And given that the table to convert the keycodes to tokens, and the tokens to readable text for program listings, was already there, all that was required is a small loop to scan the already existing table. Probably no more than an extra 20-30 bytes of Z80 code. I can almost guarantee you there was space to squeeze that into the ROM, even without looking at it. You say there were some filler bytes....
Do I need to explain it more clearly? Or write the code to prove it?
No, the ROM space is fixed and not usable for user programs, 64k address space - ROM space - I/O space - video memory - working memory = available address space for programs. Including a Parser/tokenizer in ROM does not take away any space from the user program. So, in a nutshell, you're still wrong.
You wrote: And that's what comes from getting al of your "knowledge" from Wikipedia.
I replied: My knowledge doesn't come from Wikipedia, I've been in this industry for 30+ years. I just use Wikipedia to support my statements.
I didn't use an appeal to authority, you need to check your attitude and your definitions. A direct reply to your statement is not an "appeal to authority", I provided a fact that contradicts your statement.
I didn't cherry pick facts to prove my point. The facts I cited are sufficient to demonstrate that the Mac was not just a copy of the ideas from PARC, as implied by previous comments. Go back and re-read the entire thread. I never denied that the Mac was influenced by Xerox Alto, in fact, I began my response with "Yes, Mac OS/LISA were inspired by what they saw at Xerox PARC." Nothing hidden, and no cherry picking.
Not at all. To develop for Android, you still have to own/buy a computer, spend your time developing the software, and pay someone a commission to sell it. And you have no more guarantee that the program will sell. It's the same basic model and risk either way.
I still say, give me a room full of Apple II's (preferable//e or IIgs) and eager students, and I'll give you room full of great developers. There is value in understanding how software interacts with hardware, something which has been missing in most programmers for a long time. That's not a new complaint, it existed in the mainframe and mini computer world before the microcomputer revolution. The pioneers of the micro revolution, the early adopters, etc broke that mold. But as operating systems and development environments have become more "friendly", much of that has fallen away.
I'm not impressed. Now, when they can run a simulation with more particles than the atoms in the computer, I'll be impressed. Heck, I'll make it easy, when they run a simulation more particles than transistors in their CPUs, I'll be impressed. Let's see, 92,000 CPUs @ ~ 2B/cpu = ~184T. Now that's a simulation.
Yes, Mac OS/LISA were inspired by what they saw at Xerox PARC. However, if you've read up on those, the people who actually worked at PARC said that LISA/Mac went far beyond what they had done or envisioned.
"the Apple work extended PARC's considerably, adding manipulatable icons, and drag&drop manipulation of objects in the file system (see Macintosh Finder) for example. A list of the improvements made by Apple, beyond the PARC interface, can be read at Folklore.org."
My knowledge doesn't come from Wikipedia, I've been in this industry for 30+ years. I just use Wikipedia to support my statements.
Never heard of it before. Had to google it. Ok, a Tetris knock-off 20+ years later? Tetris itself isn't even available for any modern platform.
As to your earlier questions about Linux and Mac OS X, they're not relevant. Unix was widely available as source code and encouraged alternative implementations. Mac OS X is derived from Mach, a BSD variant. And Linux started as a clean room implementation of MINIX, itself an independent implementation of the original AT&T Unix spec.
Are you just trolling or do you not know about Zynga's practices? Google them, they copy most of their game ideas, while filing suit against anyone who copies one of their game ideas. They're completely amoral, or worse.
Saying that MS ran out of time is like saying that the iPad's missing enterprise features are because Apple ran out of time.
If Apple had a huge installed base in enterprises, with the types of centralized management features Windows AD/GPO offers, then your point would be valid. However, Apple basically didn't have such an installed base, nor did they offer such centralized management features. Theerfore, they didn't have that legacy expectation to fulfill. And almost as important, they didn't have any established competition in the iPad market, it was a new category of product, that happened to have >200k apps available at launch by virtue of the iPhone market.
The iPhone itself had most of the same things going for it at launch, except for that Blackberry and WinMo devices were established competitors. There were some enterprise features developed for the iPhone (Exchange connectivity, third party management tools, etc.), and the iPad had those same capabilities at launch.
The iPad's adoption is about user experience, not making CIO's lives happier.
Correct. But it's being adopted in enterprises because it provides capabilities that haven't been viable before, not just because user's want it.
Not quite. NT3.x/4.x supported x86, Dec Alpha, MIPS, and PPC processors. It did not support ARM or SPARC. And, of course, they dropped support for all except x86. They did have support for ARM in Windows CE/Mobile, but whether that ever included code to join domains or Active Director, I can't say for sure.
Then call Google and let them know you're interested. The agreement doesn't say they won't hire people away, it says they won't initiate the contact (i.e. "cold call").
No, veganism encourages breastfeeding. While definitions of veganism may differ somewhat, this one captures it's essence:
British Vegan Society broadened its definition of veganism to "the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals."
Breastfeeding is not considered "exploitation" because the mother does it by choice.
I'm not vegan, but I since I make fun of them in some of my stand-up comedy, I did some research. Having a flawed premise can really mess up a good joke if you don't know about the flaw and work around it.
No. Atkins was mostly correct. The early stages of the Atkins diet are too carb restricted, particularly in the first 4-8 weeks. Yes, I understand why it's that restricted, but it presents a risk of gout and other complications for people who don't/can't drink enough water to flush the acids and toxins from their system. His diet is scientifically sound, but the specifics in the early stages are not realistic for a large segment of the population.
Still, his theories were correct, and the long term diet he proposed is both easy to follow, and very healthy.
Slashdot Mirror
No, he demonstrated that a few weeks ago. $1B for Instagram?
And given that the table to convert the keycodes to tokens, and the tokens to readable text for program listings, was already there, all that was required is a small loop to scan the already existing table. Probably no more than an extra 20-30 bytes of Z80 code. I can almost guarantee you there was space to squeeze that into the ROM, even without looking at it. You say there were some filler bytes....
Do I need to explain it more clearly? Or write the code to prove it?
The answer is right there on the keyboard, ASDF
Add
Subtract
Divide
Fail
And if it can deliver an electric shock when they do something idiotic, like fail to validate input, that would be awesome.
I actually had a concern as I typed it that including the second sentence would detract from the sarcasm, guess I should have left it off.
Great sig.
No, the ROM space is fixed and not usable for user programs, 64k address space - ROM space - I/O space - video memory - working memory = available address space for programs. Including a Parser/tokenizer in ROM does not take away any space from the user program. So, in a nutshell, you're still wrong.
You wrote: And that's what comes from getting al of your "knowledge" from Wikipedia.
I replied: My knowledge doesn't come from Wikipedia, I've been in this industry for 30+ years. I just use Wikipedia to support my statements.
I didn't use an appeal to authority, you need to check your attitude and your definitions. A direct reply to your statement is not an "appeal to authority", I provided a fact that contradicts your statement.
I didn't cherry pick facts to prove my point. The facts I cited are sufficient to demonstrate that the Mac was not just a copy of the ideas from PARC, as implied by previous comments. Go back and re-read the entire thread. I never denied that the Mac was influenced by Xerox Alto, in fact, I began my response with "Yes, Mac OS/LISA were inspired by what they saw at Xerox PARC." Nothing hidden, and no cherry picking.
Now, go annoy someone else.
So, in a nutshell, wrong. The tokenizer was in ROM, along with the rest of the BASIC interpreter. The amount of RAM used was unchanged.
Not at all. To develop for Android, you still have to own/buy a computer, spend your time developing the software, and pay someone a commission to sell it. And you have no more guarantee that the program will sell. It's the same basic model and risk either way.
Different time, different limitations.
I still say, give me a room full of Apple II's (preferable //e or IIgs) and eager students, and I'll give you room full of great developers. There is value in understanding how software interacts with hardware, something which has been missing in most programmers for a long time. That's not a new complaint, it existed in the mainframe and mini computer world before the microcomputer revolution. The pioneers of the micro revolution, the early adopters, etc broke that mold. But as operating systems and development environments have become more "friendly", much of that has fallen away.
Yes, we did. Although I also owned a Vic 20, Commodore 64, and a ZX81.
A completely different architecture. MIPS vs ARM.
And I presume you're the same AC who wrote
Look up Windows NT on wikipedia retard...
NT 4.0. The mention of ARM as a supported platform under Windows NT refers to Windows 8.
I hate idiots.
Woosh! Guess I didn't trigger your sarcasm detector.
I'm not impressed. Now, when they can run a simulation with more particles than the atoms in the computer, I'll be impressed. Heck, I'll make it easy, when they run a simulation more particles than transistors in their CPUs, I'll be impressed. Let's see, 92,000 CPUs @ ~ 2B/cpu = ~184T. Now that's a simulation.
Yes, Mac OS/LISA were inspired by what they saw at Xerox PARC. However, if you've read up on those, the people who actually worked at PARC said that LISA/Mac went far beyond what they had done or envisioned.
"the Apple work extended PARC's considerably, adding manipulatable icons, and drag&drop manipulation of objects in the file system (see Macintosh Finder) for example. A list of the improvements made by Apple, beyond the PARC interface, can be read at Folklore.org."
My knowledge doesn't come from Wikipedia, I've been in this industry for 30+ years. I just use Wikipedia to support my statements.
Never heard of it before. Had to google it. Ok, a Tetris knock-off 20+ years later? Tetris itself isn't even available for any modern platform.
As to your earlier questions about Linux and Mac OS X, they're not relevant. Unix was widely available as source code and encouraged alternative implementations. Mac OS X is derived from Mach, a BSD variant. And Linux started as a clean room implementation of MINIX, itself an independent implementation of the original AT&T Unix spec.
Are you just trolling or do you not know about Zynga's practices? Google them, they copy most of their game ideas, while filing suit against anyone who copies one of their game ideas. They're completely amoral, or worse.
That's no different than any other development model, or most other businesses. Starting a business is a risk, welcome to reality.
That is why I refuse to use any Zynga owned game. Even if they purchased the original rather than copy it, they'll use the profits to copy others.
Saying that MS ran out of time is like saying that the iPad's missing enterprise features are because Apple ran out of time.
If Apple had a huge installed base in enterprises, with the types of centralized management features Windows AD/GPO offers, then your point would be valid. However, Apple basically didn't have such an installed base, nor did they offer such centralized management features. Theerfore, they didn't have that legacy expectation to fulfill. And almost as important, they didn't have any established competition in the iPad market, it was a new category of product, that happened to have >200k apps available at launch by virtue of the iPhone market.
The iPhone itself had most of the same things going for it at launch, except for that Blackberry and WinMo devices were established competitors. There were some enterprise features developed for the iPhone (Exchange connectivity, third party management tools, etc.), and the iPad had those same capabilities at launch.
The iPad's adoption is about user experience, not making CIO's lives happier.
Correct. But it's being adopted in enterprises because it provides capabilities that haven't been viable before, not just because user's want it.
Not quite. NT3.x/4.x supported x86, Dec Alpha, MIPS, and PPC processors. It did not support ARM or SPARC. And, of course, they dropped support for all except x86. They did have support for ARM in Windows CE/Mobile, but whether that ever included code to join domains or Active Director, I can't say for sure.
Then call Google and let them know you're interested. The agreement doesn't say they won't hire people away, it says they won't initiate the contact (i.e. "cold call").
No, veganism encourages breastfeeding. While definitions of veganism may differ somewhat, this one captures it's essence:
British Vegan Society broadened its definition of veganism to "the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals."
Breastfeeding is not considered "exploitation" because the mother does it by choice.
I'm not vegan, but I since I make fun of them in some of my stand-up comedy, I did some research. Having a flawed premise can really mess up a good joke if you don't know about the flaw and work around it.
No. Atkins was mostly correct. The early stages of the Atkins diet are too carb restricted, particularly in the first 4-8 weeks. Yes, I understand why it's that restricted, but it presents a risk of gout and other complications for people who don't/can't drink enough water to flush the acids and toxins from their system. His diet is scientifically sound, but the specifics in the early stages are not realistic for a large segment of the population.
Still, his theories were correct, and the long term diet he proposed is both easy to follow, and very healthy.
In that instance, it appears only one is evil, not both. It's an "evil twin" scenario.