Ya. And it’s not from Michigan but Minnesota! You betcha.
-- Chris Elmquist > On Apr 24, 2020, at 7:00 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > >> >>> What in the world is this? > >> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020, Adrian Graham via cctalk wrote: >> It’s a word processor, pure and simple. I have the later version and have >> kind of been collecting tales of the Cassette Power Typing company of >> Michigan - >> http://binarydinosaurs.co.uk/Museum/cpt > > Thank you for a delightful page. I hadn't previously noticed it. > > > Trivial corrections: > > In Nov 2005 update, it says that the 9000 had an 8086 processor. > In Jan 2007 update, it says that Win 3.1 was run on it. > Windows 3.10 required A20 support, and would not run on the 8088/8086, so > that would have had to have been Windows 3.00, > OR the 9000 processor was 80X86, specifically 80286. > OR, the 9000 got a processor update. > (The pictures at the bottom of the page, of ISA boards, are clearly 16 bit > ISA, which would be 80286, not 8086) > > In Sep 2008, Gary Simpson seems to have confused Double-SIDED with > Double-DENSITY. Punching another hole is needed to convert 8" disks back and > forth between single and double SIDED. and is unrelated to density. > He also mentioned 1771 FDC, which was, indeed, FM not MFM. > (He would not be the first person to conflate capacity with density, and > think that using both sides doubled the DENSITY; it doubled the capacity, and > therefore the density of the filing cabinet, but not the "density" of the > recording format.) > > > > At one time, I received a 3.5" double density sample disk that was clearly > labelled "CPT CP/M-80" It was obviously CP/M file system, and I easily > implemented that format in XenoCopy. (It would not have been "easily" if it > weren't CP/M, MS-DOS, Stand-Alone BASIC, P-system, nor TRS-DOS) > Was that a different CPT? Similar three letter name COULD be something else > entirely. > Or had they done some different drives? > Or was that a customer modification? > Gary Simpson mentions 1771 FDC, which was single density only. > Did any of the CP/M models (pre 80x86) have double density? (likely a 179x > FDC, which was an easy upgrade from the 1771, or a whole different FDC, such > as the NEC765). > It didn't HAVE to be pre-80286; it was possible to run a Z80 emulator on PCs, > but few had reason to do so. > > -- > Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
