was there a CPM 386 ?
*ProteanThread*
bell, bell and howell, other) computer system that said CPM+ 386.
would anyone happen to know what i am talking about ? (i'd like to find
more information if possible)
--
Woodzy
http://www.rtdos.com (alternate OS for games based on the classics)
http://rtdos.com/debate (politically charged discussions)
http://rtdos.com/forum (rtdos message boards)
http://rtdos.com/rtdos (rtdos active developer chat)
http://rtdos.com/chat
retro themed chats scheduled every Thursday @ 7PM MDT (0100 GMT) and
every Sunday @ 1PM MDT (1900 GMT)
Jack Peacock
news:786170f9a1561397...@news.teranews.com...
> i remember coming across a manual for a bell (not sure if it was packard
> bell, bell and howell, other) computer system that said CPM+ 386.
>
an 8086/286 version that used EMS/EEMS memory boards, and an XM version
which used the 386 memory manager to use memory over 1MB. It wasn't called
CP/M by then but did have a compatibility program to read/write CP/M format
disks.
Jack Peacock
*ProteanThread*
news:uoudndglPM-...@mpowercom.net...
That could be it, but how many other manufacturers used "bell" in the name ?
(or even packard) ?
Wim Ton
lower ones. Before 6 it also supported a 'CP/M compatibility interrupt'.
There was an article in Dr Dobbs about it. I used it to circumvent access
control programs, as most manufacturers forgot to hook it ;-)
Wim
Richard
> > i remember coming across a manual for a bell (not sure if it was packard
> > bell, bell and howell, other) computer system that said CPM+ 386.
> >
> DRI started using the 386 memory manager with Concurrent DOS V6. There was
> an 8086/286 version that used EMS/EEMS memory boards, and an XM version
> which used the 386 memory manager to use memory over 1MB. It wasn't called
> CP/M by then but did have a compatibility program to read/write CP/M format
> disks.
That's not quite true.
DRI Developed a Concurrent-DOS-386 which used the 386 memory
management, the first issue of this was equivalent to Concurrent-DOS
XM 5.2, issue 2 was equivalent to CDOS 6.1 and issue 3 was equivalent
to CDOS 6.2, but CDOS 6.x were separate and did not have a '386 memory
manager'.
CDOS-386 was renamed DR-Multiuser-DOS 5.x and VAR versions had several
other names.
Concurrent-DOS XM (5.1, 6.x) was the version that ran on 8086 (or
80286 in real mode) and could use an EEMS card (definitely _NOT_ an
EMS card) to bank switch additional memory. These were CDOS versions
5 and 6.
LarryXP
"Richard" <rip...@Azonic.co.nz> wrote in message
news:217e491a.04061...@posting.google.com...
Since we're beating a dead horse...
The XM version of Concurrent-DOS was the 80286 version using LIM memory.
The DRI version of Concurrent-DOS was made for Compaq and IBM 386's. It was
multiuser/multitasking. Maybe the most important thing for now is that it
supported both CP/M
and DOS floppy's and could tranfer data easily between the two. It also
supported ARCNET;
which was useful for transferring data between the CPM and DOS world.
I wonder if anyone still has a network up and running with both concurrent
CPM and DOS?
Richard
> Since we're beating a dead horse...
> The XM version of Concurrent-DOS was the 80286 version using LIM memory.
No, that is not true. CDOS XM would run on an 8088 PC-XT using EEMS
such as AST RAMPage or similar. I have this. There never was an
'80286 version' of Concurrent-DOS, the 286 was too broken for DOS
programs. There was a version of FlexOS for 286, but then FlexOS never
tried to run DOS programs.
LIM (Lotus Intel Microsoft) EMS memory was of no use for a
multi-tasking system because it only used a few segments in the memory
area between 640Kb and 1Mb to transfer memory. For a task switch this
would have involved copying RAM from the program TPA to that area 64K
at a time and then copying back the other program. Far too slow.
EEMS could bank switch _any_ address and so a context switch could be
done by changing less than 16 registers.
PCs and 286 ATs had to be brought down to only 256Kb on the
motherboard so that the EEMS could fill from there and this would be
bank switchable. If the AT could not be brought down to 256Kb - some
_required_ that the motherboard hold 512Kb - then it could not be used
for XM.
> The DRI version of Concurrent-DOS was made for Compaq and IBM 386's.
Sorry what do you mean by 'the DRI Version of'. Concurrent-CP/M-86
and CDOS and CDOS-386 were all by DRI. There were versions that were
OEM and versions that were built for PCs - for any PC clone, not just
Compaq and IBM, and not just CDOS-386.
For example I have a 'Concurrent-PC-DOS 86 XM 5.0' right here in my
hand that is for "PC, PC-XT, PC-AT and 100% compatible systems".
CDOS 6 and CDOS-386 were comtemporaneous versions and these were only
for PC compatibles. CDOS 6 was XM and could run on 8088 through 80286
in real mode with EEMS cards. CDOS-386 only ran on AT 386 or better.
> It was multiuser/multitasking.
Yeah, I used it, sold it, developed using it and for it for 20 years
since version 3.1. Prior to that I used MP/M (and other things). I
still have a VAR derivitive of CDOS-386, IMS Real/32, on my main desk
that I use everyday for some software development.
> Maybe the most important thing for now is that it
> supported both CP/M and DOS floppy's and could tranfer data easily between
> the two.
Actually only some versions supported varieties of disk formats. OEMs
could support whatever flavours they liked. CP/M formats were dropped
after CDOS 5.x.
> It also supported ARCNET;
> which was useful for transferring data between the CPM and DOS world.
Just because it can support the hardware card does not mean that it
supports the protocols. CDOS supported DR-NET on a variety of
networking hardware including ARCNET and Ethernet, but only to other
machines running DR-NET. I have some ICL machines here from the mid
80s that were networked with 'MicroLAN 2' using CDOS 4.1 and 5.1 XM
(and also Unix). I also had MicroLAN 2 cards and software for PCs so
they could be network terminals.
> I wonder if anyone still has a network up and running with both concurrent
> CPM and DOS?
Just two weeks ago I replaced a System Manager site with a Linux
system. System Manager was the DataPac VAR (Value Added Reseller)
version of DR-Multiuser-DOS and may be thought of as CDOS-386 issue 7.
This system was running OzStation software on the Windows (and DOS)
client machines which implements terminal sessions and file and print
serving using DR-NET to the System Manager server.
I sold several sites like this, there is just one of these left now,
apart from my Real/32 machine which has just one Windows network
client.