On Sat, 24 Jul 1999 05:09:35 +0200, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
>> Well... How about create a "DEVICES SPECIFICATIONS" section? With several
>>subsections like:
>Not true, GFX9000 uses I/O mapped I/O exclusively, no memory mapped I/O. So
>it doesn't matter at all in which slot it is connected, or
At 01:17 PM 07/23/99 -0300, you wrote:
>>I think MSX3 shouldn't be the only "main" section. I would prefer standards
>>that are modular.
>
> Well... How about create a "DEVICES SPECIFICATIONS" section? With several
>subsections like:
>
> SOUND BOARD - with hardware and software specificati
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 01:56:32 +0200, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
>> MSX3.0 (or 4.0, I need to know this! :-) SPECIFICATIONS -
>> Decisions already made. This will be, in the future,
>> the place where the new MSX Standard will be
>> described.
>> MSX3
At 01:38 PM 7/21/99 -0300, you wrote:
> MSX3.0 (or 4.0, I need to know this! :-) SPECIFICATIONS -
> Decisions already made. This will be, in the future,
> the place where the new MSX Standard will be
> described.
> MSX3.0 IDEAS - A brief about
> I'm trying to make it up and running... (-: But I need help...
>
> 1) The name (The MSX Phoenix Project) is good? If not, lets discuss
> about this. And don't forget to put [Phoenix] in the subject... (-:
The name is ok. Changing it now will only confuse I think.
Although it has to have a
On Wed, 21 Jul 1999 17:19:25 +0200, Laurens Holst wrote:
>>Interisting! And where is this HP? 8-)
>Well the URL is in some other message on the list written today or
>yesterday. But the homepage isn't up and running yet...
>The idea was only released a few days ago.
I'm trying to make it up an
