Talk:Z-80 SoftCard

Computing Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Apple Inc. Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics 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.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc. articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft 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.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

This seems to be written from a VERY odd point of view. It's not an NPOV problem, just person.

The claim above is a very interesting observation and one suspects might indeed win an award, if such were ever to be offered, for what might be the most (gloriously?) esoteric criticism ever made of any wikipedia article. (Ericross) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericross (talk • contribs) 11:42, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

I noticed a couple problems with this article that should be corrected:

1) "The SoftCard Legacy" section is pure opinion. It should be deleted.

If not, the following information needs to be corrected:

2) The failed successor to the Apple II was the Apple III (introduced by 1980). The Mac may be considered a successor to the Lisa. The II family went on to the //e, //c and IIgs sub-families, all of them largely regarded as home machines in a time business computing was synonymous to PC-compatibility.

3) the business legitimacy of the Apple II was not usually questioned. It was the first platform where Visicalc ran, effectively legitimizing personal computers as business tools. Rbanffy (talk) 15:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the same problems with the 'Legacy' section. I deleted it on sight due to: 1. No citations, pure opinion, and 2. Bad logic. The SoftCard was released 4 years prior to the Mac, so it is impossible for the SoftCard to mitigate any business-unfriendly aspects of the Mac. By the time the Mac was mainstream, CP/M was dead anyway. Mvdwege (talk) 04:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing technical specifications

I'd have to look for sources but missing details are that its Z80 was clocked at 2.041MHz and that its terminal emulated VT52. —Paleo Neonate – 19:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm revising: according to [1] p. 15 the native codes supported by the commonly used Vidtex Videoterm 80-columns display card were a subset of the old Datamedia terminals control codes that UCSD Pascal supported. The Apple-supplied CP/M could translate them with configuration tables, so although it could presumably be configured to be close to VT52, I was mistaken above. —Paleo Neonate – 20:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]