7 Sep
1999
7 Sep
'99
4:05 p.m.
In a message dated 09/07/1999 1:20:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, donm(a)cts.com
writes:
Given the choice, take the 10/84. It has somewhat
improved graphics
capability over the 10/83. Try to avoid the so-called U-ROM version,
though. They were not the answer to a maiden's dreams as Kaypro hoped.
How can I identify the "U-ROM version?" What are it's problems?
Glen Goodwin
0/0
7 Sep
7 Sep
5:35 p.m.
On Wed, 8 Sep 1999 Glenatacme(a)aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 09/07/1999 1:20:18 AM Eastern
Daylight Time, donm(a)cts.com
writes:
On powerup, it will display a legend on the screen that speaks to ROM
2.2U-1 - or something quite similar. They are not catastrophically wrong.
Rather there are subtle differences that crop to bug you. The hard disk
format is different from all other K10s which gets in the way of a TurboROM
installation, for example. However, replacing the ROM makes them look
like all the rest.
- don
Given the choice, take the 10/84. It has
somewhat improved graphics
capability over the 10/83. Try to avoid the so-called U-ROM version,
though. They were not the answer to a maiden's dreams as Kaypro hoped.
How can I identify the "U-ROM version?" What are it's problems?
9237
days inactive
9238
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
donm＠cts.com -
Glenatacme＠aol.com