🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1990Jan1.015227.11586@santra.uucp> jmunkki@kampi.hut.fi (Juri Munkki) writes:
> I wonder how much it would cost to build a ROM SCSI drive. You would need
> a very simple processor, an SCSI chip and a big ROM. I guess the ROM would
> be the most expensive part. Apple could then put most parts of the system
> file to that ROM. I guess all fonts (outline versions!) and most system
> and finder code resources could be put in a 512K or 1024KB ROM.

Today, perhaps.  Tomorrow?  I've heard reports that many System 7.0
configurations won't fit on an 800k floppy.

> It would have to cost about $150 or less to be interesting to schools
> and floppy-only users.

I imagine it could be done for somewhere in that price range, if the volume
was sufficiently high.

>                        Macintosh Portable users would also benefit, if
> a ROM-slot version of the same ROM would be available.

How many people do you know who can afford a Mac Portable, and are
so cash-poor that they cannot afford a hard disk to go with it?

> I guess anyone with a distribution Apple System Software license might
> have the right to sell something like this. Apple doesn't license the
> ROMs, but developers can license the system software with some limitations.

It could probably be arranged.  However, I'm not sure you'd really like
the result.

Quite a few things in the Mac environment don't work very well if you
boot from a locked volume... which is how a ROMdisk would appear.  For
instance, you'd be unable to use the Chooser to select a printer, since
this requires changing the System file (to select the printer driver)
and frequently requires changing the driver-file as well (to record the
printer name, options, and so forth).  You'd be unable to use the
Scrapbook, since the Scrapbook file lives in the System folder on the
boot disk.  You'd be unable to save your Clipboard file, for the same
reason.  You'd be unable to run any third-party INITs, cdevs, drivers,
etc.  You'd be unable to add any fonts or desk accessories, either to
the System or via Suitcase or the Font/DA Juggler.  Many applications
would refuse to run, as they'd be unable to create temporary working
files on the boot volume, save preferences, and so forth.

In effect, the vendor of a bootable ROMdisk would be saying "Hey, this
isn't Burger King.  You *CAN'T* have it your way!  You can have it
the way we want to configure it for you, and no other.  Don't like
it?  Tough... see Figure 1."

How many users do you know who'd be willing to accept this?
 
> EEPROM would probably be too expensive, but a large ROM series would
> bring the price down to something reasonable. An option to add 256KB
> SIMM memory for RAM disk would make it even more popular. There will
> be a lot of spare 256KB SIMMs once people start upgrading to 1MB SIMMs.
> I wouldn't mind having a system ROM disk and a 1MB RAM disk even though
> I have a hard disk. You can't beat ROM/RAM seek time. (Transfer rates
> might not be all that great with a simple 8-bit processor.)

A combination ROMdisk/RAMdisk could make sense...  but only if the
contents of the ROMdisk wasn't cast in silicon.  For example, one might
use an EEPROM coupled with a decent-sized (2-4 meg) RAM bank.  At
power-on, the EEPROM would be copied into the RAM bank...  in effect,
preinitializing the RAM as a bootable RAMdisk.  This volume would then
be booted over the SCSI bus, and would become your "startup" volume.
You'd be able to use the Chooser, Scrapbook, etc. without difficulty.

The EEPROM would be initialized via a special downloading utility.
You'd use the Installer, Finder, etc. to create a bootable floppy that
was configured according to your tastes... and then download this image
into the EEPROM.

> Nah...they'll never do this. The people who make hardware development
> decisions never listen to us anyway.

Sigh.  This is one of those sweeping statements that can be disproven
by a single counterexample.  I'll leave it as an "exercise to the reader"
to decide whether you agree with this condemnation or not.

Why, pray tell, is "they"?  Apple?  Perhaps they'll do this, perhaps
not.  They do have something to gain by doing it, but not all that
much... and it is NOT a risk-free proposition!  From Apple's point
of view, doing it badly would be much worse than not doing it at
all.

Consider... if they implement a ROMdisk according to your proposal,
then HOW do they decide upon the configuration of the ROMdisk?  Which
printer would be pre-selected... ImageWriter?  AppleTalk ImageWriter?
LaserWriter?  What printer name would be pre-chosen?  What desk
accessories do they include?  Which do they exclude?  What applications,
if any, do they bundle onto the ROMdisk?  Which common, popular
applications will refuse to run if the startup disk is locked?  How
do they handle upgrades?  Will Apple dealers be willing to provide
a free ROM-swap service, or will they charge users (at $50/hour or
more) to swap ROMs?

There have already been quite a few flames directed at Apple for
having a closed machine architecture (in the classic Mac), for making
it difficult to add certain new features, and for being "fascistic"
(however one defines that).

This is as NOTHING compared to the poolpah which would break loose if
Apple were to start pushing a pre-configured ROMdisk as the "appropriate"
solution for low-end/hard-disk-less users.  I expect that Apple would
IMMEDIATELY be accused of attempting to lock third-party vendors out
of the low-end market... after all, you'd be unable to install ANY
third-party INITs, fonts, printer drivers, cdevs, or ANYTHING ELSE
on an Apple ROMdisk.

Perhaps some third-party vendor will decide that this is an appropriate
niche market.  It's entirely possible... but I don't expect it to
happen.  There was at least one RAM-based floppy-disk emulator available
a few years ago;  I don't recall seeing it lately, or having heard that
it ever made a big splash in the market.  Inexpensive hard disks eliminated
the niche, pretty much.

>                                         This might solve the problem of
> forcing users to buy hard disks. Most users would prefer the hard disks,
> but wouldn't it be great to be able to say: "System 7.0 doesn't require
> a hard disk, if you get our ROMDrive product for only $150. AND you can
> use the 512KB from your 1MB MacPlus."

You can do something very much like this today, with off-the-shelf
hardware and software.  Add a couple of megs of memory to an existing
machine.  Configure a boot-floppy with the System as you prefer it,
and with a RAMdisk-installer as the startup application.  Boot the floppy;
it'll initialize the RAMdisk, copy the System files over, switch-launch
the Finder on the RAMdisk, and eject the floppy.

I did this back in the days of the 512k, two-floppy-and-no-hard-disk
Mac.  It's still quite feasible today.  You get to run the environment
(INITs, fonts, etc.) that YOU have chosen... not the "vanilla"
least-common-denominator environment that somebody at Apple decided was
"appropriate" and had masked into 10,000 ROMs.

You can buy a low-end 20-meg internal hard disk for as little as $390
these days.  If I had the choice of spending $150 on a pre-canned,
nonconfigurable ROMdisk with an Apple-standard set of software,
or saving my pennies for a few months and spending $400 on a low-end
hard disk, I know which I'd choose.

Maybe other people would choose differently.  If so, somebody somewhere
will figure out how to produce and market such a device at a reasonable
cost, and do so profitably enough that they can stay in business and
support it.

I'm not about to hold my breath.

-- 
Dave Platt                                             VOICE: (415) 493-8805
  UUCP: ...!{ames,apple,uunet}!coherent!dplatt   DOMAIN: dplatt@coherent.com
  INTERNET:       coherent!dplatt@ames.arpa,  ...@uunet.uu.net 
  USNAIL: Coherent Thought Inc.  3350 West Bayshore #205  Palo Alto CA 94303