Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In a message dated 15/02/2007 09:40:16 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Seeing all this discussion about possible new hardware etc. and the risks etc. is why I've come to the conclusion that there's never going to be any new hardware. It's just not economically viable: (a) The cost in time and money to design and build would be high. (b) The size of the market is too small so the price would be prohibitively high. It would be really nice if magically a new, hyper-fast, QL compatible replacement motherboard for the QL which fitted into the case would appear, but it's not going to. Those who want to continue to play can't find the old upgrade cards anymore (though I have seen on eBay UK at the moment someone selling two QLs with one Gold Card) so there's a problem. Porting something like SMS/Q or whatever to a new platform is still expensive in time but no-where near as much as new hardware, so surely, the best way forward would be to find some easily obtainable alternative hardware which can be easily adapted to our cause. (Sorry, for me emulation doesn't cut it, it's too clunky. I want to be able to plug a machine in, switch on and hit F2.) This is why I suggested 2nd hand Amiga 1200s (I know that one of our french friends said that french keyboard layout Amigas are hard to come by) as by default they're faster than the QL with useful on-board hardware and can be easily upgraded using reasonably available 3rd party 68030/040/060 and memory upgrade boards which can often be found on eBay. The only other possible alternatives would be Ataris, which aren't expanable and you pay through the nose for a Falcon040 (if you can find one), or old Apples, which don't have a great deal of hardware documentation. The alternative to replacing the Amiga Kickstart ROM in the machine would be to have the OS on disk as software and get Kickstart to load that instead. Probably easier than burning ROMs I would imagine. At least the Amiga platform is well documented and close enough to the QL to make it feasible. (You could probably even write a Copper list to make the Amiga video hardware read the QL screen format directly.) There are very few options available. All of them would require a huge amount of work. Steve What about a hardware connector that allows an existing amiga accellerator board to connect to a QL empansion slot or a backplane, would that not be simpler and give the advantages with less effort? Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
- Original Message - From: "Malcolm Cadman" <> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 12:02 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC? >Well ... 2 years is a long time in computing ... :-) ... so may be some optimism that new ideas can take seed. And in those 2 years 86 members (28% of the membership) have said goodbye to Quanta. I would love to know who they were and why they did. What have the officers done to find out? Best wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, gwicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >- Original Message - >From: "Malcolm Cadman" <> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 5:14 PM >Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC? > > >>In other words Quanta could give £5,000 of members' money to develop a card >>and see no return on that money whatsoever. > >>Although, that is not a bad idea ... to invest in new hardware as a >risk. > >Unfortunately that is not going to happen because the members don't want it. > >Don't forget two years ago you had a choice of chairman. One candidate, me, >was a radical who wanted to take Quanta in a new direction; the other, the >present chairman, I would term a traditionalist. > >The voting was 27 to 19 in favour of the traditionalist. > >Sadly the Quanta members who subscribe to this list are not typical of the >majority of the membership. You may not like the conservatism of the present >committee, but they are probably more representative of the average member >than I am, Well ... 2 years is a long time in computing ... :-) ... so may be some optimism that new ideas can take seed. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Seeing all this discussion about possible new hardware etc. and the risks etc. is why I've come to the conclusion that there's never going to be any new hardware. It's just not economically viable: (a) The cost in time and money to design and build would be high. (b) The size of the market is too small so the price would be prohibitively high. It would be really nice if magically a new, hyper-fast, QL compatible replacement motherboard for the QL which fitted into the case would appear, but it's not going to. Those who want to continue to play can't find the old upgrade cards anymore (though I have seen on eBay UK at the moment someone selling two QLs with one Gold Card) so there's a problem. Porting something like SMS/Q or whatever to a new platform is still expensive in time but no-where near as much as new hardware, so surely, the best way forward would be to find some easily obtainable alternative hardware which can be easily adapted to our cause. (Sorry, for me emulation doesn't cut it, it's too clunky. I want to be able to plug a machine in, switch on and hit F2.) This is why I suggested 2nd hand Amiga 1200s (I know that one of our french friends said that french keyboard layout Amigas are hard to come by) as by default they're faster than the QL with useful on-board hardware and can be easily upgraded using reasonably available 3rd party 68030/040/060 and memory upgrade boards which can often be found on eBay. The only other possible alternatives would be Ataris, which aren't expanable and you pay through the nose for a Falcon040 (if you can find one), or old Apples, which don't have a great deal of hardware documentation. The alternative to replacing the Amiga Kickstart ROM in the machine would be to have the OS on disk as software and get Kickstart to load that instead. Probably easier than burning ROMs I would imagine. At least the Amiga platform is well documented and close enough to the QL to make it feasible. (You could probably even write a Copper list to make the Amiga video hardware read the QL screen format directly.) There are very few options available. All of them would require a huge amount of work. Steve -- --- Nostalgia isn't as good as it used to be. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes >Hi Roy > >I think you too miss some of points I am making. > >I am arguing for a continuing mixed economy with a place for both emulators >and hardware. I do not have a partisan stance on the emulator vs hardware >debate. But look at the numbers of people. 10 maybe enthusing on the hardware as a platform. Not very convincing is it? >Please do not take my comment about spof PCs so seriously, I am merely >having had a bit of local difficulty in that my PC hard drived died a >few weeks >ago. Hence I have been through a major salvage operation to recover data that >was not backed up (daughters mp3 tracks) followed by the discovery that as my >PC is obsolete ie the motherboard is 4 year old buying a direct replacement >hard disk is not a sensible option, instead I am splashing out on a £350+ >upgrade. Reinstalling windows XP, recovering the data and installing >the basic >software I use took most of my spare time for at least a week. >I can recompile and install an new version of smsq/e from sources in 30-40 >minutes. I can reinstall my all software on Qx0 from compact flash card in >40minutes. There is one thing a Qx0 does better. > But this is a much more complex and sophisticated system. There is no comparison. If you could do on a QL what you can do in Windows you would not need Windows. That is the point. > >The second point about smsq/e is the critical issue as Marcel is only one >person and while he has promised to release qpc2 into the wild when he loses >interest I wonder who by then will have the programming skills to keep QPC2 >upto date with the changing PC hardware & software scene? > Well the code is open. Anyone can change it - is that not what they all clamoured for? And how many people have done anything? Well about the same number as extolled the virtues of old hardware (although not the same people). No one makes any effort - that is what kills the system. Not a licence. >You said >>But what would you use all the extra power for? What >>software would drive it. The only two programs that have pushed at the >>envelope in the last few years have been QWord and QDT. We would need >>more than that. > >OK Roy, software that, in my opinion benefits from more cpu power that the >supergoldcard can deliver: > > >SBASIC on a QX0. Comfortable editing, multiple SBASICs run well so no >need to >compile little tasks a they wont slow the system down. Dont forget that >SBASIC is >probably the killer "application" on the QL scene > but it does not need any of higher power systems. Runs fine on a Gold Card. >Proforma and Prowess - juddery and barely usable on SGcard, fun on Qx0 >and QPC2 > Proforma is slugged by its own code. Re-write the code to be more efficient and it would run better. It is completely open source now. >QCDEZE runs OK on Aurora because its dumbed down, nice in high colour on >Qx0 OK I guess that is one but it is also not needed by QPC2. > >Ghostscript Why? > >Photo > Needs more than power - needs an application that is better than anything we have now. > >SUQCESS > Worked fine on my SGC Aurora system > >Text87 Same as above but it is a very limited program. Needs a rewrite but that will not happen. > >LYNX Possibly but the same above applies. > >This is by no means an exhaustive list. The point is that a lot of older >software that pushed past the envelope run nicely on the Qx0 and QPC2 >on decent >PC.Other people starting from a different position than you or I would like, >from the comments on this list, a hardware route to that same level. Because >some are content and dont wish to upgrade is not a reason to deny others the >opportunity. The people most likely to want to upgrade could be the >re-entrants to the QL scene and thats where this thread started. > No the older programs did well for their time but are now outdated and clunky in the extreme. New software with a modern approach is what we need but we have neither the programmers nor drive to do any of that. >I think Malcolm Cadman summarised the need for a hardware upgrade route well >in his email. Hardware does drive software to a degree but then you need the authors to be around to do the work. These are few and far between. Without Marcel we would have very few of our current developments. This is not Marcel's fault but ours. There is no one else who wants to make the effort/ can make the effort. Where does that leave us then? -- Roy Wood Q Branch. 20 Locks Hill, Portslade, Sussex.BN41 2LB Tel: +44 (0) 1273 386030fax: +44 (0) 1273 430501 skype : royqbranch web : www.qbranch.demon.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Thing is, there are basically 3 motivations for a developer: 1) The challenge 2) He/she wants the result for him/herself 3) Money QPC did fit all three of them. But in the case of hardware money cannot be the motivator because building hardware is expensive and one can probably be glad to cover costs. So unless you find somebody who is truly dedicated to either 1) or 2) all discussions are pretty moot, unfortunately. Regarding the firmware issue, I did offer to write it for Nasta's hardware but that was when I was still studying. I now write software professionally for 7 to 10 hours per day, and while I'd still like to do it for the challenge, between the job and my various other hobbies there's probably not much time and energy left for a nice evening filled with debugging interrupt handlers. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
- Original Message - From: "Malcolm Cadman" <> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 5:14 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC? >In other words Quanta could give £5,000 of members' money to develop a card >and see no return on that money whatsoever. >Although, that is not a bad idea ... to invest in new hardware as a risk. Unfortunately that is not going to happen because the members don't want it. Don't forget two years ago you had a choice of chairman. One candidate, me, was a radical who wanted to take Quanta in a new direction; the other, the present chairman, I would term a traditionalist. The voting was 27 to 19 in favour of the traditionalist. Sadly the Quanta members who subscribe to this list are not typical of the majority of the membership. You may not like the conservatism of the present committee, but they are probably more representative of the average member than I am, Best Wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Hi Roy I think you too miss some of points I am making. I am arguing for a continuing mixed economy with a place for both emulators and hardware. I do not have a partisan stance on the emulator vs hardware debate. Other comments on the list I think would support this general position. No doubt some of the options have specific difficulties such as who has the skill to write drivers etc but that does not invalidate the general point that a mixed economy is better than all eggs in one basket. In addition just because something may be difficult does not mean that it is impossible. To move forward need to look at ald problems with new solutions in mind. Please do not take my comment about spof PCs so seriously, I am merely having had a bit of local difficulty in that my PC hard drived died a few weeks ago. Hence I have been through a major salvage operation to recover data that was not backed up (daughters mp3 tracks) followed by the discovery that as my PC is obsolete ie the motherboard is 4 year old buying a direct replacement hard disk is not a sensible option, instead I am splashing out on a £350+ upgrade. Reinstalling windows XP, recovering the data and installing the basic software I use took most of my spare time for at least a week. I can recompile and install an new version of smsq/e from sources in 30-40 minutes. I can reinstall my all software on Qx0 from compact flash card in 40minutes. There is one thing a Qx0 does better. The second point about smsq/e is the critical issue as Marcel is only one person and while he has promised to release qpc2 into the wild when he loses interest I wonder who by then will have the programming skills to keep QPC2 upto date with the changing PC hardware & software scene? You said >But what would you use all the extra power for? What >software would drive it. The only two programs that have pushed at the >envelope in the last few years have been QWord and QDT. We would need >more than that. OK Roy, software that, in my opinion benefits from more cpu power that the supergoldcard can deliver: SBASIC on a QX0. Comfortable editing, multiple SBASICs run well so no need to compile little tasks a they wont slow the system down. Dont forget that SBASIC is probably the killer "application" on the QL scene Proforma and Prowess - juddery and barely usable on SGcard, fun on Qx0 and QPC2 QCDEZE runs OK on Aurora because its dumbed down, nice in high colour on Qx0 Ghostscript Photo SUQCESS Text87 LYNX This is by no means an exhaustive list. The point is that a lot of older software that pushed past the envelope run nicely on the Qx0 and QPC2 on decent PC.Other people starting from a different position than you or I would like, from the comments on this list, a hardware route to that same level. Because some are content and dont wish to upgrade is not a reason to deny others the opportunity. The people most likely to want to upgrade could be the re-entrants to the QL scene and thats where this thread started. I think Malcolm Cadman summarised the need for a hardware upgrade route well in his email. Re: [ql-users] Réf. : Re: Réf. : Re: Spare GC or SGC? Best Wishes Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes >Hi Per > >I think you miss the point sometimes. > >You said > > "The QL was never only about hardware for quite a number of enthusiasts, >and therefore it is still going strong in its emulated form. If you want >the best QL platform money can buy, get QPC2 and stick it in your PC." > >For quite a number of enthusiasts t it was not and still is not about >emulators, especially those who love and are sticking to original >hardware and >those who have no easy upgrade route now if they do not have a PC at home. Actually the point is in what Per said. He said 'quite a number of enthusiasts'. The number of native QL users has been dropping slowly over the years and begins to consist of those who know how to use the older software and don't want to move on. Those who have Auroras and the attendant expansions and those who ventured into the Q.xx territory are few but they do tend to be hardware enthusiasts I agree. If, however, there was a healthy software development scene they would be hard pushed to use this hardware to run better programs based on higher graphics and needing better hardware. A reasonable PC now costs the same as the price a replacement SGC would cost. > >As for QPC2 dont forget that there are 2 critical spofs (single points of >failure) for QPC2 - > >1. the PC and its OS That is a rather blinkered argument. PC hardware is pretty efficient. Almost every aspect of it is superior in performance to any QL hardware. It may not be efficient or as well designed in some ways but it is hardly a 'critical spot'. Windows may be bloated and have lots of security holes but I built a PC 2 years ago for a customer who just runs the Office Suite and email. It is still running perfectly and does not crash. It is when you start levering in all the other rubbish that people put on systems that they fall over. She is doing no more with her PC than most QL users and it works for her. >"Wot SMSQ/E license issue?" Not my personal issue here but the very real >fight that despoiled this list some time ago. It needs to be recognised >that the >consequences of that argument was a critical point in the future development >of the QL community. As for SMS/E I have compiled my own SMSQ/E for my Q60 >since 3.03 and tried to show how easy it is to do in QLToday, but the >argument >about "licence" itself seems to have killed off hardware development. Without re-igniting the 'licence issue' argument I would like to say that, if you bought your Q.xx with SMSQ/E on it in the first place the upgrade to the latest version is free (apart from postage etc.) and the latest version works on the Q.xx because Wolfgang takes the trouble to make it so. It was stubbornness and a blinkered attitude that caused the problem. Not the licence. > >"However, the second major module of the Aurora project, the mythical >Goldfire, is still outstanding. That is the project that is furthest >advanced. If >it cannot be made to succeed what chance does any other project have?" > >I agree with you there is absolutely none if everyone has your attitude. >The question to me is why did it stall, was the project too ambitious in its >scope - using a Coldfire processor or did personal circumstances for the >prime mover result in its end? I dont know. I do not think that Nasta has the time to develop it any more and, as Tony said, who would write the firmware and drivers to make it work? > >What I am suggesting is that those with hardware skills left the community >should be encouraged (financially) to look at simpler projects that need less >development time and are affordable for a larger number of the group or if >that is not possible that as a group we should consider projects with >outsourcing of development in an affordable way perhaps to eastern >europe as suggested >by Rich Mellor. I would very much have liked a new SGC replacement and the demonstrations that Nasta gave in the US a few years ago were very impressive. But what would you use all the extra power for? What software would drive it. The only two programs that have pushed at the envelope in the last few years have been QWord and QDT. We would need more than that. -- Roy Wood Q Branch. 20 Locks Hill, Portslade, Sussex.BN41 2LB Tel: +44 (0) 1273 386030fax: +44 (0) 1273 430501 skype : royqbranch web : www.qbranch.demon.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, gwicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Basically you are in an "all or nothing" situation. You have to first of >design your board on paper and try very hard to make sure it will be a >working board. Once you start to actually build the hardware, then you >cannot talk in terms of an initial prototype and then later full production. >This is, among other things, because the availability and price of chips in >in constant flux. > >If your paper design proves to work in practice, fine. If it doesn't you may >be able to get it to work by a bit of tweaking. You can also be in a >situation in which you get now return whatsoever on the capital. > >In other words Quanta could give £5,000 of members' money to develop a card >and see no return on that money whatsoever. Although, that is not a bad idea ... to invest in new hardware as a risk. The members of Quanta and other QL users need some new interest on the hardware side, to keep the activity more active. In addition, other individual investors could be involved, to spread the risk a little more. The incentive would be - prototypes to try out and a discount on a production model, free upgrades of related software for a period or forever. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In a message dated 13/02/2007 19:33:40 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If your paper design proves to work in practice, fine. If it doesn't you may be able to get it to work by a bit of tweaking. You can also be in a situation in which you get now return whatsoever on the capital. In other words Quanta could give £5,000 of members' money to develop a card and see no return on that money whatsoever. I agree that a complete design from bottom up could be a risky business but why if one was is not achievable are all other possible routes ruled out. Why not consider adapting commercially available boards. Startup costs of a project could come down to a few hundred pounds plus programming time. Have a look at Bitwise systems site : _https://www.quickusb.com/_ (https://www.quickusb.com/) for $149 dollars you get a USB module that can be adapted to interface to custom systems, board are made with a variety of adaptors. Drivers are supplied in linux & windows format with documentation. volume price breaks start at as little as 10 units. Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
- Original Message - From: "P Witte" <> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 9:20 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC? As a final thought Quanta could stimulate this by making a prize (£s > X-prize) for the first team to say design and make a prototype processor > upgrade > add on board or USB driver or whatever, >Id vote for Quanta to fund hardware developments, that would be good for >the general ambience, even though Im unlikely to buy another piece of QL >hardware kit myself. Much as I would like to see Quanta using its capital to fund QL development, I think you have to remain realistic. At QL2004 I spoke to Nasta over how you could finance a new expansion card with the possibility of Quanta financing in mind. His reply was not encouraging. Basically you are in an "all or nothing" situation. You have to first of design your board on paper and try very hard to make sure it will be a working board. Once you start to actually build the hardware, then you cannot talk in terms of an initial prototype and then later full production. This is, among other things, because the availability and price of chips in in constant flux. If your paper design proves to work in practice, fine. If it doesn't you may be able to get it to work by a bit of tweaking. You can also be in a situation in which you get now return whatsoever on the capital. In other words Quanta could give £5,000 of members' money to develop a card and see no return on that money whatsoever. It would be a very brave committee who would be prepared to take that risk. It certainly would be grossly unfair to expect a committee of just 4 people to take such an important and risky decision, Best Wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich Mellor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:55:39 -, Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: >> Yes, but programs like QWord show that the OS can now do good graphics >> ... it just needs another platform to run on, at present. >> > >That depends on your definition of platform. > >We decided that a 4 colour version of QWord would not be playable. An 8 >colour version was getting there, but you could only have a small grid and >so it was fairly pointless. > >However, with an Aurora motherboard, QPC2 or Qx0, the possibilities were >much more hopeful. Heck, we even made certain that it would work on >Aurora (plus SGC) without SMSQ/e. >It is interesting how new hardware can encourage people to write software >- we are working on an IDE / CF adaptor for the Spectrum (the DivIDE Plus) >and should actually manage to get this on the market for around £50, with >designers in Poland. However, the firmware is based on an earlier device >- the authors have been inspired to make use of the additional >functionality, but then they do not want payment for their work. > >Maybe that is the best side of the Sinclair market - people like to see >just what can be squeezed out of the old machines. It certainly proves the point that a lot of impressive software could develop, because new hardware gives a new challenge. >The problem is that there are no new QL hardware designers and it would be >a steep learning curve for anyone who wished to work on a new project. >Quanta offered funding to assist with new design, but there has to be the >market, willingness and time. Then we need firmware authors - Tony Tebby >always seems to have been closely involved in any hardware project since >the start of the QL - who else has actual experience of writing firmware >for the QL who we could call on? > >There are plenty of people still using the standard QL, but the figure >must be less than 200 and they must feel left behind. Quanta is losing >its membership fast, as people realise that they cannot expand their QL >any more than they have already (either in terms of software or hardware), >and without access to the internet, do not see the still-thriving >community - I wonder how many Super Gold Cards lie hidden away in lofts >and cupboards forgotten. As you know, SGC's are in demand now ... anyone reading this got one hidden in loft ? -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Instead of building new hardware, reuse very common old hardware which is easy to find on places such as eBay... i.e. Amiga 1200 etc. > Yes I'm agree, this sound OK. But I searching an Amiga 1200 with a french keyboard, and it's difficult to find one. Now, if someone could write a version of QDOS etc. for that platform which could be burned onto ROM (the Amiga ROMs are easy to access and replace) that would give the community an easy route for an upgrade without a massive cost for the hardware. > This may take a while. But as the Amiga already have a QL emulator, a port of QDOS may be facilitate. > And if I have an Amiga 1200, I want to use both Amiga and QL on it. (The Amiga 1200 has a built-in IDE interface and an internal floppy drive. It also has reasonable 2D graphics performance, ample for the QL-like display. Oh, and much of the original AmigaDOS was written by Metacomco in BCPL on Sinclair QLs. :-) Maybe it's pay-back time?) > Sure. > I'm asking to myself if the new AmigaOne (based on PPC) should by more suitable. But much more harder on development. > I'm thinking that like many tentative made around all these new projects needs both persons who worked on them and money. The rentability of such of projects are very difficult to be reached. > I need a 68K compatible platform to execute both QL, Amiga, Linux68K and others, ..., but Q40/Q60 lets us watch that is expensive to get this kind of system. And complete and running systems need plenty of time to be integrated and installed (I guess as I dont't have one). > There is a lot of emulators that's work well on PC. So I frequently used QPC or WinUAE. > Currently I'm working to create my own company and I searching if there is a way to put into market this such of computers... And the only one response I really find is that without an heavy investment we cannot get a large selling 68K computer that make it cheap. > As I think that work around SMS/Q and Q40/Q60 are still active, I want to earn a lot of money in order to buy to system with the suite of softwares. > I saw a lot of software I want to get, but prices are too expensive for me at this time. And it's hard to see a lot of utilities that give you pretty desktop in high resolution on QL... > After this I still hesitate to buy some hardware because when I saw products description, it's a bit difficult to make an opinion on certain products. For example, I need to modify one of my 4 QL black box to get an speedy serial port to make him communicate with a PC. In that case the solution may be Hermes/ SuperHermes Lite or SuperHermes (between 82 to 140 euros) and I pretty sure that just buying this is not sufficient to get it up and running (I think I have to build a cable, make a new box or put the QL in a tower case, find a keyboard and...) > An all of this just in order to save some software from destruction (for exemple - I recently lose VROOM as the cartridge is now dead and I don't know how to hack the protection - I had saved the files but not the original cartridge. > And what if the strategy to follow : > 1. Using QXL/QXL2 - This is a ISA card, should be now usefull to get it now in PCI Express or PCI format ? > 2. QL with extensions - Well at this time this mean QL + SGC + Aurora + Mplane + a new tower box, some hours ... > 3. Emulation. Well QPC is very attractive but now I had to know what's software to use (I want to use a C compiler, Basic Compiler and ...) > 4. Q40/Q60 .. Yes a day certainly when I will have increased my knowledge on QL > And for what ? I still don't know ;-) > So now, and it's because I cannot say "count me in for the new SGC for exemple" is that I need the help of a "QL Master Expert Consultant" in order to understand all of this. > In fact I just need what : Preserve my old programs and games from destruction and program in S*Basic (with compilation) and in C on QL. > The suite QD+Qbasic+Qliberator is about 106 euros and C68 seems to be hard to install ;-) > I thinking onto rewrite completely my website to create a dedicated zone for the QL where anyone can publish articles in order to create an "QL Advanced Wiki for Technical and Newbies" - And not in english only ;-) !!! What do you think? Steve -- --- Nostalgia isn't as good as it used to be. ___ 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] Spare GC or SGC?
I've just had a thought... Instead of building new hardware, reuse very common old hardware which is easy to find on places such as eBay... i.e. Amiga 1200 etc. Now, if someone could write a version of QDOS etc. for that platform which could be burned onto ROM (the Amiga ROMs are easy to access and replace) that would give the community an easy route for an upgrade without a massive cost for the hardware. (The Amiga 1200 has a built-in IDE interface and an internal floppy drive. It also has reasonable 2D graphics performance, ample for the QL-like display. Oh, and much of the original AmigaDOS was written by Metacomco in BCPL on Sinclair QLs. :-) Maybe it's pay-back time?) The alternative to replacing just the ROMs would be a "trap-door" add in card.. but that raises the ugly head of hardware development. The big problem with that approach, again, is driver development. However, from what I understand, there's a lot of documentation for the Amiga hardware so it's shouldn't be as bad as it might otherwise be. What do you think? Steve -- --- Nostalgia isn't as good as it used to be. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
On 12 Feb 2007, at 21:20, P Witte wrote: > > Wot SMSQ/E license issue? The Qx0 comes with a version of Qdos > included. > You could download a copy of the latest SMSQ/E sources and use Qdos to > assemble your very own version of SMSQ/E. The Registrar has gone to a > lot of trouble to make this quite painless, and best of all, it is > fr. > You can even get a version of SMSQ/E source code which can be assembled both by Qmac and (rather faster) by GWASS. Just e-mail me for this. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 2. like previous QL hardware efforts that started this discussion the QPC2 > software is a one man show. If Marcel loses interest QPC2 is dead. Just one quick point: if I completely lose interest I plan to release QPC2 in the wild. By the way, new release for Vista is still pending, sorry. It'll happen as soon as possible. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Le 07-02-12 à 17:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > Hi Per > > I think you miss the point sometimes. > > You said > > "The QL was never only about hardware for quite a number of > enthusiasts, > and therefore it is still going strong in its emulated form. If > you want > the best QL platform money can buy, get QPC2 and stick it in your > PC." > > For quite a number of enthusiasts t it was not and still is not about > emulators, especially those who love and are sticking to original > hardware and > those who have no easy upgrade route now if they do not have a PC > at home. > I agree with Ducan. I have no reason to use an emulator; if I have to use an host computer to run QL programs, I will use the host native OS instead. However, as with many retro-computing lovers, using a actual old computer has a lot of charm. It amaze me to see how much stuff an old computer can do. And buying stuff to upgrade a retro computer is a big part of the fun. Would I buy new hardware for my QL ? Probably, depending of what it does. USB board, ethernet board or all in one solution would be very tempting. François ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Hi Per I think you miss the point sometimes. You said "The QL was never only about hardware for quite a number of enthusiasts, and therefore it is still going strong in its emulated form. If you want the best QL platform money can buy, get QPC2 and stick it in your PC." For quite a number of enthusiasts t it was not and still is not about emulators, especially those who love and are sticking to original hardware and those who have no easy upgrade route now if they do not have a PC at home. As for QPC2 dont forget that there are 2 critical spofs (single points of failure) for QPC2 - 1. the PC and its OS 2. like previous QL hardware efforts that started this discussion the QPC2 software is a one man show. If Marcel loses interest QPC2 is dead. Therefore regardless of personal preferences & Marcels current health in the long term diversity is good, all eggs in one basket is bad. I also have QPC2 upto date etc, etc "Wot SMSQ/E license issue?" Not my personal issue here but the very real fight that despoiled this list some time ago. It needs to be recognised that the consequences of that argument was a critical point in the future development of the QL community. As for SMS/E I have compiled my own SMSQ/E for my Q60 since 3.03 and tried to show how easy it is to do in QLToday, but the argument about "licence" itself seems to have killed off hardware development. "However, the second major module of the Aurora project, the mythical Goldfire, is still outstanding. That is the project that is furthest advanced. If it cannot be made to succeed what chance does any other project have?" I agree with you there is absolutely none if everyone has your attitude. The question to me is why did it stall, was the project too ambitious in its scope - using a Coldfire processor or did personal circumstances for the prime mover result in its end? I dont know. What I am suggesting is that those with hardware skills left the community should be encouraged (financially) to look at simpler projects that need less development time and are affordable for a larger number of the group or if that is not possible that as a group we should consider projects with outsourcing of development in an affordable way perhaps to eastern europe as suggested by Rich Mellor. Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Duncan writes: <> While this discussion has been had here numerous times before, obviously, it is still worth having. However, you say > Without hardware development QL computing will not survive much longer > except for retro enthusiasts. The QL was never only about hardware for quite a number of enthusiasts, and therefore it is still going strong in its emulated form. If you want the best QL platform money can buy, get QPC2 and stick it in your PC. > Clearly the cost of upgrading is important to many current users as the Qx0 > series has not been taken up generally with the majority of hardware users > running system designed in the 1980s or early 1990s. As a result development > of > the Qx0 series seems to have stopped as well, presumably the market is too > small to make it worthwhile developing add ons for the Qx0 and then there is > the SMSQ/E licence issue there as well. Wot SMSQ/E license issue? The Qx0 comes with a version of Qdos included. You could download a copy of the latest SMSQ/E sources and use Qdos to assemble your very own version of SMSQ/E. The Registrar has gone to a lot of trouble to make this quite painless, and best of all, it is fr. If you want to contribute to SMSQ/E developments or to update facilities or fix bugs, there is a straightforward way to set about it. Finally, if youre not up to either, you can buy a pre-compiled version for your platform for a small fee from an official reseller, who will also offer you support. In other words, the "license issue" is a misnomer. The issue, if there is any, lies elsewhere and had better not be discussed ;o) > If someone is thinking about developing the hardware further, recognising > price constraints and the diverse needs of the community would it be possible > to > consider a modular process of upgrades. If it were possible for example: <> A modular approach is sensible. However, the second major module of the Aurora project, the mythical Goldfire, is still outstanding. That is the project that is furthest advanced. If it cannot be made to succeed what chance does any other project have? > As a final thought Quanta could stimulate this by making a prize (£s > X-prize) for the first team to say design and make a prototype processor > upgrade > add on board or USB driver or whatever, Id vote for Quanta to fund hardware developments, that would be good for the general ambience, even though Im unlikely to buy another piece of QL hardware kit myself. Per ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:55:39 -, Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tony Firshman > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > >> Neil Riley wrote: >>> Guys, >>> >>> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC >>> ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a >>> marked jump in performance from SGC and allow >>> for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream >>> of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on >>> a Black box QL. >>> >>> It is developments like this that kick start the bedroom >>> coders. >>> >>> Oh yes, count me in. > >> .. but not graphics I think. That would still have to be down to the >> motherboard. > > Yes, but programs like QWord show that the OS can now do good graphics > ... it just needs another platform to run on, at present. > That depends on your definition of platform. We decided that a 4 colour version of QWord would not be playable. An 8 colour version was getting there, but you could only have a small grid and so it was fairly pointless. However, with an Aurora motherboard, QPC2 or Qx0, the possibilities were much more hopeful. Heck, we even made certain that it would work on Aurora (plus SGC) without SMSQ/e. It is interesting how new hardware can encourage people to write software - we are working on an IDE / CF adaptor for the Spectrum (the DivIDE Plus) and should actually manage to get this on the market for around £50, with designers in Poland. However, the firmware is based on an earlier device - the authors have been inspired to make use of the additional functionality, but then they do not want payment for their work. Maybe that is the best side of the Sinclair market - people like to see just what can be squeezed out of the old machines. The problem is that there are no new QL hardware designers and it would be a steep learning curve for anyone who wished to work on a new project. Quanta offered funding to assist with new design, but there has to be the market, willingness and time. Then we need firmware authors - Tony Tebby always seems to have been closely involved in any hardware project since the start of the QL - who else has actual experience of writing firmware for the QL who we could call on? There are plenty of people still using the standard QL, but the figure must be less than 200 and they must feel left behind. Quanta is losing its membership fast, as people realise that they cannot expand their QL any more than they have already (either in terms of software or hardware), and without access to the internet, do not see the still-thriving community - I wonder how many Super Gold Cards lie hidden away in lofts and cupboards forgotten. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tony Firshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Neil Riley wrote: >> Guys, >> >> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC >> ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a >> marked jump in performance from SGC and allow >> for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream >> of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on >> a Black box QL. >> >> It is developments like this that kick start the bedroom >> coders. >> >> Oh yes, count me in. >.. but not graphics I think. That would still have to be down to the >motherboard. Yes, but programs like QWord show that the OS can now do good graphics ... it just needs another platform to run on, at present. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC > ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a > marked jump in performance from SGC and allow > for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream > of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on > a Black box QL. > > It is developments like this that kick start the bedroom > coders. > > Oh yes, count me in. > > Neil Being a devil's advocate for a moment, here are a few asides which may have a bearing on this. For not that much more than the prices above you could buy a Q40i or Q60 from D&D Systems. There is also the long lasting proposal for Nasta's GoldFire (can't remember if that was the chip name [Coldfire?]) or if it had some other name - how much would that cost to finalise and market? Neil might not be aware of this, I don't think it's been discussed since he joined the list. There might be out there somewhere a 680xx card which could be developed too, you never know, the savings in hardware development might pay for someone to port QDOS or SMSQ/E to it - fancy a new challenge Marcel? ;-))) -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Yes, I could put the program on my site if required. -- Dilwyn Jones - Original Message - From: "Robert Newson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:04 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC? > Stephen Usher wrote: > Hi Steve, > > ... > >>I find with 2M on my GC, data and programs just rattle around > >>inside! Even > >>with the base 128K machine (around 77K(?) free for use) I used to > >>be able to > >>do/run more than I could with a 540K PC. Or are people becoming > >>so > >>"bloatware expecting" that 4M sounds titchy? > > > > Yes, but the QL doesn't have all those silly GUI thingies written > > in bloating > > C++ (or now JAVA and .NET). I must admit that I sometimes found > > 128K > > restrictive but never filled the Trump Card memory. (Oh and I did > > have a > > sort-of GUI thingy for the QL, the ICE ROM & mouse.) > > Neither did the 540K PC of the time (Windwos 3.x were just about > around when > I got the GC, but never had them at the time to compare with using > the 128K QL). > > > Still, storage has never been a problem for you, other than the > > UCL Euclid > > file quota, which you got around using a neat trick using the > > e-mail inbox if > > I remember correctly. > > If space really ran out there was alway the "emergency" PTP > (Paper-Tape-Punch) archive...I still have a few sitting around > upstairs, but > with no means of reading contents :( > > > Oh and then there was thae hack for getting > > long > > printouts on the self-sevice printer.. and the Babbage programs > > you wrote > > which made UCLCC people nervous about 'cos they did things no-one > > thought a > > normal user could do. > > Funny you should mention them...I was having a chuckle about one in > particular (the pre-main code filing password adder/remover) and > exactly > what it did and how it did it. > > > By the way, I seem to remember a couple of years ago that you > > asked if you > > could pass on the source etc. of the terminal emulator I wrote to > someone, did > > you do so? Seeing as I've not got a modern machine readable copy > > would it be > > possible for you to fish it out and pass it onto whoever archives > > QL software > > on this list? Someone might as well get some use out of it. > > I have it somewhere...need to search...can't remember to whom I > wanted to > send it now. > > To whom should I sent it (ie who would possibly be interested in > archiving/having it [for distribution])? Dilwyn? > > > -- > --- > Robert Newson, E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 17 Sunnybank, South Norwood Phone: (020) 8654 6643 > London, SE25 4TQ Mobile: 07737 515 214 or 07922 060 > 873 > > > ___ > QL-Users Mailing List > http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.30/674 - Release Date: > 07/02/2007 15:33 > > ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Neil Riley wrote: >>> Guys, >>> >>> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC >>> ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a >>> marked jump in performance from SGC and allow >>> for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream >>> of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on >>> a Black box QL. >>> >>> It is developments like this that kick start the bedroom >>> coders. >>> >>> Oh yes, count me in. >.. but not graphics I think. That would still have to be down to the >motherboard. >Tony Oh well, you can't have everything ! Perhaps QL DOOM would be a better place to start ( also open source), it'd look good in 256 colours on my Aurora. This is all perfectly possible, I mean, I'm so impressed with ZM/hT plus it shows what can be achieved with an expanded QL, I wish I had the skills of the developer, I would happily develop for the QL in my spare time just to wow with the results. Neil *** The contents of this email are confidential to the intended recipient. It may not be disclosed to or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor may it be copied in any way. If received in error, please contact the company on 01793-715380, then delete it from your system. Please note neither the company nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan attachments (if any) for viruses. No contract may be concluded on behalf of the company by means of email communications. BC Services (UK) Limited (trading as Boxclever), Technology House, Ampthill Road, Bedford, MK42 9QQ. Registered No. 5290544 England www.boxclever.co.uk *** ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Neil Riley wrote: > Guys, > > I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC > ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a > marked jump in performance from SGC and allow > for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream > of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on > a Black box QL. > > It is developments like this that kick start the bedroom > coders. > > Oh yes, count me in. .. but not graphics I think. That would still have to be down to the motherboard. Tony - -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF0DhxM3RzOs8+btoRAmybAKCL70dO6q00nmtvlViK9zbrUpl7vQCbBsAZ yQIYhoRFdH2DdUiiEbtiaCQ= =c2K3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Guys, I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a marked jump in performance from SGC and allow for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on a Black box QL. It is developments like this that kick start the bedroom coders. Oh yes, count me in. Neil >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11 February 2007 20:32 >>> Well, here's number 2! Count me in! Tony Firshman wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> Ah there are lots of things one could put on it. >>> However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development. >>> It would be great to be proved wrong. >>> It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300 >>> to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then maybe >>> it could be worth pursuing. I doubt very much if Sturat is going to be >>> interested. I doubt if Nasta has time. >>> >>> .. and I wonder if I have time as well! All I could possibly do is >>> design a pcb and build. I have no expertise (or time) to design firmware. >>> >>> It is probably a pipedream! >>> >>> Tony >>> >> Have you had any replies? I for one would be interested especially if the >> successor card was well specced - minerva rom, decent processor 68060 & >> amount >> of memory 16 MB, par port, and IDEx2 and ethernet connector, and flash >> memory. What else should be on the list? >> >> > You are the only one so far. As I say this probably a pipedream unless a > firmware writer (like Stuart H) pops up. It will need *very* > sophisticated logic chips. > > Tony > > > - -- > QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFFzwrmM3RzOs8+btoRAo+kAJ9CMi5vE+slXhyahYGdnOa+6HWzZgCdE9DZ > /ATgKew46Izskw2ZMvbK8Zg= > =QT5B > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > 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 *** The contents of this email are confidential to the intended recipient. It may not be disclosed to or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor may it be copied in any way. If received in error, please contact the company on 01793-715380, then delete it from your system. Please note neither the company nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan attachments (if any) for viruses. No contract may be concluded on behalf of the company by means of email communications. BC Services (UK) Limited (trading as Boxclever), Technology House, Ampthill Road, Bedford, MK42 9QQ. Registered No. 5290544 England www.boxclever.co.uk *** ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Well ... I can't claim to comprehend all the details of this discussion, but I
could be #3 . Make that 2.5 (" 2+2 = 5, for large values of 2" :-) .
Doug L. 37830 USA
-Original Message-
>From: Rick Chagouri-Brindle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Feb 11, 2007 3:32 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
>
>Well, here's number 2! Count me in!
>
>Tony Firshman wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>>> Ah there are lots of things one could put on it.
>>>> However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development.
>>>> It would be great to be proved wrong.
>>>> It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300
>>>> to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then maybe
>>>> it could be worth pursuing. I doubt very much if Sturat is going to be
>>>> interested. I doubt if Nasta has time.
>>>>
>>>> .. and I wonder if I have time as well! All I could possibly do is
>>>> design a pcb and build. I have no expertise (or time) to design firmware.
>>>>
>>>> It is probably a pipedream!
>>>>
>>>> Tony
>>>>
>>> Have you had any replies? I for one would be interested especially if the
>>> successor card was well specced - minerva rom, decent processor 68060 &
>>> amount
>>> of memory 16 MB, par port, and IDEx2 and ethernet connector, and flash
>>> memory. What else should be on the list?
>>>
>>>
>> You are the only one so far. As I say this probably a pipedream unless a
>> firmware writer (like Stuart H) pops up. It will need *very*
>> sophisticated logic chips.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>
>> - --
>> QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>>
>> iD8DBQFFzwrmM3RzOs8+btoRAo+kAJ9CMi5vE+slXhyahYGdnOa+6HWzZgCdE9DZ
>> /ATgKew46Izskw2ZMvbK8Zg=
>> =QT5B
>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>> ___
>> 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] Spare GC or SGC?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Malcolm Cadman wrote: > > If a new Card could hit more like the £100 to £200 price range then I > believe there would be an interest, and a market for it. I doubt if it would be economic even at £200. It is likely to be pretty expensive to develop. Tony - -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFz7GEM3RzOs8+btoRArtjAJ45chd7eLndO2vDJFc4lsInS/tU+QCggA8s eJL6d2062LIpvO+EYjpxVIA= =wzyy -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Actually, on reflection, count me in for two!!! Tony Firshman wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> Ah there are lots of things one could put on it. >>> However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development. >>> It would be great to be proved wrong. >>> It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300 >>> to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then maybe >>> it could be worth pursuing. I doubt very much if Sturat is going to be >>> interested. I doubt if Nasta has time. >>> >>> .. and I wonder if I have time as well! All I could possibly do is >>> design a pcb and build. I have no expertise (or time) to design firmware. >>> >>> It is probably a pipedream! >>> >>> Tony >>> >> Have you had any replies? I for one would be interested especially if the >> successor card was well specced - minerva rom, decent processor 68060 & >> amount >> of memory 16 MB, par port, and IDEx2 and ethernet connector, and flash >> memory. What else should be on the list? >> >> > You are the only one so far. As I say this probably a pipedream unless a > firmware writer (like Stuart H) pops up. It will need *very* > sophisticated logic chips. > > Tony > > > - -- > QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFFzwrmM3RzOs8+btoRAo+kAJ9CMi5vE+slXhyahYGdnOa+6HWzZgCdE9DZ > /ATgKew46Izskw2ZMvbK8Zg= > =QT5B > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > 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] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tony Firshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Malcolm Cadman wrote: >> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich >> Mellor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> >>> I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to >>> Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing >>> to pay £200-£300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50 >>> boards to make it worthwhile, I am not certain there would be a big enough >>> market, especially with "only" 4MB RAM ! >>> >>> Rich >> >> I would guess that some of the parts for the Cards are either no longer >> available, or not available at a reasonable cost. >> >> Whereas an upgrade could use more recent and probably cheaper parts, >> with more capacity too. As well some new features. >> >> Of course, this would involve a re-design of the circuit board. >> >> Probably name it the EGC - Extreme Gold Card ... ? >> >> 1GB or more flash RAM ... ? ... :-) >Ah there are lots of things one could put on it. >However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development. >It would be great to be proved wrong. >It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300 >to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then maybe >it could be worth pursuing. I doubt very much if Sturat is going to be >interested. I doubt if Nasta has time. > >.. and I wonder if I have time as well! All I could possibly do is >design a pcb and build. I have no expertise (or time) to design firmware. > >It is probably a pipedream! > >Tony Fun to speculate though ... If a new Card could hit more like the £100 to £200 price range then I believe there would be an interest, and a market for it. The "hook" would be in the new features to be made available. The interest would be new hardware to be available. At the London QL and Quanta Group meeting today, Dave Gilham was looking through a 1985 QL Magazine which had a QL system with a hard drive offered at £2000. I wonder how many of those were sold ? -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Well, here's number 2! Count me in! Tony Firshman wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> Ah there are lots of things one could put on it. >>> However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development. >>> It would be great to be proved wrong. >>> It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300 >>> to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then maybe >>> it could be worth pursuing. I doubt very much if Sturat is going to be >>> interested. I doubt if Nasta has time. >>> >>> .. and I wonder if I have time as well! All I could possibly do is >>> design a pcb and build. I have no expertise (or time) to design firmware. >>> >>> It is probably a pipedream! >>> >>> Tony >>> >> Have you had any replies? I for one would be interested especially if the >> successor card was well specced - minerva rom, decent processor 68060 & >> amount >> of memory 16 MB, par port, and IDEx2 and ethernet connector, and flash >> memory. What else should be on the list? >> >> > You are the only one so far. As I say this probably a pipedream unless a > firmware writer (like Stuart H) pops up. It will need *very* > sophisticated logic chips. > > Tony > > > - -- > QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFFzwrmM3RzOs8+btoRAo+kAJ9CMi5vE+slXhyahYGdnOa+6HWzZgCdE9DZ > /ATgKew46Izskw2ZMvbK8Zg= > =QT5B > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > 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] Spare GC or SGC?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Ah there are lots of things one could put on it. >> However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development. >> It would be great to be proved wrong. >> It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300 >> to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then maybe >> it could be worth pursuing. I doubt very much if Sturat is going to be >> interested. I doubt if Nasta has time. > >> .. and I wonder if I have time as well! All I could possibly do is >> design a pcb and build. I have no expertise (or time) to design firmware. > >> It is probably a pipedream! > >> Tony > > Have you had any replies? I for one would be interested especially if the > successor card was well specced - minerva rom, decent processor 68060 & > amount > of memory 16 MB, par port, and IDEx2 and ethernet connector, and flash > memory. What else should be on the list? > You are the only one so far. As I say this probably a pipedream unless a firmware writer (like Stuart H) pops up. It will need *very* sophisticated logic chips. Tony - -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFzwrmM3RzOs8+btoRAo+kAJ9CMi5vE+slXhyahYGdnOa+6HWzZgCdE9DZ /ATgKew46Izskw2ZMvbK8Zg= =QT5B -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
> There are suppliers who make custom "computer on the board" 68060 systems > pricipally for industry. To my untrained eye the specs look similar to the > Qx) > without the ISA slots. > > Would take away the fun of designing a new system but might simplify the > problem to interfacing to aurora/ original QL motherboard and adapting > QDOS and > SMSQ/E to the new board. Dont know the prices of these things but there is > a > UK supplier at _http://www.bvm.co.uk/_ (http://www.bvm.co.uk/) > > > Duncan Neithercut Problem is that the only 6806 SBC is a VME device, and not one of their Stand alone SBC's, not only that but it's price appears to be negotiable, unlike the low prices for the big volume X86, Pentium, Celeron boards, most c. £149! I suspect there is not much demand for anything which is non Intel/AMD processored! Cheers Colin ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
There are suppliers who make custom "computer on the board" 68060 systems pricipally for industry. To my untrained eye the specs look similar to the Qx) without the ISA slots. Would take away the fun of designing a new system but might simplify the problem to interfacing to aurora/ original QL motherboard and adapting QDOS and SMSQ/E to the new board. Dont know the prices of these things but there is a UK supplier at _http://www.bvm.co.uk/_ (http://www.bvm.co.uk/) Duncan Neithercut ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
>Ah there are lots of things one could put on it. >However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development. >It would be great to be proved wrong. >It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300 >to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then maybe >it could be worth pursuing. I doubt very much if Sturat is going to be >interested. I doubt if Nasta has time. >.. and I wonder if I have time as well! All I could possibly do is >design a pcb and build. I have no expertise (or time) to design firmware. >It is probably a pipedream! >Tony Have you had any replies? I for one would be interested especially if the successor card was well specced - minerva rom, decent processor 68060 & amount of memory 16 MB, par port, and IDEx2 and ethernet connector, and flash memory. What else should be on the list? Duncan Neithercut ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Malcolm Cadman wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich > Mellor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > >> I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to >> Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing >> to pay £200-£300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50 >> boards to make it worthwhile, I am not certain there would be a big enough >> market, especially with "only" 4MB RAM ! >> >> Rich > > I would guess that some of the parts for the Cards are either no longer > available, or not available at a reasonable cost. > > Whereas an upgrade could use more recent and probably cheaper parts, > with more capacity too. As well some new features. > > Of course, this would involve a re-design of the circuit board. > > Probably name it the EGC - Extreme Gold Card ... ? > > 1GB or more flash RAM ... ? ... :-) Ah there are lots of things one could put on it. However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development. It would be great to be proved wrong. It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300 to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then maybe it could be worth pursuing. I doubt very much if Sturat is going to be interested. I doubt if Nasta has time. .. and I wonder if I have time as well! All I could possibly do is design a pcb and build. I have no expertise (or time) to design firmware. It is probably a pipedream! Tony - -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFzOT3M3RzOs8+btoRAimLAKCJ9N26yFr0unloeEuTYU2Qbur8egCfXRG9 ry6/iP4s9BbN/spH25K5ooQ= =ST08 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Stephen Usher wrote: Hi Steve, ... >>I find with 2M on my GC, data and programs just rattle around inside! Even >>with the base 128K machine (around 77K(?) free for use) I used to be able to >>do/run more than I could with a 540K PC. Or are people becoming so >>"bloatware expecting" that 4M sounds titchy? > > Yes, but the QL doesn't have all those silly GUI thingies written in bloating > C++ (or now JAVA and .NET). I must admit that I sometimes found 128K > restrictive but never filled the Trump Card memory. (Oh and I did have a > sort-of GUI thingy for the QL, the ICE ROM & mouse.) Neither did the 540K PC of the time (Windwos 3.x were just about around when I got the GC, but never had them at the time to compare with using the 128K QL). > Still, storage has never been a problem for you, other than the UCL Euclid > file quota, which you got around using a neat trick using the e-mail inbox if > I remember correctly. If space really ran out there was alway the "emergency" PTP (Paper-Tape-Punch) archive...I still have a few sitting around upstairs, but with no means of reading contents :( > Oh and then there was thae hack for getting long > printouts on the self-sevice printer.. and the Babbage programs you wrote > which made UCLCC people nervous about 'cos they did things no-one thought a > normal user could do. Funny you should mention them...I was having a chuckle about one in particular (the pre-main code filing password adder/remover) and exactly what it did and how it did it. > By the way, I seem to remember a couple of years ago that you asked if you > could pass on the source etc. of the terminal emulator I wrote to someone, did > you do so? Seeing as I've not got a modern machine readable copy would it be > possible for you to fish it out and pass it onto whoever archives QL software > on this list? Someone might as well get some use out of it. I have it somewhere...need to search...can't remember to whom I wanted to send it now. To whom should I sent it (ie who would possibly be interested in archiving/having it [for distribution])? Dilwyn? -- --- Robert Newson, E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 17 Sunnybank, South Norwood Phone: (020) 8654 6643 London, SE25 4TQ Mobile: 07737 515 214 or 07922 060 873 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich Mellor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to >Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing >to pay £200-£300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50 >boards to make it worthwhile, I am not certain there would be a big enough >market, especially with "only" 4MB RAM ! > >Rich I would guess that some of the parts for the Cards are either no longer available, or not available at a reasonable cost. Whereas an upgrade could use more recent and probably cheaper parts, with more capacity too. As well some new features. Of course, this would involve a re-design of the circuit board. Probably name it the EGC - Extreme Gold Card ... ? 1GB or more flash RAM ... ? ... :-) >On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:18:55 -, Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > >> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, hitchies >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> >>> Re: Jan's - >>> = >>> I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My >>> QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX >>> emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an >>> email. Thank you and sorry for the ad.. >>> >>> >>> Such an ad. no problem here! But (today) if you find a GC or SGC 'not >>> used' >>> you will succeed where many others have failed. But, if so, please >>> reveal >>> your source(s) here! :-) >> >> Yes, it is an irony that both Gold Cards and Super Gold Cards are in >> demand now, as they are no longer being produced. >> >> As well a successor not having been developed too ... -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Robert, Well, there is another QL + Trump Card owning lurker out here as well... >Rich Mellor wrote: > >> I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to >> Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing >> to pay ?200-?300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50 >> boards to make it worthwhile, I am not certain there would be a big enough >> market, especially with "only" 4MB RAM ! > >I find with 2M on my GC, data and programs just rattle around inside! Even >with the base 128K machine (around 77K(?) free for use) I used to be able to >do/run more than I could with a 540K PC. Or are people becoming so >"bloatware expecting" that 4M sounds titchy? Yes, but the QL doesn't have all those silly GUI thingies written in bloating C++ (or now JAVA and .NET). I must admit that I sometimes found 128K restrictive but never filled the Trump Card memory. (Oh and I did have a sort-of GUI thingy for the QL, the ICE ROM & mouse.) Still, storage has never been a problem for you, other than the UCL Euclid file quota, which you got around using a neat trick using the e-mail inbox if I remember correctly. Oh and then there was thae hack for getting long printouts on the self-sevice printer.. and the Babbage programs you wrote which made UCLCC people nervous about 'cos they did things no-one thought a normal user could do. By the way, I seem to remember a couple of years ago that you asked if you could pass on the source etc. of the terminal emulator I wrote to someone, did you do so? Seeing as I've not got a modern machine readable copy would it be possible for you to fish it out and pass it onto whoever archives QL software on this list? Someone might as well get some use out of it. Steve P.S. The terminal emulator emulated the UCL BBC Model B ROM based terminal emulator, which itself emulated a VT52, Tektronix T4010 with some additional escape sequences to run BBC *FX commands. -- --- Nostalgia isn't as good as it used to be. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Rich Mellor wrote: > I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to > Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing > to pay £200-£300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50 > boards to make it worthwhile, I am not certain there would be a big enough > market, especially with "only" 4MB RAM ! I find with 2M on my GC, data and programs just rattle around inside! Even with the base 128K machine (around 77K(?) free for use) I used to be able to do/run more than I could with a 540K PC. Or are people becoming so "bloatware expecting" that 4M sounds titchy? ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
> Thank you guys for support! I was thinking that I am the only one > with > classic QL here. Nearly everyone here is referring about GC, SGC, > Aurora, Qubide, QXL, Q60, QPC... I think it is because people who join a mailing list like this tend to have the latest products. I still have a QL (with Gold Card) but I tend to use a PC and QPC2 emulator the most, and also the Aurora system with Super Gold Card. But when Quanta made a survey of its members, they found that many people still use a QL with a small expansion (even some had a QL with no expansion). But people who have original QL systems tend not to write much here, so it looks like they don't exist! It is nice to see many new names here recently - Jan, Sergiusz, Neil, for example. I wonder how many other list members there are who only read the emails without writing to the list (I guess they are called "lurkers"). I hope you will all stay with us, the more people who join the list, the busier it gets. And if enough people ask for Super Gold Cards, who knows, someone might make one! I know a few of the chips are not available now, but I suppose someone could design a slightly updated GC or SGC to allow a few more to be made. At one time, we thought no more keyboard membranes were possible, but QBranch and Rich Mellor did manage to get more made. -- Dilwyn Jones > > The issue is that most wanted HW is not produced anymore. I am > referring > to GC, SGC, Qubide. Would be possible to ask authors to release > schematics, roms, GALs...etc? I think that there are capable people > of > reproducing the hardware again. What do you think (all forum > members)? > Is anyone here able to make good documentation from current HW? > Would > this violate author rights? Can we ask them to release it? > > What I realy like on the QL is QL itself (black piece of plastic). I > know that it might be opposite to others who actually like more QDOS > / > SMSQ / QPC than QL, but that's it. I am Sinclair enthusiast I guess. > > Jan in Kloboucky > ___ > QL-Users Mailing List > http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.30/674 - Release Date: > 07/02/2007 15:33 > > ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing to pay £200-£300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50 boards to make it worthwhile, I am not certain there would be a big enough market, especially with "only" 4MB RAM ! Rich On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:18:55 -, Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, hitchies > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > >> Re: Jan's - >> = >> I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My >> QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX >> emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an >> email. Thank you and sorry for the ad.. >> >> >> Such an ad. no problem here! But (today) if you find a GC or SGC 'not >> used' >> you will succeed where many others have failed. But, if so, please >> reveal >> your source(s) here! :-) > > Yes, it is an irony that both Gold Cards and Super Gold Cards are in > demand now, as they are no longer being produced. > > As well a successor not having been developed too ... > -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, hitchies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Re: Jan's - >= >I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My >QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX >emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an >email. Thank you and sorry for the ad.. > > >Such an ad. no problem here! But (today) if you find a GC or SGC 'not used' >you will succeed where many others have failed. But, if so, please reveal >your source(s) here! :-) Yes, it is an irony that both Gold Cards and Super Gold Cards are in demand now, as they are no longer being produced. As well a successor not having been developed too ... -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Hello John from Wales, Sergiusz, > Such an ad. no problem here! But (today) if you find a GC or SGC 'not used' > you will succeed where many others have failed. But, if so, please reveal > your source(s) here! :-) > > Happy hunting and happy QLing, > Thank you guys for support! I was thinking that I am the only one with classic QL here. Nearly everyone here is referring about GC, SGC, Aurora, Qubide, QXL, Q60, QPC... The issue is that most wanted HW is not produced anymore. I am referring to GC, SGC, Qubide. Would be possible to ask authors to release schematics, roms, GALs...etc? I think that there are capable people of reproducing the hardware again. What do you think (all forum members)? Is anyone here able to make good documentation from current HW? Would this violate author rights? Can we ask them to release it? What I realy like on the QL is QL itself (black piece of plastic). I know that it might be opposite to others who actually like more QDOS / SMSQ / QPC than QL, but that's it. I am Sinclair enthusiast I guess. Jan in Kloboucky ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Hi > Hello, > > I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My > QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX > emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an > email. Thank you and sorry for ad. > > Jan > If anyone here have SGC (no matter how much used :-)) available, let me know too. Sergiusz ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Re: Jan's - = I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an email. Thank you and sorry for the ad.. Such an ad. no problem here! But (today) if you find a GC or SGC 'not used' you will succeed where many others have failed. But, if so, please reveal your source(s) here! :-) Happy hunting and happy QLing, John in Wales PS And (belated) thanks to all who helped with the Kb, kb matter. I found the references very helpful. - J ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Hello, I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an email. Thank you and sorry for ad. Jan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
