CoCo's *are* real... (was: OT: PC Motherboard with a vacuum tube

They had sound too on the Commode-ores, the Coco's too IIRC. I think they left the serial port off (even on the POS Sanyo MBC-555-2 that I had) to get you for another expnsive add-on after you committed a lot of money for the unit itself. The Sanyo serial port was a crap 8250 UART and it cost nearly $100 for a 3x3 card that screwed to the back, had only a few parts such as a UART and 1488/1489 send/recieve and some resistors, caps and diodes. The Sanyo had a Ctrl key but NO Alt, u nderrated power supply, bitmap (Apple type) video on a supposed IBM compat, and other really pain in the rump problems. Witht he help of a few BBS systems, numerous editions of Soft Sector magazine and newsletters froma few Sanyo user's groups I finally had the machine where I was comfy with it, then dropped it for a clone and a PS/2. A real POS was that chicklet keyboard on the PCjr...after literally hours on end on those crappy keyboards I was so relieved to get off t hat machine to go to an AT with a tactile Alps switch keyboard. I would love to have a bulldozer and run over any more that are in existence (not really but I feel they suck that much). -> -----Original Message----- -> From: cctalk-admin(a)classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-admin@classiccmp.org]On -> Behalf Of Ben Franchuk -> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:01 PM -> To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org -> Subject: Re: CoCo's *are* real... (was: OT: PC Motherboard with a vacuum -> tube -> -> -> Roger Merchberger wrote: -> -> > Define "real" -- Admittedly, the CoCo1's chicklet keyboard sucked -> > bigtime, but The CoCo2/3's keyboard is as good as anything made -> > nowadays... (that's why the newest keyboard I use on any PeeCee is an -> > IBM "klackety" keyboard from '84 or so... and wouldn't mind having an -> > interface for these on my CoCo...) and although they were a little -> > harder to upgrade than today's machines, they were easier to hack & -> > interface to. Sure, they weren't on par to the minis & -> mainframes of the -> > same timeframe, but that's true today; and it was still a very -> capable, -> > affordable & expandable computer in it's own right. -> -> Not really a general purpose computer more like the game console -> box of today. -> The C64/Coco/Apple was the quick and simple computer - 8k rom - 64k D-ram -> and a graphics chip and CPU. It was the cost cutting that got ya -> like none of -> the common 8 bit computers had a serial port. Even the AT was -> too cheap to -> drive the IRQ open collector. -> -> > [whew... just had to get that out of the way; 6809's being my -> favorite & -> > all... ;-) ] -> That was a toss up for me between the 6809 and the PDP-8. -> Needless to say I -> working a 12/24 bit CPU that reminds you of the 6809. -> http://www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html -> -> >> Nobody in the USA made a nice 6809 machine. -> > -> > -> > Huh? That's where I beg to differ with you! I *lusted* over the ads in -> > HotCoCo & Rainbow mags for the Chieftain (methinks... weren't many of -> > those ads), and even more so, the Gimix... The Gimix was one -> *bitchin'* -> > box - ran OS-9 level 2 (wasn't there a level 3 for that?), it -> could take -> > 512K of RAM if you wanted it to, and this was by '83 or '84... -> It truly -> > was a mini, as it was designed to run multiuser apps on multiple -> > terminals with no problem... I dunno if they ever made a video -> card for -> > it.... -> -> I had forgot about them. -> -> > No, it couldn't - it was a flat memory space. However, with the right -> > SAM, bank switching was available & with some "creative memory -> > accounting" it worked quite well, especially with OS-9. -> I suspect one could decode the opcodes since you get instruction fetch -> information with the 6809.. -> -> > That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it... -> > Roger "Merch" Merchberger -> -> Mind you with fast ram now days and programable logic a nice OS-9 -> machine could be built. Finding a fast 6809 chip is the problem. -> Boy I wish OS-9 was open source. -> -> ->