Technology and Trends
 USENET Archives
  
Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!
hsdndev!spdcc!spt!mdc
From: m...@spt.entity.com (Marty Connor)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: IIcx ROM Question
Summary: Will System 7.0 show more than 8 megs on a IIcx?
Message-ID: <12699@spt.entity.com>
Date: 10 Jan 91 16:11:26 GMT
Reply-To: mdc@spt.UUCP (Marty Connor)
Organization: Hacks 'R' Us, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 28
Xref: gmdzi comp.sys.mac.misc:6156 comp.sys.mac.system:2367

I apologize in advance if this topic is old news.  Please feel free to
send private mail or post as you wish.

I have heard that the ROMs in the IIcx are not 32 bit clean, and thus
when I boot sys 7.0 I will only see 8 megs of memory even if I have 20
megs installed on a IIcx.

Can someone verify this?

Another question:  Let's say the ROMs are not clean (the ROM memory
manager has certain assumptions built in, and AUX uses all physical
memory because it doesn't use ROM mem mgr, but MACOS uses ROM memory
mgr, and so can't go into 32 bit mode safely).

Would it be possible to patch things on a IIcx by reading the ROMs
into memory and have the MMU re-map the ROM address space, apply the
patch, and run with ROM code in RAM?  or is a ROM upgrade for the IIcx
a more tractable solution?

I ask this because when System 7.0 is released and a bunch of IIcx
users boot their machines with 20mb of physical memory, it would be a
real shame if the finder showed 8mb as it does under 6.0.x.

-- 
Marty Connor, Marty's Computer Workshop, Home of the Wrist Pad[tm] Plus!
126 Inman Street, Cambridge, MA 02139
Voice: (617) 491-6935, Fax: (617) 491-7046
Net: m...@entity.com, or ...{harvard|uunet}!mit-eddie!spt!mdc

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!think.com!mintaka!
spdcc!spt!mdc
From: m...@spt.entity.com (Marty Connor)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: IIcx ROM Question
Summary: Will a ROM Upgrade be needed to run sys 7 properly on IIcx?
Message-ID: <12925@spt.entity.com>
Date: 14 Jan 91 02:09:02 GMT
Reply-To: mdc@spt.UUCP (Marty Connor)
Organization: Hacks 'R' Us, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 22
Xref: gmdzi comp.sys.mac.programmer:17425 comp.sys.mac.hardware:6182

Can someone tell me whether it will be possible to put 20 megabytes of
physical RAM in a IIcx and have System 7 use it all properly?

Will this require a ROM upgrade?

Will IIci ROMs work in a IIcx for most intents and purposes?

If the ROMs in a IIcx are not 32 bit clean, can they be loaded to RAM
and patched around using the PMMU?  Has any third party company
thought about this [the VIRTUAL people come to mind.]

Can someone help with some answers?  Thanks.





-- 
Marty Connor, Marty's Computer Workshop, Home of the Wrist Pad[tm] Plus!
126 Inman Street, Cambridge, MA 02139
Voice: (617) 491-6935, Fax: (617) 491-7046
Net: m...@entity.com, or ...{harvard|uunet}!mit-eddie!spt!mdc

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!wuarchive!udel!oscar.ccm.udel.edu!johnston
From: john...@oscar.ccm.udel.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: IIcx ROM Question
Message-ID: <41599@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Date: 14 Jan 91 03:09:17 GMT
Sender: use...@ee.udel.edu
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.system
Organization: Univ. of Delaware, CCM
Lines: 18
Xref: gmdzi comp.sys.mac.hardware:6183 comp.sys.mac.system:2398
Nntp-Posting-Host: oscar.ccm.udel.edu

In article <12...@spt.entity.com>, m...@spt.entity.com (Marty Connor) writes...
>Can someone tell me whether it will be possible to put 20 megabytes of
>physical RAM in a IIcx and have System 7 use it all properly?
> 
>Will this require a ROM upgrade?

I have heard this over and over again -- it is a good question.
So far, I don't think that there has been a decent response from Apple.

Naively, it would seem that whatever is lacking could be taken care
off by an init.  Isn't this what 32-Bit QuickDraw does for the Mac II
and the IIx?  On a 20-meg IIcx it seems like very few people would
opt to PAY for a 32-bit clean ROM if an init could patch the nasty
bits ...

What's the big deal?

Bill (john...@oscar.ccm.udel.edu)

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!olivea!apple!AppleLink.apple.com!Greg
From: Gr...@AppleLink.apple.com (Greg Marriott)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: IIcx ROM Question
Message-ID: <11707@goofy.Apple.COM>
Date: 14 Jan 91 11:19:18 GMT
References: <41599@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Sender: use...@Apple.COM
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 24
Xref: gmdzi comp.sys.mac.hardware:6201 comp.sys.mac.system:2404

In article <41...@nigel.ee.udel.edu> john...@oscar.ccm.udel.edu writes:
> In article <12...@spt.entity.com>, m...@spt.entity.com (Marty Connor) 
writes...
> >Can someone tell me whether it will be possible to put 20 megabytes of
> >physical RAM in a IIcx and have System 7 use it all properly?
> > 
> >Will this require a ROM upgrade?
> 
> Naively, it would seem that whatever is lacking could be taken care
> off by an init.  Isn't this what 32-Bit QuickDraw does for the Mac II
> and the IIx?  On a 20-meg IIcx it seems like very few people would
> opt to PAY for a 32-bit clean ROM if an init could patch the nasty
> bits ...
> 
> What's the big deal?

System 7 will not give IIcx users access to more than 8Mb of physical.  It 
will not take the place of a 32-bit clean ROM upgrade.  Virtual memory 
gives you access to more logical RAM, but still won't go beyond the 24-bit 
address space on non 32-bit clean ROM machines.

Greg Marriott
Blue Meanie
Apple Computer, Inc.

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!olivea!mintaka!spdcc!spt!mdc
From: m...@spt.entity.com (Marty Connor)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: IIcx ROM Question
Summary: what's the next step?
Message-ID: <13076@spt.entity.com>
Date: 16 Jan 91 12:37:11 GMT
References: <41599@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <11707@goofy.Apple.COM> 
<1991Jan15.133603.9346@cbnews.att.com>
Reply-To: mdc@spt.UUCP (Marty Connor)
Organization: Hacks 'R' Us, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 35
Xref: gmdzi comp.sys.mac.hardware:6242 comp.sys.mac.system:2450

I have received mail from a number of people including Apple employees
about the IIcx ROM question.

The general concensus is:

  - A ROM swap will be needed and is the cleanest way to make 32 bit
    mode possible for Mac IIcx owners.

This raises other harder questions:

  - How many people need this capability?

  - Is it worth Apple's while to do it?

  - Could existing ROMs (i.e. IIci) be used, perhaps in conjuction
    with an INIT that fixed dependencies?

  - Who can we speak to at Apple about this issue who has the power to
    make such a decision?

I would appreciate it if someone at Apple would forward this message
to the appropriate person or group there.

In appreciation I can offer my gratitude and a few Wrist Pad[tm] Pluses
(wrist rests) for people to try out.

Thanks for your help.

Marty

-- 
Marty Connor, Marty's Computer Workshop, Home of the Wrist Pad[tm] Plus!
126 Inman Street, Cambridge, MA 02139
Voice: (617) 491-6935, Fax: (617) 491-7046
Net: m...@entity.com, or ...{harvard|uunet}!mit-eddie!spt!mdc