a gold plated coffee pot but you don't see
me telling everyone do you? Still, it makes good coffee...
That's it... Stir the shit-storm... gotta love me...
Radioactive Warrior
Minnesota Mike
In article <32B0AD...@orl.mindspring.com>, Radioactive Warrior said...
>
>Todd S. Elliott wrote:
>>
>> George Taylor wrote:
>> > Ha! I don't think so. When I first read the ads for jiffy dos,
>> > I thought, gee this is such a ripoff! A parrallel transfer system
>> > should in theory reach up to 21k/sec, but it never is optimized that
>> > well. Even software only 2bit serial loaders can be up to 30x faster,
>> > blowing away jiffy dos. So what is the point of JD anyhow??
>> >
>> While JiffyDOS may not be the best serial fastloader, it is sure the
>> most compatible one on the market and is still supported! In fact, I've
>> tossed programs away if they did not work with JiffyDOS, when it should
>> be the other way around, eh? Shows the true value of JiffyDOS.
>
>No! Jiffydos IS NOT superior because it is most compatable... It is a
>poor attempt at implmenting a widespread software hack... The fact that
>it is widespread makes it "compatable" but not efficent. I personally
>don't give a crap if the software in a drive is slow or fast as if it
>really bothers me so much I will eventually write my own and implement
>the 30X plus rates that George was talking about. My qualm about the
>jiffydos system is how you people kneal down to it, money in hand...
Like it or not, JiffyDOS is a great system. If you think you can do better,
by all means do it. Maybe then people will kneal down to your system (with
money in hand), but until the day comes when something better than JiffyDOS
comes out, people will use it.
>Get a clue- read a book and spend your efforts to implement an efficent
>fastloader rather than perpetuate this Microsoft ideology of compatable
>inefficiency over brilliant quality. Go figure... They make c64 emulators
You need the clue. Who has the time? Certainly not any normal individual.
Spend years deriving a compatible speed loader or buy one that works as
advertised and does more than just speed load. Hmmmm. Compatibility *is*
important, its the same thing that made Microsloth successful, and why
JiffyDOS is where it is today. I very much doubt JiffyDOS would be where it
is today if it did not function with all my old software or only spead up
some proprietary disk format.
>for people like you- With your super-dooper cpu and 30meg ram links and
>200gig hard drives... I have a gold plated coffee pot but you don't see
>me telling everyone do you? Still, it makes good coffee...
No, emulators are not for people like me. Is it that unreasonable that I
should expect decent performance from my computer of choice? Is it
unreasonable that people want their C64's to do what all the other more
sophisticated computers do? Why is it I should not be able to upgrade my
C128 when people using any other computer have been doing it for years?
Doug Cotton
> Todd S. Elliott wrote:
> >
> > George Taylor wrote:
> > > Ha! I don't think so. When I first read the ads for jiffy dos,
> > > I thought, gee this is such a ripoff! A parrallel transfer system
> > > should in theory reach up to 21k/sec, but it never is optimized that
> > > well. Even software only 2bit serial loaders can be up to 30x faster,
> > > blowing away jiffy dos. So what is the point of JD anyhow??
> > >
> > While JiffyDOS may not be the best serial fastloader, it is sure the
> > most compatible one on the market and is still supported! In fact, I've
> > tossed programs away if they did not work with JiffyDOS, when it should
> > be the other way around, eh? Shows the true value of JiffyDOS.
>
> No! Jiffydos IS NOT superior because it is most compatable... It is a
> poor attempt at implmenting a widespread software hack...
Really? A poor attempt eh? In six years with CMD I've seen something in the
area of a dozen JiffyDOS systems -- out of several thousand sold --
returned because the purchaser found it unsatisfactory. That doesn't sound
like the kind of 'poor attempt' you describe.
> The fact that
> it is widespread makes it "compatable" but not efficent. I personally
> don't give a crap if the software in a drive is slow or fast as if it
> really bothers me so much I will eventually write my own and implement
> the 30X plus rates that George was talking about.
That's all very well and good, and who knows, maybe you can actually do
so... but the fact is that probably less than one user in 10,000 can write
their own DOS speeder, and I'd be willing to bet that fewer yet would care
to spend the time to do it.
> My qualm about the
> jiffydos system is how you people kneal down to it, money in hand...
JiffyDOS has historically been the most compatible commercial speeder, and
is also available for nearly every Commodore-compatible drive ever made.
Furthermore, the built-in wedge makes regular disk chores a lot easier,
without having to load a separate utility first. Users praise it for that
reason. It also doesn't stop working when a program has loaded, unless the
program bypasses Kernal routines altogether. None of the 'super-fast'
cartridges do this, so once you've loaded a spreadsheet, database, or other
program that needs to access other files you're back to stock Commodore
speed.
> Get a clue- read a book and spend your efforts to implement an efficent
> fastloader rather than perpetuate this Microsoft ideology of compatable
> inefficiency over brilliant quality.
And a 30x fast-loader that quits after the main program itself has loaded
is 'brilliant quality'? If you make a 30x loader that doesn't quit after
the program loads, works with ALL file types -- including REL files, speeds
up command channel access, has a full-featured DOS Wedge built-in, matches
the software compatibility of JiffyDOS, requires no extra cabling, uses
none of the ports, and works with as many different drives as JiffyDOS
does, then you'll have actually topped JiffyDOS. Until then, your argument
that JiffyDOS is inferior seems somewhat lacking in substance.
> Go figure... They make c64 emulators
> for people like you- With your super-dooper cpu and 30meg ram links and
> 200gig hard drives... I have a gold plated coffee pot but you don't see
> me telling everyone do you? Still, it makes good coffee...
Hmmm... didn't Commodore make hard drives and RAM devices for their 8-bit
machines, too? I guess we all should have tossed our Commodores and started
trying to make emulators back then, too? Does the fact that we choose to
support the Commodore and make it possible to do some things which would
otherwise be impracticle bother you that much?
Oh, and you might want to toss your 64 out right away too... after all, it
does contain Microsoft BASIC, doesn't it?
Doug Cotton
E-mail: doug....@the-spa.com
=====================================================================
| Creative Micro Designs, Inc. | Orders: (800) 6383-CMD |
| P.O. Box 646 | Support: (413) 525-0023 |
| East Longmeadow, MA 01028 | Fax: (413) 525-0147 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Visit our WWW Site at: http://www.the-spa.com/cmd/ |
=====================================================================
Thomas Pinto
Doug Cotton (doug....@the-spa.com) wrote:
: Really? A poor attempt eh? In six years with CMD I've seen something in the
: area of a dozen JiffyDOS systems -- out of several thousand sold --
: returned because the purchaser found it unsatisfactory. That doesn't sound
: like the kind of 'poor attempt' you describe.
:
: That's all very well and good, and who knows, maybe you can actually do
: so... but the fact is that probably less than one user in 10,000 can write
: their own DOS speeder, and I'd be willing to bet that fewer yet would care
: to spend the time to do it.
: JiffyDOS has historically been the most compatible commercial speeder, and
: is also available for nearly every Commodore-compatible drive ever made.
: Furthermore, the built-in wedge makes regular disk chores a lot easier,
: without having to load a separate utility first. Users praise it for that
: reason. It also doesn't stop working when a program has loaded, unless the
: program bypasses Kernal routines altogether. None of the 'super-fast'
: cartridges do this, so once you've loaded a spreadsheet, database, or other
: program that needs to access other files you're back to stock Commodore
: speed.
:
:
: And a 30x fast-loader that quits after the main program itself has loaded
: is 'brilliant quality'? If you make a 30x loader that doesn't quit after
: the program loads, works with ALL file types -- including REL files, speeds
: up command channel access, has a full-featured DOS Wedge built-in, matches
: the software compatibility of JiffyDOS, requires no extra cabling, uses
: none of the ports, and works with as many different drives as JiffyDOS
: does, then you'll have actually topped JiffyDOS. Until then, your argument
: that JiffyDOS is inferior seems somewhat lacking in substance.
:
: Hmmm... didn't Commodore make hard drives and RAM devices for their 8-bit
: machines, too? I guess we all should have tossed our Commodores and started
: trying to make emulators back then, too? Does the fact that we choose to
: support the Commodore and make it possible to do some things which would
: otherwise be impracticle bother you that much?
:
: Oh, and you might want to toss your 64 out right away too... after all, it
: does contain Microsoft BASIC, doesn't it?
:
:
: Doug Cotton
: E-mail: doug....@the-spa.com
:
Very well spoken Doug. It's obvious this guy has no clue of how pleased
everyone is with CMD, oh and of course JiffyDos...
-Tom
CyberByte/Chris Gioconda
> No! Jiffydos IS NOT superior because it is most compatable... It is a
> it is widespread makes it "compatable" but not efficent. I personally
> don't give a crap if the software in a drive is slow or fast as if it
> really bothers me so much I will eventually write my own and implement
> jiffydos system is how you people kneal down to it, money in hand...
> fastloader rather than perpetuate this Microsoft ideology of compatable
> for people like you- With your super-dooper cpu and 30meg ram links and
> 200gig hard drives... I have a gold plated coffee pot but you don't see
> me telling everyone do you? Still, it makes good coffee...
Well, guess what: maybe for some of us, commodores are not our lives. So
we do not have all day to read books, program, and implement code. So we
pay other people to do it for us, and create products like jiffydos and
ramlinks. I happen to see commodores and ibms as computers, but with very
different uses. Commodores cannot last until they have the speed,
graphics and sound of an IBM. While on the other hand, IBM's go obsolete
almost as soon as you buy one, which is not to say commies aren't
obsolete.
Chris Gioconda
cyber...@pb.net
****Go visit my web page! http://home.pb.net/~cyberbyte1
James Warren Smith Jr.
So well spoken I thought the whole message should be restated....
An excelent piece of programming Doug
Charles Kirby
_...@_.mil
David Wood wrote:
>
> Fenrir wrote:
> >
> > Is there any problem to run Speed Dos or Dolphin Dos (best to run with
> > Speed Dos cos it has a paralell through port) together with Super Cpu,
> > Ramlink etc???
> >
> > (speed dos and Dolphin dos is 2 hardware addons for the c-64/128, disk
> > turbos.... that has 2 parts
> > one that you put in the floppy drive and has a paralell cable to the
> > user port, (the speed dos has as stated
> > a through port so you can use other user port things att the same
> > time,) and a rom replasement with a switch,)
> >
> > ????
> >
> > Fenrir
>
> included in your RAMLINK _and_ SuperCPU, spend the mere $15-20 to get
> JiffyDos for your disk drive. Using some advanced technique, CMD has
> increased the transfer speed by up to 15X. (Faster than 1571 & c-128
> together!!!)
But still not as fast as the parallel speed-ups. I'm still looking for
something (other than a hard drive) that's faster than my old Rapidos
professional.
> Don't consider parallel loaders when using SuperCPU. You'll have to
> re-write the delay system for the loaders. (I have a friend who's been
> there...)
Strange... I run my Rapidos with a 4mhz turbo cartridge just fine, in
fact they work faster together. The manual says the parallel uses
hardware-synchronizing which seems to be true, I can slow the turbo card
down to .1mhz and the stuff still works!
Sarg.
Adam Vardy
Todd S. Elliott (ey...@erols.com) wrote:
: George Taylor wrote:
: > Ha! I don't think so. When I first read the ads for jiffy dos,
: > I thought, gee this is such a ripoff! A parrallel transfer system
: > should in theory reach up to 21k/sec, but it never is optimized that
: > well. Even software only 2bit serial loaders can be up to 30x faster,
: > blowing away jiffy dos. So what is the point of JD anyhow??
: Secondly, the parallel transfer between a CMD HD and the c128 via the
: RAMLink approaches 50Kb per second, easily blowing off any fastloaders
In my book '1571 Internals', it says on page 148, "...Theoretically it is
even possible to realize bus transfers at up to 60,000 bytes per second
with the C-128's fast bus hardware." And we are talking about just the
serial bus here, of course!
: on the market ever. With the right hardware, you can enjoy fast,
David Wood
Okay, i "sit" corrected. I forgot the use of a few bits to synchronize
the connection (something I thought of in my own para-trans system).
<smacking forehead> However, I considered JiffyDOS to be easier to work
with, because the SuperCPU happens to have it built into it's own ROMS,
eliminating the need to run your c-64's slower roms.
If DolphinDOS is the thing you want, and if it will work, go for it.
Don't let me talk you out of it. Besides, I shouldn't be talking, being
one who modified their _1541_ to hoot to the PC for further
compatibility. :)
-David Wood
Iceman/ICE
I've tried about every disk speeder there is out there for the
commodore. I still have some of that junk like Rapid Dos and
a few of the others. There isn't anything that even comes
close to Jiffy Dos. My only gripe is that you guys stopped
working on it (adding to it). Now see, if you had been smart,
you would have started doing things that the super carts do and
more. Especially now that items like Action Replay aren't available
to us anymore.
How about including some form of SUPERCHIP in an already great
product.
In article <58v5hu$6...@herald.concentric.net>, Rug...@cris.com says...
--
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Iceman of the Inner Circle BBS - ice...@ramlink.net
John Pinson aka ICEMAN/ICE + http://ram.ramlink.net/~icebbs
(304) 697-0101 8/n/1 300-19.2 - Chat at me with Pow Wow Online
3.2 GIGAbytes / Color v128 + Hardware Tech/SysOp/CBM/Support
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Iceman/ICE
In article <Pine.UW2.3.94.96121...@pb.net>, cyber...@pb.net
says...
>
>> No! Jiffydos IS NOT superior because it is most compatable... It is a
>> poor attempt at implmenting a widespread software hack... The fact that
>> it is widespread makes it "compatable" but not efficent. I personally
>> don't give a crap if the software in a drive is slow or fast as if it
>> really bothers me so much I will eventually write my own and implement
>> the 30X plus rates that George was talking about. My qualm about the
>> jiffydos system is how you people kneal down to it, money in hand...
>> Get a clue- read a book and spend your efforts to implement an efficent
>> fastloader rather than perpetuate this Microsoft ideology of compatable
>> inefficiency over brilliant quality. Go figure... They make c64 emulators
>> for people like you- With your super-dooper cpu and 30meg ram links and
>> 200gig hard drives... I have a gold plated coffee pot but you don't see
>> me telling everyone do you? Still, it makes good coffee...
>
Haha, Interesting point of view. And like the other guy said, not all
of us have all day to sit around and dream up drive codes to load our
other software faster. Some of us actually do other things with our
computers. What you are actually saying is, why should I buy this game
from this company when I could spend a year on it and write a much better
one, or why should I buy this monitor, I could write my own ML monitor
and do it 10 times better than this other guy, Why did I ever buy this
computer, I could have certainly designed it much better than Commodore
ever did..
Hey man, tell you what. If you can write a better code than Mark Fellows,
and put it on your own SuperDrive Enhancement Chip, and support and stand
behind it the way CMD has with Jiffy Dos.. Maybe I'll buy yours eh! Or
is talk all you do? There's alot more to it than just writing code.
ICEMAN
Thomas Pinto
Iceman/ICE (ice...@ramlink.net) wrote:
: Haha, Interesting point of view. And like the other guy said, not all
: of us have all day to sit around and dream up drive codes to load our
: other software faster. Some of us actually do other things with our
: computers. What you are actually saying is, why should I buy this game
: from this company when I could spend a year on it and write a much better
: one, or why should I buy this monitor, I could write my own ML monitor
: and do it 10 times better than this other guy, Why did I ever buy this
: computer, I could have certainly designed it much better than Commodore
: ever did..
:
: Hey man, tell you what. If you can write a better code than Mark Fellows,
: and put it on your own SuperDrive Enhancement Chip, and support and stand
: behind it the way CMD has with Jiffy Dos.. Maybe I'll buy yours eh! Or
: is talk all you do? There's alot more to it than just writing code.
:
: ICEMAN
:
How about a standing ovation for Iceman. Great buddy!
-Tom
George Taylor
admiration for Jiffy DOS. The last time I read an ad for it
was many years ago, and of course there has been more features
added since. I would like to put this discussion in perspective now:
In terms of speed, jiffy dos is only average. A supersnapshot,
for example, has 15x and 25x speed for 1541 built in, and it
includes a disk wedge and sequential file reader, and works on
1541, 1571, and 1581. 25x turbo format requires a conversion
of the program to be loaded, so that is a disadvantage. But
once converted, it always loads at 25x speed.
It does not support faster rel acess or disk operations
(like scratching or verify). If Jiffy DOS supports this, that
is a nice feature (but I have never had need for an REL file
in my life, so it doesn't much matter to me).
Snapshot also has a fast format and fast save feature, so it's
more than just a fastloader.
There are software rom replacements to offer fast save, fast load,
fast format, and disk wedge as well. They will not be as compatible
as a real ROM for some programs.
Then there are simple fast loaders, which are up to 30x faster.
They do stay in memory, but a program could possible corrupt the
code and the fast loading feature stops working.
For my uses, a snapshot or similiar cart is much more useful than
a Jiffy DOS.
Remember that this requires NO hardware modification, which could
be regarded as a bonus.
What offended me in the ad I saw years ago, was that a special
rom and cable were needed to get only a modest speedup that I
already had in snapshot. Why can't jiffydos use some better code
to achieve it's full potential for fastloading? There are many
people out there who could write that kind of code, possibly
even I could do it.
Pontus Berg
On 17 Dec 1996 06:22:54 GMT, ice...@ramlink.net (Iceman/ICE) wrote:
> Hey man, tell you what. If you can write a better code than Mark Fellows,
>and put it on your own SuperDrive Enhancement Chip, and support and stand
>behind it the way CMD has with Jiffy Dos.. Maybe I'll buy yours eh! Or
>is talk all you do? There's alot more to it than just writing code.
It takes 100 computerfreaks to change a lightbulb - one to do it and 99
to tell they could do it faster and better (but none of them ever do!)
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Who: Pontus Berg (Aka: Bacchus of FairLight)
Where: Stockholm, Sweden
Phone: +46-(0)70-5246010 (GSM)
Fax: +46(0)70-6126010 (GSM fax)
Mail: Bac...@Hem.Passagen.se
URL: http://hem.passagen.se/bacchus
Fido: 2:201/411.71
UIN: 109686
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
If it can't be done on a C64 - it's not worth doin'
Pontus Berg
On Tue, 17 Dec 1996 15:22:46 -0400, George Taylor <inte...@netcom.ca>
wrote:
>Snapshot also has a fast format and fast save feature, so it's
>more than just a fastloader.
Sure, sure! I agree with all this (replace SS5 with AR5 in my case, but
the principle apply!)
HOWEVER - I rarely run my c64 without my 1764 pluged in and unless you
pull some serious Mäkelä/Rihalto stunts you're left with either this one
or the fastloader cart!
>There are software rom replacements to offer fast save, fast load,
>fast format, and disk wedge as well. They will not be as compatible
>as a real ROM for some programs.
A hardware swtich makes if VERY compatible indeed! :-)
You also need this for loading from tape, which we ALL do almost every
day ;-)
>Then there are simple fast loaders, which are up to 30x faster.
>They do stay in memory, but a program could possible corrupt the
>code and the fast loading feature stops working.
I'd say "possible" in the above sentence s far from tru. I'd say it
stands the chance of a snowball in hell surviving in RAM if the program
loaded and ran is a packed one!
>For my uses, a snapshot or similiar cart is much more useful than
>a Jiffy DOS.
There is no collision using both is you want to! Action Replay and
JiffyDOS work great together and together thay are stronger than each of
them on their own!
>Remember that this requires NO hardware modification, which could
>be regarded as a bonus.
So you concider being cheated on some fun soldering a bonus :-)
>What offended me in the ad I saw years ago, was that a special
>rom and cable were needed to get only a modest speedup that I
>already had in snapshot. Why can't jiffydos use some better code
>to achieve it's full potential for fastloading? There are many
>people out there who could write that kind of code, possibly
>even I could do it.
First of all - JiffyDOS doesn't require another cable - that's one of
the basic points - it's fully serial!
Also, you could speed up operation conciderably by cutting corners, like
signaling on the ATN line. This works if you have a one drive system,
but I don't, and lots of the CMD customers share my situation. JiffyDOS
is just about as fast as it can be on a system using the serial line in
a fully compatible manner.
Pontus Berg
On 12 Dec 1996 04:07:04 -0800, cri...@cs.pdx.edu (bill m howland)
wrote:
> Rapidos Pro is the only parallel loader I've seen in print that is faster
>than jiffydos. This is because it does a hardware level GCR conversion AND
>buffers whole tracks. So Jiffydos may actually be an upgrade to some parallel
>systems.
SpeedDOS is slow and not worth the trouble (even if it's easy to install
as it's only two roms), but DolphinDOS, DiskDeamon/ProfessionalDOS blows
the head of JiffyDOS using a 1541, plus you can use the cable for
parallellnibblers and really fast disk copier. So if you have a C64 with
only a 1541 drive, do concider these!
However if you also have a 1581 or any of the CMD devices such as a HD,
a FD drive och a SuperCPU, I'd say nothing tops Jiffy. It's the overall
best for covering thew wide spectre of perephrials. A 1541 in parallel
speed and a 1581 in normal speed is just not a situation ju'll like a
long time!
Doug Cotton
> Given the new information in this discussion, I have much more
> admiration for Jiffy DOS. The last time I read an ad for it
> was many years ago, and of course there has been more features
> added since. I would like to put this discussion in perspective now:
> In terms of speed, jiffy dos is only average.
I don't think you can apply the term 'average'... seems to me that a stock
1541 is what users without any fast-loader at all would consider average.
But lets look at what you said next...
> A supersnapshot,
> for example, has 15x and 25x speed for 1541 built in, and it
> includes a disk wedge and sequential file reader, and works on
> 1541, 1571, and 1581. 25x turbo format requires a conversion
> of the program to be loaded, so that is a disadvantage. But
> once converted, it always loads at 25x speed.
JiffyDOS LOAD speed is 15x... pretty much on par with SuperSnapshot if you
don't go through the conversion of a program to make it load with Turbo25
speed. And most users of these cartridges, I believe, don't do this.
Effectively, then, for at least a lot of users, JiffyDOS will give them
about the same performance on a straight LOAD than they will usually get
with Snapshot -- and much better performance on most other disk operations.
> It does not support faster rel acess or disk operations
> (like scratching or verify). If Jiffy DOS supports this, that
> is a nice feature (but I have never had need for an REL file
> in my life, so it doesn't much matter to me).
This is an important point (though not specifically the REL file speedup
itself). Some users simply LOAD single file games and play them. Those
users will generally benefit as much -- or more -- from a product like
Snapshot or Action-Replay, than they will from JiffyDOS. When multi-file
games or productivity software are also on the user's palette, the pendulum
swings in favor of JiffyDOS.
> Snapshot also has a fast format and fast save feature, so it's
> more than just a fastloader.
Yes, not to mention its capturing capabilities. I've never advocated that
some cartridges aren't desirable, but that as fast-loaders they tend to be
far less complete than JiffyDOS.
> There are software rom replacements to offer fast save, fast load,
> fast format, and disk wedge as well. They will not be as compatible
> as a real ROM for some programs.
> Then there are simple fast loaders, which are up to 30x faster.
> They do stay in memory, but a program could possible corrupt the
> code and the fast loading feature stops working.
In my experience, most programs overwrite the fast-loading routines used by
any of the cartridge-based systems, so beyond initial loading, these
generally won't do much more for you in that area.
> For my uses, a snapshot or similiar cart is much more useful than
> a Jiffy DOS.
Quite feasible, as I pointed out a little further back. Personally, I put
Action-Replay ahead of Snapshot (v5), mainly because Snapshot creates
loaders that aren't compatible with all devices when using its program
capturing capability, while A-R gives you an option to create a stock
(compatible) loader.
> Remember that this requires NO hardware modification, which could
> be regarded as a bonus.
Agreed. Though after all this discussion about Snapshot (and Action-Replay)
I'm left wondering why they merit much attention at this point... since
neither is being manufactured or supported any longer. I can't vouch for
what speed-up systems are still being marketed in Europe or elsewhere, but
I'm willing to bet that JiffyDOS is probably the only Commodore speed-up
system left in the world that is actively supported by company you can call
and talk to about it.
> What offended me in the ad I saw years ago, was that a special
> rom and cable were needed to get only a modest speedup that I
> already had in snapshot.
Not sure where you ever saw this. JiffyDOS has NEVER required any special
cabling. You may have mis-read the ad, as it was almost always advertised
that JiffyDOS _DID NOT_ require extra cabling like parallel systems.
As a side-note, let me point out that when JiffyDOS was developed, the Epyx
Fastload cartridge was the 'standard'. It was less compatible than
JiffyDOS, and also slower. Only parallel systems offered more speed at that
time, yet were more difficult to install, and suffered from far more
compatibility problems than anything else (that's why they were the first
to fall out of the market). The cartridges didn't begin introducing things
like Turbo25 until after JiffyDOS reached it's current revision level of
6.01.
> Why can't jiffydos use some better code
> to achieve it's full potential for fastloading? There are many
> people out there who could write that kind of code, possibly
> even I could do it.
I think I can provide a few good reasons.
First, lets look at the 64 ROM... there are five bytes left in that ROM,
and no two of them are adjacent. And this is after MUCH code crunching that
was done to fit everything in. Thus, it would likely require either
dropping current features or creating a much more sophisticated circuit.
Second, consider the number of JiffyDOS ROMs and other products that
incorporate JiffyDOS... we've got separate computer ROMs for 64, 64c,
SX-64, C128, and 128-D; 18 different drive ROMs that cover something like
24 or more different drives; RAMLink, FD, HD and SuperCPU. Those are all
current products. Make one significant change in JiffyDOS, and it affects
27 products. It took over a year to develop and implement version 6,
despite the fact that it was still compatible with version 5 drive ROMs
(thus only the Kernal ROMs were changed). But actually changing the way the
drive code works (and thus the way the computer talks to it as well) would
be monumental... calling it a huge task would be something of an
understatement.
Third: On systems with multiple drives, the higher speeds will push signal
slewing to the point that the bus will fail to function. JiffyDOS is
already precariously close to this point on some systems, especially on
systems where third-party printers with built-in Commodore interfaces were
provided (these often create terrible electrical loading conditions on the
bus).
Fourth: Most fast-loaders that do the really high speeds get some of their
gain by skipping error checking, and we're dead set against such
approaches. And while JiffyDOS presently works in any Commodore system
throughout the world, I'd be willing to bet there would need to be
different NTSC and PAL version to get into the higher speed range.
Fifth: The further you depart from the norm, the more software
compatibility problems you'll run into. Absolutely guaranteed.
Sixth: Given the fact that practically every present owner of JiffyDOS is
sincerely happy with the product, and considering the cost of upgrading
every JiffyDOS-equipped item they own, I don't think there would be a high
percentage of upgrades sold. So the only real gains would be to
sell-through to a large number of users who do not presently have it, and
who simply haven't purchased it because they don't consider it to be fast
enough. I sincerely believe that the number of active users who fit this
criteria and would be willing to spend money on buying it once the extra
speed is available is a relatively small group.
In the final analysis, it may well be possible to overcome some of the
hardware and software problems and compatibility issues while picking up
some amount of additional speed. However, it won't hit the speeds that you
get with Turbo25 without inheriting some of the same problems, I think that
getting it up to even 20x on a LOAD would be optimistic. Thus, it wouldn't
even sell to that select group for whom the new version would be targeted.
In other words, it's a losing proposition whose cost (in time and money) of
development would never be recouped in todays Commodore market. In my
opinion, our resources are better spent on other projects that stand a
chance of paying for themselves.
Andreas
>>Then there are simple fast loaders, which are up to 30x faster.
>>They do stay in memory, but a program could possible corrupt the
>>code and the fast loading feature stops working.
>I'd say "possible" in the above sentence s far from tru. I'd say it
>stands the chance of a snowball in hell surviving in RAM if the program
>loaded and ran is a packed one!
Good saying Pontus and deeply true ... therefore I stopped using packers
to make sure most software fastloaders still work ... hahahhahahahahahahaha
>>For my uses, a snapshot or similiar cart is much more useful than
>>a Jiffy DOS.
>There is no collision using both is you want to! Action Replay and
>JiffyDOS work great together and together thay are stronger than each of
>them on their own!
Really fucking true ... especially on a 1581 and other drives with jiffydos
equipped it makes it go WOOOOSH ... AR + JD simply rule on that one,
just one bug to mention ... you will have to modify the cart or poke to
$ba to switch the drive number to #10 ... for me it's quite simple after
i simply kicked all tape routines outta my cart, but some people might
get into trouble here and then, as whenever you type "@10" to switch to
drive #10 and you have Action Replay on, it'll switch to #1 ... the tape ...
But nevertheless, both combined and slightly modified RULE !!!
>>Remember that this requires NO hardware modification, which could
>>be regarded as a bonus.
>So you concider being cheated on some fun soldering a bonus :-)
>>What offended me in the ad I saw years ago, was that a special
>>rom and cable were needed to get only a modest speedup that I
>>already had in snapshot. Why can't jiffydos use some better code
>>to achieve it's full potential for fastloading? There are many
>>people out there who could write that kind of code, possibly
>>even I could do it.
>First of all - JiffyDOS doesn't require another cable - that's one of
>the basic points - it's fully serial!
True indeed, although you CAN get a parallel cable for the CMD HD's
which will make the go even faster !!! The parallel cable is connected
to a ram link then if I remember right ...
>Also, you could speed up operation conciderably by cutting corners, like
>signaling on the ATN line. This works if you have a one drive system,
>but I don't, and lots of the CMD customers share my situation. JiffyDOS
>is just about as fast as it can be on a system using the serial line in
>a fully compatible manner.
Pontus, you are my man :)
While we are talking about fastloaders, I would like to get a ROM Image
of Speed Dos for the old C64 and most possible for the new 1541 II along
with the cable schematics ... anyone ?????? PLEASE !!!!
Count Zero of TRC * SCS / Talent Technologies ...
Call F0RPlay ... Home of the real Spankers ...
Pontus Berg
>> There are software rom replacements to offer fast save, fast load,
>> fast format, and disk wedge as well. They will not be as compatible
>> as a real ROM for some programs.
>> Then there are simple fast loaders, which are up to 30x faster.
>> They do stay in memory, but a program could possible corrupt the
>> code and the fast loading feature stops working.
>In my experience, most programs overwrite the fast-loading routines used by
>any of the cartridge-based systems, so beyond initial loading, these
>generally won't do much more for you in that area.
I fully agree with this but would also like to add that Action Replay
actually feature a function to recreate them. I think it's called "turbo
link" or something similar...
>As a side-note, let me point out that when JiffyDOS was developed, the Epyx
>Fastload cartridge was the 'standard'. It was less compatible than
>JiffyDOS, and also slower. Only parallel systems offered more speed at that
>time, yet were more difficult to install, and suffered from far more
>compatibility problems than anything else (that's why they were the first
>to fall out of the market). The cartridges didn't begin introducing things
>like Turbo25 until after JiffyDOS reached it's current revision level of
>6.01.
At this point of time - would it be possible to speed it up further but
still maintain compatibility with older revisions ?
I still hate it lacking the hexadressing feature and also for not
printing the startadresses.
What still also puzzles me is the CTRL-D function. Why is the current
device set to 0 so we have to press the function twice in order to
select device 9. I know why it is like this (I examined the code - oops
;-). I still don't like it!
How much would you offer for a version with hexadressing (missing
something like the wierdo fileselection for file copy system...)?
>Fourth: Most fast-loaders that do the really high speeds get some of their
>gain by skipping error checking, and we're dead set against such
>approaches. And while JiffyDOS presently works in any Commodore system
>throughout the world, I'd be willing to bet there would need to be
>different NTSC and PAL version to get into the higher speed range.
As long as it clearly tells in the startup I actually wouldn't mind if
it payed off in loadingspeed!
That would be easy business for you. You'd get a commented piece of
source which you could place anywhere you'd like...
>Fifth: The further you depart from the norm, the more software
>compatibility problems you'll run into. Absolutely guaranteed.
If the loading speed was tuned from 15 to 18 times or something like
that, I don't think that would be the major issue here...
Pontus Berg
On 20 Dec 96 22:14:22 -500, cou...@mail.netwave.de (Andreas) wrote:
>>>>For my uses, a snapshot or similiar cart is much more useful than
>>>a Jiffy DOS.
>>There is no collision using both is you want to! Action Replay and
>>JiffyDOS work great together and together thay are stronger than each of
>>them on their own!
>Really fucking true ... especially on a 1581 and other drives with jiffydos
>equipped it makes it go WOOOOSH ... AR + JD simply rule on that one,
>just one bug to mention ... you will have to modify the cart or poke to
>$ba to switch the drive number to #10 ... for me it's quite simple after
>i simply kicked all tape routines outta my cart, but some people might
>get into trouble here and then, as whenever you type "@10" to switch to
>drive #10 and you have Action Replay on, it'll switch to #1 ... the tape ...
>
>But nevertheless, both combined and slightly modified RULE !!!
Well, some of us got a manual when we bought the JiffyDOS and then we
learned that there is a combination - the magic CTRL-D - which actually
toggles the current decive! Use that one and you can keep the
taperoutines :-)
>While we are talking about fastloaders, I would like to get a ROM Image
>of Speed Dos for the old C64 and most possible for the new 1541 II along
>with the cable schematics ... anyone ?????? PLEASE !!!!
I'd mail Harlekin if I were you! Do you have his mailadress?
Andreas
>On 20 Dec 96 22:14:22 -500, cou...@mail.netwave.de (Andreas) wrote:
>>>>>For my uses, a snapshot or similiar cart is much more useful than
>>>>a Jiffy DOS.
>>>There is no collision using both is you want to! Action Replay and
>>>JiffyDOS work great together and together thay are stronger than each of
>>>them on their own!
>>Really fucking true ... especially on a 1581 and other drives with jiffydos
>>equipped it makes it go WOOOOSH ... AR + JD simply rule on that one,
>>just one bug to mention ... you will have to modify the cart or poke to
>>$ba to switch the drive number to #10 ... for me it's quite simple after
>>i simply kicked all tape routines outta my cart, but some people might
>>get into trouble here and then, as whenever you type "@10" to switch to
>>drive #10 and you have Action Replay on, it'll switch to #1 ... the tape ...
>>
>>But nevertheless, both combined and slightly modified RULE !!!
>Well, some of us got a manual when we bought the JiffyDOS and then we
>learned that there is a combination - the magic CTRL-D - which actually
>toggles the current decive! Use that one and you can keep the
>taperoutines :-)
Pontus, as said in the mail I sent you before: Doesn't work for me and
my Action Replay MK5 .... it always sticks to Drive #8
Maybe sumone knows WHY that is so and tell me, so I can fix that ?
Thomas Pinto
Doug Cotton (doug....@the-spa.com) wrote:
: In my
: opinion, our resources are better spent on other projects that stand a
: chance of paying for themselves.
That's for sure...SuperCpu64 comes to mind. Great product! WEll worth
the $199 plus shipping. I'll give my opinions on the SuperCpu as soon
as I mess with it a bit longer...
Olaf Seibert
In <32b81d4f...@news1.telia.com> Bac...@hem.passagen.se (Pontus Berg) writes:
>SpeedDOS is slow and not worth the trouble (even if it's easy to install
>as it's only two roms), but DolphinDOS, DiskDeamon/ProfessionalDOS blows
>the head of JiffyDOS using a 1541, plus you can use the cable for
>parallellnibblers and really fast disk copier. So if you have a C64 with
>only a 1541 drive, do concider these!
Hm, the SpeedDos Pro that I used to have (no more - I sold the machine
but now I have another 64) did have a parallel cable. I don't remember
how fast it was, but it was very compatible, even with stuff like GEOS.
> Who: Pontus Berg (Aka: Bacchus of FairLight)
-Olaf.
--
___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert rhi...@mbfys.kun.nl "I would be dead in a
\X/ week if I didn't do /something/. I'd be splattered all over the walls."
_...@_.mil
Iceman/ICE wrote:
>
> I've tried about every disk speeder there is out there for the
> commodore. I still have some of that junk like Rapid Dos and
> a few of the others. There isn't anything that even comes
> close to Jiffy Dos.
Are you kidding Iceman?! I'm not really sure what you mean by "comes
close", but for fast loading on the 1541 nothing I've ever seen beats my
old Rapidos pro. I use Jiffy on an 1581, but for games - especially the
ones that use old, lame block loading methods Rapidos rules. And
'S-Snapshoted' games load faster than with their turbo-25 mode.
> My only gripe is that you guys stopped
> working on it (adding to it). Now see, if you had been smart,
> you would have started doing things that the super carts do and
> more. Especially now that items like Action Replay aren't available
> to us anymore.
Tough to compete with people selling their old AR's for $10 on the net
some time back.
The Supercpu seems the right way to go.
Sarg.
Andreas
>Iceman/ICE wrote:
>>
>> I've tried about every disk speeder there is out there for the
>> commodore. I still have some of that junk like Rapid Dos and
>> a few of the others. There isn't anything that even comes
>> close to Jiffy Dos.
>Are you kidding Iceman?! I'm not really sure what you mean by "comes
>close", but for fast loading on the 1541 nothing I've ever seen beats my
>old Rapidos pro. I use Jiffy on an 1581, but for games - especially the
>ones that use old, lame block loading methods Rapidos rules. And
>'S-Snapshoted' games load faster than with their turbo-25 mode.
Super Snapshoted games ???? Bah ... lame ass stuff ... Jiffy Rules !!!
There is nothing else working so well with all the hardware there is
for sure ... CMD's HD's, 1571, 81, 41 (all models) etc ... and nothing
can be burned faster and put into one of these drives aswell :)))
Not that I'd do such stuff ....
>> My only gripe is that you guys stopped
>> working on it (adding to it). Now see, if you had been smart,
>> you would have started doing things that the super carts do and
>> more. Especially now that items like Action Replay aren't available
>> to us anymore.
>Tough to compete with people selling their old AR's for $10 on the net
>some time back.
AR is a nice add-on to these speeders though :)
>The Supercpu seems the right way to go.
Only if i get one for free ... 200 bux is far too much ... a SNES goes
for the same price and has the same chip along with lots of others ...
I surely will not spend that much on my 64 anymore ...