5 ms·

It was really amazing what could be done with PC/GEOS in all its incarnations on even the lowest-powered of hardware. It's to be expected, though, considering w

It was really amazing what could be done with PC/GEOS in all its incarnations on even the lowest-powered of hardware. It's to be expected, though, considering what Berkeley Softworks could pull out of a C64 with classic GEOS!

II2II 5y ago
While the C64 implementation of GEOS was an amazing example of working within limited constraints, I am left wondering how much it harmed the reputation of GEOS on other platforms. From my recollections, the frequent disk access on Commodore's notoriously slow drives resulted in a product that was barely usable. When I finally tried GeoWorks on a PC, I was stunned by it's performance and functionality. Unfortunately this was well past its prime since I avoided it for many years because of that initial experience.
- coldacid 5y ago
  Disk accesses were faster with 1571 drives than 1541s, for sure, and having a supported RAM expansion could cut down on the number of accesses needed to do anything. Similarly, GEOS 128 got away with fewer accesses as it could make use of the extra RAM available (although running GEOS 64 on a 128 would be no better than running it on a C64). That GEOS 64 was "barely usable" was more a reflection of what the Commodore 64 could provide than anything else. And I think more people than not recognized that fact. The problem with PC/GEOS is that it arrived at a time when Microsoft was releasing Windows 3.0 and trying to strangle competition in that space. Had Berkeley started working on it much earlier and got it out the door in '88 or '89, it might have had better success than it did.
  - BBC-vs-neolibs 5y ago
    I may be mixing up timelines here, but a C64 with 1571 and a RAM expansion (REU) would approach a cheap PC clone in price, so not much use if the main goal was to use GEOS. It's also easy to forget that PCs had 100% flicker free, sharp monochrome monitors (slow decay phosphor) and a C64 monitor or TV would flicker like hell in comparison.
- themadturk 5y ago
  GEOS on a C64 with RAM expansion performed very nicely, as I remember. I found it very usable to produce computer club newsletters using GeoPublish for about a year in the late 80s. (I don't remember how big my memory expansion was, and I owned both a 1541 and a 1571-compatible floppy drives). Of course, at the time I was simply blown away by using something that looked almost as good as a Mac, so it's possible my experience (and my memory of it) is tainted.
hvs 5y ago
It's an amazing feat, but man was it terrible. I just set it up recently on my C64 (with 2MB additional RAM, sd2iec drives, etc) and it was a huge pain and still barely usable. I lived through that era, so it's not just my inflated expectations distorting my view.

II2II 5y ago

While the C64 implementation of GEOS was an amazing example of working within limited constraints, I am left wondering how much it harmed the reputation of GEOS on other platforms. From my recollections, the frequent disk access on Commodore's notoriously slow drives resulted in a product that was barely usable. When I finally tried GeoWorks on a PC, I was stunned by it's performance and functionality. Unfortunately this was well past its prime since I avoided it for many years because of that initial experience.

coldacid 5y ago
Disk accesses were faster with 1571 drives than 1541s, for sure, and having a supported RAM expansion could cut down on the number of accesses needed to do anything. Similarly, GEOS 128 got away with fewer accesses as it could make use of the extra RAM available (although running GEOS 64 on a 128 would be no better than running it on a C64). That GEOS 64 was "barely usable" was more a reflection of what the Commodore 64 could provide than anything else. And I think more people than not recognized that fact. The problem with PC/GEOS is that it arrived at a time when Microsoft was releasing Windows 3.0 and trying to strangle competition in that space. Had Berkeley started working on it much earlier and got it out the door in '88 or '89, it might have had better success than it did.
- BBC-vs-neolibs 5y ago
  I may be mixing up timelines here, but a C64 with 1571 and a RAM expansion (REU) would approach a cheap PC clone in price, so not much use if the main goal was to use GEOS. It's also easy to forget that PCs had 100% flicker free, sharp monochrome monitors (slow decay phosphor) and a C64 monitor or TV would flicker like hell in comparison.
themadturk 5y ago
GEOS on a C64 with RAM expansion performed very nicely, as I remember. I found it very usable to produce computer club newsletters using GeoPublish for about a year in the late 80s. (I don't remember how big my memory expansion was, and I owned both a 1541 and a 1571-compatible floppy drives). Of course, at the time I was simply blown away by using something that looked almost as good as a Mac, so it's possible my experience (and my memory of it) is tainted.

hvs 5y ago

It's an amazing feat, but man was it terrible. I just set it up recently on my C64 (with 2MB additional RAM, sd2iec drives, etc) and it was a huge pain and still barely usable. I lived through that era, so it's not just my inflated expectations distorting my view.