[Coco] The Coco3FPGA - Bringing the Color Computer 3 into the new Millenium!

[Dave Philipsen]

I agree with that totally.  I guess it also depends on which "extras" 
we're talking about.  If the extras are internal designs on the FPGA 
such as new graphics/text modes, memory management, etc. then there is 
no apparent increase in the complexity of the design. The complexity is 
internal and if it works, it works.  However, if the extras are external 
to the FPGA then it can drive costs and complexity.  But in the case of 
the CoCo3FPGA the add-on memory / rtc / analog / rs232 board is merely 
an option much like plugging a cartridge into the cartridge port of a CoCo.

I think that if you want to design a new purpose built board then keep 
the hardware design fairly simple with not much more than an original 
CoCo 3 would have.  Then add a hi-speed serial port (like USB but 
without many of its complexities) to enable add-ons.  The beauty of 
using an FPGA is that any new hardware designed for that hi-speed serial 
port could be designed in such a way that the CPU could believe that it 
was communicating with the hardware directly on its bus even though that 
would not be true.

Dave

On 2/8/2017 4:17 PM, Zippster wrote:
> The only downside to the extras (as far as a purpose built board) would be design complexity and cost.
>
> You often see this when a project is proposed, and everyone brings up their wish list.  It can sometimes
> be enough to discourage getting it done, but doesn’t need to be.
>
> If we were able to decide just what hardware should be present, this is totally doable.
>
> Of course, it would have to be endorsed by either Gary or Roger and supported by the group
> to be successful.
>
> - Ed
>
>
>
>> On Feb 8, 2017, at 4:05 PM, Dave Philipsen <dave at davebiz.com> wrote:
>>
>> As long as the extra add-on contraptions do not detract from the backward compatibility why does it really matter whether they are there or not?  As far as the CoCo3FPGA goes there are probably a lot of people using it who don't even know what the "extra add-on contraptions" are.  The only way you would know that it's not a "simple and elegant design" would be by looking at the Verilog source really.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On 2/8/2017 3:15 PM, Nick Marentes wrote:
>>>
>>> I've been suggesting this for ages.
>>>
>>> Rogers NanoFPGA may be the best candidate for developing a custom stand alone single board maybe?
>>>
>>> The problem is that people can't stick to the basics and we start seeing all these extra add-on contraptions which get little use, tacked on to what should be a simple and elegant design.
>>>
>>> Nick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>