[Color Computer] Re: [Coco] CoCo video?

[Mark McDougall]

Neil Morrison wrote:

> I know everyone has their own idea about 'expanding' the Coco. I still like 
> the idea of an expansion interface, like the old Model I, that sits under 
> the monitor. I see a fast processor with a meg of ram and all the I/O you 
> want, HD, FD, maybe even a USB. It would connect to the Coco via a cable and 
> a connector in the ROMPak slot and would use the Coco for keyboard, video, 
> and cassette say, but would do all the heavy processing. Good place to use a 
> DMA and maybe a meg of ROM for OS-9 or whatever.

I really don't understand what you, or similar thinking persons, are trying 
to achieve here?

I can understand wanting to interface modern peripherals to the CoCo, such 
as Compact Flash disks, USB mice/keyboards, VGA monitors, network cards etc. 
That's all about convenience whilst still maintaining the underlying base 
machine to run the original software.

However, this talk about expanding the base design baffles me? When talking 
about an 'expansion interface' with extra processing grunt to 'offload' to 
etc - when does it stop being a CoCo? Taking it to a silly extreme to make a 
point, how is your proposal any different from connecting a PC via the 
serial port on the CoCo and calling *that* the 'expansion interface'? When 
you start adding processors you're really not running a 'CoCo' any more - 
regardless of how they're connected to the main unit. WHat's the point in 
adding an enhanced GIME with extra video modes? I thought the whole idea was 
to preserve the CoCo we all know and love?!?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing - just trying to understand?!?

Surely if you're going to ultimately be running 'non-CoCo' software then 
you're better off starting with a clean slate and designing from scratch?

Regards,

-- 
|              Mark McDougall                | "Electrical Engineers do it
|  <http://members.iinet.net.au/~msmcdoug>   |   with less resistance!"