Aargh, I've just been bitten by the "no reply-to line" bug. Never mind, here is my message again...
On 26 Oct 94 00:21:00 +0000, Johnathan Taylor said: > Most people seem to view the sam as just a speccy with more ram and better > graphics:-( Isn't it? :-) > I think the crappy machine-code DOS interface is one reason why > most applictions are totally ram-bound, and because most applications are > ram-bound, disk based utils like ARC,LHA,ZIP arn't usable... That is perhaps more to do with the fact that floppy disks are a bit slow for running disk-intensive programs (plus you can't actually get a great deal of stuff on a 780K disk). Also, perhaps it's just because no one has written those things yet. Personally I'd like to see a gzip for Sam, and I may write one if I ever get round to it. > LOAD d1;a$ > the ; has to be used as a seperator or it screws up! > Of course if the +D syntax is duplicated entirely then using:- > LOAD D*;a$ Why doesn't he just go the whole hog and have LOAD *"d";1;"a_file" ? :-) > I'm begining to think that a full-blown banked unix would be MOST useful! No it wouldn't. The Sam is slow enough as it is, and besides a "proper" Unix requires a hardware memory management unit. Unix also requires a large mass storage device. imc
