Hi everybody!

Talking about CP/M for 8 bit computers, I know that the most popular
CP/M version
was (is) 2.2, followed by CP/M Plus.

But, what about Personal CP/M?

Assembler sources (Z80 instead of 8080 nmemonics) are available for
CCP and BDOS,
and PL/M sources for the utilities, in the Unofficial CP/M Website.

It's seems like 2.2 with some enhancements (but it's not Plus), and
IIRC, was
destinated to Japanese market (MSX computers).

I have not found too much information about that CP/M version.

Regards.

On -28163-01--10 20:59, Floppy Software wrote:
 > Hi everybody!
 >
 > Talking about CP/M for 8 bit computers, I know that the most popular
 > CP/M version
 > was (is) 2.2, followed by CP/M Plus.

Interesting,...!
Where do You have that "marked research" from,...?

If You, or any marked research company, should ask a random
number of people what OS they are running and if they
answer with CP/M they have to answer to if 1.4, 2.x or 3.0+
You could be sure that most, if not all, selecting anything
less 3.0 only have "old crap", (sorry antique), hardware to
run it on...? (nothing wrong with that of cause)

Or are this "research" based on computers sold with CP/M...?

Or maybe the total number of license sold by DRI...?

Anyway,... at my place CP/M Plus are "the most popular"...

<ole>

Floppy Software  wrote:

(Miguel, why choose such a stupid nickname? I simply don't understand
why people are not using their real names in a world-wide group? We
have at least 5 "Bill"...!)

> But, what about Personal CP/M?

Ahem... Try: "Google" "Groups" "Personal CP/M" and "Emmanuel Roche".

(Try also "WordMaster" and "Personal CP/M".)

It is me who published, years after years, everything that is known
about Personal CP/M (BDOS Version Number 2.8)...

(Sometimes, I wonder why people choose to save some of my messages,
and not others?)

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

I could not believe my eyes, that "Floppy Software" could not find any
of the dozens of messages where I mentioned Personal CP/M, over the
years?

So, I typed "Google" "Groups" "Advanced Search" and "Personal CP/M".

Among the dozens of responses, I find one "Personal CP/M" thread,
comprising 15 messages(!), dated 29 August 2003...

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.cpm/browse_thread/thread/7fff883419d39e8b/27bf7510ae0f3fe0?hl=fr&q=group:comp.os.cpm

Of particular historical interest, of course, is the "Microsystems
Journal" article that I retyped, Vol.5 No.3 (March 1984) p.12 and
republished, the 23 September 2003.

So, I have been talking about Personal CP/M for almost 10 years, now,
and found an article mentioning it *27* years ago!

This must be a novelty? A late breaking news? A stop press news?

Why am I the only one to understand what I publish?

Why have I been the only one, in a Newsgroup so called about CP/M,
interested in Personal CP/M? During *10* years!

Why are the Americans only talking about CP/M 2.2 and ASM and DDT,
never MP/M-II and MAC and SID? (Not to mention CP/NET, GSX, and
Concurrent CP/M !...)

(I did not search the one containing info about WordMaster but, if
challenged, I will re-publish its references.)

I really wonder what some people are doing, here!

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

"Mr Emmanuel Roche, France" <roche182@laposte.net> wrote:

>I could not believe my eyes, that "Floppy Software" could not find any
>of the dozens of messages where I mentioned Personal CP/M, over the
>years?
>
>So, I typed "Google" "Groups" "Advanced Search" and "Personal CP/M".
>
>Among the dozens of responses, I find one "Personal CP/M" thread,
>comprising 15 messages(!), dated 29 August 2003...
>
>http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.cpm/browse_thread/thread/7fff883419d39e8b/27bf7510ae0f3fe0?hl=fr&q=group:comp.os.cpm
>
>Of particular historical interest, of course, is the "Microsystems
>Journal" article that I retyped, Vol.5 No.3 (March 1984) p.12 and
>republished, the 23 September 2003.
>
>So, I have been talking about Personal CP/M for almost 10 years, now,
>and found an article mentioning it *27* years ago!
>
>This must be a novelty? A late breaking news? A stop press news?
>
>Why am I the only one to understand what I publish?
>
>Why have I been the only one, in a Newsgroup so called about CP/M,
>interested in Personal CP/M? During *10* years!
>
>Why are the Americans only talking about CP/M 2.2 and ASM and DDT,
>never MP/M-II and MAC and SID? (Not to mention CP/NET, GSX, and
>Concurrent CP/M !...)
>
>(I did not search the one containing info about WordMaster but, if
>challenged, I will re-publish its references.)
>
>I really wonder what some people are doing, here!
>
CP/M 2.2 was by far the most
popular 8-bit version of the
product, and this is reflected
in the remaining hobbyists'
interest.  In fact, most folks
who used MAC, RMAC, SID, ZSID,
LINK, etc., did so under CP/M
2.2 or some derivative thereof
rather than under the more
exotic and (at the time)
expensive follow-on products
-- and all the most popular
enhancements, e.g. various
flavors of ZCPR and even the
full BDOS replacements like
DOS+, P2DOS, and ZSDOS,were
strictly for CP/M 2.2 --
similar offerings for CP/M
3.x didn't show up until the
whole Z80 era was nearly over.

So, imo any general lack of
interest in de facto DRI
ephemera like Personal CP/M is
entirely understandable.

Nearly all CPM applications sustained compatibility with CP/M 2.2,
which means they did not exploit any of the added functionality
(system calls) that CP/M Plus or MPM II offered. Not only that, most
applications retained Intel 8085 compatibility as well which means
they used no Z80-only cpu instructions.

This means that the only advantage of using CP/M Plus  vs CP/M 2.2 was
just a few more user interface advantages, and on some systems, more
performance. However, the performance difference could not be
described as "dramatic".

As for the other CP/Ms such as CP/M 86, CP/M 8000 & CP/M 68000,
applications for those were very rare since they had to be written
specifically for those systems as they could not support CP/M
applications written for CP/M 2.2.

Chris


On Mar 22, 4:35=A0pm, Bruce Morgen <edi...@juno.com> wrote:
> "Mr Emmanuel Roche, France" <roche...@laposte.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >I could not believe my eyes, that "Floppy Software" could not find any
> >of the dozens of messages where I mentioned Personal CP/M, over the
> >years?
>
> >So, I typed "Google" "Groups" "Advanced Search" and "Personal CP/M".
>
> >Among the dozens of responses, I find one "Personal CP/M" thread,
> >comprising 15 messages(!), dated 29 August 2003...
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.cpm/browse_thread/thread/7fff8...
>
> >Of particular historical interest, of course, is the "Microsystems
> >Journal" article that I retyped, Vol.5 No.3 (March 1984) p.12 and
> >republished, the 23 September 2003.
>
> >So, I have been talking about Personal CP/M for almost 10 years, now,
> >and found an article mentioning it *27* years ago!
>
> >This must be a novelty? A late breaking news? A stop press news?
>
> >Why am I the only one to understand what I publish?
>
> >Why have I been the only one, in a Newsgroup so called about CP/M,
> >interested in Personal CP/M? During *10* years!
>
> >Why are the Americans only talking about CP/M 2.2 and ASM and DDT,
> >never MP/M-II and MAC and SID? (Not to mention CP/NET, GSX, and
> >Concurrent CP/M !...)
>
> >(I did not search the one containing info about WordMaster but, if
> >challenged, I will re-publish its references.)
>
> >I really wonder what some people are doing, here!
>
> CP/M 2.2 was by far the most
> popular 8-bit version of the
> product, and this is reflected
> in the remaining hobbyists'
> interest. =A0In fact, most folks
> who used MAC, RMAC, SID, ZSID,
> LINK, etc., did so under CP/M
> 2.2 or some derivative thereof
> rather than under the more
> exotic and (at the time)
> expensive follow-on products
> -- and all the most popular
> enhancements, e.g. various
> flavors of ZCPR and even the
> full BDOS replacements like
> DOS+, P2DOS, and ZSDOS,were
> strictly for CP/M 2.2 --
> similar offerings for CP/M
> 3.x didn't show up until the
> whole Z80 era was nearly over.
>
> So, imo any general lack of
> interest in de facto DRI
> ephemera like Personal CP/M is
> entirely understandable.

Il 23/03/2011 00:35, Bruce Morgen ha scritto:

>> (I did not search the one containing info about WordMaster but, if
>> challenged, I will re-publish its references.)
>>
>> I really wonder what some people are doing, here!
>>
> CP/M 2.2 was by far the most
> popular 8-bit version of the
> product, and this is reflected
> in the remaining hobbyists'
> interest.  In fact, most folks
> who used MAC, RMAC, SID, ZSID,
> LINK, etc., did so under CP/M
> 2.2 or some derivative thereof
> rather than under the more
> exotic and (at the time)
> expensive follow-on products
> -- and all the most popular
> enhancements, e.g. various
> flavors of ZCPR and even the
> full BDOS replacements like
> DOS+, P2DOS, and ZSDOS,were
> strictly for CP/M 2.2 --
> similar offerings for CP/M
> 3.x didn't show up until the
> whole Z80 era was nearly over.
>
> So, imo any general lack of
> interest in de facto DRI
> ephemera like Personal CP/M is
> entirely understandable.

I concur and agree, and the textual archives of this very NG during the 
80s confirm that the majority of users (and coders) uses DR CP/M 2.2 
back then.

side question, what computer or terminal you use for your post ? I 
noticed the 40-column format of your posting...

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

Here is another one: DOS Plus (CP/M 86 version 4.1)
The only reason I am not running this on my Amstrad PC1512 is my ZIP-100 
drive.
The ZIP-100 is partioned  in 3 - 30Mbyte drives and runs under MS-DOS 3.2.
DOS Plus will not run the (MS-DOS) driver.
Is anyone running DOS Plus?

"Floppy Software" <floppysoftware@gmail.com> schreef in bericht 
news:5691e551-5200-4856-b0a9-e948b96a6ac1@s11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> Hi everybody!
>
> Talking about CP/M for 8 bit computers, I know that the most popular
> CP/M version
> was (is) 2.2, followed by CP/M Plus.
>
> But, what about Personal CP/M?
>
> Assembler sources (Z80 instead of 8080 nmemonics) are available for
> CCP and BDOS,
> and PL/M sources for the utilities, in the Unofficial CP/M Website.
>
> It's seems like 2.2 with some enhancements (but it's not Plus), and
> IIRC, was
> destinated to Japanese market (MSX computers).
>
> I have not found too much information about that CP/M version.
>
> Regards. 

Hi!

 > Talking about CP/M for 8 bit computers, I know that the most
popular
 > CP/M version
 > was (is) 2.2, followed by CP/M Plus.

>De: Ole Christensen <ole2n...@newsguy.com>
>Fecha: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:19:10 +0100
>
>Interesting,...!
>Where do You have that "marked research" from,...?

IMHO, CP/M 2 was (is) the most popular CP/M version,
generally speaking, and was the most widely used
around the world.

Curiosly, a lot of books and articles (their authors) agree
with me (or better: I agree with them).

In Spain, my country, CP/M Plus was the most popular CP/M version,
because it was marketed with Amstrad computers.

My first computer (I bought it in mid's 80's - brand new) was (is) an
Amstrad PCW 8256, with 512 kb of RAM (because I added later 256 kb
more),
and 2 floppy disks (the original 3", and one 3 1/2" I added later).

A powerfull computer. RAM disk. With CP/M Plus.

>De: "Mr Emmanuel Roche, France" <roche...@laposte.net>
>Fecha: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
>
>(Miguel, why choose such a stupid nickname? I simply don't understand
>why people are not using their real names in a world-wide group? We
>have at least 5 "Bill"...!)

Sorry, Emmanuel, but it's the nickname I choosed because
this name was my dreamed programming bussiness around CP/M. Too late
for me, in the mid's 80's. It never saw the light. Sentimental things.

>Ahem... Try: "Google" "Groups" "Personal CP/M" and "Emmanuel Roche".
>(Try also "WordMaster" and "Personal CP/M".)

Sorry again, but the first thing I did was try to find any
information in this google group. 0 responses. ZERO.

If you try again, NOW, you will find that:

--quote--

=AB Groups Home
comp.os.cpm

1 resultado de "Personal CP/M"

Personal CP/M for Z80   laposte.net> wrote: I could not believe my
eyes, that "Floppy Software" could
not find any of the dozens of messages where I mentioned Personal CP/
M, over the
years? So, I typed "Google" "Groups" "Advanced Search" and "Personal
CP/M".
Among the dozens of responses, I find one "Personal CP/M" thread,
comprising 15
....
01:16 por Chris - 6 mensajes - 5 autores

--unquote--

That's is... THIS THREAD!!!

>I could not believe my eyes, that "Floppy Software" could not find any
>of the dozens of messages where I mentioned Personal CP/M, over the
>years?
>
>So, I typed "Google" "Groups" "Advanced Search" and "Personal CP/M".

I tried "normal" search only, with the quoted string "Personal CP/M".

Regards,
Miguel
Spanish CP/M user.

Henk Siewert wrote:

> Here is another one: DOS Plus (CP/M 86 version 4.1)
> The only reason I am not running this on my Amstrad
> PC1512 is my ZIP-100 drive.
> The ZIP-100 is partioned =A0in 3 - 30Mbyte drives and
> runs under MS-DOS 3.2.
> DOS Plus will not run the (MS-DOS) driver.
> Is anyone running DOS Plus?

Hello, Henk!

This one is easy to answer: DOS Plus is the 8086 version of CP/M Plus
(CP/M-86 Plus) with an MS-DOS Version 2 emulator (called "PC-MODE",
about 15KB). Hence the name: DOS Plus.

The specialist of DOS Plus is John Elliott. He disassembled several
BIOSes.

I notice that your "ZIP-100 is partioned =A0in 3 - 30Mbyte drives"...
Hum... DOS Plus is CP/M Plus, so is able to handle 512MB hard disks,
with files as big as 32MB. So, technically, there is no need to
partition your ZIP-100. Of course, if you want to keep MS-DOS
compatibility, you could keep them, thus getting 3 "logical drives"
from the same ZIP-100.

I happen to be interested in the ZIP-100. Have you done some research
on it? For example, do you know that the common version ("ZIPATAPI")
needs an SCSI driver, while using an IDE interface? Do you know also
that there is a much more rarer version, physically identical to an
IDE hard disk? This is the ones that I use. I simply plug them on the
IDE flat cable, then use HDMAINT. HDMAINT thinks that they are fixed
IDE hard disks, and partition/format them without any problems.

My only problem with CP/M-86 Plus is that the LOADER was written for
the IBM XT, and does not boot from a (current) "IBM PC" (AT) from the
hard disk. That's why I boot from the floppy, then SUBMIT switches to
the ZIP-100 drive, and I have a 100MB "floppy"... (I think that I
explained this 7 or 8 years ago...)

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

"dott.Piergiorgio" <dott.PiergiorgioNIHON@KAIGUN.fastwebnet.it> wrote:

>Il 23/03/2011 00:35, Bruce Morgen ha scritto:
>
>>> (I did not search the one containing info about WordMaster but, if
>>> challenged, I will re-publish its references.)
>>>
>>> I really wonder what some people are doing, here!
>>>
>> CP/M 2.2 was by far the most
>> popular 8-bit version of the
>> product, and this is reflected
>> in the remaining hobbyists'
>> interest.  In fact, most folks
>> who used MAC, RMAC, SID, ZSID,
>> LINK, etc., did so under CP/M
>> 2.2 or some derivative thereof
>> rather than under the more
>> exotic and (at the time)
>> expensive follow-on products
>> -- and all the most popular
>> enhancements, e.g. various
>> flavors of ZCPR and even the
>> full BDOS replacements like
>> DOS+, P2DOS, and ZSDOS,were
>> strictly for CP/M 2.2 --
>> similar offerings for CP/M
>> 3.x didn't show up until the
>> whole Z80 era was nearly over.
>>
>> So, imo any general lack of
>> interest in de facto DRI
>> ephemera like Personal CP/M is
>> entirely understandable.
>
>I concur and agree, and the textual archives of this very NG during the 
>80s confirm that the majority of users (and coders) uses DR CP/M 2.2 
>back then.
>
>side question, what computer or terminal you use for your post ? I 
>noticed the 40-column format of your posting...
>
A normal Windoze news client
on a PeeCee -- I keep my
columns narrow deliberately
for readability when long
threads get nested deeply. I
actually picked up the habit
typing magazine copy on an
IBM Selectric back in the
'80s -- we did that on NCR
paper forms for the benefit
of the typesetters, those
being the waning days of old-
fashioned hot type shops and
hand-assembled "camera-ready"
layouts.

>Best regards from Italy,

Right back atcha from the USA!

>dott. Piergiorgio.

bcnu -- Bruce

On 03/22/2011 08:16 PM, Chris wrote:
> Nearly all CPM applications sustained compatibility with CP/M 2.2,
> which means they did not exploit any of the added functionality
> (system calls) that CP/M Plus or MPM II offered. Not only that, most
> applications retained Intel 8085 compatibility as well which means
> they used no Z80-only cpu instructions.
>
> This means that the only advantage of using CP/M Plus  vs CP/M 2.2 was
> just a few more user interface advantages, and on some systems, more
> performance. However, the performance difference could not be
> described as "dramatic".
>
> As for the other CP/Ms such as CP/M 86, CP/M 8000&  CP/M 68000,
> applications for those were very rare since they had to be written
> specifically for those systems as they could not support CP/M
> applications written for CP/M 2.2.
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Mar 22, 4:35 pm, Bruce Morgen<edi...@juno.com>  wrote:
>> "Mr Emmanuel Roche, France"<roche...@laposte.net>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> I could not believe my eyes, that "Floppy Software" could not find any
>>> of the dozens of messages where I mentioned Personal CP/M, over the
>>> years?
>>
>>> So, I typed "Google" "Groups" "Advanced Search" and "Personal CP/M".
>>
>>> Among the dozens of responses, I find one "Personal CP/M" thread,
>>> comprising 15 messages(!), dated 29 August 2003...
>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.cpm/browse_thread/thread/7fff8...
>>
>>> Of particular historical interest, of course, is the "Microsystems
>>> Journal" article that I retyped, Vol.5 No.3 (March 1984) p.12 and
>>> republished, the 23 September 2003.
>>
>>> So, I have been talking about Personal CP/M for almost 10 years, now,
>>> and found an article mentioning it *27* years ago!
>>
>>> This must be a novelty? A late breaking news? A stop press news?
>>
>>> Why am I the only one to understand what I publish?
>>
>>> Why have I been the only one, in a Newsgroup so called about CP/M,
>>> interested in Personal CP/M? During *10* years!
>>
>>> Why are the Americans only talking about CP/M 2.2 and ASM and DDT,
>>> never MP/M-II and MAC and SID? (Not to mention CP/NET, GSX, and
>>> Concurrent CP/M !...)
>>
>>> (I did not search the one containing info about WordMaster but, if
>>> challenged, I will re-publish its references.)
>>
>>> I really wonder what some people are doing, here!
>>
>> CP/M 2.2 was by far the most
>> popular 8-bit version of the
>> product, and this is reflected
>> in the remaining hobbyists'
>> interest.  In fact, most folks
>> who used MAC, RMAC, SID, ZSID,
>> LINK, etc., did so under CP/M
>> 2.2 or some derivative thereof
>> rather than under the more
>> exotic and (at the time)
>> expensive follow-on products
>> -- and all the most popular
>> enhancements, e.g. various
>> flavors of ZCPR and even the
>> full BDOS replacements like
>> DOS+, P2DOS, and ZSDOS,were
>> strictly for CP/M 2.2 --
>> similar offerings for CP/M
>> 3.x didn't show up until the
>> whole Z80 era was nearly over.
>>
>> So, imo any general lack of
>> interest in de facto DRI
>> ephemera like Personal CP/M is
>> entirely understandable.
>
Actually many of the applications that were written for CP/M were also 
made available for CP/M-86, especially if they were written in some hi 
level language.

When I was working at Racal-Milgo in the 1980's they were developing a 
computer system that was similar to the IBM-PC.  I had the company 
purchase sample application software from many vendors for CP/M86 and 
almost everything that was available for the 8080 was also available for 
the 8086 though many of the companies delivered the 8080 version at 
first since they got fewer calls for the 8086 versions and didn't set up 
their purchasing departments to handle this.  There was NO internet at 
that time!.   Almost all of them refused to have us ship back the 
unwanted software in exchange for the CP/M86 versions, so I ended up 
with a lot of software for MY computer!  Such things as Wordstar, Super 
Calc, Microsoft's basic and fortran, etc..

On 2011-03-23, Mr Emmanuel Roche, France <roche182@laposte.net> wrote:
> For example, do you know that the common version ("ZIPATAPI")
> needs an SCSI driver, while using an IDE interface?

That's pretty much what "ATAPI" means.
-- 
roger ivie
rivie@ridgenet.net

On Mar 23, 5:54=A0am, Floppy Software <floppysoftw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> =A0> Talking about CP/M for 8 bit computers, I know that the most
> popular
> =A0> CP/M version
> =A0> was (is) 2.2, followed by CP/M Plus.
>
> >De: Ole Christensen <ole2n...@newsguy.com>
> >Fecha: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:19:10 +0100
>
> >Interesting,...!
> >Where do You have that "marked research" from,...?
>
> IMHO, CP/M 2 was (is) the most popular CP/M version,
> generally speaking, and was the most widely used
> around the world.
>
> Curiosly, a lot of books and articles (their authors) agree
> with me (or better: I agree with them).
>
> In Spain, my country, CP/M Plus was the most popular CP/M version,
> because it was marketed with Amstrad computers.
>
> My first computer (I bought it in mid's 80's - brand new) was (is) an
> Amstrad PCW 8256, with 512 kb of RAM (because I added later 256 kb
> more),
> and 2 floppy disks (the original 3", and one 3 1/2" I added later).
>
> A powerfull computer. RAM disk. With CP/M Plus.
>
> >De: "Mr Emmanuel Roche, France" <roche...@laposte.net>
> >Fecha: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
>
> >(Miguel, why choose such a stupid nickname? I simply don't understand
> >why people are not using their real names in a world-wide group? We
> >have at least 5 "Bill"...!)
>
> Sorry, Emmanuel, but it's the nickname I choosed because
> this name was my dreamed programming bussiness around CP/M. Too late
> for me, in the mid's 80's. It never saw the light. Sentimental things.
>
> >Ahem... Try: "Google" "Groups" "Personal CP/M" and "Emmanuel Roche".
> >(Try also "WordMaster" and "Personal CP/M".)
>
> Sorry again, but the first thing I did was try to find any
> information in this google group. 0 responses. ZERO.
>
> If you try again, NOW, you will find that:
>
> --quote--
>
> =AB Groups Home
> comp.os.cpm
>
> 1 resultado de "Personal CP/M"
>
> Personal CP/M for Z80 =A0 laposte.net> wrote: I could not believe my
> eyes, that "Floppy Software" could
> not find any of the dozens of messages where I mentioned Personal CP/
> M, over the
> years? So, I typed "Google" "Groups" "Advanced Search" and "Personal
> CP/M".
> Among the dozens of responses, I find one "Personal CP/M" thread,
> comprising 15
> ...
> 01:16 por Chris - 6 mensajes - 5 autores
>
> --unquote--
>
> That's is... THIS THREAD!!!
>
> >I could not believe my eyes, that "Floppy Software" could not find any
> >of the dozens of messages where I mentioned Personal CP/M, over the
> >years?
>
> >So, I typed "Google" "Groups" "Advanced Search" and "Personal CP/M".
>
> I tried "normal" search only, with the quoted string "Personal CP/M".
>
> Regards,
> Miguel
> Spanish CP/M user.

In the USA, CP/M 2.2 was a big standard.

Later incarnations were not really revolutionary.
They were TECHNICAL advancements.
1. MP/M was even very practical for some
business offices where 2 or 3 terminals
on one computer/hard disk worked well.

2. CP/M 86 and 3. CP/M 68000 were
TECHNICAL advancements.

Those 3 and the hardware to run them
might have run 5x faster but cost 10x more,
so from the consumer standpoint they did
NOT represent a quantum improvement.

Their NUMBERS SOLD were small and
smaller numbers drove the high prices
higher and meant they were less
standard as platforms.

I owned CP/M machines but in 1983
I was in the middle of the C64 revolution.
I was a business developer, buyer, manager
and sales guy for a HUGE C64 specialty store.
I was eating, sleeping and breathing C64
working 12 hours, 6 days per week.

Hardly anybody shared my personal
enthusiasm about the C64 CP/M 2.2 module.

When the C128 came along in NUMBERS
(1984), the enhanced CP/M was STILL
more or less a NON-ISSUE for most users.
CP/M was NOT the way most used their C128.

In 1984 the C128 was already competing with
MSDOS machines like the Sanyo 550/555
which was an early and loosely "PC Compatible"
computer before the "PC Clones" took off.

By 1985 I was in the middle of assembling,
"burning in" and selling "Taiwan Clone" XTs.

I watched the ensuing race for
faster PC's with plateus at laser printers,
CDROM drives, a plateu when they got
to around 600 MHz and were fast enough
to play DVD's.

I'm somewhat amused by the way the
whole processor speed race reached
3.4 GHz and the industry moved toward
dual and quad processors to work around
the current physics limitations.

For the first time in  25 years the
endless merry-go-round of faster processors
took a step backward (speed wise) with
the low heat low energy consumption Atom
processors and $300 notebook computers.

I bought a small fleet of 3 "off lease" Dell
GX280 computers for $120 each shipped.
Even though they are SIX years old they
hold their own!  During most of the last
25 year speed race, 3 year old computers
would have been garbage.

Now it's going to take a QUANTUM improvement
in speed, performance or reduced price
to make a computer obsolete.

Roger Ivie <rivie@ridgenet.net> wrote:
> On 2011-03-23, Mr Emmanuel Roche, France <roche182@laposte.net> wrote:
>> For example, do you know that the common version ("ZIPATAPI")
>> needs an SCSI driver, while using an IDE interface?
 
> That's pretty much what "ATAPI" means.

I don't know that it was supposed to mean that, but it at
least does in the case of CD-R drives.  As I understand it,
a CD-R drive will respond to the usual disk commands for reading,
or to SCSI commands, but writing requires the SCSI commands,
sent through the IDE interface.

Also, parallel port ZIP drives also uses SCSI commands. 
I first had one attached to an NT 4.0 system, and wondered
why it wanted to install the SCSI driver.

-- glen

Surely the only purpose in having an operating systemis to hide
hardware details but offer a common API (application programming
interface).,

Unfortunately, the more sophisticated the API, the more resident RAM
is occupied.  CP/M 2.2 used about 3 pages more than 1.4, and CP/M+
(non banked) used about 16 pages more than 2.2.  But in these days of
CP/M emulators who cares about hardware independence (like mass
storeage)?  And what applications take advantage of additional APIs
offered by later CP/Ms?  Well I suppose date ande time routines are
quite nice....

With only 64 K of memory available, sure RAM is the fundamental
limiting factor!

Personal CP/M ought to have released more RAM to the user because Z80
code should be more compact than 8080 code.  Instead it actually
occupies rather more space offering APIs which nobody needs or uses.
What is the point?

Trusting that this message provokes some interesting discussions!  :)

Bill

William,

You are absolutely right! In my opinion an operating system should be as 
small as possible.
That's one of the reasons I still use CP/M 2.2 and 3 and program in Basic-80 
BASCOM.
I make programs for my hobbies, computers ;-), electronics and model 
rocketry.
Al the things I want to do I can do with the above programs. Inclusive 
graphing and designing my rockets.
And in an emulator on a 'modern' PC it is blindingly fast and the programs 
are no more than a few kilobytes.
Try that with VisualStudio on .NET.

Henk Siewert

"William" <mr.collis@physics.org> schreef in bericht 
news:0071f2fb-7ce5-4bec-bcd0-6d7ccbccb1fa@q36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> Surely the only purpose in having an operating systemis to hide
> hardware details but offer a common API (application programming
> interface).,
>
> Unfortunately, the more sophisticated the API, the more resident RAM
> is occupied.  CP/M 2.2 used about 3 pages more than 1.4, and CP/M+
> (non banked) used about 16 pages more than 2.2.  But in these days of
> CP/M emulators who cares about hardware independence (like mass
> storeage)?  And what applications take advantage of additional APIs
> offered by later CP/Ms?  Well I suppose date ande time routines are
> quite nice....
>
> With only 64 K of memory available, sure RAM is the fundamental
> limiting factor!
>
> Personal CP/M ought to have released more RAM to the user because Z80
> code should be more compact than 8080 code.  Instead it actually
> occupies rather more space offering APIs which nobody needs or uses.
> What is the point?
>
> Trusting that this message provokes some interesting discussions!  :)
>
> Bill 

A little bit of Web searching about "Personal CP/M" led me to Google's
archive of Infoworld magazine. This was a trade publication in the
United States from the mid 1970's and ran for a few decades. InfoWorld
for Jun 11, 1984 has an article about DRI's work on P-CP/M for the
Z80, as an OS for the Coleco "Adam". There's other articles in 1984 on
the same topic.

More Web searches obtained more information of that sort, from a
handful of Web sites supporting CP/M or specific systems which ran
some version of P-CP/M.

My own Google searches of comp.os.cpm, did not find many threads of
posts on the subject.

My general impression is that the P-CP/M Z80 product, and probably the
later 8086 product too, were essentially "OEM" OS's, built by Digital
Research Inc (DRI) from earlier OS's, for specific product lines, for
specific companies. A Wikipedia article on CP/M-86 lists some
systems.

I conclude that because so few products carried these two OS's, and
for a brief period, not much has been said about them.

http://www.retrotechnology.com/dri/personalcpm.html

Here are my rough notes, they have some Web links supporting the above
efforts on my part. The usual CP/M archive and resource sites have
useful material, as do other Web sites. I'll link my page back to a
list of DRI OS's I have on my Web site, at a later time. Corrections
are welcome, hope the links are useful.

I anticipate taunts and complaints from Emmanuel Roche, which I will
try to ignore.

Herb JOhnson
retrotechnology.com

On 24 March 2011, 23:08, Herbert "Xerox" Johnson wrote:

> I anticipate taunts and complaints from Emmanuel Roche,
> which I will try to ignore.

Hahaha! You are too kind!

C>dir iw6-24.*

IW6-24   WS4        12 288  02/09/09  11:02 IW6-24.WS4
IW6-24   BAK        12 416  02/09/09  11:02 IW6-24.BAK
IW6-24   TXT        12 247  02/09/09  11:08 IW6-24.TXT
IW6-24   HTM        12 570  11/12/09  20:17 IW6-24.HTM
         4 file(s)             49 521 bytes

Let see... 02/09/09 should mean "9 February 2009"... in which case
your "searches" (prompted, as usual, by what I made...) were made just
2 years *AFTER* me... How curious!

And you say that you are not copying me, "Xerox" ?

Personally, "I conclude that..." you are just copying me!

Each time I see your Web site, I see dozens of pages which were
obviously "inspired" by my work. But, so far, I have never seen you
produce anything original.

Personally, I prefer the original (me) to the copy (you: "Xerox").

Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

One English-speaking person sent me the following saying:

"Copying is the sincerest form of flattery."

Hahaha!

Unfortunately, I am not flattered by Herb "Xerox" Johnson acts of
filling his Web site with my work! For Americans, he must look like
the ultimate "Dr. S-100" expert on the Web. Unfortunately, pages after
pages (dozens of pages!), his Web site is based on my work. And, of
course, he never says that he only knows the hardware, and has not the
slightest idea of CP/M and its family of operating systems...

What a pity!

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

On Mar 25, 3:05 am, "Mr Emmanuel Roche" wrote:

> Let see... 02/09/09 should mean "9 February 2009"... in which case
> your "searches" (prompted, as usual, by what I made...) were made just
> 2 years *AFTER* me... How curious!
>
> And you say that you are not copying me, "Xerox" ?
>
> Personally, "I conclude that..." you are just copying me!
>
> Each time I see your Web site, I see dozens of pages which were
> obviously "inspired" by my work. But, so far, I have never seen you
> produce anything original.
>
> Personally, I prefer the original (me) to the copy (you: "Xerox").
>
> Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

This is absurd talk from Emmanuel Roche. And childish expressions of
rage. I will not respond to rage, with rage. Facts speak louder than
taunts.

Roche has posted here for decades, pieces of other people's software,
manuals, and articles. Not links - whole documents! This is the man
who calls me a "copier"? Absurd. He thinks he owns those documents
too, and any interest in them too. Yet he won't establish his own Web
site or archive - he is hostile to those who have. He uses this
newsgroup for his Web site, archive, and blog.

In short, Roche believes he owns comp.os.cpm, and the subject matter.
He believes if he posts about some topic, he "owns" it. He responds to
persons new and familiar to this newgroup, often with contempt - and
he wants to "own" the subjects of those discussions too.

That is the basis for his claims of "copying". Anyone with nothing
better to do, can read his prior posts, and most likely will come to
these same conclusions.

My Web site is open to anyone's considerations and interest, and needs
no apologies or explanations here. Roche, on the other hand, has no
other venue.

Roche is hostile and rude to many people. I am a target to the extent
I am active and interested, as are other people. I will not let
Emmanuel Roche's hostility, discourage my interest in CP/M or this
discussion group.

Herb Johnson
retrotechnology.com

Herbert "Xerox" Johnson wrote:

> (...) he won't establish his own Web site or archive -
> he is hostile to those who have. He uses this
> newsgroup for his Web site, archive, and blog.

Hum... I think that the situation is more complex.

Here, it is a "Newsgroup". I came here because all the other
publications mentioning CP/M died one after the other.

The "Web" is something else, which is becoming more and more
commercial.

Me, for years, I have worked on CP/M and its family, and gave the
result of my work.

I am not "hostile" toward persons having set up a Web site. In fact,
my work is hosted on Web sites in the USA, Canada, England, Germany,
Italy, Denmark, and Japan! (Not in France!...)

I have long said that I had no time and/or money to set up my own Web
site. And, honestly, I don't foresee any favorable changes in the near
future. Quite the reverse.

> My Web site is open to anyone's considerations and interest,
> and needs no apologies or explanations here. Roche, on the
> other hand, has no other venue.

Yes, of course, since I have nothing to sell...

> Roche is hostile and rude to many people. I am a target to the
> extent I am active and interested, as are other people. I will not
> let Emmanuel Roche's hostility, discourage my interest in CP/M
> or this discussion group.

No, you are not active! You are simply using the result of my work to
fill your Web site! As for your "interest in CP/M", I strongly doubt
it. You are selling S-100 Bus systems, and photocopies of their
manuals.

I also note that lynchaj and monahanz both have Web sites... and both
are selling hardware, too!

Me, according to my computer, I have more than 5,000 pages of CP/M
stuff. The problem is that information has no price, just a cost. And
this cost is the cost of copying it. Which is dropping, with "Moore's
Law".

So, short of building custom CP/M computers and "bundling" my manuals
with them, I don't see how setting up a Web site could even "break
even".

Maybe I should ask a Chinese to build CP/M systems to my
specifications? At least, I have the software and the manuals.

Ha! If only I had a good electronician to my disposal...

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

Il 25/03/2011 23:25, Mr Emmanuel Roche, France ha scritto:

> The "Web" is something else, which is becoming more and more
> commercial.

[snip]

> No, you are not active! You are simply using the result of my work to
> fill your Web site! As for your "interest in CP/M", I strongly doubt
> it. You are selling S-100 Bus systems, and photocopies of their
> manuals.

[snip]

> Me, according to my computer, I have more than 5,000 pages of CP/M
> stuff. The problem is that information has no price, just a cost. And
> this cost is the cost of copying it. Which is dropping, with "Moore's
> Law".

[snip]

OK... I'll try again to cool down:

Mr. Roche noticed that the web is "becoming more and more commercial". I 
guess he refer to the increasing pervasiness of the ads in not few 
sites, even true commercial sites (that is, e-commerce sites). One of 
the things I like of Herb's site, is that is a very straightforward 
site, without ads aside his services (more on it later) and definitively 
light bandwith-wise, without cruds in flash, java, silverlight or 
javascript &c.

The core issue in the misunderstanding IMVHO lies in the nature of Mr. 
Johnson's site and commercial activity. from what I get, is a xerox 
*service* catering two needs:

one, of servicemen of legacy equipment or repairmen whose needs *ASAP* 
the cogent manuals & schematic needed for their *work* it's of B2B 
activity, small in scope and occupying a niche market.

The other is procuring people hard copy of manuals and documentation, 
and I suspect he can also bundle together multiple related document in a 
binding.

I guess that very few people bother to care of the printing of hundred 
of scanned .pdf pages (I myself never have a good relationship with 
printers, and I even don't own this type of peripheral)

The cost of information, Roche points correctly that is also in copying 
(and printing, I add..) and herb indeed provided this service.

Everyone can do his own copy of pdf files, and if really dedicated to a 
topic and/or having time and patience to oversee and watch the most 
temperamental peripheral's (that is, the printer's) behaviour, can 
prints hundred and thousand of pages, but there's contingencies and 
circumstances needing an hard copy done.

I agree that Roche's principle is perfectly agreeable, and I even fully 
concur, being an unabashed open-source taliban and a staunch enemy of 
all these IP nonsense, but I always check the single cases and issues 
and look carefully the nuances and specifics of single cases, whose in 
the case here is that is a misunderstanding of the nature of Herb's side 
work (I suspect that is a second work or a side activity done during 
retirement, not much money to be gained but at least the satisfaction of 
being active and appreciated by people. I came from a country in which 
deals and customer/seller satisfaction is built around a good espresso ;)

Both Roche and Johnston I esteem, because both have what I value most, 
the coherency, and my true flag is indeed the Coherence.

Herb is coherent in having never bowed to the modern nonsenses in 
marketing and advertising, and his site perhaps is what is most similiar 
to the user exchange group and disk/documentation services of yore (and 
I must point that this NG, whose is about the CP/M and S-100 machines, 
coding & architecture ought to reckon this point.)

Emmanuel OTOH, is a true son of his country, whose is the true cradle of 
the free sharing of informations and knowledge and open source, since 
the days of Enlightenment and the Great Revolution, and in his 
chagrining about Herb's (side) one can feel the values embodied in the 
trio of words, Libert�, Egalit�, Fraternit�.

but I remain convinced that there is a major misunderstanding of the 
reciprocal position. I'm neither of Emmanuel or Herb's side, (actually 
on both) but I can see the damages given by this quarry, every time it 
resurfaces the topic, even a pressing topic pass in the background 
instead of being discussed and solved, and this is definitively 
detrimental to this NG.

my 2 Euros, and best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

On 26.03.2011 11:49, dott.Piergiorgio wrote:
>  [...] a true son of his country, whose is the true cradle of
> the free sharing of informations and knowledge and open source, since
> the days of Enlightenment and the Great Revolution, and in his
> chagrining about Herb's (side) one can feel the values embodied in the
> trio of words, Libert�, Egalit�, Fraternit�.

Is that your honest understanding of France ?
Think about the prohibition of the usage of (unregistered) strong 
cryptography in France, about their restrictive laws related with 
employment in general, about the riots against almost anything ?
There are a lot of advantages for living in France, too.
But you have to consider always a good and a bad side.

Regards
  Peter

Hello, Piergiorgio!

Ho! My... Such a long message!

> OK... I'll try again to cool down:

Hahaha! Yes, please: keep your calm!

> The core issue in the misunderstanding IMVHO lies in the
> nature of Mr. Johnson's site and commercial activity. from
> what I get, is a xerox *service* catering two needs:

(...)

> Both Roche and Johnston I esteem, because both have what
> I value most, the coherency, and my true flag is indeed the
> Coherence.

(...)

> but I remain convinced that there is a major misunderstanding
> of the reciprocal position. I'm neither of Emmanuel or Herb's side,
> (actually on both) but I can see the damages given by this quarry,
> every time it resurfaces the topic, even a pressing topic pass in
> the background instead of being discussed and solved, and this
> is definitively detrimental to this NG.

Hum... I have several mentioned the fact that I really wonder if
people understand what I write in a foreign language. For example,
Herb writes that I am "hostile and rude to many people" while I only
write about technical subjects! I keep mentioning facts that lead to a
logical conclusion. So, how could I be rude toward people, since I
only talk about programs? If I have something to say, it is to set
some things straight, not to criticize the person who has a wrong
interpretation of the facts, since I am convinced that, if he knew all
the elements of the subject, he would arrive to the same logical
conclusion. Hence my fanatism about getting all the documentation
possible, and sharing it. Else, I would have kept it for myself.

Programmers are not writing programs for computers, but for other
programmers.

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

Hello, Peter!

> Is that your honest understanding of France ?
> Think about the prohibition of the usage of (unregistered)
> strong cryptography in France, about their restrictive laws
> related with employment in general, about the riots against
> almost anything ?There are a lot of advantages for living in
> France, too. But you have to consider always a good and
> a bad side.

Argh! I feel that I am obliged to make some remarks.

1) When the Internet arrived in France (circa 1996), there were laws,
dating from World War II, forbiding to crypt messages... Of course,
the situation became totally irrational with the Internet (passwords
could not, legally, be crypted!), so those WWII laws were abolished.

2) Well, one of the problem of France is that, since it is a rich
country, it is the only country where Communism worked. (After World
War II, the French Communist Party had 20% of the vote. Now, it is
about 2%.) As a result, there were mountains of laws made to "protect
the workers". As a result, we have one of the biggest and most
complicated work code. For example, all the legislation was made for
periods of work of one month... Nothing was foreseen for people
working only a week (or worse: during the week-end or the night!)...
Etc, etc. Needless to say, every politician wants to leave one law
bearing his name, so we have hundreds of laws carrying the name of a
politician... but they never abolish obsolete laws!

3) "the riots about almost anything?" Hahaha! Yes, I know: when I try
to explain France to foreigner I use the image "two-stroke society".
Either there is no problem, or everybody complain! Officially, we have
been a Republic for 2 centuries but, in real life, people still
continue to work, based only on the concept of honor. And honor has no
price. When President Francois Mitterand ruled, everybody was amazed
how royalist everybody was acting, around him, a Socialist! There is a
French film, "Ridicule" (1996, Lecomte) that is worth seeing,
especially if you understand that, a few years after the end of this
movie, there was the French Revolution, which destroyed everything
mentioned in this film... All this energy wasted for nothing!

4) "There are a lot of advantages for living in France, too." Probably
"in Frankreich wie Gott zu leben"? Yes, I also think that France is a
paradise when you are rich. Everything works. Especially the
administrations (10% of french people are civil servants, hired for
life, and paid by the state -- 40 years in a job, 20 years in
retirement). The problem is the poor people, especially the Arabs and
Blacks coming since their so-called "independences" (from France).
They expelled us, Frenchs, from their countries, failed to build real
states and, since they speak French and have our ideals of a Republic,
come in our country, especially since 1973, the first Oil Crisis. Even
after 2 centuries, we are still not acting like a capitalist society,
and we have to transform those peasants (most of the first generation
not reading or writing) into French citizens that can be used by the
economy... (It is the Socialists, who decided, after leaving Algeria,
to give the French nationality to everybody born in Algeria during our
132 years colonial rule! Of course, no politician abolished this law.
So, since Algerian Hospitals, Administrations, etc, don't work, they
come in France and are treated for free, while legally being Algerian
citizens!)

5) "But you have to consider always a good and a bad side."

Indeed. Rich French people are known to leave France. Most famous
French people are living everywhere (like Switzerland), except
France... Some of them no longer have houses in France, but live in a
Hotel during their stay in their native country.

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

On Mar 25, 5:25=A0pm, "Mr Emmanuel Roche, France" <roche...@laposte.net>
wrote:
>
[snip]
> I have long said that I had no time and/or money to set up my own Web
> site. And, honestly, I don't foresee any favorable changes in the near
> future. Quite the reverse.
>

You may not have time, but money is not a factor, I use this free one:

http://www.000webhost.com/

It suffices for the documents I post for small-c:

http://www.project-fbin.hostoi.com/index.htm

hth,

Steve


[snip]
>
> Yours Sincerely,
> Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

Il 26/03/2011 19:24, Mr Emmanuel Roche, France ha scritto:

> Hum... I have several mentioned the fact that I really wonder if
> people understand what I write in a foreign language. For example,
> Herb writes that I am "hostile and rude to many people" while I only
> write about technical subjects! I keep mentioning facts that lead to a
> logical conclusion. So, how could I be rude toward people, since I
> only talk about programs? If I have something to say, it is to set
> some things straight, not to criticize the person who has a wrong
> interpretation of the facts, since I am convinced that, if he knew all
> the elements of the subject, he would arrive to the same logical
> conclusion. Hence my fanatism about getting all the documentation
> possible, and sharing it. Else, I would have kept it for myself.
>
> Programmers are not writing programs for computers, but for other
> programmers.

??????

I have understand correctly ???

Sincerely, the last sentence absolutely don't make sense... Perhaps this 
can makes sense in an euro demoscene context, but, broadly, this I 
suspect don't make sense....

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

Re-Hello, Piergiorgio!

> > Programmers are not writing programs for computers,
> > but for other programmers.
>
> ??????
>
> I have understand correctly ???
>
> Sincerely, the last sentence absolutely don't make sense...
> Perhaps this can makes sense in an euro demoscene
> context, but, broadly, this I suspect don't make sense....

Hahaha!

Have you ever wondered, Piergiorgio, why there were "User's Groups" ?

Have you ever seen a "Telephone User's Group", or a "Washing Machine
User's Group" ?

Compare one tool at random that you use every day to your computer,
and explain me why the computer needs a User's Group.

Another element: Compare the size of the various manuals to a given
program. For example, in our case, the size of CP/M (4KB, at the
beginning), to the number of manuals that were provided with it.

Who needs those manuals? The computer?

Personally, I think that it is the user/programmer...

I don't know if you remember but, at the beginning of Windows, there
was something called "Bob", which was a clipboard explaining how to
use Windows...

That is to say: Windows had been designed to ease the use of command
lines computers, and was so difficult that MicroShit spent time and
money to provide "Bob the Clipboard" to Windows users, so they could
finally understand how to use Windows, which was said to be much more
easier to use than typing a command line!... Hahaha!

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

Emmanuel actually complained that some of the
staunchest old timers doing CP/M actually try
to SELL CP/M hardware??

WTF?

Is it French socialism or just plain insanity?

I appreciate some of the stuff that Emmanuel
has done to revive, retrieve and restore lost
information, but this was an insane complaint.

I HIGHLY doubt that anybody can make money
by selling CP/M stuff.  It would be a miracle
if they can just break even!

I do not think anybody selling CP/M hardware
is trying to make huge profits.

If somebody IS able to actually make PROFIT
from selling CP/M stuff, I would applaud
them of deserving of our respect and patronage.

It would be miraculous!

Emmanuel:
Please stop trying to insult people by
accusing them of making some sort of profit
on selling CP/M hardware in this day and age.

It's just idiotic.

Il 26/03/2011 23:55, Greegor ha scritto:
> Emmanuel actually complained that some of the
> staunchest old timers doing CP/M actually try
> to SELL CP/M hardware??
>
> WTF?
>
> Is it French socialism or just plain insanity?
>
> I appreciate some of the stuff that Emmanuel
> has done to revive, retrieve and restore lost
> information, but this was an insane complaint.
>
> I HIGHLY doubt that anybody can make money
> by selling CP/M stuff.  It would be a miracle
> if they can just break even!

Actually, for what I understand, Emmanuel chagrines about Herb selling 
photocopies of technical docs (some of them not available in digital 
format, as I can understand) and I have tried to point to this detail, 
and the rationale of this side work (I don't think that Herb can live 
with this work alone) and the usefulness of this service (whose is what 
is technically Herb's business) in the B2B environment, esp. servicing 
legacy equipment, and the usefulness of the copying services in general.

as I can figure, in Emmanuel's eyes Herb has done the sin of keeping in 
non-digital form some unspecified manual or schematic and "profiting" 
from the sell of the analogue photocopies.

OTOH, in Herb's eyes Emmanuel gives a very negative publicity, harming 
his work (whose, as I known, isn't his main business, but a 
second/retired activity)

for a faint smile, I can even call this misunderstanding an example of 
the so-called "culture clash", namely a clash between the idealism of 
the Latin people and the pragmatism of the Anglo-saxon people :)

Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.

Hello, Greegor!

> Emmanuel actually complained that some
> of the staunchest old timers doing CP/M
> actually try to SELL CP/M hardware??

Argh! I really wonder if people understand what I write in English!

Greegor, I did not "complain" that some regulars of the comp.os.cpm
Newsgroup are selling hardware: I just "remarked" that, to break even,
a Web site needs to sell something. (There was no positive/negative
feeling about this fact. It was just a mention of a fact.) Since we
are talking about an operating system, it has 2 components: hardware
and software. Software (and documentation) has no price but a cost.

Now, do you remember the Post-Scriptum of a DDJ article that I
published a few years ago? I think that this Post-Scriptum is the
best, simplest, clearest explanation of the fundamental difference
between hardware and software. Here it is again:

- "The Value of Software" (post-scriptum of an article)
   H.T. Gordon
   DDJ, No.19, October 1977, p.42

(Retyped by Emmanuel ROCHE.)

(...)

The real value of anything is not in its cost, but in its utility. It
may cost
a  lot to produce a white elephant, but the result is still worthless.
In  our social  system, utility tends to be measured in the
marketplace,  in  dollars. This  has  worked  well  for  hardware,
and  for  any  software  that  can  be inextricably linked to
hardware. Unattached software can be valued in  dollars only to the
extent that users can be compelled either to buy it or do without. But
it is so readily diffusible and copiable that many users will not buy
it, except  at  a  price little above the cost (in money  and  time)
of  copying. Copyrighted  printed matter is now photocopied illegally
by  individuals  with complete  impunity, because enforcement is not
practical. Where law fails,  we cannot  expect too much of ethics. So,
the utility (in the economic sense)  of even the most useful
"software" is low. One could say the same of rainfall  or sunlight!

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

Hello.

Mr Emmanuel Roche, France wrote in message ...

>Have you ever seen a "Telephone User's Group", or a "Washing Machine
>User's Group" ?


Yes, a "Telephone User's Group" does exist. Type nokia to search for them...;)
There's even a French group - a portable telephones one, though not very
active.

>I don't know if you remember but, at the beginning of Windows, there
>was something called "Bob", which was a clipboard explaining how to
>use Windows...


That's not really what I read:

Microsoft BOB was a GUI experiment by Microsoft that was innovative but it
failed. It presented a cartoon view of an office, where users can access their
programs easily. Microsoft Bob is usually mentioned as one of the worst
products Microsoft created.

Seems to have been a sort of graphical menu.

Bye, Katzy.

On Mar 26, 1:24=A0pm, "Mr Emmanuel Roche, France" <roche...@laposte.net>
wrote:

<snip>
> Hum... I have several mentioned the fact that I really wonder if
> people understand what I write in a foreign language. For example,
> Herb writes that I am "hostile and rude to many people" while I only
> write about technical subjects! I keep mentioning facts that lead to a
> logical conclusion. So, how could I be rude toward people, since I
> only talk about programs?
<snip>

-------------
Emmanuel, you really are soooo funny...

LOL! You "*only* write about technical subjects and programs" ?

To use your dozen or so posts in this thread for example,
especially the last eight or so, how many of those hundreds
of words have any technical relevance or value whatsoever?

What "technical subject" are you referring to when you
comment on someone's "stupid" nickname? Does "stupide"
have a different meaning in French?

You are indeed a "true son of your country", or at least the
stereotype of a Frenchman: rude, insulting, condescending,
etc., to the point of being an entertaining parody.

But I think most of us here understand that you're either ill
or having fun with us and are either sympathetic or amused
instead of taking you seriously; sometimes we even find
something useful in your manual form of  "Xerox"ing.

Thank you for that and the many laughs!

mike

Hello, Mike!

> But I think most of us here understand that you're either
> ill or having fun with us and are either sympathetic or
> amused instead of taking you seriously;

Hahaha!

"Absolute logic leads to absolute madness."

(A sentence that I once found in TIME magazine.)

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France

On 26 mar, 00:25, "Mr Emmanuel Roche, France" <roche...@laposte.net>
wrote:
> I have long said that I had no time and/or money to set up my own Web
> site. And, honestly, I don't foresee any favorable changes in the near
> future. Quite the reverse.

Emmanuel,

You can post your work in a blog.

You don't have to pay anything to open a blog.

To post in a blog is as easy and fast as post here.

And there are free hostings for websites also.

Emmanuel, you really do need to stop giving people idiotic nicknames here.

I know you are critical of people who don't use their real names as user names, and there are many legitimate (and some not so legitimate!) reasons for them to do so.
That kind of remark about their name  is usually ignored, but it comes across to native English speakers as extremely rude in tone (from your last two comments about
non-real usernames anyway), and terribly bad manners - unless you are very comfortable with that person. I know, I know, I have a stupid nickname too, but I'm proud of
the fact it was given to me 19 years ago by a group of technical guys who I worked with for a decade or more, and truly respected. It was given in fun and as thanks, and
I wear it the same way.

So when you start calling other people by derogatory names, that's not something most fair-minded people can ignore.

Whatever you feel towards anyone, it is NOT appropriate to return to being a 3-year-old and calling someone the information-archival equivalent of "poopy head" in public
- that just demeans *you* in the eyes of everyone who reads such messages. I hope this makes sense to you.

Combined with your otherwise excellent english grammar, the net effect is of an extremely insulting attack ON THAT PERSON. I suspect from our private emails that you are
a much more reasonable person than it seems here, but the didactic lexicon you use when answering questions refutes that impression.

I really don't give a fetid dingo's kidney for who did what to whom - but I'm afraid I do take offense, not only at your name-calling, but your defence of that behaviour.

If you wouldn't do or say it in person, don't do or say it on the net. If you're the type of person who *would* say those kinds of things in person to people you hardly
know, then you should add a "flame" disclaimer or risk losing the credibility you hold so valuable.
Kind regards,
Peter J Naus (aka "poopy head" to my 4-y-o nephew Zack :)

"dott.Piergiorgio" wrote:
>Il 23/03/2011 00:35, Bruce Morgen ha scritto:
>> CP/M 2.2 was by far the most
>> popular 8-bit version of the
>> product, and this is reflected
>> in the remaining hobbyists'
>> interest.  In fact, most folks
>> who used MAC, RMAC, SID, ZSID,
>> LINK, etc., did so under CP/M
>> 2.2 or some derivative thereof
>> rather than under the more
>> exotic and (at the time)
>> expensive follow-on products...
>
>I concur and agree, and the textual archives of this very NG during the 
>80s confirm that the majority of users (and coders) uses DR CP/M 2.2 
>back then.

That is what I used. In may case, the path from CP/M 2.2 lead to
MS-DOS, Windows, Unix variants, VAX/VMS, several RTOS, etc. not to the
various improved versions of CP/M.
I never used CP/M 3, MPM, MSX, etc.
I believe this is typical, (not based in any research.)
--
Roberto Waltman

[ Please reply to the group.
  Return address is invalid ]