Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!oliveb!amiga!cbmvax!grr
From: grr@cbmvax.UUCP (George Robbins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: A-500 Parallel port differences
Message-ID: <2662@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Oct-87 06:36:26 EST
Article-I.D.: cbmvax.2662
Posted: Fri Oct 30 06:36:26 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Nov-87 22:29:14 EST
References: <11998@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Reply-To: grr@cbmvax.UUCP (George Robbins)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 20

In article <11998@decwrl.DEC.COM> kruger@16bits.dec.com (Digital Drills: When analog bits won't do) writes:
> About the differences in the A-500 parallel port -- it probably can't be
> powered because the 500 can't deliver the power. That power supply is wimpy,
> and it running on the edge. Can any C-A engineer verify this?

This sounds like a "have you stopped beating your wife" question to me.

The power supply for the A500 is fairly conservatively rated.  It is certainly
not "on the line".  Most of the problems we've seen have been mechanical in
nature - pieces that don't stay where they should when you drop the thing.

The reason that we didn't put hundereds of amps of 5 volts on the parallel
connector was that we wanted it to be safe to plug in any device attached
to an IBM printer cable.  The IBM parallel connector has *NO* 5 volts on it,
and no spare pins to put it on.

-- 
George Robbins - now working for,	uucp: {ihnp4|rutgers|allegra}!cbmvax!grr
but no way officially representing	arpa: out to lunch...
Commodore, Engineering Department	fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)