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

Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?

Subject: Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?
From: "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgroups@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:26:43 -0800
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm, comp.sys.apple2
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
References: <0d224663-1203-4ad5-b2b4-c026780a944c@l6g2000prm.googlegroups.com> <15379068-b7c5-4937-83a4-80b862bf950d@i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <13ngjv8q3vqptc0@corp.supernews.com> <4779156b$0$19308$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.sys.cbm:43378 comp.sys.apple2:31544

"Cameron Kaiser" <ckaiser@floodgap.com> wrote in message 
news:4779156b$0$19308$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...
> The small nitpick being, of course, that the IIgs had a 65816, so it was not
> running in 8-bit mode all the time (and my IIgs is not running in 8-bit
> emulation even most of the time for the typical applications I use on it).

Good point.  The 128 does of course have that Z80 CPU kicking around... not 
that 6502+Z80=65816, of course. :-)

References:
- C64/128 vs. Apple2?
  - From: Harry Potter <maspethrose7@aol.com>
- Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?
  - From: Pheuque <Ratteler@gmail.com>
- Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?
  - From: "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgroups@yahoo.com>
- Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?
  - From: Cameron Kaiser <ckaiser@floodgap.com>

Prev by Date: Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?
Next by Date: Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?
Previous by thread: Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?
Next by thread: Re: C64/128 vs. Apple2?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread