Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!apple!portal!cup.portal.com!-Rich- From: -Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: ZipGS GX Message-ID: <36865@cup.portal.com> Date: 13 Dec 90 05:42:33 GMT References: <36819@cup.portal.com> <1990Dec12.061924.28377@nntp-server.caltech.edu> Organization: The Portal System (TM) Lines: 66 >-Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) writes: > >> Zip's spokesman was very verbose, and hardly let me talk. It was >>mostly a prepared speech. I found out that if you upgrade the SRAM, then your >>warranty is null and void. He seemed to think that most people who upgraded >>their systems were somehow smart enough to pull the CPU (with extensive >>handholding), but nowhere near smart enough to replace the SRAM chips. He >>did not say this directly, and I never got a chance to make the comparison. > >I've talked to the zip guys (luckily for me they are within driving distance) >on the phone (I haven't managed to get a ride over to swap my board for the >RAMFast fix version yet). I have found them to be fairly nice but they got >really awkward after I asked them a technical question -- until I told them >to explain as techie as they wanted. > >Most people ARE smart enough to pull the CPU. Selecting SRAMs of the correct >size and pinout for upgrades is not something I would want to try unless I >knew more about which chips the Zip was designed for. Since Zip hasn't >released this info, they are fully justified in discouraging people from >risking their accelerators. The main reason I agree with this policy is that >Zip is moving to a cache RAM combination that uses faster chips for tag >(I assume in preparation for the ASIC 65816) -- chips which are NOT widely >available to consumers. Looking at my Zip GSX, it has two skinny 25 ns tag >RAM's -- don't count on JameCo carrying these. > >Todd Whitesel >toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu Gee Todd, I asked them about SRAM speed, and got the propaganda speech about idiots putting chips in backwards. Never was access speed mentioned, even thoug h this was my question. I got the feeling that he thought I had something to destroy my ZipChip GSX, and he referred me back to Roger Coats. Guess what, I got off work early again today to call RC. They do not answer their phone. Since warranty's are somewhat time dependant, I am beginning to get concerned. Three days of effort, and nothing. Did RC close for the holidays? Did they change their hours? If not, I will have to attempt to get in some words with that chatterbox from Zip. I work with CMOS all day, every day, and can give lectures on static hazards, and proper grounding. I do not revert to a caveman (static filled) the moment I get home. I have taked much better than reasonable precautions, after all, this is ***my*** stuff. Like I said, if it works, great. If it don't, expect your cost's to double, wether or not anything happens, at least if you order from Roger Coats. I have gone to a great deal of trouble, and not inconsiderable expense, with nothing at all to show for it. And there is an irregularity on my Zip. It came with a score mark on the front. I have no idea how it could be done, but it seemed only to affect the breadboar d area for the voltage regulator. Perhaps it goes farther than the eye can see. To everyone who's Zip works, congratulations. To everyone considering purchacin g one, be advised. At least if you own a RAMFAST, or intend to buy one... Rich -Rich-@cup.portal.com