Oswald

spectrum fan level argument again. the c64 ball is more hires and has more colors. nothing more to say

as there are simply more c64 users and c64 fans out there most people would agree that the c64s are and were better. thats the reality my friend. however this thread is still about c64 and atari. so I will just ignore all of that well then I have big news to you. c64 has a mode where the chars are reduced to 64, and in exchange you can have 4 background, and 16 foreground colors on each charplace without any restrains or extra code. you are denying that a 82 machine can be better than a 79 one. as someone said: there are much more scenarios in which the c64 can do better than those for the atari. we dont need to find anything. 90% or more of 80s games used sprites. nope my dear. atari inc. effectively collapsed because of the c64, tramiel bought it for some bargain price and saved later. if thats not a success then nothing is. also the a8bit line effectively died out in the second half of 80s because it lost it to the c64. it couldnt be beaten more than that

no its not, its just emulating the PAL circuitry's color mixing and TV's blur. yeah welcome to flicker hell, which doesnt shows in this faked picture.

BCD is useful in some situations. The vast majority of 2600 games use BCD for score calculations. As for having add-without-carry, that would require reworking the opcode map. I'm more puzzled at why $CA and $EA aren't used for "INC A" and "DEC A". There are plenty of other places to stick "INX" and "NOP". BCD is crap indeed. any other instructions taking up the chip space this shit is occupying would have been a send from god itself. (I am coding on 6510 since ~17 years)

apple machines were always overpriced piece of underpowered HW (and are today) for their price, they only sell through marketing and because the americans think if something costs more it must be better. The AmigaOS of 85 blew away the MacOS of 91. and AGA was only 1 year away from your timeline.

so Atari Basic Is missing some extremely crucial things: a) speed b) no string arrays b) only 128 variables I think this evens the scales. also you can go wherever with the cursor and edit whatever or is it restricted to edit one line at a time ? its not a crap, its a way to help the user enter cursor and color and etc commands. saving speed is an IO thing and is not the Basic's attribute. its the exact opposite: the ball was made on c64 originally it could have grays aswell but the artist made it like that, and the atari mock up was made by me, so it is the atari which is forced to use grays (or whatever shade) as substitutes of colors in this case nope, it is impossible to do that ball in a way that comes close anywhere close to c64's coloring with pms. and anyhow I can bring up 600 other pictures which is 6x more impossible for the a8 than this ball

another spectrum fan argument. dithering is not a c64 specialty, its everywhere used where there's lack of colors and people want to better that. for example at the a8bit graph2font gallery, its hard to find a picture which doesnt uses it: http://g2f.atari8.info/gallery.html you should maybe ask yourself why is it so since you have all those colors, still dithering everywhere, just like on the c64. does this below look like 80x200 like the above one? no. ofcourse you will disagree c64 basic is in the same situation. but its 4k only. there goes the missing userfriendlyness. why is bcd not a slowdown? your reasoning doesnt explains it. while in a previous post an atarian wrote a crystal clear explanation why it is a slowdown. the c64 integer stuff is interesting, I have made a little test, and probably you are right, because a floating point variable went through faster on the test code as the integer this extra time probably indicates the conversions between fp-integer. on the goto I can not comment I dont know how does it work. all I know is that the basic lines are stored as a onedir chained list so line number doesnt matter, you can make them all the same and everything will still work

I believe the point he was trying to get at is that chip music is an acquired taste ... it doesnt matters anyways since that argument equals those of the spectrum fans: "more vibrating colors", and "more clean sound". makes no sense. Because he is trying to use it against the SID only, while not having the brains to realise that the same applies to Pokey aswell.

here is a reason for you: 1985. Preemptive -Multitasking 32 bit OOP Operating System with GUI, libraries, datatypes, command line, plug n play, multimedia. it was unmatched for 10 years.

the creator decided: 16 colors are 16 colors. 27 monkeys are 27 monkeys, and 6 buttplugs are 6 buttplugs under all circumstances. no emkay, you clearly can not see, a 800xl is blocking your eyes the c64 has textmode for textmode, and the hires bitmap mode is for gfx. but really thinking with your brains what do you think was a8 hires mode built for? with no color separations ? gfx? right, then why is the c64 hires mode not good for gfx? it can even have either 2 colors only just like a8, or much more! people have to learn any "music" its not like when you get born, you come out equipped with liking guiter piano and whatever sounds

I believe you, but what I am talking about there is emkay's saying that c64's went wrong because of fastloaders. I am not denying that early c64 production was poor.

wahaha, you know speccy users very well, I see anyhow you are right. I give up on prooving, lets see if anything else interesting is to come to this thread

I havent came here to hear everyone saying that. I came to defend the c64, against statements like this: yeah, no more my system is better flamewars would be boring

we could take a non subjective measurment: which machine reads more data to display its gfx ? nonsubjectively better gfx capabilities means more data pushed through in any cases. c64 for a gfxline maxxes out at 124 bytes read for the gfx. (I havent added sprite pointers tho they are aswell 8 bytes read for gfx purposes) atari has 48 bytes of bitmap (or font) data + 8 pmgs at max. (I may be wrong here)

Ensoniq was started by the same guy who made the SID. If this guy (Bob Yannes) would have given just a few months more development time, the sid would have more sound channels: "BOB YANNES: Due to time constraints, the oscillators in SID were not multiplexed, therefore they took up a lot of chip area, constraining the number of voices I could fit on a chip." "ANDREAS : What would you have changed in the SIDs design, if you had a bigger budget from Commodore? BOB YANNES : The issue wasn't budget, it was development time and chip size constraints. "

Isn't it caused by the size of available commands? and what does that mean dear emkay, apart from showing you have not much idea about programming in general? You don't have to be polite to me in this ridiculous way. Just learn to accept other people's opinions and tastes. My question eventually explain that I have no idea of the C64's basic and that my last program is written in 1992. But it doesn't explain what you imagine in your brain well, the size (did you mean NUMBER, right?) of the available commands has nothing to do with their speed. so I think it is a nonsubjective fact that you dont know much about programming, especially about ML.

historically the default way to play music on the c64 is to call the musicroutine each frame once thus 50 times per second. then some people started to make music which called the music player often. there are tunes out there which update the tunes up to 16x50 times per second. but the most common is 2x/4x speed tunes. so a 2x tune means that it updates sid registers 2x50 times each second, etc. yeah if the player is written cleverly, then most of the player routine calls really just updates the registers, and the "music data sequencing" is done at 50fps only. this is only 4 sids: the soundchip of speccys and atari STs? first I thought its very weak compared to the SID, the sounds are somehow too clean, too perfect, and only squares no filters, etc. but later I've heard some really nicely composed tunes in and then my opinion got better about it. in the hands of a good composer it gets really good. basically its a SID with only squares/noise and no filters. but I base this only on what I hear, I dont know its specs there are many great YM tunes here : http://plopbox.net/ (change the filter to YM)

indeed.

people usually find programs cool that do things on a machine which wasnt even intended to do, not even in a simple way. except you according to you instead of paying some respect in this cases you laugh off your 'balls off'.

looks nice, could be improved a lot by a skilled gfxman. still my example showed 320x200 (without interlace) and 16 colors.

Have something that is not violet and brown? sure

Isn't it caused by the size of available commands? and what does that mean dear emkay, apart from showing you have not much idea about programming in general?

its every 2nd line hires fli + a layer of x stretched hires sprites behind the foreground hires pixels, so their lower res can be hidden each sprite 'column' has a different color. and there's only one man who can draw in this format )

http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/D/DRAX/Star_Flake.sid oh yeah star flake is wonderful and another one: http://noname.c64.org/csdb/release/download.php?id=54439 you can never stop when its about listing good sid tunes btw time to vomit pals

sidplay http://www.gsldata.se/c64/spw/ examples, I've added some more to my earlier post now: http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/J/Jammer/Mr_Marvellous.sid (trying to make the sid say "mr marvellous" without digis in fact trying to imitate singing on one chanel) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/J/Jammer/Hot_Mommas.sid (sid trying to say:oh fuck me, oh yes, oh yes without digis again) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/J/Jammer/Big_Beat.sid (fucking ammazing instruments even for someone with 22 years of c64ing) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/A/Agemixer/Freestyler.sid (remember the hit freestyler? this is a cover managing to have the sid say"freestyler" and other words) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/B/Behdad...ctric_Jesus.sid (ammazing lead instrument) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/J/Jeff/Anal_ogue.sid http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/P/PVCF/Geometric_2.sid (1:32!) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/P/PVCF/Sampled_Birds.sid (birdsound 0:30) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/B/Blues_..._Cyberspace.sid (crazy multispeed) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/W/Wacek/Psychosis.sid (psychosis, name tells it all:) http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/F/Fanta/I_Love_My_64.sid (3 sid channels + 2digi channels!) polly tracker - 4 channel sample player: - 4-9 kHz sample rate on each channel (C-2 = 8000 Hz) - 4-bit output (or 8-bit with Digimax) tunes: http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/R/Reed/R_E_E_D.sid http://www.c64.org/HVSC/MUSICIANS/R/Reed/Dirty_64.sid to your question: I dont know as I am not a musician. In general: the instruments got more sophisticated, more cleaner, and cooler, the musicians spend more times getting the instruments sound better, multispeed discovered to max (when you set the sid regs many times a frame not just once), no more adsr bugs..read here what it is: http://noname.c64.org/csdb/forums/index.ph...;showallposts=1 early tunes were full of that,