[NBLUG/talk] System Message

[Justin Thiessen]

On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 04:26:40PM -0800, Walter Hansen wrote:
> 
> I found a book on the subject and the Apples actualy had a decent built in
> semi-assembly thing called the system monitor. It would actually list your
> code in assebly (not very complexly). You'd have to put it in in straight
> hex format though. I was playing arround with this in 83 or so and didn't
> take assembly until about 86. A friend (same one with the hard drive
> fiasco) and I were trying to make a custom DOS with the file index on a
> different track. Then we were making a machine code program that ran on
> boot with a password entry. So if you didn't boot the disk and type in the
> password the disk appeared to be corrupt or unformatted. I think we got it
> working but then found it too clumbersome to actually have much use for.
> Also anyone with as much skill as us could have gotten arround it pretty
> quick.

You could do so many of these sorts of things with utility programs from
the Beagle Bros.  Remember them?  They had the coolest catalogs and
ads with lots of fun 1- and 2-line programs you had to type without
spaces...  They printed enough tips that you could essentially write
your own version of "DOS Boss" using the info.  I spent a lot of time
doing this when I was something like 14-15.  I miss that free time.
I learned so much more then by just screwing around with the computer
than I ever learned in a class.

Justin

> > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:08:07 -0800 (PST), Walter Hansen
> > <gandalf at sonic.net> wrote:
> >> No. I actually always found Fortran interesting sounding, but never got
> >> into it. Let's see BASIC/Pascal/Machine/Assebly/C/C++/Perl/PHP was my
> >> progression, Visual Basic is somewhere in there too, but I don't think
> >> it
> > <snip>
> >
> > Funny, I did assembly before machine.. Found it made easier.. Machine
> > is not easy at all, and only time I used it was when using
> > un-documented op codes on the 6510/02 processors.  Most assemblers did
> > not understand them, and most debuggers didn't either..
> >
> > Un-documented op codes got real popular for copy protection in the old
> > days, because they would be actual code, but to a debugger or
> > de-compiler it would look like random data =)
> >
> > Heh, just thinking back, the best crack for copy protect was as simple as
> > nop;
> > nop;
> > nop;
> >
> > hehe
> >
> > -Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >       "Knowing others is wisdom, knowing your self is Enlightenment."
> >                                                    -- Lao-Tzu
> > |C8H10N4O2|
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at nblug.org
> > http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at nblug.org
> http://nblug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk