Re: chinook ct-40 is this //c version?

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

Bill Garber wrote:
> "Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote in message 
> rvadnZNYLeXOQD7enZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com">news:rvadnZNYLeXOQD7enZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> > brad wrote:
> >
> > > ">
> > >
> > > > Hmm sorry maybe it was a CT-40 after all I saw. Anyway the model I have
> > > > is CT-20c with the samll 'c' being the IIc designator.
> > > >
> > > > Glenn
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > as in prev posts bill g wants to get his hands on one of these beasts to 
> > > see
> > > how hard it is to tweak a //c type plug n play hd
> >
> > There's nothing simple about it--it's a full protocol conversion.
>
>
> Simple or not, as the case may be, I have a guy looking at the
> Smartport protocol, and I can build a single board computer to
> handle it. I've already designed several different IDE controllers
> so adding that to the conversion circuit should be rather easy.
>
>
> > Accept smartport request including data, synthesize SCSI/IDE request,
> > issue it; handle data from drive, analyze SCSI/IDE status, synthesize
> > smartport response including data transfer.
>
>
> Where's the flow chart?   :o)
>
>
> > It's a computer in itself.
>
>
>
> So is the Unidisk 3.5" drive analog card. So?, where's the problem?

The level of complexity is quite similar.

I just wanted to be clear that its a microcontroller-based solution,
not a "tweak" problem.  ;-)

-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."