Talk:Commodore PET/Archive 1

Date of COMDEX

According to the Wikipedia page for Comdex, the first was in 1979. How can this page refer to PET being made in time for Comdex 1976???? -- Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2007

maybe they meant CES —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.110.223 (talk) 21:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

CBM 8032 photo

After talking it over with the contributor the 8032 photo was moved here from the article, since it didn't add any visual info as such -- the featured PET 4032 photo is of a PET with an outwardly similarly sized screen, thus looking almost exactly the same. --Wernher 20:48, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

PET Trivia

Does this actually have any relevance to the PET, or is it vanity? I played with a PET at summer camp once, but I haven't appended it to an encyclopedia article. --Anonymous

Yes, the Jeff Minter item is relevant, the guy being a very significant contributor to the world of computer games. And AFAIK the good Mr Minter hasn't done much editing in that section (or in any WKP article) -- most of the material was written by yours truly. :-) --Wernher 21:31, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

PET not a repackaged KIM

In what sense was a PET "essentially" a KIM-1, aside from both using the same processor chip? I own a KIM and I've seen the internals of a "chicklet" keyboard PET and the boards are nothing alike. --Wtshymanski 22:30, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In the sense that PET was based on the KIM-1 architecture, but obviously a new motherboard was designed specifically for the PET. To say it was "essentially" a KIM-1 would not be a huge error. ADSR6581 23:37, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The "architecture" of the KIM-1 is pretty minimal...if the PET was a 2-car carage, the KIM-1 was not even a garden shed. The KIM-1 was no more than a development board for the 6502 processor and MOS Technology's peripheral chips. You could say that *all* 8-bit computers of the early '80s had the same "architecture". Since the video section, alphanumeric keyboard and ROM BASIC of the PET made it so different than using the KIM, I think the comparison of the KIM to the PET is confusing; someone may think the KIM had ROM BASIC, etc. --Wtshymanski 03:24, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I do not agree with the description of the PET as a "repackaged" KIM-1. I own an example of most models of PETs as well as a number of 1970s 6502 SBCs (but sadly, not a KIM-1), and from a design standpoint, the KIM-1 is a simple microprocessor demonstrator board with minimal address decoding on-board (look at the "ghosting"), oriented towards small programs and limited I/O expansion. The 4K PET was a ready-to-use, complete computer system, that came out of the box with BASIC, a video display, a storage device, decoding for the entire address space, either internally for RAM, ROM, and VLSI I/O chips, or externally for a slap-on-the-side memory expansion to go up to 32K of RAM. It also came with an advanced peripheral control bus, the IEEE-488 (even if there were bugs with the initial implementation). The PET was a complete system; the KIM-1 was a demonstration board, with a different audience and goals. Ethan dicks 17:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree and I've revised the article accordingly. --Wtshymanski (talk) 23:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it's more important that Chuck got hired because of his KIM design. I've seen both MB and they are not alike visually. Whether they are very similar in functionality or in schematic form is unknown to me. Since this detail may be lost to history and is unsourced I agree with removal although with regret. Alatari (talk) 17:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

SFD-1001 and 8250

The SFD-1001 was not the "first commercially-produced 5¼" drive with a 1 megabyte format". The SFD came out in 1986, as best I can find - after HD PC floppies already existed. The earlier CBM model with exactly the same format (and DOS version!) as the SFD-1001 was the Commodore 8250, which now has an article. I decided to remove the "first" comment altogether; it shouldn't be there unless it's citeable (as I believe that honor actually goes to the IBM 32x0 series). - Todd Vierling 02:54, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The 8250 came out in 1983, or perhaps even earlier; when did HD PC floppies arise? Sorry, no ref yet, but I was using them when I was at high school ... cojoco (talk) 22:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand the confusion now. The 8250, the dual-drive version, came out years before the SFD-1001. It might be correct to say "The 8250 was the first commercially produced 5¼" drive with a 1 megabyte format". cojoco (talk) 22:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Commodore used a way of floppy formatting which instead of slicing the disc into equal radial slices for data storage they used equal sector lengths having more sectors per each track. Instead of 40 sectors per track on the TRS-80 the PET had increasing sectors per track. Letting them get 1mb onto the floppy. Alatari (talk) 05:53, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Wonder woman

Isn't it worth noting that this computer featured in wonder woman? --81.153.124.105 06:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

It also appeared in "Star Trek IV: The Search for Spock" (in Kirk's terrestrial apartment), and in "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century" (in Buck's hospital room, in one episode, as a terminal and video surveillance device), and I think there's one visible near the end of "Terminator 3: The Rise of the Machines", but I could be mistaken about that one. If someone wants to add a section along the lines of "media appearances", I don't think it would be unreasonable, but it might lead to similar sections cropping up with other vintage computers, so it will be important to add this information in a way that works well across other entries, too. Ethan dicks 17:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Cursor

Boy, I had completely forgotten about Cursor. What a treasure it was in the early days, when the only way to get a program in was to type it yourself! Lou Sander 02:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

ROM, Instruction Manual, User Port, etc.

Boy, this article is bringing back memories. There were ROM sockets in the PET, and you could program EPROMs and plug them in. I don't remember what they did, but it was cool. I can remember having a bunch of EPROMs around. I don't remember how we programmed them, either. It seems there was a separate machine for doing that.

Another thing about the PET was the instruction manual. It was maybe 32 pages long, probably printed on 8 1/2" x 11" sheets folded in two. It was pretty useless, but it had some programming stuff in it that, if you could figure it out, would get you started writing BASIC.

I also remember (I think) that on some models at least, there was a metal rod to hold the hinged monitor and keyboard assembly out of the way while you worked on the motherboard. It was like the rod used to hold up the hood on some automobiles. My mind might be playing tricks on me about it, but I don't think so.

And don't forget the User Port. You could easily program it to do stuff like controlling LED's, etc. There was some sort of an add-on device for one of the ports that let you make truly beautiful music. I don't remember being able to program the music myself, but it was available from somewhere.

A friend and I created what must have been the ultimate user port interface -- a board that could drive the solenoids on a certain kind of Selectric typewriter. We were really, really proud to have created such a wonder, and it was about the only way in those days that you could have a letter-quality printer on your PET. You can see it at the bottom of the screen here. Lou Sander 02:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Copy-edit Commodore PET

Based on the Version [1] of the article 'Commodore PET' [2] Please skim through it and use any parts of it that you like in the article. It is only a cursory suggestion.

Original: The PET (Personal Electronic Transactor) was a home-/personal computer produced by Commodore starting in the late 1970s. Although it was no top seller outside the Canadian, US, and UK educational markets, it was Commodore's first full-featured computer and would form the basis for their future success. Suggested: The PET (Personal Electronic Transactor) was a home/personal computer produced by Commodore starting in the late 1970s. Although it was not a top seller outside the educational markets in Canada, the US, and UK; the PET was Commodore's first full-featured computer that would form the basis for future success.

Original: In the 1970s, Texas Instruments was the main supplier of CPUs for use in calculators. Many companies sold calculator designs based on their chip sets, including Commodore. However, in 1975 TI increased the price to the point where the chip set alone cost more than what TI sold their entire calculators for, and the industry they had built up was frozen out of the market. Suggested: In the 1970s, Texas Instruments (also known as TI) was the main supplier of CPUs for use in calculators. Many companies, including Commodore, sold calculators based on TI chip sets. TI increased the price of its chip sets in 1975 to a point where the chip set alone cost more than the price of a similar complete TI calculator, causing the industry that had built itself up around TI chip sets to freeze out of the market.

Original: Commodore responded by looking for a chip set of their own they could purchase outright, and quickly found MOS Technology, Inc. who were bringing their 6502 microprocessor design to market. Along with the company came Chuck Peddle's KIM-1 design, a small computer kit based on the 6502. At Commodore, Peddle convinced Jack Tramiel that calculators were a dead-end. Instead they should focus on making a "real" machine out of the KIM-1, and selling that for much higher profits. Tramiel demanded that Peddle, and Tramiel's son, Leonard, create a computer in time for the upcoming trade show COMDEX (1976), and gave them six months to do it. Suggested: Commodore responded by looking for a chip set they could purchase outright. It quickly found MOS Technology, Inc. which was set to bring its 6502 microprocessor design to market. The acquisition of MOS Technology, Inc. also brought Chuck Peddle's KIM-1 design which was a small computer kit based on the 6502 microprocessor design. Peddle, who was the __ at MOS, won over Jack Tramiel, the then __ of Commodore, that calculators were a dead-end. Peddle suggested Tramiel that they should rather focus on making a "real" machine out of the KIM-1, and predicted that it would sell for much higher profits. A convinced Tramiel then gave Peddle, and Tramiel's son, Leonard a deadline of six months to create a computer in time for the upcoming trade show COMDEX (1976).

Original: The result was the first all-in-one home computer, the PET. The first model was the PET 2001, including either 4 kB (the 2001-4) or 8 kB (2001-8) of 8-bit RAM. It was essentially the KIM-1 with a new display chip (the MOS 6545) driving a small built-in monochrome monitor with 40×25 character graphics. The machine also included a built-in Datassette for data storage located on the front of the case, which left little room for the keyboard. The 2001 was announced in 1977 and started deliveries around September. However they remained back-ordered for months, and to ease deliveries they eventually cancelled the 4 kB version early the next year. Suggested: The duo came up with what became the first all-in-one home computer and named it the PET. The first model of PET, called PET 2001 with 8-bit Random Access Memory (RAM). It came in two configurations -- the PET 2001-4 which had 4 kB of RAM and the PET 2001-8 which had 8 kB of RAM. PET 2001 was essentially the KIM -1 with a new display chip (the MOS 6545) driving a small built-in monochrome monitor with 40×25 character graphics. It also included a built-in Datassette on the front of the case for data storage which left little room for the keyboard. Commodore announced the PET 2001 in 1977. The PET 2001 was a remarkable success. Although Commodore started delivery around September the same year, a back-order of months remained. Commodore eventually scrapped the 2001-4 early next year to ease deliveries.

Original: Although the machine was fairly successful, there were frequent complaints about the tiny keyboard, often referred to as a "chicklet keyboard" because the keys resembled the popular gum candy. This was addressed in upgraded "dash N" and "dash B" versions of the 2001, which put the cassette outside the case, and included a much larger and better feeling keyboard. Internally a newer and simpler motherboard was used, along with an upgrade in memory to 8, 16, or 32 kB, known as the 2001-N-8, 2001-N-16 or 2001-N-32, respectively. Suggested: Despite the success of the machine, there were frequent complaints about its tiny keyboard which had come to be referred to as a "chicklet keyboard" after the popular gum candy that keys resembled . The upgraded "dash N" and "dash B" versions of the PET 2001 addressed this issue -- it had the cassette outside the case, and a much larger and better feeling keyboard replaced the tiny keyboard. There were internal improvements as well. The upgraded PET 2001 boasted newer and simpler motherboard. The PET 2001 also gave more options in terms of RAM with the introduction of PET 2001-N-8, 2001-N-16 or 2001-N-32 which had 8, 16, or 32 kB RAM respectively. Sales of the PET 2001 increased.

Original: Sales of the newer machines was strong, and Commodore then introduced the models to Europe. However there was already a machine called PET for sale in Europe from the huge Dutch Philips company, and the name had to be changed. The result was the CBM 3000 series ('CBM' standing for Commodore Business Machines), which included the 3008, 3016 and 3032 models. Like the 2001-N-8, the 3008 was quickly dropped. Suggested: Encouraged by the growth in sales of PET 2001 in the US (and Canada?), Commodore introduced the models to Europe. Commodore altered the name to CBM 3000 as a machine called PET was already selling in Europe. CBM stood for Commodore Business Machines and included the models 3008, 3016, and 3032 (analogous to PET 2001-N-8, 2001-N-16 or 2001-N-32 respectively). The PET 2001-N-8 and the CBM 3008, following the fate of the PET 2001-4, were soon dropped.

--- Preview

The PET (Personal Electronic Transactor) was a home/personal computer produced by Commodore starting in the late 1970s. Although it was not a top seller outside the educational markets in Canada, the US, and UK; the PET was Commodore's first full-featured computer that would form the basis for future success.

In the 1970s, Texas Instruments (TI) was the main supplier of CPUs for use in calculators. Many companies, including Commodore, sold calculators based on TI chip sets. TI increased the price of its chip sets in 1975 to a point where the chip set alone cost more than the price of a similar complete TI calculator, causing the industry that had built itself up around TI chip sets to freeze out of the market.

Commodore responded by looking for a chip set they could purchase outright. It quickly found MOS Technology, Inc. which was set to bring its 6502 microprocessor design to market. The acquisition of MOS Technology, Inc. also brought Chuck Peddle's KIM-1 design which was a small computer kit based on the 6502 microprocessor design. Peddle, who was the __ at MOS, won over Jack Tramiel, the then __ of Commodore, that calculators were a dead-end. Peddle suggested Tramiel that they should rather focus on making a "real" machine out of the KIM-1, and predicted that it would sell for much higher profits. A convinced Tramiel then gave Peddle, and Tramiel's son, Leonard a deadline of six months to create a computer in time for the upcoming trade show COMDEX (1976).

The duo came up with what became the first all-in-one home computer and named it the PET. The first model of PET, called PET 2001 with 8-bit Random Access Memory (RAM). It came in two configurations -- the PET 2001-4 which had 4 kB of RAM and the PET 2001-8 which had 8 kB of RAM. PET 2001 was essentially the KIM -1 with a new display chip (the MOS 6545) driving a small built-in monochrome monitor with 40×25 character graphics. It also included a built-in Datassette on the front of the case for data storage which left little room for the keyboard. Commodore announced the PET 2001 in 1977. The PET 2001 was a remarkable success. Although Commodore started delivery around September the same year, a back-order of months remained. Commodore eventually scrapped the 2001-4 early next year to ease deliveries.

Encouraged by the growth in sales of PET 2001 in the US (and Canada?), Commodore introduced the models to Europe. Commodore altered the name to CBM 3000 as a machine called PET was already selling in Europe. CBM stood for Commodore Business Machines and included the models 3008, 3016, and 3032 (analogous to PET 2001-N-8, 2001-N-16 or 2001-N-32 respectively). The PET 2001-N-8 and the CBM 3008, following the fate of the PET 2001-4, were soon dropped. -- What do you think? Three facts need to be ascertained. If you know the answer to these, please write below. --who is kushal? 22:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

1. Chuck Peddle's position in MOS Technology, Inc. was ___________ .

2. Jack Tramiel's position in Commodore was ___________ .

3. True or false: Commodore sold PET in Canada before they went to European markets. (True/False)

DISCLAIMER: I am not professionally connected with Commodore. ---

---

Overall, I don't have any objections to the factual contents of these edits, but I would like to see this original sentence entirely re-worked to remove a glaring factual error - "PET 2001 was essentially the KIM-1 with a new display chip (the MOS 6545) driving a small built-in monochrome monitor with 40×25 character graphics" - besides the fact that I disagree that the PET was "essentially" a KIM-1, the 6545 didn't come into play until much later in the PET line with the "Fat Forty" and 80-column models (4016, 4032, 8032, 8096...) The "static PET" and the "dynamic PET" models (2001, 2001-32N, 2001-32B, 3016, 3032, etc.) had a video circuit made up of a pile of TTL parts, not a single VLSI video chip that could be programmed to different display parameters (the 4032 and 8032 use the same PCB with different jumpers and ROMs). Some time ago, I tidied up the model-by-model feature details, but left the opening paragraphs of the main entry along. If anyone is of a mind to re-write the top of this entry, please look at removing references to the 6545 in the initial versions of the 2001.

Here's an excellent poster with a detailed drawing of the innards of a 3032 (known as a 2001-32N in the U.S.) - http://www.commodore.ca/gallery/brochures/misc/Commodore_PET_Poster.jpg And here's a low-quality scan of a 1978 article going over the innards of the original PET - http://www.commodore.ca/gallery/magazines/pet_preview_et_feb78/pet_et_feb98_4.jpg Note the absence of any 40-pin DIPs being labeled as the video chip.

Ethan dicks 18:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Abbreviations for Kilobyte, etc.

The common abbreviations used in the days of the Commodore PET were KB, etc. They are still the common abbreviations as far as I have seen. The KiB is something new, unusual, and different, IMHO, and to use it is to make the article less understandable. I hope others would discuss this here. Lou Sander 02:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

An encyclopedia doesn't need to use the old abbreviations just because that's what the manufacturer used. KiB means the same thing than KB except that they are standard and unambiguous. IMHO, its use doesn't make the article less understandable, only less ambiguous and more accurate. Sarenne 11:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe you HO is shared by many others, especially where the use of these extremely unusual abbreviations is concerned. IMHO, KiB is far from standard. In fact, I have never seen it anywhere but in this article. Lou Sander 13:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually KiB is a standard (defined by standards organizations) unit (see binary_prefix), and KB=1,024 bytes is not, though it is more common. The standard KB equals 1000 bytes so it makes this article inaccurate. You can read WP:MOSNUM#Avoiding_confusion for more information. Sarenne 13:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The usage of these prefixes is a rather hotly contested guideline, but one that has maintained enough support to keep for a while. There have been several lengthy debates about the appropriateness of using them, the latest being located here. If you scan that text (there's a lot of rhetoric and repetition, unfortunately), you'll get a sense of the typical arguments for and against using the prefixes in appropriate contexts. -- mattb @ 2007-03-13T21:34Z

And the reason for using confusing, hotly contested and almost-never-used abbreviations in an article about a computer that had been gone for 20 years before they were ever thought of is? (I've still never, ever seen those abbreviations in anything, and I have several feet of computer books on my shelves.) Lou Sander 01:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

All explained on the talk page I linked. This comes up a lot, so I don't like to re-hash it on individual articles' talk pages. Please don't misunderstand, I'm not dismissing your question, only deferring to a place where it has been discussed previously. The gist of it is that we are trying to use SI prefixes (kilo, mega, giga, etc) in the strict sense that BIPM defines them (10³, 10⁶, 10⁹, respectively). SI, IEEE, NIST, et. al. recommend this usage and the usage of the IEC binary prefixes in contexts where multiples of powers of two are implied (such as with most computer memory addressing). In other words it's purely a stylistic that we've adopted for consistency and accuracy on Wikipedia. If you want to see every conceivable argument for and against using these prefixes, you can try to wade through the mass of discussion I linked. -- mattb @ 2007-03-14T04:00Z

Music Capability

I don't remember the details, but I think there was a simple external audio device that you could connect to the user port(?). With this device and the appropriate software, the PET could make extremely good-sounding music. I remember mine playing a truly beautiful version of Fur Elise -- I just don't remember the specifics of the setup that allowed it to do this. Lou Sander 12:46, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

You're not imagining it, my dad made a similar device (from a circuit published in a magazine IIRC). It connected to the right-most socket on the rear of the machine, and contained an internal speaker. I clearly remember it, black case (probably from RS or Maplin) with a green connector. Parrot of Doom (talk) 01:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I made one too. I had to have audio since the Apple had it! Alatari (talk) 12:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Non-QWERTY keyboard?

I don't remember this at all, and I had several different PETs. I'm thinking it was a QWERTY keyboard.

Also as I recall it, a feature of the original small keyboard was that it showed the PET's character graphics on the keys. A photo of the keyboard would help. Lou Sander 12:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree that a keyboard photograph would help. The keyboard wasn't non-qwerty, but it was odd. British computer journalists described it as a "calculator-style" keyboard. The letters were mounted in QWERTY order, but directly above one another in regimented rows and columns with only a tiny gap between the keys, instead of being offset as in typewriter keyboards (and modern computer keyboard) and this made touch-typing a chore.

Modern offset keyboard layout:

       Q  W  E  R  T  Y

        A  S  D  F  G  H

         Z  X  C  V  B  N

Early PET keyboard layout:

       Q W E R T Y

       A S D F G H

       Z X C V B N

--Tony Sidaway 14:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

You're absolutely right about that. I remember it well. We need a photo of the keyboard, I think. Lou Sander 15:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the (almost certainly incorrect) unsourced description of the larger PET keyboards, the full-travel ones, as "non-QWERTY". Also notice that the photograph shows that these later keyboards were offset like a modern computer keyboard (and like the Apple II which was a contemporary of those machines). --Tony Sidaway 13:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I've produced and uploaded an image of the PET 2001 "chiclet" keyboard layout design. This clearly shows the QWERTY layout and the graphics characters accessible with the shift key. --Tony Sidaway 14:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The keyboard was QWERTY but it was non-selectric. Quotes were shift-2 and the semicolon and colon were on separate keys, among other differences. I think it was descended from an APL or teletype layout.

Super Pet and Waterloo

(I worked at the Computing Centre in 1969 & 1970) The Waterloo group that developed the Super Pet was WatCom lead by Wesley Graham who was (used to be) the Director of their Computing Center. They had developed compiler/interpreters for Assembly, Fortran IV-S, COBOL, Basic, and APL. The idea being that it was a machine that could be used for teaching Software Engineering. I was not there at the time, don't know more details. But, I do know Waterloo did not have the rights to the specs and instruction set for the 6809.

(Following told to me by the Engineers involved, I worked at Motorola with them from 1980 to 83.) When the Super Pet came out, Motorola requested a copy of the documentation they got on the 6809 because Waterloo had not signed an NDA. They provided it and the engineers who developed the microprocessor were able to then know whose NDA it was. I.E. who received the original from Motorola and given start and finish, found who gave it to whom. This could be done because the engineers placed unique markers throughout the document, different markers on different copies of the documents to different people receiving them under the NDA. Call it a poor man's watermark.

I don't know if they did anything because of breaking the NDA, but Motorola certainly liked the Super Pet using their 6809.

71.231.43.16 08:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC) Henri Socha

You have any documentation of the goings on in those departments? Biographies, internal memos publicly available, etc. An article or section on the SuperPET's development would be interesting. Something like that maybe of interest to a hardware or software development article. Alatari 11:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

First 100 PETs ship in mid October 1977

Byte Magazine, February 1978, Page 190. This is a Whats New? item based on a Commodore press release.

Commodore Ships First PET Computers

The PET computer made its debut recently as the first 100 units were shipped to waiting customers in mid October 1977. Here Commodore Systems Division Director Chuck Peddle is pictured with the PETs undergoing final checkout. Shipments were made about six weeks later than expected, according to Peddle. The delay was due in part to time consuming quality control measures and the material flow problem in starting up the production lines. "In this business," Peddle argued, "six weeks is actually pretty good." Many of the first units were delivered to customers who intend to develop software for the PET. Commodore plans to create a publishing house for programs developed by users as well as employees. The company plans to increase production of the PET computers to several thousand per month by early 1978. The basic PET with 4 K memory is priced at $595, while the 8 K memory version is $795, from Commodore Business Machines Inc, 901 California Av, Palo Alto CA 94304, (415) 326-4000.

- SWTPC6800 (talk) 02:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Peddle's Ego Trip

I removed this nickname reference from the lead. While there is a source for this (here) it's irelevant for the lead, and also I can't really see any indication of widespread use of this name. If someone wants to add it in a trivia section or something, go right ahead, but I took it out of the lead as NN. 23skidoo (talk) 03:27, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Memory Map?

Didn't anybody disassemble the ROM of any of the PETs to produce a memory map?

By now, you'd think somebody somewhere would have!

Sure, it's one thing to talk about how cool the EPROMs were (because you could just go and plug them into an empty socket), it's another thing altogether to tell us where, exactly, the sockets were mapped. And I looked all over for it, up and down, and left and right, and it's nowhere to be seen. If it's in the main article (and I assure you it isn't), I can't find it.

The main article would be improved vastly if somebody included a link to a memory map, even it weren't fully commented. Either exterior to Wiki, or if that's not possible, then maybe somewhere else, inside of Wiki, like over at WikiSource? Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 05:46, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I removed the old EPROMS and upgraded with a set that has advanced BASIC. Somewhere I had both sets dumped. I still have the working machine but have no tape deck/floppy or modem to have it dump to. I might have the original manual with some memory map pics. Alatari (talk) 12:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)