Re: A92: Shells and assembler

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A92: Shells and assembler


In a message dated 10/9/99 7:40:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Betelg@aol.com 
writes:

> It has always been my opinion that the less interfearance with the actuall 
>  asembler the better.  Common "interference" also includes 'features'.  I'd 
> be 
>  happy as happy gets if I could just have a FAST text-based OS, that's not 
>  only an assembly shell, but does everything that TI's (trashy) OS does.  
> This 
>  would be ideal.  Also, I wish people (TI and the makers of various shells) 
>  would get off this Idea of programs being integrated into the OS.  I hate 
>  that.  I'd rather they give me a DOS-like OS and give me a bunch of 
programs 
> 
>  to go with it rather than all ti's all-in-one os.  also, I noticed that 
> fargo 
>  is realatively small.  Wouldn't it be fun to program a "shell" if you 
didn't 
> 
>  have TI's (worthless) os to worry about?  you could have 60K to work with 
>  instead of the usu, 5 or 6.  I think the best way to do it is not to build 
> on 
>  tios, but to build from the ground up.  I've tried to make operating 
systems 
> 
>  like this on computers, but (particularly with newer chips) assembler 
calls 
>  are soo cryptic, and tehre are so many of them (pentium II's have like 
200! 
>  wtf?).  not to mention that if you tried to make an OS that relied on 
logic 
>  instead of math, you'd waste half the processor, because it's all devoted 
to 
> 
>  stupid mathmatical operations like addition for example (cough worthless, 
> but 
>  that's offtopic.)  Anyway (I get carried away) It's probably not *too* 
hard 
>  to make such an OS for the calculator, as it's a LOT simpler than an 
intel.  
> 
>  not to mention that an OS devoted strictly or primarily to mathemetical 
>  operations (and little to graphics.  TI's OS is the WORST in this 
respect... 
> 
>  my opn'n is: just give me text, and ditch the pretty print if it means 
more 
>  versatility and power. ).
>  
you talk alot about how TI's OS is trashy and stuff.  l think it looks good.  
l think it even resembles Windows.  As a matter of fact, the OS is the main 
reason l BOUGHT the 89 (yours is 92 but same thing).  Maybe we think 
different because the 89 OS is a little faster (just because screen is not as 
big) but l have never seen any shell or OS for a calc that is as cool as the 
89/92's.  l mean, browsing thru files isn't very easy, but l've seen 
screenshots of the new AMS 2.0 (at least for the 89) and it makes the 
Var-Link a little more managable.

--TurboSoft

Visit the TURBOSOFT HOMEPAGE:  The most current Basic and C programs created 
by TurboSoft for the 89, and the most 89 web links.
<A HREF="http://turbosoft.ticalc.org/">http://turbosoft.ticalc.org/</A>