[Coco] Any news on the so called CoCo4 or NextCoCo projectthatBjork was heading?

Wed Oct 20 22:44:42 EDT 2010

Aside from your stance on software emulation (I prefer an FPGA based hardware solution), this is a great post and right on target.  The MM/1 was a dream that was just too laborious to realize, and several people sunk a lot of effort only to realize little gain.  The one who I believe was most affected was the creator himself, Paul K. Ward.  My understanding is that he put a lot of his money on the MM/1 and ended up loosing it all, including his marriage.  Suppliers (including Microware, as I was told when I worked there) got paid little or nothing from IMS. As tough a lesson as it must have been for him, I admire that he did it.  Trying to follow an act like Tandy just felt like a loosing proposition at the time, but you have to hand it to him.... he tried.

I still have my old MM/1 VHS video that Paul shipped to me back in late 1990.  Holy cow, it's been 20 years already!  I recently digitized it an aside from some bad spots and skips, it's pretty watchable.  I should put it up on YouTube.

Fast forward to now, and we have computational power that can emulate the MM/1 40 times over.  It's a different world now... a software world, where hardware is a commodity.  Building good software is enough of a job without adding hardware to the mix.
--
Boisy G. Pitre
http://www.tee-boy.com/

On Oct 20, 2010, at 8:31 PM, Paul Fitch wrote:

> I think the FPGA route is the only realistic method available to do this in
> hardware.  I'm just not that interested in a hardware project.  Doing it in
> emulation (the Coco4) however, has had me wishing very hard that I could
> program at that level.  I just don't see spending hundreds of dollars on
> duplicating hardware that in most any matchup would be inferior to the stuff
> found on every bargin basement Windows 7 starter computer available today
> for under $400.00.  And that's just the brand new stuff.  
> 
> I would love to be able fire up VCC v2.0 and get a 1024 x 768, 64k color
> screen under Uber-DECB or Nitros9 v3.0.  With native USB awareness built in,
> I would run it on my netbook, it would talk to my X-10 stuff, it would get
> my email, I would surf the web.
> 
> The thing about that (now dead) Coco4 wishlist is it could all have been
> realized two or three years ago fully in software, without the thousands of
> hours necessary to design hardware to run it.  Then finding the money to get
> it into production, then the need to convince 50 or 60 or 100 people, out of
> how many of us are there left these days, 400-500 tops, to buy it?
> 
> It reminds me so much of what the MM/1 guys went thru.  They spent their
> dreams trying to get the hardware available at the time to live up to their
> (and mine, and everyone elses) expectations.  Today you don't need that
> hardware headache.  The hardware is here, it's a software problem.
> 
> I dearly wish someone would code a solution.  I wish even more I had the
> skills to do it myself.   
> 
> I'm not interested in a hardware Coco4, but I would buy the emulation.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: coco-bounces at maltedmedia.com 
>> [mailto:coco-bounces at maltedmedia.com] On Behalf Of Little John
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 9:54 PM
>> To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts
>> Subject: Re: [Coco] Any news on the so called CoCo4 or 
>> NextCoCo projectthatBjork was heading?
>> 
>> I think Steve's idea was to actually use a "mini" pc mobo of 
>> some sort running the Vcc emulator to realize a CoCo4. A 
>> cartridge port could have been rigged to it, etc. It would 
>> have been neat to have seen had it came to exist.
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Frank Pittel" <fwp at deepthought.com>
>> To: "CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" <coco at maltedmedia.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 8:43 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Coco] Any news on the so called CoCo4 or 
>> NextCoCo project thatBjork was heading?
>> 
>> 
>>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 07:35:08PM -0500, Roger Taylor wrote:
>>>> At 06:20 PM 10/19/2010, you wrote:
>>>>> The last time I looked at the page, it said: "The CoCo 4 
>> Project is 
>>>>> dead..." I was saddened...
>>>>> but at least there is the CC3FPGA from which many things 
>> are likely 
>>>>> to evolve
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "RJLCyberPunk" 
>>>>> <cyberpunk at prtc.net>
>>>>> To: "CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" 
>> <coco at maltedmedia.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 6:06 PM
>>>>> Subject: [Coco] Any news on the so called CoCo4 or 
>> NextCoCo project 
>>>>> thatBjork was heading?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> As far as I remember, and Bjork can correct me, for years 
>> the CoCo 4 
>>>> project never made it past the to-do list.  My question since day 1
>>>> was: who was actually going to do the doing part?
>>> 
>>> I think it was on the surface a good idea and I wish that 
>> it was acted on. 
>>> The
>>> coco on an fpga project would have made a natural hardware platform 
>>> for it. Oh well.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Coco mailing list
>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco