Minimal CP-M SBC design

I grew up through the micro era, but since I started with a TRS-80 Model 1, I didn't go for CP/M (IMHO LDOS was a _much_ better OS, even if it wasn't 'the standard'.'. At the time I knew of other machines, in particular I'd sort-of heard of the PDP11, and wanted one (but no way could I ever have afforded one, not even an H11). I also loved HP engineering of the period, what little I managed to see of it. [...] As I've seaid before I, rather unconventionally, came to computing from electronics. I still consider myself to be an electornics parson first and a computer person a very distant second. One reaosn I like many of my classics is the beuatiful, and unconventional, bits of electronic (and mechancial) engineering that went into the, And that's not restricted to processors. Such things also turn up in peripherals, even in PSUs. YEs, I find the HP98x0 bit-seiral processor an interesting design. I find the PERQ processor a veryb eautiful design. I find the RK07 servo interesting, likewise the PSU in an HP7245 printer/plotter (but the vector generator in that plotter is interesting as well). The HP1350 graphics translator is plain unconventional. The PDP11/45 CPU is certainly elegrant. A fully mechancial printing terminal like an ASR33 is fascinating. And so on. In other words, the fact that it runs a user program does not make something of particular interest to me over other pieces of engineering. So yes, I do run modern peripherals on my classics. I have no problem at all plugging such things in, either to stnadard I/O ports (RS232, etc) or expenasuion slots. But I am sure glad I've got the original peripherals around too in many cases. -tony