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

Re: //c vs //c+

Subject: Re: //c vs //c+
From: david@uow.edu.au (David Wilson)
Date: 1999/02/28
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Organization: University of Wollongong, Australia
References: <19990217010814.25049.00002670@ng61.aol.com> <19990218194635.11639.00002245@ng-fy1.aol.com> <mikeford-2402991433140001@socal56k155.netwiz.net> <afkn222qkzu.fsf@dobbs.eng.sun.com> <david.920077407@wraith> <afkbtigqsqm.fsf@dobbs.eng.sun.com>

Charles Stephens <devnull@dobbs.eng.sun.com> writes:
> DW> The firmware in one version of the //c was to allow an external box with
> DW> a Zilog SIO chip in it to be interfaced to the //c serial port. This box
> DW> never eventuated.

>I don't think it would have been too useful anyways.  However, it
>would be fun to get a disassembley of the firmware so one could
>reverse engineer such a box.  It could work on any Apple machine.

I have the listing - Apple printed the firmware listing for the UniDisk 3.5
ROM version of the Apple //c (and gave it away at the time as it had the
only description of Smartport). It just fits into the 256 bytes at $C7XX.
It is incomplete as far as I know - I believe that some code would have
been loaded into RAM to allow it to work.
--
David Wilson  School of IT & CS, Uni of Wollongong, Australia  david@uow.edu.au

References:
- Re: //c vs //c+
  - From: supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)
- Re: //c vs //c+
  - From: obsbedia2@aol.com (Obsbedia2)
- Re: //c vs //c+
  - From: mikeford@netwiz.net (Mike Ford)
- Re: //c vs //c+
  - From: Charles Stephens <devnull@dobbs.eng.sun.com>
- Re: //c vs //c+
  - From: david@uow.edu.au (David Wilson)
- Re: //c vs //c+
  - From: Charles Stephens <devnull@dobbs.eng.sun.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Big Apple question
Next by Date: Re: ImageWriter II to PC
Previous by thread: Re: //c vs //c+
Next by thread: Juiced.GS 1999!
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread