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

[Gene Buckle]

thanks.  I'll lay an eyeball on it when I get the chance this week.

g.

Ben A L Jemmett wrote:
> 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
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gem-dev mailing list
> gem-dev at simpits.org
> http://www.simpits.org/mailman/listinfo/gem-dev


-- 

"I'm not crazy, I'm plausibly off-nominal!"
Proud owner of 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only of its kind.