[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Redesigning a new PROM for //e and //c hardware
- Subject: Re: Redesigning a new PROM for //e and //c hardware
- From: BLuRry <brendan.robert@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 08:06:56 -0800 (PST)
- Complaints-to: groups-abuse@google.com
- In-reply-to: <k78lub$u5s$1@news.xmission.com>
- Injection-date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:06:56 +0000
- Injection-info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.123.154.97; posting-account=HyIOQgoAAAAfAUGOevdCSBhPYcDSPtM9
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
- References: <benoit0123-1352118213@macgui.com> <k78lub$u5s$1@news.xmission.com>
- User-agent: G2/1.0
On Monday, November 5, 2012 9:28:11 AM UTC-6, Egan Ford wrote:
> On 11/5/12 5:23 AM, Benoit0123 wrote:
>
> > potential enhanced CPU within the host (either CMOS 65C02 or a
>
> > 65802).
>
>
>
> I am intrigued. This is the first I have heard of a //e with a 65802
>
> (my Apple II activity has a gap from 1986-2009). Was this a common
>
> self-upgrade? Is it as simple as just replacing the CPU? Hmmm... now
>
> where to find one...
>
>
>
> Thanks.
Seems it is virtually identical to a 65816 minus the bank-address byte. Since the 65c02 used in the //e didn't have the SC bit-operator opcodes (bbr and so on) dropping in a 65802 shouldn't make any difference to any of the software. (note: Jace emulates the SC opcodes... just in case. ;-)
-B