Re: A86: Theory question

To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A86: Theory question
From: Nuno Sao Joao <nmasj@camoes.rnl.ist.utl.pt>
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 18:18:08 +0100
Delivered-To: assembly-86-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Delivered-To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org
References: <19990511224712.90895.qmail@hotmail.com> <19990511.160319.13247.1.Ziggy2282@juno.com>
Reply-To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org

Nicolas P Zagorin wrote:
> 
> Yeah, I don't have any speck on it :)  It was an octagon thing with a
> socket in each side.  You take the calc link and plug it into a socket.
> Basically, it sends all the data from one calc to the other spots, so if
> not calc is plugged into a socket, it gets no data.  It's like if you got
> a y-connector, plugged it into your link port, and then have two of your
> friends plug into the y-connector and they each receive the data sent
> from ur calc...I actually did try that, and got it two work, but I
> remember having to build something to get it to work...
> 

  This wouldn't be too dificult to make.
  We could have a PIC based circuit. It could do buffering
  of small packets (16-24 bytes) and talk to the calcs in
  a round robin fashion. A calc, to send a packet to another
  calc, would have to send the number of the receiving calc
  first, then the packet. The PIC would receive it and hand
  it over to the receiving calc. Well, there are plenty of
  ways this could go from here...
  But if were PIC based, with very much probability it could
  be done with ONLY the PIC (which is a single 18 pin chip),
  which would make it very small and very little power
  consuming (3V is enough).
  Just some ideas...

  NSJ

References:

Re: A86: Theory question

From: "J D" <starkruzr@hotmail.com>

Re: A86: Theory question

From: Nicolas P Zagorin <ziggy2282@juno.com>