[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why the RamWorks III?
On the RamWorks III there is 4 "custom" chips labeled AE-CSTM-1 ..
AE-CSTM-4. They don't look like PAL/GAL chips because they are only 14 or 16
pins.
On some cards I suspect they are only scratched off or re-printed to make it
hard to know what the chips are. I have a clone RamWorks Basic (512K) card
and all the chips are readily available 74LS type (except the RAM of
course). If anyone has a genuine RamWorks Basic (512K) card I am curiuos to
know if any of the chips are de-faced or not 74LS types (ie. custom
printing).
Mark
Scott Alfter wrote in message <991000158.159606@chakotay.ncc74656.org>...
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>In article <9eq4sa$8pd$1@venus.itns.co.za>,
>Greg Wildman <gregw@venus.itns.co.za> wrote:
>>On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 15:03:23 GMT, Greg Buchner wrote:
>>> In article <3AEB8B47.2D7E3415@intergate.bc.ca>,
>>> Wayne Stewart <waynes@intergate.bc.ca> wrote:
>>>> Does anyone know or can guess why the RamWorks III was produced. Looks
>>>> like they just rearranged some of the chips on the RamWorks II and
>>>> renamed it.
>>>
>>> I do believe the redesign was so it would fit in the European IIe.
>>> It was probably easier to just redesign the card and produce one for
>>> the two different markets than it was to produce two different cards.
>>
>>Yes the European IIe had the auxilliary connector in line with slot 3 so
the
>>card sat further back in the case than the USA IIe.
>
>IIRC, they also reduced the chip count by replacing some (most?) of the
>74LSxxx logic with a smaller number of PALs. By setting the copy-protect
>bit in the PALs, they could stymie most attempts at cloning.
>
>On somewhat of a tangent, I bought a RamWorks II from an eBay seller a few
>months ago. On the card, four of the chips have had their identification
>ground off. The layout of the board is somewhat like this crude ASCII
>drawing, with the mystery chips marked "????" and with connectors and
>passive components omitted:
>
> ? ? L F 41256 41256 41256 41256 41256 4
>L ? ? S 3 1
>S ? ? 0 2 L 41256 41256 41256 41256 41256 2
>0 ? ? 8 S 5
>4 3 41256 41256 41256 41256 41256 6
> L ? ? L L 7
>L S ? ? S S 3 41256 41256 41256 41256 41256 4
>S 5 ? ? 2 3 1
>2 1 ? ? 4 7 41256 41256 41256 41256 41256 2
>7 5 4 5
>3 41256 41256 41256 41256 41256 6
>
>Has anyone figured out what those four chips should be? While the logic
>needed to keep all the memory refreshed and to make sure the video display
>always pulls from bank 0 while the processor can access any bank isn't
>trivial, neither is it exceedingly complex. On the off-chance that one of
>the mystery chips croaks, what would replace it?
>
> _/_
> / v \
>(IIGS( Scott Alfter (remove Voyager's hull number for email address)
> \_^_/ http://salfter.dyndns.org
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
>
>iD8DBQE7EXZcVgTKos01OwkRAielAJ9soBawYFboNoMxhhnsitoonAFZlQCcDwAc
>hSbxb8npr7NZyFqv586PE48=
>=5f0a
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----