[Coco] CoCo and SATA/USB drives.
Jim Cox
jimcox at miba51.com
Fri May 26 00:53:05 EDT 2006
I wanted to jump back into this and make a few comments.
I need to keep it brief since I am in the middle of
cleaning out my email accounts before I have them blown
out and rebuilt due to a bug in my hosting service email
program.
I had several ideas, but I am only going to suggest the
simplest, and the is to use a Linux box to handle the
Floppies and HDDs (PATA or SATA) and then using Driveware
Server or something similar to communicate to the CoCo.
Actually I think it would be nice to have a CoCoLinux
that would be taylored to us CoCo users. One thought I'd
like to add, is there a program or solution in Linux that
can be used to read and write 360K 5.25" drives or 720K
3.5" drives?
-Jim Cox
http://www.miba51.com/
On Thu, 25 May 2006 16:14:35 -0400
jdaggett at gate.net wrote:
>First off I have a BSEE and have worked in the design of
>consumer electronics
> industry for 23yrs. Most consumers don't care how the
>internal works. Just that when
> the instruction state plug one of the cable to this and
>the other end to that , turn on
> and push a few buttons and everything works. Getting to
>that point is not magic. It
> often takes a team of between 10 and 30 engineers and
>about a year to get the
> software and hardware to that point. Also a boat load of
>money.
>
> I have no problems with suggestions and ideas. It is
>through the exchange of ideas
> where one grows in knowledge. Also many things are
>possible. Not all that is
> possible is doable. There are many factors that make the
>possible less doable. Also
> ideas do proceed the technology that can make such an
>idea a reality.
>
> Anyone that suggested an IDE interface couldn't be done
>for a COCO didn't know
> what they were talking about. Simple as that.
>
>Furthermore what Roy has done is not what I would call a
>VDG (Video Display
> Generator). Instead it would more properly be classified
>as a video convertor. As
> that is what it does. It converts one format to
> another.
>
> Now as for USB. USB stands for Unified Serial Buss. It
>is no great magic that your
> camera interfaces to a serial port. The small USB
>connector is a hardware solution
> for a problem that USB encountered as speed reached
>beyond the upper limits of
> RS232 Serial protocol ( ~ 115K baud). The strength of
>USB is not in the cable or the
> connectors but i nthe software and the ICs that are
>used. USB was an afterthought
> for WIndoze 95. MS didn't fully support USB until the
>release of W98/NT4.0. So in
> the PC world, USB has been fully accepted now between 8
>and 10yrs.
>
> Now for USB and the COCO. Yes USB implementation for the
>COCO can be very
> difficult and consuming task. It also can be rather
>simple. It depends on ho wmuch
> of the USB spec do you plan to implement. For starters I
>d oubt that there is a single
> silicon solution that can implement the full USB 2.0
>specification. Any attempt will
> overwhelm the OS where it is RSBASIC or OS9. ALso
>irregardless of 6809 or 6309
> chip. Now let's talk speed. Full USB 2.0 480 kbps is
>only doable with a limited
> peripheral devices. Most likely just mice and keyboard
>or other pointing device. This
> is due to the data packet sent from the peripheral is
>very short for these, the COCO
> will never be able to take advantage of the full speed
>as the host silicon will have to
> wait for the COCO to clear the internal buffer, usually
>a FIFO.
>
> Designing the hardware is not an issue with me. It is my
>position that with the
> current level of microprocessors used in the COCO, only
>a partial implementation
> of the USB 2.0 protocol is even doable. The software
>overhead to do more than a
> key board, mice or even a printer is about the greatest
>extent of what the COCO
> can do. Even that would be a vast improvement over the
>cumbersome keyboard
> and mice setup of the COCO. Setting up a peripheral
>processor and su fficient
> hardware, then more devices could be added.
>
> This all boils down to what the community wants and
>really needs. There are now
> more alternatives than the Cypress chip solution that
>was mentioned about a year
> ago. For myself, I can design some hardware and
>software. That is not much a
> problem. Supporting it is. Expanding beyond just simple
>devices is a an issue. So
> when someone states "you don't understand what it takes
>to implement....". They
> are not just refering to the technology, but also
>support for sogtware and hardware
> bug issues. Also for expansion of features and hardware.
>Often that can be more
> difficult than the original design.
>
> Yes there can be many thins that can be done with the
>COCO. Most
> implementations will come down to cost and time to
>implement.
>
> james
>
>
>
> On 24 May 2006 at 9:12, James Hrubik wrote:
>
>> Well, first off, don't stop thinking. %^D
>>
>> Years ago I earned a number of brickbats on this list
>>for suggesting
>> an IDE adapter for the CoCo. They said it couldn't be
>>done. Its was
>> done.
>>
>> I suggested a VDG adapter for the CoCo. They said it
>>couldn't be
>> done. Roy proved them wrong.
>>
>> Five or six years ago I suggested a USB adapter for the
>>CoCo. "You
>> don't understand the difficulty. It can't be done" said
>>they. And
>> they are right, I don't understand the difficulty. I
>>have no
>> training whatever in electronic engineering. I DO have,
>>however, an
>> old Kodak DC240 camera that I use daily for my work. It
>>has a Mac-
>> type serial port, and connects directly with a Mac
>>printer cable to
>> old Macs. It also came with a cable that has the Mac
>>serial plug on
>> one end, a USB plug on the other end, and a little
>>"tootsie roll"
>> that looks like an RF choke toward one end. It plugs
>>directly into
>> my Pavillion and my iMac. No adapter. I use that cable
>>every day.
>> I don't understand the difficulty. I don't even know
>>where I would
>> start to write a driver for such a thing. But I DO know
>>that my
>> camera sends .jpgs every day down a cable that is serial
>>at one end
>> and USB at the other with no adapter. And I DO know
>>that my
>> Pavillion running XP is too stupid to know the
>>difference.
>>
>> So don't be discouraged. Keep on thinking outside the
>>box. If we
>> don't ask the stupid questions, we will never learn to
>>defy gravity.
>>
>> On May 24, 2006, at 2:24 AM, Jim Cox wrote:
>>
>> > This got me thinking about the future of Floppies and
>>Hard Drives
>> > for the CoCo community. With low cost USB External
>>Enclosueres for
>> > SATA drives becoming available and with USB floppy
>>drives already
>> > available, I think what the CoCo needs is a USB 2.0
>>adapter that
>> > can address both. I wonder if it is possible to have
>>this adapter
>> > create a new drive type that will allow the CoCo to
>>read 1.44M 3.5"
>> > floppies.
>> >
>> > I'll follow up later when I have time, but I would
>>like to know
>> > what others think about the future of drives and how
>>the changes
>> > will affect the CoCo.
>> >
>> > -Jim Cox
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> -----Items below rated "R"; parental discretion
>>advised----
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> "Brilliant minds, like productive gardens, flourish
>>under the
>> influence of bullshit."
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> From the sayings of Grampa Jim, Copyright 2006.
>> Unauthorized use of my stuff may cause senility.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.7.0/346 - Release
>>Date: 5/23/2006
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
More information about the Coco
mailing list