At 09:27 09/03/2003, Dave Brown wrote:
>Maybe-maybe not. That 'UK spec' bit is what I'm curious about. Do you know
>what details will be different in other versions (but this would only be an
>EPROM change wouldn't it?) --as in that for use in NZ?
I'm not really sure. It's entirely possible that there's very little to no
difference between the modules, but the UK versions would have had to pass
the extraordinarily strict BABT approval process - which was very
expensive, and essential if you wanted your kit to be "BABT approved" and
therefore legal to use on the UK 'phone system. Also, there was some fairly
hefty licencing restrictions, e.g. in the front of the OPD manual it states
the functions it's been licenced for.
>I have a number of these things -both complete and working, as well as
>partly ratted for spares (including some telephony modules)- they were
>called 'computerphones' down here.
I'd be willing to try an NZ module, if it's got standard BT-like connector
jacks on the back of it (same type as used by Sinclair on the QL - did he
get a job-lot of sockets to go with the OPD plugs, I wonder?). I know
bugger all about the NZ 'phone system, but as my NZ cousin is currently
over here, I'll ask him tomorrow.
> About the only useful function they had
>was the phone directory/dialler which was a winner.
Definitely; the 3-alphanumeric "short code" is also a staggeringly useful
thing. In fact, I've decided to use the OPD as my main telephone, if I can
get a reliable telephony module for it.
> They were just a year
>or so too late to ever really catch on in the face of competition from Macs
>and pcs for any serious desktop computer functionality.
Much like the QL, really. Also, one shouldn't underestimate the marketing
clout IBM had when their early PC's were coming out; really, did anyone
stand a chance against them?
--
Cheers, Ade.
Be where it's at, B-Racing!
http://b-racing.com
Received on Sun Mar 09 2003 - 18:56:00 GMT