Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Am 17.01.2011 13:30, schrieb alain.ha...@free.fr: I personnaly don't wonder about keeping an original microdrive functional or not. However, i would prefer the device could be mounted on original QL and not only with SGC. Any reasonnable speed ( floppy disk) will be good for me. Regards, Alain HAOUI - Mail Original - De: Peterpg...@q40.de À: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Envoyé: Lundi 17 Janvier 2011 10h53:32 GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Berne / Rome / Stockholm / Vienne Objet: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey paul wrote: A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Personally, the option of tucking the adapter/interface inside the standard QL case has a lot of appeal. would be cool, even compairable to using the cartidge slot in the Timex 2068 in the 'Good Ol Days' if there is enough internal physical space for the unit to reside the outer of the 2 cavities, that would be just peachy keen! If I go for option D, I don't think space will be a problem. The device should fit both microdrive locations. To those who prefer option D: * How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? * How important would be speed? (To reach maximum speed, it is impossible to use the microdrive connectors for an SD-card device. A second board would be required, attached at a place where some of the 68008 bus is available. Higher costs, and might work for GoldCard/SuperGoldCard only.) All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm I'm not even sure whether I still have some microdrive tape mislaid somewhere - So I don't care about a working drive. Cheers Tobias ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Tobias Fröschle wrote: For me it should be faster than a floppy disk but can be slower than a hard disk. I am surprised that speed seems not _that_ big issue for most. I hope this does not originate from the perception that SD cards can be swapped at any time, like a floppy replacement. As mentioned in my first posting, the device would be like a harddisk. The native file driver does not allow hot swapping - at least not yet. Only the mtools (for non-native FAT access) implement a hot swapping concept - at the expense of initializing the SD card, everytime mtools is called. All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Am 18.01.2011 11:36, schrieb Peter: Tobias Fröschle wrote: For me it should be faster than a floppy disk but can be slower than a hard disk. I am surprised that speed seems not _that_ big issue for most. I hope this does not originate from the perception that SD cards can be swapped at any time, like a floppy replacement. As mentioned in my first posting, the device would be like a harddisk. The native file driver does not allow hot swapping - at least not yet. Only the mtools (for non-native FAT access) implement a hot swapping concept - at the expense of initializing the SD card, everytime mtools is called. All the best Peter Peter, this was probably a bit misleading. It's not about swapping SD cards. It's about _not_ having to swap floppies all the time. I can very well live with the speed of my floppies nowadays, but having to swap floppy disks whenever I change between xChange and programming (or whatever) is a real nuisance once you got used to harddisks. Having a harddisk-like SD card would relieve me from that. And yes, I think I'm fine with one SD per session and no support for hot-swap of SD cards. Should I really feel like swapping something, I still got my floppy drive ;-) And: Speed is not really an issue (at least for me). Speed equivalent to a floppy drive would suffice - Albeit, if it's faster, it doesn't hurt. Cheers, Tobias ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
As my ROM-port is not free (MICE) and I have no Gold/SuperGoldCard I would prefer solution D) (although I hope I am able to do the upgrade by myslef). Solution A) would be o.k., too (then I would plug the interface to my Q40). If I did misunderstood something and solution D) isn´t working without Gold/SuperGoldCard I would prefer the solution for the QL-ROM-port. But in general every new QL-hardware is welcome! Anton Am 11.01.2011 um 12:15 schrieb Peter: Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
In message 4d34bdb8.8090...@rwapservices.co.uk, Rich Mellor r...@rwapservices.co.uk writes On 17/01/2011 21:53, Martin Wheatley wrote: At 14:53 17/01/2011, you wrote: I suppose Peter's question How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? is twofold Firstly to have some sort of compatability with any existing software, still keeping it on microdrives and not converted to some other format due to copyright/protection. It may be that the software prevents itself from running without the microdrive being present. so having one still in exisence may be needed. Secondly it maybe that in order to fit a SD card based system in to the existing QL, physical space is required for the interface that requires both microdrives to be removed even if only one microdrive slot is replaced by the SD card version. If it is easier to fit a single or twin SD system using the whole space then surely this would be the preferred method? But heres a thought, if both microdrives are replaced by the SD card interface, could the removed microdrives be fitted in their own container with a cable plugged in to the extension socket at the right hand side of the QL and used as external (expanded) microdrives as an when needed, this would solve the desire to have microdrives and still allow existing software on the microdrive to be copied across to the new storage medium. Lee Privett Once upon a time I had a third microdrive that plugged into the side of the QL As far as I remember it was a Spectrum item that that worked when you plugged it into a QL upside down martinw ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Yes, Martin that was always the case - the Spectrum ZX Microdrive faced the back of the QL - there was supposed to be a QL equivalent released, but it never made it to market. I never found using a ZX Microdrive unit as mdv3_ very reliable. When the industrial design for the external microdrives and their power packs was in process, there was a young designer called Roger, working along with the main Sinclair designer Rick Dickinson. The Sinclair power packs have also been utilised as very effective power sources for PCB drills, by an inventive Technician that I once worked with. Still functioning today. Back to one of Peter's questions. A great advantage of SD Cards would be in a basic (un-expanded) QL black box. Would really be a leap forward to incorporate some new tech in to what was once new tech of its period. Obviously expanded QL's already have an upgrade, yet would also benefit. I don't know if there is a technical difficulty with catering for both options of unexpanded and expanded QL's. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
paul wrote: A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Personally, the option of tucking the adapter/interface inside the standard QL case has a lot of appeal. would be cool, even compairable to using the cartidge slot in the Timex 2068 in the 'Good Ol Days' if there is enough internal physical space for the unit to reside in the outer of the 2 cavities, that would be just peachy keen! If I go for option D, I don't think space will be a problem. The device should fit both microdrive locations. To those who prefer option D: * How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? * How important would be speed? (To reach maximum speed, it is impossible to use the microdrive connectors for an SD-card device. A second board would be required, attached at a place where some of the 68008 bus is available. Higher costs, and might work for GoldCard/SuperGoldCard only.) All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
On 17/01/2011 09:53, Peter wrote: paul wrote: A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Personally, the option of tucking the adapter/interface inside the standard QL case has a lot of appeal. would be cool, even compairable to using the cartidge slot in the Timex 2068 in the 'Good Ol Days' if there is enough internal physical space for the unit to reside in the outer of the 2 cavities, that would be just peachy keen! If I go for option D, I don't think space will be a problem. The device should fit both microdrive locations. To those who prefer option D: * How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? * How important would be speed? (To reach maximum speed, it is impossible to use the microdrive connectors for an SD-card device. A second board would be required, attached at a place where some of the 68008 bus is available. Higher costs, and might work for GoldCard/SuperGoldCard only.) All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Personally, I think it is essential that at least one microdrive unit remains operational if option D is chosen. As for speed - I don't think in reality speed is that much of an issue, provided the device is quicker than a floppy disk drive. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk http://www.rwapservices.co.uk -- Try out our new site: http://sellmyretro.com ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Any speed faster than the original drive would be fine for me and also I don't mind about losing or keeping an original drive. --- On Mon, 17/1/11, Peter pg...@q40.de wrote: To those who prefer option D: * How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? * How important would be speed? (To reach maximum speed, it is impossible to use the microdrive connectors for an SD-card device. A second board would be required, attached at a place where some of the 68008 bus is available. Higher costs, and might work for GoldCard/SuperGoldCard only.) All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
--- On Mon, 17/1/11, Peter pg...@q40.de wrote: To those who prefer option D: * How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? I would very much like to have one functional microdrive. * How important would be speed? Not important for me. But would be *very* nice to have something that works without GC/SGC on the original machine. Cheers, Petri ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
I suppose Peter's question How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? is twofold Firstly to have some sort of compatability with any existing software, still keeping it on microdrives and not converted to some other format due to copyright/protection. It may be that the software prevents itself from running without the microdrive being present. so having one still in exisence may be needed. Secondly it maybe that in order to fit a SD card based system in to the existing QL, physical space is required for the interface that requires both microdrives to be removed even if only one microdrive slot is replaced by the SD card version. If it is easier to fit a single or twin SD system using the whole space then surely this would be the preferred method? But heres a thought, if both microdrives are replaced by the SD card interface, could the removed microdrives be fitted in their own container with a cable plugged in to the extension socket at the right hand side of the QL and used as external (expanded) microdrives as an when needed, this would solve the desire to have microdrives and still allow existing software on the microdrive to be copied across to the new storage medium. Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey --- On Mon, 17/1/11, Peter pg...@q40.de wrote: To those who prefer option D: * How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? I would very much like to have one functional microdrive. * How important would be speed? Not important for me. But would be *very* nice to have something that works without GC/SGC on the original machine. Cheers, Petri ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Rich Mellor wrote, on 17/Jan/11 15:14 | Jan17: snip The problem with copy protected microdrives continues to be an issue even some 20 years after the practice was stopped! A lot of software is cracked to overcome this issue, but not all. The use of an external microdrive may be a solution to some software, but the majority of software which anticipates a key cartridge looks only in mdv1 or mdv2 (or both). It would never look at an mdv3_, so that would have to be taken into consideration. One potential way around this, would be for the SD card hardware to be able to present a default microdrive image to the system as a microdrive cartridge, in much the same was as Q-emuLator can now do. Daniele could probably comment better on the feasibility of porting his code across ... or pins one and two of each mdv socket be jumpered together, and then the externals start at mdv1. I used to do this with a small loop of wire. Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255 t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:53:32 +0100 From: Peter pg...@q40.de If I go for option D, I don't think space will be a problem. The device should fit both microdrive locations. To those who prefer option D: * How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? * How important would be speed? (To reach maximum speed, it is impossible to use the microdrive connectors for an SD-card device. A second board would be required, attached at a place where some of the 68008 bus is available. Higher costs, and might work for GoldCard/SuperGoldCard only.) All the best Peter I would prefer to keep an original microdrive. as for speed? anything equals to or higher than the floppies would be plenty. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:27 AM, fern ferng...@yahoo.com wrote: I would prefer to keep an original microdrive. as for speed? anything equals to or higher than the floppies would be plenty. What about option E -- floppy emulator? This seems like it would have broad compatibility (GC, SGC, maybe my QXL included), and I'm betting most original QL owners do have floppy drive controllers.. Plus, this more or less exists already, unless this is meant as an academic exercise. http://www.torlus.com/floppy/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
On 17/01/2011 19:33, Mark Martin wrote: On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:27 AM, fernferng...@yahoo.com wrote: I would prefer to keep an original microdrive. as for speed? anything equals to or higher than the floppies would be plenty. What about option E -- floppy emulator? This seems like it would have broad compatibility (GC, SGC, maybe my QXL included), and I'm betting most original QL owners do have floppy drive controllers.. Plus, this more or less exists already, unless this is meant as an academic exercise. http://www.torlus.com/floppy/ I have already tested and successfully used this interface with the QL as well as host of other computers - instructions for using this SD card interface with the QL appeared in the November 2010 Quanta magazine. You can purchase the interface through me at http://www.sellmyretro.com/offer/details/HxC_SD_Card_Floppy_Disk_Emulator_%28replaces_floppy_disk_drives%29-1140 -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk http://www.rwapservices.co.uk -- Try out our new site: http://sellmyretro.com ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
At 14:53 17/01/2011, you wrote: I suppose Peter's question How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? is twofold Firstly to have some sort of compatability with any existing software, still keeping it on microdrives and not converted to some other format due to copyright/protection. It may be that the software prevents itself from running without the microdrive being present. so having one still in exisence may be needed. Secondly it maybe that in order to fit a SD card based system in to the existing QL, physical space is required for the interface that requires both microdrives to be removed even if only one microdrive slot is replaced by the SD card version. If it is easier to fit a single or twin SD system using the whole space then surely this would be the preferred method? But heres a thought, if both microdrives are replaced by the SD card interface, could the removed microdrives be fitted in their own container with a cable plugged in to the extension socket at the right hand side of the QL and used as external (expanded) microdrives as an when needed, this would solve the desire to have microdrives and still allow existing software on the microdrive to be copied across to the new storage medium. Lee Privett Once upon a time I had a third microdrive that plugged into the side of the QL As far as I remember it was a Spectrum item that that worked when you plugged it into a QL upside down martinw ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
On 17/01/2011 21:53, Martin Wheatley wrote: At 14:53 17/01/2011, you wrote: I suppose Peter's question How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional? is twofold Firstly to have some sort of compatability with any existing software, still keeping it on microdrives and not converted to some other format due to copyright/protection. It may be that the software prevents itself from running without the microdrive being present. so having one still in exisence may be needed. Secondly it maybe that in order to fit a SD card based system in to the existing QL, physical space is required for the interface that requires both microdrives to be removed even if only one microdrive slot is replaced by the SD card version. If it is easier to fit a single or twin SD system using the whole space then surely this would be the preferred method? But heres a thought, if both microdrives are replaced by the SD card interface, could the removed microdrives be fitted in their own container with a cable plugged in to the extension socket at the right hand side of the QL and used as external (expanded) microdrives as an when needed, this would solve the desire to have microdrives and still allow existing software on the microdrive to be copied across to the new storage medium. Lee Privett Once upon a time I had a third microdrive that plugged into the side of the QL As far as I remember it was a Spectrum item that that worked when you plugged it into a QL upside down martinw ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Yes, Martin that was always the case - the Spectrum ZX Microdrive faced the back of the QL - there was supposed to be a QL equivalent released, but it never made it to market. I never found using a ZX Microdrive unit as mdv3_ very reliable. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk http://www.rwapservices.co.uk -- Try out our new site: http://sellmyretro.com ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Martin Wheatley wrote, on 17/Jan/11 21:53 | Jan17: snip Once upon a time I had a third microdrive that plugged into the side of the QL As far as I remember it was a Spectrum item that that worked when you plugged it into a QL upside down Yes exactly. I used a ribbon cable adaptor with a twist. Bill Richardson got me to make 100 of these, but he lost all of them! As I said earlier, if a jumper is fitted to pins 1 and 2 of each internal socket, then the external starts at mdv1. Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255 t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
That sounds like a great QL story to tell :D --- On Mon, 17/1/11, Tony Firshman t...@firshman.co.uk wrote: From: Tony Firshman t...@firshman.co.uk Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Date: Monday, 17 January, 2011, 22:09 Martin Wheatley wrote, on 17/Jan/11 21:53 | Jan17: snip Yes exactly. I used a ribbon cable adaptor with a twist. Bill Richardson got me to make 100 of these, but he lost all of them! Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255 t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
peet vanpeebles wrote, on 17/Jan/11 22:14 | Jan17: --- On Mon, 17/1/11, Tony Firshmant...@firshman.co.uk wrote: Martin Wheatley wrote, on 17/Jan/11 21:53 | Jan17: snip Yes exactly. I used a ribbon cable adaptor with a twist. Bill Richardson got me to make 100 of these, but he lost all of them! That sounds like a great QL story to tell :D Not really - you have the *whole* story! edited as far as I can into inline. This is a classic example of how top posting can totally destory the unity of the threading. I know it is debaltable, but when people in a mailing list possible start reading later, non-inline posting makes for great illogicality in reading. The vats majority here *do* top quote, or are veyr good at editing ! Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255 t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Malcolm Lear wrote: I was looking at the QL schematics a few weeks back and noticed the Microdrives use a serial bus. I guess this is bit banged by the software to transfer data. Could this be connected to the SD SPI serial interface using level shifters (5V - 3.3V)? As always, things are not that easy :-) I'd have to leave at least 3 of 6 lines in their original use (drive selection) so other microdrives don't get totally confused. The other three lines are just one output and two data lines (both seem to change their direction at the same time, according to that output). And I don't know wether the data lines can be bit-banged at all. Even if I construct something useful from those 3 lines - which would of course involve more that just level-shifting - there is still risk to confuse the microdrive portion of the OS. Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
On 12/01/2011 12:30, Peter wrote: Malcolm Lear wrote: I was looking at the QL schematics a few weeks back and noticed the Microdrives use a serial bus. I guess this is bit banged by the software to transfer data. Could this be connected to the SD SPI serial interface using level shifters (5V - 3.3V)? As always, things are not that easy :-) I'd have to leave at least 3 of 6 lines in their original use (drive selection) so other microdrives don't get totally confused. The other three lines are just one output and two data lines (both seem to change their direction at the same time, according to that output). And I don't know wether the data lines can be bit-banged at all. Even if I construct something useful from those 3 lines - which would of course involve more that just level-shifting - there is still risk to confuse the microdrive portion of the OS. Speaking from pretty little low level knowledge, how about abandoning the microdrives completely (I thought you were) and making your interface emulate microdrives? I wonder what the O/S would make of a giant sector count (8-)# I suppose speed would be an issue as well. I wonder whether the 8302 could input/output faster. I know Laurence wound up the data lines to the 8749 to a remarkable degree. We never found an upper limit as it could clearly go faster than the PIC. It was so fast that it took a long time for us to realise we *were* getting a response. I still have the polaroids somewhere taken on my oscilloscope. Tony ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
- Original Message - From: Ian Pine ilp...@tesco.net To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 2:33 PM Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey - Original Message - snipped Anything which works on the Q40 would be good, but something which could be connected as a slave IDE device in place of the CD-ROM would be best. If it could be mounted behind the bay cover panel with a slot cut in it, would be very useful. It would be nice if it would work with the existing SMSQ/E WINx_ driver. Ian. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm I've changed my mind on this. Peter's option A sounds better to me; it is portable, and if the interface details are published, could also be put to use in other home-grown projects. Ian. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
On 12/01/2011 12:46, Tony Firshman wrote: On 12/01/2011 12:30, Peter wrote: Malcolm Lear wrote: I was looking at the QL schematics a few weeks back and noticed the Microdrives use a serial bus. I guess this is bit banged by the software to transfer data. Could this be connected to the SD SPI serial interface using level shifters (5V - 3.3V)? As always, things are not that easy :-) I'd have to leave at least 3 of 6 lines in their original use (drive selection) so other microdrives don't get totally confused. The other three lines are just one output and two data lines (both seem to change their direction at the same time, according to that output). And I don't know wether the data lines can be bit-banged at all. Even if I construct something useful from those 3 lines - which would of course involve more that just level-shifting - there is still risk to confuse the microdrive portion of the OS. Speaking from pretty little low level knowledge, how about abandoning the microdrives completely (I thought you were) and making your interface emulate microdrives? I wonder what the O/S would make of a giant sector count (8-)# I suppose speed would be an issue as well. I wonder whether the 8302 could input/output faster. I know Laurence wound up the data lines to the 8749 to a remarkable degree. We never found an upper limit as it could clearly go faster than the PIC. It was so fast that it took a long time for us to realise we *were* getting a response. I still have the polaroids somewhere taken on my oscilloscope. Tony ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Yes, that may be possible using an AVR or PIC to perform the emulation. The big up side is no modification to the QL hardware. There is also enough FLASH in most microcontrollers to store a Microdrive image, so on reset the OS could a boot file on MDV1. This could patch the OS to cope with large sector counts or load new drivers for MMC1-8. Malcolm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Tony Firshman wrote: Speaking from pretty little low level knowledge, how about abandoning the microdrives completely (I thought you were) So far, I could have used just one SD card interface, keeping one microdrive. Abandoning the microdrives completely is an option I could think about. But the task of creating SD card signals is still not trivial. I don't know exactly how the ZX8302 behaves internally, and which timings are acceptable. For example, the OS even inserts delays when just bit-banging the drive select daisy chain, and I have no idea why this is required. Line lengths? Noise? ZX8302 internal requirements? ... Using the ZX8302 for a completely different purpose might require a lot of time for investigation and experimentation. and making your interface emulate microdrives? Hehe, nice idea. Unfortunately it would be a pain in terms of speed, also size would be limited by the MDV drivers I guess :) Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
On 12/01/2011 13:48, Peter wrote: Tony Firshman wrote: Speaking from pretty little low level knowledge, how about abandoning the microdrives completely (I thought you were) So far, I could have used just one SD card interface, keeping one microdrive. Abandoning the microdrives completely is an option I could think about. But the task of creating SD card signals is still not trivial. I don't know exactly how the ZX8302 behaves internally, and which timings are acceptable. For example, the OS even inserts delays when just bit-banging the drive select daisy chain, and I have no idea why this is required. Line lengths? Noise? ZX8302 internal requirements? ... Using the ZX8302 for a completely different purpose might require a lot of time for investigation and experimentation. and making your interface emulate microdrives? Hehe, nice idea. Unfortunately it would be a pain in terms of speed, also size would be limited by the MDV drivers I guess :) I bet the drivers could be patched. You could also keep one mdv if the interface was fully compatible. It would be quite hard though switching between the two speeds. I suppose if simultaneous access was barred, the mdv driver could be patched on the fly. As Malcolm suggested, a PIC could be used, and may have enough on board storage to buffer one boot image. Failing that it could be a bootstrap to load from the card. Laurence Reeves knows a *lot* about the logic. Tony ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
If I remember right, emultating a microdrive completely is probably not a very good idea - The electrical intarface to the drives is typical minimalist Sinclair technology and consists of 3 adress lines to adress the drive (0-7), a motor start line and a read and write line. There's no way to adress a specific sector on a drive, and the technology relies on all sectors of the tape passing the r/w head in a reasonable amount of time - The logic just waits until it sees the correct sector header passing by and then starts reading or writing the specific sector. This worked quite well with small capacities of several hundred sectors. I guess nobody wants to wait until all sectors of a 2GB SD have passed the emulated head.. Cheers, Tobias -Original-Nachricht- Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:46:33 +0100 From: Tony Firshman t...@firshman.co.uk To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com On 12/01/2011 13:48, Peter wrote: Tony Firshman wrote: Speaking from pretty little low level knowledge, how about abandoning the microdrives completely (I thought you were) So far, I could have used just one SD card interface, keeping one microdrive. Abandoning the microdrives completely is an option I could think about. But the task of creating SD card signals is still not trivial. I don't know exactly how the ZX8302 behaves internally, and which timings are acceptable. For example, the OS even inserts delays when just bit-banging the drive select daisy chain, and I have no idea why this is required. Line lengths? Noise? ZX8302 internal requirements? ... Using the ZX8302 for a completely different purpose might require a lot of time for investigation and experimentation. and making your interface emulate microdrives? Hehe, nice idea. Unfortunately it would be a pain in terms of speed, also size would be limited by the MDV drivers I guess :) I bet the drivers could be patched. You could also keep one mdv if the interface was fully compatible. It would be quite hard though switching between the two speeds. I suppose if simultaneous access was barred, the mdv driver could be patched on the fly. As Malcolm suggested, a PIC could be used, and may have enough on board storage to buffer one boot image. Failing that it could be a bootstrap to load from the card. Laurence Reeves knows a *lot* about the logic. Tony ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Hi Peter, On 11/01/11 11:15, Peter wrote: what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Works for me! The major problem I had with adding stuff to my QL was the number of bits hanging out the four corners! I had a Miracle Hard drive in the ROM slot, Trump Card and Gold card (not at the same time) hanging out of the expansion slot, I had a 4 way floppy drive adaptor hanging off those, and so on. Anything that fitted inside would have been great! Especially as, once I had floppies and hard drive, I always removed the microdrives anyway. Cheers, Norman. -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
B or D would be superb for me :) --- On Tue, 11/1/11, Peter pg...@q40.de wrote: From: Peter pg...@q40.de Subject: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Date: Tuesday, 11 January, 2011, 11:15 Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Hi Peter, I was looking at the QL schematics a few weeks back and noticed the Microdrives use a serial bus. I guess this is bit banged by the software to transfer data. Could this be connected to the SD SPI serial interface using level shifters (5V - 3.3V)?. It would be neat to have drop in replacement drives. Cheers Malcolm On 11/01/2011 11:15, Peter wrote: Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
On 11/01/2011 11:15, Peter wrote: Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Hi Peter, Now, this is a project I would like to back and distribute, so I should be careful here! I also think that this is a question you should ask on the QL Forum also - www.qlforum.co.uk - it might make it a bit easier to collate responses and keep track of everyone's comments! I think option C is really a non-starter, as there are too few Gold Cards / Super Gold Cards out there and plenty of people in need of one, so without any replacement interface on the horizon, this would be limiting the market too much. Style-wise (D) seems a good option - the microdrive cartridges are now so hard to find and are mostly badly deteriorated that the life of microdrive units is now severly limited. If a means of connecting it via the MDV connector could be conjured up - would it be possible to adapt this to fit into a ZX Microdrive unit for use on the Spectrum also I wonder? However, the other logistics are how similar functionality could be provided for the THOR, Qx0 etc. Presumably, depending on the drivers, this functionality could be added by means of an industry standard SD card - IDE convertor - if so, then presumably that would provide an option for users with an Aurora + QubIDE also? As for B - I am not sure how many people use the ROM port - perhaps that could be overcome by providing the ability in the interface to insert an EPROM for a toolkit, or more importantly for a language dongle (metacomco C, Pro-Fortran etc) - after all, Miracle's hard disk did still allow use of a ROM cartridge (from memory) although I may be wrong there. I therefore think that B or D would be the preferred solutions for me. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk http://www.rwapservices.co.uk -- Try out our new site: http://sellmyretro.com ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Peter Graf wrote: what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? Any would be better than none. I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... Last year I was thinking of such a device. This was my basic outline: The QCF card for the QL ROM port as discussed at the Austrian QL meeting in June 2010. Think of it as a tiny card (similar to ROMdisq) which hosts a very basic LINUX based computer (the host, the heavy part of the firmware/driver), takes a standard FAT(32) formatted CF (or maybe SD/MMC) card and have direct r/w access to the FAT filesystem (DOS1_ to DOS8_ similar to QPC2) plus full QXL.WIN (named QXL1_ to QXL8_ to prevent clashes for users with real harddisks attached to the QL) support. To enable and manage r/w on the ROM port is not easy but was already implemented by the MIRACLE QL harddisk and TFS ROMdisq. Therefore B) is my favourite. Think of all the collectors who could then use their QL's to demo software w/o needing to open/modify the good old black box. Peter, I'm open to help writing down the software requirements, maybe even help funding the project. Go on! Cheers, Urs ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Rich Mellor wrote, on 11/Jan/11 12:13 | Jan11: snip after all, Miracle's hard disk did still allow use of a ROM cartridge (from memory) although I may be wrong there. It did. I remember he had designed it around the std eprom pack, and I had to file the case to fit a full width romdisq card. Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255 t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Rich Mellor wrote, on 11/Jan/11 12:13 | Jan11: snip after all, Miracle's hard disk did still allow use of a ROM cartridge (from memory) although I may be wrong there. It did. I remember he had designed it around the std eprom pack, and I had to file the case to fit a full width romdisq card. Tony Speaking of the romdisq, I wonder how practical it might be to adapt the romdisq drivers for Peter's card reader? I appreciate that (a) TT would probably charge for this, and (b) it might conflict with Peter's Open Source principles. Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter Options A or D best in my opinion. I wonder if an option E would be possible, plugging into the QL MDV expansion slot on the right of the QL? Depends on whether electrically it is connected to the MDV system, or if that location is just used as a convenient physical mounting point. Would be handy that the memory card is easily accessible to unplug. No doubt people would want to use more than one card (e.g. file transfer between machines?) If the electrical connection is all to a CPU socket for example, could it also be used with the Aurora boards? And I presume that if electrical connection is to CPU socket, it should be much faster than the PAR port on SGC. Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Hi Peter and all, I would highly prefer (D) the Internal interface, replacing a microdrive, wich seem to be fast and well integrated. If a such device exists, i would be interested for 2 or 3 units for me. If this project starts one day, I may help for a driver adapted and derivated from Qubide wich i mostly re-wrote for my own usage after I have managed to do a working prototype for an Expander for Qubide. The (B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port, can also be enough good for me if exists but no idea how complex is hardware nor driver. I would be very happy if a such project can born for the QL community scene. Regards, Alain HAOUI - Mail Original - De: Peter pg...@q40.de À: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Envoyé: Mardi 11 Janvier 2011 12h15:28 GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Berne / Rome / Stockholm / Vienne Objet: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Dilwyn Jones wrote, on 11/Jan/11 13:29 | Jan11: Rich Mellor wrote, on 11/Jan/11 12:13 | Jan11: snip after all, Miracle's hard disk did still allow use of a ROM cartridge (from memory) although I may be wrong there. It did. I remember he had designed it around the std eprom pack, and I had to file the case to fit a full width romdisq card. Tony Speaking of the romdisq, I wonder how practical it might be to adapt the romdisq drivers for Peter's card reader? I appreciate that (a) TT would probably charge for this, and (b) it might conflict with Peter's Open Source principles. Card reader - I didn't read in detail, but will it be read only? I assumed read/write. Romdisq auto-load drivers will not fit in an unexpanded QL. I believe he needed quite a large data buffer in ram, certainly, I would have thought, at least one 64kB block. I have no documentation for TTs driver code. It did strike me that Peter's hope to use it in a std QL might not be straightforward. Even if the drivers fit, will there be enough memory left to do anything useful? Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255 t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Urs Koenig (QL) wrote: Peter Graf wrote: what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? Any would be better than none. We had it for years, ist was the parallel port version for the SuperGoldCard and Q40/Q60. So far the software was just mtools, i.e. FAT32 access by a commandline tool. == To Derek and Dilwyn: I think we can speak franky, now that a native filesystem seems in reach. If you have comments, please go ahead. As for the final board design, the parallel port version should just cost me a weekend. The build/sales/support obstacle remains of course. I have no time to deal with it. All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Dilwyn Jones wrote: Speaking of the romdisq, I wonder how practical it might be to adapt the romdisq drivers for Peter's card reader? [...] (b) it might conflict with Peter's Open Source principles. I have no problem with commercial software, as long as there is a dedicated author, who has motivation and knowledge to implement what I'm interested in. Tony Tebby was such an author. Without Tony Tebby, open source became a very practical requirement for me, not a principle. My point of view was _major_ native hardware support. An SD/MMC driver is not _that_ major, maybe it could be written without resorting to existing free code. But in the end we're better off if it's free and we don't have to deal with royalties or wait for registrar permission on code changes. It makes life easier. All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Tony Firshman wrote: It did strike me that Peter's hope to use it in a std QL might not be straightforward. Even if the drivers fit, will there be enough memory left to do anything useful? Never planned to support an unexpanded QL yet. That would take away the option to easily use the CPU socket. The 68008 has capacitors soldered on it, so a sandwich solution with the 68008 would pile up too high. Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
I don't think either of mine have capacitors on them? A purple ceramic chip with a gold center. --- On Tue, 11/1/11, Peter pg...@q40.de wrote: From: Peter pg...@q40.de Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Date: Tuesday, 11 January, 2011, 16:59 Tony Firshman wrote: It did strike me that Peter's hope to use it in a std QL might not be straightforward. Even if the drivers fit, will there be enough memory left to do anything useful? Never planned to support an unexpanded QL yet. That would take away the option to easily use the CPU socket. The 68008 has capacitors soldered on it, so a sandwich solution with the 68008 would pile up too high. Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
peet vanpeebles wrote, on 11/Jan/11 17:19 | Jan11: --- On Tue, 11/1/11, Peterpg...@q40.de wrote: From: Peterpg...@q40.de Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Date: Tuesday, 11 January, 2011, 16:59 Tony Firshman wrote: It did strike me that Peter's hope to use it in a std QL might not be straightforward. Even if the drivers fit, will there be enough memory left to do anything useful? Never planned to support an unexpanded QL yet. That would take away the option to easily use the CPU socket. The 68008 has capacitors soldered on it, so a sandwich solution with the 68008 would pile up too high. I don't think either of mine have capacitors on them? A purple ceramic chip with a gold center. The German and US build (Korea I think)and others with 9D serial ports do. This also comes with a whole raft of other EMI mods. The vast majority, including all UK builds, don't have these capacitors. I would have thought they could be removed with little problem. Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255 t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey (Peter)
Hi All, I like Option D (internal replacement of a Microdrive). It's the best idea in my opinion and the most practical to use. I hope this will become reality! Best,TH De: Peter pg...@q40.de ?: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Envoy?: Mardi 11 Janvier 2011 12h15:28 GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Berne / Rome / Stockholm / Vienne Objet: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Hi Peter, very interesting idea. I think someone on this thread said it well that anything is better than nothing but to me option D) sounds most compelling. Best regards, Petri On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Peter pg...@q40.de wrote: Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey (Peter)
It would have to be option D for me too also, although I have only unexpanded systems it would be a reliable way of testing software written for unexpanded QLs and copying any existing software on microdrives across on to the SD card before replacing the second drive with another SD module. I would ask this question though, wouldn't the SD card adapter be configured so that the SD memory such as Class 4 or Class 6 could be used as direct access memory as apposed to external storage or isn't this feasible or still not fast enough? Or even have one MD slot as dirext access and the other as removable storage, how cool is that. Hmmmn maybe getting a little carried away now. Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 - Original Message - From: thorsten herbert thorsten_herb...@hotmail.com To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 6:33 PM Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey (Peter) Hi All, I like Option D (internal replacement of a Microdrive). It's the best idea in my opinion and the most practical to use. I hope this will become reality! Best,TH De: Peter pg...@q40.de ?: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Envoy?: Mardi 11 Janvier 2011 12h15:28 GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Berne / Rome / Stockholm / Vienne Objet: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? I can _not_ promise to really make a piece of hardware available, but it would be nice to know, just in case... A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard Pro: - Interface also works on Q40 and Q60 - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Easy reconnect from one machine to another - Hot-plugging might work - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - Slow data transfer through parallel port handshake lines B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port Pro: - QL Case doesn't need to be openened - Faster data transfer - Onboard Driver ROM - Works on QL without GoldCard / SuperGoldCard Con: - ROM-Port occupied - Complex hardware C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket Pro: - Fastest data transfer - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened - Only GoldCard/SuperGoldCard machines D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Can easily be bolted inside the case, after a microdrive was removed Plugs into CPU socket or maybe other place Pro: - SD/MMC-card can be plugged in like a cartridge - Looks cool - Very QL-style - ROM-Port remains usable Con: - QL Case needs to be openened All the best, Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Am 11.01.2011 12:15, schrieb Peter: Hi all, what would be your favorite style for an SD/MMC card harddisk for the QL? A) External interface, plugs into parallel port of SuperGoldCard B) External interface, plugs into QL ROM port C) Internal interface, plugs into CPU socket D) Internal interface, replacing a microdrive(!) Peter, for my taste: A, D, B, C while (D) is very appealing, but A is probably much more versatile outside the QL scene as well. And every single one of them would be a real killer as a HD replacement. The driver should ideally be able to access both VFAT and QDOS formatted SD cards for ease of transfer (QPC/QXL-like image files on VFAT-formatted SD, probably?) - But that's probably asked too much already. Regards Tobias ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
Tobias Fröschle wrote: The driver should ideally be able to access both VFAT and QDOS formatted SD cards for ease of transfer (QPC/QXL-like image files on VFAT-formatted SD, probably?) - But that's probably asked too much already. My plan is indeed to put a QL-HD image as a file into a FAT system. But with restrctions, e.g. it will not be allowed to move or fragment the image file. (And of course QL-HD is not the same format as QLWA.) Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
