The Sinclair QL Forum

Tinyfpga wrote:SMS2 is, post Futura, but when I look at SMS2 source code Is seems that a lot of it was developed
for an earlier project, probably the Futura.

I downloaded a PDF titled:-
http://www.sinclairql.net/downloads/198 ... 4pages.pdf

Sandy has written that the board is 215x225mm, that is contrary to the PCB Urs has and what Dave said.

Tinyfpga wrote:I think that SMS2 would not have been finished so quickly without the Futura and SMSQE would not exist
without SMS2, furthermore Mk has recently posted that "the module system SMSQ/E is using
was developed for Stella".

The SMS kernel was in use since 1990. And the module system was taken from "Stella".
(TT in "A brief history of SMSQ/E") https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... id=7823417

Hi,

The link to Wikipedia, is a article from QL Today, in a series that Tony Tebby outlined the history of QDOS / SMS development.

It just goes to show, in the article linked, that the core of SMS2 is a cut down version of the SuperBASIC interpreter, that uses Qliberator to compile source BASIC code, which is really SuperBASIC as found in the QL and now SMSQ/E.

So really, as I thought, SMS2 is a earlier version of SMSQ/E, but not as good as SMSQ/E.

Peter wrote:

RalfR wrote:

Peter wrote:Hehe, yes I know. But you are the only one.

Honest? I can't believe that. Parallel port for printer is the only sensible thing. How happy I was about my SQB. Apparently no one is printing anymore?

Not many I guess. And there are SER-PAR converters for printing.

I'm out of sync with Martin's Q68 TCP/IP driver progress, maybe it is already possible to use ethernet connectivity. Which of course won't solve the EPSON emulation issue.

I have a box like this https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-LINK-TL-PS1 ... 284&sr=8-1
I have thought about trying to use it with the Q68, but never got around to it.

Edit. I think there was a parallel port interface for the Minerva MK2 using the I2C bus. I have been toying with the idea of writing a driver for the Q68's I2C bus. Has anybody done anything with the Q68's I2C bus yet?

Martin Head wrote:-I have been toying with the idea of writing a driver for the Q68's I2C bus. Has anybody done anything with the Q68's I2C bus yet?

No, but I am raring to go. The only reason I have not done anything yet, is because I don't know how to use the I2C bus.
The ability to use the Q68 to control and measure external components such as motors, sensors, actuators etc. would
transform the q68 from an interesting programmer's toy into a serious maker's system.

For control at long distance I would try to design and build I2C <> isolated RS485 convertors.

Eventually I would like to build direct, Q68 to Duplex and isolated RS485 with power over line hardware.

Ralf's link to Wikipedia, is pertinent.
In my view the last paragraph of the article is the most interesting:-

"How much more is it reasonable to do with SMSQ which, by its need for compatibility with a 10 year old computer, is locked into a 10 year old design? Is there enough interest in the type of operating system concepts pioneered by QDOS to make it worthwhile producing a completely new system? The future depends on your response."

Nearly 20 years ago TT was effectively offering Stella to QLers.

O Qlers 'said TT
You've had a pleasant run!
Shall we be building a better system?'
But answer came there none -
And this was scarcely odd, because
They thought it already done.

(After the Walrus and the Carpenter)

Tinyfpga wrote: Nearly 20 years ago TT was effectively offering Stella to QLers.

No, he wasn't. He was offering Stella to anyone else but QLers because he didn't fancy to support legacy anymore.

Unread postby tofro » Sat Feb 19, 2022 12:37 pm
No, he wasn't. He was offering Stella to anyone else but QLers because he didn't fancy to support legacy anymore.

I sort of understand your point of view. I was using "QLers" as shorthand for fans of QDOS rather than fans of the QL. As I mentioned earlier, Stella was designed to support applications from older systems. If it could support TOS or GEM applications I am sure it would have been able to support QDOS apps, even SMS2 supports a number of QDOS apps.

Would it not be better to re-write an application to run on a new system than compromise an OS to support software as inconsequential as QDOS applications?

Martin_Head wrote: I have been toying with the idea of writing a driver for the Q68's I2C bus.

IMHO it would be impractical to use a driver to control I2C. Minerva's way of doing it seemed best and gives complete control of the bus.

Tinyfpga wrote:I don't know how to use the I2C bus.

See Minerva's implementation http://www.dilwyn.me.uk/docs/manuals/mi ... ual_11.pdf Page 53 onwards.

Although you'll need to be familiar with I2C generally and target device datasheets. Ian Burkinshaw wrote some interesting articles on i2C with QL http://www.dilwyn.me.uk/docs/hardware/IanB/ianb.html

I have never read the docs mentioned above. I have just downloaded them and gave them a brief glance.
They seem very interesting. I find post QL history fascinating.

Tony Tebby never offerred me anything except a rediculous article in QL Today, about sheep impling I was a software pirate...

Tis a pity since I would of bought all this.