stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Fri Apr 9 01:25:34 1999

Careful, now! He would have played hell trying to interleave memory
accesses between an 8080 and the video refresh process, since its various
cycle types were so different. It would have been worse YET with a Z-80!
The 6502 also allowed him to proceed with his own DOS and his OWN version of
BASIC, without which he mightn't have gotten the strangle-hold on the
personal-computers-in-business market. It's pretty hard to criticize his
choices, however little I liked the result from the standpoint of seeing it
as a tool, but his (and his partner's) decisions were definitely vindicated
in the marketplace.

Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Ward D. Griffiths III <gram_at_cnct.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Thursday, April 08, 1999 10:34 PM
Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4
floppies)


>On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 allisonp_at_world.std.com wrote:
>
>> Actually there are two points. One is track 000 and the other is the
>> innermost (for sa400 35-40 tracks later). Only track 000 was sensored
>> save for apple didn't use that either. Apple cut the interface to the
>> minimim number of wires and signals possible and made up the difference
>> with software, rather clever in my mind.
>
>During the design phase, Woz had more time than money, chips cost money
>and software only cost time. Remember that he _wanted_ to use the 8080
>but the 6502 cost only a tenth the price. (Imagine what the Apple
>might have been like with a decent CPU from the start).
>--
>Ward Griffiths
>"the timid die just like the daring; and if you don't take the plunge then
>you'll just take the fall" Michael Longcor
>
Received on Fri Apr 09 1999 - 01:25:34 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:31:40 BST