[Coco] Re: [Color Computer] What's wrong with this Picture

[jdaggett at gate.net]

On 18 Apr 2005 at 12:30, Kevin Diggs wrote:

Date sent:      	Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:30:22 -0700
From:           	Kevin Diggs <kevdig at hypersurf.com>
To:             	CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts 
<coco at maltedmedia.com>
Subject:        	Re: [Coco] Re: [Color Computer] What's wrong with this 
Picture
Send reply to:  	CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts 
<coco at maltedmedia.com>
	<mailto:coco-
request at maltedmedia.com?subject=unsubscribe>
	<mailto:coco-
request at maltedmedia.com?subject=subscribe>


> Hi,

> 

> James the Animal Tamer wrote:

> > 

> >>OH! JOY! and just relive Tandy's worst mistake on the COCO ever.

> > 

> > 

> > I vote that Tandy's worst mistake on the CoCo was to make the

> > MC-10's BASIC tokens different from the CoCo's.  This would be just

> > behind making the MC-10 at all.

> > 

> 

>  If we are voting, here are some other candidates::

> 

>  1) not using a 68008 in the tre (backwards compatability - who needs

> that? could they have put a 6809 in a cart that could have itself had

> rompaks plugged into it?)

********

Why use an 8 bit data buss on a 32 bit machine. MC68008??? Why not the 
MC68HC000FN12?


>  2) not using some of the fancier wires on the 6809

>  3) the cm-8 - we deserved better


*********
Definitley can't argue here.


>  4) tre should have had a switching PS

*********

Switching power supplies are noisy and require more filtering on the su pply lines as 
well as the AC lines. For the power that the stock tre, a linear su pply is just as cost 
effective and size wise.

*********

>  5) sloppy peripheral decoding (using 32 precious addresses when 4

>  would do)

>

*********

That can be easily solved with a bit of hacking. 

james



> Coco mailing list

> Coco at maltedmedia.com

> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco