Wolfram

How many DOS functions do you have from BASIC? As far as I know you can: Get a Directory Load Save Verify Format but you cannot: copy disks move files between disks rename a file rename is there. the rest is missing. a fair comparison would be looking at the first dos on the A8 side.

on c64: - load"$",8 is just using the command prompt on c64, like typing dir on msdos on pc. no dir listing is possible on atari from the prompt? whats so strange about this? - you dont have to boot DOS up, its in the ROM - you dont need BASIC cartridge to have BASIC, its in the ROM - you can have different DOSes (and BASICs). JiffyDOS was just mentioned. - BASIC is also the command prompt, and part of the OS, and DOS alltogether on the c64, so its pointless to disable it, any program can "disable" it (make the cpu read ram in place of basic rom) if it needs to, with 2 instructions.

That's not entirely correct. The 1541 Ultimate utilizes the expansion port so fast load cartridges can't be plugged in at the same time. You could use a cartridge port expander but there are some technical issues that may preclude them from working as intended. The 1541 Ultimate itself emulates, for lack of a better term, several of the more popular utility cartridges, all of which include fast load functionality. When using the built-in cartridges, yes, the fast load functionality will decrease load times. At present, the 1541 Ultimate does NOT support cartridge images (.crt) so saying it will "emulate any Fast Loader cart of choice (or just whatever cart, even game carts" is inaccurate and misleading. yes I got carried away there. as the Retro Replay -which is pretty old tech by now - makes it possible to use different .crt files I thought the new 1541U does the same straight away. I was wrong. anyway the best utility cartridges are supported, that means up to 16x the speed of the original 1541 speed. however most of the multiload stuff will not run at 16x speed, only the first file. from the time a program started its up on it wether it uses its own custom slow loader (which is the case most of the time), or if its written system friendly it will stay on 16x speed, or if you have a good crack (look for Nostalgia/Remember cracks of games!) you can pick between its own fastloader/system friendly mode. Street Rod for example can be "hacked" (redirect load vector to AR loader) with Action Replay with a few keypresses so it will use 16x speed, sadly tho its an exception and usually that doesnt works. edit: you might know all of the above already, I have written it down to give info to other guys.

before you will make things up: my statement to wood has nothing to do with what you said above. you had a great deal of constant personal bitching on me and you still try to act like mr wiseboy. its pathethic.

I accept the apology. Its very nice from you. As a deal I'll try to be more of an observer from now on than "stirer". I got tired by now anyway.

1541U will emulate even the FastLoader carts for you. So loading up ~50k will take not much time (depends on speeder cart). It is necessary to emulate the 1541 as accurate as possible, because for loading timing is crucial, and all timing is done via software with fastloaders. all c64 fastloaders use their own protocol done via software.

A1200 has IDE controller built in, and its pretty much compatible with A500. But if you decide you can beef it up into a machine which is internet/mp3/doom/quake etc capable. I have surfed the web on an A1200 with 68030 16 megs fast, and 80mb hdd. boy it was painfully slow looking now back

thats ironic. the decision to make the 1541 compatible to VIC20 made it a slow drive which you like to attack, but now the same decision works in your favor.

Yep, that's because the joysticks are wired to the same CIA registers as the keyboard. If you had to read joystick inputs along with a lot of keystrokes (e.g. for a complex flight sim or something alike) you would first have to read the joystick without reading the keyboard simultaneously and check if some of it's switches are closed and thereby could cause interference with some of the keys you want to test, and then skip the scanning of any interfering keys depending on the joystick readout. Or, for a less complex control setup, just use some of the 24 keys that never interfere with joystick inputs yes thats a problem, but you can circumvent it like you said, or picking key which doesnt interfere. I have played a few games needing both joy/keyboard input and never found this to be a problem. the most annoyance I got out of this was when my buddy wiggled the joystick to fuck up my typing "LOAD "$",8

The 1541 Ultimate was created to reproduce the functionality of the 1541 disk drive as accurately and thoroughly as possible and therefore it is subject to the same limitations as the original hardware. When you speak of the "shitty disc system", are you making reference to the speed at which data is transferred between the 64 and 1541? If so, be aware that when used as a 1541, the 1541 Ultimate will not be any faster than a 1541 and depending on the revision of the 1541 ROM that you use, it will present the same annoyances (like the save-with-replace bug, for example). It's a 1541 reproduction, warts and all. No historical revisionism. I hope you someday describe the 1541 Ultimate as being as shitty as a 1541. That would be a great compliment indeed. the 1541 Ultimate will emulate any Fast Loader cart of choice (or just whatever cart, even game carts). So the speed/handling issue will be not a problem with it.

which is not a problem, as 99% of the I/O solutions doesnt use the joystick port for the I/O. because it wasnt designed to be used for I/O like on the atari. C64 has other dedicated ports for I/O. also in 99,9% of the cases you dont want to type and do I/O at the same time on 8 bit systems. because they are not modern OS, where you can type on a forum while loading. the computer does either this or that.

... and on the c64 the standard hardware does not use the joystick port for data I/O. you are contradicing yourself.

He's not right. You can't just randomly choose an analogy and think it applies. indeed but you are oh so right. you are comparing ports being used for something they werent on most of the machines. apples and oranges.

You deny the reality that on many computers joystick ports were used for joysticks, and other ports were standard for I/O, unlike on atari. Its pointless to compare ports for using for something they werent 99% of the time.

yes, very realistic. WIN98SE: everybody uses one and worries about the nr of cycles it needs to read the joystick ports.

and then you fall into your own trap: c64 can read one or both of his joystick ports in less cycles than atari. not that anybody cared except you.

re-read. I have listed you as an exception of the attacking crowd edit: ie. I have said quite the contrary.

The c64 OS doesnt use the joystick ports for I/O because they were never intended to be. (The c64 OS infact never cares about joystick ports.) c64 has a dedicated parallel and serial I/O port, for doing (DATA) I/O, and beside using that it can just happily read the keyboard too. Not that it's a real life like situation, that you do both loading/typing/joystick movements at the same time. Does your solution on atari support reading keyboard/loading on the same time? Is there any use of that?

which is a pointless&unfair comparison. because except the A8 all of the listed computers have and use another solution for I/O and not their joystick port. to repeat myself this comparison is like: - hey my car's exhaust is better than your because it can blow dust off better than yours! - thats true, but my car came with a vacuum cleaner t do that job, and it can suck dust in, which is even better - bah, dont change the subject its exhaust vs exhaust!!

so its a minor difference, because c64 almost never uses the joystick ports for transferring data. the c64 uses in 99% of the time its serial port or its parallel port. and in these days there are cartridges doing TCP/IP networking, which are the shit, and cartridges using memory cards. joystick porti I/O on the c64 is a rare non standard solution.

I dont think my behaviour does damage. You wear the a8 glasses and dont notice, how everyone except the "atari versions of Fröhn" like Bryan for example, or Heaven, goes on calling me soar loser, fucker, and such just attacking me in person endlessly. While you will find me not doing these name callings, I just ignore them, because I'd like to argue about numbers, which behaviour you simply address as "chicken-shit" fashion. You bring some forums as examples how this should settle, and I just agree, there are no namecallings, no one calls anyone behaving like a "chicken-shit" because he's just ignoring the post who dont do anything but attack someone in person. Remember the disk drive speed debate? You have asked for numbers (in very angry style, shouting in capitalls, generalizing how I dont bring proofs, calling what I said bullshit, saying I never argue correctly etc etc) and I have just ignored or your attacks, and politely I have gave you your numbers, and the end result was that I was right. Using real disk drives on both sides, or in same cases even a8 disk simulators for comparison the 1541 is faster. And likewise the guys over on Lemon64, I have no problem admitting (just read back a few pages for proof) that the A8 cpu is faster, Display list is a nice feature, ROF is faster etc. etc. what makes THIS thread going on forever some guys not being able to accept some of the c64's similarly obvious strengths. Like atariksi comes and says stuff like "CIA is superior but from a software point its useless compared to what the PIA has to offer". Can maybe YOU explain me how CIA is useless, when it can do everything PIA does, and MORE. Can you explain me the chips doing keyboards/joys/paddles/c64 sio/rs232/parallel I/O/etc etc how are useless for the software? and what is your reason calling me a butthole ? You're and others just going on and on calling me names. I have given you the numbers, I am not attacking anyone in person, like many of you do here with all this namecalling etc, and I end up being the butthole.? You and others just turned the whole thing into a personal debate! Whats the problem? Its like 5-6 guys trying to bully me off the site because I will just not accept stuff like "atari's multicolor sprites are superior" or "c64 OS cant buffer keystrokes" or "CIA is useless", and so on. so you are there on it again. I will just ignore all this shit you are throwing on me, and this was the last time I have adressed this issue.

?! well if you want to do something with a computer you usually need a peripheral or something. Not with the 800XL, it's got a built-in cartridge port-of course, you can always add drives on if you want. Does the C64 have a built-in disk drive? And how large (inches) were the disks? I've never played one. At least the games are FINALLY getting onto the Virtual Console here in the US! its all the same on both machines. cartridg ports,disk drives (not built in), disk sizes, etc. c64 is already on the Virtual Console.

The fact that drive simulators vary and their host pc has to be first booted up to the drive adds to overhead. I hear you "but it has to be done only once". well, same goes to drive speeder software. Also dont forget that you're comparing here 21st century technology vs 80s. thats a "fair" comparison right? and you even want to add the software upload overhead to the c64's time for being even more "fair", but you forget about the pc preparations overhead.... a fair comparison is: HW modded a8 drive vs software uploaded 1541 the 1541 isnt even changed in HW and still is faster. so really fair would be using a 1541 modded to send 8bits parallel...

I dont need permission. its normal, happens everyday everywhere with quotes that some parts get stressed.

No, you can have CPU setup which insert wait states on I/O calls like PC does. So the fact that they timed the I/O ports at the same frequency is another gain for the Atari since net throughput is higher for I/O. We are talking I/O speed. It's the samething with timers-- PC originally running at 4.77Mhz decided to divide CPU speed by 3 and then feed it's timer chip 8253 (PIT) so their timing accuracy is 1/119318Mhz = 840ns. I agree CIA is a superior chip than PIA but the way it's implemented, it's functionality can be performed better on Atari with its chipset. and CIA can do everything PIA can, and MORE! so you can have CPU setup which insert wait states on I/O calls like PC does. etc etc yaddayadda.