On 4/24/2012 3:34 PM, Bil Herd wrote: > It also may have still been called the 264 at this point. Which brings up: I want to better understand the funky expansion port connector rationale. I understand the mini-din rationale (minimal room for connectors on back of C116) But, did moving from .1" to .08" spacing on 44 pin connector really create that much value? Was it to stymie third party cart manufacturers? I struggle with the decisions that created that unbelievably hard to source connector. Jim Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2012-04-24 23:00:20
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.