Re: inpout32
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) 3 weeks ago
- 705 views
Finally, even if I could have been solving the problem - should I have? Perhaps the question that you answered was actually more interesting to me. Before asking for help, it's worth asking why other folks would offer to help - and what do they expect to get out of it.
I was at that level years before
which was 11 years ago already.
Hmm, were you really?
i put down money to Ryan on the problem
I am confused because he couldn't do it,
others either couldn't or simply haven't done it.
Collectively you all have put more time and effort into saying "no" or "why?" than doing it.
We all knew already the same thing that Ryan learned the hard way. If it was easily doable (direct hardware access on modern Windoze), wouldn't have someone done it by now?
What's interesting is that it was doable on earlier M$ OSes - you've done it on DOS obviously, and the 9x line could have done it too. Even for 2k, the cygwin /dev/mem hack could have been reproduced. Even for XP or 2k3, you could have used that device driver that Andy suggested (without having to compile it yourself).
(So I missed something earlier. Aside from a)b)c)d) there is an option e) - using older MSDOS or even older Windoze for which the right freeware driver will give the desired results - but then this still doesn't work as another of your requirements is the ability to communicate with a modern system.)
So it's not just that it's so hard. Rather, as folks figure out how to achieve this specific goal (the one you are asking for), M$ goes ahead and closes what they consider a loophole. Hence irv was right when he made his point about this one specific OS.
Since you mentioned paying Ryan, let me see if I can help out by at least informing you about a reliable price.
I recall reading that today, it's at least $100k to make a Windoze device driver. However, most device drivers handle one small thing, while your concept is quite broader. That would otherwise be fine, but I imagine if a commercial company was handling the development of this driver for you, it would be treated as the equiv of - say - 15 regular drivers. So that'd be over a million dollars.
It's as if you cannot see how connecting OE to Aibo, Spot, Marscat, or Unitree Go2 would draw some attention to OE/Phix on Youtube. Or an electric lawn mower.
Well, of course we can. For this, I'd refer you to Greg's post here, https://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/138620.wc - he's doing it as time permits.
But of course Greg doesn't have a "Use Windoze" or "avoid C" restriction, so naturally this will be a nix solution, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if he ends up doing some C coding to fill in some missing glue or duct tape here and there.
You just gave some code, and then essentially said all it did was get a port name, but didn't make it useable, which makes it a waste of time. If all i want is a port name, i can randomly pick a word and call it that.
It's not mine (it's from the serial.ew mentioned earlier) and serial.ew overall certainly does a bit more than that - but yes, that's why I had expressed concern that serial.ew might not do the job you need.
The Ultimate64 is a nix machine that runs CBM64 Basic code, but doesn't have the hardware ports to do the interfacing. This is the same as the wintel boxes i have plenty of, which also have vastly more speed and storage and display resolution, and run Phix/OE. So why would i pay more to have a Ultimate64 which won't do what i ask?
I think I understand what happened here.
You are describing the C64 Mini, which, according to https://www.c64-wiki.com/wiki/THEC64Mini
It is based on .. Linux operating system running the VICE emulator
Of course that wouldn't work, hence why I did not suggest it.
But the actual Ultimate64 is ... not nix.
From https://www.c64-wiki.com/wiki/Ultimate_64
The Ultimate 64 .. is a reimplementation of the C64 .. on an FPGA Basis
The wiki goes on to point out that it's port-level compatible and can be installed in the original computer case of the original C64. This despite that the Ultimte64 also provides things like ethernet and USB support.
Glad you finally gave an explanation - since it sounds like the c) option is back in the running!
I do not expect you to remember i had a Redhat nix machine, bought already set up and supposedly running, with Mozilla installed, and other nix stuff, in the mid 1990's. I also attempted to install Redhat, and some other nix flavor, on an msdos machine.
I do recall you mentioning this actually. That said, we met on the OE mailing list, which I joined in the early aughts, so this would have taken place before we met.
If i remember correctly, it was the first machine that did nothing but disk thrashing, and the 2nd one did nothing.
Makes sense. Nix was harder to install and maintain back then - I do have experience and memories from those times as well. It sounds like the first ended up without enough swap to run everything, while the 2nd did not boot (some kind of LILO issue I guess - there were horror stories about non-standard BIOSes which played havoc with the LILO process).
I looked at the OE and nix on the raspi , and did not understand it, which makes it unuseable.
Because you didn't understand it.
I knew better than ask for help on this forum.
I think that would have been fine. Most likely Greg, Andy, and Pete would have given some help or pointers.
[example of real life vs online]
Now, see, i have an afternoon to do things. I cannot get you to build a device to get tires off rims online, and expect that to work for me in real life. If you wrote code that worked on interfacing the computer to real life, that's something i could then use in real life tonight. Only i can build the tire de/mounter, and only you can write the code. Ergo, i build the tire machine, and no one writes the code.
[/example]
Kat
Hey, if you can give me a couple mil, perhaps then I can see what I can do?
