21 Oct
2018
21 Oct
'18
11:09 a.m.
I'd heard, but have no sources for said hearsay, that the most common CP/M
machine in volume was the Apple II.
There were definitely knockoffs of the Microsoft Z80 Softcard. One of my
IIe systems has one from SPACE BYTE, the other is no-name. I've personally
seen more knockoffs than actual Microsoft cards. The two I have currently
are definitely "photocopy" type knockoff/clone cards, the layout is nearly
identical to the real Microsoft card I've got. That of course doesn't speak
for what was actually deployed.
Some Apple II compatibles also came with CP/M compatibility out of the box,
I don't personally know if that was MS Z80 Softcard compatible or something
else.
Thanks,
Jonathan
On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 5:54 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
> The
Softcard was a Z-80 based single-board
> computer
On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote:
It wasn't. It was only a processor card.
No version of the Softcard had it's own video output. It used normal
Apple
video output. If you wanted 80x24, you had to
use a separate third-party
80-column card, or (later) and Apple IIe, IIc, IIc+, or IIgs.
I'm not sure what you're referring to by "etc.", but the vast majority
of
Softcards and their clones did not have their own RAM, and used that of
the
Apple II.
The PCPI Applicard and it's clones had their own RAM. Some very late
models
of the Softcard had their own RAM.
I remember hearing, at one point, a statement (not necessarily reliable),
that said that 20% of Apple computers had a Softcard.
What was the approximate percentage in 1980/1981, when IBM contacted
Microsoft?
(or number that had been sold, which would include ones not actually in
use)
What was the PEAK percentage?
(or number that had been sold, which would include ones not actually in
use)
Were there other brands, or imitations, available then (1980/1981)?
Later, what percentage were imitations?
Speculatively, how much were they used V use of the machine in non-Z80
ways? (How many people bought it just ot have the capability, without
necessarily being active CP/M users?)
This is definitely not the first time that I have heard that IBM had
assumed that CP/M was a Microsoft product.