JamesD

Not sure I'd call it an arcade port since there isn't an arcade game with the same levels, but it is definitely derived from Donkey Kong.

Never heard of most of those. There is a CoCo game similar to Phantoms Five called F-16 Assault, but I don't think it has the head on screen. This is one of the best places for info on CoCo games. There are entries for 651 games, but the maintainer said he has over 400 games he hasn't added yet. http://www.lcurtisboyle.com/nitros9/coco_game_list.html *edit* Not sure why the link didn't show up.

Word processing was and is practical on most of these systems, but I wouldn't use one instead of a modern PC. Certain machines had more professional options than others for sure, and thanks to the Apple II 80 column support, it certainly has many good options. I'd rate the CoCo ahead of the Atari or C64 in this category, but fans of those machines will argue otherwise. One question... why use it for that other than just to try it? The IIe requires a RAM expansion board if you wanted to use 80 columns for word processing, but the IIGS includes enough RAM out of the box. The IIGS also lets you use the Mac like GUI if you so desire. I can hear "But GEOS..." from some people already. I've tried it, there's no contest. As I said before, Applesoft BASIC *is* an extended BASIC, though it has fewer advanced features than the CoCo, Plus/4, C128, Amstrad, etc... There are ZERO sound commands. Well... you can BEEP but that's it. As far as file I/O goes, TRS-80s, Commodores, and Atari's all have it, but I'd definitely put certain computers ahead of others in how file I/O is performed. I never cared for the way DOS 3.3 is integrated into the Applesoft interpreter, but that's just my opinion. I've never looked at ProDOS BASIC support, so I can't say anything about that. I'd say the learning curve is similar to other extended BASICs, and there is a GLUT of books on the machine. This is the one area where certain machines are head, and shoulders above the rest. Apple II, C64, and Atari have a lot of books available. If you want to collect books, these are the top platforms. In spite of that, I'd only buy a handful of them for any machine because there is so much duplication. If I wanted a computer that would might be kept going almost indefinitely, a II+ would be one of the best choices due to the lack of custom chips, and common cheap replacements of almost everything in the design. I think the keyboard controller and ROMs would be the only possible issues with it, and you can burn new eproms. A Franklin Ace 1000 might even be better since several upgrades such as the language card, upper and lower case, etc... are built in. It's somewhere between the II+, and IIe in features. Just expect to fix the foam/foil in the keyboard, and good luck finding one with a color board. I don't care for disk options that don't allow some sort of hard drive like emulation, but that's just me. This is one of the reasons I suggested Unidisk support. Non internal solutions still have to go through the floppy interface which is slow. I mentioned the BMOW Floppy Emu btw. There is another SD interface, and the source code, board layout, everything are provided. But they don't have any boards for sale. I forget what it's called. One drive option I forgot is Reactive Micro's MicroDrive Turbo, an internal card that supports DMA, which should make it the fastest option available. Since it uses an IDE connector, you *might* be able to use a cheap PC CF adapter that hooks to a card slot opening, though that would require some modification. It's $75 to $95 depending on what options you order. The one drawback, is that in doesn't emulate floppies. The only internal hard drive / floppy drive card that supported floppy images was the CFFA 3000, and even it didn't support copy protected disks. For that matter, I don't know if the external floppy emulators support copy protected disks, so people would have to do some research before buying. CiderPress is excellent. The previous version has some bugs, not sure if the latest fixed them or not. I've had problems with AppleWin keeping consistent speed on the emulated machine, and intercepting SHIFT+PRINT SCREEN is really annoying. Other than that, it works well.

Apple for bang for the buck? An Apple II system isn't going to be cheap unless you know someone. One of the complaints about the CoCo 3 is it's expensive, yet most people are asking $200 for a regular old Apple IIe, or a "for parts" IIGS. A lot of the IIe machines are even missing keys, so they need repairs. Yeah there are cheaper machines, but the bidding is still underway. One of the better B.I.N. prices I found was a IIGS for $120 + $40 shipping, and that's without a keyboard or mouse! There is a IIGS with keyboard, mouse, drives... at $120 + $50 shipping, but that's just where the current bidding is at. As for modern storage solutions, there are many options. I have a CFFA, and a CFFA 3000. They are neat, but cheap they are not. The last one was $140 + shipping or something like that. You can add a Floppy Emu to emulate an external floppy drive or hard disk (requires Unidisk support) but it's also $140 + shipping. That's more than Commodore, Atari, or CoCo solutions by quite a bit. The SDFloppy II is $82, but it only seems to emulate a floppy drive, and I'm not even sure it lets you organize multi-disk programs into their own directories. The doc I downloaded on it is brief. IF I were to recommend an Apple, I'd go with a IIe, or IIGS. These have the most options for upgrades, and he IIGS has all the new goodies such as new graphics modes, better sound, support for more RAM, 2.8MHz 65816 CPU, etc.. At one time there were a number of programs that didn't like the 65816 in the IIGS, but most of those have patched versions now. It also has most of the needed I/O controllers built on the board instead of requiring cards you might have to add. A later IIc or a IIc Plus would also be pretty good, and they also have most of the required I/O built in. I say later IIc because of the added Unidisk support added in late 1985, and internal RAM expansion connector added in 1986. Later ones also reduce the number of RAM chips. Look for a light grey colored machine for the IIc if you can. If you buy a IIc, remember that it uses an external power supply which should be included or you'll have to buy one. The IIc Plus is harder to come by, and will cost more, but it has a 4MHz CPU, 3.5" drive, and internal power supply. I have one, it's a neat machine. The drawbacks to the IIc, and IIc Plus are that it's more difficult to add upgrades, and you have fewer options.

If you are going to make statements like this, it would help anyone wanting to get into retro computing if you would actually say what the hassles are so they can decide if it's an issue for them or not.

Screen width probably goes back to IBMs 80 character punch cards. I'm guessing much of the later use was due to the 80s being 'the future' or present decade depending on when a product came out. It was very common as part of IC or microcomputer names. 8080, 8085, 8051, Z80, TRS-80, ZX-80, and a lot of other computers with 80 in their name If you drop the zero, you get 8 bit. 64, 65, and 68 were used a lot as well

The CoCo had exclusives, but it's going to be titles most people have never heard of. It was supported mostly by small game distributors like Tom Mix Software, Spectral Associates, Mark Data Products, Computerware, Ardvark-80, etc... If you dig out an old Rainbow magazine, you find quite a few unique titles buried among the arcade clones, but few of them are even on the archive.

Because clearly, that must have been what I mean even though I haven't mentioned that once in this thread.

If you only want to play games

How can something that hasn't been released impress me? At this point it's all marketing.

There is no loading, Disk BASIC is built into the ROM on the controller, or on the CoCoSDC. It's instantly available when you turn on the machine. That's pretty obvious if you've ever turned one on. Now, if you want to load OS-9, then that does require loading, but I wouldn't recommend a Unix like OS for a newb anyway.

Very valid points. A composite mod for a CoCo 1/2 will set you back as much as the computer. 4K & 16K machines may not have EXTENDED COLOR BASIC, which is why I usually tell people to look for a 64K CoCo 2 if they are going for a 1 or 2. That takes the guesswork out of whether it has EXTENDED COLOR BASIC or 64K. 64K machines have ECB The CoCo 3 always comes with ECB, and runs games you couldn't think of doing on a CoCo 1/2. I'm not going to dispute all the hardware options for carts for the C64. There are a lot of them. As long as people remember they cost extra, that's fine.

We aren't talking about a Tandy Laptop. I said all the other machines, none of which were a Tandy laptop, but for the sake of argument, lets say CoCo 2 (and I'd suggest CoCo 3 really). The problem here is right in your message "I really have no clue...". You aren't speaking from experience, and clearly, Bill doesn't know either based on his last response. So let's see how difficult the CoCo DOS really is. Feel free to post C64 equivalents so people can make up their own minds what is easier. RUN"<filename>" runs a basic program. The drive number is optional, so yeah, it's even easier than LOAD"<filename>",X , but if you want it, just change it to RUN"<filename>:<drive #>" where drive #'s start at zero. LOAD"<filename>" loads a BASIC program without running it LOADM"<filename>" loads a machine language program, if it doesn't automatically execute, type EXEC to start the program. DIR displays the disk directory KILL"<filename>" deletes a file RENAME"<filename>" TO "<filename>" renames a file COPY"<filename>" TO "<filename>" copies a file from one to the other PRINT FREE(<drive #>) will show how much space is available on a disk BACKUP <drive #> will make a backup of a disk using one drive, BACKUP <drive #> TO <drive #> will backup a disk from one drive to another DSKINI<drive #> formats the disk in the specified drive If you don't have an early DOS, games that are written for OS-9 can be launched simply by typing "DOS", like it will say on the disk label. You now have a summary of the DOS commands. What is obvious to me is that you couldn't be bothered to learn any of that because you have little or no interest in the CoCo no matter how much you pretend to be unbiased. BTW, the Plus/4, and C128 have similar commands. Why would they add similar commands if the C64 is easier? There are several commands for dealing with sequential or random access files from BASIC, but you'd want to download the DOS manual for that since it has a lot of examples. I hadn't used that in 35 years but I was still able to convert a program from using a huge list of data statements to using a sequential file in about a half hour. That included making a separate program with the DATA statements to create a file, and replacing the DATA statement read routine with a disk read routine. I spent more time looking up the syntax for OPEN, and reorganizing the rest of the code than writing the new file I/O code. It took a little longer to convert the graphics code from Plus/4 to CoCo 3 due to some issues with the original program. The code is on the CoCoTalk discord server in the BASIC area if you care to look. The CoCoSDC requires mounting a disk image if you want to control it from DOS, and there are several videos on youtube on how to use that, however, there is also a menu system that lets you browse for the game you want to run, you simply highlight it, and hit enter. People have even created SD images with everything in the CoCo Archive already setup. Some of the multi-disk games have even been modified so no disk changing is required, and it all loads off of one disk image. Someone on Discord has also been working on converting some of the disk games to cart images. He's written a program to extract the game from the disk, code to load it from a cart instead, and he's successfully tested it with some games. Any un-copyprotected game up to 32K that doesn't perform disk I/O can be converted, and a lot of the CoCo games are like that. He hasn't released anything yet, but if a multicart is more your thing, that should appear some time in the near future. Conversely, existing cart based games can be loaded, and played from the CoCoSDC. The CoCo will load faster than the C64 even if you use a high speed loader on the C64 because the CoCo uses a parallel disk interface. The CoCo *does* use proprietary joysticks, and/or you have to buy an Atari joystick adapter, though Atari joysticks won't work well with all games. But then how many people that have no experience with a classic system have Atari joysticks sitting around either? GOOD Atari type joysticks with leaf switches aren't super cheap either, though crappier ones are a dime a dozen. Atari joysticks aren't great for certain games either. Good luck playing a game like 'Doubleback' without an analog stick. There is a reason modern gaming systems use controllers with short throw analog controllers, and directional buttons. If you already own a game console or computer that required Atari type joysticks, then using what you already have will obviously be cheaper than buying something new.

If I remember correctly, it was leaving the sprite data on screen under certain conditions. It shouldn't be horrible to debug. It would have to be in the erase code. An erase is either getting skipped, or it's erasing the wrong location. The former might be due to different directional logic, collision, etc... The latter could be due to erasing the wrong object, or the object's new location rather than the old one.

Not if it means the PS5 looses exclusives, the XBOX gains them, and more people subscribe to GamePass. Part of the reason I said no more cheap titles from those studios is because it makes no sense to let people buy older titles cheap when you can use those titles to encourage people to subscribe to Gamepass instead.

Out of the box, the C64 has also has the most cryptic DOS system. For a beginner, it's not very user friendly. The C64 really needs a fast load cart, or Jiffydos ROMs so that it loads at a decent speed, and to add a DOS "wedge" to make the machine easier to use. Was that included in the price of the C64, and if not, what does that cost? All the other machines have an easier to use DOS, and faster loading out of the box.

You can say goodbye to cheap games from those studios

The sound and speech cart doesn't allow the CPU to have direct access to the sound chip. From BASIC it can be great since it can play music while the computer is doing other things, but it makes programming it a bit more difficult for regular music players.

The question always goes back to "for what". The C64 certainly has a huge game library, and had an enormous amount of support. I'm not going to post a lot of CoCo 1/2 stuff, people can find it on youtube, but I will share this. This is a recent BASIC game: Video Playback (one of many demos): The CoCo 3 is more expensive, but if you can afford one, it's well worth it. Here are some examples. Pooyan is actually a CoCo 1/2 game patched for a different palette on the CoCo 3. There are several patches like this for CoCo 1/2 games Now for games made specifically for the CoCo 3: In addition to be able to run some CoCo 1/2 games with a different color palette, there are also some games that have received patches to make them run faster. This was a test of a work in progress, but some games have been optimized with faster code. Note that when the GIME X comes out, it also has a higher speed mode that people have also shown tests of 'Rescue on Fractalus' on And normal CoCo 3 games (sorry for the commentary on some of them, I didn't do it)

The CoCoSDC is $58 if you want to add an SD drive the CoCo. That's without the plastic case which is sold separately.

Adobe fix something??? Ha ha ha ha ha...

The C64's memory layout for bitmapped graphics also causes a speed penalty for 3D wire frame graphics.

Funny how a company that dropped out of the computer market produced one of the most successful computer products to this day.

This pretty much sums up the responses to the recent what retro computer would you recommend... thread. People giving responses based on their own biases, and what features are/were important to them. But if you look at the responses, some people do list what they base their suggestion on. When it comes to the herd/standardization movement... my one complaint, is that computers hadn't had enough time to evolve before settling on "standard" machines that were supported. I think that actually slowed development of new solutions, alternate CPUs, better operating systems, etc.. because there wasn't as much competition. Can you imagine how much faster machines would have developed it we had waited a decade? In spite of the fact that I used my Amiga 3000 through several generations of PCs, and I still consider the programming environment the most productive I've ever worked on, I would have been better off getting a PC because it was the chosen standard.

CP/M and CP/M-86 are not the same thing, and wanting CP/M-86 was about wanting an OS, not wanting CP/M applications.