home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!slc6!trier
- From: trier@slc6.ins.cwru.edu (Stephen C. Trier)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.tandy
- Subject: Re: COCO vs Z80
- Date: 11 Sep 1992 15:16:06 GMT
- Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
- Lines: 24
- Message-ID: <18qd7mINN19g@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
- References: <18o3s3INNhm5@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> <1992Sep11.093350.2085@mr.med.ge.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: slc6.ins.cwru.edu
-
- In article <1992Sep11.093350.2085@mr.med.ge.com> hinz@picard.med.ge.com (David Hinz Mfg 4-6987) writes:
- >Ah, yes, the D-board. Lets see...to go to 64K on that, I had to cut the +12,
- >-12, and jump the +5 over to one of them, then piggyback another 74LS138 onto
- >the back of......and run a line to pin 33 of the SAM, etc. etc. etc.
-
- I bought a 16K D-board CoCo for $5 a few years ago, mostly for spares, but
- I was thinking vaguely of upgrading it to 64K and running OS9 Level 1 on it.
- _Then_ I found out what was involved. It's still a 16K machine. :-)
-
- >Interesting note: My first coco (C-board, yes, C! Serial number 112 or
- >something, as I recall) came with a mil-spec 6809E in it, and the SAM
- >was a 74LS783 or some such, as opposed to the 6883 label.
-
- Interesting. I know that there were many 6883's sold under the 74LS783
- name. There were other variations on the SAM sold under other 74LS labels.
- (I think one was the 74LS786?) These other versions could handle different
- refresh mechanisms and such. At least one of the 256K CoCo 1 upgrades
- (remember those?) required one of these alternate SAMs.
-
- --
- "Beware of programmers who Stephen Trier
- carry screwdrivers." Network Services Engineering, IRIS/INS/Telecom
- Leonard Brandwein Case Western Reserve University
- trier@ins.cwru.edu
-