IMG_20180904_205018.jpg
You will not be able to post if you are still using Microsoft email addresses such as Hotmail etc
See here for more information viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7296
See here for more information viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7296
BOOKMARK THIS PAGE !
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk:8085/IP_CHECK/
You can unban yourself if needed. It also sends me reports to investigate the ban.
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk:8085/IP_CHECK/
You can unban yourself if needed. It also sends me reports to investigate the ban.
DO NOT USE MOBILE / CGNAT DEVICES WHERE THE IP CHANGES CONSTANTLY!
At this time, it is unfortunately not possible to whitelist users when your IP changes constantly.
You may inadvertently get banned because a previous attack may have used the IP you are now on.
So I suggest people only use fixed IP address devices until I can think of a solution for this problem!
At this time, it is unfortunately not possible to whitelist users when your IP changes constantly.
You may inadvertently get banned because a previous attack may have used the IP you are now on.
So I suggest people only use fixed IP address devices until I can think of a solution for this problem!
CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
-
sandord
- Posts: 763
- Joined: 13 Aug 2018 22:08
- Location: The Netherlands
CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
sandord
- Posts: 763
- Joined: 13 Aug 2018 22:08
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
I wonder what this is about:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
sandord
- Posts: 763
- Joined: 13 Aug 2018 22:08
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
Unlabeled TOS chips is also something I haven't seen before:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
exxos
- Site Admin
- Posts: 28224
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
Its common bodge.. I think Atari missed 5V off a chip or something.. did look into it but cant exactly remember.
-
rubber_jonnie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14816
- Joined: 17 Aug 2017 19:40
- Location: Essex
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
I think it needs a blitter ;)
Collector of many retro things!
800XL and 65XE both with Ultimate1MB,VBXL/XE & PokeyMax, SIDE3, SDrive Max, 2x 1010 cassette, 2x 1050 one with Happy mod, 3x 2600 Jr, 7800 and Lynx II
Approx 20 STs, including a 520 STM, 520 STFMs, 3x Mega ST, MSTE & 2x 32 Mhz boosted STEs
Plus the rest, totalling around 50 machines including a QL, 3x BBC Model B, Electron, Spectrums, ZX81 etc...
800XL and 65XE both with Ultimate1MB,VBXL/XE & PokeyMax, SIDE3, SDrive Max, 2x 1010 cassette, 2x 1050 one with Happy mod, 3x 2600 Jr, 7800 and Lynx II
Approx 20 STs, including a 520 STM, 520 STFMs, 3x Mega ST, MSTE & 2x 32 Mhz boosted STEs
Plus the rest, totalling around 50 machines including a QL, 3x BBC Model B, Electron, Spectrums, ZX81 etc...
-
sandord
- Posts: 763
- Joined: 13 Aug 2018 22:08
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
It sure does 😉😉
-
Tophe38
- Posts: 17
- Joined: 02 Sep 2018 19:11
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
Your TOS rom are standard part number. It's simply mask rom, not (homemade) EPROM ;)
Tophe
Tophe
-
sandord
- Posts: 763
- Joined: 13 Aug 2018 22:08
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
So that must mean that most roms I have seen were upgrades.Tophe38 wrote: 05 Sep 2018 08:36 Your TOS rom are standard part number. It's simply mask rom, not (homemade) EPROM ;)
Tophe
-
Tophe38
- Posts: 17
- Joined: 02 Sep 2018 19:11
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
If it's EPROM with sticker on glass, yes it is.
It's easy and cheap and legal. I have done it on all my STE, even with a switch to change between 1.62 and 2.06.
It's easy and cheap and legal. I have done it on all my STE, even with a switch to change between 1.62 and 2.06.
-
JezC
- Posts: 2774
- Joined: 28 Aug 2017 23:44
Re: CO70789 - 001 REV. C1
Just noticed that one of my 1040 STFs has this PCB but has TOS 1.00 in 6x ROMs fitted...all my other STFs have the C707523 motherboards.
That's the first of my C070789 boards without the modulator & with TOS 1.00 (the others all have 2x chip TOS 1.02) so I'm guessing that this was probably a late 1040 STF (shortly before the 1040 STFM was released)?
It's still a long eject button model.
The only problem with the system is that the floppy eject spring seems to be weak (so the drive only stays in the eject position for a few seconds & then it sticks the eject button out again)...a bit of a hassle but nothing too serious (just yet).
That's the first of my C070789 boards without the modulator & with TOS 1.00 (the others all have 2x chip TOS 1.02) so I'm guessing that this was probably a late 1040 STF (shortly before the 1040 STFM was released)?
It's still a long eject button model.
The only problem with the system is that the floppy eject spring seems to be weak (so the drive only stays in the eject position for a few seconds & then it sticks the eject button out again)...a bit of a hassle but nothing too serious (just yet).
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CCBot and 1 guest