[Coco] Back to the COCO

[Zippster]

Oops, scratch that as far as the Orc90 with it’s on board rom.
It wouldn’t work on a Y cable with an FDC.  

The DACs would.  What’s a Y-cable good for again?    :)

- Ed


> On Jan 4, 2017, at 12:04 PM, Zippster <zippster278 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I don’t think it’s particularly dangerous, but without the arbitration of
> the bus via the *CTS and *SCS signals as provided by an MPI, which
> carts would work together would be very limited.
> 
> Not sure what if any arbitration is provided by the Glenside.
> 
> Communications errors are very likely without buffering too, as I found
> out during developing the mini-MPI.
> 
> Y-cables are probably ok for some things, for instance I imagine an Orc90
> and a floppy controller would work ok together.  They’re just of limited utility.
> 
> - Ed
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jan 4, 2017, at 11:35 AM, Bill Gunshannon <bill.gunshannon at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On 1/4/17 11:02 AM, Brian Blake wrote:
>>> Bill,
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure I've ever seen a buffered 'y' cable before - it would only
>>> buffer the device being plugged into the CoCo anyhow. The best solution
>>> to protect the CoCo, IMHO, would be to install the Cloud9 Protector -
>>> CPU replacement board that has buffering IC's in place already.
>>> 
>> 
>> Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear enough on that.  I remember a definitely
>> unbuffered Y-cable being offered.  Like the unbuffered connectors on the
>> Glenside interface I see this as not only a dangerous concept but I
>> really don't understand how they even work as I would expect multiple
>> devices hanging of that same bus to interfere with each other.  but what
>> do I know.  :-)
>> 
>> bill
>> 
>