5 Aug
2008
5 Aug
'08
8:44 a.m.
I thought about that..
First the C64 had already been completed, this means that the design work was done as well
as licensing. I mean she had to get permission to make the DTV in the 1st place. So that
work has already been done.
Second, so many people have hacked the DTV design to do so many things, they could easily
get this project done quicker by looking at the hacks.
If the MIT group wants to get a machine into the hands of people ASAP, then they can go
with a proven design. I think they just need to get the people who know together.
The problem I see if getting licensing for all the software. But if they can pull it off
they will have a $12 computer with a ton of software
--- On Tue, 8/5/08, Cameron Kaiser <spectre at floodgap.com> wrote:
From: Cameron Kaiser <spectre at floodgap.com>
Subject: Re: MIT want to make $12 Apple II clone
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2008, 11:26 AM
Why do they not use a Commodore 64 instead? It
has
already been
reduced to a single chip by Jeri Ellsworth and it
has
enhanced
graphics that are better then what the original
C64
had.
Intellectual property concerns, maybe? The Apple II is
certainly a much
easier design to build from elemental pieces or
reverse-engineer.
Not that I mind a $12 C64, but still ...
--
------------------------------------ personal:
http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com *
ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Vote anarchist!
------------------------------------------------------------