[Coco] What would a CoCo successor have to have as a minimum?

[Rogelio Perea]

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Steve Batson
<steve at batsonphotography.com>wrote:

...but I still think that if you drop too much for  the CoCo, you don't
> have a CoCo any more (which a lot of people complain about it not feeling
> like a CoCo anymore if you do such and such ). You just have a new system
> that's like it with no software...


Nailed it right there Steve.

All the ideas are exciting and each brings an interesting venue to
experiment with, but - as you say, many of them stray away from what the
CoCo path has been from its day of inception until now. Personally I'd
support anything that allows me to replace a dead board in one of my CoCos
and for lack of vintage parts it couldn't be fixed... a drop-in board
fashioned with the current technologies but a CoCo in every sense by its
operation: use my analog joysticks, mouse, attach game paks, etc... the old
school stuff.

The hardware enhancements that have come about due to efforts of the likes
of Roger Taylor and the Cloud9 folks are simply amazing, more so as they
work with stock CoCos - I feel they have improved on the fun of using this 8
bit marvel for years to come. In my wish list for similar enhancements is
the elusive "Ethernet Pak" (with TCP/IP support of course).

For everything else like enhanced graphics and speed and other assorted
worldly connections I will use an emulator :-)


-- RP