Re: A 21st Century Apple II?

[mwillegal <mike@willegal.net>]

Hi Alex,

I think that the replica Apple ][ kit has a lot of appeal to vintage
computer kit builders.  It's quite a neat project to put together.

I personally did it because I enjoyed the variety of challenges
associated with the project, and I couldn't find a reasonably priced
rev0 motherboard that could be used in my original Apple II
restoration project.  In a way, having a rev 0 motherboard that I
built myself in that system is more rewarding to me than having a
wrong serial number original replacement in there.

Regards,
Mike Willegal




On Mar 2, 6:23 pm, Alex Freed <alex_n...@mirrow.com> wrote:
> sfahey wrote:
>
> > In case someone hasn't directed you to it already...
>
> >http://a2central.com/?p=1645
>
> Please update the link: I'm abandoning the mirrow.com domain
> as it became a huge spam magnet in the last 10 years or so.
> The new home of my page (badly in need of an update) ishttp://alexfreed.com/FPGApple
>
> There are several fully functional Apple 2 implementations on
> FPGAs already. I made three for different platforms, the latest
> being the Altium NanoBoard. Other people did independent versions
> too. For examplehttp://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~sedwards/apple2fpga
>
> Even within our rather small community of Apple 2 enthusiasts
> opinions on what is fun are very different. For example while
> the software emulators are very handy for some experiments, to me
> they don't have a "look and feel" of an actual "real" computer.
> Even if one doesn't look like a proper Apple and has a PS2 keyboard
> attached to an off-the-shelf FPGA board.
> At the same time I like using the (relatively) modern technology to
> enhance the Apple 2 platform. For example the CFFA and my PD8 help
> to deal with the problem of floppy disks too small and hard disks
> too rare and bulky.
>
> I understand the Apple I replica to some extent. I don't quite
> understand a replica of Apple ][ rev. 0 probably because I'm not much
> of a collector. I mean it's not that different from later revisions
> that were made in millions. To me a real rev. 7 is more "genuine" than
> a rev. 0 replica. Obviously others disagree.
>
> -Alex.