CompuServe Thread

Forum unknown · Hardware

hard disk installation

27 messages in this thread
#72859From: Perry S. Kivolowitz/ASDJun 19, 1987 1:27 AM
Fine John. We'll all have something to talk about then won't we. We'll release numbers in the fall. There's a large difference between hot air and knowing confidence. The way we see it, we look forward to using the Amazing Computing hard disk test as a selling tool. To be able to show 3x to 5x or 10x other people's numbers using a standardized yard stick will be quite useful. By the way, you didn't take my advice of normalizing the diskperf results. You should try it. Perry S. Kivolowitz – ASDG Incorporated – (201) 563-0529
#72920From: John FoustJun 19, 1987 12:32 PM
My point remains: Until we see some real-world results, it makes little sense to agree with your claims, and there is certainly no way I could write about them. Have you got hardware up and running, or is this a paper calculation? (As Jack Tramiel says, "Why produce a product, when you can announce one?") By fall, the new fast file system will be out, and everyone's results will go through the (next) roof; they will double or triple as you claim, if they have a standard AmigaDOS driver. Could you post the methodology of your scheme for normalizing the results of 'diskperf', so we all can comment on its veracity and efficacy as an alternate benchmark? I can supply the AC 'diskperf' numbers in Lotus format, if needed.
#72930From: Jun 19, 1987 2:09 PM
Do you have any idea, how the fast file system will be out? Upgrade from CBM or from somebody else and will it be backwards compatible?
#73091From: John FoustJun 20, 1987 7:44 PM
That's a good question. I'm sure Commodore hasn't decided yet. My first guess it will be sold separately, as a disk set, like 1.2. I know they have distributed beta copies to some hard disk manufacturers. Backwards compatible? Sorta. Did you read my article in the latest (red cover) Amazing Computing? If not, I'd suggest it strongly. Rush out right now and buy a few copies. One for each room of your house. 🙂 If the disk driver isn't 'binddrivers'-able, then it probably won't work. Xebec owners are at the mercy of the Xebec Corp, as far as I can tell.
#73142From: Jun 20, 1987 10:27 PM
No, my last issue is the one with the CDs on the cover (Vol 2 No 5). It must be time to visit my local dealer, browse his stock of (overpriced) Amiga software and hear him grinding his teeth, when leaving with nothing but the usual Amazing Computing. Well, I do buy an item now and then, but would buy much more, if his pricing was closer to the mail order prices, but that is the same old story, which has been discussed here on the forum previously. Also, no, if I should buy any magazine for each room, it should be the July issue of Compute!. Sheldon Leemon is writing very nicely about the PrtDrvGen.
#73425From: John FoustJun 22, 1987 9:43 PM
I put PDG 2.2 on AMICUS disk #22, as well, and mention it in my next column, which should hit the streets in a week or so, in the July Video issue. You did a good job! You should have sold it! (That's what I always say to PD writers…) (AMICUS 21 and 22 are announced in this next issue, and I'm working on 22, 23, and 24. I will post a list as soon as possible. This got postponed because I lost my copy of the catalog for some of the disks…)
#73480From: Jun 23, 1987 1:59 AM
Stop Press !! I have just been notified about a bug in the version 2.2. It appears, that the load e.g. user defined character set data to the printer is non-functional. I have fixed the problem, however, but need to replace the skeleton driver.
#73539From: John FoustJun 23, 1987 6:22 PM
Can you upload the latest, greatest version? I haven't finalized AMICUS 22, so we are still safe if you have an update. I get a little lead time to fix things like this; the issue in which this disk is announced hasn't hit the streets yet. As long as the file size doesn't increase by much, it will be OK.
#73571From: Jun 23, 1987 9:26 PM
Yes, I shall, when I have finished testing. I guess, it is too late to change the version no., so I'll call it 2.2d (a 2.2c has been mailed to several people). The file size will only increase marginally.
#73719From: John FoustJun 25, 1987 1:34 AM
I thought you had the bug fixed! I *do* need it in the next day or so, or I can't fix it. I had the envelope to PIM addressed and ready to go, to send them the master disks, when your note arrived.
#73719From: John FoustJun 25, 1987 1:34 AM
I thought you had the bug fixed! I *do* need it in the next day or so, or I can't fix it. I had the envelope to PIM addressed and ready to go, to send them the master disks, when your note arrived.
#73571From: Jun 23, 1987 9:26 PM
Yes, I shall, when I have finished testing. I guess, it is too late to change the version no., so I'll call it 2.2d (a 2.2c has been mailed to several people). The file size will only increase marginally.
#73539From: John FoustJun 23, 1987 6:22 PM
Can you upload the latest, greatest version? I haven't finalized AMICUS 22, so we are still safe if you have an update. I get a little lead time to fix things like this; the issue in which this disk is announced hasn't hit the streets yet. As long as the file size doesn't increase by much, it will be OK.
#73480From: Jun 23, 1987 1:59 AM
Stop Press !! I have just been notified about a bug in the version 2.2. It appears, that the load e.g. user defined character set data to the printer is non-functional. I have fixed the problem, however, but need to replace the skeleton driver.
#73425From: John FoustJun 22, 1987 9:43 PM
I put PDG 2.2 on AMICUS disk #22, as well, and mention it in my next column, which should hit the streets in a week or so, in the July Video issue. You did a good job! You should have sold it! (That's what I always say to PD writers…) (AMICUS 21 and 22 are announced in this next issue, and I'm working on 22, 23, and 24. I will post a list as soon as possible. This got postponed because I lost my copy of the catalog for some of the disks…)
#73142From: Jun 20, 1987 10:27 PM
No, my last issue is the one with the CDs on the cover (Vol 2 No 5). It must be time to visit my local dealer, browse his stock of (overpriced) Amiga software and hear him grinding his teeth, when leaving with nothing but the usual Amazing Computing. Well, I do buy an item now and then, but would buy much more, if his pricing was closer to the mail order prices, but that is the same old story, which has been discussed here on the forum previously. Also, no, if I should buy any magazine for each room, it should be the July issue of Compute!. Sheldon Leemon is writing very nicely about the PrtDrvGen.
#73163From: Don Curtis/SYSOPJun 21, 1987 12:46 AM
That point about Xebec keeps comming up…they say they are auto-config and others (like you and Ed Lippert) say they aren't…who's right?
#73426From: John FoustJun 22, 1987 9:43 PM
Well, what is autoconfig? I (and Ed, I imagine) think it means a 'binddrivers'-able disk driver. Xebec doesn't have that. When the new file system comes around, Xebec owners are out in the cold, because they don't use 'binddrivers'.
#73923From: E. J. Lippert IIJun 27, 1987 1:08 AM
In addition to a `BindDrivers' able device, AutoConfig means that the device is actually `Configured' in to the Amiga memory map during the KickStart phase of system start-up. The protocall for an AutoConfig device (and the associated hardware required) is laid out in absolute detail by Commodore. (Lest I get shot at: By the phrase `hardware required' I am referring to what the hardware must do, not specific device types, during AutoConfig. Commodore did, how- ever provide all developers with suggested hardware device types and even a schematic of a `suggested' system.)
#73923From: E. J. Lippert IIJun 27, 1987 1:08 AM
In addition to a `BindDrivers' able device, AutoConfig means that the device is actually `Configured' in to the Amiga memory map during the KickStart phase of system start-up. The protocall for an AutoConfig device (and the associated hardware required) is laid out in absolute detail by Commodore. (Lest I get shot at: By the phrase `hardware required' I am referring to what the hardware must do, not specific device types, during AutoConfig. Commodore did, how- ever provide all developers with suggested hardware device types and even a schematic of a `suggested' system.)
#73426From: John FoustJun 22, 1987 9:43 PM
Well, what is autoconfig? I (and Ed, I imagine) think it means a 'binddrivers'-able disk driver. Xebec doesn't have that. When the new file system comes around, Xebec owners are out in the cold, because they don't use 'binddrivers'.
#73163From: Don Curtis/SYSOPJun 21, 1987 12:46 AM
That point about Xebec keeps comming up…they say they are auto-config and others (like you and Ed Lippert) say they aren't…who's right?
#73091From: John FoustJun 20, 1987 7:44 PM
That's a good question. I'm sure Commodore hasn't decided yet. My first guess it will be sold separately, as a disk set, like 1.2. I know they have distributed beta copies to some hard disk manufacturers. Backwards compatible? Sorta. Did you read my article in the latest (red cover) Amazing Computing? If not, I'd suggest it strongly. Rush out right now and buy a few copies. One for each room of your house. 🙂 If the disk driver isn't 'binddrivers'-able, then it probably won't work. Xebec owners are at the mercy of the Xebec Corp, as far as I can tell.
#72930From: Jun 19, 1987 2:09 PM
Do you have any idea, how the fast file system will be out? Upgrade from CBM or from somebody else and will it be backwards compatible?
#73024From: Perry S. Kivolowitz/ASDJun 20, 1987 1:22 AM
John, you're under a mistaken impression. I am not asking you to agree or write with/about anything. Concerning the new file system improving everyone's performance, we expect the same increase over our original estimates as other mfr's expect over their current benchmarks. That is, if we used a standard driver and file handler. But no matter. I don't really think I want to continue this non-argument with you. Perhaps we might have different words with one another when the SDP is out (and you have had enough time to understand the results). Perry S. Kivolowitz – ASDG Incorporated
#73024From: Perry S. Kivolowitz/ASDJun 20, 1987 1:22 AM
John, you're under a mistaken impression. I am not asking you to agree or write with/about anything. Concerning the new file system improving everyone's performance, we expect the same increase over our original estimates as other mfr's expect over their current benchmarks. That is, if we used a standard driver and file handler. But no matter. I don't really think I want to continue this non-argument with you. Perhaps we might have different words with one another when the SDP is out (and you have had enough time to understand the results). Perry S. Kivolowitz – ASDG Incorporated
#72920From: John FoustJun 19, 1987 12:32 PM
My point remains: Until we see some real-world results, it makes little sense to agree with your claims, and there is certainly no way I could write about them. Have you got hardware up and running, or is this a paper calculation? (As Jack Tramiel says, "Why produce a product, when you can announce one?") By fall, the new fast file system will be out, and everyone's results will go through the (next) roof; they will double or triple as you claim, if they have a standard AmigaDOS driver. Could you post the methodology of your scheme for normalizing the results of 'diskperf', so we all can comment on its veracity and efficacy as an alternate benchmark? I can supply the AC 'diskperf' numbers in Lotus format, if needed.