Larry

Looks like no one is going to come up with a C64 run, so I'll have to get one "out of the closet." BTW, I remember running another benchmark on an original 4.77 MHz IBM PC against my new Basic XL in FAST mode, and BXL was nearly as fast as the PC. I was impressed by that -- then I ran it on my ST using a third-party Basic and it blew them both away. -Larry

In looking through the "Mapping the Atari" software, there are many very short, mostly single-purpose Basic programs that would make useful subroutines. Most of these are definitely "keepers."

Thanks, Jayok- I knew I had seen it somewhere. It's there in Appendix 12, p 216 - 219. I also found another one today in Analog April, 1985. "RamOS for XL's." The one in Mapping appears a little more complete, though, with more code commenting. -Larry

My first choice is to never "reinvent the wheel," especially if it is in assembler. I'm pretty sure this has been done before and is in print (probably Analog or maybe Antic). Second choice is to roll-my-own -- I found something similar this AM called "Swap Dos" from an old Creative Computing "Outpost Atari" column. The source code is there, and I probably can adapt it. I'll look a bit longer, and then if I don't find it, I'll have a go at it. Thanks for the outline/info. -Larry

Hi Rybags- Without Basic -- I want to use a disk-based assembler. Thanks, Larry

Here is how I found it -- think it is the one referenced. Digital Press (home) Select "Picture & Videos" (left side) Advertisement Gallery (center) Select a gallery -- "computers - older" (right side) The Captain Beeble thumbnail is on the first page, center column, 5th down. It is actually a "dual" ad from Inhome Software, and it's a little difficult to see until expanded. ("Just say the magic word") -Larry

Does anyone know of software to make a ram OS (switcher) for the XL/XE? I'm aware of the basic requirements, but I'm hoping to find a generalized "maker" that would read a rom/bin file and make the swap. This is an XE to XE type swap, not an XE to 800 type (if that makes any difference). Thanks, Larry

For quite a few years, I used a Star Micronics 9-pin. It was very Epson MX compatible, but I never liked the poor 9-pin print. I now have an Epson Action Printer 3250. I like it because it is very compact, is a sheet-feed (or form feed) model, and a 24-pin printer with very good print. For a D-M, it is very quiet. I paid about $30 for it. You probably can find the manual for it on line. Incidently, I don't use it for such, but I'm pretty sure that it can also be a Win-printer, too. Having said that, 99% of the time, I now use APE's virtual MX printer. It does a beautiful job when hooked to a modern ink-jet or lazer -- and FAST. It is another amazing addition to (registered) APE. I don't believe it is in the trial version. -Larry

A small update: I compiled the benchmark with the Turbo Basic Compiler, and it runs in 33.1 seconds -- nearly 20% faster. -Larry

Did you revise the benchmark coding to account for integers? I tried Atari Microsoft Basic defining integers as N,I,S. But it had little effect on the times. I presume the accuracy would not be meaningful using integers. -Larry

Yes there were, but you will probably have a difficult time finding them now, especially since they were documentation-intensive. MMG Software had some business apps software. Peachtree had some. (I think -- saw them advertised). Micromiser had some. There was also a semi-"roll your own" forms program that was published in Computer Shopper. You might be able to do what you want with one of the better database progs. -Larry

The IIC Plus was 4 MHz machine, wasn't it? I also wonder what a 65C816 cpu would do with its improved floating point facilities? And likewise a C64 with a SuperCPU? Or (shudder) a modern PC @3 GHz? It probably would be over before it started... -Larry

> SIO2PC still seems like a novelty to me. Now a USB version! The 8meg Flashcart seems to good to be true. I can really put a bunch of games on there myself? How many fit? IDE interface now? Seems I'm going to have to get some of this stuff after Christmas. 32 OS's in one? Good grief! < Yes, the Atari community is extremely fortunate to have Steve's developments. I mean that very sincerely. Win APE is absolutely awesome. The MyIDE products are great (and I think the new internal flash interface will be even better). I know that Steve answered your post, but I'd like to focus on one of your questions specifically about the flash cartridges: "I can really put a bunch of games on there myself?" There is an archive of prepared images that you can *easily* put on a flash cart. All of the hard work has been done. However, if you decide to "roll your own," things get more complicated. Steve's instructions for his software package are detailed and good, but I found that getting the software installed and functioning was not so easy. For a long time, I could not even get PERL installed, and had to wait for a later release. But I finally got it done, and once the software is all there and in the correct directories, you can follow Steve's docs and generally get results. Steve's flashing software is command-line driven, running from MS-Dos or a Dos-window. There is also a user-written Win App to help make flashable images, but I have not yet got it working. Admittedly, after I got the command line software working, I quit trying with the other app. If you read through the flash cartridge threads and read Steve's docs, you can judge for yourself. The flashcart is a good product. I have several, and like them very much. But the software to make your own flashable images is still a work needing progress. (IMO) -Larry

Wow... I didn't think BXL and BXE were that different, would not have expected the huge speed increase in BXE. Is this interpreted or compiled Turbo BASIC? Hi Urchlay- I think this benchmark is all about the math package. BXL uses the regular Atari FP routines. BXE (with the extensions loaded) uses its own "fast math" routines. I probably ought to run BXE without its extensions to compare that. This was interpreted TBXL. I probably should run the compiler, also, but I suspect there would not be much difference. -Larry

Nice!!! What Dos did the LDW use? Did it load Synchromesh/Super Synchromesh within the Dos (as with Dos XL)? Do you know if Trub sells the boards? (Although doesn't look too difficult to create with the info provided.) -Larry

Here are some other results: Atari 8K Basic Time=405 sec. (!) Accuracy=.013959 Random=16.77, 8.80 Turbo Basic XL Time=41.6 Accuracy=.013649 Random=12.29, 17.33 Basic XL Time=395.88 (!) Accuracy=.013959 Random= 7.95, 2.45 Basic XE Time=49.7 Accuracy=.014614 Random= 17.58, 16.9 Atari Microsoft Basic Time=101.4 Accuracy .150879 Random=2.06506, 2.06506 (5.60 when RANDOMIZEd) Notes: The FAST mode of BXL and BXE made essentially no difference in the times, presumably since the line numbers are low and very close together. Atari Microsoft Basic would not run properly as the benchmark is written. RND(1) gives a random number between 1 and 1. RND(0) appears to work, but gives the same results each time. A RANDOMIZE statement must be added to "seed" the random number generator. The RANDOMIZE value can be taken from POKEY to provide a "random" seed from 0-255 IIRC. Also, the times for AMSB are single precision floating point (not integers). As usual, TBXL is fastest, with BXE a pretty close second. And what can we say about the speed of Atari Basic... Can anyone run this on the C64 for comparison? -Larry

Good point. And I should probably add a disk speed checking utility. Smart Dos has a good one included. -Larry

Most useful to less useful: Service Manuals (available for all Atari drives, Rana, and maybe Indus) Diagnostic Disks (available for Indus from BEST, 1050 from B&C) A good commercial non-copy protected disk for checking track alignment and speed. Or a "master" disk still available from B&C, I believe. Spare parts for swapping Soldering/desoldering equipment (& practice/experience desoldering) ... Analog alignment disk & Oscilloscope Luck! still helps sometimes -Larry

Can you elaborate as to its differences -- just curious to know more about it from an owner. -Larry

It's strange but Commodore 64 (around 30 millions computers sold) doesn't have a device like the wonderful SIO2PC (and the new marvellous SIO2PC USB version). Yes, that is interesting. The C64's have a DOS device that is similar: http://www.64hdd.com/index_en.html The C64 folks state that is has not been possible to develop a Windows version because in many cases, the drive takes complete control over transfers, so a multi-tasking system is out. That certainly may be true, but I'm still skeptical that with the horsepower that PC's have these days that it is "not possible." -Larry

WOW! I knew there was a good use for that second DS screen... Yes, looking really good. Hope he can get it to ~100% -- that would be cool. -Larry

Can you post a "final" picture as to what you ended up with? Did you make your resistor/capacitor addition internally in your Atari at the monitor jack? Or? Could you please add a little detail as to how you connected this? And what final values did you end up with 1000 ohms + 100 pF? Thanks, Larry

Is there some feature of this OS that you really like? I ask that because there are very good alternatives that you can piggyback or put into eprom. -Larry

You may be able to buy one from Video 61. Bob Klaas got the Supra HD stuff, and I believe that Video 61 ultimately got the HD stuff from Bob. I had a Supra that I picked up at an Atari Fair, but finally gave it away. Video 61 was trying to update their interface, at last report. -Larry

As I just found out, there are two different types of brains for these drives. I've gotten schematics and a PAL rom dump for the 6502 based board, and will soon have an 8031 based one in my possession! Quite interesting to find out they had two radically different boards for these drives.. Wonder what brought about the change? The 6502 had a more complex board, IIRC. I suspect economics drove the change. The Rana was pitched as an economical alternative when introduced. Aside from the lack of UltraSpeed, the greatest shortcoming of the Rana was poor reliability of the mechanisms, especially in double density. Many/most Rana's had "pull-down" mechanisms, unlike in their ads of the day showing the typical Tandon-style "lever-lock" mechs. The Rana that I use most often is a "RanTan" -- I replaced the original mech with a 1050 Tandon (with some technical help). Nice! -Larry