Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros

Expand Messages
  • Evan Koblentz
    ... I respectfully disagree. The SWTPC may be more significant from a technical perspective, but not from a historical perspective. I figure that technical
    Message 1 of 15 , Jun 16, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      >>> The SWTPc is more historically important than the II Plus/e IMHO,

      I respectfully disagree.

      The SWTPC may be more significant from a technical perspective, but not from
      a historical perspective. I figure that technical innovation is a subset of
      historic importance.




      -----Original Message-----
      From: Bill Degnan [mailto:billdeg@...]
      Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 11:12 PM
      To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: re: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros



      Despite the fact that the SWTPc 6800 is probably the most famous 6800
      processor-based computer, and it was one of the first micros, it's not as
      well known as the others. The SWTPc is more historically important than the
      II Plus/e IMHO, but as long as it's displayed somewhere, that's good enough
      for me. bd


      -------- Original Message --------
      > From: "Evan Koblentz" <evan@...>
      > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 10:43 PM
      > To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros
      >
      > So now that I have the list handy ... Bill suggested:
      >
      > Altair 8800
      > IBM 5150
      > SWTPC 6800
      > Commodore PET 2001
      > Osborne 1
      > TRS-80 Model 1
      > Commodore 64
      > Apple II+ (or IIe)
      >
      > I think we should remove the SWTPC from this exhibit and relocate it
      > to our "best of the rest" exhibit or some future exhibit about the
      > homebrew generation. In its place I think we should put the Mac 128K
      > (first Mac).
      >
      > The logic here is to limit this exhibit to systems that are massively
      > historically significant -- but specifically the ones that are
      > significant to regular people, not just computer geeks. This should
      > be our most representative real-world exhibit.
      >
      > Having said that, anyone have suggestions for what we should add or
      > remove from the list?




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

      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Bob Applegate
      I agree. The SWTPC machines were popular to a small set of people back then, but it was not widely covered in the press, and never got a whole lot of
      Message 2 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree.  The SWTPC machines were popular to a small set of people back then, but it
        was not widely covered in the press, and never got a whole lot of publicity.  If you asked
        people around back then to name a few key machines, I doubt any SWTPC product 
        would make the list.

        The ][+ is on the list, but not the //e.  The "two series" was fading when the //e came out,
        but the ][ or the ][+ was really a mass marketed machine that the average person could
        use.  They were extremely popular.

        Bob


        On Jun 16, 2008, at 11:12 PM, Bill Degnan wrote:


        Despite the fact that the SWTPc 6800 is probably the most famous 6800 processor-based computer, and it was one of the first micros, it's not as well known as the others. The SWTPc is more historically important than the II Plus/e IMHO, but as long as it's displayed somewhere, that's good enough for me. 
        bd 


        -------- Original Message -------- 
        > From: "Evan Koblentz" <evan@...> 
        > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 10:43 PM 
        > To: midatlanticretro@ yahoogroups. com 
        > Subject: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros 
        > 
        > So now that I have the list handy ... Bill suggested: 
        > 
        > Altair 8800 
        > IBM 5150 
        > SWTPC 6800 
        > Commodore PET 2001 
        > Osborne 1 
        > TRS-80 Model 1 
        > Commodore 64 
        > Apple II+ (or IIe) 
        > 
        > I think we should remove the SWTPC from this exhibit and relocate it to our 
        > "best of the rest" exhibit or some future exhibit about the homebrew 
        > generation. In its place I think we should put the Mac 128K (first Mac). 
        > 
        > The logic here is to limit this exhibit to systems that are massively 
        > historically significant -- but specifically the ones that are significant 
        > to regular people, not just computer geeks. This should be our most 
        > representative real-world exhibit. 
        > 
        > Having said that, anyone have suggestions for what we should add or remove 
        > from the list? 


      • Bob Applegate
        One other point I forgot to mention. The key to any exhibit is for people to associate with it. If you took 1000 people who owned personal computers in 1980,
        Message 3 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          One other point I forgot to mention.  The key to any exhibit is for people to associate with it.
          If you took 1000 people who owned personal computers in 1980, few would have had an
          SWTPC machine, but almost everyone would have owned one of the other machines on
          the list (except for the PC which wasn't out yet).

          Focus on attracting people and getting them to "connect" with the display, not the geek
          stuff.

          Bob


          On Jun 17, 2008, at 6:42 AM, Bob Applegate wrote:

          I agree.  The SWTPC machines were popular to a small set of people back then, but it

          was not widely covered in the press, and never got a whole lot of publicity.  If you asked
          people around back then to name a few key machines, I doubt any SWTPC product 
          would make the list.

          The ][+ is on the list, but not the //e.  The "two series" was fading when the //e came out,
          but the ][ or the ][+ was really a mass marketed machine that the average person could
          use.  They were extremely popular.

          Bob


          On Jun 16, 2008, at 11:12 PM, Bill Degnan wrote:


          Despite the fact that the SWTPc 6800 is probably the most famous 6800 processor-based computer, and it was one of the first micros, it's not as well known as the others. The SWTPc is more historically important than the II Plus/e IMHO, but as long as it's displayed somewhere, that's good enough for me. 
          bd 


          -------- Original Message -------- 
          > From: "Evan Koblentz" <evan@...> 
          > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 10:43 PM 
          > To: midatlanticretro@ yahoogroups. com 
          > Subject: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros 
          > 
          > So now that I have the list handy ... Bill suggested: 
          > 
          > Altair 8800 
          > IBM 5150 
          > SWTPC 6800 
          > Commodore PET 2001 
          > Osborne 1 
          > TRS-80 Model 1 
          > Commodore 64 
          > Apple II+ (or IIe) 
          > 
          > I think we should remove the SWTPC from this exhibit and relocate it to our 
          > "best of the rest" exhibit or some future exhibit about the homebrew 
          > generation. In its place I think we should put the Mac 128K (first Mac). 
          > 
          > The logic here is to limit this exhibit to systems that are massively 
          > historically significant -- but specifically the ones that are significant 
          > to regular people, not just computer geeks. This should be our most 
          > representative real-world exhibit. 
          > 
          > Having said that, anyone have suggestions for what we should add or remove 
          > from the list? 




        • Evan
          ... I sure do wish we could get a straight Apple II ....!
          Message 4 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            >>> the ][ or the ][+ was really a mass marketed machine that the average person could use. They were extremely popular.

            I sure do wish we could get a "straight" Apple II ....!
          • Evan
            ... I generally agree. Also: the connection visitors make with our exhibits doesn t have to be based solely on name recognition. For example, this was a
            Message 5 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              >>> key to any exhibit is for people to associate with it. If you took 1000 people who owned personal computers in 1980, few would have had an SWTPC machine, but almost everyone would have owned one of the other machines on the list (except for the PC which wasn't out yet). ...... Focus on attracting people and getting them to "connect" with the display, not the geek stuff.

              I generally agree. Also: the connection visitors make with our exhibits doesn't have to be based solely on name recognition. For example, "this was a local company" or "this was THE pioneering minicomputer" can also be connections.
            • B. Degnan
              Name one technical innovation that came from the ii plus...it s just a // with newer ROMs, same with the iie, it s the oops we messed up on the Apple ///
              Message 6 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Name one technical innovation that came from the ii plus...it's just a //
                with newer ROMs, same with the iie, it's the "oops we messed up on the
                Apple ///" protect Apple's marketshare system. The SWTPc was a
                revolutionary system, and for about 6 months, one of the only alternatives
                to the Altair in late 1975 early 1976.
                Bill

                At 11:21 PM 6/16/2008 -0400, you wrote:
                > >>> The SWTPc is more historically important than the II Plus/e IMHO,
                >
                >I respectfully disagree.
                >
                >The SWTPC may be more significant from a technical perspective, but not from
                >a historical perspective. I figure that technical innovation is a subset of
                >historic importance.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >-----Original Message-----
                >From: Bill Degnan [mailto:billdeg@...]
                >Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 11:12 PM
                >To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
                >Subject: re: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros
                >
                >
                >
                >Despite the fact that the SWTPc 6800 is probably the most famous 6800
                >processor-based computer, and it was one of the first micros, it's not as
                >well known as the others. The SWTPc is more historically important than the
                >II Plus/e IMHO, but as long as it's displayed somewhere, that's good enough
                >for me. bd
                >
                >
                >-------- Original Message --------
                > > From: "Evan Koblentz" <evan@...>
                > > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 10:43 PM
                > > To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros
                > >
                > > So now that I have the list handy ... Bill suggested:
                > >
                > > Altair 8800
                > > IBM 5150
                > > SWTPC 6800
                > > Commodore PET 2001
                > > Osborne 1
                > > TRS-80 Model 1
                > > Commodore 64
                > > Apple II+ (or IIe)
                > >
                > > I think we should remove the SWTPC from this exhibit and relocate it
                > > to our "best of the rest" exhibit or some future exhibit about the
                > > homebrew generation. In its place I think we should put the Mac 128K
                > > (first Mac).
                > >
                > > The logic here is to limit this exhibit to systems that are massively
                > > historically significant -- but specifically the ones that are
                > > significant to regular people, not just computer geeks. This should
                > > be our most representative real-world exhibit.
                > >
                > > Having said that, anyone have suggestions for what we should add or
                > > remove from the list?
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >------------------------------------
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >------------------------------------
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
              • B. Degnan
                ... To follow up to my earlier point....I agree that the SWTPc is not necessary and that people will know the Apple s better. I was not there (in 1975-76),
                Message 7 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  At 07:45 AM 6/17/2008 -0400, you wrote:
                  > >>> key to any exhibit is for people to associate with it. If you took
                  > 1000 people who owned personal computers in 1980, few would have had an
                  > SWTPC machine, but almost everyone would have owned one of the other
                  > machines on the list (except for the PC which wasn't out yet). ......
                  > Focus on attracting people and getting them to "connect" with the
                  > display, not the geek stuff.
                  >
                  >I generally agree. Also: the connection visitors make with our exhibits
                  >doesn't have to be based solely on name recognition. For example, "this
                  >was a local company" or "this was THE pioneering minicomputer" can also be
                  >connections.
                  >


                  To follow up to my earlier point....I agree that the SWTPc is not necessary
                  and that people will know the Apple's better. I was not there (in
                  1975-76), but from the coverage in the major magazines of the day, it
                  appears that the SWTPc was more popular than people think from the comments
                  in this thread. It was one of the most heavily advertised systems. It was
                  very well known and had a golden era of about a year which is a lifetime
                  back then. What did it in was order fulfillment problems, and eventually
                  the 6800 processor itself. We cover this topic in my class, processor
                  influence on early micro markets.
                • Bob Applegate
                  ... The SWTPC was no more revolutionary than any other system, and I disagree that it had a big following. I was there, and other machines had far more
                  Message 8 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    B. Degnan <billdeg@...> wrote :

                    > Name one technical innovation that came from the ii plus...it's just a //
                    > with newer ROMs, same with the iie, it's the "oops we messed up on the
                    > Apple ///" protect Apple's marketshare system. The SWTPc was a
                    > revolutionary system, and for about 6 months, one of the only alternatives
                    > to the Altair in late 1975 early 1976.

                    The SWTPC was no more revolutionary than any other system, and I disagree that
                    it had a big following. I was there, and other machines had far more
                    coverage and stuff written about them than SWTPC. FWIW, I really liked their
                    machines, but there wasn't a big software base and there wasn't as much
                    enthusiasm for it than some of the other machines. Some of their other products
                    were pretty cool at the time, such as that 40 column printer and the cheap
                    terminal, cassette interface adaptor, etc.

                    The ][+ was an extremely common machine that really established the 6502. It's
                    also historically interesting in that most people who view the exhibit will
                    probably have iPods, iPhones or other new Apple products. Very few of the
                    early computer companies survived, which makes the early Apple products very
                    interesting.

                    As much as I hate to admit it (Remember, I had to program Apple clones as a
                    job and hated the "architecture"), the Apple did a heck of a lot of stuff in
                    very cool ways. You might not think there is anything inovative in it, but
                    look at how much was done in software versus hardware. There is NO disk
                    controller in the common sense... it's done in software! Hardware was very
                    expensive back then, so the Woz did it in 6502 assembly language instead.
                    Scary, yes, but also quite innovative. Having bank select of ROM/RAM so you
                    could run code out of ROM while also putting new code into the RAM at the
                    same address and then switch to RAM for all accesses once the code was loaded.
                    Apple also had some pretty difficult patents on their color generatiion logic
                    that Franklin struggled to work around.

                    Bob



                    ___________________________________
                    NOCC, http://nocc.sourceforge.net
                  • Bill Dromgoole
                    1977 Motorola 6800 Computer Kit ~ Unassembled Thought someone may be interested. http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=320262160371 ... From:
                    Message 9 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      1977 Motorola 6800 Computer Kit ~ Unassembled
                      Thought someone may be interested.


                      http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=320262160371



                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "B. Degnan" <billdeg@...>
                      To: <midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 8:15 AM
                      Subject: Re: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros


                      > At 07:45 AM 6/17/2008 -0400, you wrote:
                      >> >>> key to any exhibit is for people to associate with it. If you took
                      >> 1000 people who owned personal computers in 1980, few would have had an
                      >> SWTPC machine, but almost everyone would have owned one of the other
                      >> machines on the list (except for the PC which wasn't out yet). ......
                      >> Focus on attracting people and getting them to "connect" with the
                      >> display, not the geek stuff.
                      >>
                      >>I generally agree. Also: the connection visitors make with our exhibits
                      >>doesn't have to be based solely on name recognition. For example, "this
                      >>was a local company" or "this was THE pioneering minicomputer" can also be
                      >>connections.
                      >>
                      >
                      >
                      > To follow up to my earlier point....I agree that the SWTPc is not
                      > necessary
                      > and that people will know the Apple's better. I was not there (in
                      > 1975-76), but from the coverage in the major magazines of the day, it
                      > appears that the SWTPc was more popular than people think from the
                      > comments
                      > in this thread. It was one of the most heavily advertised systems. It
                      > was
                      > very well known and had a golden era of about a year which is a lifetime
                      > back then. What did it in was order fulfillment problems, and eventually
                      > the 6800 processor itself. We cover this topic in my class, processor
                      > influence on early micro markets.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • Evan Koblentz
                      Hi, Bill D. #2. Please introduce yourself. :) ... From: Bill Dromgoole [mailto:drummy@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:42 AM To:
                      Message 10 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi, Bill D. #2.

                        Please introduce yourself. :)



                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Bill Dromgoole [mailto:drummy@...]
                        Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:42 AM
                        To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: Re: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros


                        1977 Motorola 6800 Computer Kit ~ Unassembled
                        Thought someone may be interested.


                        http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=320262160371
                      • Dan Roganti
                        Evan, I sincerely feel the SWTPC has a place in the forefront of the micro s exhibit. Now that there s plans to cover the windows, isn t there more room along
                        Message 11 of 15 , Jun 17, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Evan,

                          I sincerely feel the SWTPC has a place in the forefront of the micro's exhibit.
                          Now that there's plans to cover the windows, isn't there more room along that wall for to include additional exhibit displays, such as, the SWTPC ?


                          B. Degnan wrote:
                          but from the coverage in the major magazines of the day, it 
                          appears that the SWTPc was more popular than people think from the comments 
                          in this thread.  It was one of the most heavily advertised systems.  It was 
                          very well known and had a golden era of about a year which is a lifetime 
                          back then.  
                            
                          This is very true. I've read every issue of Popular Electronics,Radio Electronics, and Byte during that time to know that SWTPC was not a just a blip on the radar screen.

                          Bob Applegate wrote:
                            
                          One other point I forgot to mention.  The key to any exhibit is for people to associate with it.
                          If you took 1000 people who owned personal computers in 1980, few would have had an
                          SWTPC machine, but almost everyone would have owned one of the other machines on
                          the list (except for the PC which wasn't out yet).
                          1980 was by far a different world than in 1975, this is comparing apples to oranges(add your pun here). Practically every year during the 70's there was a "next gen" in home computers being designed. It was quite apparent the sales of SWTPC were falling beginning in 1978 since the Apple II, TRS80 and the PET2001 were released--but so were the Altair's, Imsai's of that day.

                          The SWTPC was no more revolutionary than any other system, 
                          As for the innovative feature in the SWTPC, it was a complete turnkey system before Altair/Imsai ever thought if it--no front panel needed, no bootstraping,etc--"instant on", terminal access, and Basic in Rom.
                          and I disagree that it had a big following.  I was there, and other machines had far more
                          coverage and stuff written about them than SWTPC.  
                          Bob ?!  would you know that SWTPC was one the biggest electronic kit makers since the 60's after Heathkit. Anybody who was anyone in electronics back then, frequently read Popular Electronics, Radio Electronics(and Byte), would have built(at least helped someone with) one of their electronics kits. Including their computer kits, beginning with the TV typewriter. Their strength lied in the fact that it relied on the community of fellow engineers to design kits while SWTPC provided the manufacturing and logistics to let you buy them.
                          Some of their other products
                          were pretty cool at the time, such as that 40 column printer and the cheap
                          terminal, cassette interface adaptor, etc.
                            
                          The SWTPC 6800 was by far the most *cost effective computer kit* than any Altair or Imsai of the day--they were the cheapest with most features--you could get the same functionality at a far lower cost--just read about it.
                          It's also historically interesting in that most people who view the exhibit will
                          probably have iPods, iPhones or other new Apple products.  Very few of the
                          early computer companies survived, which makes the early Apple products very
                          interesting.
                            
                          I realize there may be limited exhibit space at the moment till all the renovation is done. But I hope we don't stoop to making it a museum just for the popular. I also realize you just can't have every micro there is as found on oldcomputers.com--unless you have as much room as CHM. I don't see how the Atari 400/800 has been ignored, this was quite a significant achievement for that company.

                          just my 2cents
                          =Dan
                          [ Pittsburgh --- http://www2.applegate.org/~ragooman/   ]
                          

                        • schwepes@moog.netaxs.com
                          In addition to its ancestory to the iPod is the fact many of the younger viewers used various kinds of Apples in school during the eighties. bs
                          Message 12 of 15 , Jun 20, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            In addition to its ancestory to the iPod is the fact many of the younger
                            viewers used various kinds of Apples in school during the 'eighties.
                            bs


                            On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Bob Applegate wrote:

                            > B. Degnan <billdeg@...> wrote :
                            >
                            > > Name one technical innovation that came from the ii plus...it's just a //
                            > > with newer ROMs, same with the iie, it's the "oops we messed up on the
                            > > Apple ///" protect Apple's marketshare system. The SWTPc was a
                            > > revolutionary system, and for about 6 months, one of the only alternatives
                            > > to the Altair in late 1975 early 1976.
                            >
                            > The SWTPC was no more revolutionary than any other system, and I disagree that
                            > it had a big following. I was there, and other machines had far more
                            > coverage and stuff written about them than SWTPC. FWIW, I really liked their
                            > machines, but there wasn't a big software base and there wasn't as much
                            > enthusiasm for it than some of the other machines. Some of their other products
                            > were pretty cool at the time, such as that 40 column printer and the cheap
                            > terminal, cassette interface adaptor, etc.
                            >
                            > The ][+ was an extremely common machine that really established the 6502. It's
                            > also historically interesting in that most people who view the exhibit will
                            > probably have iPods, iPhones or other new Apple products. Very few of the
                            > early computer companies survived, which makes the early Apple products very
                            > interesting.
                            >
                            > As much as I hate to admit it (Remember, I had to program Apple clones as a
                            > job and hated the "architecture"), the Apple did a heck of a lot of stuff in
                            > very cool ways. You might not think there is anything inovative in it, but
                            > look at how much was done in software versus hardware. There is NO disk
                            > controller in the common sense... it's done in software! Hardware was very
                            > expensive back then, so the Woz did it in 6502 assembly language instead.
                            > Scary, yes, but also quite innovative. Having bank select of ROM/RAM so you
                            > could run code out of ROM while also putting new code into the RAM at the
                            > same address and then switch to RAM for all accesses once the code was loaded.
                            > Apple also had some pretty difficult patents on their color generatiion logic
                            > that Franklin struggled to work around.
                            >
                            > Bob
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > ___________________________________
                            > NOCC, http://nocc.sourceforge.net
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > ------------------------------------
                            >
                            > Yahoo! Groups Links
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                          • Evan
                            Ancestry to the iPod? That s quite a stretch other than they re both successful Apple products. ... From: schwepes@moog.netaxs.com Subj: RE:
                            Message 13 of 15 , Jun 20, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Ancestry to the iPod? That's quite a stretch other than they're both successful Apple products.



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

                              From: schwepes@...
                              Subj: RE: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros
                              Date: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:00 pm
                              Size: 3K
                              To: "midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com" <midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com>

                              In addition to its ancestory to the iPod is the fact many of the younger
                              viewers used various kinds of Apples in school during the 'eighties.
                              bs


                              On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Bob Applegate wrote:

                              > B. Degnan <billdeg@...> wrote :
                              >
                              > > Name one technical innovation that came from the ii plus...it's just a //
                              > > with newer ROMs, same with the iie, it's the "oops we messed up on the
                              > > Apple ///" protect Apple's marketshare system. The SWTPc was a
                              > > revolutionary system, and for about 6 months, one of the only alternatives
                              > > to the Altair in late 1975 early 1976.
                              >
                              > The SWTPC was no more revolutionary than any other system, and I disagree that
                              > it had a big following. I was there, and other machines had far more
                              > coverage and stuff written about them than SWTPC. FWIW, I really liked their
                              > machines, but there wasn't a big software base and there wasn't as much
                              > enthusiasm for it than some of the other machines. Some of their other products
                              > were pretty cool at the time, such as that 40 column printer and the cheap
                              > terminal, cassette interface adaptor, etc.
                              >
                              > The ][+ was an extremely common machine that really established the 6502. It's
                              > also historically interesting in that most people who view the exhibit will
                              > probably have iPods, iPhones or other new Apple products. Very few of the
                              > early computer companies survived, which makes the early Apple products very
                              > interesting.
                              >
                              > As much as I hate to admit it (Remember, I had to program Apple clones as a
                              > job and hated the "architecture"), the Apple did a heck of a lot of stuff in
                              > very cool ways. You might not think there is anything inovative in it, but
                              > look at how much was done in software versus hardware. There is NO disk
                              > controller in the common sense... it's done in software! Hardware was very
                              > expensive back then, so the Woz did it in 6502 assembly language instead.
                              > Scary, yes, but also quite innovative. Having bank select of ROM/RAM so you
                              > could run code out of ROM while also putting new code into the RAM at the
                              > same address and then switch to RAM for all accesses once the code was loaded.
                              > Apple also had some pretty difficult patents on their color generatiion logic
                              > that Franklin struggled to work around.
                              >
                              > Bob
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > ___________________________________
                              > NOCC, http://nocc.sourceforge.net
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > ------------------------------------
                              >
                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >

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

                              Yahoo! Groups Links
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.