Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!jarthur!spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu!tybalt.caltech.edu!toddpw
From: toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: The Apple IIf
Message-ID: <1990Feb24.061438.4364@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu>
Date: 24 Feb 90 06:14:38 GMT
References: <900222.14492460.054933@UWEC.CP6>
Sender: news@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 63

S707503@UWEC.BITNET (MARK RINECK) writes:

>Umm...some of the things mentioned in that paper sound an awful lot like
>something close to a MacIntosh.  Of course, there are some Amiga-like
>things in there, too. (the DMA and co-processor/blitter ideas) I would

DMA and coproc/blitter are good ideas in any computer, and they are extremely
cheap to do once you have the custom chip capability that Apple has.

>find it hard to blend any of the Amiga's screwy architecture into a
>new GS...the new GS mentioned is something like a Macintosh that is
>8/16 bit based instead of 16/32 bit. I like all the ideas presented,

The original Amiga architecture (pre-2000) was pretty durn clean, you had
chip ram which was like the //gs standard RAM except the Amiga guys handled
it much better. The //gs is largely a //e on steroids because of the Mega //,
which is an overrated and inappropriate compatibility box. It takes a good
amount of schematic knowhow (and not just a little inside info) to figure out
why this is true, but I can prove it with an oscilloscope and a few hours.

>but how about compatibility with ROM 1-3 (even though even ROM 1,2 and
>3 aren't exactly perfectly compatible!)?

That's no problem, Since the firmware, BASIC, and monitor take up little
space next to the toolbox, which will of course also be there. This machine
could be called the //gs+ or ROM 4 or something, but I think a completely
new (and much better!) custom chip set (that's what really makes the machine,
along with the internal peripherals) deserves its own letter. I chose F to
stand for Fast, Fixed, Flexible, and (hopefully) Future.

Before anyone worries, this new machine would be very //gs compatibile, because
the //gs architecture itself is still really simple (hey, it's an Apple //) and
it is only the implementation working around the Mega // that produces all this
redundancy and extra logic.

>Math Co-processor: How about a math co-processor to go along with the
>65816? A 65716 (or some other great number...that number is fictional.)?
>This follows the co-processor/Amiga style.

Have nothing against the idea. Except no such coprocessor exists yet, and
WDC plans to put a RISC FPU on chip when they make the 65832. If they make it.
About the only way the 65832 will ever see daylight is if Apple says, "we'd
like to buy it" and signs a contract with them. The chip's features look really
promising if Mensch can design it the way he wants to. But until then, we
have the Floating Point Engine (standard slot 68881/2 card).

>How about a multiple-format 3.5" drive? (This is pretty far-fetched.)
>A drive that can read/write Unidisk, GS, Mac and FDHD formats...and why
>not throw in MS-DOS, too...maybe a semi-intelligent drive/controller
>in the style of the old Commodore 1541 drives...but not that slow.

The FDHD already reads every 3.5 format that holds 1 Mb and under.
A disk controller for the present //gs Disk Port exists, it was developed for
the Apple //c+, and will probably go into the next Mac as well. Bravo to Apple
for much a much needed floppy coprocessor.

>Other than that, I like it.  Now, if Commodore/Amiga would just give the
>500/2000 some nice GS/Mac styling...

No comment :)

Todd Whitesel
toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu