[Coco] CoCo3FPGA, FPGA Development, and GIME replacement

[Stephen H. Fischer]

Hi,

Aaron says it very well.  I was reading forward to see if anyone said what I 
was about to, and he did!

The "WANTers" need to keep SILENT and let the "DOers" produce what they can, 
if they can.

The best projects are those produced by designers actually using the product 
and not being paid by a company to earn their salary.

-------------------

What they are doing is just part of the puzzle, another part is exploring 
the limits of NitrOS-9 which is the only way to leverage additional 
capabilities. (A quick look was good.) That discussion I hope will start 
soon but no date is set. That will require an emulator that is flexible in 
many ways and not trying to just do existing hardware.

Then there are changes to the "C" compiler, assembler, linker and ... to 
allow the breaking of the 64K limit on the 6x09. I may still have the 
manuals from ~ 1968 that describes this. Yes, I did say 1968.

----------------------

Then the application software to build new programs can be written.

----------------------

----------------------

So, it just not building the hardware, that is just a part of the bigger 
picture.

Not doable if too many just sit on the sidelines and wait. Our numbers are 
too small to allow that.

SHF

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Aaron Wolfe" <aawolfe at gmail.com>

To: "CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" <coco at maltedmedia.com>

Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 4:33 PM

Subject: Re: [Coco] CoCo3FPGA, FPGA Development, and GIME replacement


On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Nick Marentes <nickma at optusnet.com.au> 
wrote:
>> Maybe in a few years we can have a cheap coco 4 that does everything
>> everyone wants (well..that will never happen, but let's say 100% of what
>> 95% want, or vice versa).
>
> This may be the problem. Maybe a standard spec needs to be defined of what 
> a
> CoCo4 actually is?
>

It's a trap! :)

This has been discussed before, and it's clear that there is no
universal agreement on what a "CoCo 4" is, should or could be.

There are many theoretical approaches that could be taken, yet the
only actual progress seems to be in the FPGA realm, and here we have a
single project.
So, for now I think the "spec" is whatever Gary's FPGA project
provides, until some alternative exists. Gary has always been very
receptive to suggestions.

> Someone who only plays games on the CoCo will have different wants from
> someone who only runs OS-9.
>
> I would have thought with the advancements in FPGA's nowadays, simulating
> the operations of a 25 year old custom chip should be possible.
>

I'm sure it's possible, after all Gary has an enhanced GIME in FPGA as
part of his project. I think the obstacle is a matter of the cost and
the effort in creating the interface between FPGA and GIME socket.

> Just blowing in the wind... :)