What would you want in GS/OS 7.0?
D Finnigan
rewrite of 6, but still maintained compatibility, what would you have it
include?
Personally I'd like a redesigned, updated interface, better handling of
5.25" drives, and perhaps faster load time from disk (if that were
possible). A sort of "MultiFinder" like add-on would be nice too, and
perhaps some kind of Chooser desk accessory, to improve printer and network
selection.
Sheppy
> If Apple or someone were to release a GS/OS 7.0, which would be a total
> rewrite of 6, but still maintained compatibility, what would you have it
> include?
Well, just to be clear, there is no GS/OS 6. The current version of GS/
OS is 4.0.2, which is included on System Disk 6.0.1. :)
> Personally I'd like a redesigned, updated interface, better handling of
> 5.25" drives, and perhaps faster load time from disk (if that were
> possible). A sort of "MultiFinder" like add-on would be nice too, and
> perhaps some kind of Chooser desk accessory, to improve printer and network
> selection.
I don't think you can do much better supporting 5.25" drives than it
currently does. The fact is that Apple 5.25" drives aren't designed to
be particularly intelligent. Not sure what you could improve, really.
It already loads pretty fast, especially given the limitations of the
hardware.
Improved network and printer selection would be nice, although the
current interface isn't bad actually IMHO. However, support for
AppleShare over IP would be a must-have, IMHO. And even AppleShare
over IP has been phased out in Mac OS X Snow Leopard, so support for
other file sharing protocols would probably be good. WebDAV maybe, or
NFS.
Sheppy
D Finnigan
> On Dec 16, 3:33�pm, dog_...@macgui.com (D Finnigan) wrote:
>> If Apple or someone were to release a GS/OS 7.0, which would be a total
>> rewrite of 6, but still maintained compatibility, what would you have it
>> include?
>
> Well, just to be clear, there is no GS/OS 6. The current version of GS/
> OS is 4.0.2, which is included on System Disk 6.0.1. :)
>
Ah, you know I had a funny feeling as I was posting that someone would call
me out on that. I've noticed that while space-booting to see the loading
messages that it is indeed GS/OS 4.x. So is it just Finder 6.x, then?
>> Personally I'd like a redesigned, updated interface, better handling of
>> 5.25" drives, and perhaps faster load time from disk (if that were
>> possible). A sort of "MultiFinder" like add-on would be nice too, and
>> perhaps some kind of Chooser desk accessory, to improve printer and
>> network
>> selection.
>
> I don't think you can do much better supporting 5.25" drives than it
> currently does. The fact is that Apple 5.25" drives aren't designed to
> be particularly intelligent. Not sure what you could improve, really.
>
Well, I meant more in the area of being able to read more formats and such,
but I guess there's too many hardware limitations for the rest of it.
> It already loads pretty fast, especially given the limitations of the
> hardware.
>
Well, that's subjective, I suppose. I just have a plain-jane 2.8 MHz IIgs
with 3.5" disk drives. Maybe you have something faster.
> Improved network and printer selection would be nice, although the
> current interface isn't bad actually IMHO. However, support for
> AppleShare over IP would be a must-have, IMHO. And even AppleShare
> over IP has been phased out in Mac OS X Snow Leopard, so support for
> other file sharing protocols would probably be good. WebDAV maybe, or
> NFS.
>
Yeah, definitely. Something like a light-weight Marinetti would be nice to
have as an integral part of the system, and even personal file-sharing too,
so the IIgs could act as a file server for other Apples, or even a Mac or
two. :-)
I usually think of more improvements as I use the System, but I haven't used
it in awhile, so this is what I remember in particular. The IIgs was just a
weird system overall, IMO.
David Empson
> On Dec 16, 3:33 pm, dog_...@macgui.com (D Finnigan) wrote:
> > If Apple or someone were to release a GS/OS 7.0, which would be a total
> > rewrite of 6, but still maintained compatibility, what would you have it
> > include?
>
> Well, just to be clear, there is no GS/OS 6. The current version of GS/
> OS is 4.0.2, which is included on System Disk 6.0.1. :)
>
> > Personally I'd like a redesigned, updated interface, better handling of
> > 5.25" drives, and perhaps faster load time from disk (if that were
> > possible). A sort of "MultiFinder" like add-on would be nice too, and
> > perhaps some kind of Chooser desk accessory, to improve printer and network
> > selection.
[...]
> Improved network and printer selection would be nice, although the
> current interface isn't bad actually IMHO. However, support for
> AppleShare over IP would be a must-have, IMHO. And even AppleShare
> over IP has been phased out in Mac OS X Snow Leopard
No it hasn't. AFP over IP is the native file sharing protocol in Snow
Leopard (Mac OS X 10.6).
Snow Leopard still has server-side support for the version of AFP over
IP being used by Mac OS 9 as a client, so you can connect from Mac OS 9
to 10.6. There was a bug in 10.6.0 and 10.6.1 which prevented this
working, but it was fixed in 10.6.2.
Snow Leopard dropped client-side support for the version of AFP over IP
supported by Mac OS 9's Personal File Sharing, so you can't connect from
Mac OS X 10.6 to Mac OS 9, but Snow Leopard can connect to older
versions of Mac OS X.
Snow Leopard dropped the last vestiges of AppleTalk. Printing was the
only AppleTalk feature which remained in Leopard (Mac OS X 10.5). I
think you have to go back to Panther (Mac OS X 10.3) for AFP over
AppleTalk, but I don't know if it was compatible with the AFP client in
the Apple II.
If I ever need to transfer files via AppleTalk, I have a LocalTalk
connection between my Apple IIgs and my PowerMac 8600 running Mac OS 9,
then I have an Ethernet connection to my MacBook Pro running 10.6.2.
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
Toinet
>
> > I don't think you can do much better supporting 5.25" drives than it
> > currently does. The fact is that Apple 5.25" drives aren't designed to
> > be particularly intelligent. Not sure what you could improve, really.
>
> Well, I meant more in the area of being able to read more formats and such,
> but I guess there's too many hardware limitations for the rest of it.
>
http://www.brutal-deluxe.fr/projects/appledisk525/index.html
The driver:
- reads faster (because it does not check for DEAAEB end markers)
- handles more 6*2 formats (D5AA96 and D4AA96 header markers)
- handles 5*3 format (D5AAB5 header marker)
- reads 256, 512 and 1024 bytes blocks
Linked to new FSTs, DOS 3.2 / DOS 3.3 / RDOS 3.3 and RDOS 3.2 (I still
have not done anything usable for CP/M), the driver does a lot more
than the original version,
antoine
macdog
Built in support for HFS.
Built in support for MS-Dos disks
Minor annoyance change request.....change the way the mouse clicks/
drag to open menu items....a la "2 menu" NDA (if i am remembering the
nda correctly) style of opening/menu selection with mouse.
Better clock..like cronos?
built in screen saver
Just a couple ideas.
Jamie.
Jeff Blakeney
The weird thing is, most of the suggestions I've seen so far have all
been handled by add-ons already. GS/OS was well designed from the
beginning which is why I still love it.
I'm not sure what a "redesigned, updated interface" would mean but if
you want to change the look of your system, I believe it is currently
possibly but I've never used themes or skins on my Windows machine, I'm
not sure I'd use them on my IIgs.
Someone mentioned adding a lighter version of Marinetti. I don't think
that is possible seeing as the current Marinetti consists of a PIF that
is 42 KB, a CDEV that is 17 KB and a link layer that can range from 8 KB
to 20 KB (I didn't check the size of the LANceGS or Uthernet link
layers, though) and all the other link layers can be deleted if you
don't need them. Those sizes are how much disk space they take and
totals only 67 KB to 89 KB. You're not going to get much smaller than that.
Things like HFS and MS-DOS support, screen savers, clocks, clicking to
open and then select a menu item rather than dragging and FSTs for
reading other 5.25" formats are all things that are either currently
available for or could be written for System 6.0.1. Not to say these
things could be improved with a new version of the system software, just
that a new OS isn't really needed for those sorts of things.
What I would like to see that would require a new OS would be:
- Completely separate the FST system from the OS and documenting the FST
system so that writing other FSTs would be easier.
- Rewrite all the tool sets so that they are safe to use in a preemptive
multitasking environment.
- Add preemptive multitasking capability.
- Perhaps a different way of programming could be created too so instead
of every program having their own event loop, have a single OS
controlled event loop that your program simply tells what events it is
interested in and what code to call when those events occur. It is an
interesting idea my brother and I came up with but we haven't worked
on details.
What I woiuld like to see that would probably benefit from being in a
new OS but wouldn't necessarily need a new OS:
- Rewrite the display system so that it will be easier to update to
different video hardware. Something like FaceLift that never was
finished.
- Network file sharing support.
That's just off the top of my head. I can probably come up with more
when I have time to think about it a little more. :)
IUnknown
> - Rewrite all the tool sets so that they are safe to use in a preemptive
> multitasking environment.
> - Add preemptive multitasking capability.
(disclaimer: didn't get much sleep last night- ramblings of a madman)
Sadly, this is one of those things that will likely never be possible,
at least not without requiring additional hardware.
The IIgs GS/OS toolbox shared much of it's architecture with the early
versions of macOS. Even with a proper MMU, apple was never able to get
a reliable version of it working on a mac.
The IIgs is complicated because there is no memory protection in
place, which means that all toolbox calls need to ensure that the
descriptor handles and memory they are working with isn't being used
by someone else... which would require each toolbox call to be
prefixed by some overriding process identifier handle....
Ultimately, rewriting the toolbox is a neat idea, but since the
original interfaces need to retain binary compatibility (stack
signatures cannot change), a massive 'thunking layer' would need to be
established. The nice thing is that the vast majority of toolbox calls
operated using descriptor handles, which was good design from the
outset.
So, a call like (stupid example, not correct in any way shape or form)
getGrafPort(&handle)
.. would need to internally make a call to
thunkedGetGrafPort(getCurrentProcessHandle(), &handle)
.. which at that point, the 'preemption manager' would then validate
the use of that handle/resource against the process identifier
specified....
The system would still be vulnerable to use of resources not managed
by the gs/os toolbox, which is an entirely different challenge.
Then there is the issue of stack/state management when switching
between processes..... With a 2.7mhz main processor, the overhead
of switching the stack and register state (including hardware state
like video modes, etc) would be substantial.
Now, in theory... if you could have a simple slot 2 card that
implemented some of this logic/state management in a coprocessor
(fpga) or something akin to that, it may be viable... but the key is
being able to trigger the hardware to perform context switches.
Even as a proof of concept, you would need a bare minimum of an
external hardware interrupt generator .....
I don't know A2GS hardware very well, so I assume the slots/bus allow
for hardware interrupts.
Sheppy
> > - Rewrite all the tool sets so that they are safe to use in a preemptive
> > multitasking environment.
> > - Add preemptive multitasking capability.
I don't think multitasking and the like is a viable option. It can be
done in theory but is such an enormous undertaking that it isn't in my
opinion worth tackling. Given the problems inherent when you have no
memory protection, it would only serve to make the system less stable,
I think.
Sheppy
Michael J. Mahon
>>- Rewrite all the tool sets so that they are safe to use in a preemptive
>> multitasking environment.
>>- Add preemptive multitasking capability.
>
>
> (disclaimer: didn't get much sleep last night- ramblings of a madman)
>
> Sadly, this is one of those things that will likely never be possible,
> at least not without requiring additional hardware.
>
> The IIgs GS/OS toolbox shared much of it's architecture with the early
> versions of macOS. Even with a proper MMU, apple was never able to get
> a reliable version of it working on a mac.
>
> The IIgs is complicated because there is no memory protection in
> place, which means that all toolbox calls need to ensure that the
> descriptor handles and memory they are working with isn't being used
> by someone else... which would require each toolbox call to be
> prefixed by some overriding process identifier handle....
This isn't really necessary, since the OS always knows which process
it last dispatched, and that's the only one that can be calling.
-michael
NadaNet and AppleCrate II: parallel computing for Apple II computers!
Home page: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon
"The wastebasket is our most important design
tool--and it's seriously underused."
mdj
Most of the machinery has already been done though. I forget the name
of the "MultiFinder" like extension, but that provided a great
enhancement to the 'experience'.
IMO the biggest improvement would be do to what Apple (and the open
source community) now do: ship the development tools with the system.
Matt
Mark Frischknecht
--
Close this world. txen eht nepO
|
Mark Frischknecht
sicklittlemonkey
> IMO the biggest improvement would be do to what Apple (and the open
> source community) now do: ship the development tools with the system.
Heh, +1 insightful! ;-)
Also, a package manager would be nice.
Cheers,
Nick.
Toinet
The Manager by Brainstorm Software, sold by Seven Hills
av
Mitchell Spector
>If Apple or someone were to release a GS/OS 7.0, which would be a total
>rewrite of 6, but still maintained compatibility, what would you have it
>include?
I think seeing a System 6.1 update is more realistic than System 7.0,
considering all the work involved (not impossible mind you, years after
the Apple III had been abandoned by Apple, its users commissioned
an independent programmer to write a new OS and they got one).
Some basic things I'd like to see...
- Finished MS-DOS FST (support for writing)
- Sticky pull-down and contextual menus (i.e. one mouse click)
- Auto-scrolling windows (i.e. selecting icons with elastic tool)
- Built-in screen saver
- Built-in menu clock
- Drag & drop launching (i.e. drag document onto application)
- View GIF, JPEG, BMP (thumb-nail only) within Finder
- Hear MIDI, WAV, AIFF, MIDIsynth within Finder
- Open SHK compressed documents within Finder
Well, rather than go on, basically lots of little things involving the
GUI that have been present in Windows and MacOS for years.
What I'd love to see, probably more than an OS update, is
someone release a new video game or demo on the same
level as Rastan or Mega Demo. :) It's been at least a decade
since I've seen anything new....yet people still code for other
orphaned machines to this day. Seems wasteful not seeing
the same for the IIGS...
Mitchell Spector
David Empson
> Sheppy <the.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Improved network and printer selection would be nice, although the
> > current interface isn't bad actually IMHO. However, support for
> > AppleShare over IP would be a must-have, IMHO. And even AppleShare
> > over IP has been phased out in Mac OS X Snow Leopard
>
> No it hasn't. AFP over IP is the native file sharing protocol in Snow
> Leopard (Mac OS X 10.6).
Correction to my previous post, in case anyone is wanting to do file
sharing between Mac OS 9 (or earlier) and Mac OS X 10.6: it turns out I
had the compatibility backwards.
Mac OS X 10.6.2 as a client can connect to Mac OS 9 (running File
Sharing over TCP/IP) as a server, but the other way around does not
work. (I just confirmed this.)
As I noted in my previous post, there was a bug in Mac OS X 10.6 and
10.6.1 which prevented both directions from working, but it was fixed in
10.6.2.
This means that you cannot connect via AFP between Mac OS 8.6 (or
earlier) and Mac OS X 10.6 (or later), unless you have a third party
AFP-over-IP server running on the 8.6 (or earlier) machine. I don't have
AppleShare IP so I don't know how it might change the situation, but it
is possible that it will allow a wider compatibility overlap.
ObAppleII: A Mac OS 9 server with File Sharing and TCP/IP support
enabled is still compatible as a go-between for getting files from an
Apple II (via AFP over AppleTalk) to any version of Mac OS X (via AFP
over TCP/IP).
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
tonykavadias
There is HyperCard GS for starters, I suppose!
--
-- tonza