Re: about the plus4

From: Anders Carlsson <>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:37:36 +0200
Message-ID: <673F8B29CB05499D84D347DB0428E3E3@zapac9ea002038>
Gerrit Heitsch wrote:

> From what I read that chip (6562/63) was working, but needed rather 
> expensive SRAM since it used the 'no badline' approach of the original 
> VIC.

Aha, it explains why the VIC-40 upgrade never really took place. I have 
Commodore brochures in four colour print where it says soon there would be a 
40 column upgrade chip, and they didn't mean the software 40 column 

It actually shines a little more light on why the TED project lived on, 
assuming Commodore needed a cheaper alternative to the VIC-II for future 
entry level computers.

Best regards

Anders Carlsson

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Received on 2012-04-19 17:00:21

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.