ZX81 denigrated! (was Re: Approaches to projects)

From: Pete Turnbull <pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com>
Date: Sun Nov 28 06:49:47 2004

On Nov 27 2004, 18:54, Dave Dunfield wrote:
> At 16:28 27/11/2004 -0500, you wrote:
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Tony Duell <ard_at_p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
> >
> >> What's this love of the ZX81, which I regard as a postively
> >> machine. I'd not rip one apart, though, mainly because there's
little of
> >> use to raid from it...
> >
> >You regard it as horrible because . . . ?
> Aside from keyboard ;-)
> CPU intensive video design - lose video when program running (or
> mode for ZX81).
> This also makes it highly dependant on the internal firmware, so that
> tough to adapt other Z80 software systems to run on it.
> "RF only", and poorly shielded computer make it tough to get decent
TV display.

I wonder if that's becasue it's VHF? UHF ones I've seen here aren't
*too* bad, and it's trivial to add a composite video lead.

> Limited internal RAM - and expansion very prone to connector
> (practically useless without an external keyboard so that you didn't
have to
> touch the machine while it was running).

Yu can replace the internal RAM.

> Slightly odd dialect of BASIC.


> But... I still consider the ZX80/81 a rather interesting and
innovative design,
> because it truly was designed to get "something from almost nothing".
 Most of
> the items listed above are just the "nature of the beast" - given
what it was
> (the lowest price entry on the block) and to be *VERY* cheap to

Yes, I would agree. I still keep mine, though I've hardly ever used

Pete						Peter Turnbull
						Network Manager
						University of York
Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 06:49:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:37:19 BST