gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) (02/02/91)
Okay, I've got the COCO I with the chiclet keys. I know the newest COCO is around $99. What I want to know is what I have to get to duplicate my current system with a newer COCO. I've got: 64K COCO I Disk drives (2, one double-sided made to think it's two drives) 5-1/4" Drive controller Mouse & Joysticks OS-9 Various game programs Adapter for composite video and Y/C (chroma-luma monitor) output COCOMAX II program & COCOMAX mouse driver cartridge Diagnostic cartridge (not a big deal, just curious) How much of this stuff would I have to replace????!?!? GMS IX-1g266 ATT-BELL LABS ihlpq!gms (708)979-0914
rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) (02/04/91)
Gilbert M. Sterart writes: >[paraphrased] .. I have a CoCo I, I wanna replace it with a CoCo III, > what can I keep / what can I throw away... Well, you are pretty much in luck.. You can re-use the disk controller and drives. If you have the VERY old style disk controller (v1.0 ROM instead of v1.1), you may have a small problem, but I don't think so. The mouse and joysticks will still work fine. Your OS9 will still work ok IF it is version 2.0 or higher. if it is version 1.xx, you will need to upgrade to either level 1 version 2.0, or level II. You can throw away your chroma-luma convertor, as the CoCO III outputs to (among other things) composite video. As far as the CoComax goes, i'm not sure. I would assume it will still work, unless there is an address conflict with SuperECB (addresses to E000-FFFF). (This problem causes conflicts with J&M v1.23 disk controllers as well, as the J&M rom is 16k long, the last 8k of which is overwritten by SuperECB. Also causes similar problem with rs-232 pak.) Cheers, Russell Hoffman rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu flames to /dev/null
ingoldsb@ctycal.UUCP (Terry Ingoldsby) (02/05/91)
In article <sbfCfTe00WB60DN1sG@andrew.cmu.edu>, rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: > Gilbert M. Sterart writes: ... > >[paraphrased] .. I have a CoCo I, I wanna replace it with a CoCo III, > > what can I keep / what can I throw away... ... > Well, you are pretty much in luck.. > You can re-use the disk controller and drives. If you have the VERY old style > disk controller (v1.0 ROM instead of v1.1), you may have a small problem, If you have a very old controller, it may require -12 v (and maybe +12v, I can't remember). It may also balk at running at 1.8 MHz, although this is not likely. I just added +/- 12 v supplies to my CoCo III and everything is happy. You can fit something inside the case without too much trouble. -- Terry Ingoldsby ctycal!ingoldsb%cpsc.ucalgary.ca Land Information Services or The City of Calgary ...{alberta,ubc-cs,utai}!calgary!ctycal!ingoldsb
pete@wlbr.imsd.contel.com (Pete Lyall) (02/05/91)
In article <sbfCfTe00WB60DN1sG@andrew.cmu.edu> rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: >Gilbert M. Sterart writes: > >>[paraphrased] .. I have a CoCo I, I wanna replace it with a CoCo III, >> what can I keep / what can I throw away... > >Well, you are pretty much in luck.. >You can re-use the disk controller and drives. If you have the VERY old style >disk controller (v1.0 ROM instead of v1.1), you may have a small problem, >but I don't think so. Not fully accurate.... the 1.0 DOS rom wasn't the only problem. The primary difference between the two ROMS was that the latter one (version 1.1) had a built in DOS command that would bootstrap track 34 into memory, and kickstart it. If you have a 1.0 ROM, a simple basic program can be used to achieve much the same thing. The larger problem is that running OS9 LII, you're running at 1.78 Mhz (similar to the old coco's high speed mode), and this causes problems with older controllers. Some folks have patched their disk driver code so that any disk access are done at the older .89 Mhz rate. Newer controllers, and most of the J&M family seem to have been unaffected by the speed changes. Pete Lyall -- Pete Lyall Contel Corporation Compuserve: 76703,4230 OS9_Net: (805) 375-1401 (24hr 300/1200/2400) Internet: pete@wlbr.imsd.contel.com UUCP: {hacgate,jplgodo,voder}!wlbr!pete
gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) (02/06/91)
In article <1991Feb5.005957.14282@wlbr.imsd.contel.com>, pete@wlbr.imsd.contel.com (Pete Lyall) writes: > In article <sbfCfTe00WB60DN1sG@andrew.cmu.edu> rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: > >Gilbert M. Sterart writes: > > > >>[paraphrased] .. I have a CoCo I, I wanna replace it with a CoCo III, > >> what can I keep / what can I throw away... > > > >Well, you are pretty much in luck.. > >You can re-use the disk controller and drives. If you have the VERY old style > >disk controller (v1.0 ROM instead of v1.1), you may have a small problem, > >but I don't think so. > > Not fully accurate.... the 1.0 DOS rom wasn't the only problem. The > primary difference between the two ROMS was that the latter one > (version 1.1) had a built in DOS command that would bootstrap track 34 > into memory, and kickstart it. If you have a 1.0 ROM, a simple basic > program can be used to achieve much the same thing. Okay, you people convinced me. I ran out (yes, I kind of sprinted, in a purposeful-yet-unhurried gait) and got the COCO III for 99 bucks. Such a deal. When I remember how much soldering and money I put into that COCO I 4K integer BASIC so many years ago... Anyway, I hooked up the monitor and pushed in the disk controller. The E-BASIC is, I believe, V1.1, and the disk controller ROM is V 2.0. I can't get COCOMAX to work (it's the second release for the original COCO). The prompt comes up with "DISK BASIC 2.0, blah, blah". Now, does this mean that the controller would probably work with a different version of COCOMAX? In other words, does the display of the BASIC tell me the controller will work? Or do I have to do something else (change "modes", whatever). What chips can I scavenge from the old COCO? 6821s? What is the difference between the 6809E and the 68B09E? What improvements were made in the III as opposed to my much-hacked-and-modified I with 64K, composite output, etc.? What does the new version of OS9 get me? What does the new COCOMAX III get me? Anybody use the COCO 10 word processor? Any experience with MIDI programs? I'm writing songs for some public access programs, so are they usable for more than just "Hey, look what I can do, Ralph"-type demos? And about that Dan Quayle, is he for real? Why are mountains bigger on Mars? And... You get the idea. Thanks muchly in advance. If this doesn't get this newsgroup more articles, I can start randomly flaming people with unecessary insults... :-) G. Mark Stewart ihlpq!gms Ready, set, START TYPING!
gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) (02/06/91)
In article <535@ctycal.UUCP>, ingoldsb@ctycal.UUCP (Terry Ingoldsby) writes: > In article <sbfCfTe00WB60DN1sG@andrew.cmu.edu>, rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: > > Gilbert M. Sterart writes: > ... > > >[paraphrased] .. I have a CoCo I, I wanna replace it with a CoCo III, > > > what can I keep / what can I throw away... > ... > > Well, you are pretty much in luck.. > > You can re-use the disk controller and drives. If you have the VERY old style > > disk controller (v1.0 ROM instead of v1.1), you may have a small problem, > > If you have a very old controller, it may require -12 v (and maybe +12v, I > can't remember). It may also balk at running at 1.8 MHz, although this > is not likely. I just added +/- 12 v supplies to my CoCo III and everything > is happy. You can fit something inside the case without too much trouble. Man, this is so cool, getting so much information from folks! Thanks in spades! Anyway, yeah, that's what I was getting to in a previous posting. Would the lack of the extra voltages prevent the DISK BASIC display from coming on at power-up? Like, is the BASIC ROM in the controll powered by 5V and various drive control circuitry powered by 12? Bottom line, will my drives work. They don't seem to be finding anything on the disks. I get nothing from DIR, but the drive motor is activated. Just doesn't deliver anything to the COCO, and times out. As ever, TIA. GMS
jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones) (02/06/91)
In article <1991Feb5.162031.13456@cbnewse.att.com> gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes: >I can't get COCOMAX to work (it's the >second release for the original COCO). The prompt comes up with "DISK >BASIC 2.0, blah, blah". Now, does this mean that the controller would >probably work with a different version of COCOMAX? I use OS-9 exclusively on my CoCo, but...if I remember rightly, CoCo Max came with a hunk of hardware to do 8-bit A/D to get enough resolution on the mouse/joystick, and there may be problems with that. Perhaps some former CoCo Max (or current CoCo Max III) user will come forth. >What chips can I scavenge from the old COCO? 6821s? Depends on which of them will run at the higher clock rate. >What is the difference between the 6809E and the 68B09E? The clock rate that Motorola is willing to claim they'll run at. >What improvements were made in the III as opposed >to my much-hacked-and-modified I with 64K, composite output, etc.? Improvements: comes with composite output, RGB output (you should give some serious consideration to an RGB monitor--makes life much nicer); of course, the additional RAM (do yourself a favor, and get 512K); much nicer graphics (though it's not hard to do better than the CoCo 1 and 2--we're talking a 16-entry color lookup table with colors chosen from RGB222 (that's right, RGB222)). Unfortunately, the designers felt constrained to be backwards compatible with some of the worse things about the CoCo (the keyboard setup, the sleazoid pseudo-serial port, Color BASIC :-), the clunky Multi-Pak Inter- face). >Any experience with MIDI programs? You're posting from Indian Hill, where I used to work in the same building with Mike Knudsen, author of Ultimuse, and you're asking a question like that?! :-) Oops--I edited out the question about OS-9/6809 Level Two. The folks who worked on that did quite a bit of stuff--most notably, windowing. (I'm typing this on my CoCo 3 at home in one window. A shell is going in another window, and in yet another I have a Kermit running in connect mode talking to the 68020 VME-bus system sitting next to the CoCo.) It's worth your while, IMHO. James Jones (This message has been treated with new lemon-freshened DISCLAIMO, rendering it utterly free of any opinions save my own.)
gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) (02/07/91)
In article <4937@mcrware.UUCP>, jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones) writes: > In article <1991Feb5.162031.13456@cbnewse.att.com> gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes: > >I can't get COCOMAX to work (it's the > >second release for the original COCO). The prompt comes up with "DISK > >BASIC 2.0, blah, blah". Now, does this mean that the controller would > >probably work with a different version of COCOMAX? > > I use OS-9 exclusively on my CoCo, but...if I remember rightly, > CoCo Max came with a hunk of hardware to do 8-bit A/D to get enough As a matter fact, I wonder about that, too. The high-res box came with the original COCOMAX. Now, they indicate the need for the Tandy Hi-Res pack (which I ordered from Colorware for 10 bucks). Is there a difference? And, let me clarify. The disk is not loading the program at all. This may be a controller problem, but I'd rather someone said something definitive ("Nope. 2.0 controller definitly needs 12V." or something like that) before I experiment by plunking down another 100 or so bucks and find out I wasted my money. > resolution on the mouse/joystick, and there may be problems with that. > Perhaps some former CoCo Max (or current CoCo Max III) user will come > forth. > > >What chips can I scavenge from the old COCO? 6821s? > > Depends on which of them will run at the higher clock rate. > > >What is the difference between the 6809E and the 68B09E? > > The clock rate that Motorola is willing to claim they'll run at. So, does the III run at the high speed by default? What's the poke address? I tried the old location last night and it didn't seem to do anything. Sure like the new 40/80 screen, tho'. > 1 and 2--we're talking a 16-entry color lookup table with colors chosen > from RGB222 (that's right, RGB222)). What's that? Electrical spec., complete interface spec., IEEE nomenclature? > >Any experience with MIDI programs? > > You're posting from Indian Hill, where I used to work in the same building > with Mike Knudsen, author of Ultimuse, and you're asking a question like > that?! :-) Mike, look at the press you're getting! > > Oops--I edited out the question about OS-9/6809 Level Two. The folks who > worked on that did quite a bit of stuff--most notably, windowing. (I'm Well, I'm sold. Keep those cards and letters spewing forth. As always, ad-(thanks)-vance. GMS
ww0n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Walter Lloyd Wimer III) (02/07/91)
pete@wlbr.imsd.contel.com.UUCP (Pete Lyall) writes: > In article <sbfCfTe00WB60DN1sG@andrew.cmu.edu> rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu > (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: > >Gilbert M. Sterart writes: > > > >>[paraphrased] .. I have a CoCo I, I wanna replace > >>it with a CoCo III, what can I keep / what can I throw away... > The larger problem is that running OS9 LII, you're running at 1.78 Mhz > (similar to the old coco's high speed mode), and this causes problems > with older controllers. Some folks have patched their disk driver code > so that any disk access are done at the older .89 Mhz rate. Newer > controllers, andmost of the J&M family seem to have been unaffected by > the speed changes. > Pete Lyall An even larger problem is that the original Radio Shack floppy controllers required +12 volts which is not available on the CoCo 3. When I got my CoCo 3, I hacked my controller, cable, and drive to get the +12 volts from the floppy drive. Crude, but it worked fine. And my controller didn't seem to have any problem with the CoCo 3's 1.78 MHz clock rate. Now I have an FHL Eliminator, so I no longer use my RS controller on my CoCo 3. I may resurrect my CoCo I and then I'll need the RS controller again. Walt Wimer Carnegie Mellon University
jal@acc.flint.umich.edu (John Lauro) (02/07/91)
In article <Ebg6ENO00WCpIGMYJY@andrew.cmu.edu> ww0n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Walter Lloyd Wimer III) writes: > >pete@wlbr.imsd.contel.com.UUCP (Pete Lyall) writes: >An even larger problem is that the original Radio Shack floppy >controllers required +12 volts which is not available on the CoCo 3. > >When I got my CoCo 3, I hacked my controller, cable, and drive to get >the +12 volts from the floppy drive. Crude, but it worked fine. And my >controller didn't seem to have any problem with the CoCo 3's 1.78 MHz >clock rate. > One other way of getting an old controller to work that I haven't seen mentioned yet... Get a multi-pak interface. This will supply the 12 volts to the controller. (If I remember correctly, they are hard to find lately.) Oh course, you may need an upgrade for that too if you have an old one. (The upgrade for the multi-pak is more important if you use OS-9 Lev II.) - John
gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) (02/08/91)
In article <1991Feb7.142856.10328@engin.umich.edu>, jal@acc.flint.umich.edu (John Lauro) writes: > In article <Ebg6ENO00WCpIGMYJY@andrew.cmu.edu> ww0n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Walter Lloyd Wimer III) writes: > > > >pete@wlbr.imsd.contel.com.UUCP (Pete Lyall) writes: > >An even larger problem is that the original Radio Shack floppy > >controllers required +12 volts which is not available on the CoCo 3. ... > One other way of getting an old controller to work that I haven't > seen mentioned yet... Get a multi-pak interface. This will supply > the 12 volts to the controller. (If I remember correctly, they are > hard to find lately.) Oh course, you may need an upgrade for that There's a question. Why? It seems to be a pretty useful unit for a COCO, so why are they hard to find? BTW, am I going to need a MP to use the hi-res box? How does it interface? Can I use the old "Y" connector I used on my COCOMAX I hi-res pack? As for controllers, how do I "spot" an "old" controller? I saw various differences along the way, from the pack getting shorter, to the change in color from black to white, etc.. The ROMs in the first "old" one were 1.0, mine's 2.0. Does that make mine "new"? Or is the shorter case the result of the 12V components being eliminated? Again, I don't have "new" pack available to swap, and I'm not sure I want to spend a couple hundred putzing around. And also-again-in-addition-ad-nauseum, the disk basic prompt comes up, the drive is activated, but no files are found. Maybe that's a clue to something, but I'm not sure what. It'd be simpler if I had a new controller to swap, but I don't. Lastly, why are COCO-IIIs so cheap? Cheaper to produce, on the way out, or is COCO-IV coming out? Any guesses? GMS
jal@acc.flint.umich.edu (John Lauro) (02/08/91)
In article <1991Feb7.164611.29356@cbnewse.att.com> gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes: >In article <1991Feb7.142856.10328@engin.umich.edu>, jal@acc.flint.umich.edu (John Lauro) writes: >> In article <Ebg6ENO00WCpIGMYJY@andrew.cmu.edu> ww0n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Walter Lloyd Wimer III) writes: >> > >There's a question. Why? It seems to be a pretty useful unit for a >COCO, so why are they hard to find? BTW, am I going to need a MP >to use the hi-res box? How does it interface? Can I use the old "Y" >connector I used on my COCOMAX I hi-res pack? No, the hi-res box will not need either a "Y" cable or a MP. >As for controllers, how do I "spot" an "old" controller? I saw various >differences along the way, from the pack getting shorter, to the change >in color from black to white, etc.. The ROMs in the first "old" one >were 1.0, mine's 2.0. Does that make mine "new"? Or is the shorter >case the result of the 12V components being eliminated? Again, I don't >have "new" pack available to swap, and I'm not sure I want to spend >a couple hundred putzing around. And also-again-in-addition-ad-nauseum, >the disk basic prompt comes up, the drive is activated, but no files >are found. Maybe that's a clue to something, but I'm not sure what. >It'd be simpler if I had a new controller to swap, but I don't. If you have an old controller, it will come up normally. It's just when you access the drive that you will have trouble. Try formatting a fresh disk. Also if you still have your old computer, make sure the disk you are trying still works. If so, and you can't get the CoCo 3 to work, it's probabbly an old controller. I'm not sure at the exact point where the switch was, but I think it was after the 1.1 roms were first released. Note: If you purchased the controller from someone else, they could have changed the roms, and so you can't really go by that... > >Lastly, why are COCO-IIIs so cheap? Cheaper to produce, on the way out, >or is COCO-IV coming out? Any guesses? Cheaper to produce, but mainly that only accounts for why they came down to about $200. On they way out is the real reason. I don't think Tandy is planning a CoCo-IV, and haven't made a CoCo 3 for over a year.
se@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Sina Eatemadi) (02/08/91)
<Gilbert M. S. writes many things...>
[paraphrased]
<...I have Disk Ext. Basic 2.0...>
This is probably the cause of many of your problems. When the coco3 boots
it transfers rom to ram and changes the 1.0 DECB to 2.0 DECB (only changes
the version number...does not add any miraculous patches...) This most
likely means that you have a very old disk controller with the original
1.0 rom.
The solution involves a hardware/software combination. Upgrade you rom
to DECB vr. 1.1 *or* buy Spectro Systems' Extended ADOS-3; this thing has
it all including the kitchen sink, can be burnt into an EPROM and plugged
into your disk controller.
You were exactly correct on your theory of the disk controller power supply.
The rom in the controller only needs +5v while the drive controller chip
needs +/- 12v.
The hardware end involves either running +/- 12v from your coco3 power
supply (these voltages can be found in the 3 with digging and a regulator),
the disk controller chip (1793?) doesn't require much, so....
or, you can go out and purchase a new (or used (CoCoPro sells used stuff))
disk controller, either Tandy or 3rd party. Ah, another soln is to buy
one of the 3rd party multi-pak type units which provide +/- 12v .
<...Software; what about cocomax? max-10? midi?...>
software wise, go with specific coco 3 items. cocomax I can be patched to
work on the coco3, but the new version is much better. the a/d converter
used for cocomax I is not required on the coco3, instead you can use the
Tandy hi-res pak.
max-10 (referred to as coco-10...) is an adaption of MacWrite that Macmany
of the MacPersons use on their MacMachines. It's a decent program and the
one word-processor I always set up when others need to do a paper on my
machine, in a word it's idiot-proof.
the coco3 can easily handle midi-out via the bit-banger serial port on the
back of the machine (4 pin DIN plug). the coco3 really shines running
mike k.'s UMUSE III under OS-9 with multiple windows running and the ole'
midi keyboard just cranking away...
There are also hardware cards (6850 uarts) that will allow the coco to
read midi data (midi in) as well as send midi out. Programs that come
to mind are CoCo Midi Pro, CoCo Midi III, Umuse III, Lyra (no, maybe not
Lyra ???) Anyway, there are some out there, check the RainBow mag.
<...6809E vs. 68B09E, use any chips from coco1...>
the B is motorola's designation for 2.0 mhz (A = 1.5 mhz).
considering that almost all the chips on the coco3 motherboard are
soldered in, there's not much use for them. (yes, gone are the days
of the F-series (NC) boards - a hacker's delight...)
<...what about Dan Quayle, mountains of mars...>
funny you should ask, as head of the U.S.'s science and space
commission, Danny has elected to lead a manned space mission to
mars to answer just such a question. Of course, he has the full
support of the congress, g. bush, m. fitzwater, j. sununu, iacoco,
john smith, jane doe, and the entire keystone heights rotary club
as long as he agrees not to stop off and speak to any high school
students...
<...mpi, y-cable, coco3's so cheap...>
the multi-pak interface (mpi) was discontinued over 2 years ago.
Why? Something to do with the infinite wisdom of Tandy execs.
y-cables are stronly discouraged *especially* if you will be using
OS-9 Lv 2. The CoCo's 40 pin bus cannot handle the extra capacitance
of the ribbon wire reliably. (spoken from someone who's had erroneous
data written to LSN 0 of an OS-9 hard drive....)
the coco3's are going cheap b/c they are being discontinued. Word has
it that a 3 has not been manufactured since late 87. Note, you can
pick up some floor model coco3's for less than the advertised $100
(same for cm-8 monitors, opened software, etc.)
Sorry to rant and rave, but previous posts requested quite a bit. I strongly
recommend picking up a copy of the Rainbow magazine for more coco info. Also,
the is a listserver running dedicated to the coco 1-3 and OS-9. It's address
is listserv@pucc.princeton.edu
I have no affiliation with any of the companies, software titles, etc.
mentioned above. Posted purely for entertainment value only...
later days dudes,
chris se@beach.cis.ufljejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones) (02/08/91)
In article <1991Feb7.164611.29356@cbnewse.att.com> gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes: >There's a question. Why? It seems to be a pretty useful unit for a >COCO, so why are they hard to find? BTW, am I going to need a MP >to use the hi-res box? How does it interface? Can I use the old "Y" >connector I used on my COCOMAX I hi-res pack? They're hard to find because Tandy stopped making them a while back (and perhaps didn't have as big a stockpile as they had of CoCos). At least a couple of companies make hardware that can be used in place of an MPI. (You *do* get RAINBOW magazine, don't you?) The high-res joystick/mouse interface that Tandy sells plugs right into the cassette I/O and joystick ports. (BTW, Y-cables are heavily contraindicated in some circles. Given the unbuffered nature of the connector on the CoCo, I would think that one should at least secure the Y-cable very well if one uses it. Note also that if one uses a Y-cable, the cartridges are drawing power from the CoCo 3's internal power supply, instead of using a separate power source such as is in the MPI or its substitutes.) >Lastly, why are COCO-IIIs so cheap? Cheaper to produce, on the way out, >or is COCO-IV coming out? I wouldn't be surprised if it were cheaper to produce--lower part count, what with GIME replacing the old SAM/VDG (and perhaps there are other examples of custom chips--I'm not a hardware dude). Also Tandy evidently has discontinued the CoCo 3 (so if you're going to buy one, you'd better hurry). A CoCo 4? Highly unlikely, I'd say. The change in status to discontinued is fairly recent, but for a long time, I've personally seen no evidence of Tandy's having made any effort to do anything for the CoCo, and with one exception, the Radio Shack salesmen I've seen have not given evidence of knowing much about the CoCo. (I add here that all I know is what I read in the papers, opinions expressed above are solely my own, and that I know no more about Tandy than the average man in the street.) James Jones
rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) (02/09/91)
> ... fires up drive, but does not read directory ...
Sounds to me like perhaps the lack of 12V input to the controller
is hosing you over. You can solve this problem without having to get
a new controller, I'm sure. I'd tell you how right now, but I'm at college,
and my specs on the catridge port are at home (240 miles away). Perhaps
someone else out there on the net could inform us of which pin on the
controller to inject +12V into, so that the older controller will work
on the CoCo III....
Cheers,
Russell Hoffman
rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu
Carnegie Mellon University.sjcst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Scott J. Corley) (02/10/91)
Gilbert , the reason that COCO Max wont work on the Coco 3 is that the
special input pak that you need to use with it is located at memory
addresses which were unused in the Coco 1 & 2 but are now occupied
by the Coco 3's GIME chip. As for your other questions. 1) There really
isnt a RSDOS 2.0 or RSDOS 2.1. Unlike the old Coco's the Coco 3 copies
the information in the RSDOS ROMS to RAM and then patches it like the
some of the programs for 64k Coco's used to do. One of the things
they patch is the version number of the RSDOS ROM ,changing the version
number from RSDOS 1.0 or 1.1 to RSDOS 2.0 or 2.1.
The reason Tandy decided to load RSDOS into RAM and then patch it
is that they wanted to add new features to RSBASIC but didnt want
to pay Microsoft ,who wrote RSBASIC and owns the rights to it ,
to upgrade it. Copyright law prevents someone other than the copyright
holder from modifying a program stored in a fixed , permanent form like
ROM and marketing it. Instead Tandy hired Microware to add enhancements
to RSBASIC and they did so by loading the Microsoft RSBASIC code into
RAM and then patching it to add new features like support for 40/80
column screens , a On Error Goto statement , etc. Its legal because
the modified code is stored in RAM which is not a permanent form of
storage because it loses all information when you turn the power off.
2) I have the Max-10 wordprocessor which is what I assume you are
talking about when you mention the "Coco 10" wordprocessor. If you've
ever seen the wordprocessor MacWrite for the Macintosh , then you've
seen Max-10 for the Coco 3. Max-10 was written to be as close a
clone of MacWrite as is possible on the Coco 3. Having used both
programs , I think that the author did a pretty good job.
Instead of using the 40 or 80 column text screen of the Coco for
its display Max-10 uses the high resolution graphics screen
for its display like Telewriter 64 & VIP Writer did on the old
Coco 1 & 2. But the display and speed of Max-10 is much better than
on those old Coco 1 & 2 programs because of the extra features of
the Coco 3 like its resolution (640x192 vs 256x192) , double clock
speed mode ,etc. Because Max-10 uses the high resolution graphics
screen for its display , you can import and print pictures in it
along with your text. It comes with utilities that will import
most Coco graphics format and convert them for use with Max-10.
Some of those formats are Coco Max II & III , Color Max , PMODE 4
,etc.
Max-10 is controlled by a joystick or mouse just like Coco Max II
and uses icons, drop down menus ,etc so it is very easy to learn and
use. The biggest advantage that Max-10 has over other Coco
wordprocessors it that it has a WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You
Get) display. The display on the screen looks exactly like what
you will see if you perform a print out. No more guessing what
your text's going to look like when its printed out. No more
wondering about where page and paragraph breaks are going to fall,
etc. You can see exactly how your formatting is going to look.
No more imbedding printer control codes in order to get page
breaks , type face and so on. If you want bold face type you
simply select bold face from a menu and you'll see it right on
the screen. Same goes for Italic type and others.
Max-10 uses its own fonts in both its display and its printout.
and this has both advantages and disadvantages. The advantages
are that the fonts on the screen and the fonts on a printout
will be exactly the same. Another advantage is that Max-10 thus
allows you to use Font sizes and styles that arent available
on most printers. The disadvantages are that some of the fonts
included with Max-10 dont look that good when printed out and
you cant use the printer's builtin fonts without losing the
WYSIWYG display. If you do use the printers's built in fonts
the print out of your text will look nothing like the display
of Max-10.
The biggest disadvantage of Max-10 is that it is very slow
in printing because it uses its own fonts. In order to use
its own fonts Max-10 uses the graphics mode of the printer
in order to print. In other words , Max-10 performs a screen
dump in order to print anything out and as you undoubtedly
know screen dumps can take a long time. In normal mode ,
Max-10 can take 10 min to print a page. If you are using
the special high quality printout mode , Max-10 can take
45 min to print a page but the quality of the printout
looks fantastic (with the right fonts).
If you want ease of use , WYSIWYG display , ability to use
lots of different fonts and good looking printouts then
give Max-10 a try. If you need speedy printouts , ability
to use builtin printer fonts effectively , ability to write
large documents (Max-10 only allocates 64k of memory for
holding text even with 512k of memory) get something else.
The reason that MulitiPaks are so hard to find is that Tandy
stopped making them and selling them 3 years ago. A lot of
people want them but they are not available except on the
used market. A few companies , Howard Medical , Hawksoft
have come out with crude imitations of it though. The
reason that Tandy's selling the Coco 3 for $99 is that they
are closing them out. They stopped making them some time
ago and are just selling off their old stock. There wont
be a Coco 4 because it would compete with Tandy's low cost
PC clones.
Scott Corleygmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) (02/12/91)
Thanks to everyone that provided help for the drive controller problems I was experiencing. I put a jumper in the controller to allow me to use the leads on the drive controller standard interface, 3 and 4, to let me power the pack over these leads. I hacked a power supply in the drives themselves, and used this to run the 12V devices on the pack. I think it's probably what one person that helped out did. And as he said, it's not standard, but it works. It also is invisible. Also, as I was told, the COCOMAX I uses a part of the address spectrum for hi-res control that the COCO III has allocated for something else. It starts to load the first time, then stops. Second time, it prints the DISK BASIC information. Anyway, from what I've heard, COCOMAX III ought to be pretty impressive. Again, thanks to everyone that helped out, and also for the extra interesting tidbits. My daughter should enjoy her new machine. Now I'm about to try to teach a six-year-old BASIC... (I figure by the time she's about twelve, she can build me a nice 100 MFLOP graphics processor... GMS
halkoD@batman.moravian.EDU (David Halko) (02/13/91)
In article <1991Feb5.162031.13456@cbnewse.att.com>, gmark@cbnewse.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes: > In article <1991Feb5.005957.14282@wlbr.imsd.contel.com>, pete@wlbr.imsd.contel.com (Pete Lyall) writes: > > In article <sbfCfTe00WB60DN1sG@andrew.cmu.edu> rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: > > >Gilbert M. Sterart writes: > > > > > >>[paraphrased] .. I have a CoCo I, I wanna replace it with a CoCo III, > > >> what can I keep / what can I throw away... > > > > > >Well, you are pretty much in luck.. > > >You can re-use the disk controller and drives. If you have the VERY old style > > >disk controller (v1.0 ROM instead of v1.1), you may have a small problem, > > >but I don't think so. > > > > Not fully accurate.... the 1.0 DOS rom wasn't the only problem. The > > primary difference between the two ROMS was that the latter one > > (version 1.1) had a built in DOS command that would bootstrap track 34 > > into memory, and kickstart it. If you have a 1.0 ROM, a simple basic > > program can be used to achieve much the same thing. > > Okay, you people convinced me. I ran out (yes, I kind of sprinted, in a > purposeful-yet-unhurried gait) and got the COCO III for 99 bucks. Such a > deal. When I remember how much soldering and money I put into that COCO I > 4K integer BASIC so many years ago... Only soldering you will need to do for memory upgrades is to break the 512K mark and jump into 1 Meg! <smile> 128K may suit you fine for awhile, though... > Anyway, I hooked up the monitor and > pushed in the disk controller. The E-BASIC is, I believe, V1.1, and the > disk controller ROM is V 2.0. I can't get COCOMAX to work (it's the > second release for the original COCO). The prompt comes up with "DISK > BASIC 2.0, blah, blah". Now, does this mean that the controller would > probably work with a different version of COCOMAX? I used to have a version of CoCoMax (old version) which was patched to work just fine on the CoCo3... they are out there, just have to find someone with it and maybe they could send you the patches or the entire thing... > In other words, does > the display of the BASIC tell me the controller will work? Or do I > have to do something else (change "modes", whatever). What chips can > I scavenge from the old COCO? 6821s? What is the difference between > the 6809E and the 68B09E? The main differences between chips in the CoCo1 and 3 are speed improvements (if there is a B added to the chip number... this means that PIA's and the 6809 from the CoCo1 will work in the CoCo3, but may be a bit flakey at the higher speed the CoCo3 can run at... > What improvements were made in the III as opposed > to my much-hacked-and-modified I with 64K, composite output, etc.? The CoCo3 gives you the ability to get 2 times as much speed out of the system, 2 times as much memory, stock, with the ability to upgrade to 512K or 1 Meg with some soldering, higher resolution graphics, real 80, 64, and 40 column windows and the actual ability to access the extra memory in Basic. > What does the new version of OS9 get me? OS9 Level II wil give you the ability to run with windows under OS9, is 2 times as fast as Level I, gives you more memory for your programs under OS9 to use (full 64K instead of oly 30 or so K), ability to use several 80 column text windows simultaneously, high resolution graphical programs are becoming more available under Level II, Level II is compatable with well written Level I packages, and the list goes on. > What does the new COCOMAX III get me? More colors, higher resolution, more drawing options, animation... very nice package. > Anybody use the COCO 10 word processor? If you are talking about Max10, it is very nice, indeed.... I like VIP Writer 3.... if you are looking for a powerful wordprocessor which does not have to be a "what you see is what you get", then VIP Writer 3 is probably the best out there right now... I love it. > Any experience with MIDI programs? Lots out there... Ultimuse3 under OS9, I have heard alot of good things about. > I'm writing songs for some public access programs, so are > they usable for more than just "Hey, look what I can do, Ralph"-type demos? If you like to listen to MIDI music, then, sure, you can use it. If you like to write MIDI music, then sure, you can use it. If you like to record MIDI music, then HEY, no problemo. > And about that Dan Quayle, is he for real? Why are mountains bigger on > Mars? And... > > You get the idea. > Thanks muchly in advance. If this doesn't get this newsgroup more > articles, I can start randomly flaming people with unecessary insults... :-) > > G. Mark Stewart > ihlpq!gms > > > Ready, set, START TYPING! Well, finished typing.... <smile> Any other questions, I will be happy to help you out to the best of my ability, but remember, I am not perfect, so some of the things I say may be incorrect... Dave Halko djh9381@moravian.edu
jfbeam@eos.ncsu.edu (Ricky Beam) (02/16/91)
>In article <1991Feb7.142856.10328@engin.umich.edu>, (John Lauro) writes: >> One other way of getting an old controller to work that I haven't >> seen mentioned yet... Get a multi-pak interface. This will supply >> the 12 volts to the controller. (If I remember correctly, they are >> hard to find lately.) Oh course, you may need an upgrade for that > >There's a question. Why? It seems to be a pretty useful unit for a >COCO, so why are they hard to find? BTW, am I going to need a MP >to use the hi-res box? How does it interface? Can I use the old "Y" >connector I used on my COCOMAX I hi-res pack? > Well, the MPI was "killed" along with all the coco stuff... The cocomax hi-res pack will not work as is on a COCO3 due to where it is maped. It is mapped at $FF9X--the GIME area. If you plug it in an upgraded MPI, the computer should not even "see" it out there. There is a fix for this but I don't have it. As for a multi-pak, I am working on developing an 8 port interface with 2-7seg LED's to show the selections to fit in a BABY-AT case. I expect this to be available to "real" people in a month or so. NOTE:plans only! I am not going to MAKE these things FOR you!!! AT ALL! >As for controllers, how do I "spot" an "old" controller? I saw various well, the FD-502 card is a short one. The FD-501 is long and (???) works without 12v. The FD-500 (urgh) is long, dusty(!) and needs 12v (unless "fixed") >differences along the way, from the pack getting shorter, to the change >in color from black to white, etc.. The ROMs in the first "old" one >were 1.0, mine's 2.0. Does that make mine "new"? Or is the shorter That IS 1.0---the coco3 ROM changes it to say 2.0! >case the result of the 12V components being eliminated? Again, I don't >have "new" pack available to swap, and I'm not sure I want to spend >a couple hundred putzing around. And also-again-in-addition-ad-nauseum, >the disk basic prompt comes up, the drive is activated, but no files >are found. Maybe that's a clue to something, but I'm not sure what. Well, that sounds like the controller chip is not powered!!! (12v you know... open it up and find the part number on the 40 pin chip) >It'd be simpler if I had a new controller to swap, but I don't. > >Lastly, why are COCO-IIIs so cheap? Cheaper to produce, on the way out, >or is COCO-IV coming out? Any guesses? > They are cheap because Tandy wants to get rid of them!! Costs money too much money to have them setting around. ------------------- jfbeam@eos.ncsu.edu -------------------- Ricky Beam Box 15240 118B Bragaw NCSU Raleigh, NC 27607 (919) 828-8554 --------------------