Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

368 Excellent

About 1050

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

10,166 profile views
  1. Just a wild guess, but one tenth of an inch? 2.54 millimeters. Hold up the legs of an IC to the holes and does it match? That's it then. So that's not diagonally of course, you'll need some math there.
  2. I'll always vote for the incompatibility reason. SD in FM and 26 sector per track MFM were "lifted" from 8 inch discs. Put 8 inch topology on a 5 1/4" and you have instant incompatibility with all other players. This is too perfect of a fit to ignore.
  3. It's a mess, but it has the same first sector pretty much as the Happy 7 disk. Then sector 2 is blank and that won't work for a boot sector at ALL. Hyper does replace text in often repeated similar patterns all the way to the end for both discs that make it look like a purposely made to be shit disc. No VTOC, No directory, how does it get this sideways without help? The 1st sector similarity has me thinking do you have the Happy 7 disks and have you tried to boot them? Until we get sector two with something in it and correct the "errors" in sector one which by rough guess would be about 20 bytes, we are not getting very far with this rocket. And then there's this feeling that if you booted Happy 7 you would find it says it's a Happy. So just an outright ripoff that somehow is not qualified for a full copyright infringement effort across the pond due to non working software supplied and on the phone the voice says to use the Happy software and don't bother me again.
  4. Known as bypass capacitors and/or decoupling capacitors, their use is common. One for every chip is the generic rule with some high performance people up sizing the capacity at the same time. Your 104 examples would then be 204 or 304 if you cared to double or triple that actual capacity shunting the noise spikes to ground plane locally. Atari commonly used a chip capacitor inside a glass case with axial leads mounted to the captured chip capacitor inside = insanity on some level. http://docs.eao.hawaii.edu/JCMT/i/012_HARPB/localOscillator/Manufacturers/Phytec/AppNote/Atmel/PLD/doc0484.pdf This note primarily aimed at PLD devices like PAL or GAL, but please note - EVERY chip deserves the upgrades suggested in this application note. This one a little newer, is on about static ram chips. http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/AppNotes/Atmel-8580-TPM-Power-Supply-Decoupling-ApplicationNote.pdf
  5. Clever. With the metal tab installed the step motor hits an OBstackle and reverts to the opposite direction of it's own accord. I would have thought it would be done with software instead myself, but what do I really know or even paid attention too. Nice catch, next time I'm close to one of those I'll see it again for the first time correctly.
  6. I never said that. Up until you mentioned a size range, we were talking about a 576K Peterson as is Peterson. You don't get to count those banks accessible by ANTIC only as a valid CPU bank when you are using it as a ramdisk (CPU driven), UNLESS you forgo the ANTIC access feature in your claims for the upgrade at least to some extent. The 576 Peterson breaks the rules on both sides of the issue. It's only a half assed confusion of either one or the other while in reality being both at the same time. Just adds to the confusion certainly for the new guys. End of the day, Peterson is bragging about the size of his chips used while he does have some ANTIC access but those banks stop at 320K just like the Compy Shop does - but it's still a 576? NO it is not, it's more of a confusion than anything else. No complaints just means that there are no programs that use it as a full ramdisk and an ANTIC only access graphically intensive demo at the same time. Mind you I don't have one, especially the one with the fancy switch you posted above to dig further into the issue that I'm never really worried about in the first place (hi, Mathy:) ). Mathy and I go round and round on this issue since forever it seems (late 90s?), he has his rules and I have mine and we are both very stubborn. Without that program and certainly without the upgrade, I can't flesh it out - this cat doesn't get skinned here - but I have my doubts about it's ANTIC access in the ANTIC access only modes certainly. It seems to me that banks just might be used twice which would result in disaster for the data contained in the expanded memory. Unless you use simple software that never attempts such a thing. That just happens to be the case today, so I would expect no complaints. Just in case anybody didn't hear that, my reservations are based only on the theory of how ANTIC access is supposed to work as is used in the 130XE, and as I and I alone interpret that. So it's just one opinion and not an opinion I'm heavily invested in. When I see the Puff US+ 130XE (320K) with a solder bridge on bit5 to bit4, I tend to wonder how this is a fix for ANTIC access issues in the first place, yet that's the claim. It leaves me wondering what kind of beast he created there and I'm not so sure that's a good fix. I'm also not so sure Peterson can take an XL 576 upgrade, drop it into a 130XE and make the same claim either. I will easily admit it's some kind of mixture, but exactly what to do with that is a dunno for me. I've saved your link to discussion with the extra fancy switch offered up by Peterson. I hope to make one someday but I have zero faith it will be any day soon. Thanks for the link just the same - it's very intriguing.
  7. I feel your pain with real hardware struggles, gianlucarenzi. Best of luck with that issue. I've been to your github posts, but I don't understand C and do my code writing in assembler. BUT I did find out that emulators don't work like they often say they do when counting on the various expanded memory choices we have there. And I haven't tried all emulators either, just Atari800win. Starting at this thread: In the beginning there in that thread, I wasn't aware of the issues of Rambo type extended memory upgrades. First thing I learned is that my emulator was lying to me and I had to "pretend" the code I was writing did what I wanted it too. It often didn't which is why I call for so many screenshots running on real hardware. All I had to work with WAS an emulator, but eventually the code was approved by those running real Rambo upgrades. I have issues with using this upgrade on a 130XE as it has bit 5 use firmly reserved for ANTIC access modes and I have zero confidence one can take an upgrade for a XL and slap it into a XE without issues. I'm thinking there are issues and I have NOT approved the peterson for XE use, even though I've seen some 320K versions that also had the same issues. None of those issues have been cleared up for me, so I fear I'm not going to be able to work up a fix in any case. Much less guide you with pointers in a language I don't understand (C). I don't see how one can use bit5 as a banking byte and have it count as "one more valid" bank, it should be discounted as it's an ANTIC access bank. Yet it's still used for "one more valid bank" counts. I don't understand using both systems and still have both systems work at all. I have no code written to test for these anomalies either. On the XL we don't have ANTIC access MMU (U34), it would seem best to limit the work to that platform. But only sometimes does this seem to be clear path to me. Simply put, I have not resolved my issues in order to voice a clear opinion on the matter. I clearly don't know what to think about it. I'm doing good to detect a genuine Rambo with my code. So such as it is, welcome gianlucarenzi to all you can feast on, glad to have you on board too.
  8. Philsan, Have your friend give these memory testers a try, especially EXTEST.COM inside MEMRAMCHECKTEST.ATR. https://atariage.com/forums/topic/189604-small-thing-memtest-10-1996-jaku-b/?do=findComment&comment=3815398 I was thinking the Peterson was a Rambo knockoff, am I wrong? Again? At any rate EXTEST.COM should exclude the rambo system banks from the list of usable banks and thus be 4 less banks than most other testers, IF that Peterson is a rambo type memory expansion.
  9. The files beyond sector 720 use a second VTOC bit map sector above sector 1023 which DOS 2.0 is completely unaware of. DOS 2.5 shows them with the brackets < > . 1023 sectors was the limit for sector counting as the three end bytes also needed bits for file number merged within the first two bytes of the last three bytes. This left 0x3FF (1023) as the last usable sector. The second VTOC of DOS 2.5 was I believe at sector 1024 and 1025 thru 1040 were wasted space. So many ways it's not so very compatible with any other DOS. But I used the devil out of it in the years before I had a ramdisk.
  10. That was about I had to report to you as well, the identical first page in both files. I wouldn't call it non 6502 code since rarely some is about, but it's not typical of Atari 6502 I'm used to seeing at all. Very little of it would work and that just doesn't seem like memory space compromised op code then. Dunno what to think of it.
  11. Hi Larry, I don't recall where they were going up for sale, when and IF they go up for sale. I'd hate to miss out on my rare chance. Please inform us of exactly where again for some of us with the foggy brain cells again. TIA. Good stuff, dang good stuff.
  12. Please do, I'm all ears. In fact, I'm stuck right here writing the easy to use MyDOS floppy format tool Andreas (CharlieChaplin) is looking for. I don't have a 1.4 meg system set up to read a percom block from but need that data to fold into the oddly used DRVDEF table at 0x07CC which is done by O Change Config menu selection normally. If the DRVDEF table contains the correct information for the drive doing the format, MyDOS will in fact format it and build the proper matching VTOC for it. Currently the only way to do that is via the O Change Config menu. Reading a Percom block from the drive won't do it with MyDOS because of the format bug where the DRVDEF values are written out as a Percom block to the drive FIRST, and even if that fails, a format is attempted without ever correcting the DRVDEF table. As if error checking isn't an option that should exist? Thus writing a percom block to a drive will never work for a subsequent format done on that drive. And this is supposed to be the way it is supposed to work in the land of Atari as I understand it. But it doesn't work at all with MyDOS unless you go manual and use O Change Config first. I'm thinking there is no need to bother with 2,880 k since there are no floppies nor drives available? Even brand new way back when, they didn't work but a couple of times and the drive got returned for defective. Which quickly ran stores out of stock and had angry customers demanding their full money back. Some got their money, most didn't because it was an industry wide hemorrhage of zero drives that could be made to work even for a dozen floppies. They are listed as existing, but today none actually do. AND we don't have a current floppy controller that is capable anyway. Unless I'm wrong in my research, please correct me. Anyone? And TIA for everything.
  13. There is support for 77 track drives which I tend to think might be some flavor of original 8 inch drives, but have nothing other than a hunch about that. And then one can specify huge sector counts in a drive table that lends itself to mounting 16 meg ATR files as one of those drives quite nicely. Perhaps this method of putting in obscene values into the standard configure drive method was meant for "hard drives"? The code for 4.1 (1985) still contained bugs that would not allow full function of a 16 meg drive properly. In 1988 and with 4.50 those bugs were addressed and fixed by Puff. The odd hard drive table above is still in play as well. Larry, you can also press * to get a directory of the default directory, which if it's pointing at some subdirectory can be handy too.
  14. De-labeling is not an obstacle these days with any modern USB eprom programmer of the $40 eBay variety. They have an option of "guess which logic chip this is" and with the help of that testing facility, the number they used to carry can found very easily.
  • Create New...