>the original Apple II. At what point did this family >tree no longer produce Apple II computers? Hmm... These were made by Apple. If Apple called them "Apple II", then they are Apple II's. If Apple would have named the Macintosh also "Apple II", then it would be an Apple II too. ;-) The manufacturer is the issue in my point of view. >That's exactly what were doing here with Jeri's >project you see. We (well, Jeri really) are >integrating discreet components and adding advanced >hardware features. Yes, but AFAIK Jeri is not the CBM (though that wouldn't be a bad thing, right? ;-) Anyway, as I said, her board seems to be so appropriate extension for the C64 (while still keeping most of the backward compatibility), that I can happily consider such a C64 as "real thing." What to say about completely new mainboard, I wouldn't call it a "real" C64. I guess this thing depends very much of individual's own sight. And, of course, this "maybe-not-so-real-C64-if-you-think-so" would be a very fascinating product anyway, though as for myself, I'd prefer an expansion board. >By the way, your definition excludes the C-128 from >the C-64 family because the C-64 motherboard and >keyboard are not present. The C-128 actually uses Of course, because it's a C128, not C64. As more precisely, it's a REAL C128... ;-) -Miika - This message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list. To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe | mail cbm-hackers-request@dot.tml.hut.fi.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.1.1.