Re: PET II questions (P500, B128, B256)

From: Nicolas Welte (
Date: 2001-12-12 12:47:57

Marko Mäkelä wrote:
> That reminds me of another PET II question (to get back on the subject of
> this thread): is the 720D (or B-256 with built-in floppy drives) equipped
> with a 8250LP, or does it have a more "direct" connection, like the
> internal 3.5" floppy drive of the Commodore 65?  I think that the
> 500/600/700 user's manual hinted that an internal drive option would be
> available that would not feature a separate CPU.

Strange. I don't know for sure, but many of the 720D computers in Germany
have the same drive as the 8296D, i.e. a slighlty modified 8250LP. The reason
could be that these were upgraded plain 720 computers that just had a 8296D
drive kit added. 

The differences between a 8250LP and the internal drive of my 8296D are small
and are mostly to account for the limited space in the SK type case. So the
analog board is not mounted vertically between the two drives and attaches
directly to the mainboard, but it is mounted diagonally behind or in front of
the drives (I forgot) and attaches via a ribbon cable. The drive controller
also attaches to the 8296D board with a ribbon cable (via a small adaptor
board) to the internal IEEE488 header. One other difference is that the drive
open/close levers are shorter than on a 8250LP, because the free height on
the front is only about 2/3 of an LP.

> BTW, my work on cbmlink (the prlink replacement) is proceeding slowly but
> firmly.  I hope to be able to finish the file and disk copiers tonight
> (the Commodore side has already been ported to the new framework).  As
> it'll support the same cables as prlink 0.9.9 (in addition to the C2N232
> device), anyone who uses prlink could be a beta tester.

Oh, great! This means I could make full use of the software, even if I only
have a PC64 cable? And with changes to the Commodore side only, every RS232
interface could also be supported easily, like the 6551 ports on CBM-II and
Plus/4 or external UART/ACIA carts for the 64/128, because the serial
interface code on the host side would stay the same?


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list

Archive generated by hypermail 2.1.1.