//c+ switch settings, QWERTY/Dvorak (was Re: IIc+ mouse `A+ Little Mouse')

From: Derek Peschel <dpeschel_at_eskimo.com>
Date: Fri Aug 30 16:49:01 2002

On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 05:39:13AM -0700, Sellam Ismail wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Derek Peschel wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 02:32:30AM -0700, Sellam Ismail wrote:

> > > > > If I recall correctly, the seminally useless 40/80 column switch on the
> >
> > Does that mean "useless from the time when it was created" or "useless and
> > spreading its uselessness to all its descendants"? :)
>
> Both I guess. It didn't actually change the display. It was supposed to

I just realized that "seminally useless" could also mean "unable to have
descendants", as in "its sperm is useless". :)

> > Do you know of a program that actually read that switch? The expansions
> > that made the ][+ into the //e and //c were rather complicated, and yet not
> > complete enough (I wish they had made all the soft switches readable --
> > I hate write-only registers).
>
> Yes, it would have been nice in some (very very very) rare instances to
> know what graphics mode you were in, for instance. Or what bank of memory
> you were in. Mostly from a cracking standpoint I guess.

Writing a debugger is what I had in mind. In that case the feature is
vital. Otherwise it's pretty unimportant. I still hate write-only
registers on principle. (Because then the OS has to keep a copy, and you
have to trust that people won't use the real register, etc.)

> > No, but I do know that the same feature existed on the //e (i.e. before
> > the //c came out) but it was only accessible by changing internal
> > wiring. I read about this in an issue of Call A.P.P.L.E. which (of
> > course) I no longer have.
>
> Wow, crazy. I never knew that, or even heard of it. In fact I want to
> see a source before I believe it :)

You find me an archive of Call A.P.P.L.E. magazines, I'll find you a source.

-- Derek
Received on Fri Aug 30 2002 - 16:49:01 BST