MP/M-86 - CP/M

This is a discussion on MP/M-86 - CP/M ; From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up. I was looking thru 'lastdri.zip' donated by Randy to Gaby's site, and I noticed 'MPM86SRL.A86' which is a file serialization program to imprint a serial number into source files from ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32

Thread: MP/M-86

  1. MP/M-86

    From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up. I was looking thru
    'lastdri.zip' donated by Randy to Gaby's site, and I noticed
    'MPM86SRL.A86' which is a file serialization program to imprint a
    serial number into source files from DRI, this is an OEM utility. In
    this case it installs the serial number into the system files of MP/
    M-86 so that each software package is uniquely serial numbered.

    The source to this utility shows interresting date--

    ; title 'Serialization Program for MP/M-86 09/14/81'
    version EQU 20 ;version 2.0
    system EQU 1 ;MP/M 86 system
    ; Serialization Program for MP/M 86 diskettes

    ; Copyright (C) 1979, 1980, 1981
    ; Digital Research
    ; Box 579 Pacific Grove
    ; California, 93950
    ; Revised:
    ; 14 Sept 81 by Thomas Rolander (MP/M II 8080)
    ; 18 Sept 81 by Danny Horovitz (MP/M-8086)
    ; '$' signs taken out of identifiers and labels for
    ; ASM86 compatibility, names of serialized
    ; programs changed, only one disk to be serialized

    So already, by the time of the introduction of the IBM-PC, there is MP/
    M-86 and version 2.0, at that. The jpeg image of the diskette has the
    date 8 Oct 1981, and 'MP/M-86 v 2.0' and 'altos'. The 'altos' likely
    means the diskette file system for storage type. The development
    system was likely the Intel SBC 86/12, as mentioned in other sources.
    While there is CCP/M-86 for the ibm-pc, no strict mp/m-86 version for
    the ibm-pc has been found to my knowlege. It is pretty well
    established that mp/m-86 morphed into the ccp/m-86 offering early- as
    version ccp/m-86 v 2.0.

    Steve



  2. Re: MP/M-86

    On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:46:43 -0700 (PDT), s_dubrovich@yahoo.com wrote:

    >From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up.


    >So already, by the time of the introduction of the IBM-PC, there is MP/
    >M-86 and version 2.0, at that.


    There is ample evidence to show historians what really happened.

    IBM wanted to compete with Apple. They wanted a dumbed down
    crippled desktop computer. With cassette tape-drive storage no less.

    The most important 'feature' had to be that it wouldn't take anything
    away from their lucrative minicomputer sales and leasing operations.

    For this reason alone, IBM chose the 8088 instead of the 8086, for
    which they ALREADY had mask sets, and which they were ALREADY
    producing in their chip foundry. This let them tell mini customers the
    IBM PC wasn't really a 16-bit computer, it only had an 8bit processor.

    IBM needed an operating system. The then-current 'state-of-the-art'
    was MP/M, and Digital had been working hard on the -86 version,
    WHICH THEY DEMONSTRATED FOR IBM ON THAT FATEFUL
    DAY WHEN IBM CAME CALLING. Multi-tasking? Oh, the HORROR!

    IBM was pissed - this wasn't anything like what they wanted.

    Kildall and Co wanted to give the world the best they had to offer,
    and I don't think Gary ever really grasped that IBM operated on a
    different agenda. Just as he never really understood the depths of
    Tim Paterson's treachery and Gates deceit and outright law breaking.

    In retaliation, which mis-fired and hit the PC industry as a whole and
    not just the IBM corporation, Kildall NEVER produced an authorized,
    or even specifically targeted, IBM PC version of MP/M-86.

    It's tragic that he didn't rush it out the door the summer of 1981.

    There was nothing stopping him but wounded pride.

    But that's a story for another day.

    Bill


  3. Re: MP/M-86

    As someone who was in the industry and who knew both Gary and Bill AT
    THE TIME (and I was closer to Gary than Bill), I have never agreed with
    your views of what happened, or your summary below.

    First, I believe that the issues between IBM and DRI were a culture
    clash, and had little to do with any software that was or was not shown
    to IBM.

    Second, I believe that the OS "pitched" to IBM was CP/M-86, not MP/M-86
    as you seem to suggest. I am not implying that MP/M-86 was not shown or
    offered to IBM, but IBM wasn't looking for a multi-user or multi-tasking
    OS, and MP/M-86 was not finished at the time. Don't forget that the
    IBM-PC shipped in 1981, but was developed in 1980. Regardless, the
    critical issue between DRI and IBM was cultural in nature. Any issues
    involving the software itself (whatever it was) were tertiary.

    Third, Tim Patterson was a programmer, not a businessman. He reverse
    engineered parts of the user interface and api of CP/M-86. By the
    standards of the day, I don't think he necessarily did anything illegal.
    He did not know what would LATER happen to the OS he was writing. You
    act like he did what he did with knowledge of LATER events that didn't
    even involve him (the deal to sell 86-DOS to Microsoft was not a
    decision that he was not a direct party to; he only wrote 86-DOS for
    SCP, he didn't OWN it. Further, the people who did own 86-DOS and SCP
    had no knowledge of what MS was doing with IBM, and even MS didn't know
    just how significant the events that were unfolding would later prove to
    be, or where they would lead).

    You seem to me to have an axe to grind, and it seems to color your
    perception of things. You also seem to have your perception of those
    events colored by our retrospective knowledge of SUBSEQUENT events,
    things that did happen [later] but that the parties in question didn't
    know, at that time, would happen.

    There was, in my opinion, a lot more accident and luck in the way things
    turned out than treachery or deceit.



    Bill wrote:
    > On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:46:43 -0700 (PDT), s_dubrovich@yahoo.com wrote:
    >
    >>From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up.

    >
    >> So already, by the time of the introduction of the IBM-PC, there is MP/
    >> M-86 and version 2.0, at that.

    >
    > There is ample evidence to show historians what really happened.
    >
    > IBM wanted to compete with Apple. They wanted a dumbed down
    > crippled desktop computer. With cassette tape-drive storage no less.
    >
    > The most important 'feature' had to be that it wouldn't take anything
    > away from their lucrative minicomputer sales and leasing operations.
    >
    > For this reason alone, IBM chose the 8088 instead of the 8086, for
    > which they ALREADY had mask sets, and which they were ALREADY
    > producing in their chip foundry. This let them tell mini customers the
    > IBM PC wasn't really a 16-bit computer, it only had an 8bit processor.
    >
    > IBM needed an operating system. The then-current 'state-of-the-art'
    > was MP/M, and Digital had been working hard on the -86 version,
    > WHICH THEY DEMONSTRATED FOR IBM ON THAT FATEFUL
    > DAY WHEN IBM CAME CALLING. Multi-tasking? Oh, the HORROR!
    >
    > IBM was pissed - this wasn't anything like what they wanted.
    >
    > Kildall and Co wanted to give the world the best they had to offer,
    > and I don't think Gary ever really grasped that IBM operated on a
    > different agenda. Just as he never really understood the depths of
    > Tim Paterson's treachery and Gates deceit and outright law breaking.
    >
    > In retaliation, which mis-fired and hit the PC industry as a whole and
    > not just the IBM corporation, Kildall NEVER produced an authorized,
    > or even specifically targeted, IBM PC version of MP/M-86.
    >
    > It's tragic that he didn't rush it out the door the summer of 1981.
    >
    > There was nothing stopping him but wounded pride.
    >
    > But that's a story for another day.
    >
    > Bill
    >

    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  4. Re: MP/M-86

    Hello, Steve!

    > From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up.


    Indeed.

    > I was looking thru
    > 'lastdri.zip' donated by Randy to Gaby's site, and I noticed
    > 'MPM86SRL.A86' which is a file serialization program to imprint a
    > serial number into source files from DRI, this is an OEM utility. In
    > this case it installs the serial number into the system files of MP/
    > M-86 so that each software package is uniquely serial numbered.


    Yes, there are several versions of SERIAL available. (Remember the
    "Synchronization error"?)

    > The source to this utility shows interresting date--


    > So already, by the time of the introduction of the IBM-PC, there is MP/
    > M-86 and version 2.0, at that. The jpeg image of the diskette has the
    > date 8 Oct 1981, and 'MP/M-86 v 2.0' and 'altos'. The 'altos' likely
    > means the diskette file system for storage type. The development
    > system was likely the Intel SBC 86/12, as mentioned in other sources.


    Argh! I am afraid I do not understanding it like you. You may remember that
    the most powerful version of CP/M was MP/M-II? Notice the "II", meaning
    "2"... So, when they changed processors, why would not he had started with
    "Version 2.0"? (It is the BDOS Version Number that is important, not the
    processor!)

    Regarding "Altos", CP/M Plus (which is a single-user version of MP/M-II) was
    written for an "Altos ACS-8000" (connected to 4 terminals and one VAX..., as
    you can check on the Internet, in the Appendix of the "CP/M Plus System
    Guide") and, in one of his letter, Gary Kildall says that Altos made a
    fortune selling MP/M-II systems... (If you search the Internet, you will
    find quite a lot of links to "Altos" and "MP/M-II". They were made in
    California. Unfortunately, I have never seen one in France.)

    > While there is CCP/M-86 for the ibm-pc, no strict mp/m-86 version for
    > the ibm-pc has been found to my knowlege. It is pretty well
    > established that mp/m-86 morphed into the ccp/m-86 offering early- as
    > version ccp/m-86 v 2.0.


    The reason why "mp/m-86 morphed into ccp/m" is the rotten hardware of the
    IBM Clown. Remember that MP/M-II managed 4 terminals on a Z-80 running at
    4-MHz. Because of the "memory-mapped" video of the IBM Clown, it was no
    longer possible to produce reliable multi-user systems for the IBM Clown.
    That's why Digital Research was giving a card with its CCP/M systems, card
    on which were plugged the additional "consoles" (screen + keyboard),
    enabling several terminals to run trouble-free on an IBM Clown running
    CCP/M.

    Waoh! Hope to have been clear.

    Yours Sincerely,
    Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France




  5. Re: MP/M-86

    On Jul 1, 2:30*pm, "Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France"
    wrote:
    > Hello, Steve!
    >

    Hello Emmanuel!
    > > From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up.

    >
    > Indeed.
    >
    > > I was looking thru
    > > 'lastdri.zip' *donated by Randy to Gaby's site, and I noticed
    > > 'MPM86SRL.A86' *which is a file serialization program to imprint a
    > > serial number into source files from DRI, this is an OEM utility. *In
    > > this case it installs the serial number into the system files of MP/
    > > M-86 so that each software package is uniquely serial numbered.

    >
    > Yes, there are several versions of SERIAL available. (Remember the
    > "Synchronization error"?)
    >

    But this one is for patching the mp/m-86 system files...

    > > The source to this utility shows interresting date--
    > > So already, by the time of the introduction of the IBM-PC, there is MP/
    > > M-86 and version 2.0, at that. *The jpeg image of the diskette has the
    > > date 8 Oct 1981, and 'MP/M-86 v 2.0' *and 'altos'. *The 'altos' likely
    > > means the diskette file system for storage type. *The development
    > > system was likely the Intel SBC 86/12, as mentioned in other sources.

    >
    > Argh! I am afraid I do not understanding it like you. You may remember that
    > the most powerful version of CP/M was MP/M-II? Notice the "II", meaning
    > "2"... So, when they changed processors, why would not he had started with
    > "Version 2.0"? (It is the BDOS Version Number that is important, not the
    > processor!)
    >

    Good question, however cp/m-86 for the IBM PC as offered by IBM was cp/
    m-86 version 1.0, with DRI's release for the IBM PC, it was version
    1.1, even though the bdos version was 2.2 for both. The IBM PC (only)
    version 1.1 of cp/m-86 does _not_ support a hard drive. The IBM PC&XT
    version 1.1 _does_ support a hard drive. But probably, you are
    correct, I think the main difference between mp/m l and mp/m ll was
    file locking, mainly, as I recall it.

    > Regarding "Altos", CP/M Plus (which is a single-user version of MP/M-II) was
    > written for an "Altos ACS-8000" (connected to 4 terminals and one VAX..., as
    > you can check on the Internet, in the Appendix of the "CP/M Plus System
    > Guide") and, in one of his letter, Gary Kildall says that Altos made a
    > fortune selling MP/M-II systems... (If you search the Internet, you will
    > find quite a lot of links to "Altos" and "MP/M-II". They were made in
    > California. Unfortunately, I have never seen one in France.)
    >

    Did the Altos have an 8086 cpu? (A quick search shows a Z-80) so it
    was used for storage or cross compiling in regards to the diskette
    under discussion. The diskette holds mp/m-86 files.

    > > While there is CCP/M-86 for the ibm-pc, no strict mp/m-86 version for
    > > the ibm-pc has been found to my knowlege. *It is pretty well
    > > established that mp/m-86 morphed into the ccp/m-86 offering early- as
    > > version ccp/m-86 v 2.0.

    >
    > The reason why "mp/m-86 morphed into ccp/m" is the rotten hardware of the
    > IBM Clown. Remember that MP/M-II managed 4 terminals on a Z-80 running at
    > 4-MHz. Because of the "memory-mapped" video of the IBM Clown, it was no
    > longer possible to produce reliable multi-user systems for the IBM Clown.
    > That's why Digital Research was giving a card with its CCP/M systems, card
    > on which were plugged the additional "consoles" (screen + keyboard),
    > enabling several terminals to run trouble-free on an IBM Clown running
    > CCP/M.
    >

    Well.. the memory mapped video had nothing to do with it:
    a) quite a few cp/m-80 systems had memory mapped video, the Amstrad
    PCW8256 was one, as you know that one.

    b) As to the IBM PC/XT and DRI's Starlan, the addin board was for 4
    additional rs232 ports with its own interrupt vector address to attach
    4 more terminals for an 'office' setup of 5 terminals controlled by
    multiuser CCP/M-86.

    > Waoh! Hope to have been clear.
    >


    Me too!

    Steve

    > Yours Sincerely,
    > Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France



  6. Re: MP/M-86

    On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 21:30:23 +0200, "Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France"
    wrote:

    >Hello, Steve!
    >
    >> From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up.

    >
    >Indeed.
    >
    >> I was looking thru
    >> 'lastdri.zip' donated by Randy to Gaby's site, and I noticed
    >> 'MPM86SRL.A86' which is a file serialization program to imprint a
    >> serial number into source files from DRI, this is an OEM utility. In
    >> this case it installs the serial number into the system files of MP/
    >> M-86 so that each software package is uniquely serial numbered.

    >
    >Yes, there are several versions of SERIAL available. (Remember the
    >"Synchronization error"?)
    >
    >> The source to this utility shows interresting date--

    >
    >> So already, by the time of the introduction of the IBM-PC, there is MP/
    >> M-86 and version 2.0, at that. The jpeg image of the diskette has the
    >> date 8 Oct 1981, and 'MP/M-86 v 2.0' and 'altos'. The 'altos' likely
    >> means the diskette file system for storage type. The development
    >> system was likely the Intel SBC 86/12, as mentioned in other sources.

    >
    >Argh! I am afraid I do not understanding it like you. You may remember that
    >the most powerful version of CP/M was MP/M-II? Notice the "II", meaning
    >"2"... So, when they changed processors, why would not he had started with
    >"Version 2.0"? (It is the BDOS Version Number that is important, not the
    >processor!)
    >
    >Regarding "Altos", CP/M Plus (which is a single-user version of MP/M-II) was
    >written for an "Altos ACS-8000" (connected to 4 terminals and one VAX..., as
    >you can check on the Internet, in the Appendix of the "CP/M Plus System
    >Guide") and, in one of his letter, Gary Kildall says that Altos made a
    >fortune selling MP/M-II systems... (If you search the Internet, you will
    >find quite a lot of links to "Altos" and "MP/M-II". They were made in
    >California. Unfortunately, I have never seen one in France.)
    >
    >> While there is CCP/M-86 for the ibm-pc, no strict mp/m-86 version for
    >> the ibm-pc has been found to my knowlege. It is pretty well
    >> established that mp/m-86 morphed into the ccp/m-86 offering early- as
    >> version ccp/m-86 v 2.0.

    >
    >The reason why "mp/m-86 morphed into ccp/m" is the rotten hardware of the
    >IBM Clown. Remember that MP/M-II managed 4 terminals on a Z-80 running at
    >4-MHz. Because of the "memory-mapped" video of the IBM Clown, it was no
    >longer possible to produce reliable multi-user systems for the IBM Clown.
    >That's why Digital Research was giving a card with its CCP/M systems, card
    >on which were plugged the additional "consoles" (screen + keyboard),
    >enabling several terminals to run trouble-free on an IBM Clown running
    >CCP/M.


    Never seen that video thing here. All the CCP/M on PC that I'd seen
    here used a 4 (or 8) port serial card and a conventional terminal..
    In the case of the customer I serviced it was a flock of Telvideo
    955s. With a 286 cpu and Extended memory and two D540 32MB drives it
    was a very nice system for 3-5 users.. Still have a 386/33 setup
    with that tucked away along with media and manuals.


    Allison


    >
    >Waoh! Hope to have been clear.
    >
    >Yours Sincerely,
    >Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France
    >
    >



  7. Re: MP/M-86

    On Jul 1, 3:30*pm, "Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France"
    wrote:
    > Hello, Steve!
    >
    > > From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up.

    >
    > Indeed.
    >
    > > I was looking thru
    > > 'lastdri.zip' *donated by Randy to Gaby's site, and I noticed
    > > 'MPM86SRL.A86' *which is a file serialization program to imprint a
    > > serial number into source files from DRI, this is an OEM utility. *In
    > > this case it installs the serial number into the system files of MP/
    > > M-86 so that each software package is uniquely serial numbered.

    >
    > Yes, there are several versions of SERIAL available. (Remember the
    > "Synchronization error"?)
    >
    > > The source to this utility shows interresting date--
    > > So already, by the time of the introduction of the IBM-PC, there is MP/
    > > M-86 and version 2.0, at that. *The jpeg image of the diskette has the
    > > date 8 Oct 1981, and 'MP/M-86 v 2.0' *and 'altos'. *The 'altos' likely
    > > means the diskette file system for storage type. *The development
    > > system was likely the Intel SBC 86/12, as mentioned in other sources.

    >
    > Argh! I am afraid I do not understanding it like you. You may remember that
    > the most powerful version of CP/M was MP/M-II? Notice the "II", meaning
    > "2"... So, when they changed processors, why would not he had started with
    > "Version 2.0"? (It is the BDOS Version Number that is important, not the
    > processor!)
    >
    > Regarding "Altos", CP/M Plus (which is a single-user version of MP/M-II) was
    > written for an "Altos ACS-8000" (connected to 4 terminals and one VAX...,as
    > you can check on the Internet, in the Appendix of the "CP/M Plus System
    > Guide") and, in one of his letter, Gary Kildall says that Altos made a
    > fortune selling MP/M-II systems... (If you search the Internet, you will
    > find quite a lot of links to "Altos" and "MP/M-II". They were made in
    > California. Unfortunately, I have never seen one in France.)
    >
    > > While there is CCP/M-86 for the ibm-pc, no strict mp/m-86 version for
    > > the ibm-pc has been found to my knowlege. *It is pretty well
    > > established that mp/m-86 morphed into the ccp/m-86 offering early- as
    > > version ccp/m-86 v 2.0.

    >
    > The reason why "mp/m-86 morphed into ccp/m" is the rotten hardware of the
    > IBM Clown. Remember that MP/M-II managed 4 terminals on a Z-80 running at
    > 4-MHz. Because of the "memory-mapped" video of the IBM Clown, it was no
    > longer possible to produce reliable multi-user systems for the IBM Clown.
    > That's why Digital Research was giving a card with its CCP/M systems, card
    > on which were plugged the additional "consoles" (screen + keyboard),
    > enabling several terminals to run trouble-free on an IBM Clown running
    > CCP/M.
    >
    > Waoh! Hope to have been clear.
    >
    > Yours Sincerely,
    > Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France


    Emmanuel,

    For all you intelligence and knowledge on all things CP/M which I have
    noticed over the years reading this group you possess a lot of, I
    really wish you would stop using "IBM Clown" in your posts. I degrades
    what you are posting. It's like listening to someone who every 4th
    word says "ummm".

    Bill H

    P.S. we all have had our pet names for the systems we didn't like at
    one time or another, the Crapple, the Commode, the Trash 80, the
    Crackentosh, MessyDos, Windoze etc.

  8. Re: MP/M-86

    no.spam@no.uce.bellatlantic.net wrote:

    >> The reason why "mp/m-86 morphed into ccp/m" is the rotten hardware of the
    >> IBM Clown. Remember that MP/M-II managed 4 terminals on a Z-80 running at
    >> 4-MHz. Because of the "memory-mapped" video of the IBM Clown, it was no
    >> longer possible to produce reliable multi-user systems for the IBM Clown.
    >> That's why Digital Research was giving a card with its CCP/M systems, card
    >> on which were plugged the additional "consoles" (screen + keyboard),
    >> enabling several terminals to run trouble-free on an IBM Clown running
    >> CCP/M.

    >
    > Never seen that video thing here. All the CCP/M on PC that I'd seen
    > here used a 4 (or 8) port serial card and a conventional terminal..
    > In the case of the customer I serviced it was a flock of Telvideo
    > 955s. With a 286 cpu and Extended memory and two D540 32MB drives it
    > was a very nice system for 3-5 users.. Still have a 386/33 setup
    > with that tucked away along with media and manuals.


    Later variants like Concurrent DOS used multi-display, memory mapped video
    boards. The one I'm familiar with had four multi-pair cables that ran up to
    50-ft. to a little interface box. You plugged an MDA display, PC keyboard and
    a serial mouse in and had a nice, lightweight terminal. The host system could
    additionally have a VGA adapter fitted for a total of (5) user stations.

    Even on a lowly 486/25, it was quite usable for business apps of the time
    (early 90s DOS programs - this was pre-Windows).

    The remotes supported Hercules graphics and we ran Generic CADD in monochrome
    graphics mode on them. Still have the hardware somewhere in the garage, I think.

    Steve

  9. Re: MP/M-86

    Re: "Remember that MP/M-II managed 4 terminals on a Z-80 running at
    4-MHz. Because of the "memory-mapped" video of the IBM Clown, it was no
    longer possible to produce reliable multi-user systems for the IBM Clown."

    MP/M-86 could EASILY (trivially) have been written to support User 0 on
    the PC internal video and other users on RS-232 serial ports to "dumb
    terminals". Granted, you couldn't run a lot of PC software on the other
    terminals, but in most cases MP/M-86 was used to run custom software.


    Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France wrote:
    > Hello, Steve!
    >
    >> From time to time, the subject of MP/M-86 pops up.

    >
    > Indeed.
    >
    >> I was looking thru
    >> 'lastdri.zip' donated by Randy to Gaby's site, and I noticed
    >> 'MPM86SRL.A86' which is a file serialization program to imprint a
    >> serial number into source files from DRI, this is an OEM utility. In
    >> this case it installs the serial number into the system files of MP/
    >> M-86 so that each software package is uniquely serial numbered.

    >
    > Yes, there are several versions of SERIAL available. (Remember the
    > "Synchronization error"?)
    >
    >> The source to this utility shows interresting date--

    >
    >> So already, by the time of the introduction of the IBM-PC, there is MP/
    >> M-86 and version 2.0, at that. The jpeg image of the diskette has the
    >> date 8 Oct 1981, and 'MP/M-86 v 2.0' and 'altos'. The 'altos' likely
    >> means the diskette file system for storage type. The development
    >> system was likely the Intel SBC 86/12, as mentioned in other sources.

    >
    > Argh! I am afraid I do not understanding it like you. You may remember that
    > the most powerful version of CP/M was MP/M-II? Notice the "II", meaning
    > "2"... So, when they changed processors, why would not he had started with
    > "Version 2.0"? (It is the BDOS Version Number that is important, not the
    > processor!)
    >
    > Regarding "Altos", CP/M Plus (which is a single-user version of MP/M-II) was
    > written for an "Altos ACS-8000" (connected to 4 terminals and one VAX..., as
    > you can check on the Internet, in the Appendix of the "CP/M Plus System
    > Guide") and, in one of his letter, Gary Kildall says that Altos made a
    > fortune selling MP/M-II systems... (If you search the Internet, you will
    > find quite a lot of links to "Altos" and "MP/M-II". They were made in
    > California. Unfortunately, I have never seen one in France.)
    >
    >> While there is CCP/M-86 for the ibm-pc, no strict mp/m-86 version for
    >> the ibm-pc has been found to my knowlege. It is pretty well
    >> established that mp/m-86 morphed into the ccp/m-86 offering early- as
    >> version ccp/m-86 v 2.0.

    >
    > The reason why "mp/m-86 morphed into ccp/m" is the rotten hardware of the
    > IBM Clown. Remember that MP/M-II managed 4 terminals on a Z-80 running at
    > 4-MHz. Because of the "memory-mapped" video of the IBM Clown, it was no
    > longer possible to produce reliable multi-user systems for the IBM Clown.
    > That's why Digital Research was giving a card with its CCP/M systems, card
    > on which were plugged the additional "consoles" (screen + keyboard),
    > enabling several terminals to run trouble-free on an IBM Clown running
    > CCP/M.
    >
    > Waoh! Hope to have been clear.
    >
    > Yours Sincerely,
    > Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France
    >
    >
    >

    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  10. Re: MP/M-86

    Hello, "Bill H"!

    > For all you intelligence and knowledge on all things CP/M which I have
    > noticed over the years reading this group you possess a lot of, I
    > really wish you would stop using "IBM Clown" in your posts. It degrades
    > what you are posting. It's like listening to someone who every 4th
    > word says "ummm".
    >
    > Bill H
    >
    > P.S. we all have had our pet names for the systems we didn't like at
    > one time or another, the Crapple, the Commode, the Trash 80, the
    > Crackentosh, MessyDos, Windoze etc.


    Many thanks for your comment, since I am writing in a foreign language, that
    I don't speak fluently (for me, English is a written language).

    However, I cannot pledge to no longer write it, since, in my humble opinion,
    it describes perfectly current "Personal Computers" running Micro****
    software...

    (The "Commode" was funny, since it is a French word. In France, we used
    "Therese" for the TRS-80. I have used MessDos and Windoze.)

    Yours Sincerely,
    Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France




  11. Re: MP/M-86

    Hello, Steve!

    Just a few quick remarks.

    > But this one is for patching the mp/m-86 system files...


    So what? As far as I remember (never used SERIAL), it can serialize COM and
    SPR files under CP/M Plus... (As long as the file as the proper 6 null bytes
    in the right place, it can be any filetype.)

    > Well.. the memory mapped video had nothing to do with it:


    I know. Maybe I should have written (in this foreign language): "People
    writing programs for Mess-DOS were almost always using direct memory mapped
    calls to display their stuff (contrary to CP/M programs, which used the
    BDOS). This made it impossible to port easily Mess-DOS programs under
    Concurrent CP/M, which, being multi-tasking and multi-user, needed to run
    only well-behaved programs, making their I/O through the BDOS."

    (You will note that this explanation is longer, but this is what I was
    thinking when I wrote my sentence.)

    To finish: I think that MP/M-86 (being a 8086 version of MP/M-II) was
    developed for the S-100 Bus. After the famous "IBM Clown" appeared, Gary
    Kildall made the decision to add "virtual screens", thus getting "Concurrent
    CP/M". So, it seems that he thought that the bus of the "IBM Clown" was not
    capable to develop easy add-on boards for additional terminals. When CCP/M
    failed, compatibility with Mess-DOS Version 1 was the goal, then
    compatibility with Mess-DOS Version 2, then ability to run VGA programs (as
    mentioned by Steven Hirsch). In the end, Concurrent DOS was probably
    impressive. However, I am a CP/M fan, so am more interested in CP/M Plus
    (for single user) and Concurrent CP/M (for multi-user).

    Yours Sincerely,
    Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France



  12. Re: MP/M-86

    "Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France" wrote:
    > Hello, "Bill H"!
    >
    >> For all you intelligence and knowledge on all things CP/M which
    >> I have noticed over the years reading this group you possess a
    >> lot of, I really wish you would stop using "IBM Clown" in your
    >> posts. It degrades what you are posting. It's like listening to
    >> someone who every 4th word says "ummm".

    >
    > Many thanks for your comment, since I am writing in a foreign
    > language, that I don't speak fluently (for me, English is a
    > written language).
    >
    > However, I cannot pledge to no longer write it, since, in my
    > humble opinion, it describes perfectly current "Personal
    > Computers" running Micro**** software...


    You're wrong here. That same hardware is running BSD, Linux, Unix,
    CP/M, Solix, etc., all of which have nothing to do with Microsoft.

    --
    [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
    [page]:
    Try the download section.



  13. Re: MP/M-86

    On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:15:46 -0400, CBFalconer wrote:
    > "Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France" wrote:
    >> Hello, "Bill H"!
    >>
    >>> For all you intelligence and knowledge on all things CP/M which
    >>> I have noticed over the years reading this group you possess a
    >>> lot of, I really wish you would stop using "IBM Clown" in your
    >>> posts. It degrades what you are posting. It's like listening to
    >>> someone who every 4th word says "ummm".

    >>
    >> Many thanks for your comment, since I am writing in a foreign
    >> language, that I don't speak fluently (for me, English is a
    >> written language).
    >>
    >> However, I cannot pledge to no longer write it, since, in my
    >> humble opinion, it describes perfectly current "Personal
    >> Computers" running Micro**** software...

    >
    > You're wrong here. That same hardware is running BSD, Linux, Unix,
    > CP/M, Solix, etc., all of which have nothing to do with Microsoft.


    Heckfire, back when the IBM clone was a new thing (the 'xt'), they
    were being used to run Minix and DR-DOS..

    --
    jimbo@sonic.net
    Linux: gawk, date, finger, wait, unzip, touch, nice, suck, strip, mount,
    fsck, umount, make clean, sleep. (Who needs porn when you have /usr/bin?)

  14. Re: MP/M-86

    Bill wrote:
    > In retaliation, which mis-fired and hit the PC industry as a whole and
    > not just the IBM corporation, Kildall NEVER produced an authorized,
    > or even specifically targeted, IBM PC version of MP/M-86.


    I'm pretty sure I've sold several original packages of MP/M-86 that
    specifically say "IBM PC".

    --
    David Griffith
    dgriffi@cs.csbuak.edu <-- Switch the 'b' and 'u'

  15. Re: MP/M-86

    I don't know why (I hope I am not developing paranoia) but I feel many
    persons react more to my (humble) opinions than to those of others?

    > However, I cannot pledge to no longer write it, since, in my humble

    opinion,
    > it describes perfectly current "Personal Computers" running Micro****
    > software...


    In particular, I have the big feeling that the IBM Clown is led by
    marketing, not by technical improvements. (Marketing dictated, of course, by
    Micro**** and Intel.)

    In general, since I used an Epson QX-10 under CP/M Plus during 15 years
    WITHOUT EVER HANGING IT ONCE (except when programming), I am appaled /
    despaired / (chose an appropriate English verb) when the Windows computers I
    am obliged to use to read the Internet hang... (and I seem to often change
    computer: probably every 2 years)
    Also, the more I learn the inside of the IBM Clown (from a programmer's
    perspective), the more I understand how superior the Epson QX-10 was,
    technically. You may remember my surprise when I discovered that the IBM
    Clown cannot underline something on screen, a thing that I had expected to
    be available, of course. Also, I could produce high-resolution graphics
    (640x480) on my QX-10 using high-level programs in BASIC. So far, the best
    that has been made under CP/M-86 is the VGA drivers of John Elliott, but I
    am sorry to report that they are inferior to what was available on a 8-bit
    system...

    I am sure that, if someone was really serious, he would also notice some
    obvious drawbacks of the IBM PC. Since I am typing this, I will end by
    noticing 2 such items:

    1) lack of keyboards of various sizes (have you ever bought a pair of
    gloves? How many gloves are made, per year? Glove manufacturers manage to
    produce gloves for all sizes. I don't know how many IBM Clown are produced
    every year, but, so far (and I have read microcomputer magazines for more
    than 20 years!), as far as I know, no IBM Clown maker has ever released a
    system with keyboards of different sizes (in the contrary: now, the fashion
    is bigger and bigger portables (with 17 inches screens!) and their keyboards
    are bigger and bigger, even going as far as to include a numeric keypad!
    Crazy!

    2) 20 years ago, there was a "full page screen". That is to say: a screen
    able to display the contents of a (to be printed) page totally on the
    screen. In contrast, 20 years later, I am ogliged to scroll 3 times my
    screen to display the contents of a page... (As we say in French: "This must
    be progress?")

    Yours Sincerely,
    Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France




  16. Re: MP/M-86

    *Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France* wrote on Thu, 08-07-03 16:57:
    >20 years ago, there was a "full page screen".


    This is a true and valid point. With my mother's eyesight not being
    what it used to be (heck, mine isn't to a very noticeable degree) I
    convinced her to buy a big 24" screen and we set it to a rather low
    resolution. Now what you always need and never get enough of is height,
    but as her screen is no longer 4:3 but 16:10, height is what you don't
    get.
    But then home computers always have been for gaming and now video,
    never for work. This is the one area where PCs under CP/M really were
    different and Windows boxes no longer are.


  17. Re: MP/M-86

    On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 19:30:53 -0700 (PDT), s_dubrovich@yahoo.com wrote:

    >On Jul 2, 4:40*pm, "Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France"
    >wrote:


    >> To finish: I think that MP/M-86 (being a 8086 version of MP/M-II) was
    >> developed for the S-100 Bus


    Just for nostalgia's sake I went out to my garage, and pulled a
    random copy of Computer Shopper to look through. The one
    on top is from July, 1988. Twnety years ago.

    If you haven't seen Computer Shopper from those days, it was
    around an inch and a half thick.

    This issue just happens to have a really excellent article about
    the evolving operating systems of the day. Along with detailed
    histories.

    It ends with the clear finding that OS/2 was so superior to
    anything else ever run on micros that it just naturally will take
    over the world.

    Oh, and there weren't any CD drives in the ads.

    But it says something about certain Altos models being built
    specifically to run MP/M86. They may have been it's biggest
    market.

    Bill

  18. Re: MP/M-86

    On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 00:37:49 -0500, Bill
    wrote:

    >On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 19:30:53 -0700 (PDT), s_dubrovich@yahoo.com wrote:
    >
    >>On Jul 2, 4:40*pm, "Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France"
    >>wrote:

    >
    >>> To finish: I think that MP/M-86 (being a 8086 version of MP/M-II) was
    >>> developed for the S-100 Bus

    >
    >Just for nostalgia's sake I went out to my garage, and pulled a
    >random copy of Computer Shopper to look through. The one
    >on top is from July, 1988. Twnety years ago.


    Oh, my! Page 181 ... Gary Kildall at the keyboard of an IBM PC, title
    of the article ''Digital Research: A New Era''. Kildall did some
    office cleaning and installed new executives; explains the changes
    in marketing strategy and product design, says booked orders for
    a million copies of DR's new DOS for PCs and clones.

    Bill

    (well, the damn thing IS 520 pages ... takes time to page through....)


  19. Re: MP/M-86

    Hello, "Bill"!

    > Just for nostalgia's sake I went out to my garage, and pulled a
    > random copy of Computer Shopper to look through. The one
    > on top is from July, 1988. Twenty years ago.


    > But it says something about certain Altos models being built
    > specifically to run MP/M86. They may have been it's biggest
    > market.


    Bill, if you have been reading this Newsgroup, you know that I am forever
    looking for interesting stuff (that I cannot find in France).

    So, is there an article dealing specifically with the Altos running under
    MP/M? (Could you scan it, if so?)

    Or, have you just seen several random comments about Altos? They seem to
    have been very successful selling MP/M systems... That's why I find it
    curious that they are so little know, now.

    Yours Sincerely,
    Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France




  20. Re: MP/M-86

    s_dubrovich@yahoo.com wrote:
    > On Jul 3, 5:57*am, dgri...@cs.csbuak.edu (Dave Griffith) wrote:
    >> Bill wrote:
    >> > In retaliation, which mis-fired and hit the PC industry as a whole and
    >> > not just the IBM corporation, Kildall NEVER produced an authorized,
    >> > or even specifically targeted, IBM PC version of MP/M-86.

    >>
    >> I'm pretty sure I've sold several original packages of MP/M-86 that
    >> specifically say "IBM PC".


    > You wouldn't happen to have a backup copy you could donate to Gaby's
    > site?


    Yes. I still have some left.

    --
    David Griffith
    dgriffi@cs.csbuak.edu <-- Switch the 'b' and 'u'

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast