Yes, it's alive and moving closer, as I am currently working on OCE/ECS accelerators.
Jens
Caution: Non registered users only see threads and messages in the currently selected language, which is determined by their browser. Please create an account and log in to see all content by default. This is a limitation of the forum software.
Also users that are not logged in can not create new threads. This is a, unfortunately needed, counter measure against spam. Please create an account and log in to start new threads.
Yes, it's alive and moving closer, as I am currently working on OCE/ECS accelerators.
Jens
Yes, it's alive and moving closer, as I am currently working on OCE/ECS accelerators.
Jens
I have a A1000 NTSC which I hope to be able use as a PAL machine. Would rhe ACE1K be used to fit a newer PAL Agnus to the A1000?
If so, I am highly interrested since I have not been able to source a MOS8367 from anywhere…
I have a A1000 NTSC which I hope to be able use as a PAL machine. Would rhe ACE1K be used to fit a newer PAL Agnus to the A1000?
Expanding to anything more than 512k chip ram means that a "fat" ECS Agnus must be used. This means that the chip is software-switchable between PAL and NTSC. The only difference between the two versions is the chip ID, which ACA1k will be able to set, no matter what Agnus version you have installed. This will make a PAL chip appear like an NTSC one, or vice versa - and it'll be a simple menu option.
since I have not been able to source a MOS8367 from anywhere…
I have a few in stock. Send me an eMail if you're interested.
Jens
I am very interrested indeed!
I have sendt an email to shop@icomp.de 👍
If you need beta testers ACE1K, I volunteer right away to buy an early version to test in my Amiga 1000 and my Amiga 2000A (rev 4) with the same Agnus installed.
Harald
I also volounteer to be beta tester:-) Is there any change it will be released in upcoming months?
No timeframe on this.
Hi, are there any updates regarding release date?
P.S. Why are you deleting my post?
I keep deleting your post because #27 is still valid. It remains valid, even with you asking.