[Coco] Re: CoCo video?

[Richard E. Crislip]

Hello Mark

On 03/02/2006, Mark McDougall wrote:
> Neil Morrison wrote:
>
>> I know everyone has their own idea about 'expanding' the Coco. I still
>> like the idea of an expansion interface, like the old Model I, that
>> sits under the monitor. I see a fast processor with a meg of ram and
>> all the I/O you want, HD, FD, maybe even a USB. It would connect to
>> the Coco via a cable and a connector in the ROMPak slot and would use
>> the Coco for keyboard, video, and cassette say, but would do all the
>> heavy processing. Good place to use a DMA and maybe a meg of ROM for
>> OS-9 or whatever.
>
> I really don't understand what you, or similar thinking persons, are
> trying  to achieve here?
>
> I can understand wanting to interface modern peripherals to the CoCo,
> such  as Compact Flash disks, USB mice/keyboards, VGA monitors, network
> cards etc.  That's all about convenience whilst still maintaining the
> underlying base  machine to run the original software.
>
> However, this talk about expanding the base design baffles me? When
> talking  about an 'expansion interface' with extra processing grunt to
> 'offload' to  etc - when does it stop being a CoCo? Taking it to a
> silly extreme to make a  point, how is your proposal any different from
> connecting a PC via the  serial port on the CoCo and calling *that* the
> 'expansion interface'? When  you start adding processors you're really
> not running a 'CoCo' any more -  regardless of how they're connected to
> the main unit. WHat's the point in  adding an enhanced GIME with extra
> video modes? I thought the whole idea was  to preserve the CoCo we all
> know and love?!?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing - just trying to understand?!?
>
> Surely if you're going to ultimately be running 'non-CoCo' software
> then  you're better off starting with a clean slate and designing from
> scratch?

Begin pontification

It seems to me that there many out there, and frankly me included, who would
really have loved to have seen a CoCo4. That fabled next generation CoCo
that never happened because Fort Worth deemed it better to search for  the PC
Clone Eldorado and went bust doing it just like Commodre did. I think others
are wanting to add more functionality to their CoCos so that they can
continue using a machine the mainstream world as long thought to be dead.
Pluggin in a USB flash RAM in place of hard-drives, floppy drives, and
cartridges really turns me on. Just think, all that functionality without that
clumsy, space wasting MPI.

I am amused at the aurgument by purist concerning not changing a thing.
While I totally understand what they are saying, that being any added
functinality or power will make it a non-CoCo, the thought comes to mind, that
goes like this, it either grows or it dies.BTW, I heard that same arguement from the Commodre Amiga crowd too. My
humble opion is to allow each to do what they want, it is a free country.
This reply is coming to you via Amikit, an Amiga emulator, running on a W2k
PC. It could have just as easily come from a Linux PC. My working CoCos and my trusty ole Amiga A4000 are sitting
right here next to me. The only reason I'm using the emulator is that my not
so trusty A2065 ethernet card crooked on me last month 8-(. Soooo I'll
probably have to change my tag line <sigh>.

Anyway that is my take and opinion on the situation.

End pontification

Regards
-- 
Cruising on AutoPilot                        |
        With an Amiga           ---o-o-O-o-o---  and a CoCo