#Super Buster Broken?
48 messages in this thread
I've been hearing some nasty rumors on FIDONET concerning a flaw in the
A4000's Super Buster chip. Supposedly this is the reason why it has taken
so long for CBM to come out with the 4091 controller. Has anyone else
heard of this? If it is true, I wonder if CBM will be able to find a
workaround, or will we have to have the chip replaced?
//
\X/ John – K7KB (TechnoJunkie at heart)
It is true.
The current shipping A4000 has a socketed SuperBuster chip. It is the
same chip though, as what is in the surface mounted model.
It is going to be a major warranty situation for Commodore I suspect.
-mark=
Drivin' on Otto Pilot
You are not kidding it's going to be a major warranty situation. I guess
the thing to do right now is wait and see what CBM is going to do about
getting the Buster replaced for us that have a SMD version. Well I've
learned my lesson. I'm NEVER, EVER going to buy a first run Amiga again.
I'm going to let someone else do CBM's beta testing.
//
\X/ John – K7KB (TechnoJunkie at heart)
John,
SMD repalcements usually are handled on a board swap basis. If they
are feeling generous, you will probably only get stuck with labor and
postage and handling…
A Cute Tag is a terrible // /\ /\
Thing to Waste… Gary Vander Mei's \X/ /–\miga ON /–\UTO-PILOT
and the loss of time… that's the big one for many people.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
If you have a new 4000l, that chip is socketed. Otherwise, it's surface
mounted ( for "reliability" <he snickered>. Just wait till a CIA goes bad,
if you think THIS was troublesome… ). If you have the former, you are
probably in luck, as the fix will be inexpensive AND easy. If you have the
latter, then you're almsot certainly a candidate for a motherboard
replacement. Yep, the whole stinking thing. Will CBM actually *DO* such a
thing? Your guess is as good as mine – and I'm as interested as you are.
I've been waiting for the SCSI solution like most other 4000 owners, and
without that fix, none of us can use it.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
"Uhm, my serial port stopped working." "That'll be $400 for a motherboard
swap, is that Mastercard or VISA?"
Maybe it's a secret plan to help increase profits at Amiga dealerships. 🙂
Maybe it's a secret plan to disenfranchise current new model Amiga
owners.
Maybe it's just incompetance.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
Lets be fair now. Commodore *does* honor their warranties. They are
*still* replacing "free of charge" all Rev 6.0 A2000 motherboards.
They will fix this as well.
In the case of those who have bad motherboards, they will be replaced.
Those who just need the chip will get the chip.
It bothers me sometimes your attitude toward Commodore.
-mark=
Drivin' on Otto Pilot
Mark:
I totally agree with you, CBM has always been good to me on service.
Twice I have had to call on them in the last 7 years and both times, they
were very gracious. Perhaps Ben can expand a little bit on his sour
attitude… Ben???
-Jonathan
I did, to Mark. I will add, to you, that the one time *I* needed service
from them, they charged me about $400 to fix a 3 month old 2630 card that
failed while installed. I was annoyed, to say the least. See my message to
Mark for a more general feeling about why I tend to come down heavily on
them from time to time, if you like.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Jee Ben. When my 2630 died one month AFTER the warranty was up C= still
replaced it. In fact the old one had 2megs of RAM and the replacement came
with 4megs. However I do have a dealer who will fight for you.
BTW I also have a 4000 with the surface mounted buster chip. I'll let you
know how I come out on this one.
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
I made the (major) mistake of buying that 2630 from CATS. I got no support
worth mentioning (other than the opportunity to pay for that repair) – and
I never bought hardware from CATS again… I buy from dealers now and am a
lot happier. Just one more footnote in the CBM saga. :^\
We'll BOTH let each other know how the buster "thing" comes out.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
For the most part, you and I use the same dealer — and he is excellent.
I'd much rather purchase from him (even at a slightly higher price) than
go through CATS. I know what I'm getting, can have it that day, and know
that support will be first class.
-sja
Me too. But initially, the prices from CATs blinded me. No more.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
One more footnote. My dealer just called and told me that he cornered a
C= official at WOA and convinced them to send me the power up software
even though I bought my 4000 before Jan. 1st. It DOES help to have a
dealer that will fight for you. For those who live it the northeast my
dealer is Infotronics in Woodbury CT. Tell Nick Paul sent ya! 😉
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Good for you, Paul. :^)
I'm a big fan of dealers – and of service; wouldn't mind a bit if classic
mail-order was knocked out of action completely.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
As long as the dealers in question aren't allergic to giving price quotes.
I went MO on my 1200 because my "local" dealer refused to quote a price. I
bought my MBX 1200z MO after my dealer was unable to get them in when
promised. I couldn't wait, A 1200 w/o expansion is just too farging
slow…
Brian — Cruising on AutoPilot…..
OK Ben… I guess every person and ever company can have a bad
experience. I hope that you don't have a similar experience should you
require there services again. BTW, I have since left Everex and the
Abaton… my opinions will be kept private…. you might find out how I
really feel.
-Jonathan
I don't have your faith, not at all.
You think CBM's "honoring" the warranty is the issue? Well, let's ask a
few questions – such as, were in your warranty does it say that the
machine will work with future cards? The 4000 works with the 2091, they've
provided a ROM to see that it does. Doesn't work WELL, mind you, but it
works. But forwards compatibility? Look back – have they provided an
upgrade for 2000 class machines to work with zorro III cards? No. And they
won't – it'd require (you guessed it) a motherboard swap, and after all,
the Z3 std came out after the machine did. A similar situation obtains for
the 4000 – it works with the disk controllers I have now, and what leg in
the warranty do I have to stand on when a NEW card comes out that won't
work? For THAT matter, who's to say that they won't pull the same trick
with the new SCSI card and make it run PIO, the way they have with the
2091? DOn't say they won't, they DID with the 2091…
When you say "They will fix this as well" you're being a lot less
responsible than I am; I say there is a possibility that they will not,
which allows for either situation. You speak as if you can specify company
policy, which let's be perfectly clear, you cannot. You don't know what
they'll do any more than I do.
Now, my attitude towards CBM is built of experience with CBM as a
developer AND as a user. It could be fairly described as about 6 years of
compound frustration. CBM does NOT always do the right thing; I can trot
out many examples if you'd like to spend the time – we can talk about
anything from design stupidities like surface mounting CIA's to your basic
set of marketing lies, such as the Transformer fiasco; We can talk about
the complete lack of fixes for 1.3 when crashing OS bugs were extant for
literally _years_; we can talk about software idiocy such as the lack of
VM/protection support in the OS; we could knock around CBM's executive
(and sub-executive) merry-go-round; We could talk about the dismal 2091
ROM situation(s); we could poke at the way they don't have ARexx installed
properly in released machines; we could ruminate upon the lack of the
proper manuals supplied with the 1200; we could talk about the CDTV CD-ROM
licensing fiasco; we could banter about the lukewarm-to-cold support for
the bridgeboards since day one; We could talk about laptops (but why
bother?); I suppose we could talk about the amazingly interesting
differences between Euro prices and prices here; we could talk about
big-developer support or lack of it; We could talk about how long it took
them to produce CDROM support for anything but the CDTV (aftermarket
developers eventually did it – because CBM didn't EVER do it)… Yes, we
could certainly talk about a lot of things! CBM has been no favorite of
mine in the past, as you have no doubt guessed.
Sure, ALL of this is in the past (although some is the very recent past),
and perhaps CBM's doing a lot better _these_ days. After all, there's
certainly opportunity – they've changed numerous people at "power" levels
in the Amiga part of CBM recently; head of engineering, head of CATS…
they (I hear from ex-employees) have shucked the last remaining vestiges
of the UNIX group, so we won't have that lead weight hanging round our
necks anymore… :^)
But what it'll take for me to say, "CBM's a good company doing the right
thing" is evidence, not opportunity.
The Amiga, which is not CBM per se, IS a favorite of mine. Despite all the
bumbling, of which there has been an incredible amount, I truly belive
that the Amiga is one of the best computers you can buy today. In fact, if
you read the foregoing, which only gives you the barest *tip* of the
iceberg as to why I'm not particularly enamored of CBM, the simple fact
that we still develop for the Amiga, and that I still use them personally
ought to tell you a lot about the machine.
As near as I can tell, the only things inside CBM that work moderately
well to very well are CATS and Engineering. They've done wonders
considering the environment.
Sorry if my attitude bothers you… it'll change when CBM does.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
I understand your perception, please try to understand mine.
You have posted a message all but saying that you don't think Commodore
will fix the problem with the A4000. I post a message saying quite the
opposite.
Lets consider your message a second:
In one swell foop you have damanged A4000 sales in this forum, some may
decide to 'wait' until the 'bugs are worked out' etc. Is this good for
the Amiga community on the whole? Is it good business? Does it make
sense in a public forum to take Commodore to task when you know they don't
have a represenative here? Just what are you trying to do, other than to
drag Commodore's face in the mud?
I freely admit that Commodore does not do everything right, I will go
further and say they have done *A LOT* that is wrong and downright stupid.
I just believe in giving them the opportunity to do what is right, and
then damning them when they don't do what is right.
I should have not stated they will fix the problem, but *MY* experience as
a dealer indicates that they *will* fix it. Consider the A2000 Rev 6
motherboard situation. Machines that are *out of warranty* are *given*
completely new motherboards at *no charge*. I have seen Commodore warrant
customer systems when I didn't think they should. I have seen Commoodre
warranty systems that had not been out of the box for over 18 months. I
have seen Commodore warrant out a bridgeboard that was *way out* of
warranty and was *damaged* by another dealer. I know about that one
personally as I did it, with the aid of Commodore for one of our forum
members here. Don't hand me this crap that Commodore doesn't support the
products they sell. I am not describing the Gold Service stuff either.
Gold Service is the best thing Commodore has ever done to improve the
crediability of the Amiga. We have parts arriving the next day after a
customer reports a problem to Gold Service. The dealer is *paid* by
Commodore to go on site to replace the system or bad part. It is a good
program and supported well.
The A4091 is an A4000 product designed to work with an A4000. It probably
would not sell to well if it didn't work on all A4000s. I can tell you
this, Commodore can not afford to not fix this one.
This is A4000 situation is different than any that you have described in
your posting. The A4000 has a 'defect'. The A4000 is warranted for a
period of one year to be free of 'defects'. They have to honor the
warranty.
Now onto your software thoughts.
I was at the developers conference in Pasadena when you trotted out your
ideas about VM. I agree with you in many areas, but this one I simply do
not. I felt your suggestion that Commodore implement yet another flag for
developers use until they could do VM right was self-serving and was not
good for the Amiga on the whole. Perhaps you made this suggestion in
frustration, I don't pretend to know. I think VM is important to the
future of the Amiga, but it is not critical –today–. You think it is
critical because your product needs a lot of memory. That is a myoptic
view. If the folks at Nova Design can implement application level virtual
memory, why can't Black Belt Systems? I think you guys can, but simply do
not want too.
What is important today, at least in my opinion as someone who sells the
stuff, is an operating system that can produce good looking text and
graphic output. The printer drivers have seen little to no improvement
since 1.3. Yep, they have new interfaces, but the drivers themselves have
not improved. We need scaling font technology in the printer drivers just
like Windows has.
It would also be nice to have an online help system comparible to Windows,
AmigaGuide is an excellent first step, but where is the Amiga-based online
help done in AmigaGuide?
I would like to sum this up by saying. We both have strong opinions on
many topics. I have grown to respect your opinions, and I ask that you
respect my opinion as a professional. It is my opinion that Commodore
does support the products they sell and I have every reason to believe
that will continue with the A4000.
-mark=
Drivin' on Otto Pilot
Mark – let me say just one thing – I believe, with all my heart, that
buying a 4000 now is a mistake. It's broken, and there (currently) is no
fix. That's what I'll tell anyone who asks me squarely; it's only one
person's opinion, after all. :^).
"Here, sir, buy this Chevy; it's perfect, except there is no drivers seat.
GM is working on that problem, and will give you a drivers seat if and
when they come up with one; perhaps this will be covered under warranty.
In the meantime, you can sit on this orange crate; GM has carefully made
it removable so it will be little trouble to change. Yes, it's true that
previous orange crates were welded to the frame; however, they no longer
manufacture the vehicle that way."
—————–
Regarding the developers conference in Pasadena, you should know better
than to say ANYTHING about that… you'll find yourself forbidden to
attend future conferences or meetings in short order, I expect.
—————–
Your opinions on VM are really pretty funny, almost not worth responding
to except that you're so deluded. It amazes me that you spout confidential
information from a NDA covered meeting, and then make confused allegations
as to why I said whatever I might have said. It is a fact that what I
asked for would have benefitted ASDG, Black Belt, and Nova equally – NOT
just "us". It could have saved Nova a great deal of work, perhaps,
depending on where they were in their design. Perhaps not, could also
easily have been too late. Whatever. Further, it would have benefitted
SoftLogic, Gold Disk, and any other developer with a serious application
that can, under any circumstance, make a large demand on memory. Just try
loading in a large 24bit image (you know, say, 5100×6600 by 24 bits….
it's "only" about a hundred megabytes of memory) into PageStream and
you'll find out what good VM would be REAL fast. :^)
The only reason VM's not critical today in the Amiga market because it's
NOT THERE. it IS there in the Mac market, and it IS there in the Windows
market – why do you think that is so? You think it's because some myopic,
self-serving, selfish, lazy developer cornered MicroSloth and said
"gimme!" even though it wasn't good for the windows market as a whole? Not
a chance. It's there because it's CRITICAL, Mark. It's in the Mac because
it's CRITICAL. It's in UNIX systems because it's CRITICAL. It's in other
operating systems because it's CRITICAL. If it wasn't CRITICAL, you can
*BET* they'd leave it out. It's a pain in the butt, it requires extra,
expensive hardware, and it ALSO requires a bit of thought at the OS level,
not to mention education of the developers. You seem to be somehow
convinced that all the OTHER computer manufacturers are STUPID and CBM is
SMART. Wrong!
As long as the Amiga OS is crippled by no VM, it won't be critical to the
Amiga market. And the Amiga market will remain more towards the toy side
than the professional side.
You can bet that we could, if we were minded to, patch the operating
system itself as other developers have done and make an MMU based VM. We
could also build in local non-MMU based paging, as you see in ImageFX.
And, you can bet that we probably won't.
In the context of doing CBM's work for them, funny you should mention
AmigaGuide. We're already using (some might say wasting) some of our
resources creating a working help system for the Amiga which provides most
of the visual goodies that Windows help does, since AmigaGuide does not,
and according to the author, will not, for AmigaDOS 2.0. We're NOT happy
about it, either – but AmigaGuide just doesn't cut it for decent looking
hypertext help.
Foo. I think I'll go make a hot chocolate. Every time someone gets me
*seriously* considering CBM at length, I get heartburn.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
Your feelings and wishes about VM are quite public, exactly what did I say
that disclosed something confidential involving Commodore?
It seems anytime that you disagree with someone you make the accusation
that the person must be misinformed or 'deluded'. In my posts to you I
never stoop to calling you names. You need to make up your mind, either
my comments are good on the whole or they are not. A post several months
ago said something very complimentry of me, or have you forgotten?
Perhaps you were deluded at the time??
Ben, you have no glass of true-seeing, though I know you think you do
have. You do not make your living at the selling-end of the Amiga
hardware engine. I have yet to lose a sale to someone who said "Drats,
the Amiga, it is wonderful..but its lack of VM makes it unusable for our
application". I have on the other hand heard people say that the Amiga
output was unacceptable for professional use. Who should I believe-you? or
my customer? I suspect if you took a poll of all of Commodore's dealers
you would not find one that would line up and say they lost a sale over
this issue.
You are saying that since it doesn't exist the mainstream players are
ignoring the Amiga or considering the system non-professional. Are these
the same professionals who bow to the God Microsoft and actually use
Windows? If so, well what can I say?
I do agree that VM is important to the future of the Amiga. I just
disagree about the priority that you place on it. I feel that you are too
close to the subject to be objective about it. However, unlike you, I am
interested in your thoughts on the issue.
I never called you lazy, nor your company. I will however point out that
a 3rd party solution does exist for VM, and it is my guess that it is not
selling that well. The fact is that many people who have need to have the
memory that you outlined in your post probably do *not* do their work on a
personal computer at all. Have you ever tried to use Windows while it is
pretending to have 100MB? I wonder if it can even be done with any hope
reasonable response time?
One thing you do not consider in your calculations. The Amiga operating
system was not written with VM or Resource Tracking in mind. Windows was
as was UNIX. Can we afford to have this added to the OS knowing full well
that it will break applications? If your vision is not clouded then you
should ask yourself this when you make statements about what should be
done and what should not be done. The question is: Is it good for the
Amiga *marketplace* and is it worth the cost?
I think you are right, VM is good for the Amiga and it is worth the cost
as long as we get resource tracking as well. A VM system without resource
tracking would be laughed at. I think you'll agree with me here.
Don't put words in my mouth Ben. I never said that 'other computer
manufacturers are stupid and CBM is smart'. In fact, often times I feel
otherwise. Like I said in my last post, my history with Commodore as a
dealer (been in it close to 6 years now) is quite different from your
expierence as a developer. Commodore has supported their customers and
have made free upgrades to systems out of warranty when a manufacturing
defect was found. Case and point–A2000 Rev 6 motherboards.
Your analogy is flawed by the way. The car seat vs. the SuperBuster chip
makes no sense. The A4000 currently does not require this bug to be fixed
in order for the product to be functional and useful. There are currently
no boards that even demonstrate the problem with the SuperBuster. The car
seat is something that would be noticed immediately, and would render the
vehicle undriveable. Since you don't have the A4091 card now, just what
has the SuperBuster done to reduce your productivity? Hell, if you hadn't
read about it here you probably would be still talking about how good the
A4000 is. 🙂
Ben, a good poster you are. Objective? Far from it. Keep it up though,
I enjoy it.
Signed.
The ever deluded one…
-mark=
Otto Pilot Engaged..
Mark:
Do you happen to know if the version of Gigamem that supports the 68040 is
out yet? I have a friend who has Gigamem on his 2000, and loves it, but so
far I can't use it 🙁 (I even have a 60 meg partition set aside for it!)
// -Mike Schiller
\X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
I don't know. I will see what I can find out though.
-mark=
Otto Pilot Engaged..
Mark;
Ben can and does voice rather strong opinions which he sometimes dilutes
with "not so relevant" comments. However, on virtual memory he is mostly
right. We do need it, maybe not quite as badly as he believes (though I
suspect he is even right on the urgency of the need). Image processing is
yet another area where the Ami can "make a name for itself" IF it can
continue to stay ahead of the competition.
The other point is even more important. ONLY C= can properly do virtual
memory support. Third party VM is horrible kludge at best.
-bill
Gee, thanks. I think. :^)
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben;
It was intended to be complimentary but not unreservedly so. You and I
both know that we don't always agree.
Your positions have always been defendable from a rational basis. I have
not always agreed with the basis or the weight assigned to the importance
of the basis but have always agreed that if the basis and weighting were
accepted then your point was valid.
I don't mind disagreeing with someone but I want to be able to respect
someone else's point of view. In your case, even when I disagreed
vehemently, that has always been possible.
-bill
Nice try, Mark.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben, if you sold a hypertext based help system, I'd buy a copy. Even something
as primitive as xman in UNIX is better than nothing.
A good one could be used to develop CAI software; on-line docs for the custom
software I wrote my mom, for example.
Even better would be something like Sunview had – point the moust at an object,
press the help key and a baloon appears telling you about the object. (Gee,
that was way back in 88, too…)
Well, won't be too long now… I've got a 90% or so working beta in my
machine as we speak; the text stuff is 99.9% there, images are on the way
as is the application interface.
Balloon help in 88, eh? Wondered where the Macentoids got that from…
seemed kinda… dare I say it? "silly."
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Heh. I didn't want to use the "mac" word, but yeah. It's actually quite
helpful at the moment, because my user's have three of them, but lost all the
print documentation….
Anyway, I'll look forward to the help system.
> "Here, sir, buy this Chevy; it's perfect, except there is no drivers
> seat. GM is working on that problem, and will give you a drivers seat
> if and when they come up with one; perhaps this will be covered under
> warranty. In the meantime, you can sit on this orange crate; GM has
> carefully made it removable so it will be little trouble to change.
> Yes, it's true that previous orange crates were welded to the frame;
> however, they no longer manufacture the vehicle that way."
Rather poor analogy. Please keep in mind that C= probably didn't know
about the bug until they attempted to do a ZIII DMA Board. Your analogy
suggests that the dealers — as well as C= knew about the bug as they were
selling the 4000. It would be more apt to say that the present 4000
"engine" can't accept a storage "turbocharger."
Brian — Cruising on AutoPilot…..
I don't buy it. The design was supposed to handle DMA. It doesn't. It's
broke.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
And how in heck was C= supposed to know until someone actually _tried_ to
do ZIII DMA? Only since the 4000 came out w/o SCSI did anyone want a ZIII
card for something other than RAM. Be glad they discovered it NOW instead
of after all those 4000/030's shipped.
C= couldn't fix it until they knew it was busted. Of course, ASSUMING that
the chip was perfect and soldering it directly to the board wasn't such a
hot idea. They're only human you know. Nor they alone in ASSUMING their
hardware is perfect.
Now how long has the 4000 been out? 1-1/2 years? Funny, but I recommend to
my PC-Clone nut friends to NEVER buy a computer using "the latest"
ANYTHING until that "the latest" has been out for AT LEAST a full year.
"Leading Edge" technology is often the "Bleeding Edge" of reliability.
If C= follows through on this like they did with the A2000 r6.2 MB, a fair
number of 4000 owners may see new main boards coming their way.
I still think the "driver's seat" analogy was extreme, but at least you
didn't try to say that the engine was missing.
Brian — Cruising on AutoPilot…..
Nope, the engine is clearly there. :^) I still love my 4000, I just want a
seat now.
Your point about how was C= supposed to know… is a good point. Moving
sideways (only a little bit, though) now, we know they DO know that the
CIA's die with depressing regularity. And they surface mounted the little
buggers. So *I* don't see why you think they should have been smart enough
to socket something that's not an I/o part.
Me, I think the devil invented surface mounting, anyway.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Surface mounted chips? I've never had problems replacing them. I use just use
the analytical person's tool, the crow bar. Given enough time you can divide
anything into it's basic parts.
I'm holding off buying a 4000 until they socket those 8520s. Or until they
revamp the chip and make them more forgiving.
> So *I* don't see why you think they should have been smart enough > to
socket something that's not an I/o part.
I wasn't even concerned with SMD CIAs. I personally think surface mounting
them was ridiculously stupid, but it "does" save C= a buck or two — at
our expense of course, some people (Manf. Engineers) seem to forget about
"ease of service." SMD devices also tend to be more reliable than their
socketed counterparts, getting shipped via United Parcel Smashers won't
shock chips loose. Given the somewhat distributed nature of C=
manufacturing, this may have been a factor.
"If an ASIC is new, expensive, proprietary, or a common-failure item,
socket it." Don't you wish C= thought that way?
> Me, I think the devil invented surface mounting, anyway.
Actually, I think the DoD ("Den of Devils") had a hand in it.
Brian — Cruising on AutoPilot…..
Brian
> Only since the 4000 came out w/o SCSI did anyone want a ZIII
> card for something other than RAM. Be glad they discovered it NOW
> instead of after all those 4000/030's shipped.
As I am writing this, the A4000/30 has already been in available in UK stores
for about two weeks. Does this mean that all these machines have Zorro III's
that won't DMA properly???
If so, does anyone know what CBM's position is about this?
Thanks
Alex
So it sucks, and no one should buy it eh?
I guess the next ImageMaster bug that crops up, we should send whatever
current stock of your product back to the distributors eh?
The program was suppossed to handle ____. It doesn't. It's broke.
The coin does flip ya know.
-mark=
Otto Pilot Engaged..
Certainly the coin flips. In fact, 9.50 which just shipped is more like
"missing an engine" than the seat; we've making good on it with a free
upgrade to 9.51. If CBM does the same, I'll be happy. We stopped selling
9.50 and no product leaves until 9.51 is ready (Tuesday… I hope).
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Are you kidding! You think I would be so lucky to get the socketed Buster?
Nope, mine is the SMD version. So maybe I'll get a new 4000 motherboard. I
hope CBM learns it's lesson about making the major chips socketed instead
of SMD's. As far as the question of whether or not CBM will replace the
motherboard they have no other option as far as I'm concerned.
//
\X/ John – K7KB (TechnoJunkie at heart)
As far as you're concerned, and me too as far as that goes. However, we're
both in the same position – we'll take whatever CBM offers, or doesn't,
and that'll be the end of it. Our opinions are irrelevant, now as always,
to CBM.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Oh I think CBM will do the right thing. They would alienate a lot of 4000
owners if they didn't fix the Buster problem. Actually it wouldn't bother
me that much if I didn't want a 4091 controller so bad. I'm curious as to
what in the Buster is broken, and whether or not it would affect other
3rd. party or CBM cards.
//
\X/ John – K7KB (TechnoJunkie at heart)
John,
It is no rumor. If you have a 4000 with the SuperBuster surface mounted
you will have to have a motherboard replacement. If your 4000 is from the
last production run the SuperBuster is socketed and you'll need a chip
replacement.
-sja
Well do you think the best thing to do is start bugging Commodore Express
on getting the motherboard replaced, or wait until CBM issues a statement
on what we should do? Have they issued any instructions for us with SMD
Buster's?
//
\X/ John – K7KB (TechnoJunkie at heart)
John,
Since CBM does not have the problem fixed yet there is nothing to gain by
bugging Commodore Express. I got a 4000 last week, while the SuperBuster is
socketed it's the same part number as the surface mounted version.
OK Steve, I'll just wait until I hear something from CBM before I start
bugging Commodore Express. Hope they get the problem fixed soon!!
//
\X/ John – K7KB (TechnoJunkie at heart)