Re: Softcard (Was: Microsoft-Paul Allen
I have a Basis (apple ][ clone) with a cpm card built on the main board…. George > On Oct 21, 2018, at 11:09 AM, systems_glitch via cctalk > wrote: > > I'd heard, but have no sources for said hearsay, that the most common CP/M > machine in volume was the Apple II. > > There were definitely knockoffs of the Microsoft Z80 Softcard. One of my > IIe systems has one from SPACE BYTE, the other is no-name. I've personally > seen more knockoffs than actual Microsoft cards. The two I have currently > are definitely "photocopy" type knockoff/clone cards, the layout is nearly > identical to the real Microsoft card I've got. That of course doesn't speak > for what was actually deployed. > > Some Apple II compatibles also came with CP/M compatibility out of the box, > I don't personally know if that was MS Z80 Softcard compatible or something > else. > > Thanks, > Jonathan > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 5:54 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk > wrote: > The Softcard was a Z-80 based single-board computer >> >> On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: >>> It wasn't. It was only a processor card. >>> No version of the Softcard had it's own video output. It used normal >> Apple >>> video output. If you wanted 80x24, you had to use a separate third-party >>> 80-column card, or (later) and Apple IIe, IIc, IIc+, or IIgs. >>> I'm not sure what you're referring to by "etc.", but the vast majority of >>> Softcards and their clones did not have their own RAM, and used that of >> the >>> Apple II. >>> The PCPI Applicard and it's clones had their own RAM. Some very late >> models >>> of the Softcard had their own RAM. >> >> I remember hearing, at one point, a statement (not necessarily reliable), >> that said that 20% of Apple computers had a Softcard. >> What was the approximate percentage in 1980/1981, when IBM contacted >> Microsoft? >> (or number that had been sold, which would include ones not actually in >> use) >> >> What was the PEAK percentage? >> (or number that had been sold, which would include ones not actually in >> use) >> >> Were there other brands, or imitations, available then (1980/1981)? >> >> Later, what percentage were imitations? >> >> Speculatively, how much were they used V use of the machine in non-Z80 >> ways? (How many people bought it just ot have the capability, without >> necessarily being active CP/M users?) >> >> >> This is definitely not the first time that I have heard that IBM had >> assumed that CP/M was a Microsoft product. >> >> >> >>
Re: Softcard (Was: Microsoft-Paul Allen
On Sun, 21 Oct 2018, systems_glitch wrote:
I'd heard, but have no sources for said hearsay, that the most common CP/M
machine in volume was the Apple II.
At one time.
I have heard that Amstrad eventually passed them.
How were sales of Commodore 128?
There were definitely knockoffs of the Microsoft Z80 Softcard. One of my
IIe systems has one from SPACE BYTE, the other is no-name. I've personally
seen more knockoffs than actual Microsoft cards. The two I have currently
are definitely "photocopy" type knockoff/clone cards, the layout is nearly
identical to the real Microsoft card I've got. That of course doesn't speak
for what was actually deployed.
I would assume that in the early days, it was all, or almost all the real
Microsoft one. That would include the time when IBM thought that
Microsoft was the source of CP/M.
LATER, there were imitations, copies, clones, and counterfeits.
Some of the "imitators" were legal, and may even have had improvements.
Don't know where to get numbers of those. Sales data for the Microsoft
one exist, but for the others?
The law is not always clear as to how close an imitation may be. For
example, Kevin Jenkins/"Hercules" copied the MDA design, adding RAM and
graphics capability. Then he was furious when others copied his design.
("clone smasher" ad campaign, that even claimed that imitation boards
could destroy the computer)
Some Apple II compatibles also came with CP/M compatibility out of the box,
I don't personally know if that was MS Z80 Softcard compatible or something
else.
Basis 108 had a Z80 secondary processor.
Re: Softcard (Was: Microsoft-Paul Allen
I'd heard, but have no sources for said hearsay, that the most common CP/M machine in volume was the Apple II. There were definitely knockoffs of the Microsoft Z80 Softcard. One of my IIe systems has one from SPACE BYTE, the other is no-name. I've personally seen more knockoffs than actual Microsoft cards. The two I have currently are definitely "photocopy" type knockoff/clone cards, the layout is nearly identical to the real Microsoft card I've got. That of course doesn't speak for what was actually deployed. Some Apple II compatibles also came with CP/M compatibility out of the box, I don't personally know if that was MS Z80 Softcard compatible or something else. Thanks, Jonathan On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 5:54 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > >> The Softcard was a Z-80 based single-board > >> computer > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: > > It wasn't. It was only a processor card. > > No version of the Softcard had it's own video output. It used normal > Apple > > video output. If you wanted 80x24, you had to use a separate third-party > > 80-column card, or (later) and Apple IIe, IIc, IIc+, or IIgs. > > I'm not sure what you're referring to by "etc.", but the vast majority of > > Softcards and their clones did not have their own RAM, and used that of > the > > Apple II. > > The PCPI Applicard and it's clones had their own RAM. Some very late > models > > of the Softcard had their own RAM. > > I remember hearing, at one point, a statement (not necessarily reliable), > that said that 20% of Apple computers had a Softcard. > What was the approximate percentage in 1980/1981, when IBM contacted > Microsoft? > (or number that had been sold, which would include ones not actually in > use) > > What was the PEAK percentage? > (or number that had been sold, which would include ones not actually in > use) > > Were there other brands, or imitations, available then (1980/1981)? > > Later, what percentage were imitations? > > Speculatively, how much were they used V use of the machine in non-Z80 > ways? (How many people bought it just ot have the capability, without > necessarily being active CP/M users?) > > > This is definitely not the first time that I have heard that IBM had > assumed that CP/M was a Microsoft product. > > > >
