[Coco] RiBBS & MM/1

[Joel Ewy]

Ron Bihler wrote:
> ...
>
> So more on the MM/1, I recall it was going to be a very nice machine.
> Bigger/Faster etc but still run most of the old os9 programs with a
> simple re-compile.  Did that all pan out as planned?  Did it get the
> software support needed?  Using Cheap PC boards would have been so
> very nice.
The MM/1 did have a generally compatible window system to the
GRFINT/WINDINT in OS-9 LII, so it was pretty easy to port that type of
program from the CoCo to the MM/1.  The MM/1 had most of the same
graphics modes as the CoCo 3 plus higher resolution and 8-bit color
modes with a 24-bit color palette.  The CPU was a 15- or 16MHz 68000
variant.  It was faster in raw CPU than the Amiga 1000/500, Atari ST, or
Mac 128/512/Plus.  But production was slow and by the early to mid '90s,
all those other computer lines were running 68020, 68030, or 68040
chips, and I think '94 saw the first of the PPC Macs.

At the same time, FHL was selling all kinds of things, from the TC-9 to
the TC-70 (very similar to the MM/1, but just different enough to cause
compatibility issues) and other machines as well.  But the main problem
was that the different vendors didn't agree on a common window
environment.  The beauty of OS-9's modular design is that it could have
obscured the differences in hardware between the different systems to
create a common market for software authors, but this fact wasn't well
exploited.

There was some good software developed for the MM/1.  In particular,
SubEtha (Allen Huffman and Joel Mathew Hegberg) did some good stuff. 
And David Graham and others ported lots of GNU stuff.  But there was
never enough to really unlock the potential of the hardware.  I would
still really love to get ahold of a copy of Hegberg's Write Right word
processor...

And of course the cheap PC boards were just for the MM/1b, which I never
got (but wanted).  Unfortunately, I don't think that KWindows was ever
completed for VGA (though I could well be wrong about that).  If that's
true, then the MM/1b / AT306 didn't have a CoCo compatible window
system.  There was a completely different system called GWindows, but
there was even less ready-made software for that, and it cost more
money.  And I think that multi I/O boards and certain models of VGA
cards were basically all that were supported under OS-9.  Of course, one
could always roll one's own drivers.  Just a matter of time,
documentation, and programming skill.  Probably lots of all of the above.
> At one time it was said it would run Amiga programs or maybe os9 Amiga
> programs, but that was a long time ago and my memory has faded.
>
Only Amiga OS-9 programs would have been feasible.  And Amiga OS-9 is
more rare than the MM/1 itself, I think.  And I think it didn't have a
window system, so there wouldn't have been much thrill there.  I do
remember the original IMS flyer advertising that it would be faster than
an Amiga.  Well.  Faster than some Amigas.
> ...
> Was there a kit version of the MM/1 as well?  I remember I once a
> Video Tape of the MM/1, didn't really do much as the applications
> where way behind, but it looked nice.
>
I bought an assembled CPU board.  It came with the printed manuals and
system floppies.  David Graham also sent me the bare memory and I/O
boards, and I bought parts to stuff them.  So mine was even more of a
kit than most!

JCE
> A good walk down Memory Lane, some very good memories for sure.
>
> Ron Bihler
>
...