> m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> Niki wrote: >>> JohnS a écrit : >>>> --- >> <snip> >>>> You should have better success with another 128MB of RAM.. >> <snip> >>> I corrected that problem, and now it *looks* like everything's OK. But >>> you're right. Another 128 MB RAM won't hurt. (My first computer, a >>> single-board 8080, actually had 512 *bytes* of RAM, so it's just a >>> matter of adapting to modern times :oD) >> >> *heh* I remember the first computer I owned, and my ex and a friend >> violated the warranty on the RadShack CoCo, opened it up, and doubled >> the memory for a birthday present. Then, I had 32K ram! (Are you sure you >> didn't mean 512K RAM?) > > Not unless it had some additional hardware assistance. The 8080 can only > address 64K. Apologies - I was thinking 8088. Name doesn't sound at *all* alike.... <g> mark