classic battle atari 8bit vs commodore 64

[Rybags]

Hardly feasible, considering ICs of the day were lucky to cram in 5,000 components. Hence Antic and GTIA being seperate slices of silicon rather than being on the same die.

 

And, the pointlessness of further developing the 8-bit systems post-1985 have already been covered.

[Bryan]

Just imagine what sort of capability (hardware wise) such a machine was capable of, and not just a fully programmable Antic chip, apply that to the GTIA and pokey, give them full programmability...

 

Seems like what you want is an Amiga.

[Rybags]

Actually, I've said it before - Antic would have been better off without Display Lists and just acting as a "Copper" with wait and store/store multiple instructions instead of what it has.

 

Then, have a register representing the current graphics/scroll/DLI mode (or # of blank lines). Forget the PMG DMA - a store multiple op could handle that.

 

As such, the 8 cycles normally available for DList and PMG DMA per scanline could have been used at the programmers discression - e.g. a store multiple taking 6 cycles could do the PM Graphics registers, a store multiple taking 8 cycles could load 7 colour registers. And of course, you'd have DLIs as per normal.

[JamesD]

I'm sure opening up many of the chips like the Antic would have allowed some amazing capabilities.

 

The TED chip in the Plus/4 has it's internal registers visible and modifiable by the CPU and people have done some clever things with it.

 

BTW, the Timex Sinclair 2068 added double buffering, higher color resolution, joysticks and an MMU to the Speccy design. Too bad they didn't make an effort for more compatibility with the Speccy out of the box or the later Speccy's didn't borrow from more advances made in the 2068. Porting software from the Speccy to it isn't that bad though. If it hadn't been rushed to market before the engineers were done, it would have included some great stuff. Too bad they didn't give it a better keyboard either. IMHO, it was the most ambitious of the Speccy designs but Timex really fumbled the ball with the American market.

I have a 2068 and a Speccy +2A myself. I've never turned on the Speccy though since I need a power adapter.

 

One advantage I have to give to the Z80 is that it supports compilers a little better than the 6502.

Yes there are C compilers for the 6502 but I just think it's easier for the compiler to generate efficient code for the Z80.

The 64180 offers some enhancements that support compilers a little better.

Too bad the Rabbit didn't exist then. It's has a Z80 like instruction set optimized for use with a compiler.

Anyway, some of the new games that have come out for the Speccy were written in C.

Edited August 1, 2007 by JamesD

[carmel_andrews]

Bryan, Re: your ‘Amiga’ comment/remark

 

No, I mean exactly as stated, an expanded Atari 800…i.e. taken the A800’ design concept (the main/support hardware each having it’s own daughterboard, incl. CPU and having the boards feed into the 800 main-board and sticking it into a pc stylee tower casing/housing)

 

The Amiga design concept is the reverse of the A800’s design concept, namely rather then multiple graphics/sound devices in one system, to incorporate the capabilities of multiple graphic/sound devices within 1 device and add extra capabilities

 

Additionally if that is the attitude you have towards potential A8 upgrades, then I suppose in your mind, upgrades like the original dataque turbo 8/16 proccy/os upgrade (and subsequent similar devices), the ‘gumby’ upgrade (and subsequent stereo/dual pokey upgrades, including the proposed ‘hard SID’ upgrade) and also not forgetting Bob Wooley’s original ‘Dual Antic’ Upgrade and it’s modern equivalent/version, namely the proposed polish upgrade the VBXE (Video-board XE) are essentially turning the A8 into another Amiga

 

Hardly, all that’s being done is to extend the hardware platform/base of existing A8 technologies and bringing it into some semblance equivalent to modern standards

 

To slightly extend the point somewhat, seeming as though the STe and TT are basically extended versions of the ST are you saying that these machines are essentially Atari ‘Amigas’…hardly

 

…and I s’pose your against that sort of thing

 

After all, all the Amiga is, is a reverse engineered version of the Atari 8bit (going by the design spec envisioned by the original A8 design team and the then Warner’s management theory of what the 800 and 400 should be doing h/w wise)

 

And towards the end of the lifespan of the Amiga as a hardware platform (or since they launched of the A2000 and going back even to the Amiga 1000) Amiga started going down the PC route (design wise)

[Bryan]

Additionally if that is the attitude you have towards potential A8 upgrades, then I suppose in your mind, upgrades like the original dataque turbo 8/16 proccy/os upgrade (and subsequent similar devices), the ‘gumby’ upgrade (and subsequent stereo/dual pokey upgrades, including the proposed ‘hard SID’ upgrade) and also not forgetting Bob Wooley’s original ‘Dual Antic’ Upgrade and it’s modern equivalent/version, namely the proposed polish upgrade the VBXE (Video-board XE) are essentially turning the A8 into another Amiga

 

The A8 is what it is. Atari never upgraded it much and today we can strap a GeForce video processor to it and call it an upgrade, but the truth is you're either into retro hardware or you're into duct-taping the A8 onto everything you can. Fixing all the A8's limitations really isn't in the spirit of the thing.

 

So, I like modifications but I think there are several that don't really fit into the retro hobby (and they won't really get supported anyway). So it's a fine line.

 

Hardly, all that’s being done is to extend the hardware platform/base of existing A8 technologies and bringing it into some semblance equivalent to modern standards

 

When I want modern standards, I have a lot of choices.

 

After all, all the Amiga is, is a reverse engineered version of the Atari 8bit (going by the design spec envisioned by the original A8 design team and the then Warner’s management theory of what the 800 and 400 should be doing h/w wise)

 

The Amiga's a reverse engineered version of the A8?

 

Umm... the Amiga's a completely new design created by many of the same people who created the A8. I don't think anyone at any time at Amiga Computers ever opened up an 800 and yelled "Eureka!"

Edited August 3, 2007 by Bryan

[FastRobPlus]

I think Amiga is a forward-engineered version of the Atari.

 

 

Come to think of it, there is a good way to settle the "which home computer is best" debate once and for all:

 

Did Bill Williams code a game for it?

If Yes, the computer wins.

If No, the computer is a looser.

 

Becuse we all agree, or should agree anyway, that a home computer without a Bill Williams game is a barren wasteland of despair.

[Bryan]

I think Amiga is a forward-engineered version of the Atari.

 

 

Come to think of it, there is a good way to settle the "which home computer is best" debate once and for all:

 

Did Bill Williams code a game for it?

If Yes, the computer wins.

If No, the computer is a looser.

 

Becuse we all agree, or should agree anyway, that a home computer without a Bill Williams game is a barren wasteland of despair.

Furthermore... I ask that the acronym BWoD be used when referring to such machines.

 

Bryan - typing on his BWoD (that can at least emulate a B. Williams game).

[TwiliteZoner]

It is pointless to compare the older software pre XE because Atari had to make it compatible with the 400. So for most of the games you are comparing a 16k Atari Rom to a 64k Commodore diskette.

 

As far as the hardware itself is concerned, the 800's keyboard was the better of the 2 machines.

[popmilo]

I just got one Atari 800XL

 

I am commodore fan to the bone by the way, but I like atari as a piece of computer history too...

 

It has great cpu, 1.7MHz makes a difference, sound is ok, but the graphics are in my opinion "not good enough"....

 

I was franticly trying to find some great game or demo that would make me say "uuuuu it really is better then c64 ! ", but had no luck...

 

Pleasse tell me: Are the games like Creatures, Last Ninja, Turrican, Myth,Armalyte, Ikari warriors and many more.... possible ?

[Allas]

Well, Atari had a normal production of software until 1985. Most of the pre-1985 games are better in Atari machines.

 

 

But after 1985, licenses games for Atari computer were closed, and few little companies continue making game in Atari computers. Most of these games are not in the quality level of the first half decade. In this second half, C64 do his business with a large amount of arcade portings.

 

P.D. Sorry for the people who don't want to see Atari screenshots, but a post without screenshots looks sad.

Edited August 4, 2007 by Allas

[Goochman]

Allas, that last picture looks like Tarzan from the 8bit - I thought that was only released on the Colecovision?

[supercat]

One thing that really amazes me is how badly Commodore blew the peripheral expansion path on the C64. Its two biggest deficiencies compared with the Apple were (1) horrible floppy interface; and (2) goofy printer hookup. Given that the C64 is perfectly capable of connecting to a Centronics printer with a simple cable (there are enough I/O pins on the User Port to handle it) and that such a hookup would be better in almost every way to using the "Serial Port" (except that comparatively little software supports it) the failure to officially support such a connection is mind-boggling.

 

I also find it interesting that neither Commodore nor Atari really seemed to take cassette storage seriously, when I would think that a company that did so could have had an enormous leg up on the market.

[ijor]

I also find it interesting that neither Commodore nor Atari really seemed to take cassette storage seriously...

 

I can't agree more!

 

And I think it wasn't just Atari or Commodore. Software publishers didn't care too much either. One thing that amazed to me at the time, is that most US releases are not compressed. The very first thing you'll try to implement with something as slow as the tape is compression. And you don't need the ultimate packers we have today, even a simpler RLE compression is useful most of the time (that can easily decompress on the fly).

[Bryan]

I also find it interesting that neither Commodore nor Atari really seemed to take cassette storage seriously...

 

I can't agree more!

 

And I think it wasn't just Atari or Commodore. Software publishers didn't care too much either. One thing that amazed to me at the time, is that most US releases are not compressed. The very first thing you'll try to implement with something as slow as the tape is compression. And you don't need the ultimate packers we have today, even a simpler RLE compression is useful most of the time (that can easily decompress on the fly).

 

I think their vision of the market was really skewed. Atari thought they would be the next Apple with everyone dropping $1K on 810 (and possibly $2K on 815) drives, and Commodore thought...well, I don't know what the hell Commodore was thinking. A few tweaks and the 64 could have been so much more elegant. I guess they both thought people would just be happy it worked...eventually.

[supercat]

And I think it wasn't just Atari or Commodore. Software publishers didn't care too much either. One thing that amazed to me at the time, is that most US releases are not compressed. The very first thing you'll try to implement with something as slow as the tape is compression. And you don't need the ultimate packers we have today, even a simpler RLE compression is useful most of the time (that can easily decompress on the fly).

 

They didn't seem to care about load times in general. Many protection schemes were dog slow to load off disk, and were incompatible with fast loaders. I wish some publisher would have designed their software so that the bulk of the data would be scrambed but load in the conventional way (using a fast-loader, if one is installed); the unscrambling routine could be loaded at the end using whatever protection mechanism the publisher saw fit. For the C-64, the mechanism could even include having some code on the 1541 drive do part of the unscrambling (e.g. have the C-64 compute a four-byte scramble of a block of data, have the 1541 scramble that, and then use the result to unscramble the block).

[Gury]

Allas, that last picture looks like Tarzan from the 8bit - I thought that was only released on the Colecovision?

Hi Goochman, actually there is A8 version

 

Tarzan of the Apes:

http://gury.atari8.info/details_games/1784.htm

 

The screenshots show little artifacting which will be removed soon. I began complete revision of game screenshots and only characters which remain are T to the end of alphabet. Every missing screenshots will be added afterwards.

[www.atarimania.com]

Er... Yapman Software is the pirate software group.

 

Here are more screens from a version with the original credits: http://www.atarimania.com/detail_soft.php?...VERSION_ID=5287

 

The game is complete but was never officially released (a shame).

 

--

Atari Frog

http://www.atarimania.com

[Allas]

Never released? I think I have a piracy copy from 1986... any idea why not being released in cartridge/diskette? was/is a good quality game.

 

Other way Frog, there is a little mistake in Atarimania sentence query constructor when you find games by author names. You get the same game many times, it seems a DISTINCT or some element in GROUP BY sentence is missing.

Edited August 5, 2007 by Allas

[www.atarimania.com]

Never released? I think I have a piracy copy from 1986...

Never released officially, meaning you couldn't buy it in shops.

 

any idea why not being released in cartridge/diskette? was/is a good quality game.

Certainly because Coleco decided to pull out of the business.

 

Other way Frog, there is a little mistake in Atarimania sentence query constructor when you find games by author names. You get the same game many times, it seems a DISTINCT or some element in GROUP BY sentence is missing.

Thank you for reminding us, I know we need to fix this. Actually, if an author is also responsible for the graphics and music (for example), the program appears three times, which is silly...

 

--

Atari Frog

http://www.atarimania.com

[emkay]

Well, Atari had a normal production of software until 1985. Most of the pre-1985 games are better in Atari machines.

 

[...]

 

 

But after 1985, licenses games for Atari computer were closed, and few little companies continue making game in Atari computers. Most of these games are not in the quality level of the first half decade. In this second half, C64 do his business with a large amount of arcade portings.

 

P.D. Sorry for the people who don't want to see Atari screenshots, but a post without screenshots looks sad.

 

 

What to say, the "history seems not to be trues, somehow.

 

Amaurote is a "simple" version on the A8 and it is far better than the C64 version. Well, not by programming issues but by hardware limits of the C64!.

And, well ... the game is from 1987. Which is the time, after the ATARI was told "dead".

[carmel_andrews]

Bryan….Your way of mark, just to put things into perspective

 

The original turbo 8-16 proccy/os upgrade was designed and released in 1987, just to remind you, Atari were not only still officially manuf., producing as well as selling/marketing the A8 computers and gaming system (XEGS) during this time, Atari infact seriously considered doing there own version of this product (as long as they allowed dataque to make the product 100 p/c compatible with the A8 o/s, unfortunately neither party clinched the deal)

 

The original ‘Gumby’ or Stereo/Dual pokey upgrade, again designed and released in 1987, just to remind you, Atari were not only still officially manuf., producing as well as selling/marketing the A8 computers and gaming system (XEGS) during this time

 

Bob Wooley’s original ‘Dual Antic’ upgrade (either 1986 or 1987) guess what, yes, Atari were still manuf., Producing and selling marketing the A8 computers and gaming system (XEGS) during this time

 

To extend the point further, if you’d been following the video-board xe thread, you would have seen the following quote ‘original idea/spec was to use multiple antics and gtia chips’….sounds like a slightly extended version of Mr. Wooley’s ‘dual antic’ upgrade, doesn’t it

 

Not forgetting the fact that Atari even tried playing the upgrade stakes themselves…Remember the Amy Chip

 

And that the original 400 only came with 8k memory and a CTIA (not GTIA) Graphics Chip

 

Hardly like throwing/straping on a Geforce (or to extend you point somewhat) let’s throw in a sound blaster as well, into an A8…and anyway last time I checked, I didn’t think these particular devices were A8 compatible

 

Let’s take this argument a stage further, I’m sure you remember the SNES or Super Nintendo (or Super Famicom if your from Japan/Asia)

 

What does that imply or infer…unless I am much mistaken, an UPDATED or UPGRADED version of the 8bit Nintendo perhaps

 

And getting back to things Atari and focusing on the 7800 this time or as GCC originally referred/called the 7800, namely the ‘Turbo 2600’, isn’t that just an upgraded or enhanced 2600 with a built in 2600 mode

 

And more to the point the machine the 5200 replaced as Atari’s competitor to the coleco vision and intellivision, also would have used an upgraded processor (10 bit proccy, apparently called SARA), and upgraded sound/graphics hardware

 

And remembering of-course that Machines like the Channel F and The VCS were basically advanced versions of Magnavox’s Odyssey system but instead of having cartridges the size of a 5200 machine, they managed to shrink the circuit board the odyssey games came on down to the size of an 8 track tape or the VCS cart size

 

And even further…even the Amiga…wasn’t that based on the Atari 800 (albeit an enhanced/extended version, which is why I guess Atari bought into the company by servicing them with a loan and try and get their hands on the technology)

 

And taking the Amiga point even further, what’s this ECS/AGA all about…wasn’t ECS just an UPGRADED/UPDATED version of OCS and AGA, wasn’t or isn’t that just an ECS version of an ECS with extra capability (remembering that those particular versions of the AMIGA are now considered RETRO)

 

I guess you’d rather we were still thumbing around with pong machines, zx80 (and the ram pack wobble) and of-course single board systems like Altair 8080, Kim-1, Aim65 etc

 

Or, failing that, seeming as though you like retro in it’s basic/purest form, I guess you rather go back to being a caveman

 

And going by your previous responses, when I say retro in its basic/purest form I mean, without extension, modification, enhancement or expansion, so I guess you’d rather go back to being a caveman BUT WITHOUT THE AID OR USE OF A CLUB, seeming as though you prefer retro in it’s basic/purist form namely in an unmodified, unexpanded, un-enhanced, un-extended state

 

 

Re: Fast rob +

 

Didn't Bill Williams do some games for APX (Atari Program Exchange) or was that another Bill Williams

[Rybags]

Dual Antic?

 

Does such a product exist?

 

And, how could it possibly work? You'd need 4 MHz RAM and staggered access to avoid conflict.

[carmel_andrews]

Rybag's...don't ask me, ask Bob Wooley, he's the one that did the original 'dual antic' upgrade

 

i read about it in either page 6 or database's Atari user (which page 6 later took over)

 

The upgrade apparently allowed upto 4096 colours on screen, that's all i remember

[Bryan]

Bryan….Your way of mark, just to put things into perspective

 

You're really arguing about things I never said but okay... let's go.

 

The original turbo 8-16 proccy/os upgrade was designed and released in 1987, just to remind you, Atari were not only still officially manuf., producing as well as selling/marketing the A8 computers and gaming system (XEGS) during this time, Atari infact seriously considered doing there own version of this product (as long as they allowed dataque to make the product 100 p/c compatible with the A8 o/s, unfortunately neither party clinched the deal)

Sure. And the 65816 was around a few years before that. I can certainly see upgrading A8's with these.

The original ‘Gumby’ or Stereo/Dual pokey upgrade, again designed and released in 1987, just to remind you, Atari were not only still officially manuf., producing as well as selling/marketing the A8 computers and gaming system (XEGS) during this time

Yup, it's a quick and easy hack and quite worthwhile.

Bob Wooley’s original ‘Dual Antic’ upgrade (either 1986 or 1987) guess what, yes, Atari were still manuf., Producing and selling marketing the A8 computers and gaming system (XEGS) during this time

It's a very complicated upgrade, but it's still fine if you want to mess around with it.

To extend the point further, if you’d been following the video-board xe thread, you would have seen the following quote ‘original idea/spec was to use multiple antics and gtia chips’….sounds like a slightly extended version of Mr. Wooley’s ‘dual antic’ upgrade, doesn’t it

Well, my point (and my only point) was that once you hook up a modern FPGA and start designing upgrades, there's really no limit to what what you can add and at some point it's no longer retro hardware you're playing with. I work with electronics all day long and I could bring an A8 up to more modern specs, but I'd really just be controlling modern hardware with obsolete hardware.

Not forgetting the fact that Atari even tried playing the upgrade stakes themselves…Remember the Amy Chip

Atari didn't do shit. By the time it was over the Atari 8-bit computer was almost exactly what it was in 1978. They blew millions on the R&D of vaporware and never added a single feature that made a difference you could actually see.

And that the original 400 only came with 8k memory and a CTIA (not GTIA) Graphics Chip

This is the only exception. The GTIA wasn't ready, so Atari released a preliminary version with the extra modes disabled. Why are we even talking about 400's?

Hardly like throwing/straping on a Geforce (or to extend you point somewhat) let’s throw in a sound blaster as well, into an A8…and anyway last time I checked, I didn’t think these particular devices were A8 compatible

Everything is compatible if you're willing to build the interface.

Let’s take this argument a stage further, I’m sure you remember the SNES or Super Nintendo (or Super Famicom if your from Japan/Asia)

 

What does that imply or infer…unless I am much mistaken, an UPDATED or UPGRADED version of the 8bit Nintendo perhaps

Again, I have no idea what you're getting at. I figure you'd call the SNES a "reverse engineered" NES.

And getting back to things Atari and focusing on the 7800 this time or as GCC originally referred/called the 7800, namely the ‘Turbo 2600’, isn’t that just an upgraded or enhanced 2600 with a built in 2600 mode

Okay, I think I get it. You're inferring that I loathe the word upgrade in all its applications. Amusing.

And more to the point the machine the 5200 replaced as Atari’s competitor to the coleco vision and intellivision, also would have used an upgraded processor (10 bit proccy, apparently called SARA), and upgraded sound/graphics hardware

Uh huh.

And remembering of-course that Machines like the Channel F and The VCS were basically advanced versions of Magnavox’s Odyssey system but instead of having cartridges the size of a 5200 machine, they managed to shrink the circuit board the odyssey games came on down to the size of an 8 track tape or the VCS cart size

They were nothing like the Odyssey. The Odyssey was a discrete (and largely analog) videogame system with no CPU, no RAM, and no ROM on the cartridges. The other systems you mention are processor based. None of the systems you mentioned are based on each other in any way.

And even further…even the Amiga…wasn’t that based on the Atari 800 (albeit an enhanced/extended version, which is why I guess Atari bought into the company by servicing them with a loan and try and get their hands on the technology)

It was really a whole new system, but the Copper chip was probably inspired by concepts used in the 800.

And taking the Amiga point even further, what’s this ECS/AGA all about…wasn’t ECS just an UPGRADED/UPDATED version of OCS and AGA, wasn’t or isn’t that just an ECS version of an ECS with extra capability (remembering that those particular versions of the AMIGA are now considered RETRO)

 

I guess you’d rather we were still thumbing around with pong machines, zx80 (and the ram pack wobble) and of-course single board systems like Altair 8080, Kim-1, Aim65 etc

No, but as long as you're having fun with this fantasy that I hate all hardware...

Or, failing that, seeming as though you like retro in it’s basic/purest form, I guess you rather go back to being a caveman

Yes. In fact I'm going to use this laptop to club a buffalo later.

And going by your previous responses, when I say retro in its basic/purest form I mean, without extension, modification, enhancement or expansion, so I guess you’d rather go back to being a caveman BUT WITHOUT THE AID OR USE OF A CLUB, seeming as though you prefer retro in it’s basic/purist form namely in an unmodified, unexpanded, un-enhanced, un-extended state

Okay, I'll strangle it with my bare hands.

 

Dual Antic?

 

Does such a product exist?

 

And, how could it possibly work? You'd need 4 MHz RAM and staggered access to avoid conflict.

It used separate RAM for the 2nd Antic. They were to run in parallel with some method of combining the output. Mr. Andrews is going to go nuts but from what I've seen, it probably isn't worth the complexity of adding half of a 2nd A8.

 

Crap. Now I'm late for work.

 

-Bry