Jump to content

Nickolasgaspar

New Members
  • Content Count

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Nickolasgaspar

  1. Well the drive is already shipped. Let's hope the seller did a good packing job. He has an excellent rate (ebay) so I want to think he knows what he is doing. The good thing is that the drive comes without a psu.... minus one threat for things going wrong . Thanks for your time.
  2. Will it survive without anything in it? The seller doesn't seem to be willing to bother about it.
  3. Does anyone know the best way to ship an 1050? The seller doesn't have the cardboard so should he leave the hatch open or closed? Should he use an old floppy if available?
  4. The update is....the Pokey was bad. I was tricked by 3 different Pokeys and their incompatibility issues between 3 boards? One pokey chip works great (touch tab) in all three boards. The second pokey in just two boards and the last one doesn't recognize tab inputs in all three boards. Really weird ....
  5. So in my case, I bought and repaired a tablet. It works on a 800xl and 900xlf(65xe) board but it refuses to work on the 800xlf board. I checked the +5V pin on the joystick port and I replaced all the ICs one at a time but still nothing. The resistors and caps appear to be ok. Any ideas?
  6. I am experiencing the same issue...it works on a 65XE but not on a 800XL(XLF). From what I read in here I have to switch most of the ICs in order to find the issue. But first I will check the 9pin port and the passive components of its circuit. Did you manage to use your tablet with RAMbrandt?
  7. To be fair, in the episode 3 he admits he is using a 400/800 cpu board as a blue print. Well he is Dutch so maybe the "reverse engineer" statement is a "language barrier" issue.
  8. Well I don't really understand how you "know it is not". You can literally google the pinout of both versions and find out that Sally just uses two previously disconnected pins (#35,36) to implement a specific function previously performed by 4 logic chips on the main board. Who knows what other changes were made. We weren't members of the "board" during that time to "know" anything. The Default Position in Logic is defined by the available evidence. The things we know about the "Liz" project, their identical pinouts, the ability to reproduce Sally's function by adding some external logic chips, the cost of designing and producing new CPU architecture while there was already a die available and of course the use of the name "6502"...all provide sufficient and necessary evidence to dismiss further unnecessary assumptions.(Parsimony). Maybe there were additional changes...but the moment to accept that claim is only after we can put our fingers on objective evidence. A C014377(400/800 models) is a standard 6502. The pins 35,36 are disconnected and there isn't a logic circuit on the XE mainboard to perform the needed function hence allow a 130xe to function.
  9. How a wiki link on dies is relevant to the modified version of a 6502?
  10. That is not the sense I use the phrase "faster chips". When I say faster, I mean to run faster. Faster chips means more money. That makes no sense in our economic system even back in the 80s.
  11. I think the answer is obvious since the early machines (400 800) came with a standard 6502 and those additional logic chips and the daughter board in this video can run on an XL machine with a standard 6502.
  12. I never said that our posts contradicted each other. In a discussion one can add to other people's comments. I only pointed out that, independent of the method (binning or not) 6502s were graded and Atari's internal nickname (6502C) caused confusion and ambiguity specially when it was included in commercial documentation. There was also no reason to put binned cpus in Atari 8bit and C64 machines because it would affect the rest of their architecture. As far as I know the PCs were the first to allow such upgrades without the need of any daughter boards...and this was their recipe of success.
  13. Check this series of a guy restoring an Atari 800xl . In episode 3,4 and 5 he reverse engineers, designs and builds the circuit that is inside a Sally chip and uses it with a standard 6502. He literally uses 4 logic chips. btw this dude is the high priest of new age woo, Bernardo Kastrup. His philosophy may suck but he is a master in computer engineering.(actually he has a PhD on this).
  14. The 6502C stands probably for "custom 6502". I quote the relative article from atarimania.com "This chip was originally named SALLY by Atari engineers, but Atari Customer Support documents (Field Services Manuals) variously described it as "6502 (Modified)", "6502 Modified", "Custom 6502", or "6502C". Field Service Manuals published by Atari, Corp./Atari Corporation reverted to using the chip's original name, SALLY, while Atari, Corp./Atari Corporation XE consumer owner's manuals (unfortunately) continued to use "6502C" in reference to the SALLY 6502. Several manufacturers produced the SALLY 6502 for Atari, including MOS Technology, Synertek, Rockwell, NCR, and United Microelectronics (UMC). It is important to note that chips marked "6502C" such as the MOS Technology MCS6502C, MOS Technology MPS6502C, Synertek SY6502C, Rockwell R6502C, or UMC UM6502C are NOT the Atari "6502C" but rather equivalents to the standard MCS6502 that are certified for 4MHz operation. Atari SALLY 6502 chips are never marked "6502C" but, other than the UMC UM6502I, always carry the Atari part number C014806." So using letters(A,B,C) to grade 6502 by maximum speed IS a thing but it's not relevant to Atari's C014806 variant. Its only for the standard 6502 cpus. We are talking about two different products. There is another variant that can only be found in early 400, 800 models which appears to be a standard 6502 cpu. The Sally chip replaced a number of logic chips responsible for the same halt routine in those early models. The truth is that Sally chip exists only because of cost reducing practices. link: http://www.atarimania.com/faq-atari-400-800-xl-xe-what-are-sally-antic-ctia-gtia-fgtia-pokey-and-freddie_14.html
  15. I found pictures of the last XE model, the 800XE(its an 65XE in Eastern Europe). They used the 130xe mobo with only two DRAM chips and the ECI port. I have an 65XE with a Freddie Chip and without an ECI port, so I was wondering if there are any XEs versions released without a Freddie chip. It looks like there aren't any. http://oldcomputer.info/pictures/index.php?spgmGal=Museum/8-bit/Atari_800XE&spgmPic=5
  16. I think I found . From what I understand 2 DRAM machines always have an ECI port.
  17. Yes, I happen to have an 800xlf board. So there are variations of the 65XE with 2 DRAMs? Is there a way to tell the difference without opening the machine? Do you have a link to check the board of this version?
  18. Do you know if all 65XEs come with Freddie chips or are there any versions without?
  19. lets compare NTCS vs Pal!!! lol I don't mind the bluish highlights on the NTSC version. It resembles an ambient blue background light.
  20. The SID "metal" always reminded me the 80's porn music. I thought it was my personal bias...until I found out that I am not the only one with that impression.lol
  21. Since my first job was creating digital illustrations I have to say that I do love C64 still images. The higher resolution, the earthy colors and creative use of that grey and purple colors produce real art in my opinion. I really appreciate creative art on limited resources. But again the problem is that there aren't enough colors to produce dramatically different results, without ignoring advantage of the higher resolution in the detail of these images. On the other hand, images on the Atari 8bit line are a bit more "rough" from a resolution perspective but the available hues and colors can produce a huge spectrum of different color schemes. Here is a great image from Lamer's demo "Prozac".(Scrolling picture). If you check this thread you will see many examples of converted still images. Of course they are not "art" but they can roughly show the abilities of the hardware to produce images in a variety of different color schemes. An other great example is the conversion of the "Defender of the Crown" title screen.
  22. This thread's title is about the graphics abilities of two 8 bit micros. I threw in CPC because even coders of that period accepted CPC's superiority over C64's capabilities. (Virgin Software quote in the video below). The homebrew community has proven that all 8bit machines are capable game machines and provided a larger pool of "data" for our evaluations. Some are better in specific genres than others. Sure, scrolling looks great on C64 and Atari machines with their dedicated hardware, Pseudo 3d and scaling is superior on atari 8bit computers due to Miner's advanced architecture(I saw a new C64 racing game with impressive scaling), and "16bit" like appearance is CPC's strong point without having many serious drawbacks in scrolling or sound. In my opinion and based on old and new game library , the Atari 8bit line and the CPC are the most balanced machines since they both score really high in all categories (graphics/colors,scrolling/scaling,sound). Of course we are forgetting MSX2 machines with their objectively superior graphics and Speccy's aesthetic which is so unique and artistic in so many instances. I would be equally happy owning any of the 8bit classics micros but I have to admit though, in the case of the C64, its the support this machine enjoyed during his commercial life not its graphics that would justify my satisfaction. Well I don't really play games anymore(I just test them for some secs) so my critique is solely based on my initial impressions on their graphics, sound and control response.
×
×
  • Create New...