Talk:Compucolor

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Compucolor was copied or moved into Intecolor/Compucolor 8001 character set with this edit on 3 June 2023. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

I remember this model, but it had a nice BASIC in ROM[1]. I think it was max 48K RAM too. Was it discontinued in '93 or '83? 75.18.207.111 16:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This says 32KB RAM maximum. 75.18.207.111 16:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The ROM contained a ripped-off version of Microsoft BASIC and a simplistic file system. Microsoft found out about them, and forced ISC to become a Microsoft distributor. They also collected royalties on all machines sold up to that time."[2]. But the BASIC had vector graphics commands, which I didn't think MS had in '77. Or maybe they did have DRAWTO or LINETO or whatever, but I can't remember. 75.18.207.111 16:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sheesh, I'm having a lot of trouble remembering. The owner/operator of a video arcade I frequented in '82 had one. There must have been models after the Model 5. 75.18.207.111 16:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "discontinued date" was copied over from another article that I based this one on (Apple II, I think). I've fixed it now (by removal, unfortunately). The one or two "facts" in here that aren't from those external sites are from my memories, so they might not be exactly spot on. I thought our Compucolor II had 64K, but I could be misremembering. The highest reference I found was for 32K myself (or did I see a 48K?). The OS is also speculative. I do remember those BASIC vector graphics commands - they were crazy! Ben Hocking ^(talk) 17:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note 1: the Intecolor History website mentions "an overall 64KB operating system memory allocation"...Ben Hocking ^(talk) 17:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note 2: Also from that site: "By mid 1993, production of traditional 8001, 3800, 8800, AGS, were basically discontinued from production." I'm adding the 1993 date back to "discontinued." Ben Hocking ^(talk) 17:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

" the history depicted here is not concentrated on the Compucolor II, but on the Intecolor brand of products."75.18.207.111 02:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The largest memory configuration for the Compucolor II, the Model 5, was 32 KB. ROM occupied 0x0000 to 0x3FFF. There was an 8 KB hole in the memory space at 0x4000 - 0x5FFF. 4KB of video RAM was located both at 0x6000-0x6FFF and 0x7000-0x7FFF, the difference being that CPU has priority over the refresh logic in the lower address range, and the display had priority over the CPU in the higher address range. The ROM used the lower address when clearing the screen and such, and the upper range was used for most other operations -- it was slower (access could happen only during hblanking) but accesses didn't corrupt display refresh. User RAM occupied 0x8000-0xFFFF. The Compucolor had provisions to add another 8KB ROM module which could be plugged into the motherboard to fill the hole at 0x4000-0x5FFF. For confirmation of this, see the Maintenance Manual, pdf page 99 for the memory map, and pdf pages 75 and 76 for mention of the add-on ROM and RAM modules. There were third party products to add multiple banks of 8 KB ROM into that window, or to add another 8 KB of RAM (which wasn't contiguous with the rest of user memory, so was not usable by BASIC), but those required cuts and jumps to the motherboard to work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goiter (talk • contribs) 06:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect capitalisation

The article (and title) refer to the machine varyingly as "Compucolor" and "CompuColor". Which is correct? A page move may be required. 86.139.61.114 (talk) 16:03, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has fixed it. Thanks. 86.139.61.114 (talk) 19:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First home computer?

I know that the original CompuColor (model 8001) is often considered "the first desktop color graphic computer", but was it not also the first home computer in general, color or not? Being released in December of 1976, this predates the "Trinity of 1977". So was this the first all-in-one desktop microcomputer available to consumers? If so, that seems like something worth noting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.24.11 (talk) 14:20, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]