Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site ea.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!jejones
From: jejones@ea.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.6809
Subject: Re: rumor: Tandy Model 9
Message-ID: <7300026@ea.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Nov-84 18:23:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ea.7300026
Posted: Fri Nov 23 18:23:00 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 26-Nov-84 08:02:02 EST
References: <344@busch.UUCP>
Lines: 29
Nf-ID: #R:busch:-34400:ea:7300026:000:1369
Nf-From: ea!jejones    Nov 23 17:23:00 1984

/***** ea:net.micro.6809 / busch!tfp /  8:38 pm  Nov 20, 1984 */
    This week's Infoworld (or thereabouts), John Dvorak's column:
Claimed that there was going to be a Tandy Model 9 with OS-9 (& of
course the 6809) out soon... I guess, a new and improved CoCo?
/* ---------- */

Dunno--although the "of course" isn't quite true; it *could* run
OS-9/68000.

I definitely hope that he's correct, and that said beast will run OS-9
Level Two if it's a 6809, and that the (relatively) new Motorola RMS
chip set will be used on it. (Said chips were mentioned in the CoCo
session at the OS-9 conference at Des Moines. (For those who didn't see
M. Knudsen's postings on them round about year's beginning, they're a
VERY souped-up version of the VDG and SAM chip. Examples:  24*80 text
(with real lower case), 640 * 400 graphics with some ridiculously large
palette (alas, no mixed graphics and text modes, but *I* wouldn't
complain...)) Also, there was a fellow in the audience who I think
would've sworn on a stack of Bibles that RS was coming out with a 68000
box...)

The thought that Tandy might no longer be afraid of undercutting
their inferior Z-80 and 8086 boxes by selling a 6809-based machine
without gutting it in I/O is a pleasant one indeed. (Not that it's
only *their* Z-80 and 8086 boxes that are inferior. *Any* Z-80 or
8086 box is inferior.)

					James Jones