trs-80 model II trouble--problem solved..and follow-up
cclist at sydex.com
Fri Dec 18 00:48:54 CST 2009
On 17 Dec 2009 at 21:07, Fred Cisin wrote:
> Let's not do like Gibson/Spinrite.
> Perhaps the manufacturer had some test for the chips that was more
> rigorous than what we have. If they say that their product is bad,
> I'll believe them, even if it "tests good" most of the time.
Let's put this in its historical context. When Intel started making
16K 16-pin DRAM, yields weren't terrific, so they sold a limited
number of "half-good" parts--2109s early on, probably to mark their
About 1978-79, the US got in a trade spat with Japan over DRAM
"dumping" and the supply of DRAM abruptly dried up (pesaging other
similar periods yet to come). You couldn't find 16K DRAM for any
price in quantity. There was at least one break-in for the sole
purpose of stealing DRAM that I'm aware of, nearly putting the firm
out of business.. (Later, there was a hijacking of a truck carrying
mostly CPU chips, but that's another story). The Mercury-News
archives doubtless has the story somewhere.
So, given the situation, sifting through 8K DRAM to find decent 16K
parts was quite reasonable. I recall that our 2109s were tendered
somewhat apologetically by our Intel sales rep when we asked for 2117
DRAM engineering samples.
These were the purple ceramic carriers with gold lid version.
Plastic was later. When the antidumping order was lifted, we
received a bunch of NEC uPD416s. We were surprised at how much
better they were than the Intel parts (I still have those too).
More information about the cctalk