[Coco] CoCo-X project

[Mike Rowen]

I agree with you, Mark. Clearly, the CoCo-X is out of reach for many who have interest. But the interest will likely continue within the CoCo community. Even if the Kickstarter project falls short of it's goal, it at least establishes what might be available to produce something or simply have succeeded in testing the potential market, which may be too small. I certainly applaud Gary's effort. I have great interest in any CoCo project that may expand it's capabilities. They are purely for hobby & personal enjoyment reasons. As you say; if it's been 30 odd years, a few more won't hurt. How many of us would now buy an MM/1, TC-9, or OS-9 system featured in 68' Micro if we could? Getting back into the CoCo has been my chance to do it the way I couldn't 30 years ago. So certainly nostalgia is a major driver, and our small community is a unique one. I don't see this ever becoming unpleasurable for myself and I'm sure you who have been with it these decades feel the same way. :) I support those with the time & skills that I lack. If I were to hit the lottery, I would likely devote myself to chasing all the knowledge I lack about the CoCo just for the sheer enjoyment of it. :) I don't have that kind of time currently, but I do what I can, even if that's just reading everyone else's posts here while I'm on the run.

Cheers,
-Mike

On Apr 18, 2013, at 3:42 PM, Mark McDougall <msmcdoug at iinet.net.au> wrote:

> On 18/04/2013 11:55 PM, Allen Huffman wrote:
> 
>> Well, if this doesn't get funded, I think we are done with CoCo 4 talk
>> unless there really are interested folks, but they don't like the FPGA
>> concept. I think having the real I/O ports and ability to use a real 6809
>> is the best compromise I have seen between emulation and recreation.
> 
> I don't agree with this statement at all.
> 
> Something like Coco-X is always going to have limited appeal, even within the Coco community, but practically zero OUTSIDE it. I think the target of approximately 200 units was always going to be optimistic, though I would have expected more ($250) backers than the current 16. Perhaps more would have chosen to back it if it looked like reaching its goal?
> 
> Personally I'm still _very_ interested in an FPGA-based Coco motherboard replacement, and always will be. I just don't think the market is there to build such a thing and hope to break even on development costs. This is the sort of project that will have to be undertaken by someone who is willing to bear the brunt of the costs themselves, and then share it with others without any hope of a profit by selling them strictly at manufacturing cost.
> 
> Regardless, I don't see why we should close the door on discussion of the Coco4; it's obvious this still interests a lot of people and the whole point of being part of an enthusiast group is to discuss what interests us - right?!? We've all waited 30-odd years for a Coco4 - what's a few more?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- 
> |              Mark McDougall                | "Electrical Engineers do it
> |  <http://members.iinet.net.au/~msmcdoug>   |   with less resistance!"
> 
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco