kenjennings

Where can one buy these marvelous things? A couple google searches didn't help.

Was the speech hardware in the 1400/1450 on the bus/had register addresses? Or was it tied into SIO somehow?

Are you still missing this one? I bought it on eBay and can lend it to you for a while when it arrives.

The only one I found currently on eBay is $149.00 I guess it is already "rare/vintage". Edit: D'oh. [headslap] Never search for long, complete product names Bought one for $39.

Yup. In many of the scenes the background is static with the character motion in the foreground. Construct one background image reserving a portion of the pallete for that, then the only thing that changes is the moving characters. The compression and playback of those sequences should be efficient. Unfortunately, not every scene is like that. There are some where the scene pans which requires complete screen animation. (or a very difficult horizontal scroll.)

Would the symptoms look like.... able to format DSDD, but fails on the verify as soon as it starts reading the top side? Reads double-sided, single-density OK, but refuses to read anything in double-density from the top side?? (Really, I'm getting totally zero successful reads on the top side in DD, but SD still reads the top side fine.) The problem is, there's no CRT anywhere around. Maybe it's my G53 laptop. I'll have to try hotgluing the little metal dealie back on.

They're asking $60 for that! The thing about open hardware designs is that if you look around you can find something similar.... http://nootropicdesign.com/ve/ That one is $32.95. (or $24.95 for a kit if you know which end of the soldering iron to hold.) They have another toy with video output -- http://nootropicdesign.com/hackvision/ A videogame with multiple input controller options. $43.95 assembled, or $33.95 as a kit.

That's interesting. I'd never seen video out of the arduino without another shield attached, so assumed it didn't do it. (you're not kidding with the color and resolution -- it makes a TRS-80 look luxurious.)

That could be formidable. The Arduinos don't have video output themselves. However, there is the Gameduino shield: http://excamera.com/sphinx/gameduino/ Still, the Arduino runs this "display" by sending commands over SPI. Like a serial terminal.. Vaguely like the XEP80 "80 column" display that hooks up to the Atari's joystick port. It would still be formidable. Somehow the video from the Gameduino shield has to be mixed with the Atari's.

Not to mention the extra $500 for shipping from Germany.

Holy krap. a 1400 and 1450. I almost regret spending the employee bonus on a bioloid premium robot kit. If I had a 1450 would I use it? . . . . Nah. I could not handle the thought of turning it on and having something burn out.

There's another thread around here about the POKEY's popularity in Atari's arcade systems... http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/187044-use-of-pokeys-in-atari-games-arcade-machines/ After a quick trip around the internet I found these are reported to use POKEY: Centipede Crystal Castles Tempest I'Robot, Major Havoc, Star Wars and Return of the Jedi, Super Sprint Paperboy for starters.

As others have said, the USB cart is mostly for controllers. If one wants to hook up a USB device chances are a driver has to be written. It's pretty much not worth trying to run a card reader unless you're looking for a programming challenge for yourself. If you want to use SD cards, then get SIO2SD, or use the SD card in a PC and SIO2PC to connect the PC to the Atari.

I have it in the Amiga. Yes, it is horribly hard to play. Yes, it's play value does last about as long as one can watch a demo. The game is impossible between the fact the mouse just isn't a good controller for this, and that the avatar is in the center of the screen and it is often impossible to judge if other ships are in front, behind, or directly below. As a game, it qualifies as punishment. As an interactive demo it's interesting eye candy when consumed in small doses.

Got mine. #5. Simply marvelous. Makes me wonder why Atari's PacMan was so, so... so not like this one.

As slow as it may be compared to an IDE or other kind of device, here the Ramdisk makes makes moving between DOS and a cartridge with memsav on nearly instant. A lot faster than any floppy or even SIO2PC. So, I guess the comparison is between nearly instant and instantly instant

Really? How can a game possibly work without W, A, S, D??

I did link the commodore.ca site. You didn't see that? Every single source of information on the web says the C64, VIC II, and SID design started NO EARLIER than 1981. Including the respected site, Commodore CA, and Secret Weapons of Commodore. On Commdore.ca's C64 page: "The 64 began its design life in January of 1981 when MOS Technology engineers decided they needed a new chip project. . . .By November of 1981, the chips were completed. The chips did not exist before the Ultimax, either, as you stated: Nobody disputes design of the C64 or the Ultimax began in 1981. Your point being? nothing. But, here's what Secret Weapons of Commodre actually says about the Ultimax, by referencing the On the Edge book: http://www.floodgap....et/ultimax.html "On the Edge states that the Ultimax was born in 1981 of Commodore Japan engineer Yashi Terakura, who wanted to design a game console out of the new chips being designed for what would become the 64 (p240)." So, you see per the sources you find respectable, the chips did not yet exist, they were BEING designed in 1981. Yet, you insist: You will not find any source including the sources you find respectable that even suggest the VIC II and SID existed a year and a half before the introduction of the C64, because to state so would be an unsupportable lie.

When Curt comes out with that Atari 8-bit based Flashback I plan to buy a dozen. If I ever had to reduce to one authentic, original model it would be the 800 because of the four joystick ports. (Due to build quality it's highly likely the 800 might be the only one left working.)

I also wanted to cry when I read this. Because it sounds like my wife's idea of cleaning the house. Pray I don't leave an Indy 500 driving controller, or a touch tablet, or an unlabelled cartridge, or the SIO2PC-USB interface out in plain sight. Its highly likely any of it would end up in the trash just because she couldn't recognize what it does.

Right, and that's the point. The C64 was marketed heavily based on its alleged 64K capacity which was unavailable to the casual (non machine-language programming) user. In the end, an Atari 800 with only 40K RAM and the C64 with "64K" have roughly the same amount of memory when BASIC is running.

Mostly, I'd just "Ditto" potatohead's list. The first "computer" was a 2600 with the basic cartridge and keypads. I exhausted the possibilities of it over a weekend, and decided to get a computer. I would have ended up with an Apple, but in Dec 1979 saw an Atari 800 running a demo in the window of a computer store in the mall. They still wanted to sell only the Apple and had to be forced to let me leave with the 800. Games were definitely one of the best parts. As Atari was the big name in arcades, and had agreements with other companies the Atari 8-bits got the best arcade ports and usually got them first (and sometimes were the only ports.) What I liked is that without machine language a person using BASIC could produce some decent graphics and games. Mixing graphics modes requires only building a display list, and the the display runs itself. I'd list the top games on the ride with Atari 8-bits as: Star Raiders, Rescue on Fractalus, Shamus, Defender, Pac Man, Donkey Kong. (Ballblazer was more of a interactive demo than a game, wasn't it? This list is going to get long, so I'll stop here with the favorite "game" I picked up later on: Mac/65

Seasoned machine code programmers can get at around . . . Most users and purchasers were not seasoned coders. "64K" was just marketing spin, as if the world didn't know about the 16-bit address limit of the 6502 before Commodore came along. (or bank switching for that fact.) The majority would enjoy the user-friendliness of a non-autobooting, "64K" system that gave them 38,911 bytes of memory to work with and required typing Load "*", 8, 1 to boot/run non-BASIC software. Shades of... 1978.

Beautiful work. It goes without saying, you rock, but it should be said; You Rock.

I don't think A8 chipset was finished the day when Atari 400/800 were released so I believe it was finished more than 9 months before VIC-II/SID chipset. Obviously it is a fact that A8 computers were released two and half years before C64. And obviously it is a fact the Commodore arcade motherboard unreleased project finished before the Commodore Max (4kb chicklet/membrane keyboard C64 essentially) design using the now unused VIC-2+SID designs was started in early 81 by engineer Yashi Terakura of Commodore Japan. Unlike the A8 chipset which was a normal product development with chipset design up to final prototype and then further ongoing changes after launch like CTIA Vs GTIA 256 colour upgrade in 1980 the C64s core technology were two completed off the shelf custom chips from a scrapped arcade project 18 months before 1st C64 hardware sign off in late Dec 81/early Jan 82. So no the gap is not 2.5 years technically, VIC-2 vs GTIA based A8 chipset are the same age in years pretty much and just different in their methods to achieve the same goals. I am talking about VIC-2 +SID NOT "C64 computer" (only revision was disastrous change to SID via 8580 years later) Apparently, an undisclosed feature of the Commodore 64 is time travel. You'll be doing a lot of editing on the web to get all those other confused historians in line with your "completed off the shelf custom chips from a scrapped arcade project 18 months before 1st C64 hardware sign off in late Dec 81/early Jan 82." You should start with the four pages on Wikipedia for The Commodore 64, Commodore International, the VIC-II and SID. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_International http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_64 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_SID http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_VIC-II Then work on these others: http://www.commodore.ca/products/c64/commodore_64.htm http://www.mayhem64.co.uk/c64design.htm All these pages agree the chip design began in 1981. In fact, for the SID design: "The SID was devised by engineer Robert "Bob" Yannes, who later co-founded the Ensoniq digital synthesizer company. Yannes headed a team that included himself, two technicians and a CAD operator, who designed and completed the chip in five months, in the latter half of 1981." It's kind of hard for an arcade system implemented with an "unused VIC-2+SID designs" to exist more than a year before the SID design was even started. Everything I read on the 2600 says when it was finished it the designers expected it to have a short lifespan and immediately began planning a successor. Depending on where one can draw the line between paper napkin diagrams and official design specs that puts the start of the Ataris design at late 1977 to early 1978. So, the C64 design is at least 2.5 years (if not 3) years after the Ataris; an eternity in computing technology terms. The only significant advancement that the C64 brought was in cheapness, with little interesting to show in capability which is pretty sad considering that huge gap of time.