11 Nov
2005
11 Nov
'05
4:57 p.m.
On 11/11/05 01:14, "Tony Duell" <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Not quite. The chips, including the Amstrad gate arrays are pretty much
the same, but the mechanical layout is different. The PPC has 2 boards
stacked one on top of the other, with a strange DIN41612-like connector
(but longer, I think 40 pins in a row) between them.
system unit (with no cover -- the cover was the
monitor base), a laptop
which was wider than a PDP11 (seriously, it's got a full-size 102 key
keyboard. and other similarly 'interesting' products.
You mean the PPC512 and PPC640? Quite interesting design really - a PC1512
or 1640 motherboard stuck in a clamshell case with a 7 inch LCD screen and full size keyboard. The 640 had twin floppies too.
Also ran on batteries
AFAIK both models could take 2 drives and the internal modem option card.
I have a PPC640, 2 drives, modem, etc, And the service manual +
programming reference.
though I can't remember how long they lasted.
IIRC it's 10 C cells, and they don't last that long. I normally run mine
off a 12V bench supply.
Still, for some reason I acturally prefer them to
Sinclair's offerings.
It may well be because my first computer as a Sinclair (MK14), and I had
so many problems with it (both from the manual and the ridiculous design)
that I never want to suffer one of his products again.
From what I've been told you can blame NatSemi
for the design of the MK14,
not Science of Cambridge - it was a rehash of the SC/MP
reference design
board.....can anyone verify that?