Timeline for Why did the stock Amigas not have a battery for keeping the time/date?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 16, 2022 at 0:16 | comment | added | supercat | @BruceAbbott: I wonder if it would be possible to design a device which would fit around an alkaline AA or AAA cell (different device for each) but would have a bulge which could accommodate leaking battery ooze. Or perhaps have a device fit around an AAA sell but have exterior dimensions sized for an AA (again with space to hold ooze). | |
| Feb 15, 2022 at 22:11 | comment | added | Bruce Abbott | @supercat some did eg. Amstrad, Apple - but for primary cells not rechargeable. But standard dry cells had short lifen and high capacity lithium batteries were very expensive. NiMH had the advantage of 'never' needing replacement, and in the days when PCs were turned fully off when not in use the battery drained faster than they do today. I think the problem is that PC manufacturers believed the data supplied by battery manufacturers, which said they could be charged indefinitely and wouldn't leak! | |
| Feb 15, 2022 at 19:01 | comment | added | supercat | @BruceAbbott: I wonder why more devices didn't use battery holders that were designed to contain any battery leakage? | |
| Feb 15, 2022 at 9:22 | comment | added | Bruce Abbott | The IBM PC didn't have an RTC, and it wasn't cheap. Neither did the Apple IIc, the BBC Micro, the Atari 130XE, the Amstrad CPC6128... Seems like a lot of contemporary computer manufacturers were 'very very cheap'. And a good thing too. So many expensive computers have been destroyed by leaky RTC batteries. | |
| Feb 14, 2022 at 23:46 | history | answered | scruss | CC BY-SA 4.0 |