expansion differences (was Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers)

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sat Apr 27 02:26:19 2002

I don't think I ever actually saw a diskless Apple][. They must have existed,
because, as you've pointed out, they have that cassette port.

Dick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Franchuk" <bfranchuk_at_jetnet.ab.ca>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: expansion differences (was Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers)


> Richard Erlacher wrote:
>
> > The Apple][ didn't really need a lot of plugging. It was designed to be a
> > computer, though its predecessor, the Apple I had signal names on its
> > schematic that clearly indicated it was intended as a video device more
than
> > as a general purpose computer. That was probably reasonable since
everything
> > had to be slaved to the video refresh timing. The TRS-80 was in the
stores
> > nearly a year before the expansion interface, disk drives, and OS were
> > available. I don't know what the story on the PET was, as there were no
> > outlets for them here in the Denver area that kept 'em in stock. They
> > certainly didn't have an OS or anything of the sort until well after their
> > market window in the U.S. had closed. AFAIK, their successes were mainly
in
> > the European market. I remember seeing their ads in mags brought back
from
> > Europe, but in the entire time I was looking ad commercial systems, the
only
> > PET I ever saw, in private hands or in the hands of a merchant, was the
> > original 4K PET with the toy (Chiclet?) keyboard. The C64 doesn't fit in
the
> > same generation with these early machines.
>
> Well Cassette I/O and TV video out and a cheap keyboard with BASIC
> is what I call a 'Toy/Games' computer. Any computer with less than 48k
> of
> memory I consider a control computer from that era of computing.
> Note the price of game consoles have stayed about the same $299-$399
> and real computers $899-$1299. (Canadian)
>
>
>
> > The serial printers of the time seemed to work fine at low baud rates
since
> > they were most often the daisywheel types. Those cost WAY more than a
person
> > wishing to save money on a $399 CoCo would have wanted to pay.
> The only printers for the coco really was the RS ones and really crappy
> at that too!
>
> > It IS the most important part of the computer, since it's what you saw.
The
> > user interface seems, still, to be the primary issue in deciding on one
system
> > over another for home use. It's like the speakers in your sound system.
I
> > normally tell people to spend at least half their home stereo budget on
> > speakers, half the remainder on their receiver/amplifier, and the
remainder on
> > signal sources.
>
> What no $$$ for the tubes ???
> Good way to buy a sound system.
>
> > True, not to mention that, back then, (1980) they were the only computer
maker
> > with a world-wide retail/service/distribution network.
> Often the only store that sold computerrs in a small town!
>
> > That's something I wasn't aware of, though I still maintain that RS really
> > didn't intend for it to be used for 3rd party hardware. They certainly
didn't
> > provide paths, in general, by means of which one could expand a system
beyond
> > their own designs, which other mfg.'s often (possibly unintentionally)
did.
> That is true of 99% of all the computer systems. With the PC it really
> only took
> off once the clones came in. In hindsight nobody other than OS/9 systems
> really
> produced a good computer system in the 1980's.
>
> --
> Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
> www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
>
>
Received on Sat Apr 27 2002 - 02:26:19 BST