CompuServe Thread

#1.5 ROMS ON 4000'S

23 messages in this thread
#38015From: KEN A. GENDRICHDec 1, 1993 3:39 PM
This may sound stupid, but I need to run my software on 1.5 roms. When distributing systems, I have been replacing the 2.0 roms with 1.5. Since I have no plans to redevelope this particular package under 2.0, I must continue this practice. However, 2000's are becomming rare. Does anyone know if 1.5 roms will work properly on the 4000's motherboard? – thanks
#38017From: Dale LarsonDec 1, 1993 4:18 PM
1.5 ROMs will not work on the A4000 because there are no such things. Presumably you mean 1.3. They won't work either. Even if you could get ROMs in the right format (A4000 uses two ROMs for 32-bit access), you'd loose HD access, you'd loose AGA functionality (and you may not be able to get any video out of an AGA machine without 3.x, but I'm not entirely sure). What software are you so stuck to that refuses to work under an operating system less than five years old? — Dale L. Larson, Intangible Assets Manufacturing — INTERNET:dale@iam.com
#38039From: KEN A. GENDRICHDec 2, 1993 11:41 AM
Thanks for the info Dale, The software in question was developed for / by us for an industrial market niche. We are currently porting it to *WINDOWS* due to marketing pressures etc. However, we still are marketing the product until the new release is ready. The system runs in the 2.xx environment, for a while. Problems to resolve: Dialog boxes which we use for error handling do not appear The screen refresh system when switching windows is slowwwww and the customers with the older version complain about these 1/2 second delays. I'm looking for the least expensive solution to this temporary problem. If you have any ideas, I would appreciate the input. (Note: Program mods are my last resort since the code has not been opened in 3 years, and the development team is busy with the windows port)…..
#38042From: Dale LarsonDec 2, 1993 1:12 PM
So you're abandoning the Amiga as soon as your Windows version goes into production, you only work under 1.3, and you can't get any new A2000/3000s (I'm assuming that A500/600 isn't an option for you). How long until your Windows version goes into production? If not long, you might consider buying up used A2000s or A3000s — set a price you are willing to pay and post that to the nets and see if you get a response. If your Windows version won't be ready soon enough for used machines to be a reasonable stop-gap measure, I'd say you'd better open up the code. Not that you have much choice. — Dale L. Larson, Intangible Assets Manufacturing — INTERNET:dale@iam.com
#38048From: Andre C. CharronDec 2, 1993 7:16 PM
Dale, (Mr. Larson)! No more time on your hands? Good for you, in the good sense. What's "Intangible Assets Manufacturing"? I posted a question called "Leftovers" in the "C Programming" (or "General Programming") section. If you can, I would most appreciate having you look at it. If you have time. Please? I'm from the A1000 days but just bought a 4000. Screamin' box! Thanks in advance for your time. Andre Charron
#38068From: Dale LarsonDec 3, 1993 9:36 AM
Intangible Assets Manufacturing is my company. As far as your programming question, one disadvantage of using AP is that it doesn't (as far as I can tell) easily allow you to go back and read messages you've already past. I didn't select "Leftovers" when it went by, so it's not in my history file, so I don't know what your question was… — Dale L. Larson, Intangible Assets Manufacturing — INTERNET:dale@iam.com
#38081From: Andre C. CharronDec 3, 1993 7:43 PM
Dale, Thank you most kindly for responding. I promise not to make a habit of this; (asking you for help) but I inherited a problem that's really got me this time. Works like this: We open on a high resolution, interlaced, 4 bitplane double buffered screen, (with a window) load custom bitmaps and then display and animate bobs. A some point we need to remove a bob but when we do, the bob remaining on the screen has some "leftover" imagery remaining. The bob itself is fine (undamaged) and continues to move around properly but there remains, at the location the bob was when the other was removed, well, leftovers. This imagery flashes on and off at about 1 Hz. If we replace the bitbap the leftover is eliminated but this is not a solution. When removing the first bob, we RemIBob(), SortGList() the list and DrawGList() it twice (for the double buffering). Tried WaitBlit() followed by Delay() since we know that WaitBlit() returns when the blitter has only started it's final blit. No avail. 🙁 Are we going about this the right way? Leaving something out? Thanks bunches in advance for your time. Andre Charron 72614,1544
#38085From: Dale LarsonDec 4, 1993 6:13 AM
I'm not a graphics guy, so I couldn't give you an answer myself. You left out imporant (to someone in the know) information about what machine, chip revs, OS, etc. INTERNET:kcd@cbmvax.commodore.com might be able to help you as he is a graphics Sofware Engineer at Commodore, just remember that he's also real busy. — Dale L. Larson, Intangible Assets Manufacturing — INTERNET:dale@iam.com
#38030From: SyndesisDec 2, 1993 8:21 AM
Amiga 2000s are "becoming rare"? As compared to Amiga 4000s? No way.
#38040From: KEN A. GENDRICHDec 2, 1993 11:54 AM
Would this be the Same John Foust, University of Wisconsin Madison, 1982- ? If so, I would expect no less than a reply whos goal was to *flame* rather than to help. Never the less, thanks for responding, good to hear from you again. Oh, If you have a source for *new, in the box, warranteed 2000's* please forward it to me. Although the 2000 is a robust wonderful machine, with a huge installation base (at least compared to the 4000) my customers will not accept anything but new equipment. – Ken Gendrich, The Cadcrete Company – CIS: 73633,446
#38066From: SyndesisDec 3, 1993 9:09 AM
Yup, that's me. I didn't intend to flame – your original posting did not lead me to the conclusion that you were looking for new, warranteed A2000s. Your customers want new equipment, but will settle for unsupported, out-dated software? What is 'Cadcrete?' Where is it? I continued to live in Madison until a year ago, when I moved to a little town between Madison and Milwaukee. I've been self-employed writing software on several platforms since 1986…
#38079From: KEN A. GENDRICHDec 3, 1993 6:33 PM
John; Sorry (in advance) if I responded in that "tone of voice". The software (to my customers) is not out-of-date since it provides an enormous amount of functionality in comparison to my competitors, and to my customers' previous approach. I am not at all unhappy with the product, and it is extremely robust. I do, however, wish to continue to be the leader in our industry regarding inovation and product enhancement. Unfortunately, the Amiga Platform is no longer the platform of choice. This is primarily a marketing / customer perception issue. We are moving this portion of our product line to the Intel / Windows platform where the rest or product line lives. Side Note: The AMIGA XX00 line has been the most consistant / robust product line that we have serviced in the last 7 years. The system software, hardware, firmware in these products outperform and outlast the IBM / PC products. I could probably force out market to continue to accept this platform, but my desire to survive overcomes my desire to be loyal (sorry) to the AMIGA platform. Cadcrete : (C)omputer (A)ssisted (D)ispatch for the Concrete Industry Sales/Support/Administration : Murfreesboro, TN Development : Evergreen, Co Date of Inception : 1986 We began our product line with real time dispatching and truck tracking. The Amiga provided a GUI / intuitive interface with preemptive mutlitasking, which we needed and that the IBM world did not even come close to providing. However, the Novell NOS and database management tools surpassed any AMIGA based products available. So, we married a DOS app on top of the Novell File System for a robust database environment with AMIGA DOS 1.3 for our user interface and real time system. (Derek Zahn wrote most of the Amiga code). Now, however, we want a homogeneous system built on top of a strong operating system, strong Network Operating System, strong database environment, and Strong GUI. This is a challenge, let me tell you…. There are so many parts out there, but no heros…. yet. So, that's the story, glad to hear from you again. I am planning on posting some detailed messages regarding my quest for this utlimate environment. I would appreciate any input that you may have….. – Keep in touch, ken
#38090From: BILL LEACHDec 4, 1993 9:43 AM
Ken; Little doubt that you have not already done so but just to be sure… have you looked closely at OS/2? With your application, task protection is probably quite important. -bill
#38095From: KEN A. GENDRICHDec 4, 1993 11:13 AM
Bill; Ah yes OS/2, yet another operating system. I have looked at 0S/2, but not "closely" as you recommend (it's still shrinkwrapped <g>). There is a mature heated debate (everywhere) regarding which platform to choose (with the proper foresight). There is also an attempt by many to build platform generic apps so they can change their mind right up to release date. Since we wish to minimize our development time / cycle (I can only assume), and get products completed and out the door (with the proper maintenance tools in place) , it seems that we need to identify the tools available for such a task, and consider the OS / NOS / DBMS platform as carefully as we have choosen COMPILERS and LIBRARIES in the past. Of course, the problem will always be that each year , the entire game seems to change…. – thanks for the help – oo – ken
#38107From: BILL LEACHDec 5, 1993 8:54 AM
Ken; I suppose that the reasons that I mention OS/2 are mulitple. However, a very large percentage of the folks that I know around here are running OS/2. They have a great deal to say about how badly the computer press is treating OS/2 (sound familiar guys?). Several of these people are dos box gurus that write software for a living and have extensive experience with DOS, Windoz, OS/2, and a more than passing familiarity with NT. Several are also experienced with Unix, VMS, SunOS and yes even AmigaDOS. The are consistant in their opinions concerning the quality of the OS when comparing OS/2 to either Windoz or WNT. -bill
#38109From: Robert ComerDec 5, 1993 12:58 PM
I'll second that opinion of OS/2! (My company is also going straight OS/2 on PC's) Bob Comer — Flying high and fast with my A1200HD'030 on Autopilot! From Cheyenne, Wyoming U.S.A.
#38113From: Robert LittleDec 5, 1993 9:45 PM
Darn it! Bob beat me to it! I guess I'll 'third' that OS/2 comment. Robb
#38119From: KEN A. GENDRICHDec 6, 1993 2:28 AM
Thanks Rob et all ok, at the very least, I'll remove the shrink wrap and haul out the disks, install OS2 and skip the sleep part. – ken
#38124From: BILL LEACHDec 6, 1993 6:44 AM
Sleep? What is sleep? -bill
#38149From: Robert LittleDec 7, 1993 12:35 AM
Actually, with OS/2 2.?, you may not lose as much sleep as you think. Robb
#38123From: BILL LEACHDec 6, 1993 6:44 AM
"Thirding" is better than not getting a word in at all <g> I have noticed that the more experience that someone seems to have with advanced operating systems the more likely they are to favor OS/2 over things like Windoz or WNT. -bill
#38148From: Robert LittleDec 7, 1993 12:35 AM
Looking at it from a 'systems' point of view, I'd have to agree with you again. OS/2 actually is put together pretty well. Although, I've had experience with alot of platforms I still have only read/talked about Windoze-Not Today so, I guess I have to reserve judgement there. Looking at OS/2 from a user's perspective however, is another matter. What do you need all that hardware for (NT needs more, obviously) if Windoz'll run it? Robb
#38093From: SyndesisDec 4, 1993 11:07 AM
Ah, yes, I remember your software now… Derek wrote some of the subroutines for one of our products, and I've cursed that code hundreds of times ever since. 🙂