Thinking of a scanner
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Iphoto 08 to iPhoto 09
Next: Apple Tech Support?
From: Jim on 25 Feb 2010 06:03 On 2010-02-25, Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> > Was Jupiter the one that ran Fortran or was that something else of the >> > period? >> >> Forth, wasn't it? > > Wasn't there a plugin chip that, with some surgery involved like getting > inside, would turn the ZX-81 into a Forth machine? <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?title=Talk:Sinclair_ZX81#FORTH_ROM> So it would seem that there were adverts for it, at least. Jim -- http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk http://twitter.com/GreyAreaUK "Get over here. Now. Might be advisable to wear brown trousers and a shirt the colour of blood." Malcolm Tucker, "The Thick of It"
From: Duncan Kennedy on 25 Feb 2010 06:04 In message <1jegu9z.1jzfov51ro1s5cN%peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk>, Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> writes >Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> > Was Jupiter the one that ran Fortran or was that something else of the >> > period? >> >> Forth, wasn't it? > >Wasn't there a plugin chip that, with some surgery involved like getting >inside, would turn the ZX-81 into a Forth machine? That sounds familiar. There is still a ZX81 web site somewhere. -- Duncan K Downtown Dalgety Bay
From: Chris Ridd on 25 Feb 2010 06:05 On 2010-02-25 10:56:27 +0000, Peter Ceresole said: > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >>> Was Jupiter the one that ran Fortran or was that something else of the >>> period? >> >> Forth, wasn't it? > > Wasn't there a plugin chip that, with some surgery involved like getting > inside, would turn the ZX-81 into a Forth machine? IIRC Forth interpreters are usually quite small, which is why Forth is (or was) quite popular in low-memory environments like Open Firmware (PPC Macs, Sun SPARCs) and apparently things like telescopes. I don't see why you couldn't make a zx81 do Forth, but whether that needed an extra chip or not I don't know. Apart from memory, I don't see why it would have needed extra hardware. -- Chris
From: Woody on 25 Feb 2010 06:25 Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > On 2010-02-25, Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > >> > > >> > Yes. I was confusing the processor with the Worst Keyboard In The World > >> > machine. > >> > >> That would be either the Speccy or the Mattel Aquarius. Both 'dead > >> flesh'-style keyboards. > >> > >> But the clincher would be the Jupiter Ace - a dead flesh keyboard in a very > >> flimsy case. > > > > I don't know, the oric atmos keyboard got a bit tiring after a while. > > The Oric *Atmos* keyboard was a rather nice full travel one. Tad small, but > a good feel. > > The Oric *1* keyboard was those thin, calculator-style keys that started > hurting after about 10 minutes. Oh yes, it was the 1. The light coloured one, the atmos was later wasn't it. -- Woody
From: Peter Ceresole on 25 Feb 2010 06:27
Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?title=Talk:Sinclair_ZX81#FORTH_ROM> > > So it would seem that there were adverts for it, at least. I saw several- which was my only contact with the Forth ROM. -- Peter |