, it doesn't have to be a turbo R necessarily, but the thing is
quite slow, so an MSX2 or 2+ would make for a boring demonstration ("Is it
still loading?").
>> I think it would be a good idea to have a place dedicated to JoyNet. The
>> snake game from Brazil could be sh
> RicBit has made progframs to transfer data between PC and MSX using a
> Joynet cable (the first transfer and runs ROM files, and the second
> plays WAV files). This programs are free and with small changes you
> can use it to transfer data to your MSX.
How fast is it? I
> > Not at all. Linux knows the `network driver' as a special object. I
should
> > just write a network driver, so the parallel port is treated as a
network
> > device. Then you can just use the connection as if it is an ethernet
card
> > , which means there is no need for a point to point link. I
2nd frame for 3D
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
> Hmm... I just had a weird idea ! How about using two MSXs? One should have
> Genlocker and 3D Master system glasses and other MSX should be connected
> to other MSX's Video in. Then they would be connected to each others by
> using JoyC
> The big question is: DO I NEED TO RESOLDER MY CABLE (hope not :-( )!
No you do not have to make a new cable. The schematics above are
-WRONG-! At least to our new 'JoyCom', 'JoyNet' or whatever you want to
call it, standard.
DO NOT MAKE THE CABLE DESCRIBED EARLIER. IT I
name.
>I propose the name "JoyNet", because it uses joystick
ports, it's a network
>and it should provide us with a lot of MSX-fun (joy).
>What do you think about this name? Any other name
proposals?
As I already proposed...
Greetings
Maico Arts
MSX Ma
(that's the name of my version) the game
in wich you have to kill some phantom using bombs. In xblast more than one
player are present in the game, each player play from a different computer
(joynet !!!).
What have yo to do ? To kill all the others player ! Simpler and very funny
!
What do you
At 01:51 PM 03/06/99 +0100, you wrote:
>>I made a diskROM like that which reads DSK images from PC to MSX through
>>the JoyNet cable. At the moment, it is read-only and works under DOS1
>>(MSX-DOS and BASIC). I can send you the code if you like. The main problem
>>
] If you read carefully, you can see that I mention that the normal Joystick
] AND JoyNet can use the full speed very well. I was talking about the problem
] that the Z380 would be too fast to read the mouse... Even on a turboR this
] is a problem (non-working mouse routines).
It is only a
7;driver' for emulating disk-images from a PC to a MSX.
> The
> >idea is to connect a MSX to a PC and then emulate a disk from data that
> is
> >stored on the PC.
>
> I made a diskROM like that which reads DSK images from PC to MSX through
> the JoyNet cable. At th
r MSX project "i", and also I have spoken a lot of people about JoyNet (I
had a flyer about it on my stand). Unfortunately, the fair was over so soon
that we didn't have the chance to play Laserbikes, sorry Augusto, but the
people know it exists now, for I mentioned it as 'still
to other MSX's Video in. Then they would be connected to each others by
> > using JoyCOM (or JoyNET ?) and one MSX could generate picture only for
> > one eye !
>
> Yeah ! weird ... and funny too ! maybe we try that latter ! but there
> will be
> some video sync probl
At 11:15 AM 10/13/98 +0200, you wrote:
>I want to make the cables too, but what is the best way to make the cable
>so if I take my MSX to a fair or club I will be able to connect to somebody
>else without any problems.
Yes, that is the idea of a standard.
>Should the cable be like a T with th
bility.
> UZIX is ready for a NFS ?
Network is too far away from UZIX reality now.
> Can UZIX be used with Joynet Cable ?
Yes, but nothing is implemented yet.
There are more important tasks to do before thinking about
network.
> cat /etc/mtab | more
> for 3 ti
it doesn't have to be a turbo R necessarily, but the thing is
> quite slow, so an MSX2 or 2+ would make for a boring demonstration ("Is it
> still loading?").
Ah, well... I'll see what I can do.
> >> I think it would be a good idea to have a place dedicated to Joy
ghly undesirable, for example when running
a JoyNet-program, in that case the normal interrupt will disable two of the
three transmission 'channels'.
~Grauw
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>&g
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Laurens Holst wrote:
> > Yes, a timeout is needed for such situations. But as long as the other
> > side is connected (and running an os with JUMP drivers), everything should
> > be ok and no locks are possible.
>
> You should _never_ assume that... One flawd bit on the ack l
robably 1 bit) was
received. In this case: using the "ACK" signal. That would again be a
SYNCHRONOUS method (every transfer synchronised with the returned
acknowledge). It seems that's the idea with JoyNet.
>
> Since the timing information is part of the communicated message,
Hi,
Sorry for sending wrong information to the list. I was outdated and with problems
to read the last messages. I thought that I was the only one that made a cable...
Thanks to everybody who helped. The link at Laurens' homepage is correct, but the
game isn't there yet. I upload
On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Martial BENOIT wrote:
> why don't you use the DOS? I mean you are talking of BDOS, by the way buy
> making the game directly load from DOS prompt, you'll have the DOS and BIOS
> entry in page 0 that is RAM in DOS mode, therefore you just have to modify
> RST38 RAM location so
At 03:04 PM 03/06/99 +0100, you wrote:
>> What about the inter slot call? That's one RST you'd better not redefine.
>> For example, the H_KEYI handler in the NMS8250 uses it.
>
>ARGH! That is bad... Well, I'll just make sure BIOS is switched in
>page 0 when I call it. That doesn't happen very
At 10:22 AM 4/29/99 +0200, you wrote:
>>If you want, I can mail you my source for a communication protocol. It has
>>one major problem though: it cannot recover from errors. Errors are rare,
>>so for testing the protocol is OK, but there errors are just a bit too
>>frequent (once in 80 megs if my
eone else with a little more knowledge about electronics anxious
> to do it)
I often ask for people with more electronics knowledge to make or explain
something, but I get little response. So it is better to try and do it
yourself.
Besides, the converter is not that difficult. You have enough so
> > I don't know much about IP either, but Adriano Camargo Rodrigues da Cunha
> > knows (and implemented it in UZIX) and Laurens Holst is now learning (and
> > implementing) it. Guys, please enlighten us.
> Pfff... It's really very simple. An IP packet consists of a header
IP packets are
on.
I'm not sure the reasoning I used above is the one used for the
name-giving. But I have had a couple of courses at the university about
asynchronous computing and communication, so I know what's asynchronous and
what isn't.
>Besides: if JoyNet only standardises the cable, than
s are connected in a ring (Joynet basic principle number 1 :-))
Communication takes place in one direction, lets say from right to left.
At the start, some fuzzywuzzy takes place to determine the size of the
ring - lets say N. Then each computer sends its own data block (to left),
reads N data block
On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, you wrote:
>
> > 3. When JUMP should be used
>
> The term "JUMP" is not introduced...
> JUMP = Joynet Univeral Message Protocol?
Hmm did I forget that? sorry. It should be Joynet Unified Mac
the condition of an if-statement can be, and how
the radar can be used (or am I now asking just one question). Anyway, I
think it would be easy to make it hecto-multi-player (257 players at most,
simultaneously), by making use of joynet. I'm coding something at the
moment so that implementin
f all of my
> CD's, maybe even IR controlled)
>
> Just some of my crazy ideas...
Perhaps this is possible, but it would not be the easiest way. Connecting
MSX to PC is possible via the joystickport(s) or printerport (depends on
the direction of the stream). I heard people are workin
picture takes any time, but if you wish
to make a game, you have to generate two a bit different pictures, and
that takes plenty of time.
Hmm... I just had a weird idea ! How about using two MSXs? One should have
Genlocker and 3D Master system glasses and other MSX should be connected
to other
theoretically- a lot MORE support than any Z380 project.
Another matter is hardware relatively inexpensive (ACCNET,
RS232C, JoyNet-Joy-Com...) that requires few soft (specially the
first two ones) to get a, let's say, sooner 'pay-back'.
IMHO, I think it should be continued the codi
,
Almost
>Real (disk A...), Calculus and others (Techno Crew/TeddyWarez/...???)
>- Also some nice demo's from Switzerland! Like that Raytracing demo.
>- Hardware like JoyNet! I hope there will be some software for it soon!
>
>This would really impress Nishi! Other proposals welcome
Pah, spammer... tsk tsk tsk... ^_^
Heh, but I read it a lot less nowadays, yes. But there's not really been
anything really interesting (read: programming-related) going on recently...
like joynet, that was fun (even if it didn't really end up being used or
anything, but ah, if someon
using two MSXs? One should have
> > Genlocker and 3D Master system glasses and other MSX should be connected
> > to other MSX's Video in. Then they would be connected to each others by
> > using JoyCOM (or JoyNET ?) and one MSX could generate picture only for
> > one
xample, I like a lot games like "Warcraft II", or "Dune 2000" in
multiplayer mode.
I'm impatient for see "DOME" and "Strategic Army" on my MSX!! And Laurens
said thet Strategic Army will support JoyNet for multiplayer! It is
wonderful! :-D
--
Anto
] >Then, I can put it into my 'Joystick-connection report',
] which I will post
] >now and then.
] >
] >By the way, about the name of this 'standard'... I propose
] the name
] >=== The JoyCom standard ===
] >Let me know if you agree or have got other ideas.
]
ter network using the new standard is compatible
with the F1 Spirit 3D cable. Can someone with 2 MSX2+ machines verify this?
And what about a name for the new standard? It's much easier to refer to
when it has a proper name.
I propose the name "JoyNet", because it uses joystick por
o.. It was mentioned in the discussion
about JoyNet.
> > But I don't use them anyway. I don't care about the colours. Hmm.
> > Would I get colours if I login on a Unix machine and try: set term
> > ansi?
>
> I don't know if it runs, but you can force colors
optionally one 'native
language' version, i.e. Dutch or Spanish etc.
I have made a start on my harddisk (MSX).
I will make some HTML when I've got time and will then put it on my
homepage. If it's there I will let you know, and from then on you can email
me additions.
So
e.
>Well that's the reason.
Thanks.
>By the way, the joystickroutines on the interrupt also (re)set those pins,
>unfortunatly. And that is stupid because therefor JoyNet can't function with
>the normal interrupt enabled.
Something to do with touchpad handshaking, perhaps?
ething, but I get little response. So it is better to try and do it
> yourself.
>
> Besides, the converter is not that difficult. You have enough soldering
> skill (JoyNet and TI83 cables). And the electronics are not that hard
> either, you can find data sheets of most ICs on t
orks is because
>the protocols are standardised!
I was talking specifically about software for the joystick network (vote
for JoyNet! ;). I am actually very much in favor of standardized protocols,
but I think it would be overkill in this case.
The only situation I can think of where it is usef
Hi networkers!
>How about :
>
>The JoyNet Standard
Wow! We agree on a name before we even read each other's proposals...
>How about making a small name competition?
Nah. It's too much trouble and it takes too long.
I was thinking of dedicating some WWW pages to th
"random", so use those for the result.
;====
; RANDOM.ASM
; JoyNet Tetris
; Kryten/Mayhem 1998
;
BDOS: equ #F37D
BDOS_GTIME: equ #2C
RANDOM_PATTERNH: equ #B5
RANDOM_PATTERNL: equ #AD
ra
't have so much spare time. But please, send me exact
>specifications on what the condition of an if-statement can be, and how
>the radar can be used (or am I now asking just one question). Anyway, I
>think it would be easy to make it hecto-multi-player (257 players at most,
>simulta
gt; my
> > CD's, maybe even IR controlled)
> >
> > Just some of my crazy ideas...
>
> Perhaps this is possible, but it would not be the easiest way. Connecting
> MSX to PC is possible via the joystickport(s) or printerport (depends on
> the direction of the s
to make a single demo with contributions from marathon visitors.
I think it would be a good idea to have a place dedicated to JoyNet. The
snake game from Brazil could be shown, and shevek's Boulderdash clone and
maybe my Tetris clone (if it's finished in time).
Bye,
Maa
when the first anti-messages for this discussion appear :-))
Well, as long as the word 'MSX' is in the body at least once or twice, it
can't be considered off-topic, can it? ;)
Personally, I think it's a fun distraction from that endless JoyNet/Com
discussion!
Greetz,
ames at my page.
:I propose the name "JoyNet", because it uses joystick ports, it's a network
:and it should provide us with a lot of MSX-fun (joy).
:What do you think about this name? Any other name proposals?
JoyCom... the Joystick Communication-standard (The JoyCom standard).
-used to be made
on a toilet paper cylinder-...)
- 2-computer JoyNet connector...
I have programmed some editions of Track (diskmag) and also some
music-discs; Overload (of Datax, my club. It was a moonsound-musicdisk while
I had no MoonSound!!! I sometimes still wonder why it worked...), and Music
Man
Hi,
Last week I uploaded a game for testing your cables.
But the game was with still with a bug. Sorry for that.
Today I uploaded a new fixed version. The game was
saved in ASCII text format with SAVE"snafu.txt",A
Just browse the URL, save the form like text and
th
to keep informed
> on the MSX scene and talk to all the people you know, you'll come as
> a visitor, not as a stand holder.
You could sell JoyNet cables and some game for it! ;-)
> Another problem of having a stand is that you have to watch it. It's
> not safe to leave
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Adriano Camargo Rodrigues da Cunha wrote:
> UZIX processes have priority. You can use a daemon process as a
> JUMP driver (as TCP/IP do). The only problem that can arise is that it
> will slow down the link (assuming JUMP is a sincronous protocol - an
> asincronous prot
ke Compass compact sources in the background while the editor
is running. It may be tricky to program, but I think there is CPU power
unused while editing.
You'll probably re-write the source storage of Compass anyway, since when
using tokenized lines, a pointer per line would take more space
ttempt
can
> be made to make a single demo with contributions from marathon visitors.
Ahh the second idea is also very nice!!!
The first idea... Well it's nice but maybe as a 'sub-contest', cause such a
thing won't take too much time...
> I think it would be a good idea
rmatted and compressed stream. This
file is copied to an MSX-disk and then read by FudeBrowser.
2) JoyNet connection
In this second step, the MSX and the PC will be connected through
a JoyNet link. The MSX will be able to browse the HTML files stored
locally in the PC.
example RPGs (Strategic Army 0.5!),
Real Time Strategy-games (SA but I think I won't use it; scrolling is still
too slow) and Grand Theft Auto-like games (using JoyNet!)... And, ofcourse,
when the computer it is running on is a MSX2+, it will use the features of
the MSX2+. And if you really need t
he new egroup, do it please and
> inform us as soon as you did it.
Ah, Phoenix. I hope all specs and schemes or Phoenix will be subitted to the
Phoenix homepage???
Really hope so, for compatibility's sake...
By the way, how did you solve the joystickport timing-problem???
Joystick and JoyNet
der to read
pins 6 and 7 they first set them. Ofcourse this won't have to be done
everytime, but if they for example don't set bits 6 and 7 then if some nerdo
changes bits 6 and 7 into 0 the buttons can't be read anymore until the next
reset.
Well that's the reason.
By t
ould limit it
> to 14 bits/16kB)
I think that would be better. For people without JoyNet, more than 1
robot would have to run on a single MSX.
Also, if you store the stack(s) and the program itself outside of the
memory, a robot program will use more MSX memory than just the
internal memory
Hi!
Philip wrote:
>Isn't it possible to connect the MSX to the PC in a way you can access the
>harddisk of the pc ?
You can do that using the JoyNet cable. Simply build one for the MSX and
one for the PC parallel port.
I am making some software, called JoyDsk, which emulates a flopp
files to
>>disk..
>
>No, not really. Assembling my SA-sources (which are quite large) only takes
>about 30 seconds on my 7MHz MSX. And I can immediately try it out (I can't
>when working on PC... ok, I can use an emulator...).
You can use a JoyNet cable and the JoyDsk ROM. Sl
Pumpkin Adventure 3, and maybe more)
- St. Sunrise hardware! (ofcourse GFX9000, Moonsound, Sunrise IDE, Sunrise
RS232)
- Impressive MSX2-demo's like NOP's Unknown Reality (256kB/MSX Audio), Almost
Real (disk A...), Calculus and others (Techno Crew/TeddyWarez/...???)
- Also some ni
s to make a new powerful MSX MACHINE, with extended
capabilities and a reverse compatibility mode with old MSX standards...
ASCII must realize that Japanese people are NOT good in creating new
things. Japanese are good in making things cheaper, smaller, faster...
But see... they could
positive point is that the data flow can be
> > > bidirectional.
> >
> > I don't understand: why are these properties consequences of using
> > packets?
>
> With packets I mean packets that are sent in one go, without executing
> other code while waiting for acknow
, the graphic system will be a module. Then, you
can put GFX9000 and have great graphics.
>Do ya think I'm pesimistic? Look at Moonsound and GPX9000,
>specially GPX9000. And at their due time they had
>-theoretically- a lot MORE support than any Z380 project.
>Another matter is hard
AM) to your MSX. But the advantages are that
it is proven (I already made it for JoyNet) and the transfer rate could be
much higher than floppy (depending on cable, interfaces and protocol).
By the way, is direct SCSI-to-SCSI possible? If the SCSI IDs of the PC SCSI
card and the MSX SCSI card are no
u mean that sending or receiving a packet is an atomic action?
Yes.
> > Actually it is the being timed
> > that makes it possible to be bidirectional. A non-timed protocol must have
> > at least two lines (data and acknowledge) on the sender side. For joynet,
> > that mean
ur
interrupt routine faster, but it can speed up your non-interrupt code.
- Not decreasing the disk drive counter, which requires a slow
inter-slot-call.
- No writing to the joystick registers of the PSG. If you omit that,
you will be able to use the JoyNet without disabling interrupts.
So you
no way you can 'standardise' this somehow.
wrong. It is very unlikely that ASCII Corp. will continue the MSX
development. So the only persons who can optimize the MSX system are WE.
This mailinglist is an excellent instrument for doing this. Just look at
the JoyNet proposal. It is good for ev
made that up too.
One must: Quarth.
Hell of a game.
And maybe, if we can arrange it, also some game like Triplex or so (or maybe
the JoyNet tetris clone will be finished???).
> >And ps, if you want to present something or have any new products, I'd
like
> >to know in advance,
t listed
>or is listed but in an incompatible way... I'm very glad with this...
>relieved.
>By the way, there was some guy (dunno where) developing an OPL3 board!!!
Leonard...
>Aargh! Let us make it MoonSound-compatible and convince this guy to use
>OPL4!
while. If you make the possibility to play
> >against the computer (not using joynet), you could also spread robot-programs.
>
> When robot-programs are spread you can take the program of another and your
> own to play agains each other. No need to have a real 'computer&#x
e) developing an OPL3 board!!!
Aargh! Let us make it MoonSound-compatible and convince this guy to use
OPL4!!! (which can still be achieved).
Oh, by the way, I think a new MSX must have a decent timer of which the
speed can be set and which can generate an interrupt. This is definately
using the Dos2-routines before doing any BDOS-call though...
> >No. I didn't say that. But since everybody (okay okay exaggerated) use
some
> >direct I/O for certain devices future hardware will adapt to it. So you
can
> >do it as if it were standard. At least with
using the
>keyboardbuffer, etc. I just want to load it in my loader, nice and quietly.
>And besides, MemMan has a downside: the mapperroutines are way not as fast
>as Dos2's mapperroutines.
And DOS2 are not "that fast" too, as all BIOS... (-:
>No. I didn't say that.
en mailing, you can look it up. But when telling??? No,
Phoenix definately needs a decent URL.
By the way, why is WWW.MSX.COM still not occupied? It definately is a nice
URL, and more logic then, for example, www.msxnet.org or www.msx.org . Why
.org? Is it cheaper than .com? If I remember correctly (b
tc).
It isn't perfect for the current system either. They could for example have
included support for multiple mappers too. (well, in fact it is there, but
you'll have to do the slotswitching yourself).
If you really want perfect mapperroutines then use MemMan. But I don't lik
g about making a totally
new computer which would emulate MSX. There was spoken about a new MSX
though, with one chip technology.
> But God knows how I want to be completely wrong about this, and maybe
> ASCII really wants to make a new powerful MSX MACHINE, with extended
> capabilities an
201 - 279 of 279 matches
Mail list logo
