Mac-system 7.0
Jon Deutsch
of system7 running on AMAX?
X-------------------+--------------+-----------------------X
| | |\ |>j...@brahms.udel.edu<| "For my 2 cents, |
| \|on |/eutsch |>>-----------------<<| I'd pay a dollar" |
X------+--------------------+--------------------+---------X
Jeremy A Moskowitz
>Does anyone know about the possibility
>of system7 running on AMAX?
Yeah.. I tried getting it to work for three hours straight.
I tried: 1) Booting off the installition floppies
- that didn't even boot
2) booting with a 6.0.3 disk and running the installer
- that got to 1/3 way then died.
3) Reformatting my AMAX1: partition and tring steps 1-3
4) Copying an already laid down system 7.0 on the HD and
bascially, it got the happy mac - then reboot infinately.
Someone else tried:
1) Installing 7.0 on ANOTHER hd on a REAL mac, and then
putting it on AMAX. That didnt work etiher.
This leads me to the conclusion that 7.0 has built in Amax detection.
I'm not kidding about this... this could simply be a small thing
to fix (ie: hack 7.0 to work) but I doubt it...
Anyone want to call readysoft and post their findings while I
reformat my HD 6.0.7 again, as I've lost everything in the process
of getting 7.0 on there.
DO NOT ATTEMPT TO PUT 7.0 ON YOUR AMAX: partition. IT WILL NOT WORK!
That is all
Monitor of comp.sys.amiga.emulations
-jeremy
--
E Pluribus // Contacts: jer...@brahms.udel.edu or jer...@chopin.udel.edu or
Unix // jer...@freezer.acs.udel.edu -amiga clasic 2000-
\\ // --->Monitor of comp.sys.amiga.emulations<---
\X/ 2001 Dalmations - My stars, its full of dogs...
Doug Bischoff
After hacking around like you wouldn't believe with Sys 7.0 to get it even
INSTALLED on AMAX... I had the same problem as anyone else: the sad mac.
In short... i don't believe sys 7.0 will work on AMAX. But to be honest:
the biggest advantages of it work on an Appletalk networked Mac, and the only
thing you'd be getting that's better is Virtual Memory (hard disk space can be
used as memory) which is SLOW AS SIN and TrueType (which'll only work if you
have an Apple printer as far as I understand it) fonts.
To me... it isn't worth the trouble.
P.S. Has ANYBODY gotten the Multifinder to run on AMAX and still allow
you to do everything normally? Like get into the DA's?
/---------------------------------------------------------------------\
| -Doug Bischoff- | *** *** ====--\ | "Sir, I Protest! |
| -DEB110 @ PSUVM- | * *** * ==|<>\___ | I am NOT a |
| -The Black Ring- | *** *** |______\ | Merry Man!" |
| --- "Wheels" --- | *** O O | -Worf |
| Corwyn Blakwolfe | T.R.I. ------------- | ST:TNG |
\---- DEB...@PSUVM.PSU.EDU D.BISCHOFF on GEnie THIRDMAN on PAN -----/
Lou Ordorica - SunU Field T & D
> you to do everything normally? Like get into the DA's?
> /---------------------------------------------------------------------\
> | -Doug Bischoff- | *** *** ====--\ | "Sir, I Protest! |
> | -DEB110 @ PSUVM- | * *** * ==|<>\___ | I am NOT a |
> | -The Black Ring- | *** *** |______\ | Merry Man!" |
> | --- "Wheels" --- | *** O O | -Worf |
> | Corwyn Blakwolfe | T.R.I. ------------- | ST:TNG |
> \---- DEB...@PSUVM.PSU.EDU D.BISCHOFF on GEnie THIRDMAN on PAN -----/
I too had many problems with A-MaxII until I upgraded my processor to a
68030 and used the MMU option.
Suddenly, inits like Adobe Type Manager and even the screen hack/saver
AfterDark worked perfectly under Multifinder with no compatibility problems
whatsoever.
I then tried loading A-MaxII without the MMU option, and the system
crashed while booting.
My guess is that the MMU plays an important role in mapping available
memory in one continguous block, the way the Mac expects it.
Those of you considering a cpu upgrade should watch out for cheap 68030
accelerators with no MMU - you lose it's important A-MaxII advantage!
Lou
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| My opinions do not represent the opinions of my employer. |
| "Not everyone can carry the weight of the world." |
| l...@Corp.Sun.COM -R.E.M. |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Markus Wild
>Those of you considering a cpu upgrade should watch out for cheap 68030
>accelerators with no MMU - you lose it's important A-MaxII advantage!
You won't find any 68030 accelerators without an MMU, the 68030 has it
builtin;-)
-Markus
PS: You're right considering 68020 accelerator boards.
--
Markus M. Wild - mw...@iiic.ethz.ch | wi...@nessie.cs.id.ethz.ch
--
Still looking for a REAL debugger for Release 4 ...
Jean-Noel MOYNE
In article <91141.134...@psuvm.psu.edu> Doug Bischoff
<DEB...@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> In short... i don't believe sys 7.0 will work on AMAX. But to be
honest:
> the biggest advantages of it work on an Appletalk networked Mac, and the
only
> thing you'd be getting that's better is Virtual Memory (hard disk space
can be
> used as memory) which is SLOW AS SIN and TrueType (which'll only work if
you
> have an Apple printer as far as I understand it) fonts.
> To me... it isn't worth the trouble.
True engouh ... But there are a few features that could be worth
it. Mainly, it's 7.0 ability and _BIG_ improvement if you're dealing with
a lot of files. It's _way faster_ ! Not to mention much more reliable. An
other thing is the possibility to have the finder run in the background
(for those who haven't tried it yet: yes ! When you copy a file for
example, even if the cursor is a watch, you can still go to the
upper-right corner and switch to something else, the copy won't stop.
But maybe you don't want that on an Amiga .... it too pathetic ...
When I see the way it works on my IIfx, and when I think how it would work
with the same CPU under AmigaDOS, especially when you know what's inside a
IIfx for IO processing. And of course, it doesn't work when you're
formatting a floppy (this very tricky operation taking over the
68030@40Mhz ! (-:).
They're still quite far away from a vintage 1986 Amiga1000 with
256K of RAM where you can nearly format a floppy twice at the same time !
(-:
Oh ! And one last thing, don't try 7.0 unless you have at least
2MB of memory. I'd say 4MB is a minimum (for a Mac+ emulation) to do
anything serious.
JNM (Amiga developper lost in MacLand)
---
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
JNM: jnm...@lbl.gov - The postmaster allways pings twice (soon
in your mailbox!)
Lou Ordorica - SunU Field T & D
>>accelerators with no MMU - you lose it's important A-MaxII advantage!
>You won't find any 68030 accelerators without an MMU, the 68030 has it
>builtin;-)
>-Markus
>PS: You're right considering 68020 accelerator boards.
>--
>Markus M. Wild - mw...@iiic.ethz.ch | wi...@nessie.cs.id.ethz.ch
This is true - I was referring to versions of the 68030 that are available
with the MMU masked out. Apparently, these CPUs test bad with MMU, but good
without the MMU, so Motorola sells them as MMU-less CPUs for a reduced cost.
-Lou
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| --- My opinions do not represent the opinions of my employer. --- |
| ---- "Not everyone can carry the weight of the world." ---- |
| l...@Corp.Sun.COM -R.E.M. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Daniel Tessier
In article <1991May22....@bernina.ethz.ch>,
wi...@nessie.cs.id.ethz.ch (Markus Wild) writes:
|> In article <41...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> l...@flipper.Corp.Sun.COM (Lou
Ordorica - SunU Field T & D) writes:
|> >Those of you considering a cpu upgrade should watch out for cheap 68030
|> >accelerators with no MMU - you lose it's important A-MaxII advantage!
|>
|> You won't find any 68030 accelerators without an MMU, the 68030 has it
|> builtin;-)
|>
|> -Markus
|>
|> PS: You're right considering 68020 accelerator boards.
the MMU tests are sold as "MMU-less" by Motorola, to save money. I know
that CSA sells 'economy' models based on those chips (they seem to be
about $100 less than the regular models).
/----------------------------------------------------------------\
| Dan Tessier PHONE : (613)765-2380 |
| Bell-Northern Research, Ltd. INTERNET: tes...@bnr.ca |
| Ottawa, Ontario, Canada UUCP : ...uunet!bnrgate.bnr.ca |
| !bmerh185!tessier |
| "Mothers are the necessity of invention" |
| - Calvin & Hobbes |
\----------------------------------------------------------------/
William J. Coldwell
>In article <41...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> l...@flipper.Corp.Sun.COM (Lou Ordorica - SunU Field T & D) writes:
>>Those of you considering a cpu upgrade should watch out for cheap 68030
>>accelerators with no MMU - you lose it's important A-MaxII advantage!
>
>You won't find any 68030 accelerators without an MMU, the 68030 has it
>builtin;-)
Call your Motorola rep to get the facts on the new plastic 030. CSA is
now using it in a less expensive version of the Mega Midget Racer.
--
William J. Coldwell PLink: CRYO I'm a 3-DPro, wouldn't you
Amiga Attitude Adjuster BIX: wjcoldwell like to be a 3-DPro2 ?
Cryogenic Software UUCP:billc@cryo 3-D PROFESSIONAL 2.0
#define STD_DSCLMR "The above opinions are mine. You can't have them."
James is just this guy, you know...
a single key stroke! Select the diskettes and hit Option-E to eject the disk.
The disk will pop out and the system goes down, how convenient!
Michael Marvin Morrison
>
>In article <1991May22....@bernina.ethz.ch>,
>wi...@nessie.cs.id.ethz.ch (Markus Wild) writes:
>|> In article <41...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> l...@flipper.Corp.Sun.COM (Lou
>Ordorica - SunU Field T & D) writes:
>|> >Those of you considering a cpu upgrade should watch out for cheap 68030
>|> >accelerators with no MMU - you lose it's important A-MaxII advantage!
>|>
>|> You won't find any 68030 accelerators without an MMU, the 68030 has it
>|> builtin;-)
>|>
>|> -Markus
>|>
>|> PS: You're right considering 68020 accelerator boards.
>Haha! There ARE boards that have 68030s without the MMU. 68030s that fail
>the MMU tests are sold as "MMU-less" by Motorola, to save money. I know
>that CSA sells 'economy' models based on those chips (they seem to be
>about $100 less than the regular models).
>
>/----------------------------------------------------------------\
>| Dan Tessier PHONE : (613)765-2380 |
I don't believe that they are '030 uP's that failed any tests.. I seem to
remember Motorola saying that the TESTING of the MMU was the expensive part,
and so they just masked out part of the MMU logic, and don't bother testing
for it. It is also declaired as an embeded processor I believe.
--
Michael M Morrison /| |\
m...@reaper.chi.il.us <or> | | Cold Steel on Ice | |
reaper!m...@miroc.chi.il.us \| |/
Charles Cazabon (186-003-526)
significant savings over the regular price. One company (GVP, I think)
is now selling "economy" 68030 accelerator cards, with this special
no-mmu 68030.
-Chuck
caz...@hercules.uregina.ca
Tim Grantham
>Does anyone know about the possibility
>of system7 running on AMAX?
>
run it under A-max 2.06. No go. It will install all right but the machine locks
up during boot shortly after the `Welcome to Macintosh' message appears.
I phoned Simon Douglas, the programmer of A-max, and he said that the next
version of A-max would run System 7.0. He also confirmed my own discovery that
A-max is not completely compatible with System 6.0.7 -- only with lower revs.
Tim.
Ralph Babel
(Charles Cazabon (186-003-526)) writes:
> One company (GVP, I think) is now selling "economy" 68030
> accelerator cards, with this special no-mmu 68030.
Nope, not GVP.
Ralph
George Nincehelser 5-6544
>
>I phoned Simon Douglas, the programmer of A-max, and he said that the next
>version of A-max would run System 7.0. He also confirmed my own discovery that
>A-max is not completely compatible with System 6.0.7 -- only with lower revs.
>
functionality.
I took a look at an AMax II circuit board. Are the Apple ROMs really being
used, or are they just checked to see if they are present?
--
/ George David Nincehelser \ geo...@swbatl.sbc.com \
/ / Southwestern Bell Telephone \ Phone: (314) 235-6544 \
/ / / Advanced Technology Laboratory \ Fax: (314) 235-5797 \
/ / / /\ 1010 Pine, St. Louis, MO 63101 \ de asini umbra disceptare \
JKT
Anderson) says:
>
>A dealer friend told me the new System 7s they just got in would not work with
>the 128K ROMs. He said System 7 would only work on an SE and above. He
>called an Apple support person and that's what he was told. He looked in the
>manual it it said the same thing: it ony works on an SE and above.
Bzzt! Wrong on TWO counts:
1) Apple says System 7.0 will work on the Mac Plus, and MacWeek
has confirmed it.
2) The Mac SE has the same 128K ROMs that the Plus has. If it
didn't work with the 128K ROMs, it wouldn't run on the SE.
He's a DEALER saying this? Just confirms what I've posted in
this group before... dealers s*ck. They CONSISTENTLY don't
know what they are talking about but will ALWAYS claim they
do. This applies to Amiga, Mac, and PC dealers alike. It
seems that anyone who DOES know what he/she is talking about
goes into a field that pays more than selling computers. :-)
Ok, I'm done raving now. Anyway, System 7 is supposed to work on
the Mac Plus. The current conflict apparently has something to
do with System 7 checking a ROM location that A-Max modifies when
it copies the ROM code into RAM. Once A-Max is made not to change
that location anymore, we'll have compatibility. :-)
Kurt
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|| Kurt Tappe (215) 363-9485 || With. Without. And who'll ||
|| 184 W. Valley Hill Rd. (home) || deny it's what the fighting's ||
|| Malvern, PA 19355-2214 458-5000 || all about? - Pink Floyd ||
|| (work) --------------------------------||
|| jkt...@psuvm.bitnet jkt100&psuvm.psu.edu QLink: KurtTappe ||
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Anderson
>>of system7 running on AMAX?
>>
>run it under A-max 2.06.No go.It will install all right but the machine locks
>up during boot shortly after the `Welcome to Macintosh' message appears.
>
>A-max is not completely compatible with System 6.0.7 -- only with lower revs.
the 128K ROMs. He said System 7 would only work on an SE and above. He
called an Apple support person and that's what he was told. He looked in the
anyone know if this is incorrect. Since the maker of A-Max said the next
A-max will work with System 7, either he's planning a 256K A-Max or the guy
I know is wrong. Anybody???
George Nincehelser 5-6544
>A dealer friend told me the new System 7s they just got in would not work with
>the 128K ROMs. He said System 7 would only work on an SE and above. He
>called an Apple support person and that's what he was told. He looked in the
>manual it it said the same thing: it ony works on an SE and above. Does
>anyone know if this is incorrect. Since the maker of A-Max said the next
>A-max will work with System 7, either he's planning a 256K A-Max or the guy
>I know is wrong. Anybody???
System 7.0 does work on the Mac Plus. I've several friends that are running it
on their Pluses.
Charles Cazabon (186-003-526)
>
>I took a look at an AMax II circuit board. Are the Apple ROMs really being
>used, or are they just checked to see if they are present?
The Roms are read in at bootup (of the Amax side)...after that, they are
not used at all. This is why some programs allow you to change Amax to
read the rom files from disk rather than from the cartridge...reading the ROMS
into RAM is painfully slow.
FastMax2.lzh (available on ab20) does this; however, to prevent piracy and
all that sort of thing, it checks for the presence of the cartridge even
though it loads the ROMS from disk.
-Chuck
caz...@hercules.uregina.ca
A.C. Lock
>> One company (GVP, I think) is now selling "economy" 68030
>> accelerator cards, with this special no-mmu 68030.
>Nope, not GVP.
CSA are manufacturing cheap versions of their Mega Midget Racer cards which do
not contain a MMU, which seems rather silly to me, since it means that memory
access to chip ram is going to be slow since you won't be able to map this
memory using the MMU to 32 bit ram.
Adam
Jean-Noel MOYNE
No no no no no ... Let me explain, you don't want to map CHIP
memory anywhere, CHIP memory is slow, because it is chip memory which
means it is accessed by other co-processors (DMA for guys like the blitter
et al.).
On the other hand, the ROMS are slower than 32-RAMs, first
because they're ROMs and also because they're 16 bits. Since the CPU is
the only one to access them, it is nice to be able to use a MMU to map the
ROMs (_not_ the CHIP memory!) into fast 32bits RAM.
It is true that this unability will make quite a difference on
most of the common operations, since mapping the ROMs in fast RAM does the
trick, as far as most acceleration goes.
JNM
Mike Haas
>builtin;-)
>
>-Markus
>
increase/price decrease, so it actually might be something to look out for.
Mike Haas
>the 128K ROMs. He said System 7 would only work on an SE and above. He
system 7 will work on any mac+ or newer with at least 2 meg. 'course,
virtual mem and some other of their 'fancy' stuff doesn't work on
the small machines, but should work fine with AMAXD, once mr. douglas
does his thing.
Mike Haas
>
>2) The Mac SE has the same 128K ROMs that the Plus has. If it
> didn't work with the 128K ROMs, it wouldn't run on the SE.
>
closed machine.
In fact, I know it's not true. One of the big hypes about the SE when it
came out was that it was faster than a mac+ due to optimizations in the
display software, better quickdraw, etc. I measured this to be a 10% speed
improvement.
HA...the mac plus roms with AMAX on my 1000 go 5% faster than the SE!
Valentin Pepelea valentin@btr.com
>
>CSA are manufacturing cheap versions of their Mega Midget Racer cards which do
>not contain a MMU, which seems rather silly to me, since it means that memory
>access to chip ram is going to be slow since you won't be able to map this
>memory using the MMU to 32 bit ram.
Perhaps you meant that accesses to ROMs will be slow, since you will not be
able to use "setcpu fastrom" or "c:cpu fastrom" under 2.0. Chip memory will
always be slower than fast memory, the MMU just can't help with that.
Valentin
--
"An operating system without virtual memory Name: Valentin Pepelea
is an operating system without virtue." Phone: (408) 985-1700
Usenet: mips!btr!valentin
- Ancient Inca Proverb Internet: vale...@btr.com
JKT
>
>>2) The Mac SE has the same 128K ROMs that the Plus has. If it
>> didn't work with the 128K ROMs, it wouldn't run on the SE.
>>
>I don't think this is true...there are no slots in the mac plus...it's a
>closed machine.
What do ROMs have to do with the number of slots??
You're talking about 2 different issues here; the ROMs contain
the fundamental operating code and have no effect on the number
of slots. Those slots are handled by other chips, specially
designed to control them.
Kurt
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
:: Kurt Tappe (215) 363-9485 :: With. Without. And who'll ::
:: 184 W. Valley Hill Rd. (home) :: deny it's what the fighting's ||
:: Malvern, PA 19355-2214 458-5000 || all about? - Pink Floyd ::
:: (work) --------------------------------||
:: jkt...@psuvm.bitnet jkt...@psuvm.psu.edu QLink: KurtTappe ||
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
David Tse
JKT...@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) writes:
>Bzzt! Wrong on TWO counts:
>1) Apple says System 7.0 will work on the Mac Plus, and MacWeek
> has confirmed it.
>2) The Mac SE has the same 128K ROMs that the Plus has. If it
> didn't work with the 128K ROMs, it wouldn't run on the SE.
You are the one who is also wrong! Mac SE has 256K ROM, as are the II, SE/30,
IIx, IIcx, and the Portable; IIci, IIsi, IIfx have 512K ROM. The Mac 128K,
and the Mac 512K have 64k ROM. The Mac 512Ke, and Plus have 128K rom.
Check it out before you said others are wrong, please.
>He's a DEALER saying this? Just confirms what I've posted in
>this group before... dealers s*ck. They CONSISTENTLY don't
>know what they are talking about but will ALWAYS claim they
>do. This applies to Amiga, Mac, and PC dealers alike. It
>seems that anyone who DOES know what he/she is talking about
>goes into a field that pays more than selling computers. :-)
Right.
>Ok, I'm done raving now. Anyway, System 7 is supposed to work on
>the Mac Plus. The current conflict apparently has something to
>do with System 7 checking a ROM location that A-Max modifies when
>it copies the ROM code into RAM. Once A-Max is made not to change
>that location anymore, we'll have compatibility. :-)
Are you sure that's the cause?
> Kurt
>--
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>|| Kurt Tappe (215) 363-9485 || With. Without. And who'll ||
>|| 184 W. Valley Hill Rd. (home) || deny it's what the fighting's ||
>|| Malvern, PA 19355-2214 458-5000 || all about? - Pink Floyd ||
>|| (work) --------------------------------||
>|| jkt...@psuvm.bitnet jkt100&psuvm.psu.edu QLink: KurtTappe ||
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
David Tse
(account to be expire soon, new account coming soon in June)
Paul Dickson
No no no no no ... Let me explain, you don't want to map CHIP
memory anywhere, CHIP memory is slow, because it is chip memory
which means it is accessed by other co-processors (DMA for guys
like the blitter et al.).
On the other hand, the ROMS are slower than 32-RAMs, first
because they're ROMs and also because they're 16 bits. Since the
CPU is the only one to access them, it is nice to be able to use a
MMU to map the ROMs (_not_ the CHIP memory!) into fast 32bits RAM.
It is true that this unability will make quite a difference on
most of the common operations, since mapping the ROMs in fast RAM
does the trick, as far as most acceleration goes.
But the MMR does not need an MMU to protect a copy of AmigaDOS in RAM.
It has fast static RAM for this. In fact, if you aren't running
AmigaDOS 2.0, half the static ram can be used as cache. About the only
thing that can't be run on an Amiga with this stripped '030 is enforcer.
monty@sagpd1
>
>CSA are manufacturing cheap versions of their Mega Midget Racer cards which do
>not contain a MMU, which seems rather silly to me, since it means that memory
>access to chip ram is going to be slow since you won't be able to map this
>memory using the MMU to 32 bit ram.
>
>Adam
When The CSA people demoed these "cheap versions" of the midget racer
at our users group about 3 months ago they made a point of stressing the
fact that the hardware itself transfered the proms to 32 bit memory.
As for 32 bit access to chip ram I don't think this is possible on any
16 bit Amiga. MMU or not you don't gain 32 bit access to chip ram unless
you have a 32 bit chip bus. But then I have been wrong before :).
They did say that is was simple to later remove the inhibited 68030 and
install a regular 68030 at a later date.
Monty Saine
B.J. Anderson
> Monty Saine
While we're on the subject... anyone mind nailing down the reasons that the
Mega Midget can go for so much less than the GVP series stuff?
-Beej
--
I must remember to be cheerful and obedient.
I must remember to be cheerful and obedient.
I must remember to be cheerful and obedient.
mail: ande...@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu