Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. like previous QL hardware efforts that started this discussion the QPC2 software is a one man show. If Marcel loses interest QPC2 is dead. Just one quick point: if I completely lose interest I plan to release QPC2 in the wild. By the way, new release for Vista is still pending, sorry. It'll happen as soon as possible. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Is there was any virus on QL ?
On 12 Feb 2007, at 12:13, Dilwyn Jones wrote: QL jobs have a JMP.L job_start_address instruction in the first few bytes, to jump past the $4AFB flag and job name. This could in theory (never tried this part) be hacked to jump to an extra bit of code tacked onto the end of a program to run a 'virus', which ends with the original JMP.L job_start_address to run the program from its original execution address. I *HOPE* I am wrong and this cannot be done. But I'm also optimistic that nobody on the QL scene would even dream of trying to write a working virus! Adrian Dickens in his QL Advanced User Guide shows how to set up a self-cloning program. (See 4.4.2) His program drew a set of coloured blobs across the screen. This went on until one of the blob sets hit the edge of the screen at which time all the programs committed suicide. This is not strictly a virus since you yourself have to start it going in the first place, but it gives an indication of what can be done. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Is there was any virus on QL ?
Yours answers are interesting, and Per as made an article that can teach simply on how it's possible to make a virus. See www.witteware.com/knoware : 2007/02/12 Addition | Virus - Article and listing: Anatomy of a virus. New. Now I will consider that is possible to get viruses on QL, but at this time there is no real virus on QL instead of there is some on PC, Amiga, ... I please to see that on QL there is no virus and hope there is no in the future. I will use the example of Per (if Per is agree of course) for my presentation at the side of a program of us that stealth browsed URL behind Internet Explorer, and another program that can shutdown without any wait a computer. They made to help to understand concepts. Jimmy. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de George Gwilt Envoyé : mardi 13 février 2007 11:56 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [ql-users] Is there was any virus on QL ? On 12 Feb 2007, at 12:13, Dilwyn Jones wrote: QL jobs have a JMP.L job_start_address instruction in the first few bytes, to jump past the $4AFB flag and job name. This could in theory (never tried this part) be hacked to jump to an extra bit of code tacked onto the end of a program to run a 'virus', which ends with the original JMP.L job_start_address to run the program from its original execution address. I *HOPE* I am wrong and this cannot be done. But I'm also optimistic that nobody on the QL scene would even dream of trying to write a working virus! Adrian Dickens in his QL Advanced User Guide shows how to set up a self-cloning program. (See 4.4.2) His program drew a set of coloured blobs across the screen. This went on until one of the blob sets hit the edge of the screen at which time all the programs committed suicide. This is not strictly a virus since you yourself have to start it going in the first place, but it gives an indication of what can be done. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
I've just had a thought... Instead of building new hardware, reuse very common old hardware which is easy to find on places such as eBay... i.e. Amiga 1200 etc. Now, if someone could write a version of QDOS etc. for that platform which could be burned onto ROM (the Amiga ROMs are easy to access and replace) that would give the community an easy route for an upgrade without a massive cost for the hardware. (The Amiga 1200 has a built-in IDE interface and an internal floppy drive. It also has reasonable 2D graphics performance, ample for the QL-like display. Oh, and much of the original AmigaDOS was written by Metacomco in BCPL on Sinclair QLs. :-) Maybe it's pay-back time?) The alternative to replacing just the ROMs would be a trap-door add in card.. but that raises the ugly head of hardware development. The big problem with that approach, again, is driver development. However, from what I understand, there's a lot of documentation for the Amiga hardware so it's shouldn't be as bad as it might otherwise be. What do you think? Steve -- --- Nostalgia isn't as good as it used to be. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] SDGC
Hi, there has always been a number of QL folks who want native hardware, but weren't satisfied with the concept of the Q60. They kept looking for a Super Duper Gold Card. I often tried to understand what they really have in mind but failed. Some of them seem on this list now, maybe my curiosity can be helped... The starting point for the Q40/Q60 formfactor was: Nearly all QL users weren't satisfied with the black case keyboard, so they mount their QL stuff in other cases, especially PC cases. Often a lot of tinkering was involved, even backplanes were made to ease the tinkering a bit. Consequently, a modernized QL should rather fit a PC case than the black box. (That's what I thought.) I could have given the Q60 a black box formfactor. Would this have satisfied those looking for SDGC? Or is this more than a question of the form factor? Are there parts on the QL motherboard which are ANY use in combination with a = 68040 system? All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, there has always been a number of QL folks who want native hardware, but weren't satisfied with the concept of the Q60. They kept looking for a Super Duper Gold Card. I often tried to understand what they really have in mind but failed. Some of them seem on this list now, maybe my curiosity can be helped... The starting point for the Q40/Q60 formfactor was: Nearly all QL users weren't satisfied with the black case keyboard, so they mount their QL stuff in other cases, especially PC cases. Often a lot of tinkering was involved, even backplanes were made to ease the tinkering a bit. Consequently, a modernized QL should rather fit a PC case than the black box. (That's what I thought.) I could have given the Q60 a black box formfactor. Would this have satisfied those looking for SDGC? Or is this more than a question of the form factor? Are there parts on the QL motherboard which are ANY use in combination with a = 68040 system? I think is is just nostalgia for the first experience. For the people who liked the original black box, the add-ons to that are attractive, and one feels one is still using the original. Tony - -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF0bQRM3RzOs8+btoRAhU9AJ4pi5D+5q00tza2HSMbl2jvM3TZyQCfW4aW /HBJRj9h2y3EaD80PbR39ho= =Dab9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
I think is is just nostalgia for the first experience. For the people who liked the original black box, the add-ons to that are attractive, and one feels one is still using the original. Tony I think so too . . . looking at it objectively if you replace too much of the original QL you are no longer really using the QL, but the fact that it is still in the black box is subjectively attractive. Rick ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
Instead of building new hardware, reuse very common old hardware which is easy to find on places such as eBay... i.e. Amiga 1200 etc. Yes I'm agree, this sound OK. But I searching an Amiga 1200 with a french keyboard, and it's difficult to find one. Now, if someone could write a version of QDOS etc. for that platform which could be burned onto ROM (the Amiga ROMs are easy to access and replace) that would give the community an easy route for an upgrade without a massive cost for the hardware. This may take a while. But as the Amiga already have a QL emulator, a port of QDOS may be facilitate. And if I have an Amiga 1200, I want to use both Amiga and QL on it. (The Amiga 1200 has a built-in IDE interface and an internal floppy drive. It also has reasonable 2D graphics performance, ample for the QL-like display. Oh, and much of the original AmigaDOS was written by Metacomco in BCPL on Sinclair QLs. :-) Maybe it's pay-back time?) Sure. I'm asking to myself if the new AmigaOne (based on PPC) should by more suitable. But much more harder on development. I'm thinking that like many tentative made around all these new projects needs both persons who worked on them and money. The rentability of such of projects are very difficult to be reached. I need a 68K compatible platform to execute both QL, Amiga, Linux68K and others, ..., but Q40/Q60 lets us watch that is expensive to get this kind of system. And complete and running systems need plenty of time to be integrated and installed (I guess as I dont't have one). There is a lot of emulators that's work well on PC. So I frequently used QPC or WinUAE. Currently I'm working to create my own company and I searching if there is a way to put into market this such of computers... And the only one response I really find is that without an heavy investment we cannot get a large selling 68K computer that make it cheap. As I think that work around SMS/Q and Q40/Q60 are still active, I want to earn a lot of money in order to buy to system with the suite of softwares. I saw a lot of software I want to get, but prices are too expensive for me at this time. And it's hard to see a lot of utilities that give you pretty desktop in high resolution on QL... After this I still hesitate to buy some hardware because when I saw products description, it's a bit difficult to make an opinion on certain products. For example, I need to modify one of my 4 QL black box to get an speedy serial port to make him communicate with a PC. In that case the solution may be Hermes/ SuperHermes Lite or SuperHermes (between 82 to 140 euros) and I pretty sure that just buying this is not sufficient to get it up and running (I think I have to build a cable, make a new box or put the QL in a tower case, find a keyboard and...) An all of this just in order to save some software from destruction (for exemple - I recently lose VROOM as the cartridge is now dead and I don't know how to hack the protection - I had saved the files but not the original cartridge. And what if the strategy to follow : 1. Using QXL/QXL2 - This is a ISA card, should be now usefull to get it now in PCI Express or PCI format ? 2. QL with extensions - Well at this time this mean QL + SGC + Aurora + Mplane + a new tower box, some hours ... 3. Emulation. Well QPC is very attractive but now I had to know what's software to use (I want to use a C compiler, Basic Compiler and ...) 4. Q40/Q60 .. Yes a day certainly when I will have increased my knowledge on QL And for what ? I still don't know ;-) So now, and it's because I cannot say count me in for the new SGC for exemple is that I need the help of a QL Master Expert Consultant in order to understand all of this. In fact I just need what : Preserve my old programs and games from destruction and program in S*Basic (with compilation) and in C on QL. The suite QD+Qbasic+Qliberator is about 106 euros and C68 seems to be hard to install ;-) I thinking onto rewrite completely my website to create a dedicated zone for the QL where anyone can publish articles in order to create an QL Advanced Wiki for Technical and Newbies - And not in english only ;-) !!! What do you think? Steve -- --- Nostalgia isn't as good as it used to be. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
Op Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:50:25 +0100 schreef Tony Firshman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I think is is just nostalgia for the first experience. For the people who liked the original black box, the add-ons to that are attractive, and one feels one is still using the original. The design of the Sinclairs stuff has always appealed to me. It was a major factor in choosing my first ZX81 and on to the QL. But software demands outgrew the black box and adding memory, floppies hard disks made it longer with loose boxes attached so less attractive and less practical. That's why I made my MaxiQL, separating the keyboard from the base and adding a frame on top of the base with floppy and hard drives. I also made sure it was mostly black. (It can regularly be seen at the Eindhoven show, next one March 24.) Also the MinisQL is an attractive design; small, quiet (no big fan), if only it were black. So MY ideal machine would be one that is capable of using the full potential of SMSQ/PEv2 (only QPC2 and Qx0 can do that now, both Aurora/SGC and QXL suffer from lack of memory) and can be fitted in a black box (or my MaxiQL or MinisQL). QL Today v10i2 had an article of the June 2005 Eindhoven show where Jens Wildgruber showed his QL in a rack, with a Flashcard in stead of a hard disk. That could make a compact QL, maybe even be put in the black box! Bob -- Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma: http://www.opera.com/mail/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
So MY ideal machine would be one that is capable of using the full potential of SMSQ/PEv2 (only QPC2 and Qx0 can do that now, both Aurora/SGC and QXL suffer from lack of memory) and can be fitted in a black box (or my MaxiQL or MinisQL). QL Today v10i2 had an article of the June 2005 Eindhoven show where Jens Wildgruber showed his QL in a rack, with a Flashcard in stead of a hard disk. That could make a compact QL, maybe even be put in the black box! Well, if he put in a couple of Compact Flash slots into the machine you could use Hitachi/IBM Microdrives instead of Sinclair Microdrives. ;-) Wouldn't that be cool? A new guts inside a QL case with closer to up-to-date hardware and CF slots where the Microdrives were. ;-) Steve -- --- Nostalgia isn't as good as it used to be. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
Rick Chagouri-Brindle wrote: I think so too . . . looking at it objectively if you replace too much of the original QL you are no longer really using the QL, but the fact that it is still in the black box is subjectively attractive. I wonder if the QL motherboard needs to stay to keep the thing subjectively attractive. Or could the QL be filled with completely new life, just keeping the black case? Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rick Chagouri-Brindle wrote: I think so too . . . looking at it objectively if you replace too much of the original QL you are no longer really using the QL, but the fact that it is still in the black box is subjectively attractive. I wonder if the QL motherboard needs to stay to keep the thing subjectively attractive. Or could the QL be filled with completely new life, just keeping the black case? Peter Now that is an interesting idea . . . in fact that is not something I would be opposed to. I particularly liked the idea of using Compact Flash drives instead of Microdrives . . . very modern but leaning back to the original QL too! ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Réf. : Re: Réf. : Re: Spare GC or SGC?
Alain Hauoi wrote: We have probably need to implement a 2 layers drivers scheme. A general low level driver managing communication protocol and a device driver over this for each kind of periperal/device. I think a scheme like one implemented by T Godefroy for ATAPI protocol (low level) and CD manager (high level - not yet very high ) can be a good general architecture. It is true that available hardware becomes obsolescent in a very short time, but I think that for some categories, things still more generic and more stable. I am thinking about devices, such : - Optical mouse (My real dream for QL) - Storage device (external disks, CD/DVD and card reader/writer) - Twain scanner For others devices like webcams, printers, ... things may be harder to follow. My last thought will be that I am not saying that we must developp a new performant hardware and there is or not a suffisient market..., but if we do, we cannot dont consider implementing an USB port. I am affraid we haven't the choice : there is no more serial mouse, IDE disks are on falling side, centronics/serials printer are now souvenirs Well said, Alain. The problems faced would be big, but I think your suggestions ought to be considered at least. I would not necessarily buy a Hyper-Super-Duper-Ultra Gold Card (Platinum Card?) if it was going to cost me close to the price of a Q60, in which case I'd buy a Q60. If a USB interface were to become available for QL or Aurora and there were scanners, cameras, optical mice etc with drivers for my QL or Aurora with such an interface, then that might persuade me. -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] A QL Trip Down Memory Lane
As an example of variety, I'll mention my confuser (computer :-) room: Three Macs (two of them laptops), two PCs (One 733, the other 133[!], a custom build long ago), and several QLs (many still in styrofoam boxes; one somewhat working). Yes, internet connectivity for four of the above. All as old as about 1999 or farther back, with OS's as old as 98SE or QDOS, or as recent as SuSE 10.x and Mac OS 10.3 . The Macs e.g. have been an education. My life? What life? I have no life. O insuportable! O heavy hour!--Apologies to Messrs. Bill the Bard and Othello. Actually, I _do_ have a life outside computers. Doug L. 37830 Hi Doug, You are right, I have lots of different computers around too, mostly picked up for little actual cost. It is the activity that is the fun, not the OS as such. The so called old computers let you get at them, rather than the new computers which just give you ready made applications. -- Malcolm Cadman My son (age 11) is a good example of what you say. I spend much of my time at work with Windows-based software and [apart from being the office expert :-( fixing the odd glitch] I am purely a user and don't get the same enjoyment of using those computers as I do from my SMSQE/QDOS systems. Whereas my son is quite competent at using the programs on his PC, he takes little or no interest in how it actually works. The applications are what he's into and what he (and his friends) can do with them, whether it be games, digital camera, mp3, etc etc He can't understand why I still use a system which is over 2 decades old when I have a perfectly good fairly modern PC! I've given up trying to explain to him :-) -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] A QL Trip Down Memory Lane
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], extdgl42 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Now: Who knows what secret passages shadows lie in the hearts of QLs. I guess that is what we usually get around to doing on this list ... some of the time ... :-) Seeing all the different systems, including OSs, is part of the fun. But it did my heart good a few nights ago to see the familiar three screen pic for the first time in a year or two, even if it was on a monochrome monitor full of jiggle from the 50/60 problem. Now if I can get a decent monitor (possibly get fixed the Acorn Tony tried to resurrect at QL NA) and a (fully) working set of floppy drives. It would warm the cockles of my little black heart to be able to do large shares of what I currently take PCs and Macs to do on that Little Black Box. Good luck with breathing the life back in to that old QL. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] A QL Trip Down Memory Lane
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] , extdgl42 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Interesting; reminds me I was just on Amazon reading about their history of Commodore. Apple, IBM, M$ et al survived. Commodore was one of the main players early in personal computing, and in fact is said there to have been one of the main reasons Sinclair was knocked out of the game. But the others are remembered and Commodore is not, despite having had many firsts. I don't have the URL right with me, but I expect one can google or search Amazon on computer books and commodore history. Commodore was an important player here is the UK. Eventually they went for the then emerging PC market, and more or less lost out. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rich Mellor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:55:39 -, Malcolm Cadman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, but programs like QWord show that the OS can now do good graphics ... it just needs another platform to run on, at present. That depends on your definition of platform. We decided that a 4 colour version of QWord would not be playable. An 8 colour version was getting there, but you could only have a small grid and so it was fairly pointless. However, with an Aurora motherboard, QPC2 or Qx0, the possibilities were much more hopeful. Heck, we even made certain that it would work on Aurora (plus SGC) without SMSQ/e. It is interesting how new hardware can encourage people to write software - we are working on an IDE / CF adaptor for the Spectrum (the DivIDE Plus) and should actually manage to get this on the market for around £50, with designers in Poland. However, the firmware is based on an earlier device - the authors have been inspired to make use of the additional functionality, but then they do not want payment for their work. Maybe that is the best side of the Sinclair market - people like to see just what can be squeezed out of the old machines. It certainly proves the point that a lot of impressive software could develop, because new hardware gives a new challenge. The problem is that there are no new QL hardware designers and it would be a steep learning curve for anyone who wished to work on a new project. Quanta offered funding to assist with new design, but there has to be the market, willingness and time. Then we need firmware authors - Tony Tebby always seems to have been closely involved in any hardware project since the start of the QL - who else has actual experience of writing firmware for the QL who we could call on? There are plenty of people still using the standard QL, but the figure must be less than 200 and they must feel left behind. Quanta is losing its membership fast, as people realise that they cannot expand their QL any more than they have already (either in terms of software or hardware), and without access to the internet, do not see the still-thriving community - I wonder how many Super Gold Cards lie hidden away in lofts and cupboards forgotten. As you know, SGC's are in demand now ... anyone reading this got one hidden in loft ? -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
- Original Message - From: P Witte To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 9:20 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC? As a final thought Quanta could stimulate this by making a prize (£s X-prize) for the first team to say design and make a prototype processor upgrade add on board or USB driver or whatever, Id vote for Quanta to fund hardware developments, that would be good for the general ambience, even though Im unlikely to buy another piece of QL hardware kit myself. Much as I would like to see Quanta using its capital to fund QL development, I think you have to remain realistic. At QL2004 I spoke to Nasta over how you could finance a new expansion card with the possibility of Quanta financing in mind. His reply was not encouraging. Basically you are in an all or nothing situation. You have to first of design your board on paper and try very hard to make sure it will be a working board. Once you start to actually build the hardware, then you cannot talk in terms of an initial prototype and then later full production. This is, among other things, because the availability and price of chips in in constant flux. If your paper design proves to work in practice, fine. If it doesn't you may be able to get it to work by a bit of tweaking. You can also be in a situation in which you get now return whatsoever on the capital. In other words Quanta could give £5,000 of members' money to develop a card and see no return on that money whatsoever. It would be a very brave committee who would be prepared to take that risk. It certainly would be grossly unfair to expect a committee of just 4 people to take such an important and risky decision, Best Wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
In a message dated 13/02/2007 19:33:40 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If your paper design proves to work in practice, fine. If it doesn't you may be able to get it to work by a bit of tweaking. You can also be in a situation in which you get now return whatsoever on the capital. In other words Quanta could give £5,000 of members' money to develop a card and see no return on that money whatsoever. I agree that a complete design from bottom up could be a risky business but why if one was is not achievable are all other possible routes ruled out. Why not consider adapting commercially available boards. Startup costs of a project could come down to a few hundred pounds plus programming time. Have a look at Bitwise systems site : _https://www.quickusb.com/_ (https://www.quickusb.com/) for $149 dollars you get a USB module that can be adapted to interface to custom systems, board are made with a variety of adaptors. Drivers are supplied in linux windows format with documentation. volume price breaks start at as little as 10 units. Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
Peter Graf wrote: I wonder if the QL motherboard needs to stay to keep the thing subjectively attractive. Or could the QL be filled with completely new life, just keeping the black case? I think that an Aurora card can in principle be built into a QL case, but it's not easy. Probably easier to build it into a PC style case. But it's one way of putting new life in the old black box. As you can't use microdrives with Aurora, that space becomes available and an Aurora, Qubide and SGC would probably fit inside the QL case, probably just the SGC heatsink and the drive and printer connectors protruding. IIRC correctly, the Aurora is slightly narrower than a QL board, so leaves some space for cables etc. I remember there were some power supply issues and the need to modify the ribbon cable connection of the QL keyboard, but the Aurora manual gives some advice on these. But if a 'Super QL' were made to fit the original case, it would of course have nostalgia value, as the original QL case design was one of its great features. -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
Dilwyn Jones wrote: But if a 'Super QL' were made to fit the original case, it would of course have nostalgia value, as the original QL case design was one of its great features. Absolutely . . . are there certainly seems a market for nostalgia at the moment . . . There's a Dutch company that have recreated the MSX micro on tiny bit of kit and the pre-orders for that sold out very quickly. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
On 13 Feb 2007, at 22:06, Dilwyn Jones wrote: But if a 'Super QL' were made to fit the original case, it would of course have nostalgia value, as the original QL case design was one of its great features. If a SuperQL was made as a new motherboard, but incorporating connectors for MDV, using Net connector locations for audio in/out, phonejack connectors (even with adaptors) for USB/Ethernet... I'd pay quite a lot for such a device, especially if it featured space for an internal HD. I'd even be happy for it to use the QL PSU if the power requirements were low enough. Richard -- Tasty Other - Because Far Too Much in Life Makes Sense Music for download - coming soon (RIP MP3.com) G.A.S. http://www.dmc12.demon.co.uk/music/ Platform: PowerMac G5 2.0GHz Dual, 20 LCD, Logic, Hammerfall. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] SDGC
It would be great to be able to fit a PC in a QL case, with a 100% compatible QL emulator running on it and able to access the microdrives (or better 1 mdv and a memory card reader in the right slot) and QL keyboard, plus plenty of USB ports on the back for floppy disks, printers and other devices. Lots of memory and a 1024x768 24 bit mode supported by the OS wouldn't hurt either. Not that it makes any sense (except for the QL case and mdv, you can already get close to this with a Q60 or PC+emulator), but it would be pretty cool! :) Daniele -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] d.com] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 7:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ql-users] SDGC Rick Chagouri-Brindle wrote: I think so too . . . looking at it objectively if you replace too much of the original QL you are no longer really using the QL, but the fact that it is still in the black box is subjectively attractive. I wonder if the QL motherboard needs to stay to keep the thing subjectively attractive. Or could the QL be filled with completely new life, just keeping the black case? Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
