I'm just about to consider firing up one of my old CP/M S-100 boxes just for
spite and to see if I can get it to run the way I want. It starts with
wanting the CPU board, and I'll probably have to try several, to run the 8
MHz Z-80H I still have lying about somewhere. Then I want to run the 8"
Shugart hard drive using an XCOMP HDC board set which is purported to work
better than the MSC board I used on my own station back about 20 years. If
I can get the CPU to run, and I believe I have fast enough static memories
to handle that, no wait states required, I think, then it might be
interesting to see what one can squeeze out of the old 8" winchester. I
know I can whack up a wire-wrapped version to work, and then I won't have to
worry about the bus timing at all, at least for starters, because a FDC/HCD
combination will easily fit on a board with all the necessary logic, RAM,
ROM, and I/O.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Wednesday, March 31, 1999 9:12 PM
Subject: Re: Rebirth of IMSAI
<That was along time ago. Perhaps it was 56K rather than 48. All my CPM
<systems, and I had several at the time, used 64K, though that's a small
<difference nowadays.
No, It's a result of knowing the machine and CPM and programming around it.
The base distribution of CPM for that machine would not use memory above
E800h due to the controller. It didn't meant it couldn't be there. If you
didn't program around that the best you could do was 52k.
All my other machines have 64k of ram or more. The practical aspect of it
is that most apps 48k was plenty and only a few really wanted that little
bit more.
Oh the softsectro controller using the 765... The IO was also memory mapped
into the FFF0->FFFFh segment of ram. that way I could use the more
flexible
memory ops that were also faster and also the
controller could be
co-resident.
Allison