Yet Another Old Cyber-Coot
ajp166 at bellatlantic.net
Fri Oct 27 19:43:07 CDT 2006
>Subject: Re: Yet Another Old Cyber-Coot
> From: ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell)
> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 00:08:13 +0100 (BST)
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
>> > I am not sure what you mean by 'in one package'. I personally think the
>> > Epson QX10 is one of the nicest CP/M machines ever, but that has a
>> > separate monitor and keyboard so it might not be 'one package'.
>> What I mean by "one package" is that the machine is a complete
>> computer -- monitor and keyboard built in. One plug, one diskette, and
>> you're off... My personal preference is for separates, in computers,
>Well, the Epson QX10 meets the second of those criteria. It's 3 units
>(processor box, keyboard, monitor), but there's only one mains cable (the
>monitor, and obviously the keyboard  take power from the PSU in the
Visual 1050, main box has two floppies and the monitor sits on top of it.
If you have the hard disk (sasi interface) then it's three. Z80, 128k
with 6502 to do monochrome text and graphics. Runs CP/MV2.2 and CP/M+.
For an all in one box, North*Star Advantage Z80, 128k One or two
floppies and hard disk Runs NS*dos, CP/M2.2 or UCSD PASCAL.
For laptop, PX8 with 120k ramdisk wedge. For totable Kaypro 4/84
with 360k 5.25 floppy, 720/781k 3.5" floppy, Turborom with personality
card, Handyman and Advent 1mb ramdisk.
In the range of sperates, will S100 do? I also have others.
> Although I do have a keyboard from a Ramtek graphics unit which does
>have it's own internal mains PSU.
>> > I'm also partial to the RML380Z, but mainly becasue that was the first
>> > CP/M machine I used )at school).. And to be honest, CP/M was a let-down
>> > after the LDOS I used at home on my TRS-80 Model 1.
My $.02 is LDOS was later and had some good ideas but the software base
of applications was smaller.
>> Perhaps... But CP/M was a hobbyist O/S that sort of became the
>> industry standard. Cool, in a way. The closest thing to THAT today is
>> Linux, and that's a tad bit complicated (and too good) for hacking it to
>> be much use.
>I've always thought the analogy is between CP/M and MSDOS (and not
>because of the obvious technical similarities). Both are pretty minimal
>OSes, both became industry standards, and in both cases there were often
>better choices available.
The biggest reason CP/M succeeded was it was good enough, easily ported to
new hardware and inexpensive. Because I abstracted the hardware sufficiently
the base of software grew as it ran on any machine that could run CP/M.
>> And, truth be told, it's clear that a lot of the people I've seen
>> post in the last 24 hours obviously know a lot more than I do about
>> quite a few things. That is as it should be. Normally, I'm the alpha
>> geek wherever I am, so it's refreshing to think I'll be LEARNING things
>> for a change. So far, it reminds me of the Aloha Computer Club back in
>> the 70s... Everybody is knowledgeable, and some VERY much so, but all
>> experienced in somewhat different areas. Seems like a friendly group,
>> too. I'm a painfully honest person (I know, I know, liars say that,
>> too) so I'll let people know when I don't know something. But, I have
>I think you are going to fit in here. I certainly consider that the day I
>stop learning is the day I die. And I think everyone here is basically
>very honset (certainly all the classic computer collectors I've met face
>to face are).
Clipped off the Monroe discussion. Nice machine but memory serves they
were not simple hardware!
More information about the cctech