Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!psuvax1!vu-vlsi!cbmvax!daveh From: daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Obsolescence of A1000 Message-ID: <2619@cbmvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 26-Oct-87 18:15:32 EST Article-I.D.: cbmvax.2619 Posted: Mon Oct 26 18:15:32 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 29-Oct-87 20:46:39 EST References: Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA Lines: 27 in article , mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Portuesi) says: > > I understand that the bus timing is much more robust on the 2000 than > the 1000, simply because the 2000 contains no KickStart tower to > louse things up. Would this get in the way of a compatible card > cage? The local bus timing on a 2000 will be better in many respects due to the ROM and some higher integrations (Fat Agnus comes to mind here). But what's more important is that expansion devices, except for something sitting in the coprocessor slot, don't care about this. 'Cause they're all properly buffered, and of course there's no problem of distance between buffers and the 68000. So an A2000 backplane for the A1000 would be no problem at all. As some of us have mentioned before, we use an open-air (no case) backplane for the A1000 around here. All the A2000 cards (except for coprocessor slot cards) work in this just fine. I'd expect anything that Perry's gang or anyone else whips up could work just as well on an A1000. > Michael Portuesi / Carnegie-Mellon University > ARPA/UUCP: mp1u+@andrew.cmu.edu > BITNET: rainwalker@drycas (a uVax-1 run by CMU Computer Club) -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga Usenet: {ihnp4|caip|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh "The B2000 Guy" PLINK : D-DAVE H BIX : hazy "Computers are what happen when you give up sleeping" - Iggy the Cat