Hello Fellow Netters,

     I have one of ICD's 1 meg M/IO boards for sale!  ICD isn't making
these things right now (because of the DRAM shortages) so if you want
one, this may be your only chance!

     The M/IO has a serial (modem) port, a parallel printer port,
one meg of memory (can be used as RamDisks, Printer Spoolers, or
any combination of the two), and a Hard Disk interface that'll
handle EIGHT SASI and SCSI controllers at once.

     Oh, yes, you can also use the serial port for a serial
printer, and put a spooler on it.

     1 Meg Multi/Input-Output board with manual and
     Interface to hook to a 130XE (has _two_ cartridge ports)
     ---------------------------------------------------------
     $310

     If interested, call (606) 276-3375 from noon to 10pm EST.

Greg Parsons

P.S. If I am not at home the answering machine is.

CORRECTION: ICD still manufactures both the 1 megabyte MIO and the 256K MIO.
They only sell these directly (not through dealers).  The demand for these
are at a minimum.

P.S.: ICD may even be offering a ROM upgrade to fix some of the known
      "features" <ahem> in the near future.

--Ron

Digital Equipment Corporation - "What a great way to have a good time..."
guest_tmp%misery.@decwrl.dec.com  -and/or-  decwrl!misery.dec.com!guest_tmp

Charles,

        Sorry I guess I have to post, my mail keeps bouncing back.  My drive
mechanism is wearing.  its not the SIO cable (I've had that problem also), no
matter how much tweaking of the cable I do it doesn't work.  Only a rap on top
of the drive works.  It also makes a louder than usual (HaHaHa) sound when
moving track to track.  I have been considering a 551 for about 6 mo. and this
problem only appeared about two mo. ago, so I guess I will get the 551 use the
1050 as a second drive until it breathes its last breath.  Thanks anyway.

                                        Paul Amonson
                                        Bitnet:  AMONSON@IDCSVAX

Nick,

        No luck with personal mail to you either, boy BITNET sure is FUN!!  I
did however receive your mail and I do appreciate it.  I will probably get it
because I hate having to boot from disk (especially with my unreliable 1050)
just to use the VAX at my school.  Is it true that SDX has a "CONFIG.SYS"
simular to MS-DOS to define devices and such?  Also how "transparent" is the
cartridge?  I do a lot of machine language programming and I find it useful
to manipulate CART control ($D500-D5FF).  How forgivable is SDX?  Also I have
seen the SDX for around $55, have you seen lower prices, and where.

Thanks in advance!

                                        Paul Amonson
                                        BITNET:  AMONSON@IDCSVAX

 RE: unreliable 1050

  Adding an xf551 is a good idea, especially since the xf551 can be upgraded
to an 80 track mech (2880 sectors of 256 bytes each :) for about $100.
  SDX does have a config.sys file but I don't know the MSDOS config file so I
can't say just how "close" they are.  As for the cart line...forget it....the
SDX does not like being played with.  I am not sure how the on/off function is
accomplished, but it is apparently compatible with other carts (so you could
put BASIC XE on top of EXPRESS, on top of DIAMOND, on top of SDX, on top of
the RTIME8 and they would all work).

Ordania-DM
@cup.portal.com

I've had Sparta X for several months now and consider it a well-spent
investment in my 8-bit system.  Prior to using SDX I used Sparta 3.2d
(which at the time I was using to run a Carina II BBS) so upgrading
to SDX was a natural choice for me.  

SDX seems to work with more programs than before (especially if BANKED
mode is used on a 128K> machine with the X command), but there are a
few programs it simply doesn't work with (AtariWriter Plus, for instance,
although I have heard of a patch to make it work).  I __LOVE__ having
ARC at my fingertips, although Bob Puff's ARC/DEARC programs are about
twice as fast as SDX's.  But one nice thing about SDX is the existence
of a PATH variable that specifies where to look for programs you want
to run.  For example, you can have it look at the CAR: (SDX cartridge)
first, then the current working directory, then in your D1:UTIL> directory,
etc...  This is VERY VERY VERY handy!!  

I like just about everything with SDX with a few exceptions.  I WISH there
was a switch on the cartridge that would let me disable it, rather than
having to do a COLD /N everytime I don't want it on.  Then again, I don't
suppose it would be TOO difficult to build one.. :-)  Another problem
with SDX is the lack of technical documentation.  Bob Puff lives in my
area, and he had the darndest time getting enough information about SDX
so he could make BobTerm work with it (not to mention the CLI!!!!).  Is
there anything else I don't like??  Not right offhand!!

Oh yea, there is something..  I also wished ICD has aimed more for a
UNIX style shell than (gasp!) MeSsy-DOS..  oh well!  Can't have
everything!  Maybe we'll get Unix for the 8-bit  now that the
Turbo 8-16 board is out.. ;-)
__________________________________________________________________________
Albert Yarusso,  Rochester Institute of Technology

Bitnet:  ajy2@ritvax.bitnet
Usenet:  ajy2208.ritcv.rit.edu

Hello all...  

   Have finally dug up a copy of Atari DOS 2.5, and begun using the two
Atari 1050 drives I recently bought (separately) to replace my decrepit and
annoying single-density-only Percom drive.  Am running into certain phenome-
na which I think I've heard a little about, but am not entirely clear on,
and am without documentation for DOS 2.5 (I got it on a disk with Atari
Protection Techniques book, NOT with either of my 1050's.)

   System consists of two Atari 1050 drives: Drive 1 sports a 'US Doubler'
chip, Drive 2 is unmodified as far as I know.

   I find that I can't reformat an enhanced-density disk into Single density
from certain programs (e.g. Bob Puff's Disk Communicator, which insists on
doing Enhanced density after presenting me with a choice between Single and
Enhanced), but that I seem to be able to do it okay from DOS 2.5 (the menu).
Additionally, I seem to be able to READ Enhanced Density MOST of the time
on the US-Doubler drive, but not ALWAYS, and can apparently NOT WRITE it at
all.  All of this is subject to the strong possibility of insufficient evi-
dence, but I'm in a hurry to just get someone to send me the Real Story...

  Basically, I'd love to see some technical stuff about the software support
for the US Doubler, e.g. what CIO or SIO command(s) must be sent to get into
and out of Single, Double, and Enhanced (if it coexists on this drive) densi-
ties, at will, for formatting.  (I already understand that READING the disk
AUTOMATICALLY configures the drive to READ the proper density.)

  Ditto for Atari DOS 2.5, including extensions to DOS 2.0 XIO (CIO) calls
and parameters for handling the "additional sectors," Enhanced density, et
al.

  I realize that this is a lot to ask for, and a bit vague at that, but I'm
dying for SOME information; I've got all this hardware and only REALLY know
what's what when I ignore it all and use single-density only.  

  Thanks in advance, Oh Net Gurus!

     Chris Chiesa
--
UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee,uunet}!bsu-cs!cfchiesa
cfchi@bsu-cs.UUCP                                          

I suggest you try finding a copy of a different DOS.  I think the software
engineers who designed DOS 2.5 were on an acid trip when they designed it.
I myself am partial to SmartDOS because it's fairly powerful and easy to use.
If you want something that's more powerful, hunt around for a version of
MyDOS.  I believe the latest version is 4.3(at least that's the latest version
I have).  It, along with its utilities, can do just about anything you want
it to do an probably some things you don't want it to do.  Good luck in your
search.
                                       David Montgomery
                                       Sales Technologies Inc.

--
David Montgomery                                          gatech!stiatl!david
Sales Technologies, Inc
3399 Peachtree Rd, NE
Atlanta, GA  (404) 841-4000

In response to an initial posting of mine, in article <5@stiatl.UUCP>,
  d@stiatl.UUCP (David Montgomery) writes:

Well, I *have* a copy of SmartDOS, and of DOS 2.5, and of a "way back" version
of MyDOS (maybe 1.0 or something).  I can use my drives from DOS, and even from
BASIC.  But what I want to know is the inner software commands that must be
sent to, and received from, a normal 1050 drive, to implement the distinction
between "single" and "enhanced" densities.  And then, I want to know how the
installation of a US Doubler chip affects these same operations, e.g. why is it
that only SmartDOS "knows how to use" the US Doubler?  (For example, my copy of
MyDOS, and of SmartDOS, both claim that my UNenhanced 1050 is "configurable for
Double Density," but that my US-Doubler'd one is NOT.  Obviously, the software's
interpretation of the meaning of "double density" and "configurability" is
DIFFERENT from the hardware's.)

Incidentally, I've been receiving some of the preliminary information about
how DOS 2.5 tells a normal 1050 what to do -- public thanks, Ron! -- but have
yet to hear one peep about the US Doubler effects...  (Thanks in advance, Ron,
if THAT is what your "next transmission" is going to include!)

--
UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee,uunet}!bsu-cs!cfchiesa
cfchi@bsu-cs.UUCP                                          

I just replied to article <5@stiatl.UUCP>, in which d@stiatl.UUCP
(David Montgomery) wrote a number of interesting things.  I neglected, however,
to comment (and ask another question!) on something else:

First off, David, you may be interested to hear that the sources to MyDOS 4.51
(and the assembler capable of assembling said MyDOS sources) were recently post-
ed to this very newsgroup.  If you missed it, you might want to have someone
send it to you again.

Second, and this is a general question: I'm concerned about the "BUILD" program
that was supplied with the MyDOS sources.  I notice that it runs "under your
current version of MyDOS," and just REPLACES the existing DOS "in memory" and
poof, you're in the new version.  My question is, will this work under all prior
versions of MyDOS, or am I going to be in trouble if I don't have a "relatively
recent" version?  I think I have (gulp) something like 1.0 !  I know things can
change pretty drastically between major revisions, so I would like to have the
answer to this question BEFORE I try to install 4.51.  Thanks in advance.

Chris
--
UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee,uunet}!bsu-cs!cfchiesa
cfchi@bsu-cs.UUCP