Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!PT.CS.CMU.EDU!andrew.cmu.edu!ww0n+ From: ww0n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Walter Lloyd Wimer, III) Newsgroups: comp.sys.m6809 Subject: Re: Future of Coco Message-ID: Date: Sat, 21-Nov-87 10:32:28 EST Article-I.D.: andrew.sVdP8Ay00UoBzVk0As Posted: Sat Nov 21 10:32:28 1987 Date-Received: Mon, 23-Nov-87 03:47:20 EST Organization: Carnegie Mellon University Lines: 89 In-Reply-To: <821@cblpf.ATT.COM> > From: mdk@cblpf.ATT.COM (x5693) > Subject: Future of Coco > > Let's try to raise a little thought provoking discussion on one of our most > popular subjects: that little marvel called the Color Computer. > > What do you feel is the future of the Color Computer? What improvements in > design, peripherals, software will be available in the next ten years? I like the CoCo as much as the next guy, but realistically-speaking I'm not so sure it will still be around in *ten* years. > How will Tandy react to these improvments in marketing, software > development, etc.? What would *you* like to see in the way of improvement > of the Coco? > > I'd like to start the ball rolling by stating that Tandy will finally > realize what a powerful tool the Coco is and actively market it. I doubt it. > With the use of the OS9 operating system, more software developers will > enter the market. We should see a proliferation of desktop publishing > and graphics programs. > Tandy might even change the disk controller to access 40 and 80 > track drives, include a real-time clock, and a parallel interface. According to the new "Christmas Sale and Gift Catalog" the FD-502 floppy disk drive and controller is a 40-track, double-sided system. > With improvements in the CPU, the Coco will be able to access 1 MB of > memory on the motherboard. Now here's the one thing that might save the CoCo. If it's still around in ten years, I project that it will have a 68000-family processor along with a 6809 for I/O processing and compatibility with older models. We'll be running OS-9/68000 which will have improved also. Actually, from an assembly-language programmmer's view, I like the 6809 more than the 68000. But you can't argue against the 68000's comparative speed. > With the higher memory access, we can expect to see better graphics > capabilities, and higher clock speeds. (FYI: The clock speed is a design issue concerning the processor and memory speed. It has little or nothing to do with the quantity of memory.) > I would like to be able to access some MS-DOS applications (Did I > actually say that dirty word???:-):-)), so I would like to see some > utility that would allow the Coco to use MS-DOS programs. I DO NOT > want the Coco to go to an MS-DOS format. I like OS9, despite the problems. This is virtually impossible. To run any arbitrary MS-DOS application would require making the CoCo as IBM-compatible as possible -- it would have to have an Intel 8086-family processor (yuck!) and other associated hardware. It would be far better (and easier) to port high-level language source code for an MS-DOS application to OS-9. Of course, even this could be messy. I think OS-9 will continue to improve as long as Microware is making a profit. If people see that there is a market in developing sophisticated applications for OS-9, then the applications will be developed. Throw away your single-tasking MS-DOS junk. :-) :-) > One of the best things Tandy could do would be to change the design of > that stupid Multipak Interface. They could rotate the thing 90 degrees > so the paks plug into the back instead of sticking up and letting the > cables sprawl all over my desk. This sounds like a good idea. > > Well, I've rambled enough. What does the rest of the net think? > > > Mike King So have I. Now you all know what *I* think, for whatever it's worth. . . Walt Wimer Carnegie Mellon University Internet: ww0n+@andrew.cmu.edu Bitnet: ww0n+%andrew.cmu.edu@cmccvb UUCP: ...!psuvax1!andrew.cmu.edu!ww0n+