[Coco] [Color Computer] RE: [CoCo] Atari and Amiga comparison

[Frank Pittel]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 03:22:02PM -0400, RJRTTY at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 3/14/07 12:01:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> jdiffendaffer at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> 
> >I love the Coco3 and it does compare favorably... unless you  consider
> >a few things.
>  
>  
> Well the Amiga was better in many ways but the great thing about
> the CoCo 3 is a low entry price because most of it's functions were
> cpu driven.   If you wanted you could add a sound  cart,
> a no halt disk controller, an RS232 serial cart as well as the OS9 
> operating system and all these things freed
> up the 6809 to concentrate on driving the graphics.   The point  is
> you had options you didn't have with the Amiga.   And I am  referring
> to the Amiga 500 for comparison purposes.   No one here is  suggesting
> the CoCo 3 could compare with machines based on later 680x0
> cpu's and coprocessors.
>  
> It's too bad the CoCo line didn't continue like the Amiga and Atari
> did.  One wonders what would have been if it had.
>  

I've often wondered what things would have been like if the coco had
been built around a 68000 unstead of a 6809.