[Coco] RE: [Color Computer] Looking for a Coco I 64k?

[L. Curtis Boyle]

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 13:56:07 -0600, Arthur Flexser <flexser at fiu.edu> wrote:

> As someone else here reminded me, piggybacked 16K chips dont allow the  
> display
> window to be moved to the upper 16K--the display just shows flickering  
> garbage
> if you try.  So, I'd suspect that piggybacked 32K chips might act  
> similarly if
> you tried to move the display window to the upper 32K, as KEY-264K  
> probably
> requires.  I wonder if even the author of KEY-264K actually had access  
> to a
> machine with piggybacked 32K chips.  Seems a lot of trouble to install  
> to save a
> few nickels on a set of 64K chips, and then, for all your trouble, you
> apparently wind up with a machine that can't even display the upper
> 32K.  (Wouldn't that present a problem for OS-9, too?)
>
> Art
>

     I remember at the time I did the stacked 16K chips, it was WAY cheaper  
than buying 64K. Her in Canada at that time, it was almost $200 to get a  
set of 8 4164's, and a set of 4116's was only ~$75 (and, since I already  
had 16K in the machine, it was only ~$75 to upgrade to the point of  
running 32K programs, as opposed to $200 and removing the old chips). I  
had this done before OS-9 was released (sometime in 1982), so I had no  
reason to want 64K at the time, as there wasn't really any software for it.
     I also remember 68 Micro Journal mentioning in their ad's for their  
magazine about a project that enabled "96K, which the SAM chip is already  
capable of doing"... was that 96K RAM, or 64K RAM/32K ROM?

L. Curtis Boyle