Re: What's Next for the Apple II?

[Dan <me@here.net>]

In article <1a410081.0401142025.6df1f473@posting.google.com>,
 mspangler@gemsi.com (Michael Spangler) wrote:

> On a IIe, I can hotwire C11 and a 741 op-amp to get an extra ttl
> input. What can I hotwire for an extra ttl on a B&W, or windows
> laptop, and expect it to still work?

Offhand I don't know, but if you had the schematics I'm sure it could be 
done.  You weren't blindly soldering things on your Apple // without the 
schematics, were you?

>  Can I rewrite the Basic interpreter, and burn a new ROM? Can I even
> get the Rom out of the machine at all?

Yes, yes and yes.   On a real IBM PC the BASIC is still in ROM.   Non 
IBM machines don't have (or need) it.

> Do you have the pinout of the big chip on the motherboard that is not
> the CPU? The integrated all  in one memory controller/bridge to other
> busses/ and general kitchen sink chip?

Again, all you need is the schematic, which is probably available on 
Intel's (or whoever) website.

> The nearest thing to an Apple II is the Basic stamp collection, and
> they have little ram, no mass storage, and are not self contained. And
> they cost more.
> 
> That is the point. 

The "point" seems to be that you are more familiar with the hardware of 
an Apple // than you are of modern machines.   How this relates to 
"control", you have yet to explain.   

By your logic, I know people who would claim that they are in "full 
control" of PCs because they are familiar with it and know where to look 
for info, parts, etc.   Give them an Apple // and they would be lost, 
like you apparently are with anything newer than a IIgs.   It doesn't 
mean/prove anything, just that you are more familiar with one and not 
the other.

Dan