> On 2017-06-28, at 15:42, smf <smf@null.net> wrote: > >> IFIRC everybody thought the 6522 worked correctly so redesigning a well working stuff would be a pure waste of money. Rumour has it that the hardware bug was discovered too late for the redesign.. at least that's more or less what I seem to recall.. > > The issues with the 6522 appear to have been widely known at the time, as was the hardware workround. > > The people working on the drive might not have known, or they may have thought they could work round it in software. > > I don't believe there was a long time between the IEEE interface being removed from the 2031 to discovering it wasn't going to work & then the decision to bitbang with the CPU, rather than using a 6526 or adding the logic gates to prevent the lockup. I don't stand firmly behind the version I mentioned. I wasn't there where and when it happened. I only repeat the most common rumour, source of which is supposed to be credible (as with all rumours :-) -- SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/ Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2017-06-28 15:02:22
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.