Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.apple2.programmer > #1560 > unrolled thread

Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.apple2.programmer

Contents

  Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> - 2015-03-28 21:49 +0000
    Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA David Schmenk <dschmenk@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 11:14 -0700
      Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA aiiadict@gmail.com - 2015-04-01 11:27 -0700
      Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> - 2015-04-03 01:36 +0000
    Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net> - 2015-03-30 18:20 -0400
      Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA David Schmenk <dschmenk@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 22:04 -0700
        Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net> - 2015-03-31 14:01 -0400
          Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA David Schmenk <dschmenk@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 12:11 -0700
            Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net> - 2015-03-31 15:42 -0400
            Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> - 2015-04-03 01:41 +0000
            Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA pitz <pitz.wong@gmail.com> - 2015-04-07 23:26 -0700
              Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA ol.sc@web.de (Oliver Schmidt) - 2015-04-09 21:22 +0000
                Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA David Schmenk <dschmenk@gmail.com> - 2015-04-13 07:27 -0700
        Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA Antoine Vignau <antoine.vignau@laposte.net> - 2015-03-31 12:09 -0700
          Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net> - 2015-03-31 15:48 -0400
            Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> - 2015-04-03 01:39 +0000
          Re: Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> - 2015-04-03 01:29 +0000

#1560 — Web server for Uthernet II written in PLASMA

Dave Schmenk says "What do you do when you build a new ethernet card,
implement an SDCard storage device using the SuperSerial Card, and create a
new language just for the Apple II? Tie it all together with a web server"

He is using the built-in TCP/IP stack of the W5100 chip on the upcoming
Uthernet II. The language used is PLASMA.

http://schmenk.is-a-geek.com/wordpress/?p=216


I would also like to toot my own horn and post a link to my upcoming
vaporware product, the Marina IP stack. Take a look: http://marina.a2hq.com/

It does not work on the Uthernet II yet.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1561

On Saturday, 28 March 2015 14:49:59 UTC-7, D Finnigan  wrote:
> Dave Schmenk says "What do you do when you build a new ethernet card,
> implement an SDCard storage device using the SuperSerial Card, and create a
> new language just for the Apple II? Tie it all together with a web server"
> 
> He is using the built-in TCP/IP stack of the W5100 chip on the upcoming
> Uthernet II. The language used is PLASMA.
> 
> http://schmenk.is-a-geek.com/wordpress/?p=216
> 
> 
> I would also like to toot my own horn and post a link to my upcoming
> vaporware product, the Marina IP stack. Take a look: http://marina.a2hq.com/
> 
> It does not work on the Uthernet II yet.

David, that is very cool. I also have a stack for the original Uthernet that is coming along (implementing TCP now). I chose to implement the Wiznet stack first, as I wanted to make sure I took full advantage of its features instead of using it as just an Ethernet packet send/receive device. You might want to review the 5100's functionality so that you match your API up to it. I also auto-detect the CS8900 and Wiznet 5100 to load the appropriate driver, although I can't promise how robust is is.

Ethernet driver: https://github.com/dschmenk/PLASMA/blob/master/src/libsrc/uthernet.pla

Wiznet driver+stack: https://github.com/dschmenk/PLASMA/blob/master/src/libsrc/wiznet.pla

Dave...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1570

YouTube video???

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1576

David Schmenk wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 March 2015 14:49:59 UTC-7, D Finnigan  wrote:
>> Dave Schmenk says "What do you do when you build a new ethernet card,
>> implement an SDCard storage device using the SuperSerial Card, and create
>> a
>> new language just for the Apple II? Tie it all together with a web
>> server"
>> 
>> He is using the built-in TCP/IP stack of the W5100 chip on the upcoming
>> Uthernet II. The language used is PLASMA.
>> 
>> http://schmenk.is-a-geek.com/wordpress/?p!6
>> 
>> 
>> I would also like to toot my own horn and post a link to my upcoming
>> vaporware product, the Marina IP stack. Take a look:
>> http://marina.a2hq.com/
>> 
>> It does not work on the Uthernet II yet.
> 
> David, that is very cool. I also have a stack for the original Uthernet
> that is coming along (implementing TCP now). I chose to implement the
> Wiznet stack first, as I wanted to make sure I took full advantage of its
> features instead of using it as just an Ethernet packet send/receive
> device. You might want to review the 5100's functionality so that you
> match
> your API up to it. I also auto-detect the CS8900 and Wiznet 5100 to load
> the appropriate driver, although I can't promise how robust is is.

You know, I would give my left shift key to figure out to implement media
sense detection on the original Uthernet (in other words, when the cable
comes out or in).

Now there's this silly status byte you can poll that is LinkOK but that
times out after 50 MS! What do to? Well you can test for TxOK, which I do.
And then if you get 2 or three failures in a row then the cable is probably
unplugged. At this point you could test the LinkOK bit.

Great. It's not a work of beauty, but it's not too bad either.

Now how to detect the cable being plugged back in??!! Just blindly send
Ethernet frames until one succeeds? What!

Regarding TCP: ain't gonna happen until I've got a clock card giving me at
least 1 second IRQs. No way, man. Not gonna go down the software loop timer
path!

-- 
]DF$
The Marina IP stack for Apple II--
http://marina.a2hq.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1562

"D Finnigan" <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote in message 
news:dog_cow-1427579397@macgui.com... 
> Dave Schmenk says "What do you do when you build 
> a new ethernet card,  implement an SDCard storage 
> device using the SuperSerial Card, and create a new 
> language just for the Apple II? Tie it all together with a 
> web server" 
> 
> He is using the built-in TCP/IP stack of the W5100 chip 
> on the upcoming Uthernet II. The language used is PLASMA. 
> 
> http://schmenk.is-a-geek.com/wordpress/?p=216 
> 
> I would also like to toot my own horn and post a link to 
> my upcoming vaporware product, the Marina IP stack. 
> Take a look: http://marina.a2hq.com/ 
> 
> It does not work on the Uthernet II yet. 

Maybe it's just me, but posting anything about a new card 
before it is officially completed and released is politically 
incorrect.  Especially when it's not even your creation.  8>) 

Bill Garber - I love my 
C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
http://www.sepa-electronics.com 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1563

On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 3:16:04 PM UTC-7, Bill Garber wrote:
> "D Finnigan" <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote in message 
> news:dog_cow-1427579397@macgui.com... 
> > Dave Schmenk says "What do you do when you build 
> > a new ethernet card,  implement an SDCard storage 
> > device using the SuperSerial Card, and create a new 
> > language just for the Apple II? Tie it all together with a 
> > web server" 
> > 
> > He is using the built-in TCP/IP stack of the W5100 chip 
> > on the upcoming Uthernet II. The language used is PLASMA. 
> > 
> > http://schmenk.is-a-geek.com/wordpress/?p=216 
> > 
> > I would also like to toot my own horn and post a link to 
> > my upcoming vaporware product, the Marina IP stack. 
> > Take a look: http://marina.a2hq.com/ 
> > 
> > It does not work on the Uthernet II yet. 
> 
> Maybe it's just me, but posting anything about a new card 
> before it is officially completed and released is politically 
> incorrect.  Especially when it's not even your creation.  8>) 
> 
> Bill Garber - I love my 
> C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
> http://www.sepa-electronics.com


Bill-

I think I speak for all of comp.sys.apple2.programmer when I say "Huh?".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1564

"David Schmenk" <dschmenk@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:3eab9636-3397-412f-b02a-0acf80dc03a1@googlegroups.com... 
> On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 3:16:04 PM UTC-7, Bill Garber wrote: 
>> "D Finnigan" <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote in message 
>> news:dog_cow-1427579397@macgui.com... 
>> > Dave Schmenk says "What do you do when you build 
>> > a new ethernet card,  implement an SDCard storage 
>> > device using the SuperSerial Card, and create a new 
>> > language just for the Apple II? Tie it all together 
>> > with a web server" 
>> > 
>> > He is using the built-in TCP/IP stack of the W5100 chip 
>> > on the upcoming Uthernet II. The language used is PLASMA. 
>> > 
>> > http://schmenk.is-a-geek.com/wordpress/?p=216 
>> > 
>> > I would also like to toot my own horn and post a link 
>> > to my upcoming vaporware product, the Marina IP stack. 
>> > Take a look: http://marina.a2hq.com/ 
>> > 
>> > It does not work on the Uthernet II yet. 
>> 
>> Maybe it's just me, but posting anything about a new card 
>> before it is officially completed and released is politically 
>> incorrect.  Especially when it's not even your creation.  8>) 
>> 
>> Bill Garber - I love my 
>> C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
>> http://www.sepa-electronics.com
> 
> 
> Bill-
> 
> I think I speak for all of comp.sys.apple2.programmer 
> when I say "Huh?". 

Well, simply this... The subject line says, "for Uthernet II". 
Officially, there is no "Uthernet II" as yet.  This is the 
reason Glenn has Beta testers discussing it in private forums. 

Bill Garber - I love my 
C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
http://www.sepa-electronics.com 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1566

On Tuesday, 31 March 2015 10:57:39 UTC-7, Bill Garber  wrote:
> "David Schmenk" <dschmenk@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:3eab9636-3397-412f-b02a-0acf80dc03a1@googlegroups.com... 
> > On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 3:16:04 PM UTC-7, Bill Garber wrote: 
> >> "D Finnigan" <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote in message 
> >> news:dog_cow-1427579397@macgui.com... 
> >> > Dave Schmenk says "What do you do when you build 
> >> > a new ethernet card,  implement an SDCard storage 
> >> > device using the SuperSerial Card, and create a new 
> >> > language just for the Apple II? Tie it all together 
> >> > with a web server" 
> >> > 
> >> > He is using the built-in TCP/IP stack of the W5100 chip 
> >> > on the upcoming Uthernet II. The language used is PLASMA. 
> >> > 
> >> > http://schmenk.is-a-geek.com/wordpress/?p=216 
> >> > 
> >> > I would also like to toot my own horn and post a link 
> >> > to my upcoming vaporware product, the Marina IP stack. 
> >> > Take a look: http://marina.a2hq.com/ 
> >> > 
> >> > It does not work on the Uthernet II yet. 
> >> 
> >> Maybe it's just me, but posting anything about a new card 
> >> before it is officially completed and released is politically 
> >> incorrect.  Especially when it's not even your creation.  8>) 
> >> 
> >> Bill Garber - I love my 
> >> C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
> >> http://www.sepa-electronics.com
> > 
> > 
> > Bill-
> > 
> > I think I speak for all of comp.sys.apple2.programmer 
> > when I say "Huh?". 
> 
> Well, simply this... The subject line says, "for Uthernet II". 
> Officially, there is no "Uthernet II" as yet.  This is the 
> reason Glenn has Beta testers discussing it in private forums. 
> 
> Bill Garber - I love my 
> C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
> http://www.sepa-electronics.com

Ah, gotcha. A better subject line would have been "Web server for the Wiznet 5100 written in PLASMA". All my code was written on my own, personally built Wiznet 5100 card. I don't have any pre-release knowledge of the Uthernet II (except I heard it was based on the Wiznet 5100), so I think that was speculation on David's part.

Dave...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1567

"David Schmenk" <dschmenk@gmail.com> wrote in message news: 
786f1204-aec1-434e-90a8-8ebaa4757e28@googlegroups.com... 
On Tuesday, 31 March 2015 10:57:39 UTC-7, Bill Garber  wrote: 
> "David Schmenk" <dschmenk@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:3eab9636-3397-412f-b02a-0acf80dc03a1@googlegroups.com... 
> > On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 3:16:04 PM UTC-7, Bill Garber wrote: 
> >> "D Finnigan" <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote in message 
> >> news:dog_cow-1427579397@macgui.com... 
> >> > Dave Schmenk says "What do you do when you build 
> >> > a new ethernet card,  implement an SDCard storage 
> >> > device using the SuperSerial Card, and create a new 
> >> > language just for the Apple II? Tie it all together 
> >> > with a web server" 
> >> > 
> >> > He is using the built-in TCP/IP stack of the W5100 chip 
> >> > on the upcoming Uthernet II. The language used is PLASMA. 
> >> > 
> >> > http://schmenk.is-a-geek.com/wordpress/?p=216 
> >> > 
> >> > I would also like to toot my own horn and post a link 
> >> > to my upcoming vaporware product, the Marina IP stack. 
> >> > Take a look: http://marina.a2hq.com/ 
> >> > 
> >> > It does not work on the Uthernet II yet. 
> >> 
> >> Maybe it's just me, but posting anything about a new card 
> >> before it is officially completed and released is politically 
> >> incorrect.  Especially when it's not even your creation.  8>) 
> >> 
> >> Bill Garber - I love my 
> >> C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
> >> http://www.sepa-electronics.com
> > 
> > 
> > Bill-
> > 
> > I think I speak for all of comp.sys.apple2.programmer 
> > when I say "Huh?". 
> 
>> Well, simply this... The subject line says, "for Uthernet II". 
>> Officially, there is no "Uthernet II" as yet.  This is the 
>> reason Glenn has Beta testers discussing it in private forums. 
>> 
>> Bill Garber - I love my 
>> C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
>> http://www.sepa-electronics.com 
> 
> Ah, gotcha. A better subject line would have been "Web server 
> for the Wiznet 5100 written in PLASMA". All my code was written 
> on my own, personally built Wiznet 5100 card. I don't have any 
> pre-release knowledge of the Uthernet II (except I heard it was 
> based on the Wiznet 5100), so I think that was speculation on 
> David's part. 
> 
> Dave... 

That would have worked well, especially for someone who may have 
bought a Wiznet 5100 breakout board. They could devise their own 
interface to the Apple II and used your code on that. If I didn't 
have so much of my own work to do, I may have done that myself. 

Bill Garber - I love my 
C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
http://www.sepa-electronics.com 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1578

David Schmenk wrote:
> 
> Ah, gotcha. A better subject line would have been "Web server for the
> Wiznet 5100 written in PLASMA". All my code was written on my own,
> personally built Wiznet 5100 card. I don't have any pre-release knowledge
> of the Uthernet II (except I heard it was based on the Wiznet 5100), so I
> think that was speculation on David's part.

I copied the headline from A2Central.

Mea non culpa. :-P

Donec eris felix....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1603

On Tuesday, March 31, 2015 at 12:11:33 PM UTC-7, David Schmenk wrote:
> 
> Ah, gotcha. A better subject line would have been "Web server for the Wiznet 5100 written in PLASMA". All my code was written on my own, personally built Wiznet 5100 card. I don't have any pre-release knowledge of the Uthernet II (except I heard it was based on the Wiznet 5100), so I think that was speculation on David's part.
> 
> Dave...

I'm wondering about the choice of the Wiznet 5100 for the Uthernet II.  It may be related to when the project got started, but the 5200 had come out almost two years ago and it improved a lot on the 5100, possibly cheaper too.  Then again, maybe it's because the 5200 removed the direct bus interfacing capability and only provides SPI to communicate with it -- this could have needed more supporting chips in the PCB.

It's just that SPI is becoming the common way of interfacing with a lot of these modern chips or hobbyist boards that it may end up simplifying an Uthernet card (I could be totally wrong here).  The actual programming interface exposed by the Uthernet card to an Apple II program could remain the same.  Glenn himself is no stranger to SPI, as he seems to have worked with it with other boards.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1604

Hi,

>I'm wondering about the choice of the Wiznet 5100 for the Uthernet II.  It =
>may be related to when the project got started, but the 5200 had come out a=
>lmost two years ago and it improved a lot on the 5100, possibly cheaper too=
>.

All WIZnet 5xxx chips aren't exactly error-free ;-) After carefully
checking the WIZnet errata documents I felt that the the W5100 issues
can in general be dealt with best.

Apart from the above understanding and workarounding the WIZnet 5xxx
errors (both the ones explicitly documented in the errata docs and the
ones indirectly documented by workarounds in WIZnet driver code) is
quite time consuming and tedious.

Therefore I suggested to Glenn to stay with the best understood W5100.

>Then again, maybe it's because the 5200 removed the direct bus interfaci=
>ng capability and only provides SPI to communicate with it -- this could ha=
>ve needed more supporting chips in the PCB.

That was in fact another aspect.

>It's just that SPI is becoming the common way of interfacing with a lot of =
>these modern chips or hobbyist boards that it may end up simplifying an Uth=
>ernet card (I could be totally wrong here).  The actual programming interfa=
>ce exposed by the Uthernet card to an Apple II program could remain the sam=
>e.  Glenn himself is no stranger to SPI, as he seems to have worked with it=
> with other boards.

Glenn would have liked to go with SPI in order to allow to connect
additional devices beside the WIZnet chip to the Apple II bus. But in
contrast to the later WIZnet chips the 5100 SPI is ridiculously slow.
So staying with the 5100 implied staying with the indirect interface.

However in contrast to the CS8900A indirect mode which needs 16 I/O
addresses the 5100 indirect mode needs only 4 I/O addresses. This
means that there are plenty I/O addresses left to potentially add SPI
later in order to drive other devices.

Regards,
Oliver

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1605

On Thursday, 9 April 2015 14:22:25 UTC-7, Oliver Schmidt  wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> >I'm wondering about the choice of the Wiznet 5100 for the Uthernet II.  It =
> >may be related to when the project got started, but the 5200 had come out a=
> >lmost two years ago and it improved a lot on the 5100, possibly cheaper too=
> >.
> 
> All WIZnet 5xxx chips aren't exactly error-free ;-) After carefully
> checking the WIZnet errata documents I felt that the the W5100 issues
> can in general be dealt with best.
> 
> Apart from the above understanding and workarounding the WIZnet 5xxx
> errors (both the ones explicitly documented in the errata docs and the
> ones indirectly documented by workarounds in WIZnet driver code) is
> quite time consuming and tedious.
> 
> Therefore I suggested to Glenn to stay with the best understood W5100.
> 
> >Then again, maybe it's because the 5200 removed the direct bus interfaci=
> >ng capability and only provides SPI to communicate with it -- this could ha=
> >ve needed more supporting chips in the PCB.
> 
> That was in fact another aspect.
> 
> >It's just that SPI is becoming the common way of interfacing with a lot of =
> >these modern chips or hobbyist boards that it may end up simplifying an Uth=
> >ernet card (I could be totally wrong here).  The actual programming interfa=
> >ce exposed by the Uthernet card to an Apple II program could remain the sam=
> >e.  Glenn himself is no stranger to SPI, as he seems to have worked with it=
> > with other boards.
> 
> Glenn would have liked to go with SPI in order to allow to connect
> additional devices beside the WIZnet chip to the Apple II bus. But in
> contrast to the later WIZnet chips the 5100 SPI is ridiculously slow.
> So staying with the 5100 implied staying with the indirect interface.
> 

My first attempt at interfacing the Wiznet 5100 was with the Arduino Ethernet Shield, which uses the SPI interface. I tried hacking an SPI connection together using a 6522 and a shift register. It almost worked reliably ;-) What we need is a cost effective and available Apple II bus <=> SPI chip. Along with some ROM chip control logic, it would open up a large body of available controllers and devices to the Apple II in a simple package.

> However in contrast to the CS8900A indirect mode which needs 16 I/O
> addresses the 5100 indirect mode needs only 4 I/O addresses. This
> means that there are plenty I/O addresses left to potentially add SPI
> later in order to drive other devices.
> 
> Regards,
> Oliver

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1565

On Tuesday, March 31, 2015 at 7:04:06 AM UTC+2, David Schmenk wrote:
> I think I speak for all of comp.sys.apple2.programmer when I say "Huh?".

Nope, I understand what Bill means here and I agree with him, despite the fact that I trust you. We have been informed of plenty of vaporware things (either h/w (transwarp) or s/w (marina ;-)). I think it is safer to "talk" only once everything is available, either h/w or s/w.

Antoine

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1568

"Antoine Vignau" <antoine.vignau@laposte.net> wrote in message 
news:ee8fe457-a1a6-4ab1-aa28-bf7bf6231cd6@googlegroups.com... 
On Tuesday, March 31, 2015 at 7:04:06 AM UTC+2, David Schmenk 
wrote: 

>> I think I speak for all of comp.sys.apple2.programmer 
>> when I say "Huh?". 
> 
> Nope, I understand what Bill means here and I agree with him, 
> despite the fact that I trust you. We have been informed of 
> plenty of vaporware things (either h/w (transwarp) or s/w 
> (marina ;-)). I think it is safer to "talk" only once 
> everything is available, either h/w or s/w. 
> 
> Antoine 

That's all I was concerned with.  I have the utmost confidence 
in 'a2retro' but you never know, he might just get discouraged 
and give up on it.  

Bill Garber - I love my 
C1 D0 D0 CC C5 A0 C9 C9 C7 D3 
http://www.sepa-electronics.com 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1577

Bill Garber wrote:
> "Antoine Vignau" <antoine.vignau@laposte.net> wrote in message 
> news:ee8fe457-a1a6-4ab1-aa28-bf7bf6231cd6@googlegroups.com... 
> On Tuesday, March 31, 2015 at 7:04:06 AM UTC+2, David Schmenk 
> wrote: 
> 
>>> I think I speak for all of comp.sys.apple2.programmer 
>>> when I say "Huh?". 
>> 
>> Nope, I understand what Bill means here and I agree with him, 
>> despite the fact that I trust you. We have been informed of 
>> plenty of vaporware things (either h/w (transwarp) or s/w 
>> (marina ;-)). I think it is safer to "talk" only once 
>> everything is available, either h/w or s/w. 
>> 
>> Antoine 
> 
> That's all I was concerned with.  I have the utmost confidence 
> in 'a2retro' but you never know, he might just get discouraged 
> and give up on it.  

Doubtful, I think. The fact that some people like me have beta Uthernet II
that is about 95% functional leads me to believe that he has what it takes
to make up that last 5% and get out a product that is two times as good as
the original Uthernet.

-- 
]DF$
The Marina IP stack for Apple II--
http://marina.a2hq.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1575

Antoine Vignau wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 31, 2015 at 7:04:06 AM UTC+2, David Schmenk wrote:
>> I think I speak for all of comp.sys.apple2.programmer when I say "Huh?".
> 
> Nope, I understand what Bill means here and I agree with him, despite the
> fact that I trust you. We have been informed of plenty of vaporware things
> (either h/w (transwarp) or s/w (marina ;-)). I think it is safer to "talk"
> only once everything is available, either h/w or s/w.

I was hoping to post the Marina announcement on the April Fool day, and it
was complete and ready to go, but I had to do it today instead. ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.apple2.programmer

csiph-web