On 5/26/20 1:46 PM, Mike Stein wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Brian K. White"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware
On 5/26/20 11:59 AM, Mike Stein wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Brian K. White&
- Original Message -
From: "Brian K. White"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware
> On 5/26/20 11:59 AM, Mike Stein wrote:
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Brian K. White" mail
On 5/26/20 11:59 AM, Mike Stein wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Brian K. White" mailto:b.kenyo...@gmail.com>>
To: mailto:m...@bitchin100.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware
> ... you have to convi
- Original Message -
From: "Brian K. White"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware
> ... you have to convince me why I should agree
> with whatever it is you wish I would do or not-do.
---
I don't think anyone has
On 5/26/20 10:42 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote:
It was commercial software, Brian. Why the impedance here
If you don't like impedance then I suggest the way to avoid it is to
stop expecting something you have no right to.
If you don't want something of yours published, you can opt not to
publish
- Original Message -
From: Tom Wilson
To: m...@bitchin100.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph wrote:
Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being shared
my bad, I should have started a separate thread on "what do do about
M100SIG posted at Internet Archive".
I'm done anyways.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:50 AM Tom Wilson wrote:
> Absolutely. We certainly should not be passing around stuff that is being
> actively withheld.
>
> I’m not against
Absolutely. We certainly should not be passing around stuff that is being
actively withheld.
I’m not against distributing orphaned works, but if someone has made a
point of saying “that’s mine, you should not be copying it,” then we need
to respect that.
But also, let’s not get hung up in the
Thanks, I’ll keep the changes to myself. I want to add an interface for
simplicity, maybe even a “disk-drive” look to it. I have it on a RPI in a
case with a screen top. I think a full-screen Drive Image with blinking
activity light would be cool.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:43 Tom Wilson wrote:
-
From: Tom Dison
To: m...@bitchin100.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware
Should I not be looking at the source? I was going to add some additional
features.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:02 Stephen Adolph wrote:
I find your statement
: "Brian K. White"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware
> On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote:
>> My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial
>> implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically rel
Great, very interesting.
Unfortunate that this has happened.
Morally, I think it is the respectable thing to honor Wilson's wishes here
to the best ability we have.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:31 AM Tom Wilson wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Is
I asked about LaddieAlpha, too. We can use it and even modify it, but we
can’t redistribute our changes to other people.
I’ll dig out the email chain when I get a chance. Short version, it’s
publicly available, so of course you can download and use it. You just
cannot give it to someone else
It was commercial software, Brian. Why the impedance here?
The dispute was/is between Rick Hanson, who has departed, and Wilson Van
Alst, who's status is unknown.
Wilson alleged that Rick made Wilson's commercial software available to all
via the M100SIG. It is a long ago dispute. That's
This isn't about LaddieAlpha but about some things that are included in
M100SIG.zip, which is an archive of an old CompuServe forum that has
been around for some time.
--
bkw
On 5/26/20 10:38 AM, Tom Dison wrote:
Ok, I’ll delete LaddieAlpha. Sorry about that.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:31
Who manages that Bitchin100 that has the git repository I cloned?
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:38 Tom Dison wrote:
> Ok, I’ll delete LaddieAlpha. Sorry about that.
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:31 Tom Wilson wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
I just asked what I thought was a riduculous question, but you're saying
that's exactly what did happen?
That does make this at least an interesting question.
--
bkw
On 5/26/20 10:02 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote:
I find your statement ridiculous Brian.
I hope this is simply because you were not
Ok, I’ll delete LaddieAlpha. Sorry about that.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:31 Tom Wilson wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being shared
>> publicly we should take steps to remove it.
>>
>>
On 5/26/20 10:00 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote:
If there were versions floating around that were not marked "no VAN"
then that was unfortunate.
It does not change the fact that Van's software was published
without his permission.
What this is all about, is the fact that his software was published
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph wrote:
>
> Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being shared
> publicly we should take steps to remove it.
>
> thanks
> Steve
>
Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If it’s
posted to Internet
I find your statement ridiculous Brian.
I hope this is simply because you were not aware of the theft.
> Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever has
> any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever public,
> then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad.
If there were versions floating around that were not marked "no VAN" then
that was unfortunate.
It does not change the fact that Van's software was published without his
permission.
What this is all about, is the fact that his software was published
without his permission.
And so,
An M100SIG
On 5/26/20 8:31 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote:
Brian,
just curious, did you post the M100SIG to the internet archive?
If so, did you ensure that you posted the "No VAN" version, which has
deleted all of Wilson Van Alst's code?
I believe this was Van's wishes.
..Steve
What in the world did you
follow up;
looks like this is not the "no Van" version of the M100SIG; suggest we pull
this one down and replace it with the one that has all of Wilson's code
scrubbed.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 8:31 AM Stephen Adolph wrote:
> Brian,
> just curious, did you post the M100SIG to the internet
I have to say I really like LaddieAlpha, I have it running on a Raspberry
Pi - very ready to install and, and now I have plenty of storage for my
Model 200. I did a git clone of it and hterm, and plan to play with the
source is both.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 07:24 Brian K. White wrote:
> On
Brian,
just curious, did you post the M100SIG to the internet archive?
If so, did you ensure that you posted the "No VAN" version, which has
deleted all of Wilson Van Alst's code?
I believe this was Van's wishes.
..Steve
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 8:24 AM Brian K. White wrote:
> On 5/26/20 4:23
On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote:
My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial
implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically related
to the unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round tuits...
I think it may be lost in the same place mine
>
> My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial
> implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically related to the
> unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round tuits...
>
I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to.
> (By the way, the
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 3:40 PM Philip Avery wrote:
> No, though I was reminded of that by the recent Hardware Scroll post.
> Decided to leverage ROM code, so eventually M100 CP/M gets down to "rst 4".
>
> Philip
>
OK. Yeah you have to draw the line somewhere on all these features if you
ever
No, though I was reminded of that by the recent Hardware Scroll post.
Decided to leverage ROM code, so eventually M100 CP/M gets down to "rst 4".
Philip
On 26/05/2020 10:34 am, John R. Hogerhuis wrote:
Is the hardware scroll being used in REX CP/M?
Sounds like that was the plan at some
Is the hardware scroll being used in REX CP/M?
Sounds like that was the plan at some point.
-- John.
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 1:05 AM B 9 wrote:
> From: "John R. Hogerhuis"
>> To: m...@bitchin100.com
>>
>> Yes the Model T screen driver is slow. It's possible we could speed it up
>> a little because there is some hardware scrolling capability built into the
>> video chip drivers that the ROM
- Original Message -
From: B 9
To: m100@lists.bitchin100.com
Sent: Monday, May 25, 2020 4:05 AM
Subject: [M100] Undocumented hardware
.
> (By the way, the Bitchin100 site could use a friendly "how to transfer binary
> files over a serial port using only builtin soft
My comments below, cheers Steve
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 4:05 AM B 9 wrote:
> From: "John R. Hogerhuis"
>> To: m...@bitchin100.com
>>
>> Yes the Model T screen driver is slow. It's possible we could speed it up
>> a little because there is some hardware scrolling capability built into the
>>
>
> From: "John R. Hogerhuis"
> To: m...@bitchin100.com
>
> Yes the Model T screen driver is slow. It's possible we could speed it up
> a little because there is some hardware scrolling capability built into the
> video chip drivers that the ROM does not make use of.
>
> But that would
> a)
35 matches
Mail list logo
