#WB1.2
11 messages in this thread
I was under the impression that a random trashing of the track buffer would
immediately cause a guru or equivalent. Is it that easy to randomly trash the
the disk buffer. After all, it is considered to be encoded already, are all
patterns legal? Hopfully, there is some identifying characteristic that would
cause an immediate crash.
Regarding the query back up this thread, you can also get further hardware
details on the Amiga by getting a set of Schematics from Cardinal Software at
14840 Build America Dr. [no kidding], Woodbridge, VA 22191. They cost $24.95
for a four sheet set plus leaflet.
Jeez!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why go to Cardinal when you can get them from Commodore
for $15.00?????????????????? Jeez, what's this world coming to?
Todd,
The Cardinal schematics are reportedly more complete and better
documented. I say reportedly 'cuz I haven't seen either but am going on what I
have seen here.
Don
Don,
Thanks for the info. The way I hear it, Cardinal translated the boards
into a CAD package. I don't know about how well they documented them and I
admit, C-A's package is far from perfect (they tell you so), but it is "from
the horse's mouth". If anyone has or has seen the Cardinal package, please
leave a message letting us know what is documented and how well.
Happy New Year.
Todd
Todd,
Someone left a message a while ago where they said that Cardnial
actually took an Amiga apart and traced every line on it and then put the whole
package into a CAD program and verified the result with the Amiga schematic
package and used that to label the lines.
Happy New Year!
Don
Don,
Yeah, that sounds right, but why would that be better than the doc from
Amiga, since the entire schematic seems to be included, as well as doc on
expansion?
Todd
Todd,
Again, let me stress, I have seen neither doc, so am not speaking from
experience, but my understanding is that the Cardinal stuff is better laid out
(easier to read) and had more complete..or thorough documentation.
Perhaps someone who has seen one or the other can jump in and let us
know if in fact the Cardinal schematics are better than those supplied by
amiga.
Don
Don,
Well, I do have the Commodore Docs and I must admit that they are
anything from being easy to read! Others, please jump in at this point and let
me know what's in Cardinal's docs. I can't believe that they could be better
than C-A's, since I've never seen a disassembly of something that more closely
relayed the author's intention than the source did.
Anyway, enough is enough. I'll jump off this thread now unless someone
has some insight on the situation. 'nuff said …
Todd
Todd,
I have the Cardinal schematics, and have noticed at least one innaccuracy,
though others have said things that make me think that I have a slightly
earlier version. I have heard others say that there are more innaccuracies.
All in all though, they doo look pretty darn close, and are quite large, sort
of blueprint size. Great for us middle-aged types whose eyes are not what they
used to be.
I haven't sent off for the CBM stuff yet (except for an earlier package with
expansion docs only), but will do soon.
Regards, Larry.
Todd Thanks for the info Larry. If all
Cardinal does is provide a schematic, then I don't think there's anyway
possible that they can be better or more useful than Commodore's docs.
Commodore offers a fair amount of insight into future enhancements and design
priorities that are probably not present in Cardinal's spec's. Please let me
know if Cardinal provides anything else with their package besides a bare-bones
schematic.