On Wed, 7 Aug 2002, Roger Merchberger wrote:
> Every machine has it's pros & cons... the video memory mapping that seemed
> to defy logic on the Apple ][s is one of the main reasons why I never stuck
> with them...
Actually, it's entirely logical, if you're a computer :)
The problem is not the non-sequential graphics screen layout (easily
fixed with an index-referenced memory map) but the fact that you must do
all the graphics processing in between regular code unlike on other
systems that had a dedicated graphics chip. Ditto for the sound
generation. Which makes games that were developed on the Apple ][ all
the more impressive. The code to pull off really slick games had to be
tight and clever. Therefore, Apple ][ programmers make better overall
coders (in my not-at-all-humble opinion :P )
> Honestly, I don't think I *ever* had a Tandy CoCo, no matter where I got
> it, no matter what shape I got it in, that didn't boot first time up; IIRC
In my experience I'd have to agree with that assessment.
> I had a floppy drive controller that on occasion might hiccup every 1/4th
> boot every couple years; pull 1 screw, reseat chips, reassemble, good for a
> couple more years. The beauty of that controller was this: if it was wonky,
> it wouldn't survive the boot to OS-9. If the OS booted, it would work
> flawlessly until the next reboot, even if it was days later... I still have
> no idea how the chips "knew" to "hold on, dammit, hold on!" - but I never
> lost a single bit.
I don't think I've ever had an Apple ][ disk controller failure of any
kind. With only 7 ICs there wasn't much to go wrong :)
> Maybe Tandys just don't like you??? ;-)
Not Tandys, Radio Shacks (and Commodores, and Ataris... :)
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
Received on Wed Aug 07 2002 - 23:43:27 BST