Best 8-bit computer of all time

[GasMonkey]

On Monday, there was a bash regarding the 25-year history behind the Commodore 64. There is no question that it was the top selling model of all time but was it the best?

 

The 64 only had 16 colours and 64Kb of RAM. It was truly a dynamic time, but top selling does not always mean it is the best.

 

What do you think was the best 8-bit of all time?

 

S

Edited December 14, 2007 by GasMonkey

[fdurso224]

The Apple II was quite revolutionary for its time, thanks to Steve Wozniak's ingenuity! A true thinker.

 

Anthony....

[vdub_bobby]

The 64 only had 16 colours and 64Kb of RAM.

16 colors is kind of weak, but how many 8bit computers had more than 64 Kb of RAM?

[Warriorisabouttodie]

My vote is the Atari 800, but it's really more a matter of opinion than anything else. There is no clear winner as to which of the 8bit computers was best.

[GasMonkey]

The 64 only had 16 colours and 64Kb of RAM.

16 colors is kind of weak, but how many 8bit computers had more than 64 Kb of RAM?

 

True, 64KB was a lot for 1982, but the 64 was around for a decade like many other 8-bit machines. The 64 never came with more than 64K. I think the 64 was a marketing success and Commodore's manufacturing and supply lines helped them reduce the cost, but I think there are many more makes that offer some better features. Granted, the SID chip was a great feature.

[A Sprite]

For raw power, the MSX2+ might take it.

 

# Processor: Zilog Z80 compatible running at 3.58 MHz or more (5.37 MHz versions were available)

# ROM: 64 KB

 

* BIOS + Extended BIOS (32 KB)

* MSX BASIC V3.0 (16 KB)

* DiskROM (16 KB) (optional, very common)

* Kun-BASIC (16 KB) (optional)

* Kanji ROM (optional)

 

# RAM: commonly 64 KB (on Japanese computers)

 

* Memory mapped (4 MB/slot max)

 

# Video Display Processor: Yamaha V9958 (aka MSX-Video)

 

# resolutions: 512×212 (16 colours out of 512)and a 256×212 video mode with 19268 colors.

# sprites: 32, 16 colours, max 8 per horizontal line

# Hardware acceleration for copy, line, fill, etc.

# Interlacing to double vertical resolution

# A vertical scroll register

#a horizontal scroll register

#128k video RAM

 

# Sound chip: Yamaha YM2149 (PSG)

# Optional sound chip: Yamaha YM2413 (OPLL) (MSX-Music)

# Clock chip RP5C01

# 3.5" Floppy disk drive is very common

[thomasholzer]

My sig says it all :-)

[GasMonkey]

My sig says it all :-)

 

Your sig says it with class as well. I believe you are right on that too.

[A Sprite]

Said with class, but there's only one way to settle for true gentlemen to settle this...

 

[GasMonkey]

Said with class, but there's only one way to settle for true gentlemen to settle this...

 

 

Damn, you would have to bring logic into it

[thomasholzer]

Said with class, but there's only one way to settle for true gentlemen to settle this...

 

 

 

Love the A8 version (top)

[Ross PK]

The Atari 800XL without a doubt.

 

Hey OP, you should have done a poll.

[AtticGamer]

Zx Spectrum, the games seem more playable than the C64 ones but some C64 games are better than Speccy ones.

Can't say anything about Apple II, MSX or Atari 8-bit line as I haven't played them yet.

[deathtrappomegranate]

It depends what you mean by "best".

 

In terms of power, MSX2+ is a great candidate, although I really like the Enterprise 128.

 

Software base? Maybe Spectrum or C64.

 

Overall?

 

A8, baby, A8.

[Technosis]

The 64 only had 16 colours and 64Kb of RAM.

16 colors is kind of weak, but how many 8bit computers had more than 64 Kb of RAM?

 

IIRC, the C64 was capable of only eight on screen sprites at once (without special programming routines). That's a real limitation for games such as shoot'em up's. Great system nonethless....

[A Sprite]

It depends what you mean by "best".

 

In terms of power, MSX2+ is a great candidate, although I really like the Enterprise 128.

 

Software base? Maybe Spectrum or C64.

 

Overall?

 

A8, baby, A8.

 

Thanks for leading me to a computer I've never met before. Only two things keep it from immediately taking the crown on raw power: it can't run all 256 colors in it's high resolution mode ( I've only seen one color, with shading. ) and there are no sprites.

 

What it can do is harder to find; most of it's games are emulated from other computers...

 

It's a mystery.

 

I'm hooked.

Edited December 15, 2007 by A Sprite

[A Sprite]

Screenshots.

 

 

 

 

 

The Enterprise 128 in action. (click to watch)

 

All shots stolen without permission from the good people here. Pay them a visit if you get the chance. Hundreds of downloads, even if you can't speak Hungarian. It's like AtariAge; the scene is kept alive long after the company's crash.

Edited December 15, 2007 by A Sprite

[GasMonkey]

I always felt the best meant power, graphics, sound: the whole package. Usually when all areas were good or great, the whole system was better for it. The Amiga taught us that custom chips were the way to go. Today most systems are segregated: separate video cards and sound with little to know help from the processor.

 

The Atari 800 was simply the best in my mind: but it needed better marketing -- the product itself was far better than the C64.

[thomasholzer]

I always felt the best meant power, graphics, sound: the whole package. Usually when all areas were good or great, the whole system was better for it. The Amiga taught us that custom chips were the way to go. Today most systems are segregated: separate video cards and sound with little to know help from the processor.

 

The Atari 800 was simply the best in my mind: but it needed better marketing -- the product itself was far better than the C64.

 

Actually the A8 was first with custom chips, Pokey (Sound) and Antic/GTIA (Graphics)...continued with Amiga just goes to show that the same people worked on those computers.

 

The Enterprise (ELAN, FLAN) might have been a good computer (for a British machine), even the SAM computer (also British) was quite good, but both were DOA.

Edited December 15, 2007 by thomasholzer

[potatohead]

My favorite was the CoCo3. Nice graphics, hardware memory management, beautiful 6809 processor, damn shame Tandy mangled the marketing of it so badly.

 

Best all around though, is the A800. Had that, a C64 (which I really liked, BTW), and the CoCo 3. I kept the Atari because it's just a killer machine. And the 400 just looks damn cool. Everybody that sees it, always takes a closer look.

 

Honestly, the C64 has some serious graphics power. Both computers do. IMHO, the Atari is harder to realize it's full potential than the C64 is, and that shows on some of the later titles produced for the C64. CoCo 3 could do a ton with just software graphics, and on NTSC televisions would easily do 160x192x256 colors. I don't think I've ever seen any game development take advantage of this. Maybe some day, home brewers will step up and really show that machine off. Also, IMHO, that machine had the potential to kick both the A800 and the C64 asses solid.

 

There are a few things about the Atari machines that really appeal.

 

The OS systems engineering on the Atari is just excellent. Device independant I/O, robust interrupt handling, SIO, and bi-directional and latched game ports, light pens, etc... Lots of fun to be had on the machine where just getting things into and out of it are concerned. As a kid, I did lots with those ports. Burned out port #4 too. The core systems engineering took advantage of most of these things in a robust way. That made the A800 feel more like a real computer than most other machines. Only real downside is the text display that was the default. Always thought the C64 had the edge on that, barring software 640x200 efforts.

 

(On that note, using two font tables, and display list interrupts, it was possible to get seriously good looking monochrome text on the thing. Wish I still had that code. The trick was to alternate red and blue color settings for the high resolution mode. That put the little sub-pixels between one another, yielding a somewhat complex to address, but nice looking high resolution graphics, or text mode display.)

 

Atari basic was great too. It was well thought out, and if one used the string handling techniques (change string address pointers), could manipulate the sprites and bit mapped graphics nicely, with just higher level string manipulation commands. One feature, in particular, I liked was how it handled math expressions. One can do stuff like: x = x + (x < 5) to pack an if then, into a compact math operation. Liked that a lot.

 

The COMPUTE series of Atari books opened me up to a lot of excellent programming fun. That proved to be valuable as the things my peers and I learned on the old 8 bitters really helped us later in life. (also biased all of us toward open systems We all had different computers and that meant sharing code and knowledge if we were to share our programming efforts!)

 

For an 8 bitter, the Atari was nice and fast. Being able to pick and choose how one applied the graphics hardware really made a difference too. Turn it all off and get the fastest compute, turn it all on, and mix in heavy interrupt processing and it ran a lot slower, but did more.

 

The sheer variety of displays possible is appealing too. It's got texture other machines just don't have. I really like this. It's distinctive and has been very entertaining to watch people continue to squeeze more out of the hardware over the years. That goes for our favorite VCS as well. The stuff being done today is just amazing. Love it. Jay Miner would be proud.

 

One artifact of that happens to be games nicely keyed to the display. Doing that gives most of them a nice feel. Other machines, like the Apple and CoCo, didn't have that same feel. Atari and often C64, both seemed rock solid where other machines just didn't have it. That's the display hardware, CPU, and game logic all executing in high precision. Love that too. It's actually why I continue to enjoy the VCS, despite it's age. Look at a game like KABOOM! Freaking awesome, very fast, real-time, hand - eye test that's just addictive.

 

Overall construction of the original Atari computers was great too. Expensive, but solid. I'll never forget the impression I first had of the C64, Spectrum, even the CoCo. The Atari was just THERE up front, substantial. The others felt cheap. Powerful in their own ways, but just not so well engineered. Remembered thinking those computers will never last. Never really thought that of the Atari, and so far it's been largely true.

 

The decision to keep the graphics keyed to a non-interlaced NTSC color cycle is distinctive also. On most televisions, there are no stray pixels, no color fringing effects, just nice, solid colors. I like that, even if it's a bit less resolution. Like it enough, my current efforts on the Propeller, which does software video, have all been Atari like so far. Just looks classic, solid. I'm sure that's me and early influences playing themselves out today. No matter. I see others doing the same thing, so I know I'm not alone there.

 

C64 does great music. From the look of things, POKEY is still unexplored and hobbled by some missed decisions way back when. Atari does great sounds though! Like the display, the variety of sounds has a lot of texture to it. Very different experiences are possible both graphically and sonically. IMHO, that's one of the Atari differentiators that set it apart from most other machines.

 

Lots of input devices too. Light pen, that goofy mind controller thing, the science lab stuff. All great fun, and totally useful for lots of early kid learning about the world and the computer. Why don't we see more of that kind of stuff for USB today? It's all damn fun. Current gen kids are missing out, unless they go back to micros (like the Propeller, PIC, SX, etc...)

 

There is one other thing too. For some reason, in my area of the country, the Atari people were the coolest people. CoCo owners were all techy and kind of wierd. They did get OS/9 though, and that kicked for the time. C64 owners were more users than hacker types, by percentage. Atari people were this well rounded mix of all kinds. IMHO, that speaks right to the variety of experiences the machine offered. To be fair, the Apple owners were like that also, more so than owners of other machines.

 

Never met a happy TI owner! What's with that? It was a tank, but pretty cool actually! I had one for about a year and really liked the thing. Was kind of a monster to get in and assembly program for though.

 

The Atari articles available to us as kids were awesome. I loved reading about how the machine worked and the authors of that time conveyed this just excellent playful, can do, attitude that was catchy. That whole scene really defined me for the better. Atari is mixed up in that and it's all good. On that note, the people who brought us the internals of the Atari really sparked an interest in me. I remember being totally excited about getting MAC/65 on cart. That's powerful stuff! It was as much fun getting the machine to do stuff I wanted it to do, as it was playing games, and producing documents ever was.

 

Still have that cart and the nice little manual on my reference desk, along with my original data books for the MOS technologies and moto stuff. Looking at that, from time to time, reminds me that the sheer art of computing is fun. Atari was a part of that.

 

If one takes pure graphics metrics, sprites per line, colors per line, number of free moving objects, colors on screen, grey scales, sound channels, etc.... it's easy to card stack and put most machines at the top. Taken as a whole, design, systems engineering / programming, inputs, experiences possible, community, etc... Atari really shines. Look at AA here, by way of example. We love Atari, but also enjoy the retro scene in general. Maybe it's because Atari connects us and was a good enough experience overall so as to not really threaten any of us. (speaking generally, of course)

 

It's Atari 8 bit computers at the top for sure. A really great comparison is SGI computers -vs- most everybody else in the 90's. The whole scene was similar, the machines featured great custom hardware, lots of I/O options, good community, lots of excellent docs (that I refer to to this day, BTW), etc... It's more about the whole picture for me, than it is some particular spec.

 

One thing is absolutely true, and I love it. We've not seen all the Atari machines can do just yet. More is coming. For machines made so long ago, that's just awesome, IMHO.

Edited December 15, 2007 by potatohead

[+save2600]

Never met a happy TI owner!

 

Now you have! I was going to respond that the TI is actually my favorite classic computer.

But we all know that the TMS9900 is a 16-bit processor, so I guess that does not count

for this thread

 

I play around with it still once a week. As far as gameplay and graphics go, the arcade

conversions blew away anything on the Atari or C64 - IMO. Also, I felt it was super EASY

to get into its assembly programming and even dabbled in it back in the day. Still have

many unfinished games written in 9900 for it somewhere that loaded through the

Mini-Memory cart/tape drive.

 

And talk about its Extended Basic programming cart! Again, way ahead of its time.

Super easy and intuitive stuff to program. Ahh... built in Speech and Sprite coding.

Think I might have to brush up on my programming skills and get some games off

the ground before too long. And speaking of that... I just wish the TI had more of a

software library - thanks to the politics of TI back then. It wouldn't have mattered

anyway. It was not marketed well at the end and when they dropped the price,

support was already long gone. Still, what a great machine it is.

 

-Frank

 

www.coinopdreams.com

Edited December 15, 2007 by save2600

[potatohead]

Cool!

 

Well, the full setup was really a pretty nice combination. For some reason, the assembly stuff just didn't jell back then. I just sort of bumped into the TI and didn't have the motivation I did toward the other machines. Bet that's a big part of my perception today. I had friends with Ataris, C64's and CoCo's, so there was some energy and people to talk to, just not there on the TI.

 

Extended BASIC is pretty sweet. I seem to remember it being capable of 32 single color 8x8 sprites on screen at one time, with free motion on all of them. There was a line limit (4 or 5) per line, but it had a multiplexer built in, which really was a great feature at the time. That left the would be programmer to focus more on just doing stuff, than enabling the ability to then do stuff. I don't remember that BASIC being as fast as some others, but it had a lot of nice features.

 

Had lots of fun with the voice thingy too. IMHO, another machine just begging for home brews.

[liveinabin]

The ZX Spectrum was an utter joy to program on, and a great entry into the world of computers in general, especially as it was SO cheap.

[Pengwin]

The ZX Spectrum was an utter joy to program on, and a great entry into the world of computers in general, especially as it was SO cheap.

 

Absolutely. Totally agree here. And some of the best games of the 8-bit era were only avail;able on the Spectrum, or started life on a Spectrum.

 

However, my choice, and it is only a personal choice, would be the 800XL. it had a great keyboard, plenty of free RAM (especially if BASIC was disabled), a more than capable BASIC and, well it goes without saying, the graphics were phenomenal.

[thomasholzer]

The Uk'ers will defend their Spectrum saying it was awesome when actually it was not, mainly because it was British (Maggy Thatcher waved a Spectrum in front of some Japanese people shouting 'we're gonna conquer the world in electronics with this, watch out Japan'!!), it didn't work properly (just like Clive Sinclairs C5, the Microdrive, the electric bike accessory and the tiny in-ear radio), and it was cheap enough for 9 year old to buy (or ask for at Christmas).

Thankfully that machine was only a huge success in UK, whilst we (the rest of the world) enjoyed decent computers with disk drives and joystick ports built-in.

Having said that, as already mentioned, many (well alright...a few) UK programmers started out on the Speccy and became worldwide successful programmers for companies like Sony and Nintendo.

Edited December 15, 2007 by thomasholzer