Re: [Ql-Users] Q68
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Peter Graf wrote: > Mark Martin wrote: > > > Do you have a working 68K core with all the support chips? > > The Q68 is a functional system on a finished PCB, actually running QDOS > Classic and Minerva. > Do you have an estimate of a price range? > > I have spent many hundreds of working hours for the Q68 - for free. > (And by the way, we are not talking some tinkered breadboard, but a > professional PCB design, certainly better than average industry quality.) > > I spent money for tools and prototyping which I do not seek to recover. > You're obviously more than entitled to recuperate your R&D and production costs and make a little for yourself. I just suspect this tiny market may not bear much. From my perspective, Spartan 3E "equivalent" dev boards are less than $100 nowadays, and you have boards like Papilon and the fore-mentioned ArcadeFPGA. That stuff is ubiquitous. I have no doubt your board is better in many respects, but I'm personally not interested in a 200 euro board. Maybe others might be. > > Even if I have to purchase production parts myself (and I'd be glad if > someone else can do that job) I would do it on zero profit basis. > If it's to that stage where you just need to finance a run, I'd be interested in helping participate with that in whatever way you see fit -- I'd rather see something happening today and if that means putting a small investment at some risk to see 0% return for the sake of getting such a board, I'm all ears. > > Given those facts, remarks like "charging for every little thing" are a > way to remove the rest of motivation for QL work I had left. > Oh, please don't mind me. I'm just a putz with little free time and meager ambition. Plus, I'm American, so I'm bound to be full of it. The sad truth is that in just about every other retro community I meagerly participate in, there are lots of open projects. I see so little of that in the QL space, and it saddens me. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QLwIP
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Peter Graf wrote: > > Could it be licensed under an open source license? > > GPL planned. > That's hopeful. What can I do to encourage or support that? > > > If the answer is no, I may be motivated to start an open project if I > could > > find help answering the question of hardware support. To my knowledge, no > > known ethernet capable hardware support exists for any networking library > > on any "QL" platform. > > There are ethernet cards for Q40 and Q60. > QLwIP supports them. > I was hoping for broader support of hardware. It's a broad base to begin with, though, isn't it? There's QL original hardware, QXL, Q40/Q60, Amiga/Atari emulators. Software emulators. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Q68
Am 14.09.2013 23:47, schrieb Marcel Kilgus: > Peter Graf wrote: >> If I find the time to design suitable caches, I expect CPU core speed >> between 32 and 40 MHz. At 20 MHz, the Dhrystone benchmark gave something >> between SuperGoldCard and Q40. >> >> For the general public, I might hold back some design files until >> expenses for manufacturing have been covered. On a personal basis, I can >> be asked for more. > > Wouldn't it make more sense to use an existing board like replay/fpga > arcade, which already incorporates a working 68020 IP core (for AMIGA > /Atari emulation) and apply your knowledge and existing cores there? > Even their first batch consisted of 150 boards, which might be more > than QL users still out there ;) > > Just my 10ct. > > Cheers, Marcel Compared to that beast, the Q68 is a beauty, smaller and less expensive even if we make only 10 ;-) Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Q68
Mark Martin wrote: > Do you have a working 68K core with all the support chips? The Q68 is a functional system on a finished PCB, actually running QDOS Classic and Minerva. > What would > convince you to release that so that efforts could be made to port that to > inexpensive dev kits? Sorry, I can not spend additional time to support even more boards, while having a better, already finished board. I designed the Q68, because those kits were more expensive to manufacture, bigger, and did not contain all the hardware I found suitable. > I know this runs contrary to the current QL culture of charging for every > little thing, but if a semi working core were made available, I'd be > interested in putting what little expertise I have to help finish it. But > only on commodity hardware now that it's becoming ubiquitous (e.g. > arcadefpga) I have spent many hundreds of working hours for the Q68 - for free. (And by the way, we are not talking some tinkered breadboard, but a professional PCB design, certainly better than average industry quality.) I spent money for tools and prototyping which I do not seek to recover. Even if I have to purchase production parts myself (and I'd be glad if someone else can do that job) I would do it on zero profit basis. Given those facts, remarks like "charging for every little thing" are a way to remove the rest of motivation for QL work I had left. Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Q68
Peter Graf wrote: > If I find the time to design suitable caches, I expect CPU core speed > between 32 and 40 MHz. At 20 MHz, the Dhrystone benchmark gave something > between SuperGoldCard and Q40. > > For the general public, I might hold back some design files until > expenses for manufacturing have been covered. On a personal basis, I can > be asked for more. Wouldn't it make more sense to use an existing board like replay/fpga arcade, which already incorporates a working 68020 IP core (for AMIGA /Atari emulation) and apply your knowledge and existing cores there? Even their first batch consisted of 150 boards, which might be more than QL users still out there ;) Just my 10ct. Cheers, Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QLwIP
Mark Martin wrote: > In what state does QLwIP exist today? Undocumented and untouched for many years. Requiring QDOS Classic. > Could it be licensed under an open source license? GPL planned. > If the answer is no, I may be motivated to start an open project if I could > find help answering the question of hardware support. To my knowledge, no > known ethernet capable hardware support exists for any networking library > on any "QL" platform. There are ethernet cards for Q40 and Q60. QLwIP supports them. > I have often pondered what it would take to make > tulip or ne2000 support available for SMSQ on my QXL, but that would > require a working DOS-like build environment and x86 assembly coding > knowledge, neither of which I am enthusiastic about at this moment. tulip or ne2000 support would not be sufficient, as SMSQ/E has no TCP/IP stack. Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[Ql-Users] QLwIP
In what state does QLwIP exist today? Could it be licensed under an open source license? If the answer is no, I may be motivated to start an open project if I could find help answering the question of hardware support. To my knowledge, no known ethernet capable hardware support exists for any networking library on any "QL" platform. I have often pondered what it would take to make tulip or ne2000 support available for SMSQ on my QXL, but that would require a working DOS-like build environment and x86 assembly coding knowledge, neither of which I am enthusiastic about at this moment. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Q68
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Peter Graf wrote: > Malcolm Lear wrote: > > > I really like the idea of the Q68. Of all these options its the only > > one I'd go out and buy. What sort of CPU speed are talking about and > > will the FPGA design files be available to modify? > > If I find the time to design suitable caches, I expect CPU core speed > between 32 and 40 MHz. At 20 MHz, the Dhrystone benchmark gave something > between SuperGoldCard and Q40. > > For the general public, I might hold back some design files until > expenses for manufacturing have been covered. On a personal basis, I can > be asked for more. > > I'm also considering to release the board schematics at some point. In > this case, a person with FPGA skills could use the board for general > purposes. For example, I have successfully tried two different RISC CPUs > on the Q68, but I did not design any memory or video controllers for those. > Do you have a working 68K core with all the support chips? What would convince you to release that so that efforts could be made to port that to inexpensive dev kits? I know this runs contrary to the current QL culture of charging for every little thing, but if a semi working core were made available, I'd be interested in putting what little expertise I have to help finish it. But only on commodity hardware now that it's becoming ubiquitous (e.g. arcadefpga) ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
I agree with Derek ... ;-) <> Il giorno 14/set/2013, alle ore 20:53, "Derek Stewart" ha scritto: > On 14/09/13 13:53, Peter Graf wrote: >> Hi, >> >> since the turn of the century, I invested a lot of time into some QL >> hardware and software projects. Except the Q60 Graphics Card, all of >> them actually worked, and have been shown to a few friends. >> >> I didn't have the motivation to finish them. For a long time, the reason >> was that I saw the requirement for a free QL operating system first. I >> spent time on that area, trying to help others who had a similar goal. >> But we did noch achieve a breakthrough, and my other projects suffered. >> >> Life has changed, time has become even shorter nowadays. It is >> absolutely unrealistic that all my projects can be released someday. But >> maybe I can rescue at least *one* of them, before all work is lost forever. >> >> Everything related to my Coldfire based Q60 successor makes no sense >> anymore. The point was high speed, but todays PCs are so fast that >> emulation easily beats it. Here are those projects which might still >> have relevance: >> >> * QLwIP: QL native TCP/IP support, and some applications for it like >> email, webserver, browser etc. >> >> * QLPUI: A modern GUI for QDOS, with themes and proportional fonts. Runs >> on native hardware and on emulators. A simple demo can be found at >> http://terdina.net/ql/software.html >> >> * Q60 Graphics Card: Flatscreen monitor support and other improvements >> for the Q60 >> >> * QLMMC: An SD/MMC card adaptor for the parallel port of Q60 and >> SuperGoldCard, easy to plug in, but speed only similar to floppy >> >> * QLSD: Internal SDHC card "harddisk" for the original QL, using the >> microdrive slots >> >> * Q68: Native QL computer on a 8x10 cm board, flatscreen support, SDHC >> cards, sound, SER, ethernet. CPU is within an FPGA chip. Runs both QDOS >> Classic and Minerva. The operating systems themselves seem to work >> allright by now, also Basic and some programs. Other programs might >> never work, I suspect further bugs in the CPU. >> >> Which project deserves a seat in the lifeboat? Which one would *you* >> prefer to see finished - even if it comes with limitations? >> >> All the best >> Peter >> ___ >> QL-Users Mailing List >> http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm > Hi, > > I think: > > 1: Q68 > 2: QLMMC > 3: QLwIP/QLPUI > 4: QLSD or Q60 Grpahics Card > > So basically I think all should be done. > > regards, > > Derek > ___ > 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] A seat in the lifeboat?
On 14/09/13 13:53, Peter Graf wrote: Hi, since the turn of the century, I invested a lot of time into some QL hardware and software projects. Except the Q60 Graphics Card, all of them actually worked, and have been shown to a few friends. I didn't have the motivation to finish them. For a long time, the reason was that I saw the requirement for a free QL operating system first. I spent time on that area, trying to help others who had a similar goal. But we did noch achieve a breakthrough, and my other projects suffered. Life has changed, time has become even shorter nowadays. It is absolutely unrealistic that all my projects can be released someday. But maybe I can rescue at least *one* of them, before all work is lost forever. Everything related to my Coldfire based Q60 successor makes no sense anymore. The point was high speed, but todays PCs are so fast that emulation easily beats it. Here are those projects which might still have relevance: * QLwIP: QL native TCP/IP support, and some applications for it like email, webserver, browser etc. * QLPUI: A modern GUI for QDOS, with themes and proportional fonts. Runs on native hardware and on emulators. A simple demo can be found at http://terdina.net/ql/software.html * Q60 Graphics Card: Flatscreen monitor support and other improvements for the Q60 * QLMMC: An SD/MMC card adaptor for the parallel port of Q60 and SuperGoldCard, easy to plug in, but speed only similar to floppy * QLSD: Internal SDHC card "harddisk" for the original QL, using the microdrive slots * Q68: Native QL computer on a 8x10 cm board, flatscreen support, SDHC cards, sound, SER, ethernet. CPU is within an FPGA chip. Runs both QDOS Classic and Minerva. The operating systems themselves seem to work allright by now, also Basic and some programs. Other programs might never work, I suspect further bugs in the CPU. Which project deserves a seat in the lifeboat? Which one would *you* prefer to see finished - even if it comes with limitations? All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Hi, I think: 1: Q68 2: QLMMC 3: QLwIP/QLPUI 4: QLSD or Q60 Grpahics Card So basically I think all should be done. regards, Derek ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
I will choose preferably, what noone else is able to finish. SD card interafce can be created by someone else. But complete new QL machine cannot be finished by everyone. Then, I choose Q68 as no. 1 and QLwIP as no. 2. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Q68
On 14/09/2013 15:41, Peter Graf wrote: Malcolm Lear wrote: I really like the idea of the Q68. Of all these options its the only one I'd go out and buy. What sort of CPU speed are talking about and will the FPGA design files be available to modify? If I find the time to design suitable caches, I expect CPU core speed between 32 and 40 MHz. At 20 MHz, the Dhrystone benchmark gave something between SuperGoldCard and Q40. For the general public, I might hold back some design files until expenses for manufacturing have been covered. On a personal basis, I can be asked for more. I'm also considering to release the board schematics at some point. In this case, a person with FPGA skills could use the board for general purposes. For example, I have successfully tried two different RISC CPUs on the Q68, but I did not design any memory or video controllers for those. Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm That's excellent Peter, thanks! ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
Ciao, I vote 1st for Q68 and 2nd for QLwIP Fabrizio ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
-Original Message- >From: Peter Graf >Sent: Sep 14, 2013 8:53 AM >To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com >Subject: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat? > >Hi, > >since the turn of the century, I invested a lot of time into some QL >hardware and software projects. Except the Q60 Graphics Card, all of >them actually worked, and have been shown to a few friends. > >I didn't have the motivation to finish them. For a long time, the reason >was that I saw the requirement for a free QL operating system first. I >spent time on that area, trying to help others who had a similar goal. >But we did noch achieve a breakthrough, and my other projects suffered. > >Life has changed, time has become even shorter nowadays. It is >absolutely unrealistic that all my projects can be released someday. But >maybe I can rescue at least *one* of them, before all work is lost forever. > >Everything related to my Coldfire based Q60 successor makes no sense >anymore. The point was high speed, but todays PCs are so fast that >emulation easily beats it. Here are those projects which might still >have relevance: > >* QLwIP: QL native TCP/IP support, and some applications for it like >email, webserver, browser etc. > >* QLPUI: A modern GUI for QDOS, with themes and proportional fonts. Runs >on native hardware and on emulators. A simple demo can be found at >http://terdina.net/ql/software.html > >* Q60 Graphics Card: Flatscreen monitor support and other improvements >for the Q60 > >* QLMMC: An SD/MMC card adaptor for the parallel port of Q60 and >SuperGoldCard, easy to plug in, but speed only similar to floppy > >* QLSD: Internal SDHC card "harddisk" for the original QL, using the >microdrive slots > >* Q68: Native QL computer on a 8x10 cm board, flatscreen support, SDHC >cards, sound, SER, ethernet. CPU is within an FPGA chip. Runs both QDOS >Classic and Minerva. The operating systems themselves seem to work >allright by now, also Basic and some programs. Other programs might >never work, I suspect further bugs in the CPU. > >Which project deserves a seat in the lifeboat? Which one would *you* >prefer to see finished - even if it comes with limitations? > >All the best >Peter >___ >QL-Users Mailing List >http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm QLwIP! Doug LaVerne 37830 USA Ql Forever into the Modern Day even if BBx ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[Ql-Users] Q68
Malcolm Lear wrote: > I really like the idea of the Q68. Of all these options its the only > one I'd go out and buy. What sort of CPU speed are talking about and > will the FPGA design files be available to modify? If I find the time to design suitable caches, I expect CPU core speed between 32 and 40 MHz. At 20 MHz, the Dhrystone benchmark gave something between SuperGoldCard and Q40. For the general public, I might hold back some design files until expenses for manufacturing have been covered. On a personal basis, I can be asked for more. I'm also considering to release the board schematics at some point. In this case, a person with FPGA skills could use the board for general purposes. For example, I have successfully tried two different RISC CPUs on the Q68, but I did not design any memory or video controllers for those. Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
Hi Peter, Re: I invested a lot of time into some QL hardware and software projects. but todays PCs are so fast that emulation easily beats it. -- Many thanks for your extensive work for the QL community. Alas it seem to be true that 'todays PCs are so fast that emulation easily beats it'; and I have no 'lifeboat' preferences. But I do send my best wishes for the more circumspection future. John in Wales ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
Q68 > Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 14:53:58 +0200 > From: pg...@q40.de > To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com > Subject: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat? > > Hi, > > since the turn of the century, I invested a lot of time into some QL > hardware and software projects. Except the Q60 Graphics Card, all of > them actually worked, and have been shown to a few friends. > > I didn't have the motivation to finish them. For a long time, the reason > was that I saw the requirement for a free QL operating system first. I > spent time on that area, trying to help others who had a similar goal. > But we did noch achieve a breakthrough, and my other projects suffered. > > Life has changed, time has become even shorter nowadays. It is > absolutely unrealistic that all my projects can be released someday. But > maybe I can rescue at least *one* of them, before all work is lost forever. > > Everything related to my Coldfire based Q60 successor makes no sense > anymore. The point was high speed, but todays PCs are so fast that > emulation easily beats it. Here are those projects which might still > have relevance: > > * QLwIP: QL native TCP/IP support, and some applications for it like > email, webserver, browser etc. > > * QLPUI: A modern GUI for QDOS, with themes and proportional fonts. Runs > on native hardware and on emulators. A simple demo can be found at > http://terdina.net/ql/software.html > > * Q60 Graphics Card: Flatscreen monitor support and other improvements > for the Q60 > > * QLMMC: An SD/MMC card adaptor for the parallel port of Q60 and > SuperGoldCard, easy to plug in, but speed only similar to floppy > > * QLSD: Internal SDHC card "harddisk" for the original QL, using the > microdrive slots > > * Q68: Native QL computer on a 8x10 cm board, flatscreen support, SDHC > cards, sound, SER, ethernet. CPU is within an FPGA chip. Runs both QDOS > Classic and Minerva. The operating systems themselves seem to work > allright by now, also Basic and some programs. Other programs might > never work, I suspect further bugs in the CPU. > > Which project deserves a seat in the lifeboat? Which one would *you* > prefer to see finished - even if it comes with limitations? > > All the best > 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
Re: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
On 14/09/2013 13:53, Peter Graf wrote: Hi, since the turn of the century, I invested a lot of time into some QL hardware and software projects. Except the Q60 Graphics Card, all of them actually worked, and have been shown to a few friends. I didn't have the motivation to finish them. For a long time, the reason was that I saw the requirement for a free QL operating system first. I spent time on that area, trying to help others who had a similar goal. But we did noch achieve a breakthrough, and my other projects suffered. Life has changed, time has become even shorter nowadays. It is absolutely unrealistic that all my projects can be released someday. But maybe I can rescue at least *one* of them, before all work is lost forever. Everything related to my Coldfire based Q60 successor makes no sense anymore. The point was high speed, but todays PCs are so fast that emulation easily beats it. Here are those projects which might still have relevance: * QLwIP: QL native TCP/IP support, and some applications for it like email, webserver, browser etc. * QLPUI: A modern GUI for QDOS, with themes and proportional fonts. Runs on native hardware and on emulators. A simple demo can be found at http://terdina.net/ql/software.html * Q60 Graphics Card: Flatscreen monitor support and other improvements for the Q60 * QLMMC: An SD/MMC card adaptor for the parallel port of Q60 and SuperGoldCard, easy to plug in, but speed only similar to floppy * QLSD: Internal SDHC card "harddisk" for the original QL, using the microdrive slots * Q68: Native QL computer on a 8x10 cm board, flatscreen support, SDHC cards, sound, SER, ethernet. CPU is within an FPGA chip. Runs both QDOS Classic and Minerva. The operating systems themselves seem to work allright by now, also Basic and some programs. Other programs might never work, I suspect further bugs in the CPU. Which project deserves a seat in the lifeboat? Which one would *you* prefer to see finished - even if it comes with limitations? All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm I really like the idea of the Q68. Of all these options its the only one I'd go out and buy. What sort of CPU speed are talking about and will the FPGA design files be available to modify? Cheers, Malcolm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
Hi Peter, All of them, probably! My first choice would probably be QLwIP and applications, to give the QL a chance to get on the internet. Second choice: I would really like the QLSD project to see the light of day. Dilwyn Jones Which project deserves a seat in the lifeboat? Which one would *you* prefer to see finished - even if it comes with limitations? All the best 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
[Ql-Users] A seat in the lifeboat?
Hi, since the turn of the century, I invested a lot of time into some QL hardware and software projects. Except the Q60 Graphics Card, all of them actually worked, and have been shown to a few friends. I didn't have the motivation to finish them. For a long time, the reason was that I saw the requirement for a free QL operating system first. I spent time on that area, trying to help others who had a similar goal. But we did noch achieve a breakthrough, and my other projects suffered. Life has changed, time has become even shorter nowadays. It is absolutely unrealistic that all my projects can be released someday. But maybe I can rescue at least *one* of them, before all work is lost forever. Everything related to my Coldfire based Q60 successor makes no sense anymore. The point was high speed, but todays PCs are so fast that emulation easily beats it. Here are those projects which might still have relevance: * QLwIP: QL native TCP/IP support, and some applications for it like email, webserver, browser etc. * QLPUI: A modern GUI for QDOS, with themes and proportional fonts. Runs on native hardware and on emulators. A simple demo can be found at http://terdina.net/ql/software.html * Q60 Graphics Card: Flatscreen monitor support and other improvements for the Q60 * QLMMC: An SD/MMC card adaptor for the parallel port of Q60 and SuperGoldCard, easy to plug in, but speed only similar to floppy * QLSD: Internal SDHC card "harddisk" for the original QL, using the microdrive slots * Q68: Native QL computer on a 8x10 cm board, flatscreen support, SDHC cards, sound, SER, ethernet. CPU is within an FPGA chip. Runs both QDOS Classic and Minerva. The operating systems themselves seem to work allright by now, also Basic and some programs. Other programs might never work, I suspect further bugs in the CPU. Which project deserves a seat in the lifeboat? Which one would *you* prefer to see finished - even if it comes with limitations? All the best Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
