Mr SQL

X2 I'm not promising the OP it's going to work either just that it's a good experiment. Just like the Hairy Harry magnetic toy we had as kids there may be enough free phosphor to magnetize and accumulate on the remaining phosphor in the dark spots, worth a try. Excellent detailed description of degradation - what are your thoughts on the Hairy Harry analogy to adhere free non-degraded phosphor by creating a permanent magnetic field on it for targeted binding on the degraded areas? Here is an explanation of the science behind the technique that was described:

The TRS-80 was named for the Z80 initially, but it quickly became powerful marketing. Anyone who could add could tell the ZX-81 was a little better than the ZX-80. It was equally clear to anyone with decent algebra skills that the TRS-80 was four times more powerful than the VIC-20 and 20% more powerful than the C64, Apple and Atari 800XL. It was all a numbers game. Commodore got smart with the 128 and then smarter still moving to the Amiga 500 - good machines like the Atari ST would have done much better with a big number after it and instead of confusing people sounding like the C64 the Jag, would have done far better marketed as the Jaguar 5000 Moon Machine - let's do the math now!

You and batari are both old-school engineers like me so should keep an open mind; consider we only come across new ideas by experimenting, only academics and their students can avoid them using simple idioms. I am not impressed by the debunkers on the thread or the OP's engineering knowledgebase for that matter or he would not need the advice. I think the idea is sound and worth a try in case the particular phosphor compound is magnetic or can be magnetized- that's what was described in the post, have you ever work a magnet over a screwdriver or paperclip like that when you were a kid? It gets magnetized and it becomes a magnet too, magnetic fields are transferrable and that's the idea there with phosphor accumulation but the trouble is there are many types of phosphor and not all are equally magnetic so I think the OP would have to experiment to see if it helps.

Yes the magnets are balanced for convergence and only on the color sets. Agree about the degaussing coils but those are also only on color sets. I did a search and saw the same idea I suggested here on the Antique Radio Forums: "you could lessen burn-in by swiping a magnet back and forth over the area, with video on the screen, in as many directions (incidental angles)..." If think perhaps what is happening is that some free phosphor sticks to the existing phosphor that remains in the burned area if the burn is not that bad as phosphor is also magnetic.

The phosphor coating is magnetic so it may depend how badly it's burned. If leaving the set on maximum brightness has done nothing it's worth trying. There are magnets for convergence in some sets.

Distortion from the magnetic field. Yes, use a greater distance to the screen based on the strength of the magnet.

Try holding a magnet just close enough to each of the larger sunspots to lighten them for a few seconds. Repeat until significantly lessened or resolved; be careful of holding the magnet for too long or too closely.

The BBC was really cool for having two programming languages in ROM and being able to mix the languages easily together - Assembly programming was enhanced to go horizontal with the ":" BASIC concatenator for Assembly statements as well. I've implemented these design features in SuperCharger BASIC but it should also be possible to use a good BASIC without using any inline assembly or pokes and peeks as that is beyond BASIC and essentially using advanced Machine Language, necessary with the MC-10 in that link because the graphics modes beyond 64x32 semi-graphics are not accessible through BASIC like they are on the larger Color Computer models. The Interact with the large text display looks similarly intriguing to the BBC Micro from this perspective with some models having four classic programming languages in ROM.

I found the keyboard usable because the keys are small enough large fingers have room, but you can't touch type at speed like on the CoCo II keyboard or even the mushy C64 keyboard - I sat in front of both for hours coding bitd. I was disappointed when the MC-10 was discontinued and the CoCo III came out, because of the potential for semi-graphics that the MC-10 had and which incidentally were neglected on the GIME emulation for the CoCo III, VDG not fully emulated. This was unfortunate because bigger pixels are better and allow for more Atari looking games with bigger pixels and more colors - 9 colors as opposed to 4 - as well as mixing of fine resolution character graphics with the semi-graphics. Here is a cool page with techniques one MC-10 programmer is using that interestingly resemble C64 peeks and pokes to get to the hidden semigraphics modes that exist on the MC-10.

X2 Great point - that journey is half the fun and can be lost if the machine starts maxed out.

^This is why, and I think the big letters are a big plus. I find the 32 column display of the CoCo and MC-10 and the 22 column display of the VIC very welcoming and refreshing to code on - everything really jumps out at you when the text is big. Probably every programmer writing pro software in the 80's would agree it was a more fun then, but what about the user experience? Today people are trained to constantly squint at tiny phone displays with too many pixels to see clearly. That always looks painful to me and I refuse to do it, I wish I still had my analog Startek from 1997. The Interact you don't care for looks more and more keen, particularly the model with all four languages of the era I mentioned earlier all built in - BASIC, Assembly, Logo and Forth in ROM. How retro computer cool!

Great post and perspective and all good questions. BASIC was designed as a tiny Fortran on the Dartmouth Time Sharing system so that all college students and not just engineers could learn to program simply. Chess is simple programming too with only about 10 commands but ensuing relational calculus is potentially so complex that IBM used it to find potential programmers before the BASIC experiment. Putting BASIC on all of those home computers was an extension of the Dartmouth BASIC experiment intended for everyone, and the more challenging low memory footprints like 4K of RAM coupled with a capable BASIC allowed better development of potential. Today we find some of the best programmers were influenced by these early duress coding constraints. Unfortunately many of the bright minds with potential who received a C64 may have missed the chance to see their potential fully developed in part because of the large 40K RAM available to BASIC and the direction towards a more consumer oriented gaming system like Nintendo. Good point @JamesD about learning potential and there is a significant connection between the programming tools that were introduced to children's developing minds then when programming was "for everyone", and what we see Today when programming is only for elitists and consumers are just using computers to be pushed around by push content advertising. @phoenixdownita as to weather I would recommend the Interact - yes I would after reading the details about it's Dartmouth designer on this page here. And Simons BASIC is fantastic but not relevant as James pointed out - this was not a meaningful participant in the experiment like 30 million C64s.

How is the VDG setup without the 6883?

Disagree, retro computing was all about BASIC like the introduction in the manual for the Interact illustrates - an obscure 4K Computer I just saw on this thread here which I might possibly also recommend. There are really only two retro languages, BASIC and Assembly, though there were some interesting attempts at other high level languages on home computers such as Logo, Forth and Pascal none of them gained the traction of BASIC.

X2 all excellent points - phoenixdownita has brought up a related point that is missed from some of the comments: Yes we are, that was a big part of the home computer revolution as an extension of Dartmouth "programming for everyone" teaching concept; learning BASIC was what you were supposed to do with a home computer in those pioneering times, not just play games on it. A good BASIC with a smaller memory footprint is more challenging to the intellect and more expressive code is developed, this is part of the outcome we've observed from the 80's BASIC experiment and from the Dartmouth experiments earlier. You and your friends all participated in this experiment but would have more likely to have become better programmers and done less gaming if you received systems with a good BASIC and smaller memory footprint. There are colorful semi-graphics that multiply the bit-plane for free in the VDG present in the MC-10, it's the same graphics chip from the Color computer and semi-graphics are a big part of the retro experience, check out this Atari looking Defender clone using the VDG. These programs can be ported to the MC-10 fairly easily like the Dragon due to the similar architecture and many have been:

Very cool you have an MC-10 in your collection Bill, this is a fun computer that was well designed for it's form factor. I would envision a new user having fun exploring the friendly quickstart guide and the BASIC manual and writing cool programs like James just did here in the previous post. I did see creative people exploring the C64 and writing all manner of programs for it bitd but it didn't encourage efficient coding for having too much memory - here's a quote paraphrased from Lonnie Falk, the editor of the Rainbow to illustrate this issue: When we upgraded to 16K we had so much room our BASIC programs were no longer as well designed Lonnie was a friend and business partner as well and he hit the nail right on the head - Spaghetti code and lack of structure was more due to the growing memory space available to BASIC as best illustrated by the C64. I think that if I traveled back 35 years in time and gave Marty McFly a 4K MC-10 or Bally Home Computer or the 2K ZX-81 then he would grow up to become a most excellent programmer like @JamesD and if I gave him the C64 he might also but it would much be harder because he would be learning inefficient coding practices with all that RAM. A good question for this threads perspective is weather folks would make the same recommendation in 1984 to help Marty get familiar with home computers and learn about computing as to help him learn about retro computing Today?

Suggesting the C64 seems like suggesting the Nintendo Disk BASIC system; this review by Classic Game Room is strikingly similar to most nostalgic C64 system reviews where players play and copy games on disk with no mention of BASIC Programming: I think the NES was effectively designed to be a C64 clone with comparatively bad sound. I agree and those are some reasons the MC-10 still beats the C64 in the BASIC programming competitions and in James demos.

It's not just the MC-10, simple 4K BASIC computers that are well put together are considered by myself and many who create IDE's, platforms and languages Today to be a better model for learning because of their simplicity. The Small BASIC paradigm initiative was driven by this past simplicity - you don't realize it because you're a retro computing expert and a connoisseur in addition to having experienced the technology directly as a child. The C64 was definitely part of the influencing paradigm as evidenced by the fact that it can run the simple BASIC type-ins from the science text books of the 80's and compete in the retro 10 liner contests, but it does not shine like the MC-10 in those contests. People who had one simply prefer it for being a better gaming machine. Some fun trivia on the MC-10, because it had a more powerful processor than it's contemporaries it saw popular incarnations overseas including an expanded model similar to the CoCo III. Here's the Alice version looking like it was created by Atari Kee-Games:

Maybe not so baffling: The MC-10 has a great keyboard you can actually use in it's form factor, far easier to type on than the ZX-80 and Atari 400 membrane keyboards. I actually wrote programs for this machine bitd as well as the other color computers and it's documentation and total package impressed me as very well geared for the beginner. The manual and the quick start guide are well written and easy for anyone to follow, otherwise I would recommend a CoCo like James. The MC-10 has big 32x16 all capital letters that are easier on the eyes than the C64 and a better Microsoft BASIC, between standard and extended. I liked the display on the machine better then and now. The C64 has a much better full screen editor but the MC-10 keeps it simple requiring you to retype a line if you make a mistake. For simple file transfers it's easy to connect a standard cassette player or an ipod to load files today, not as easy with the C64 as my UIEC requires I know how to load "Bootloader",8,1 and then RUN it to get a menu up like the flashcarts for my other gaming consoles - that's what I use my C64 for - as a gaming console for classics and new homebrews D-Pac Defender and PowerGlove with it's awesome SID tune, and for listening to the 40,000 chiptune high voltage SID collection on a real 6581 R2 SID with it's analog filters still intact That's also what I'd recommend the C64 for, but for a beginner with that list of requirements who wants easy access to a library (and all of the home computers have relatively good libraries because they've been around for a long time) without cryptic commands and additional semi-compatible loading hardware the MC-10 easily edges out the C64. The file transfer time is around the same at 1500 baud compared to 1900 baud for the 1541/UIEC emulation. The MC-10 is a better introductory computer in my opinion from having used them - I'm working on a classic Disk BASIC for the Atari 2600 using the SuperCharger that more resembles the BASIC on the MC-10 with simple a load command and indexed file system which was possible with the cassette, the seek mechanism exposed to BASIC like with the ADAM's indexed high speed tape drive. Multicolor graphics plot commands are available like on the MC-10 with no poke commands required for games written with the BASIC, but they could be. So having programmed on it then and been impressed by it, and writing a BASIC modeled after it now I would highly recommend it. I could write a fun game in 10 lines with the MC-10 and Jim Geirre does exactly that - I compete with Jim regularly in the annual BASIC programming contest. There are some entries from the C64 scene, but when it comes to BASIC we generally trounce them soundly. The A8 BASIC programmers like @vitocoare the real competition creating BASIC games far cooler and more graphical and colorful than the C64's! I would also recommend SuperCharger BASIC for the Atari 2600 for these reasons, particularly the programming contest scene - here's the quickstart guide that was influenced by the MC-10's quickstart guide you saw in the video: BASIC_Programming_Quickstart_guide.pdf And here are a few examples of simple 10 line games and 4K BASIC games possible on the Atari 2600 for folks to try out, not a lot of memory is needed in BASIC to have fun!

I programmed a type-in game for the C64 in BASIC and I did have to use pokes for the sound but what some people may not realize is that it's a rich Microsoft BASIC implementation that is excellent with MD Array support and advanced BASIC features, it just does not have any extensions for graphics and sound commands because it's the same BASIC from the Commodore PET. I wrote a lot of games for the CoCo in BASIC and Machine Language and utilities like disk editor and a Bulletin Board System with it's even more advanced Microsoft Extended BASIC implementation. The C64 is powerful enough to run real applications like this too but I would recommend the CoCo over the C64 for someone new to retro computing who wants to write games in BASIC; specifically the 4K MC-10 incarnation from 1983, look what Jim Gerrie is doing with it:

Good question! The learning Assembly cart with a 104 page manual is pretty cool, everyone wanted to learn BASIC and Assembly and elitists favored the latter - the O2 looked like a real computer so why not take advantage of that? Atari had astronauts on BASIC Programming but the Magnavox O2 could program the NASA moon lander in Assembly. https://www.the-nextlevel.com/odyssey2/db/game/computer-intro-12 This is one area where Odyssey² truly outdid its competition -- when it released Computer Intro, a cartridge which allowed users to learn fundamental Assembly-language programming. The cartridge came packaged with a spiral-bound, 104-page manual entitled "A Beginner's Guide to Computer Technology" that featured a brief history of computers, an introduction to programming techniques, sample programs, key codes, and more.

Awesome thread! Super Pacman is definitely underrated - yes the speed totally changes the way you play the game, and the keys and doors add new elements to the genre. I loved playing KC when it came out for enhancing the genre - moving dot and power Pellet characters and moving walls somewhat similar to the doors in Super Pac. This gauges KC as a thinking mans Pacman genre variation much like Super Pacman - great classification! I am writing a KC Operating System for SillyVenture 2020 inspired by the evolved genre: Liked the comparison video here with so many different versions, some with subtle and not so subtle changes that can add or subtract from the gameplay but all are interesting.

Here is RC4 of the KC OS! KC_OS_RC4.bin @Prizrak please add with these notes. New changes are: OS theme music slowed down by 75% Connected both KC Demo's - the KC non-scrolling demo has three lives for KC and then transitions to the KC Scrolling demo. KC II improvements - the scrolling playable demo has tweaks to the gameplay and dynamically changing maze. @Al_Nafuur I think this is a good test that flushes an error with the multiload where only forward indexing is working, maybe the algorithm used to parse the header is forward only? Forward indexing working for all examples: KC_OS is program load 0 and it can load program loads 1,2 and 3 successfully from any of the three zones as long as the button is pressed very briefly (there may be another issue with the button latching as per the manual). Backward indexing not working for all examples: The non-scrolling KC Demo has a SuperCharger index of 2 and cannot load the scrolling demo after losing 3 lives, which has a SuperCharger load index of 1. Likewise the scrolling demo is unable to move the index backwards to return to the OS index of 0 when you hold the button down. And Arkanoid Airhead in the bottom zone with a SuperCharger index of 3 cannot automatically return to the OS when you miss the ball and instead reloads the current index after a long delay.

Yes it's similar to a Color Computer with the Videotex ROM instead of BASIC, it's bit-banger serial port is there but wired to the modem. It even has the same VDG just like the Dragon; I wonder if CoCo BASIC programs would run if you replaced the Videotext ROM with the Extended BASIC ROM.

X2 even my 1981 Arcadia SuperCharger will never become obsolete as a flashcart because it plays all of the classic 2K and 4K Atari games as well as the 6K SuperCharger games opening up a large library of hundreds of titles. All the newer carts are backwards compatible with this library as well as the 16K and 32K Atari games - being able to support 64K games and ARM extension games is desirable too and I currently have to switch between multiple flashcarts to play all of these games. I think the fragmentation comes when an isolated format or extension is developed that is hard to play everywhere, I also think we're seeing both classic technology and DPC+ being pushed a lot further with some of the new releases.