PDA

View Full Version : So... What's with this forum?

astonred
02-09-2009, 05:48 PM
Hasn't the Foleo long since been consigned to the stuff of legend?
Joel
02-09-2009, 07:09 PM
Well, that's why we also have the Zodiac, iQue, AlphaSmart and other forums :)

We'd rather have them all for reference.
astonred
02-11-2009, 08:43 PM
Well, that's why we also have the Zodiac, iQue, AlphaSmart and other forums :)

We'd rather have them all for reference.

but as far as I'm aware the foleo never made production.
Josser
02-11-2009, 09:48 PM
but as far as I'm aware the foleo never made production.
They produced thousands of them. They were pulled from the distributors the day before they were to be sold.
Bazzeil
02-13-2009, 11:47 PM
I think it would have been very cool to at least try one, the first netbook... they didnt advertise it correctly though... they refered to it as requiring a Treo to operate
bizzybody
02-28-2009, 09:39 PM
Nahhh, the first 'netbooks' were the Toshiba Libretto line and 'palmtop' clones thereof, like the Palmax. Actually, most of those were smaller than todays netbooks.
Cyker
03-06-2009, 07:22 AM
What about the Psion? :p
DennisOS2
04-12-2009, 10:25 AM
The first PalmTops were the HP 95, 100, & 200LX. They were called Palmtops because they fit into the palm of your hand. They ran a DOS variant, a CF slot, sync'ing to your PC, Pocket Quicken, full PIM apps (including Lotus 123).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_200Lx
mike p
08-11-2009, 07:45 PM
The first PalmTops were the HP 95, 100, & 200LX. They were called Palmtops because they fit into the palm of your hand. They ran a DOS variant, a CF slot, sync'ing to your PC, Pocket Quicken, full PIM apps (including Lotus 123).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_200Lx

I was just going to post about the HP 95LX. I used to have one, pretty cool but useless without any way to add or remove files.
DennisOS2
08-12-2009, 10:27 AM
I was just going to post about the HP 95LX. I used to have one, pretty cool but useless without any way to add or remove files.

It had a serial cable to transfer files. You could use a mouse and even load Win3.0.
mike p
08-12-2009, 12:18 PM
It had a serial cable to transfer files. You could use a mouse and even load Win3.0.

On the 95? I seen it on the 200 but not 95.
DennisOS2
08-12-2009, 02:48 PM
On the 95? I seen it on the 200 but not 95.


The article in Wiki says there is a RS-232 cable.
mike p
08-12-2009, 03:20 PM
I mean for Windows 3.
DennisOS2
08-12-2009, 04:29 PM
I mean for Windows 3.

Yes, the reference to Win3 was for the ability to load on the 200.
bizzybody
08-12-2009, 05:11 PM
Windows 3.0 had Real Mode. It could run without Extended Memory (XMS) but needed some Expanded Memory (LIM EMS). Standard Mode required Extended Memory, which wasn't available with the 8088 or 8086 CPU.

Windows 3.1 removed Real Mode but still had Standard Mode and could run on an 80286 CPU. Windows 3.11 also had Standard Mode but Windows for Workgroups 3.11 only had 386 Enhanced Mode- dropping compatability for all x86 CPUs older than the 80386. (I dunno about the very short lived WFWG 3.1 or if the Workgroups for Windows add-on would install on Win 3.11 on a 286.)
mike p
08-12-2009, 06:28 PM
Yes, the reference to Win3 was for the ability to load on the 200.

I thought so, since the 95 has Dos 3, and the 200 has Dos 5. I had Windows 3.1 running on Dos 7.10 on a ols Fujistu I got. Its a Japanese laptop, it has Windows 95 now but I may put 3.1 back on it.
DennisOS2
08-17-2009, 10:23 PM
Windows 3.0 had Real Mode. It could run without Extended Memory (XMS) but needed some Expanded Memory (LIM EMS). Standard Mode required Extended Memory, which wasn't available with the 8088 or 8086 CPU.

Windows 3.1 removed Real Mode but still had Standard Mode and could run on an 80286 CPU. Windows 3.11 also had Standard Mode but Windows for Workgroups 3.11 only had 386 Enhanced Mode- dropping compatability for all x86 CPUs older than the 80386. (I dunno about the very short lived WFWG 3.1 or if the Workgroups for Windows add-on would install on Win 3.11 on a 286.)
WFWG3.1 had same memory architecture as Win3.11. I was intrigued by the fact that Win3.0 could run on the LX200. Love that device. So ahead of its time. Example of a manufacturer that was not committed to the platform, however. Their follow-ons were not evolutionary enough ........ didn't advance the platform in meaningful ways.

Does anyone have pics of the LX200 with Win3.0 running on it.