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

Re: AW5 vs WP 1.1 for 2e



bieling@terra.es wrote:
On May 24, 2:34 am, "Michael J. Mahon" <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:

The introduction of the IIgs into the Apple II market is another
example of this--"too little, too late".



I think that the the Disk II is the reason why the Apple II's speed
could not be increased steadily along the time, a la par with the
contenders.

A 'worse', less smart, but less 'synchronous' Disk II design may have
permitted to speedup the the Apple II much more easily, as the CPU
speed would not have been such an important factor in compatibility.
Somewhere along the line, a timing source could have been added... if
the need had ever arisen.

Using the Apple II itself as an FDC instead of a Floppy Disk
Controller *chip*, although clever and bright from an engineering
point of view, has had some unforeseen, long-lasting (and bad)
consequences...

But they were all rather easily dealt with by several different
accelerator designs.  The Zip Chip design was even licensed by
Apple for incorporation in the //c+, so the path to faster
machines was open by the mid-1980s.

Another approach that would have worked well would have been to
create a smartport 5.25" drive that worked for all non-copy-
protected disks, with a "compatibility mode" that fell back to
1MHz-Woz-mode for old copy-protected stuff.

Both approaches were straightforward in the mid-1980 timeframe.

What made any simple "crystal swapping" approach to speeding
the machine impractical was the synchronous integration of the
processor and the video clock.  That very clever design would
have required a complete re-working to speed the machine up
without a cache-based approach.

The original Apple II design was a "crystalline" design, with
everything synergistically dependent on everything else.  This
is both its greatest beauty and its inevitable "exoskeleton"
that mandated a complete re-design to significantly improve it.
If you combine that need with the need for very low-level
compatibility, you have a recipe for getting pretty far from
cost-performance optimality.

Another fundamental problem was dependence on the 6502 line, which
was extended in a very quirky way beyond 4MHz, without a second
source and with spotty delivery guarantees.

-michael

NadaNet file server for Apple II computers!
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/

"The wastebasket is our most important design
tool--and it's seriously underused."