From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 00:43:42 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com>
wrote:

Steppe wrote ...

Sam Gillett wrote:

...

Man, all I ever see of Steppe is him quoted in other peoples posts.
For some reason none of his posts show up on my news server...?

For me Steppe is the (nearly) Invisible Poster. ;-) Er, anyone else
not getting his posts?


Jason

--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jkr7@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

J. Robertson wrote:

Man, all I ever see of Steppe is him quoted in other peoples posts.
For some reason none of his posts show up on my news server...?

For me Steppe is the (nearly) Invisible Poster. ;-) Er, anyone else
not getting his posts?

Oh, that's a pity! But don't worry, my postings are usually a mixture of childish babble and misinterpreted flames. ;D

/Steppe


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


"Steppe" <steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote in message news:3f012b7d@news.nefonline.de...

J. Robertson wrote:

Man, all I ever see of Steppe is him quoted in other peoples posts.
For some reason none of his posts show up on my news server...?

For me Steppe is the (nearly) Invisible Poster. ;-) Er, anyone else
not getting his posts?

Oh, that's a pity! But don't worry, my postings are usually a mixture of childish babble and misinterpreted flames. ;D

/Steppe

Just so J. Robertson can see your reply ;-)

Regards,

Clockmeister.


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Clockmeister wrote:

Just so J. Robertson can see your reply ;-)

ROFL! Thanks a lot! :-P
Could this problem with my messages not showing up have something to do with
my Newsprovider? I use Nefkom, my local telephone and internet provider. Are there any free newsservers that allow posting _and_ are considered reliable?
I tried a few, but got sick of them pretty soon.

/Steppe


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Michael J. Schülke wrote:

http://news.cis.dfn.de/

Wow, danke!

/Steppe


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 12:26:18 +0200, "Steppe" <steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote:

Could this problem with my messages not showing up have something to do with >my Newsprovider? I use Nefkom, my local telephone and internet provider. Are >there any free newsservers that allow posting _and_ are considered reliable? >I tried a few, but got sick of them pretty soon.

Free newsservers that allow posting can sometimes get "banned" by some
other newsservers because of spam; spammers like free servers.

-Miika

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Miika Seppänen wrote:

Free newsservers that allow posting can sometimes get "banned" by some
other newsservers because of spam; spammers like free servers.

I can figure this be the case. But my newsprovider is not free, you have to have his internet access to use his newsserver. Whatever, I think I'll check out the one Michael suggested.

/Steppe


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


Steppe wrote ...

Miika Seppänen wrote:

Free newsservers that allow posting can sometimes get "banned" by some
other newsservers because of spam; spammers like free servers.

I can figure this be the case. But my newsprovider is not free, you have to >have his internet access to use his newsserver. Whatever, I think I'll
check out the one Michael suggested.

Steppe, I notice that your news server is not adding a line to the message header with X-Complaints-To:

Some servers could be set to consider any message without this line in the header as possible spam and filter it out. But, as you can see by the
replies you get, most people do see your messages.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!







--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 18:00:05 +0800, "Clockmeister"
<gerryvdb@tnet.com.au> wrote:

"Steppe" <steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote in message >news:3f012b7d@news.nefonline.de...

J. Robertson wrote:

Man, all I ever see of Steppe is him quoted in other peoples posts.
For some reason none of his posts show up on my news server...?

For me Steppe is the (nearly) Invisible Poster. ;-) Er, anyone else
not getting his posts?

Oh, that's a pity! But don't worry, my postings are usually a mixture of
childish babble and misinterpreted flames. ;D

Darn, So I'm really missing a lot of good stuff then? ;-)

Just so J. Robertson can see your reply ;-)

Thanks for volunteering to quote all of Steppe's posts from now on.
;-)


Jason

--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jkr7@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

J. Robertson wrote:

For me Steppe is the (nearly) Invisible Poster. ;-) Er, anyone else
not getting his posts?

I've got another suggestion: Why don't you just put me out of your killfile? :-)

Thanks for volunteering to quote all of Steppe's posts from now on.
;-)

Yeah, thanks from me too!

/Steppe


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


"Steppe" <steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote in message news:3f02910c$1@news.nefonline.de...

J. Robertson wrote:

For me Steppe is the (nearly) Invisible Poster. ;-) Er, anyone else
not getting his posts?

I've got another suggestion: Why don't you just put me out of your

killfile?

:-)

Thanks for volunteering to quote all of Steppe's posts from now on.
;-)

Yeah, thanks from me too!

No, I don't think so... oops.

Drat!

Regards,

Clockmeister.


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Clockmeister wrote:

Thanks for volunteering to quote all of Steppe's posts from now on.
;-)

Yeah, thanks from me too!

No, I don't think so... oops.

Drat!

Hehehe... that wasn't really serious. ;-)

/Steppe


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

I think that Maurice should post a statement here on where he is up to. I was going to order through Commodore Scene, but was put off by the amount of time Allan has been waiting for his current order. Allan also had to turn down one quite substantial order quite recently.

Shaun.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


Steppe wrote ...

Clockmeister wrote:

Thanks for volunteering to quote all of Steppe's posts from now on.
;-)

Yeah, thanks from me too!

No, I don't think so... oops.

Drat!

Hehehe... that wasn't really serious. ;-)

This "echo" is on me... ;-)

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!





--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

What I don't understand is why Maurice doesn't have some electronics
assembly company do partial assembly of the various CMD boards for him - leaving only the major parts to be added in and then final assembly?

Dave

"Clockmeister" <gerryvdb@tnet.com.au> wrote in message news:3f0401de$0$59950$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...

"Ramlink666" <ramlink666@aol.com> wrote in message news:20030702115500.24606.00000008@mb-m11.aol.com...

I think that Maurice should post a statement here on where he is up to.

I

was

going to order through Commodore Scene, but was put off by the amount of

time

Allan has been waiting for his current order. Allan also had to turn

down

one

quite substantial order quite recently.

Perhaps Maurice has bitten off more then he can chew!?

Regards,

Clockmeister.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Mike Paull wrote:

Or if he can't handle the production sell it off to Jens.

Who has a batch of not-quite-ready-yet C-One boards, to be ready real
soon now since early May?

I was really impressed how well the production went, and thought that
the C-One project had finally found a schedule it would adhere to. Then,
one day before the release date, comes the announcement that shipment
would be delayed by another two or three weeks for adding a feature.
Adding a feature is a Good Thing, so that's alright.

However, since then neither Jens nor anybody else hasn't even made an order-of-magnitude statement about the release date. The original
release date was two months ago, and I wonder whether all the work being
done now was really unforseen (or forgotten?) when production was
planned, or whether there are other problems stalling the release.
Either way, I don't think this is being handled in a very professional
manner.

Sorry for the rant.

Regards,
Michael
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Michael J. Schülke" <news0307@mjschuelke.de> wrote in message news:MPG.1971ed3781c5dffc989749@News.CIS.DFN.DE...

However, since then neither Jens nor anybody else hasn't even made an order-of-magnitude statement about the release date.

The hardware's done, but the cores & other software are yet to be finished,
and that's simply something that's fairly useless to try to set a release
date for.

--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Michael J. Schülke wrote:

I know. But Jens and Jeri knew the state of the cores and the other
software when production started...

With a major redesign in the C1 board (from Rev. 1 to Rev. 2),
Jeri and her programming partners have had to redo the start-up and
the cores from the beginning.


Truly,
Robert Bernardo
Fresno Commodore User Group
http://videocam.net.au/fcug
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in news:k2gbrway0vd.fsf@legolas.mdh.se:

"Clockmeister" <gerryvdb@tnet.com.au> writes:

I wonder how much of a market will be left for his products now
that the C-One is in production?

Why, can the C-One be interfaced as a peripheral to a real C64?

Very Possible. Just build an C-One version of the 64HDD or a C64 version of the 64HDD software so you can master the control. If that is a feature
people will like to have with the C-One. I'll look into that in the near future. I will try to familiarize myself with this software. I will likely
add this as a means of interfacing or commanding. Think, "CommandCenter64"
for c64 and a "CommandCenter" for the C-One. I think it is cool. Commanding
a C-One with my C-NIX OS project installed with a C64 or another C-One
would be a cool idea and I can see applicible kinds of use with other c64/c-128/C-One systems equipped other OSs as well.

Nice ideas. I seen remote station software for Windows systems in the past
and it certainly brings ideas.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

=?ISO-8859-15?Q?Michael_J=2E_Sch=FClke?= <news0307@mjschuelke.de> wrote
in news:MPG.1971ed3781c5dffc989749@News.CIS.DFN.DE:

Mike Paull wrote:

Who has a batch of not-quite-ready-yet C-One boards, to be ready real
soon now since early May?

I was really impressed how well the production went, and thought that
the C-One project had finally found a schedule it would adhere to.
Then, one day before the release date, comes the announcement that
shipment would be delayed by another two or three weeks for adding a
feature. Adding a feature is a Good Thing, so that's alright.

However, since then neither Jens nor anybody else hasn't even made an order-of-magnitude statement about the release date. The original
release date was two months ago, and I wonder whether all the work
being done now was really unforseen (or forgotten?) when production
was planned, or whether there are other problems stalling the release.
Either way, I don't think this is being handled in a very professional manner.

Sorry for the rant.

Regards,
Michael

I know how you feel. You are not alone. I have reserved my order as
well. I have talked briefly with Jeri about the project. I didn't want
to bug her too much as she was up all night working on it. She is a busy
girl. So guys, don't bug her on a daily basis. Maybe once a week or two
or three. She needs the time and I am graciously giving her as much time
as necassary.

From what I picked up, she is currently working on the cores. This will
take probably a month or two at best. Since she would have to test with
several different programs for one. It could take more time. Hunting
down all the little bugs is a big task. Anyway, enjoy and please
patiently wait. We all have to wait patiently.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307060316530.32321-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

What feature?

Be nice to Jens and politely ask him the question or read the archives on
the C-One list.

Hmmm......

Hmmm......

He could be slowed down with the patent application, I suppose. Doing
it in Europe must be miles of red tape more than doing it in the U.S.

Not likely. Not even in the US. The patent is likely will be held in the
cores and the overall C-One design. The DOS/KERNAL/BASIC Roms are not patentable. This is whole different story of its own.

Again the features have been exhaustively explained to you. What part of
what has been told to you that you do not understand ?



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|Not likely. Not even in the US. The patent is likely will be held in the |cores and the overall C-One design. The DOS/KERNAL/BASIC Roms are not |patentable. This is whole different story of its own.
|
|Again the features have been exhaustively explained to you.

You really think so?

|What part of what has been told to you that you do not understand ?

What part of my objections has eluded the grasp of your razor sharp
mind? Do you dispute the one to one ratio of objection to clarification
that you seem to be espousing?

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in news:k2gk7at5zfo.fsf@legolas.mdh.se:

wildstar <wildstar128@hotmail.com> writes:

Of course, but then Maurice's business would've been killed three
years ago when old Pentium 150 systems could be picked up cheap
if the only interesting product was any kind of HDD solution.

True, but JiffyDOS and other business would be of more interesting use. Especially when processing locally was truly necassary. Transfer would
not have been much problem but execution would have for the Intel unit
but for a C64 would have benefit of SCPU devices. SCPU gave run-time
execution benefits.

3 years ago CMD's cbm business folded. Maurice's business in the CBM
scene is yet to be seen to true form.

I remember talking with him about Flash media replacement for a new replacement of RAMLink. Um, FlashLink. This was about 2-3 years ago. I
was also talking to him about the computer project CMD was working on. As
I had interest in that project.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|The C-One would consist of a SuperVIC,

What wishful thinking! In fact, you couldn't detail the specs of
a SuperVIC if your cold, lifeless, mental circuitry depended on it.

|MonsterSID,

Have you ever seen any patent applications for this thing?

|IDE,

Think you can find anybody who wants to use it as Per wrote it?
Besides the PC fanatics, that is?

|SD-RAM controller,

Black box.

|and some other I/Os as well as the classic SIDs (optional). The main
|CPU could consist of a 65c816, z80, or some other CPU.

Why, you could make the C=1 into a PC, if you wanted to, right?

|The 65JE02 is unique,

Although Herr Twitcher can prove a thing or two, I don't think you can.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307072340050.3764-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

It's extensive rather than exhaustive.

At the same time exhausting for the typist.

No, it's been like that for the rest of us since you and your horse
first got here.

Yeah, and you annoyed everyone here too.

No, just straight-faced lack of confidence in your abilities to
describe the thing from the hardware up, certainly total incredulity
when it comes to your ability to describe the mapping of the DMA
engine to memory.

Matthew, it I was given all the tentative documents that are not being distributed to anyone even you. I would not have that kind of info. First
off, hardware chips are often have one or more mappable locations.
Hardware is instantly mapped. Old ISA boards are very similiar (yet have
there differences) to CBM hardware devices. They have a series of jumpers
on board so you can manually configure the cards mapped locations as
mapping is instant as that is where in memory the main microcontroller's registers woulds be mirrored to. Since these hardware from time to time
share the same main memory as with the CPU. There is times when the CPU
has to just sit and wait. Ok. Simple as that. Some hardware can be
dynamically loaded depending on which devices are mapped in which
locations. For the most part, hardware can not share the same location.
They can share the same IRQs if IRQ sharing is an option. Yet this is
mostly found in Windows/Linux PC hardware. This will make sense with PCI.

Now, DMA simply means Direct Memory Access. Turn the Fucking CPU Off and
take control of main memory. Ok, with the C-One, I would say that you
would put the CPU on stand by and take control of the SD-RAM Controller
and have control of the operations from the SuperVIC core. I would assume
that will be all internal inside one of the FPGAs. I can not answer that question 100% because the info in the terms of the C-One is not that
highly documented or at least published.

Let's go for the basics of her graphics board.

I will only be able to provide information that is documented - um
released.

|Jeri is developing a "coreset" to make the FPGAs functions like chipset >|used by a given computer model that you select.

The 65816 'native' mode. The one with a fantastic new graphics board,
and DMA memory manager.

I will give you more information as the board is released. As stated,
some documentations will be released as the C-One is released. This is preventing documentations going out and having to rewrite and reprint documentations that are obsolete and inaccurate.

|If you select a C64 mode to boot into.

Oh, I could turn a real C-64 on, if that's all I wanted.

Yes... That is exactly the key to the menu program and loading the of the
FPGA with the appropriate binaries and loading the ROMs. The FPGA uses a dynamic mapping model.

The principle is that an average user (dumb orc) can simply press the key
for the mode he or she wishes to boot in and in a flash - the screen
should show the mode he or she wishes to be in. Say I pressed the "1" key
for C64 mode, I should expect the famous c64 prompt showing with the
flashing cursor and then type LOAD"*",8,1 and then type RUN and my
favorite 5.25" C= Game should execute as usual. That is the quality that
we want. I should expect my GUNSHIP game to start up with its famous
tune. As well as one of my favorites "ACE2" start up and be listening to
the famous Rob Hubbard tune. These are the games that really got me into computers.

As far as an OS correlating to the hardware, one could map the hardware
and update an integrated database to hold the data so an application can
go off a central data information source and not be stuck with hard coded memory access to explicit memory location. Hard coded memory access from applications can be a bad thing in an environment in which hardware is
dynamic and the key is to keep the application level software away from physical memory until it has gathered current and correct information and
that all hardware modifications or updates are done through OS routines
which will automatically update the OS's integrated database system. This
will then give an application a fairly decent source for the current information where hardware would be mapped before the app writes or reads
from the memory. You certainly do not want the app to be writing wherever
the app programmer decides as that may not be correct from one persons configuration to another. That is why Hardware IDs may be given as keys
for use of associated arrays. Say an Associative Array of Registers.
Simply search the RegisterMappingArray for SD-RAM_BANKSWITCH and you
should be able to retrieve a hexadecimal value of the register. This is a little idea behind my OS. Hardware will likely be mapped as the computer starts and the OS starts but I need to be open to handle "real-time"
changes.

There are several ways to handle this.

|We essentially load the C64 chipset into the C-One.

Nah, tell me about the 65816 'native' mode instead.

Ok, which part do you want to start with. I am only able to go with the
same info that you were given too like everyone else.

|This is done by loading in a set of files into the FPGA.

Assuming Per Olofsson's code worked.

Yes, assuming it works.
(From the last time I checked, it seems to be working at least from the screenshots)

|This set of files can be called a "coreset". You can not map hardware
|until you know what you chipset is going to be and that is determined
|by the "coreset" files.

Rather, the core had damn better support the signals for the pins
of the 65816, where they OUGHT to be, or it aint gonna work AT ALL.
Think about that, Rick, and let it sink in, if you can.

Yes... That is why different coresets maybe used for use with different
CPUs. I understand that. The same rules go for a z80 as well as any other
CPU. Otherwise, you could possible damage your CPU if it was not done
right. We are talking about hardware and basic electronics. So let's
always keep that in mind.

I don't care; I will be plugging a real 65816 in, anyway. No need
for Gideon's quasi-65802. If you aren't going to let us plug a
real microprocessor in, then why even have a universal 'socket?'

The 65c816 is stock anyway so you really just need to get the machine as
is. You do not really need to use the CPU Slot unless you want a fancy
CPU Slot that also gives you z80 as well and gives you some method to
handle switching between the two CPUs for stuff like C-128 stuff and CP/M stuff. And we get down to working out a Super-VDC.

<worthless blather snipped>

|The C-One is very different.

Really? In what way?

IBM PCs are static hardware accept for the mapping process.




--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

no response from my ebay email...

*sigh*

The IDE64 guys have received my emails, answered my questions and been very helpful. I've since placed an order with them for the IDE64, DUART and
PC-KEYB .

I'm still interested in the CMD hard disk, should Maurice ever reply to any correspondance.

Mike

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307080419380.27942-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

Do you know what they are? Or need I ask?

Yes I know what patents are.

'Processes,' Little Tinman. Ways of doing, ways of producing,
methods of achieving particular results. The means whereby
the ends are arrived at - the very essence of a method or
means, as it happens to be, or is intended to be the subject
matter of the Patent Office. Patents are *always* open to
the public. Look at the etymology behind the word 'patent'
(if that helps any).

Ok

Certainly not! Trademarks are not patents.

"MonsterSID" would be a trademark. The technology that makes up the core
would be considered patentable. If I recall right. Western Design Center
had received patents on their "soft core" version of the 65c02 so they
can be used in FPGAs and ASICs. The word soft in soft core often defines whether the core is a digital file that you load into the FPGA to
configure it or a physical core as traditionally made chips are. It is
pretty complex and hard to explain without using visual examples.

|Then again, Jeri wouldn't be giving you jack shit info about
|patents until she sees it important to tell you.

Patents benefit everyone, not just me. They benefit Jeri
by giving her specific rights over the methods that she has
discovered, and the machines necessary to implement those
methods. When she files for a patent, she obtains special
protection over the processes underlying the devices she
has innovated.

Yes it does. Patents give Jeri exclusive rights over the design of her
cores. She can not patent them until the cores themselves are made. The
C-One motherboard itself may or may not be patentable. It is all in the
patent laws. When she does patent them, then you will know. She is not
giving certain information until it is done. It is call protection.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

May I inquire as to why this thread is showing up over in
comp.ai.philosophy?


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"Bill Modlin" <modlin1@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:sRucnRwnOZLHspaiXTWJkw@metrocast.net...

May I inquire as to why this thread is showing up over in
comp.ai.philosophy?

Oh? That would be the work of one Matthew Montchalin...


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:

Certainly not! Trademarks are not patents.

|
|"MonsterSID" would be a trademark.

Maybe someday, assuming someone wishes to appropriate it.

|The technology that makes up the core would be considered patentable.

<digression snipped>

|Then again, Jeri wouldn't be giving you jack shit info about
|patents until she sees it important to tell you.

Patents benefit everyone, not just me. They benefit Jeri
by giving her specific rights over the methods that she has
discovered, and the machines necessary to implement those
methods. When she files for a patent, she obtains special
protection over the processes underlying the devices she
has innovated.

|
|Yes it does. Patents give Jeri exclusive rights over the design of her
|cores.

Bright light, Sherlock.

|She can not patent them until the cores themselves are made.

That's what the paperwork concerning intermediate work products are for.

|The C-One motherboard itself may or may not be patentable.

Oh, let's mix our questions of law and fact together, why don't we?

|It is all in the patent laws. When she does patent them, then you will know.

It would benefit her to let people that her product has been patented.

|She is not giving certain information until it is done. It is call |protection.

With someone like you on her team, she's sure to have an easier ride.

Somewhere.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


Dave Dahle wrote ...

"Bill Modlin" <modlin1@metrocast.net> wrote in message >news:sRucnRwnOZLHspaiXTWJkw@metrocast.net...

May I inquire as to why this thread is showing up over in
comp.ai.philosophy?

Oh? That would be the work of one Matthew Montchalin...

Crossposted to comp.ai.philosophy so that Mr. Modlin can see your answer.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!




--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307081710080.19532-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Bill Modlin wrote:
|May I inquire as to why this thread is showing up over in >|comp.ai.philosophy?

Would you like me to cross-post it to some other sites known
to be chatterbot hangouts?

Matthew, I am not going over to comp.ai.philosophy to discuss this. It is clearly off-topic there and you know it. I would say Option C, Matthew do
Not crosspost to other newsgroups and mail lists.



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307081704210.19532-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

Maybe someday, assuming someone wishes to appropriate it.

<digression snipped>

Hmmm..... perhaps she can and then there is the philosophy of keeping
your mouth shut until the patents rights have been officially awarded.

Bright light, Sherlock.

That's what the paperwork concerning intermediate work products are
for.

Oh, let's mix our questions of law and fact together, why don't we?

It would benefit her to let people that her product has been patented.

Yes, when patents are given. People can't infringe patents of something
if they do not know how the device is made, can they. First off, I can't infringe or steal Jeri's SuperVIC design. The info on the designs are not provided. Smart Jeri. Keep your mouth shut. Don't give the info away.
Patent the design as soon as possible and do not state they are patented
until you are given the patents rights from the US Patents Office. Since
it is illegal to say a something is patented if they are not.

Matthew, patents takes more time now adays to be processed as the "invention"/design as the invention/design has to be compared with
anything else to see if your invention/design hasn't already been
patented by someone else. Since Jeri is best to not give design details
of the cores such as the "SuperVIC" and "MonsterSID" cores until she has received patents. She is likely doing that. So this is why we haven't got
any details on the design structure and model of these cores. So she is
being smart to not tell you for one. How are we sure that you would not
be attempting to steal her design for your own purpose.

With someone like you on her team, she's sure to have an easier ride.

I never said that I was on her team but I am on her side. I made my order reservation and I am protecting this "to be" investment. I'll give you
this update. She is working on the cores.

Just be patient. Info is helpful. Rants are simply annoying. Please be of
help and benefit. As long as you do not digress to rants.

Somewhere.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

"wildstar" <wildstar128@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:Xns93B2D9EF74DCEwildstar128hotmailco@216.168.3.44...

Matthew Montchalin <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0307081704210.19532-100000@lab.oregonvos.net:

[snip]

It would benefit her to let people that her product has been patented.

Yes, when patents are given. People can't infringe patents of something
if they do not know how the device is made, can they. First off, I can't infringe or steal Jeri's SuperVIC design. The info on the designs are not

Just my 2 cents (wearing my cynical hat). :-)

??? What new and innovative invention has she made that warrants the expense and exclusivity of a patent?

AFAIK they cannot be based on the design of previous items (SID and VIC),
and processes alone (eg reconfigurable hardware) are notoriously difficult
to patent

Further, the only advantage a non-submarine patent gives is the inventor
time to develop and exploit the device, or protection against another party applying for the same patent. Is it really needed here?

There may be legal complications resulting in any defence of the patent once given - in that much of the technology and ideas seen in the CommodoreOne
have already been seen in machines such as Atari Jaguar, the Sprinter2000, Commodore 64/128 and IIRC some models of mobile phone.

The best chance for survival the C1 has is if it keeps a low profile in the corporate and legal world, and I would be VERY surprised if Jeri is even considering applying for a patent.


Marc Walters


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113