Jump to content

mozartpc27

Members
  • Content Count

    183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mozartpc27

  1. What is this? https://www.ebay.com/itm/Colecovision-Galaxian-Complete-Brand-New-in-Box-Limited-Edition-1-of-50/283314720241?hash=item41f6df8df1:g:-y8AAOSwcs1cIACX
  2. I started this thread with a comparison to the C65 and the project to basically re-create and re-invent that machine. Commodore's last 8 bit got nearly to production, but not quite, and came very late in the game - 1991. It was a wholly different concept from the earlier 128, although it was to have, like the 128, a 64 mode. But whereas, as you say, the 128's 64 "mode" was in fact just a second 64 computer inside the 128 box, with a dedicated processor and everything, producing 99.9% compatibility or something like it, the "Commodore 65" would only have emulated the 64 in software, resulting in a compatibility of 75% or so (which I have never really understood what that means - it seems like it could mean that like all of the software would be 75% compatible, or, to put that another way, not compatible at all!). The issue about compatible software will exist for this new machine just like what you are talking about with the TI-99/8; since the REAL C65 was never released, there is NO software for its native mode. Yet these folks at mega65 are doing it anyway. I must say the Commodore 64 software/hardware scene is rather robust for a machine dead 25 years now, and I guess that is not maybe the case with the TI-99 scene, but it seemed like it was from a (mostly) outsider's perspective. The 65 was to be, in other words, quite a different machine, and of course it has long since reached mythical status amongst Commodore fans. I was so impressed that there were actually people developing a latter-day 65 - the time involved seems just enormous - but it made me wonder if any other retro communities had similar project developing - or if other retro communities would even be aware of just how far these Commodore guys seem to think they can take it.
  3. I am more of a Commodore guy but I have an interest in all old systems and the TI-99/4 is one I am currently trying to get back into (sold off a collection I had for some cash for another project, but now feeling the itch again). But as a Commodore guy I keep a close watch on current projects out there in the scene and by far the most exciting is this: the Mega65, a latter-day attempt to create, essentially, the infamous never-produced Commodore 65 prototype machine for production. Details here: www.mega65.net It honestly looks like it is coming together, slowly but surely, and amazingly. It made me think what other unproduced machines might be take np by their corresponding communities. The TI community is so strong, I naturally thought of the TI-99/8. Has there been any thought anywhere for folks to work on this?
  4. Great thread. I got a ColecoVision at a time that must have been post-crash, because at the same time my sister got a Cabbage Patch doll (when stores could not keep those things in stock), and the reason I got the CV was because my Mom wanted to get my sister a Cabbage Patch doll and Coleco I think was running some factory direct promotion in which IF you were willing to buy a CV THEN they would also agree to sell you a Cabbage Patch doll so you would be guaranteed to get one. So for our birthdays in one of 83, 84, or 85, my sister got a Cabbage Patch Doll and I got a CV. Later my Mom got an ADAM, and I remember my Aunt did too. I would have guessed that was when prices were being slashed, so later in the computer's run, but I remember my Aunt got one also shortly after we did and she returned hers because it didn't work, which suggests one of the earlier, buggier models. Today I use the ADAM exclusively, albeit basically only as a CV. It was actually a much better and more reliable CV than the CV itself. 30+ years on and it still works perfectly, with a beautiful picture - unlike my CV, which had to be totally rehabbed.
  5. About a year and a half ago I had to sell off my TI-99/4A collection to fund another project. At the time I had a TI-99/4A with an original box, the PEB with disk drive (and a few other cards I never got around to testing/using), and several carts. Well, I'd like to get back into it. If anyone has such things to sell, PM me. You guys are the friendliest vintage computing community by the way, by far.
  6. I do. Both of my ColecoVisions crapped out so I switched to the ADAM which works perfectly.
  7. Sure glad I opened this thread... I thought my Defender cartridge had simply died, didnt know it didnt work on the ADAM. Why is it that it doesnt work?
  8. plbyrd, I dont know you or your work, but I sure do hate to see someone walk away from the scene angry, particularly if they are a contributor. Sadly I am not a contributor, I do not possess the technical skills required - I just love all things Commodore and retro computing generally! This is supposed to be fun. I guess if it stops being fun you have to walk away, at least for a while.
  9. I am more of a Commodore guy but I had picked up a TI-99/4A at a local convention, built up a bit of a cartridge library, and finally, about a year ago, bought a PEB at a great price from a guy on vcfed. I didnt use it much and I have a toddler at home so my time for the retro computing hobby is severely curtailed these days, and in the end I chose to sell my setup to fund another project (a retro car I acquired). I am seriously considering hopping back in. I have to say, without a doubt, the TI-99/4A community is one of the very best and most geenrous, open, and friendly retro computing communities out there.
  10. This is how we got our CV too. Mom wanted to get my sister a cabbage patch doll and had to buy me a ColecoVision. Fortunately our birthdays are 8 days apart so we each got our gift, and I think my cousins already had a ColecoVision so I had some familiarity. My mom then went on to buy an ADAM so we doubled down on the Coleco thing, and indeed it is the ADAM that I use today.
  11. Wait, what? They ADAM has, like, wisdom teeth? Pictures for sure!
  12. Way late to this party but I have to admit, as a Commodore user, the notion suggested by the OP two years ago of porting GEOS to the TI-99/4A is fascinating to me. Even as a hypothetical not sure how feasible it is, maybe with the memory expansion? Still, interesting.
  13. Ikranaka, thanks for posting and sharing that article. I'd never seen it before; very informative. And how about that mail away ad for the "private arcade" home cabinet thing? That's amazing. Wonder if they ever sold any, and if there are any left around.
  14. I only have an Atari 800XL, which does not have the Atari key that the 800 has. What was this key used for, and why was it dropped?
  15. Yes, but on the Commodore, first off, all commands worked in both upper and lower case, and second of all, the "upper case" characters that appeared on the screen were ready-to-use in terms of writing commands. if you shift-lock a Commodore in BASIC, the characters that are printed are the special graphical characters - those would not be recognized by BASIC. To get lower case characters in Commodore BASIC, you had to hit shift while holding down the Commodore key, and, like I said, if you did that, all BASIC commands would still work just fine.
  16. I guess it is the "default" in terms of what the computer expects to see, but the computer doesn't boot by default to "upper" case, so, between that and the fact that the "lower case" letters are really "upper case" in appearance, I have to say it is a bit confusing. Add to that that the manual nowhere mentions the upper case requirement... All that said, what is really embarrassing is that I had figured out the upper case thing once before on my own, and had forgotten it. Until I read jedimatt's post, that is. Then I dimly remembered having discovered this little quirk before.
  17. So the COMMAND doesn't need to be capitalized (old), but the device name does (DSK1)? And even if that is the case, CAN you have a device "dsk1"? Aren't the device names fixed - DSK1, DSK2, DSK3 - and aren't they limited to 3?
  18. I am an idiot!!!!!!! I completely forgot that the DISK commands only work if you type them in ALL CAPS - which of course is very subtle on the TI-99/4A, because even the "lower case" character set appears to be ALL CAPS. So this was my problem! So stupid! My only question is - since it was the COMMAND that was wrong, rather than it being BASIC being unable to read the damn disk, why did get error codes of the style x0 on any command I tried, instead of a BAD COMMAND NAME type of error?
  19. OK... so, thank you, Casey, for the suggestion about trying CALL FILES(1). I tried this in regular AND extended BASIC, and it does NOT return an error message with the PEB plugged in, turned on, and hooked up to the computer. Extended BASIC recognizes the memory expansion card, as before. The disk drive in the PEB also initializes and does something - a self test? - when you load Extended BASIC. I can manipulate disks - catalogue, rename, format, run diagnostic tests - from the Disk Manager. But, out of either BASIC or EXTENDED BASIC, I CANNOT read from, write to, or otherwise use a floppy disk. The errors I get are all of the x0 variety - indicating neither BASIC reads the drive as present. But, again, the CALL FILES(1) command does NOT return an error in either BASIC or Extended BASIC, so I guess the computer CAN see the card, but somehow not the drive. But it CAN see the drive if I am running the Disk Manager and just trying to manipulate the disk through that. Any ideas?
  20. I did try the various commands in Extended BASIC, and was still getting x0 errors. I'll have to try the CALL INIT test.
  21. Will need to try this at the next opportunity.
  22. arcadeshopper was kind enough to send me an Extended BASIC cart, I used it yesterday, and the computer does see the memory expansion card from Extended BASIC (reports two lines of memory, STACK and another line - if I turn off the PEB and try the same command, only one line of memory).
  23. Any statement referencing the drive returns an error of x0.
×
×
  • Create New...