sicklittlemonkey wrote:
On Apr 3, 2:39 am, "Michael J. Mahon" <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:I'm not familiar with the Acorn transition. Did it preserve essentially "seamless" compatibility with the existing software base?I think so, yes, for much of their primary markets' software base (education and games). The compatibility was via software emulation, with help from compatible video hardware. It's mentioned in passing in the first couple of sections here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acorn_Archimedes For various reasons I think you might prefer to read the fascinating and broader story of Acorn itself, since it will answers questions you might have much better than I can: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acorn_Computers_Ltd
A very interesting story! It appears that the early coprocessing orientation of the design team presented many interesting alternatives that were largely unexplored by the Apple team, who viewed coprocessing as extrinsic to the system's design. When that is coupled with the very successful generalization of the 6502 principles to the ARM, a very impressive synergy of the 6502 "feel" with new technology resulted. I have an ARM development system, but haven't yet explored it. This makes me very interested in learning more about it. ;-) -michael NadaNet networking for Apple II computers! Home page: http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/ "The wastebasket is our most important design tool--and it's seriously underused."