[Coco] 8-Bit Microcomputers

[KnudsenMJ at aol.com]

In a message dated 1/23/04 11:45:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
arikboke at yahoo.com writes:

> Of course the Coco had great games too :)  It wasn't on par with the MSXs or
>  the Ataris or even the Commodores, but the 6809 processor seems to have 
lent
>  itself to real work (I'm just now refamiliarizing myself with the Coco). 

The 6809 really is a lot better CPU than the 6502 in most respects.  
Certainly nicer to program in assembler.

Another advantage of the Coco over any other 8-bit home computer was its D-A 
converter, which allowed it to play any sound that could be digitized and 
stored in ROM or RAM.  The Atari and C=64 had nice little music synth chips (3 
part harmony plus percussion noises), but couldn't say "We got choo!".

Also only the Coco had analog joysticks (64 or 256 positions in each axis).  
Well, maybe the Apple had them too, but nobody could afford an Apple.  The 
Atari and C=64 sticks were just cursor keys with a mechanical interface.

> The one thing I remember liking about Cocos vs the other home 8-bitters 
> available
>  in the US was that it had REAL DISK DRIVES, not those pathetic serially 
> chained
>  monsters that crawled at cassette speeds (the Atari SSSD drive stored 90K, 
> and made pinging sounds on the TV as it, very slowly, read data - ugh).

Yes, Coco's disk system was superior, plus it was *industry standard* out of 
the controller Pak.  Thus letting you upgrade your drive by scrounging drives 
out of IBM PCs, all the way to 720K 3.5" units when they came out.  Atari, 
C=64, and Apple users were all stuck with proprietary all the way.
--Mike K.