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

[Paul T. Barton]

May be refering to "the banker" or another way to get multiple 32k (lower)
banks of dram.

(I built one).

Paul - idezilla

--- "L. Curtis Boyle" <curtisboyle at sasktel.net> wrote:

> 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



	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com