[Coco] The Tri-Annual CoCo 4 Thread

[Aaron Wolfe]

On Feb 13, 2014 12:35 AM, "Mark McDougall" <msmcdoug at iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> On 13/02/2014 3:44 PM, Michael Robinson wrote:
>
> > A strictly hobbyist approach to developing a COCO 4 hasn't worked and
> > probably won't work.  The problem is, it has been a long time since the
> > COCO died and you have to go bigger.  Maybe IBM can help.
>
> Even IBM don't have the capability to produce what you refer to.
>
> >> I'm really not sure what this statement has to do with the
specifications
> >> you throw about. It's also old news, and has also been done before.
And,
> >> FTR, I *am* an electronics design engineer; one that has worked on
designs
> >> for modern intel base-boards and PCI & PCIe boards so you might say I
know
> >> a little about modern computer design too...
> >
> > Are you calling me a liar?  That's what it sounds like to me.
>
> Exactly which sentence above has me claiming you're a liar? I'm starting
> to understand now where your ideas are coming from...
>
> It's clear I'm wasting my breath. But with having written my first
> computer program 35 years ago, a degree in Computer Science and another in
> Electrical Engineering, 26 years experience as a professional programmer,
> 20 years experience as a professional engineer (including computer
> design), experience in both hardware and software emulation of a host of
> systems (including the Coco), what do I know?

Oh, quit being difficult and just make him an 800Mhz, 32 bit RISC CPU
that's backwards compatible with the (cisc) 6809.  You could have had it
done by now if we could all just get along.

I'm going to rewrite nitros9 into a 32 bit operating system with support
for modern ssd drives, etc tomorrow on my lunch break.  Probably throw in a
new GUI as well. Let's do this thing.

TIA
-Aaron