[Coco] Today, I have seen the CoCo 4...

[Aaron Wolfe]

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Frank Swygert <farna at att.net> wrote:
> I'm inclined to think of an FPGA as more or less emulated hardware. I know
> it's not quite emulation... maybe "simulated" is closer to reality. But
> either way none of the original CoCo hardware fits without further adapter
> boards for connectors and hardware. So in the end it's more or less six of
> one, half dozen of the other. It looks like there wouldn't be much
> difference in initial cost either though. Might be some savings in
> development since one is 80% software, but with the main FPGA work already
> done and available there really isn't any cost savings there. Back to
> six of one, half dozen of the other! In the end both would look and feel
> similar to a CoCo and have pretty much the same capabilities, but neither
> would actually be one.
>

There are some differences between a PC running an emulator and the
FPGA that may seem small but they add up to a quite different
experience.

First of all, like our favorite computer, the FPGA solution is
"instant on".  It boots just as fast as a CoCo.  I think this is an
important part of anything that aims to be a "CoCo 4".

Second, the FPGA boards may not require any "adapter boards" to
support CoCo hardware, and if they do require something then the
interface is likely to be much more simple than something for a PC.
Consider that much like the CoCo, the FPGA boards are designed with an
experimenter in mind.  Mine has dozens of I/O pins available, ready to
be connected to all sorts of things.  Simulating the rear I/O from the
coco (bitbanger/joystick/cassette) should be quite simple compared to
doing this on a PC, and because the FPGA board controls everything,
there are no timing issues in the host PC to worry about or other
complications.   Even things like RGB or composite output would be
possible (and easier than trying to get this out of a PC).  Connecting
the keyboard out of a CoCo is also a possibility and again easier than
in a PC.   Basically, the FPGA board provides hardware that makes it
easy to experiment, much like the original CoCo.  A PC solution
doesn't offer this.

Third, the "don't knock it till you've tried it" argument :)  I have
been aware of CoCo emulators for years.  I have had one installed and
ready to use on my PC for a few years, and I've used one in the past
year as a tool for development on the DriveWire project.  Never in all
that time did I actually use an emulator like I used my CoCo as a kid.
 The emulator is a tool but it isn't exciting and it doesn't inspire
me to do things.   The very first time I powered up Gary's FPGA Coco,
I started typing in BASIC code.  I've spent hours now playing with
this thing, I've even typed in a couple programs from the Rainbow.  It
just feels right.  Makes you wonder why I haven't done the same thing
with my real CoCo, which I got running about a year ago.  I'm not sure
to be honest.  Maybe it's the combination of the authentic CoCo
experience with the ability to flip a switch and see my program get
25x faster :)


> ----------
> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 13:06:41 -0300
> From: Diego Barizo<diegoba at adinet.com.uy>
>
>> >  Frank Swygert wrote:
>> >>  Which brings me back to why not merge an emulator with an OS (or
>> >>  "hide" the OS behind the emulator interface) and use something like a
>> >>  Mini-ITX board with a VIA or Atom processor, and create an optional
>> >>  expansion card that either uses the PCI slot or a parallel printer
>> >>  port. Cost of those boards is under $200, and the "look and feel"
>> >>  would be about the same.
>> Mark McDougall wrote:
>> >  Here's where I beg to differ. It may "look and feel" the same to some,
>> >  but simply knowing what's under the hood makes a huge difference to
>> >  me. Using software emulation on a Wintel platform "does not a Coco
>> >  make" in my books, regardless of the physical form factor.
>> >
>> >  But if it floats your boat, then go for it!
>> >
>
> I share that feeling. An emulated CoCo over another OS doesn't feel
> right. Maybe something inside me knows that a PC (or Mac) is not really
> a CoCo.
> Of course, I use emulators a lot and they could probably be a very handy
> tool to develop new extensions, either hardware or software, for the
> CoCo. Having VCC in my thumbdrive is pocket fun.
>
> Diego
>
> --
> Frank Swygert
> Publisher, "American Motors Cars"
> Magazine (AMC)
> For all AMC enthusiasts
> http://www.amc-mag.com
> (free download available!)
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>