[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RAMFast ROM's



Mitchell Spector wrote:
"bill.martens@gmail.com" <bill.martens@gmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 20, 10:27 am, Gust L Friedemann <g...@apple2.com> wrote:
bill.mart...@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 19, 1:37 pm, Gust L Friedemann <g...@apple2.com> wrote:
I have 2 Rev. D RAMFasts. Can someone please tell me the difference
between the later ROM revisions? What is the difference between 3.01F
and 3.01-EZ? My EZ appears to have a different main chip (Zilog) than my
other? Can someone shed some light on this?
Thanks!
The 3.01EZ ROM has a bug in it which is why it was followed up by the
3.01F ROM.  The bug is, if I remember correctly one that causes
complete data loss with the drive and should not be used. (It seems to
me there was one function that caused this in particular but I dont
have my notes in front of me.)
So, 3.01F *supersedes* -EZ, regardless of model controller chip?
I dont remember the upgrade but there might have been another chip
that was included.  It's been too many years, but I had 5 of them.  I
will see if I can dig up my notes on it, however, do not use the
3.01EZ card if you value your data.

Haven't visited here in well over a year, but happened to see this thread and thought I'd clear up some misconceptions above.

The original RamFAST, produced by CV-Technologies, used a Hitachi processor. When Sequential Systems bought the design and did their own manufacturing, they replaced it with a Zilog processor. The "EZ" ROM firmware put the Zilog CPU (Z180) into Hitachi CPU mode (HD64180). Which makes me think, the Sequential cards must have been locked into revisions "E" and "F" of the firmware.

The RamFAST firmware "E" and "EZ" both contained a bug involving the built-in tape backup software's RESTORE function. You could create a backup with no problem, but it would not be able to restore/write it back. Revision "F" resolved that bug, and contained only a single byte of data changed from what I recall. Revision E/EZ is completely safe, it does NOT cause data corruption.

To answer the question: Yes, 3.01f supersedes 3.01ez, it still contains code to make it work with the Zilog processor. And "EZ" works happily with the CV-Technology card with the Hitachi processor present, I have one installed in mine.

Mitchell Spector

Thank You!

Clarification! Bless you Mr. Spector. :)

I'll have to get 2, 3.01f ROMS from ReactiveMicro if I don't decide to sell these off.

Thanks again.