In a message dated 15/02/2007 09:40:16 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Seeing all this discussion about possible new hardware etc. and the risks
etc.
is why I've come to the conclusion that there's never going to be any new
hardware. It's just not economically viable:
(a) The
- Original Message -
From: "Malcolm Cadman" <>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
>Well ... 2 years is a long time in computing ... :-) ... so may be some
optimism that new ideas can t
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, gwicks
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>- Original Message -
>From: "Malcolm Cadman" <>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 5:14 PM
>Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
>
&g
Seeing all this discussion about possible new hardware etc. and the risks etc.
is why I've come to the conclusion that there's never going to be any new
hardware. It's just not economically viable:
(a) The cost in time and money to design and build would be high.
(b) The size of the market is too
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
>Hi Roy
>
>I think you too miss some of points I am making.
>
>I am arguing for a continuing mixed economy with a place for both emulators
>and hardware. I do not have a partisan stance on the emulator vs hardware
>debate.
But look at the num
Thing is, there are basically 3 motivations for a developer:
1) The challenge
2) He/she wants the result for him/herself
3) Money
QPC did fit all three of them. But in the case of hardware money
cannot be the motivator because building hardware is expensive and one
can probably be glad to cover c
- Original Message -
From: "Malcolm Cadman" <>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
>In other words Quanta could give £5,000 of members' money to develop a card
>and see n
Hi Roy
I think you too miss some of points I am making.
I am arguing for a continuing mixed economy with a place for both emulators
and hardware. I do not have a partisan stance on the emulator vs hardware
debate.
Other comments on the list I think would support this general position.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
>Hi Per
>
>I think you miss the point sometimes.
>
>You said
>
> "The QL was never only about hardware for quite a number of enthusiasts,
>and therefore it is still going strong in its emulated form. If you want
>the best QL platform money
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, gwicks
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>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 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 cap
- 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 des
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
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 QDO
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 a
On 12 Feb 2007, at 21:20, P Witte wrote:
>
> Wot SMSQ/E license issue? The Qx0 comes with a version of Qdos
> included.
> You could download a copy of the latest SMSQ/E sources and use Qdos to
> assemble your very own version of SMSQ/E. The Registrar has gone to a
> lot of trouble to make this
[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
Le 07-02-12 à 17:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
> Hi Per
>
> I think you miss the point sometimes.
>
> You said
>
> "The QL was never only about hardware for quite a number of
> enthusiasts,
> and therefore it is still going strong in its emulated form. If
> you want
> the best QL platfor
Hi Per
I think you miss the point sometimes.
You said
"The QL was never only about hardware for quite a number of enthusiasts,
and therefore it is still going strong in its emulated form. If you want
the best QL platform money can buy, get QPC2 and stick it in your PC."
For quite a nu
Duncan writes:
<>
While this discussion has been had here numerous times before,
obviously, it is still worth having. However, you say
> Without hardware development QL computing will not survive much longer
> except for retro enthusiasts.
The QL was never only about hardware for quite a numb
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:55:39 -, Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tony Firshman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>> Neil Riley wrote:
>>> Guys,
>>>
>>> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC
>>> ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a
>>> ma
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tony Firshman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Neil Riley wrote:
>> Guys,
>>
>> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC
>> ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a
>> marked jump in performance from SGC and allow
>> for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I drea
> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC
> ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a
> marked jump in performance from SGC and allow
> for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream
> of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on
> a Black box QL.
>
> It is developments like this th
Yes, I could put the program on my site if required.
--
Dilwyn Jones
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Newson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
> Stephen Usher wrote:
Neil Riley wrote:
>>> Guys,
>>>
>>> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC
>>> ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a
>>> marked jump in performance from SGC and allow
>>> for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream
>>> of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on
>>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Riley wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC
> ( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a
> marked jump in performance from SGC and allow
> for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream
> of QL Quake ( wel it is o
Guys,
I would happily fork out £300-350 for a SDGC
( Super Duper GC ) but it would have to be a
marked jump in performance from SGC and allow
for reasonable graphics. Being a gamer I dream
of QL Quake ( wel it is open C source ! ) running on
a Black box QL.
It is developments like this tha
32 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [ql-users] Spare GC or SGC?
>
>Well, here's number 2! Count me in!
>
>Tony Firshman wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>>> Ah there a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>
> If a new Card could hit more like the £100 to £200 price range then I
> believe there would be an interest, and a market for it.
I doubt if it would be economic even at £200. It is likely to be pretty
expensive to develop
Actually, on reflection, count me in for two!!!
Tony Firshman wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>> Ah there are lots of things one could put on it.
>>> However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development.
>>> It would be gr
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tony Firshman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich
>> Mellor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>>
>>> I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to
>>> Stuart about this), but I do wonder ho
Well, here's number 2! Count me in!
Tony Firshman wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>> Ah there are lots of things one could put on it.
>>> However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development.
>>> It would be great to be p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Ah there are lots of things one could put on it.
>> However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development.
>> It would be great to be proved wrong.
>> It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spendi
> There are suppliers who make custom "computer on the board" 68060 systems
> pricipally for industry. To my untrained eye the specs look similar to the
> Qx)
> without the ISA slots.
>
> Would take away the fun of designing a new system but might simplify the
> problem to interfacing to auror
There are suppliers who make custom "computer on the board" 68060 systems
pricipally for industry. To my untrained eye the specs look similar to the Qx)
without the ISA slots.
Would take away the fun of designing a new system but might simplify the
problem to interfacing to aurora/ origina
>Ah there are lots of things one could put on it.
>However I suspect the market does not exist for such a development.
>It would be great to be proved wrong.
>It need maybe 40 to 50 people willing to commit to spending maybe £300
>to £400 each. I am happy to receive commitment emails, and then
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Malcolm Cadman wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich
> Mellor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>> I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to
>> Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be wil
Stephen Usher wrote:
Hi Steve,
...
>>I find with 2M on my GC, data and programs just rattle around inside! Even
>>with the base 128K machine (around 77K(?) free for use) I used to be able to
>>do/run more than I could with a 540K PC. Or are people becoming so
>>"bloatware expecting" that 4M
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich
Mellor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to
>Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing
>to pay £200-£300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50
>b
Robert,
Well, there is another QL + Trump Card owning lurker out here as well...
>Rich Mellor wrote:
>
>> I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to
>> Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing
>> to pay ?200-?300 for a SGC nowa
Rich Mellor wrote:
> I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to
> Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing
> to pay £200-£300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50
> boards to make it worthwhile, I am not certa
> Thank you guys for support! I was thinking that I am the only one
> with
> classic QL here. Nearly everyone here is referring about GC, SGC,
> Aurora, Qubide, QXL, Q60, QPC...
I think it is because people who join a mailing list like this tend to
have the latest products.
I still have a QL (wi
I would be interested in sourcing a new development of SGCs (must write to
Stuart about this), but I do wonder how many people would still be willing
to pay £200-£300 for a SGC nowadays. Certainly with a need to make 50
boards to make it worthwhile, I am not certain there would be a big enou
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, hitchies
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Re: Jan's -
>=
>I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My
>QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX
>emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could
Hello John from Wales, Sergiusz,
> Such an ad. no problem here! But (today) if you find a GC or SGC 'not used'
> you will succeed where many others have failed. But, if so, please reveal
> your source(s) here! :-)
>
> Happy hunting and happy QLing,
>
Thank you guys for support! I was think
Hi
> Hello,
>
> I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My
> QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX
> emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an
> email. Thank you and sorry for ad.
>
> Jan
>
If anyone her
Re: Jan's -
=
I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My
QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX
emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an
email. Thank you and sorry for the ad..
Such an ad
Hello,
I wonder if anyone here has some spare (not used) GC or SGC for sale? My
QL has only superQboard with 512k RAM, which is good, but not enough (ZX
emulator is demanding). I would appreciate if you could drop me an
email. Thank you and sorry for ad.
Jan
___
48 matches
Mail list logo
