Re: TWGS bad cable symptoms/AUX connector?

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

mystix@direct.ca (Herbert Fung) wrote:

>supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer) writes:
>
>>>local electronics component stores and expect it to work?
>>
>>I think you can.  The old cable had brittle wires, if I recall, and that
caused
>>it to fail if you plug it and unplug it repeatedly.  If your cable has a
>
>Do you know what some of the symptoms of cable failure are? I'm curious if
this
>might be my problem.

I'm afraid I don't.  It probably just stops working or becomes unstable.
I still have the original cable with no problem probably because I've
left it in the IIGS unmoved.  I don't expect the cable to be your problem,
though, because you wrote earlier that your TWGS worked fine until
the RamFAST was plugged in.

>>it appears that a replacement can be constructed using a DIP connector, a
>>flat ribbon cable, and a the right type of connector at the other end.  All
>
>Are there certain grades of ribbon cable that are more flexible than others?
I'd
>rather not have to do this too often.

I've read that the key is to find one with gold plated wires.  I could be
wrong on this.

>Well at present I'm looking at replacing the CPU with a 14 MHz version,
replace
>the SRAMs with 12ns, replacing the crystal with either a 50MHz or 64MHz
versions,
>and fabricate a new cable. I sure hope my problem really is with my TransWarp
>or I'm gonna feel really silly. :O

But you'd have a fast IIGS one way or the other!  ;-)

By the way, take a look at http://www.apple2.org/ Tony Diaz's web
site.  I think that's the right URL.  His 16Mhz TWGS unit is working
fine with his RamFAST...other neat things on his site are lots of pics
and his "how to" guide to building of his two portable IIGS units!

>>It is a high speed bus for connecting memory most likely.  This memory
>>could be addressed directly by the processor at full speed.  AE never
>>did come up with a product to connect here.  The Zip GS has such an
>>AUX connector too.
>
>Hmm, not really knowing much about electronics per say, would it be possible
to
>hook up more than one CPU? Of course I'd imagine that the operating system
>would have to be modified to take in account for dual processors, but it would
be
>a neat trick.

I've always thought that packing mega amounts of processing power
into a single CPU chip was kind of inefficient since the greatest
computer of all, the human brain, uses distributed processing.  A
computer with 100 CPUs of, say, 14Mhz 65C02 units would run cool,
consume not much more power than a typical Pentium, and would
be extremely powerful and fast.

Not sure how one would program such a computer, though.  I think
an OS for it would have to be written from scratch.

Applying the type of die shrink technology seen in Pentiums and
PowerPCs, I'd bet 100 65C02s can fit comfortably on a single die
the size of a Pentium or PowerPC.