[Coco] Re: Coco Digest, Vol 12, Issue 28

[farna at att.net]

I don't see your comment as starting a flame war, just some discussion. ;>
I can see your poinit. From a user standpoint, a new CoCo-like OS or shell using readily available hardware would be a step forward. My only argument is that most people who continue to use the CoCo do so because it is so easy to interface with on a hardware level. It's a great small computer, but can easily be used as a controller. That's where it has an advantage over modern hardware -- compact size and easy to interface to. That's why new hardware has been stressed. I think a compact CoCo done in a couple large chips and a little glue logic would be a big step up from a BASIC Stamp that is easier to use since it has a built in console (no need for another computer for development work). I'd keep the PIAs as separate chips (assuming they are still readily available) and keep separate buffere chips for the 6809 input lines (don't want to blow those big chips!). Both in sockets, of course. Some modern interfacins would be needed -- like a standard keyboard input, or a USB port. I personally think the USB port for all standard I/O (keyboard, disk drives, etc.) would be the way to go even if the USB controller is more powerful than the main computer. The USB controller would be mainly for convenience, the rest of the computer's "power" would be in the easy programming and interfacing. If the computer was just NitrOS9 compatible would be acceptable IMHO, but DECB would be a definite plus. I always liked the ease of programming in DECB, and throw a 10 MHz or so speed at it would aleviate the slowness. 

The software soultion would likely be a better choice for those wanting CoCo compatibility mainly for running CoCo software. The emulators are pretty good for that, but writing a compatible OS for something like the original Pentium would be a nicer solution.

--
Frank Swygert
Publisher, "American Independent 
Magazine" (AIM)
*Elite* publication for those 
interested in all 
aspects of AMC 
history,performance,restoration,etc
. 
(AMC,Rambler,Nash,Hudson,Jeep,etc.)
http:farna.home.att.net/AIM.html
(free download available!)
			



> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 11:02:07 -0700
> From: Andrew <keeper63 at cox.net>
> I don't want to start a flamewar, but I 
> don't think the future of the CoCo is in hardware, but in software. I am 
> not talking emulation here (unless we can somehow get all of the ROMs 
> for emulators to be released to the community), but something new 
> running in software. This could be the "base" of a new CoCo (with extra 
> CoCo-like BASIC commands). Done right, it could be made very portable 
> (via gcc) to a TON of hardware, both now and in the future...
> 
> Andrew