[Wizard] new to the list

[Bernard Blackham]

On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 02:09:40PM +0800, Mike Fineberg wrote:
> >> Are there (m)any websites up with info on, or general info about:
> >> * drive connectors/adapters
> >> * PSUs (12v -> 5v) [I did see the one Michal posted - I'll have to see
> >about cutting that one back]

The best source at the moment is the archives of the list (URL in
the headers of this email hopefully) - Nick & Harry are in the
process of sourcing various bits. I suppose we should make a webpage
of the progress of these. Any volunteers? :)

> >> * has anyone done anything with DOS (ms or otherwise) with these? Any
> >problems? (I was planning a dual boot DOS/Win98SE for mp3 playing /
> >loading up more stuff)

I was nearly going to, in order to flash to BIOS, but decided I
didn't need it. It wouldn't be too hard I'd imagine.

> >Why the hell would you run dos/windows for mp3 playing?
> 
> Easy - no start up time. no shut down time. no disk checking.
> That's what you need for a car mp3 player... It's not a matter of
> it being a 'good' OS, it's a matter of a fast, very, very small
> OS.

If you're stripping it down that much, you can get Linux to boot on
them in about 25 seconds (I just timed it):

 - 16 of those seconds are the BIOS which you can't do all that much
   about even in DOS
 - 6 seconds loading a stripped down kernel (which I'll post
   somewhere soon)
 - your MP3 playing program, whatever.

I've got an xterminal image up that basically loads the kernel,
brings up networking and starts X. Nothing else.

It's a race against DOS, but you'll also get native networking and
remote access - you could enable you SSH or FTP server (an extra
second or three) and copy files on, etc etc etc.

I too ask why DOS? To use more than 640KB of memory, HIMEM.SYS
generally takes a few seconds to kick itself about. And it's just
that much less powerful.

My opinion only. Feel free to pick at it, please :)

Regards,

Bernard.

-- 
 Bernard Blackham 
 bernard at blackham dot com dot au