[Fwd: Re: [DigitalResearch] [Fwd: [GEM Development] Googlewhack]]

[Shane M. Coughlan]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [DigitalResearch] [Fwd: [GEM Development] Googlewhack]
Date: 	Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: 	Thomas Clayton <topcatdrc at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: 	DigitalResearch at yahoogroups.com
To: 	DigitalResearch at yahoogroups.com



Dear Shane:

I: (Just slightly, off-topic)What's with the GEM-Dev
'subscription service' ??? I've tried, at least,
three(3) times to 'subscribe' since getting 'back'
on-line last Fall - twice in the last month. (Are
there *too many* memebers? :-( )  Please let Gene - or
whomever - know! (Feel free to pass along my e-mail
address to that person!)

II: A.The Ataris', which ran versions of GEM, were
68x00 based systems. I think the 1024 was a 68000(?)
system. Therefore, it is NOT out of the question that
these boxes being inquired about, ran GEM, also.
    B.The 'Unix'-like OS is *most likely* (not
definitely) DRI FlexOS(?). I've often wondered just
WHAT it consisted of, and could accomplish. (As we
agree, I'm pretty sure, there were many 'missed
opportunities' by DRI.)

Thanks for your continued development of GEM, BTW.
I'll write you off-list about some 'tools' that may be
available to ease your further development work. Based
upon what you've posted at your website, I think I
have an idea of 'where' you're attempting 'to go'.

Tom Clayton



--- "Shane M. Coughlan" <shane_coughlan at hotmail.com>
wrote:

 > On the GEM development mailing list there was a post
 > that I thought you
 > guys might be able to help out with:
 >
 >
<http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=la&q=pg9000+g%65mdos&btnG=Quaere 
<http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=la&q=pg9000+g%65mdos&btnG=Quaere>>
 >
 >   Just googling for Philips PG9000 gives barely
 > enough information to figure
 > out what it was - a UNIX workstation with an MC68010
 > processor, running
 > SysV.2, and only ever mentioned on Usenet by one
 > person. Is this another
 > non-PC that could run GEM? And does it have anything
 > to do with this mention
 > from the 1985 review of GEM in Personal Computer
 > World:
 >
 > <   I would expect to see GEM running on other
 > operating systems in
 > <   the immediate future.
 >
 > <   An obvious candidate is Unix, where GEM could go
 > a long way to converting
 > <   what has always been a supremely unfriendly
 > system into a usable business
 > <   operating  system. Given DR's current activity
 > on the Unix front, this
 > <   wouldn't be at all surprising.
 >
 >   What *was* DR's activity on the Unix front,
 > anyway? Wikipedia attributes
 > Microport UNIX to them (which is odd, because
 > <http://members.cruzio.com/~bluejay/main.html 
<http://members.cruzio.com/%7Ebluejay/main.html>> says
 > Microport was a company
 > incorporated in 1986).