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

[Ben A L Jemmett]

Regards,
Ben A L Jemmett.
(http://web.ukonline.co.uk/ben.jemmett/, http://www.deltasoft.com/)
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Shane M. Coughlan" <shane_coughlan at hotmail.com>
To: <gem-dev at simpits.org>
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 11:21 AM
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [DigitalResearch] [Fwd: [GEM Development] Googlewhack]]


> 
> 
> -------- 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).
> _______________________________________________
> gem-dev mailing list
> gem-dev at simpits.org
> http://www.simpits.org/mailman/listinfo/gem-dev
>