cocoiii@hobbes.ncsu.edu (John Vestal) (01/27/91)
First a little clairfication (sp), I did not say that I knew anything about the TC-70. I just gave what I knew about the MM/1. As a college student, I see the MM/1 as a more practical system than the TC-70. I am NOT am impartial party. I favor the MM/1, David Halko seems to favor the TC-70. halkoD@batman.moravian.EDU (David Halko) writes: >The TC-70 comes with more memory than the MM/1 (from what I last remember...) True, 512K more I think. >Because of the extra memory, the TC-70 is slightly faster than a stock MM/1. Not sure about that... A little faster on graphic puts, probably, but not in CPU speed. They are equal there. The graphics could be a little faster because the first meg is video/process memory. The rest is just for process, not video. >The TC-70 will run on the KBus, making available for it a tremendous amount >available expansion options... excellent for POS applications which need >all the terminals they can get (aimed at Business) True, but the KBus is a 16-bit bus. The MM/1 has a 32-bit bus. Right now, ie with the 68070, it doesn't matter. With an '030 or '040, it takes 2 clock cycles to move data into the CPU, the MM/1 will take 1. >The TC-70 will act as a direct mother board replacement for owners of >QT systems, so they can upgrade their systems to color graphics cards >and memory easily instead of throwing away the entire machine to buy a-new... You just have to buy SIMMS to expand memory on the MM/1, if you get both cards. The current plan, I think, is for IMS to make a new CPU card, and use the other 2 cards as Video processor to the '030 upgrade, but I'm not sure. >The TC-70, through the KBus, will use existing memory expansion cards, for >those who are upgrading this means KBus owners can get the free graphics >with no loss of memory cards... never mind if someone needs more memory >upon ordering... it will be available... The MM/1 you can get with 1, 3 or 9 megs. No problem with memory expansion, and I believe the TC-70 has the same 9 meg limit? Correct me please if I am wrong. >Besides all this, Bruce Isted is a proven programmer and developer for >the CoCo... with support like his, the TC-70 can't go wrong... the guy >is absolutely incredible- making the best OS9 hard/floppy/multicard adaptor >on the market for the CoCo3... IMS has been busting there butts to find new developers for software on the MM/1. I haven't heard of anything the Frank Hogg is doing to get new software for his computer. Bruse Isted is going to be very busy to get a buch of useful application out in a few months. 8-) >FHL has been around for quite a few years (over a decade) and delivers >excellent support! He has delivered me nothing but the greatest support >over the past couple of years with technical assistance for the >equipment that I had purchased from him. I haven't delt with him, but I don't doubt that in the least. >The TC-70 is aimed at a business market while keeping compatability with >the OS9 Graphical world now in existance. While the MM/1 may be less >expensive, the TC-70 is definitely aimed at a different market as well >as having more hardware support so far... For someone who wants to put >together an inventory control system with 20 terminals and have a color >graphics display in the rear office with a windowing environment to make >managing the system more efficiently with minimal extra cost, the TC-70 >definitely takes the pie... an 80386 would never do this that well... neither >would an 80486 with the current operating systems out there (with the >exception of OS9000... but I don't know of any vendors outside of Microware >who handle it...) True again, if you want to go over 5 terminals the TC-70 is the way to go. If not, the MM/1 is probably better. By the way, the MM/1 and the TC-70, and all OSK machines are going to have the same Graphical Interface. I know the guy that is working on that. Right now it is on the MM/1. Then it will be ported to TC-70, PT68K, Atari ST, and Amiga (I think the Amiga... not sure about that one.) With this interface, a program will run with graphics on any of those platforms by moving the objects. >For business support, the TC-70 takes the cake... for home, maybe an MM/1 >would be nicer... for myself, I am waiting for a VSC card to be released >for the K-Bus and get a 68030 or 68040 CPU, bus, and video card... I can >manage to build up the system I ultimately want in pieces, with all the >power I can ever want, since I can afford them that way... > David J. Halko By the way, both machines are easily upgraded. You just have to take the graphics processor out, and install a new one. Of course, you would have to have new drivers, but that would be easy enough. I really don't think anyone would go wrong with either system. I don't think we should be fighting amoung ourselves about which OSK system is best. Let's just lest the rest of the world know what we have. OS-9 is the best OS that I have seen, and I have see MS-DOS, AmigaDOS, and the Mac. Let's just let this one ride. Please David, correct me if I'm wrong, and we'll drop it. cocoiii (John Vestal) -- ****************************************************************************** * cocoiii@catt.ncsu.edu Phone: (919) 831-2890 North Carolina State * * John Vestal P.O. Box 21537 Raleigh, NC 27607 University * ******************************************************************************
kdarling@hobbes.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) (01/28/91)
>halkoD@batman.moravian.EDU (David Halko) writes: >The TC-70 comes with more memory than the MM/1 (from what I last remember...) >Because of the extra memory, the TC-70 is slightly faster than a stock MM/1. Yes. And No. ;-) The VSC chip can handle up to 1.5 meg RAM, of which 1 meg may be video. The TC70 comes with 1.5 meg; the MM/1 with 1 meg. But neither is faster: all RAM accesses goes thru the VSC and are subject to video access sharing. Once you expand the systems (MM/1 on second board, TC70 on K-Bus RAM card), then the cpu can get full-time accesses to that VSC-external RAM, giving about a 50% increase in overall system speed (you jump from being approx equivalent to an 8Mhz 68000, up to about a 12.5Mhz 68000). It might turn out that the MM/1 is faster on expanded systems tho. See, when you add fast external RAM on it, that RAM is set to map in at the lowest 68K addresses _instead_ of the slower VSC RAM (which gets moved elsewhere). This means that all the OS9 kernel code and vectors are loaded into, and run from, fast RAM instead. I dunno what the TC70 does. Anyone? > [...] In general agreement with the rest. The K-Bus provides for a hacker's delight. The MM/1 was designed for plug-and-go inexpensive. I suspect bus adapters for both could become popular. >cocoiii@hobbes.ncsu.edu (John Vestal) writes: >True, but the KBus is a 16-bit bus. The MM/1 has a 32-bit bus. No. The MM/1 has an optional 32-bit bus designed, but the stock commercial version only needs and uses a 16-bit bus. The more important difference is that the MM/1 bus allows multiple bus masters... meaning that assuming a 68030 card becomes available, both it and the 070 could access any peripherals (34010 video, multiple serial port card, etc) on a backplane with more slots. As Jim Omura pointed out tho, what exists now may be more important than conjecture. - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
halkoD@batman.moravian.EDU (David Halko) (02/14/91)
In article <1991Jan27.135517.12380@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>, cocoiii@hobbes.ncsu.edu (John Vestal) writes: > First a little clairfication (sp), I did not say that I knew anything > about the TC-70. I just gave what I knew about the MM/1. As a > college student, I see the MM/1 as a more practical system than the > TC-70. I am NOT am impartial party. I favor the MM/1, David Halko > seems to favor the TC-70. > > > halkoD@batman.moravian.EDU (David Halko) writes: > > >The TC-70 comes with more memory than the MM/1 (from what I last remember...) > > True, 512K more I think. > > >Because of the extra memory, the TC-70 is slightly faster than a stock MM/1. > > Not sure about that... A little faster on graphic puts, probably, but > not in CPU speed. The extra memory frees up the machine and gives it a slight throughput advantage but nothing that can't be solved by putting more memory in the MM/1. > >The TC-70 will run on the KBus, making available for it a tremendous amount > >available expansion options... excellent for POS applications which need > >all the terminals they can get (aimed at Business) > > True, but the KBus is a 16-bit bus. The MM/1 has a 32-bit bus. If I remember correctly, the MM/1 dioes not come with a stock 32 bit bus, but comes with a 16 bit bus to the outside world like the KBus. This was subject for alot of discussion on the Princeton Listserver. > By the way, both machines are easily upgraded. You just have to take > the graphics processor out, and install a new one. Of course, you > would have to have new drivers, but that would be easy enough. I > really don't think anyone would go wrong with either system. I don't > think we should be fighting amoung ourselves about which OSK system is > best. Let's just lest the rest of the world know what we have. OS-9 > is the best OS that I have seen, and I have see MS-DOS, AmigaDOS, and > the Mac. Let's just let this one ride. Please David, correct me if The point of my article was to show that there was a descent market for the TC-70, which differed slightly from the MM/1. Rather than clashing, the markets complment themselves quite nicely. The MM/1 is mostlikely better suited for institutionalized applications, like low power, low cost multiuser/multitasking workstations, home computers, small business, and such while the TC70 market seemed better apt for people wanting to upgrade their current FHL machine, use for business (larger POS based systems with needs for lots of terminals), data aquisition at a larger scale (since many ports can be connected simultaneously due to the 20 slot bus structure which is inherent to the K-Bus.) These are two very similar machines aimed at two different markets and both shall fare well, hopefully, hopefully in the OS9 world. Most home users will choose the MM/1 because of the economical value of the machine (you don't get the speed, options, etc. in any other computer system at an equivalent price.) Franks current user base will be around for a long period of time and will definitely remain loyal through all of Frank's hard work, etc. Two very similar machines aimed at two very different market places, that is what we have here. The mail question is what the people choose if they overlap both market places and do not solidly fit into either one solidly. Those were the points that I had tried to highlight. > cocoiii (John Vestal) David J. Halko