Hi,
Has somebody a mouse for the PCW16?
Would be great to get one!
Is the port specific to the PCW?
Quote from: Gryzor on 17:20, 21 April 11
Is the port specific to the PCW?
The physical plug is (like I know) not specific. But the way the mouse transfers data is specific.
Well, I tried to connect a common available mouse, but in this case the mouse arrow just jumps to the corner of the screen.
IMHO a PCW16 mouse is needed. But I got no idea where to get if from. You can use the Roseanne OS by keys too, but it's like using Windows without a mouse - just a pain.
What are the different plugs ? (DIN ? other ? )
If you can find the connectics, you can certainly craft some adapter for common mouses from this era... Atari ST mouse per example...
Quote from: MacDeath on 17:02, 23 April 11
What are the different plugs ? (DIN ? other ? )
If you can find the connectics, you can certainly craft some adapter for common mouses from this era... Atari ST mouse per example...
Hehe! The British won't take DIN, but DIN would be good for the whole world ;-)
No, seriously, it's a serial mouse. I have to make a picture or so.
Any PcW16 User here ???
Rarer than PLUS'.
Sorry to up this topic...threadomancy.
I was wonderning about this PcW16.
it's main problem seems that its OS is somewhat closed... it even don't really enable software to be ran from disk apparently.
but as it is still a Z80 machine, would it be possible to get something like SymbOS running on it ?
or any new os, perhaps even CP/M ?
one of the main reason it is not compatible may be the display.
While CP/M, PCW and most other Z80 machines were like 640x200 or 720x256 (older PCW or CPC in full screen could do that)... a 640x480 would prouve quite uncompatible (480/2 = 240, not 256...) and not sure the Monochrome VGA like display (or perhaps Atari ST like in monocolour hi-res monitor) would handle well a 640x200 unless a proper emulation could be performed.*
Also the machine seems to lack a proper extension port (printer and parallel though)
BTW I'd like to know wheter the MAinboard is prone to be upgraded (hack-hardware) or not...
But i couldn't find any site with screenshots from the electronic inside not informations on this.
I mean, if you could hack it into having more RAM, good OS, extension port, perhaps external monitor or HDD, this could be sweet...
Extra point if a more CPC like display could be got... (PLUS' ASIC transplantation anyone ??? :D )
But I suspect a small "modern" Motherboard with close to no free room not extensions ports possible and small surface mounted components... ouch...
Anyway it was said to have a
Rescue Disk which enable to re-flash the OS or even get some updates.
The PCW16 (http://members.iinet.net.au/%7Edaveb/cpm/pcw16.html)
QuoteMemory is 1Mb of RAM, and 1Mb of Flash (similar to a non-volatile RAMdisc) which contains the BIOS, Rosanne, and the built-in software. Most of the Flash memory can be updated using software, but the first 64k (which contains the BIOS) can only be altered by plugging a reprogramming cartridge into the underside of the PCW.
QuoteThere is space on the main circuit board for an extra 1Mb RAM, an extra 1Mb flash, a hard drive interface and an interface to a colour VGA monitor. These would probably have to be fitted professionally. There is no expansion port as such; any expansion would have to be done either via the parallel port, or through the reprogramming socket in the base.
apparently, it can really be somewhat upgraded a bit, with HDD and proper VGA.
QuoteThis information is derived simply from seeing three PCW16s demonstrated at the Crawley PCW Club. Any inaccuracies are my own fault.
Hope he wasn't wrong then concerning the VGA and HDD.
QuoteWith detailed knowledge of Rosanne, it would probably be easy to implement a basic CP/M 2 BIOS for it. One point to note is that "common memory" is at the bottom of the memory map rather than the top, and a hypothetical CP/M BIOS would have to perform paging gymnastics to translate CP/M BIOS calls into Rosanne calls.
Good point the machine is in 16mhz, but I would be curious to know how the video is handled, I mean it is quite Hi-resolution so it can even be heavy compaired to a CPC... (32K VRAM ? perhaps even a bit more like 40K ?)
still lurking a bit more...
OLD-COMPUTERS.COM : The Museum (http://www.old-computers.com/museum/photos.asp?t=1&c=52&st=1)
(http://www.old-computers.com/museum/photos/Amstrad_PCW16_Mainboard_s1.jpg)
Quote> MOTHERBOARD
Only two chips provide all the internal functions of the PCW-16, a Winbond I/O chip and an Amstrad custom chip.
Provision is made for additional RAM and Flash RAM as well as a possible hard disk interface.
(1) 1 MB RAM chips. Provision is made for a second 1 MB RAM bank
(2) A trap door, allowed to insert a ROM chip from underneath the computer. However, in this version, the location is empty, no socket is soldered
(3) 1 MB Intel Flash RAM chip
(4) Custom Amstrad chip. Holds a 16 MHz Z80 CPU, video interface, addresses and data bus management
(5) Winbond 83787 I/O chip. One found this chip in numerous PC compatible I/O cards
(6) Provision is made for additional Flash RAM chips
(7) Provision is also made for either a second floppy drive, or an hard disk drive
( 8) Video output connector
(9) FDD power connector
(10) Power supply connector
(11) Backup battery and buzzer.
looks like having a lot of unused chips sockets...
reminds me my old 520STF motherboard lol (actually have all places for STE upgrades but weren't put until the real STE)
(http://www.old-computers.com/museum/photos/Amstrad_PCW16_RomTrap_s1.jpg)
Quote> UNDERNEATH TRAP DOOR
Among the numerous expansions planned by Amstrad, this trap door allowed a ROM chip and a connector to be added.
(http://www.old-computers.com/museum/photos/Amstrad_PCW16_Keyboard_s2.jpg)
Quote> KEYBOARD CLOSE-UP
The keyboard was a colored version of a standard PC-AT model. Each fuction key allowed a software module to be called. Four-color keys was used to manage system windows.
This keyboard alone is cute and awesome...
Ok from what it looks, one big ASIC seems to contain the CPU and the video system.
So upgrade it into a "superCPC" may not be that possible...
Anyway, a proper OS with old PCW compatibilities, and 2 diskdrives+HDD, max RAM/Flash and so on would be great enough.
Looks like there is free space for a 15pin connector on the back too...(beteween mouse and keyboard plugs)
What would it be ?
VGA port ?
PcW16 Rosanne (http://www.fvempel.nl/pcw16.html)
QuoteThe three-button mouse in close-up with the communication ports in the background. The mouse uses a standard serial port and has a MS/PC mode switch, thus indicating that it could be PC-compatible (I did not test this yet). The screws allow for a solid connection.
The keyboard featuring 102 keys, plugs in using a standard PS/2 connector on the back and is compatible indeed, though it should be noted that the Rosanne software keeps on requesting you to hit the 'yellow' key or to use the mouse! Fortunately (and that does depend on your taste and experience) most shortcuts correspond to the Windows convention.
Quote from: MacDeath on 12:28, 26 March 12
but as it is still a Z80 machine, would it be possible to get something like SymbOS running on it ?
or any new os, perhaps even CP/M ?
You can run CP/M as an application under Roseanne. She is a wonderful OS, and SOS hardly can compete with her. Sorry, no offense. I know it's hard to get docs for Roseanne, but it's a really great and real OS!
Wow, lovely pics there... I guess Amstrad produced these themselves?
A shame that Amstrad don't put the same 16Mhz CPU into the CPC+ range. >:(
Quote from: TotO on 18:38, 27 March 12
A shame that Amstrad don't put the same 16Mhz CPU into the CPC+ range. >:(
Thanks' god they did not! I like my undocumented and illegal opcodes ;) Actually they should have used the Z380 CPU.
According to what I posted, there is not a "real" Z80 inside the machine but an Asic containing an overclocked Z80 alongside the Video system (and perhaps other stuffs...).
Quote from: TFM/FS on 21:56, 27 March 12Thanks' god they did not! I like my undocumented and illegal opcodes ;)
I would have prefered to get a famous 16MHz CPC+ with 3"1/2 disk for all, instead of the existing one.
Quote from: MacDeath on 23:34, 27 March 12
According to what I posted, there is not a "real" Z80 inside the machine but an Asic containing an overclocked Z80 alongside the Video system (and perhaps other stuffs...).
Exactly! And this ASIC lacks some of the illegal Z80 instructions. (I'm not talking about the undocumented thought, that's a difference).
Quote from: TotO on 08:36, 28 March 12
I would have prefered to get a famous 16MHz CPC+ with 3"1/2 disk for all, instead of the existing one.
Well, we all have dreams :) However in this case I would rather take a Z80H instead of the ASIC implementation of the Z80.
On the other hand it's not too late to create a CPC++ or CPC#.
Sure, it's not.
Quote from: TotO on 20:38, 28 March 12
Sure, it's not.
A serious team would be needed. People who can follow a project a longer time and do not loose interrest after 6 months. We do have a lack in hardware people though. No offense to anybody, but at the moment I only have Bryce and Nilquader in mine. (There are others too, but they don't even have time to post much here).... just thinking...
The Z80 in an ASIC? Doesn't this run contrary to the "App-Specific" part of ASIC? :D Or was it so cheap and powerful by then that it was easier to do it this way?
A kind of emulated Z80 then... is this a usual practice?
Steve, do you know the v6z80p (http://www.retroleum.co.uk/v6z80p/)? Include the most part of your ideas and even has a speccy mode.
Yes, I do know about that one, but it is not (yet) CPC compatible, we spend a lot of our time complaining about "speccy ports" so why would I want a speccy compatible? :laugh: .
Perhaps of more interest is his board using the eZ80, which should be 50 times faster than the z80 used in the CPC, but again not CPC compatible but a better starting point for someone who knows how to program FPGA's. :D
FPGA is one solution. See CPC core in the C-One or T-Rex1
However I would prefer a real Z80 or successor, which only can be the eZ80 today. The eZ80 will give us some problems with the I/O, but nothing that couldn't be handled.
About the Z80, not 3.3 MHz. The CPC runs it a 4 MHz, but with prolonged cycles. If you would use a 3.3 MHz speed, it would screw up timings.
But this is all offtopic, let me open a new thread for that...
Quote from: steve on 20:32, 29 March 12
;D Yes i know that but it is reduced to 3.3Mhz by the video timing, we would have to do the same for software to run at the proper speed if the software used software timing loops Etc.
No, sorry! But 3.3 comes just close. For example a ld a,b is 1 ys in CPC, but 1.2 ys on a 3.3 mhz z80. It's all not that easy.
All my NOPs run to 4MHz ;D , and the same happen with other few z80 instructions ;)
Quote from: SyX on 13:37, 30 March 12
All my NOPs run to 4MHz ;D , and the same happen with other few z80 instructions ;)
Exactly, and 3.3 MHz would make all the NOPs tooooo long. So while you do nothing you would waste a lot of time by doing nothing :laugh:
Instead of arguing over trivialities, you could explain how you would get the Z80 to run at the same speed as it would in a CPC.
Quote from: steve on 19:45, 30 March 12
Instead of arguing over trivialities, you could explain how you would get the Z80 to run at the same speed as it would in a CPC.
We should continue this discussion in the CPC# Thread. Let's stay PCW16 here :)
Thread necromancy:
@TFM:
According to these sites, the PCW16 uses a standard three-button mouse with the "Mouse Systems" protocol.
Amstrad PcW16 (http://toastytech.com/guis/pcw.html)
JOYCE: Downloads (http://www.seasip.demon.co.uk/Unix/Joyce/download.html)
In the file bin/AnneSerialMouse.cxx there's a reference to Mouse Systems.
And finally here are the "Mouse Systems" protocol specifics:
What protocol do mice use? (http://www.kryslix.com/nsfaq/Q.12.html)
In the end, you'll need to find a 3-button serial mouse, as the Mouse Systems protocol seems to be standard for 3-button PC mice.
MaV
Quote from: TFM/FS on 02:37, 24 April 11
Hehe! The British won't take DIN, but DIN would be good for the whole world ;-)
Ummm, what? Plenty of stuff had DIN connectors in the 80s in Britain as the default multi-pole connector choice. And we used to refer to them all as n-pin DIN too (although I can't remember how we used to differentiate between the 180° and 270° versions).
Reel-to-reel tape recorders, other tape recorders, CPC monitor, Dragon joystick ports, etc. You can still just walk into any branch of Maplin and buy them ready for soldering on to things...
Even the "As British as it gets" BBC computers used DIN connectors!
Edit: I probably should mention, there's an entire PCW16 including mouse/manuals and all the rest on offer over on Amibay at the moment: http://www.amibay.com/showthread.php?t=46396 (http://www.amibay.com/showthread.php?t=46396)
Bryce.
Are the protocols that different so that one has tried to build a PS/2 or USB to mouse systems adapter?
I'm pretty sure that it would be cheaper than trying to find that kind of mice.
Edit: I found this description of the protocols (http://www.simandl.cz/stranky/elektro/mouse/mouse.htm).
DIN in GB? I never stop learning!
Thanks Rob for the link!
Well, yeah, someone is making money out of this market niche:
PS/2 and Serial Mouse Protocol Converters from Vetra Systems, the Industry's (http://www.vetra.com/327text.html)
VIP-327-PS-3B for 65$
Perhaps there's a Chinese company for that.
They may be hard to find, but buying a used serial three button mice will be much cheaper, even if you have to wait a little to find one.
Anyway, as I said in my previous post, the point is: The PCW16's mouse is a PC standard 3 button mouse and has a known protocol.
Yes, and it's extremely hard to get it. I tried about 10 mice, and not a single one worked.
Here's the original user manual on offer, in case you might get more info there: Amstrad PCW16 User Manual 1996 | eBay (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Amstrad-PCW16-User-Manual-1996-/161041510974?pt=UK_VintageComputing_RL&hash=item257ed2723e)
Bryce.
Sadly only UK :(
Quote from: TFM on 16:47, 28 March 12
Exactly! And this ASIC lacks some of the illegal Z80 instructions. (I'm not talking about the undocumented thought, that's a difference).
Sorry for digging out this old thread, but this is exactly, what I am wondering about:
Does the "Z80" in the PcW16 ANNE Asic support all kind of 8bit index register access? Like LD r,IXL or DEC IYH or ADD IXH etc. etc.
CU,
Prodatron
I've just asked Habi (CP/M Box author) and he thinks that all these are supported . He also thinks it passes all zexall test. Not so sure it supports the illegal instructions. He'll be testing it and I'll be telling you the results as soon as he tells me.
Thanks a lot! :)
Quote from: Prodatron on 14:04, 15 March 15
Sorry for digging out this old thread, but this is exactly, what I am wondering about:
Does the "Z80" in the PcW16 ANNE Asic support all kind of 8bit index register access? Like LD r,IXL or DEC IYH or ADD IXH etc. etc.
CU,
Prodatron
Looked at the PCB (back the day), it's a kind of custom chip instead of the Z80. As I know it supports at least the commonly used undocumented and illegal instructions. But honestly I didn't make a full test, just used couple source examples.
Habi just confirmed that the pcw16 passes all zexall tests, and at 4x speed!
He told me that scf/ccf don't work because it's a nec core, but it's normal.
He thinks that the undocumented/illegal instructions should work fine as with zilog's z80.
Thanks a lot for the info!
SCF, CCF don't work?? Phew, but these are 100% "official" Z80 commands and sometimes quite usefull. Or do they still set/negate the CF but don't modify N,H?
Both SCF and CCF work perfectly; it's just that the undocumented flags behave in a different way. :)
I'll try to test all the undocumented instructions (including duplicates and double nops) and illegal ones (with redundant or mutual exclusive prefixes), just to be sure.
Thanks, Habi, and good to read from you here! :)
Quote from: Habi on 22:36, 17 March 15
Both SCF and CCF work perfectly; it's just that the undocumented flags behave in a different way. :)
I'll try to test all the undocumented instructions (including duplicates and double nops) and illegal ones (with redundant or mutual exclusive prefixes), just to be sure.
That's awesome! And welcome here, even if my welcome comes a bit late. :) :) :)
Well, it appears to behave exactly like a Zilog Z80. :D
Double o exclusive prefixes doesn't cancel each other, redundant do nothing. The double nops ($ED) behave like that, and also the undocumented opcodes worked, redundant (NEG, IM x, ...) or not (SLL).
There are two things I would like to test also: the OUT (C), 0 opcode (I suspect will be more like OUT (C), $FF because it's CMOS) and MemPTR (which I believe will be again the same as Zilog).
I'll let you know when I have more information. :)
Quote from: Habi on 22:36, 17 March 15
Both SCF and CCF work perfectly; it's just that the undocumented flags behave in a different way. :)
Zexall doesn't test the SCF/CCF flags properly, and I don't think it's been mentioned here before. I have the info on it and it's something I'm planning on implementing in my emulators for the next release.
Finally I've had some time to test these things. :)
The Out puts an $FF on the bus (as expected), and MemPTR works the same way as a Zilog processor.
The PCW ASIC has also some kind of buffer for I/O which can be made float to any value, but that's another story... ;)
Quote from: Executioner on 00:00, 23 March 15
Zexall doesn't test the SCF/CCF flags properly, and I don't think it's been mentioned here before. I have the info on it and it's something I'm planning on implementing in my emulators for the next release.
Yes, I know, but it is good enough to differentiate between Zilog and Nec, which was my point being it a NEC macrocell. :)
And for the record: there is NO good SCF / CCF test, because it's dependant on the previous instruction, as seen on [Z80 at Scratchpad, the home of unlimited fan-fiction mini-wikis! (http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/Z80)].
This article is particularly interesting: [Down to the silicon: how the Z80's registers are implemented (http://www.righto.com/2014/10/how-z80s-registers-are-implemented-down.html)]. It appears flags are latched in a temporal register, so we have here something similar to MemPTR logic.
For example, my Z80 emulation passes all the exhaustive Spectrum tests (way better than ZexAll) except the one specifically made to expose this double behaviour of SCF and CCF. I've some information on it also, but it's a bit confusing; so I'm waiting to someone translate those high resolution z80 scans into transistors. :D
Edit: I wold like to clarify that I was referring the NEC (uPD780) version of Z80. The original Zilog behaviour is known thanks to Patrik Rak, and of course it's correctly handled in my Z80 emulation. ;)
As long as SCF, CCF and all 8bit IX/IY Index register commands (with IXL, IXH, IYL, IYH) are working "normal" I am very happy! ;D
Hi, an old thread...
but... has anyone done a dump and full disassembly of the OS yet? What is the memory map like on the PCW16? Could the OS be modified to run on CPC?
Quote from: zhulien on 14:24, 12 August 21
Hi, an old thread...
but... has anyone done a dump and full disassembly of the OS yet? What is the memory map like on the PCW16? Could the OS be modified to run on CPC?
As somebody that's coded on the pcw16 back in the day I would say no there's no way to modify for the CPC. It was slow even with a z80 four times faster than a CPC's, and the screen size of 640x480 makes it near impossible. The CPC's memory banking is also not flexible enough.
TBH Symbos is x10 better anyway.
It would be cool if symbos came out for pcw16 then...
Quote from: zhulien on 14:24, 12 August 21
Could the OS be modified to run on CPC?
It could be simulated, even a bit faster. But this would take time and effort - maybe it's not worth doing that. Maybe somebody has time for such a project, even if I doubt it.
does anyone have a detailed knowledge of rosanne that no longer seems to exist online?
Searching for "rosandoc.zip" should find it.
Ha, maybe ;-)
I've got one of these somewhere...