Re: Apple IIe + ProDOS = Headache

[pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <veOdnUqPY_XhOEDdRVn-iQ@comcast.com>,
Bill Garber <willy46pa@comcast DOT net> wrote:
>
>"Paul Schlyter" <pausch@saaf.se> wrote in message
>news:cbjkhr$aml$1@merope.saaf.se...
>: In article <p6OdnfVj9thO20HdRVn_iw@comcast.com>,
>: Bill Garber <willy46pa@comcast DOT net> wrote:
>:
>: > Therefore it would either be advisable to update
>: > all Apple IIs to 65C02
>:
>: It's not at all advisable, since it cannot be done.
>: The 65C02 does not work on a lot of (most?) Apple II
>: and II+ machines.  My own Apple II+ is such a machine
>: - the 65C02 just refuses to work there; I've tried.
>: On the IIe the 65C02 works fine though.
>
>There are mods that may need to be done to allow the
>65C02 to run on such machines. Have you tried those?

Nope!  I just tried to replace the CPU chips.

However, don't you think it's unreasonable to expect these
mods to be done on each and every Apple II/II+ out there?

>Also, the MCT SpeedDemon is a nice alternative to the
>65C02 in the motherboard, if you can find one that is.

...if...... :-) ..... again, most Apple II/II+ owners
won't find one....

>: And even if it could be done, are there enough 65C02
>: chips in the world to fill the need if every 6502
>: Apple II would upgrade its CPU to the 65C02 ?
>
>I'm sure we could dig up quite a few of them if the
>need should arise. I haven't looked too awfully much,
>but I have seen small quantities of them available.
>
>: Finally: what's the point of upgrading the CPU of an
>: Apple II which either doesn't work, or will be thrown
>: away?  Yep, that is the actual fate of a lot of
>: Apple II's....
>
>That is inevitably the fate of everything on this earth,
>but if you would rather run a II or II+ than get a //e,

A II+ is what I have....

>then trying to upgrade its CPU would be the next best
>thing.

I'm quite content running only software which works on the
original 6502

> I wanted to learn programming on the Apple II,
>so I got myself a II+ with the idea that starting nearer
>beginning of the line might assist me in the endeavor,
>but I discovered that it was limited in what I could do,
>and I've sold it. Now I use a //e and IIgs only. Seems
>I can perform everything on those that I could on the II+
>and more, so I agree, why upgrade the II or II+, when
>those do just fine.

....but don't you think it would be even better to switch
to a more modern and much more capable computer?

Running a II/II+/IIe/IIgs is, as far as I'm concerned, done
only for one reason: nostalgia.  Whatever one might learn
there is of limited use in the modern world of computing.

>: > or eliminate ProDOS version 1.3 altogether.
>: > Better safe that sorry.  :o)
>:
>: Why should person A be prevented from running ProDOS 1.3
>: on his 65C02 equipped Apple II just because person B, who
>: have no intentions to run ProDOS 1.3, does not want to
>: upgrade his Apple II's CPU to a 65C02 ????
>
>I was actually speaking to person's A and B individually,
>rather than to the Apple II community as a whole. Each
>person should decide whether to upgrade to 65C02 or get
>rid of ProDOS 1.3 on an individual basis. Is that clearer?

If so, you should avoid advicing to upgrade "all Apple IIs".
Yep, you expressed yourself that way.

>Bill @ GarberStreet Enterprizez };-)
>Web Site - http://garberstreet.netfirms.com
>Email - willy46pa @ comcast DOT net
>Change DOT to a dot to contact me
>
>
>
>---
>This email ain't infected, dude!
>
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.708 / Virus Database: 464 - Release Date: 6/19/04
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Grev Turegatan 40,  SE-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW:     http://www.stjarnhimlen.se/
         http://home.tiscali.se/pausch/