Re: RFC : SOME IDEAS FOR THE APPLE II FPGA'ers

["Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com>]

mdj wrote:
> Michael J. Mahon wrote:
>
>
> > (I try to stay out of these vaporware discussions, but sometimes it
> > gets so inflated that I feel some air needs to be let out.  ;-)
> >
> > Again, if it's all for fun or education--great, but this really isn't
> > comp.sys.apple2.fantasy.
>
>
> I take your point, although it seems like everyone chatting away here
> has quite different goals, and very different ideas on what is
> realistic.

That divergence, never made clear, is a major part of the
problem I have with the discussion.  It's like five blind
men feeling different parts and describing an elephant!  ;-)

> If I could achieve what *I* want by buying myself an FPGA development
> kit and having a bit of a play, I'd have done it by now. The problem
> is, I'd like to recreate my IIe in a way that's useful beyond just
> bringing up an Apple II on a development board.
>
> What I'd like to achieve depends on connecting a physical Apple II
> expansion bus, plus some dynamic ram to the dev board. I could possibly
> get away with 1 slot wired by a jumper set to the dev kit, but even
> then we're talking about a lot of mucking about with level adjusters to
> mesh TTL to CMOS.
>
> Unfortunately, this kind of work is nontrivial and rather expensive in
> a home shop, and unless a bunch of people are interested in the end
> result, and are happy with the chosen path forward, it's just not going
> to happen.

And, though you've described some characteristics of a solution that
you prefer, you haven't shared what your *objective* is--from which
those requirements are derived.

From what you've said, I'm having a hard time understanding why
you aren't satisfied with a real Apple II.  It would seem to satisfy
all the characteristics you describe, is inexpensive, reliable, and
generally easy to fix.  The only thing that doesn't get you is the
fun of playing with FPGAs.  ;-)

> If we as a collective, could sort out what we'd LIKE to have, then
> possibly we could come up with a board design, chat to the GSE-Reactive
> team, and see if we can come up with something *other* than just
> 'fantastical' discussions.

Now, that puts another spin on it--it has to be a design that many
people would like to have.  Judging from the fragmentation of discussion
on this thread, that may be the hardest thing of all!

> I'm keen enough about seeing this go forward that I'm happy to play
> project maintainer, contribute some conceptual designs, organise
> peoples collective wishes/wants and distill it into something tangible.
> It's too big a job for one person, IMHO, and even if it's not, it'd be
> an utter waste to develop such a thing and have it only considered
> valuable by a very small group, when I believe there's actually a large
> number of people 'out there' who would love to have one, and enough
> collective talent to create something impressive that everyone involved
> can be proud of.

I understand exactly what you mean, but I suspect that the only designs
that will be *realized* are those carried out by exactly one person.
One very motivated and capable person can do it.  Two very motivated
and capable persons who agree on almost everything and communicate
extremely well could also do it.  (Do you see why I think that a solo
project is more likely? ;-)

> Just remember, we can implement the 6502 in limitless numbers of ways
> on an FPGA, and everyone would be free to use whichever design floats
> their boat, but if there's no tangible platform to stick this FPGA on,
> it's all just clever ideas and imagination disappearing into the ether.

The problem will be that each quite different design is the product of
a "quite different" designer, and the probability of any of the detailed
designs of other "quite different" designers being acceptable to the
first is almost negligible.

If someone put a "plastic" platform with a very modular design out there
for others to modify, that could create the environment you describe, so
maybe someone thinks that *that* would be a great project.  (Sounds a
little like the C-one, doesn't it?  And look how much follow-on work
that fine project has generated... )

The good news is that the tools to do such a project are getting better
and cheaper every day, so at some point, the "investment threshold" for
some solo designer may drop to the point where they just do it.

I predict that when someone does it, not many will be sold, but it will
spawn a lot more threads like this one.  I also predict that if it *is*
done, it will be done by someone who doesn't read or contribute to these
threads.  ;-)

-michael

Music synthesis for 8-bit Apple II's!
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/

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