Because if I use a baby AT case, it will take less space than the
apple case. I will also be able to stick the floppy drive inside.
>Why?
>
><keyboard is external anyway. But I was reading the CP/M manual
><(pretty shallow), and it mentions a 16-user capability and password
><protection.
>
>Well the 16 user thing is not multiuser it's a way of diving up the
>directory into 16 distinct areas as CP/M didn't have subdirectories.
>
>Password protection? There wasn't any as part of CP/M.
The CP/M 3+ manual says the syntax is drive:12345678.123;password.
Maybe it's a weird DR thing. They tended to add weird stuff...
><say that the Z-80 was better than the 8088? It was certainly used
><much more...
>
>Better... that's a relative term. It was cheaper to use, more software
>available as it was fully upward compatable with the 8080 (and 8085)
>that preceeded it and it was there before the 8088. Also as the 8088
>got faster the z80 also got faster and added a MMU. I can still build
>a system using z80 for less than the 8088 and the z80 one will be
easier
>to program. If the program gets larger than fits in the 64k space then
>the competition becomes a bit more fair. Still segmented space is
pretty
>ugly and a paged MMU on z80 is very easy to do. Or better yet a z180
>(64180) which is a z180 with MMU, 2 serial ports and a DMA all on one
>chip (and still cheaper and faster than a bare 8088 in 1985). The
z180
>also offered something the 8088 line never had which was a compatable
>highly integrated version as the 8088 needed several parts around it to
>use effectively and the '188 was an odd duck compared to the 8088. So
>for the 8088 comparison the z80 was hard to dislodge. It really took
the
>386(32bits) to make a real impact.
>
>Z80 space was characterized as developing, it was inexpensive to
develop
>around, there were lots of similar and competing systems (both
>a blessing and curse), tons of cheap to free software, offered
sufficient
>compute power and friendy to program in assembler. The only other chip
>to be as persistant, easy to use and popular was the 6502.
>
>I might add that both were quite popular in the instrumentation and
>control sytems field.
>
>Tidbit... the z80/z180 is still in production and the cmos z80s182 runs
>at a screaming 20mhz internal clock (roughly 2-4mips processing speed)
>and can come to a complete stop, using only microwatts of power in that
>mode. I have a z180 at 9.8mhz and it's quite fast for text apps and is
>usually waiting on the SCSI hard disk system (xybec/st251).
>
>
>Allison
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at
http://www.hotmail.com
Received on Fri Jun 12 1998 - 20:37:35 BST