Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!ames!sdcsvax!sdcc6!loral!dml From: dml@loral.UUCP (Dave Lewis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.m6809 Subject: Re: Future of CoCo3 Message-ID: <1494@loral.UUCP> Date: 9 Dec 87 00:24:10 GMT References: <750@potpourri.UUCP> <1447@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> Reply-To: dml@loral.UUCP (Dave Lewis) Followup-To: comp.sys.m6809 Distribution: na Organization: Loral Instrumentation, San Diego Lines: 69 Keywords: future, coco3, graphics Summary: That ain't a CoCo! In article <1447@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> koonce@bosco.UUCP (tim koonce) writes: > > A lot of people have been talking about the need to expand the >CoCo's memory from 512k to several meg. As I see it, the problem with >memory right now is _not_ the 512k total memory limit, but the 64k >per-process limit..... > ....a change of processor to one with a large linear >address space, i.e. a 680x0. More memory is of dubious usefulness >under the other limitations imposed by OS9 and the 6809. > ....discusses other limitations of the CoCo3.... So, what you want is a 68000-based machine (possibly with options to add 68010/020/030) that can be expanded to 4 megs or more, hardware-assisted video, built-in disk controller, and more I/O. Such a machine is already available; it's called the Amiga. DON'T TRY TO MAKE A LAMBOURGHINI OUT OF A FORD! The Color Computer is what it always was: a low-cost computer with enough power and features for the serious home user. It's not a CAD workstation, a professional programmer's development station, or a desktop video engine. The 'enhancements' you recommend would price it right out of its market. Do you seriously think such a machine could sell for less than $600? I don't. I think it would compete directly with the Amiga 500, and suffer the enormous disadvantage of being upwardly compatible with a "toy" instead of downwardly compatible with some really advanced hardware (the Amiga 1000 and 2000). ("toy" is not my term; it's from the ignorant bean-counter types that buy all those IBM's.) I'd say a 68000 Color Computer is AT LEAST 5 years away, probably more, possibly never. Look how long it took Radio Shack to make the first real change, and how reluctantly they did it. I went to the Radio Shack booth at this year's San Diego Computer Society show and asked why they had three un-klones* and NO CoCo 3's. They said the CoCo 3 was "being discontinued". AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!! I said, sure, they're going to discontinue the only thing they've ever done right, that had sold 200,000 units before the first shipment reached the loading dock. Now I realize I've said some unpleasant things here -- but don't flame me as a CoCo-basher. I wrote NewDisk, the shareware OS-9 disk driver for the CoCo 1&2; rewrote OS9Gen and Cobbler to work with double-sided disks; did new versions of MakDir, Dir, and Dump; and I'm still working on OS-9 utility programs for CoCo 1, 2 and 3. I purchased an Amiga 1000 in July, which I spend most of my time on; I also bought a CoCo 3 last month. I think there's still a lot of unused potential in the current hardware, why build a whole new computer just because there are some faster ones out there? I've been off the net for a while because news-posting from my site has been broke for the last four months or so, what can I say, I'm back. * I propose the term "klone" for all the IBM pee-pee me-too's out there. Since Radio Shack's line of 8086 machines are not really `compatible', they should be called "un-klones". ------------------------------- Dave Lewis Loral Instrumentation San Diego hp-sdd --\ ihnp4 --\ sdcrdcf --\ bang --\ kontron -\ csndvax ---\ calmasd -->-->!crash --\ celerity --->------->!sdcsvax!sdcc3 --->--->!loral!dml (uucp) dcdwest ---/ gould9 --/ "The day-to-day travails of the IBM programmer are so amusing to those of us who are fortunate enough never to have been one -- sort of like watching Charlie Chaplin trying to cook a shoe." -- the new and improved Fortune database -------------------------------