[Coco] Typo: CoCo 4 (or 5) perspectives: close hardware emulation?

[Fedor Steeman]

I discovered a confusing typo in my last mail. I wrote:

"In object-oriented software design, this can be expressed as a set of
object exchanging messages or events."

I meant to write:

"In object-oriented software design, this can be expressed as a set of
objects exchanging messages or events."

"Objects" should have been in plural...

All the best,

Fedor

On 27/01/07, Andrew <keeper63 at cox.net> wrote:
>
> Joel,
>
> You wrote:
>
> The problem with Linux is that it takes a little while to boot in a
> live-cd-type situation where it has to do a lot of hardware detection
> and autoconfiguring.  Not a long time, but it ain't nuthin' like
> powerin' on that CoCo, man.  But once it gets up and running it's hard
> to beat for stability, and it can be almost completely configured
> away.   FreeDOS would boot in seconds on a modern PC, but wouldn't have
> nearly the hardware support that a modern Linux kernel does.  No USB,
> poor networking.  DOS didn't compare well with the CoCo back in the day
> (at least in terms of price/performance), the only real benefit you'd
> get from it now is the ability to take advantage of the speed of the
> underlying hardware.  I guess it also would put up little resistance
> against an emulator program that wanted to directly manipulate the
> hardware, but why reinvent that particular wheel?
>
> ---
>
> Just a couple of cents here, but why not simply boot directly into the
> emulator instead of DOS or Linux? In effect, the emulator becomes the
> operating system. I guess I am thinking something like a hybrid between
> one of the emulators and FreeDOS, so you gain all the hardware interface
> functionality from FreeDOS for the emulator, but you don't have to have
> all the extra DOS stuff. If done right, I imagine it could look, feel,
> and work almost identical to DECB - and if the emulation is kept tight
> (and you had the ROM images or something similar), OS-9 and NitrOS9
> should still work (or be tweaked to work).
>
> There would still be a startup delay, but I don't think that is a real
> deal-breaker, otherwise no one would use any computer anywhere. The
> issue of network and USB hardware would still be there, but plenty of
> open-source code is out there for getting most of the basic stuff going.
>
> Does this sound like a good (or at least interesting) approach, or am I
> being daft here...?
>
> Andrew L. Ayers
> Glendale, Arizona
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>