Dixie Canner CPT 8000?

[Chris Elmquist]

Ya. And it’s not from Michigan but Minnesota!

You betcha.

--
Chris Elmquist

> On Apr 24, 2020, at 7:00 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>>> What in the world is this?
> 
>> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020, Adrian Graham via cctalk wrote:
>> It’s a word processor, pure and simple. I have the later version and have kind of been collecting tales of the Cassette Power Typing company of Michigan -
>> http://binarydinosaurs.co.uk/Museum/cpt
> 
> Thank you for a delightful page.  I hadn't previously noticed it.
> 
> 
> Trivial corrections:
> 
> In Nov 2005 update, it says that the 9000 had an 8086 processor.
> In Jan 2007 update, it says that Win 3.1 was run on it.
> Windows 3.10 required A20 support, and would not run on the 8088/8086, so that would have had to have been Windows 3.00,
> OR the 9000 processor was 80X86, specifically 80286.
> OR, the 9000 got a processor update.
> (The pictures at the bottom of the page, of ISA boards, are clearly 16 bit ISA, which would be 80286, not 8086)
> 
> In Sep 2008, Gary Simpson seems to have confused Double-SIDED with Double-DENSITY. Punching another hole is needed to convert 8" disks back and forth between single and double SIDED.   and is unrelated to density.
> He also mentioned 1771 FDC, which was, indeed, FM not MFM.
> (He would not be the first person to conflate capacity with density, and think that using both sides doubled the DENSITY; it doubled the capacity, and therefore the density of the filing cabinet, but not the "density" of the recording format.)
> 
> 
> 
> At one time, I received a 3.5" double density sample disk that was clearly labelled "CPT CP/M-80"   It was obviously CP/M file system, and I easily implemented that format in XenoCopy.  (It would not have been "easily" if it weren't CP/M, MS-DOS, Stand-Alone BASIC, P-system, nor TRS-DOS)
> Was that a different CPT?  Similar three letter name COULD be something else entirely.
> Or had they done some different drives?
> Or was that a customer modification?
> Gary Simpson mentions 1771 FDC, which was single density only.
> Did any of the CP/M models (pre 80x86) have double density? (likely a 179x FDC, which was an easy upgrade from the 1771, or a whole different FDC, such as the NEC765).
> It didn't HAVE to be pre-80286; it was possible to run a Z80 emulator on PCs, but few had reason to do so.
> 
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred             cisin at xenosoft.com