A quick A1200 Q

[StevenJGore]

what's the difference between a C= A1200 upgraded with 3.1 roms and and an Amiga Technologies A1200?

Besides 3.1 ROM's and a PC floppy drive adapted for the Amiga, I believe that the AT A1200's motherboard is a later revision and fixes a few problems that Commodore never had chance to do.

Which one should you sell? IMHO, you should sell the Commodore A1200, simply because its an older motherboard revision. The floppy drive problem of the AT A1200 won't affect you unless you have lots of old games on non-DOS floppies which use strange methods of copy protection.

Steve.

[StevenJGore]

Ah yeah, isn't the floppy drive a standard HD drive modded to work as DD....?

Yep!

[StevenJGore]

I think the processor in the Escom one was a bit cack, an EC version, which was cack in some way compared to the original?

No, don't think so. They were both 68EC020's in the Commodore and AT models.  :-)

What sort of motherboard hacks do you mean?  :-?

[StevenJGore]

Is there anything sucky about the EC'020's?

Nothing that separates the Commodore A1200's from the AT A1200's. Obviously, full 68020 processors would have been more ideal because the 68EC020 only has a 24-bit address bus, rather than the 32-bit address bus of the full 68020, and a 68EC020 can only address 16Mb of memory... so I guess from those points-of-view the 68EC020's are sucky! But then how many true Amigans are running A1200's with just their stock processors?  :-)

[StevenJGore]

Only the fact that MMU & FPU functions are missing!

The 68020 doesn't have any MMU or FPU functions, in either the full or economy versions. The 68030 was the first to have a MMU, of which the 68EC030 was lacking an MMU.