Re: Question about Apple ][ ROM chips!

["william strutts" <wrstrutts1@nospam.home.com>]

Charles Forbin" <sark314@hotmail.com> wrote in message
2ab25086.0110010921.3dc5fa22@posting.google.com">news:2ab25086.0110010921.3dc5fa22@posting.google.com...
> markREMOVE@syndicomm.com (Mark Percival) wrote in message
news:<3b95730a.5638064@news.videotron.ca>...
>
> (in reference to my motherboard serials of 8001 and 8031)
>
> > These hand written numbers is the year and week of the year these
> > boards rolled off Apple's assembly line.  Week one of 1980 (January)
> > and week 31 of 1980 (July) respectively.  Both would be II+ vintage
> > motherboards of different revisions.
>
> I've been doing a little more research, and I've found that the 8001
> motherboard is definitely *not* the one that originally came with the
> case.  The serial number on the bottom of the case is A2S1-2067,
> which, according to
>
> http://member.nifty.ne.jp/apple2tree/wnew/whatnew2.htm
>
> makes the case that of one of the earliest ][ models, too early for
> the original board to have been a Rev 4 (the one in it now).  However,
> as far as the board itself is concerned, I've run across this auction
> on eBay:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1279383811
>
> and am seeing what is purported to be a standard ][ with a motherboard
> serial of *8012*.  The seller has an image up of the case's bottom
> label, in which "A2S0016" is checked; I compared it with a list I
> found on a cached Google site (the URL is obscenely long):
>
> A2S0016: Apple ][, 16K
> A2S0032: 32K
> A2S0048: 48K
> A2S1016: Apple ][+, 16K
>
> These designations are in agreement with the first URL I've given
> here.  What I'm thinking at this point is that the eBay guy has a very
> late-model standard Apple ][ with the second label (the one with three
> boxes to checkmark), one that was made in 1980, assuming the board
> wasn't swapped.  If this is true, then is it possible my 8001 board
> was *not* originally part of a ][+, and is hence simply a replacement
> ][ board?  The reason I am persisting in this investigation is that I
> find the lines between ][/][+ very fuzzy between 1979 and 1980, in
> regards to exactly when the ][ was discontinued and the ][+
> exclusively made (other than the /// of course).  This makes it
> difficult to determine what hardware was common to both, particularly
> motherboard revisions.

Woa! It is going for over $300 bucks now.  How can it be
an original II? I thought they had the gold RAM chips.
--
--
William R. Strutts - wrstrutts1@nospam.home.com - Whatever!

C'est moi!  http://www.facelink.com/wrstrutts

Just hacking away...

Remove nospam to reply.
"