tfp@busch.UUCP (Bitwise operator) (11/19/84)
This week's Infoworld (or thereabouts), John Dvorak's column:
Claimed that there was going to be a Tandy Model 9 with OS-9 (& of
course the 6809) out soon... I guess, a new and improved CoCo?
Anyone heard anything more about this? (Dvorak is known to goof...)
(NOTE: any answers to my previous questions might have been lost
last week when ihnp4 was dead... looks like a lot of mail (maybe
news too) went down the drain..)
tom ihnp4!we53!busch!tfpjejones@ea.UUCP (11/24/84)
/***** ea:net.micro.6809 / busch!tfp / 8:38 pm Nov 20, 1984 */
This week's Infoworld (or thereabouts), John Dvorak's column:
Claimed that there was going to be a Tandy Model 9 with OS-9 (& of
course the 6809) out soon... I guess, a new and improved CoCo?
/* ---------- */
Dunno--although the "of course" isn't quite true; it *could* run
OS-9/68000.
I definitely hope that he's correct, and that said beast will run OS-9
Level Two if it's a 6809, and that the (relatively) new Motorola RMS
chip set will be used on it. (Said chips were mentioned in the CoCo
session at the OS-9 conference at Des Moines. (For those who didn't see
M. Knudsen's postings on them round about year's beginning, they're a
VERY souped-up version of the VDG and SAM chip. Examples: 24*80 text
(with real lower case), 640 * 400 graphics with some ridiculously large
palette (alas, no mixed graphics and text modes, but *I* wouldn't
complain...)) Also, there was a fellow in the audience who I think
would've sworn on a stack of Bibles that RS was coming out with a 68000
box...)
The thought that Tandy might no longer be afraid of undercutting
their inferior Z-80 and 8086 boxes by selling a 6809-based machine
without gutting it in I/O is a pleasant one indeed. (Not that it's
only *their* Z-80 and 8086 boxes that are inferior. *Any* Z-80 or
8086 box is inferior.)
James Jones