OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows - CP/M

This is a discussion on OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows - CP/M ; "Lee Hart" wrote in message news:43EC36DD.149B4912@earthlink.net... >>> Supposedly Dos was based on CP/M enough that software would run >>> on both. How close are they to each other? Could you run a copy >>> of Windows 1.0 on CP/M 86 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows

  1. Re: OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows

    "Lee Hart" wrote in message
    news:43EC36DD.149B4912@earthlink.net...
    >>> Supposedly Dos was based on CP/M enough that software would run
    >>> on both. How close are they to each other? Could you run a copy
    >>> of Windows 1.0 on CP/M 86 (are the dos and cp/m bios calls the
    >>> same)?

    >
    > Tom Lake wrote:
    >> No. The calling sequences are similar but there's no software that
    >> would run on both. The Op Codes are totally different between the
    >> 8080 and the 8088/8086.

    >
    > Ah, but there *were* programs that ran on both CP/M-86 and DOS. I have a
    > copy of Mark Hersey's MODEM86 for example; it could be renamed .COM or
    > .CMD to run on either DOS or CP/M-86. As I recall, he had some
    > auto-detect code in the program that figured out which operating system
    > it was in, and made its calls appropriately.


    OK, I misread it. As soon as I see CP/M I think of CP/M-80 even though
    it clearly says CP/M 86.

    Tom Lake



  2. Re: OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows


    On 2006-02-10 leeahart@earthlink.net said:

    > > > Supposedly Dos was based on CP/M enough that software would run
    > > > on both. How close are they to each other? Could you run a copy
    > > > of Windows 1.0 on CP/M 86 (are the dos and cp/m bios calls the
    > > > same)?

    >
    > Tom Lake wrote:
    >
    > > No. The calling sequences are similar but there's no software that
    > > would run on both. The Op Codes are totally different between the
    > > 8080 and the 8088/8086.

    >
    > Ah, but there *were* programs that ran on both CP/M-86 and DOS. I
    > have a copy of Mark Hersey's MODEM86 for example; it could be
    > renamed .COM or .CMD to run on either DOS or CP/M-86. As I recall,
    > he had some auto-detect code in the program that figured out which
    > operating system it was in, and made its calls appropriately.



    No. You're mis-remembering.

    MODEM86 came with two executable utilities named CMD2COM and
    COM2CMD, which ostensibly would alter the main MODEM86 execu-
    table file to allow it to run under either DOS or CP/M-86.

    But there was nothing "automatic" about this; it had to be done
    manually by the user.

    And those utilities did much more than merely rename the file.
    They wrote a new OS-specific header for the MODEM86 executable.

    The file headers are significantly different between the two
    platforms.

    DOS can't even come close to executing a CP/M-86 .CMD file, nor
    CP/M-86 to executing a DOS .COM file.


  3. Re: OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows


    Anonymous Guy wrote:
    > On 2006-02-10 leeahart@earthlink.net said:
    >
    > > > > Supposedly Dos was based on CP/M enough that software would run
    > > > > on both. How close are they to each other? Could you run a copy
    > > > > of Windows 1.0 on CP/M 86 (are the dos and cp/m bios calls the
    > > > > same)?

    > >
    > > Tom Lake wrote:
    > >
    > > > No. The calling sequences are similar but there's no software that
    > > > would run on both. The Op Codes are totally different between the
    > > > 8080 and the 8088/8086.

    > >
    > > Ah, but there *were* programs that ran on both CP/M-86 and DOS. I
    > > have a copy of Mark Hersey's MODEM86 for example; it could be
    > > renamed .COM or .CMD to run on either DOS or CP/M-86. As I recall,
    > > he had some auto-detect code in the program that figured out which
    > > operating system it was in, and made its calls appropriately.

    >
    >
    > No. You're mis-remembering.
    >
    > MODEM86 came with two executable utilities named CMD2COM and
    > COM2CMD, which ostensibly would alter the main MODEM86 execu-
    > table file to allow it to run under either DOS or CP/M-86.
    >
    > But there was nothing "automatic" about this; it had to be done
    > manually by the user.
    >
    > And those utilities did much more than merely rename the file.
    > They wrote a new OS-specific header for the MODEM86 executable.
    >
    > The file headers are significantly different between the two
    > platforms.
    >
    > DOS can't even come close to executing a CP/M-86 .CMD file, nor
    > CP/M-86 to executing a DOS .COM file.


    Using this idea, could you not write a generic program that would
    attempt to convert older DOS only programs to run on CP/M-86 and expand
    the number of usable programs for CP/M 86?

    Bill H - www.ts1000.us


  4. Re: OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows

    Bill H wrote:
    > Anonymous Guy wrote:
    >
    >>On 2006-02-10 leeahart@earthlink.net said:
    >>
    >> > > > Supposedly Dos was based on CP/M enough that software would run
    >> > > > on both. How close are they to each other? Could you run a copy
    >> > > > of Windows 1.0 on CP/M 86 (are the dos and cp/m bios calls the
    >> > > > same)?
    >> >
    >> > Tom Lake wrote:
    >> >
    >> > > No. The calling sequences are similar but there's no software that
    >> > > would run on both. The Op Codes are totally different between the
    >> > > 8080 and the 8088/8086.
    >> >
    >> > Ah, but there *were* programs that ran on both CP/M-86 and DOS. I
    >> > have a copy of Mark Hersey's MODEM86 for example; it could be
    >> > renamed .COM or .CMD to run on either DOS or CP/M-86. As I recall,
    >> > he had some auto-detect code in the program that figured out which
    >> > operating system it was in, and made its calls appropriately.

    >>
    >>
    >>No. You're mis-remembering.
    >>
    >>MODEM86 came with two executable utilities named CMD2COM and
    >>COM2CMD, which ostensibly would alter the main MODEM86 execu-
    >>table file to allow it to run under either DOS or CP/M-86.
    >>
    >>But there was nothing "automatic" about this; it had to be done
    >>manually by the user.
    >>
    >>And those utilities did much more than merely rename the file.
    >>They wrote a new OS-specific header for the MODEM86 executable.
    >>
    >>The file headers are significantly different between the two
    >>platforms.
    >>
    >>DOS can't even come close to executing a CP/M-86 .CMD file, nor
    >>CP/M-86 to executing a DOS .COM file.

    >
    >
    > Using this idea, could you not write a generic program that would
    > attempt to convert older DOS only programs to run on CP/M-86 and expand
    > the number of usable programs for CP/M 86?
    >
    > Bill H - www.ts1000.us
    >

    Well... ,
    Your getting heavily into the "well behaved" thing here.
    If a program ONLY used the documented calls ,sure a translator
    could work. This would be extremely rare (not as in ebay L@@K)
    for programs of the time. Due to hardware issues and poorly
    written bios ,most programmers went "outside" the OS calls
    for expanded function and speed.
    By the way ,can someone point me to a resource similar
    to Ralf Browns "Interrupt List" but for CPM calls ?

    Thanks,
    Mark Whitlock

  5. Re: OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows


    On 2006-02-10 Bill H. said:

    > Anonymous Guy wrote:
    >
    > > leeahart@earthlink.net said:
    > >
    > > > Ah, but there *were* programs that ran on both CP/M-86 and
    > > > DOS. I have a copy of Mark Hersey's MODEM86 for example; it
    > > > could be renamed .COM or .CMD to run on either DOS or
    > > > CP/M-86. As I recall, he had some auto-detect code in the
    > > > program that figured out which operating system it was in,
    > > > and made its calls appropriately.

    > >
    > > No. You're mis-remembering.
    > >
    > > MODEM86 came with two executable utilities named CMD2COM and
    > > COM2CMD, which ostensibly would alter the main MODEM86 execu-
    > > table file to allow it to run under either DOS or CP/M-86.
    > >
    > > But there was nothing "automatic" about this; it had to be done
    > > manually by the user.
    > >
    > > And those utilities did much more than merely rename the file.
    > > They wrote a new OS-specific header for the MODEM86 executable.
    > >
    > > The file headers are significantly different between the two
    > > platforms.
    > >
    > > DOS can't even come close to executing a CP/M-86 .CMD file, nor
    > > CP/M-86 to executing a DOS .COM file.

    >
    > Using this idea, could you not write a generic program that would
    > attempt to convert older DOS only programs to run on CP/M-86 and
    > expand the number of usable programs for CP/M 86?
    >
    > Bill H - www.ts1000.us


    No; not really practical for a number of reasons -- some of which
    were pointed out by Mark W. in another message.

    Even if you intercepted and redirected a DOS program's calls to
    O.S. services, and compensated for the difference in memory
    allocation ("bottom-up" for DOS versus "top-down" for CP/M-86),
    you'd still have other major problems to overcome.

    If you have DOS source code (either original, or via disassembly),
    it's sometimes possible to "port" that code to CP/M-86 by rewriting
    and then reassembling it. I've done this with many small DOS-based
    utilities and "demos."

    Indeed, the DOS-based "TED" text editor was ported to CP/M-86 in
    such a manner by one particularly talented and determined programmer.

    But it ain't easy.

    Today, with (maybe) 12 people in the entire world using CP/M-86,
    it's hard to justify the time and labor involved in porting a
    major DOS app to CP/M-86 -- even if you have the source code.


  6. Re: OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows

    Mark Whitlock wrote:
    >

    .... snip ...
    > By the way ,can someone point me to a resource similar
    > to Ralf Browns "Interrupt List" but for CPM calls ?


    I believe I did something of the sort in the documentation for
    DOSPLUS 2.5. Roam around in:



    --
    "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
    the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
    "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
    "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
    More details at:
    Also see



  7. Re: OT -- FA -- Ancient version of Microsoft Windows

    Mark Whitlock wrote:
    : By the way ,can someone point me to a resource similar
    : to Ralf Browns "Interrupt List" but for CPM calls ?



    --
    ------------- http://www.seasip.demon.co.uk/index.html --------------------
    John Elliott |BLOODNOK: "But why have you got such a long face?"
    |SEAGOON: "Heavy dentures, Sir!" - The Goon Show
    :-------------------------------------------------------------------------)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2