Atari v Commodore

[+wood_jl]

A8 has dual Pokey, but I hardly see the point. Could get a 25 year old Casio keyboard for $10 that sounds better, and then you'd actually HAVE a real synth if it gets you off.

 

 

25 year casio keyboards can do this really?

 

 

also pokey's are not built into various commercial boxes which are used to make music. no wonder why SID is used for that and Pokey is not.

 

you are just playing it like emkay. A8 cant do turrican? no problem. lets compare c64 turrican to amiga version, now we can say it sucks. you do the same trolling.

 

 

Just let me get this straight - or you correct me on your stance.

 

Are you shitting on the Amiga now, in comparison to the C64? Such balls. While I never owned one, I've always respected the Amiga, particularly in regards to its Atari DNA. What sucks? Atari? Amiga? Both? Anything but Commie SID?

 

You think the 3-voice C64 is viable for making commercial music outside of "chip tunes" in 2009? Gimme a hit of that shit, then let's get some Sound Blaster Audigy (or whatever the hell they're up to now) cards for our PC. Or are you still consumed with the fantasy that you Commie's 3-voice FM schlock is world class? What year is it? I don't know emkay, but you bode well for his sanity if he disagrees. Maybe your philosophy will prevail, and they'll re-release "Van Halen 1984" and the synth tunes will sound as revolutionary as they did then... Better yet, they should re-dub the album with a Commie64 sounds and set the music industry on its ear, and then it'd really rock! BWAH HA HA HA HA!

Edited April 14, 2009 by wood_jl

[+SpiceWare]

I don't think the VIC 20 was a failure at all. Plenty of people had them, software was developed for them, and then things moved on.

that part wasn't directed at you.

 

My only point in that example was to highlight how the most popular tech is almost always not the best tech.

I understand, my point is "the best tech" comparisons often target specific features but gloss over "the complete package". It's easy to say BETA is better because of the picture quality, but just as easy to say VHS is better because of recording time. For most recording time is very important, picture quality less so(especially back when everything was RF). So from a "Complete Package" viewpoint, VHS ended up being the best technology for most people.

 

It's quite like this entire topic, "the Atari is better because of colors, the C= is better because of sprites" or "the Atari is better because of POKEY, the C= is better because of SID". When taken as a complete package, the Atari was better for some, the Commodore for others.

 

I think the biggest factor of "the complete package" in the whole Atari vs Commodore boils down to price, an often overlooked "tech feature". When I got my first computer in 1981, it was a VIC 20. Price was $299. In contrast the CoCo was $399 and Atari 400 was $499. The difference doesn't sound like much today, but using an inflation calculator that boils down to $699, $933 and $1167 in 2008 prices.

 

There was another factor in my decision - I hadn't yet heard about the VIC 20 and was originally going to get a CoCo. I spent the summer of 81 working at my grandparents to raise half the money for it (my parents were paying for the half for Xmas). We happened to be in the neighboring town and went into Radio Shack as grandma wanted to see this newfangled thing I was saving for. The CoCo was turned off and when I asked the guy working there if he could turn it on he said "I can't, there's a password that has to be typed in exactly or it will ruin the computer, and I don't know the password". I knew he was lying as by that point I'd already been using Commodore PETs for a year at my high school. I had considered the Atari 400, but I didn't have enough money and I really didn't like the membrane keyboard.

[+SpiceWare]

300 cartridges. Impressive.

Nice way to gloss over the 500+ on tape

 

Then again, it's the only valid media for a pissant system

pissant eh? Atari had a 2 year head start and yet the Vic was the first break a million - hardly insignificant. Of course during that time frame even the Atari had everything on cartridge or tape as floppy drives were still extremely expensive and rare.

 

with a measly 5K RAM.

Sure 5K wasn't much, but it was easy to add more RAM (and no soldering required). Mine had 32K of RAM when I ran my BBS on it. There were 64K expansions available for it as well.

[FastRobPlus]

300 cartridges. Impressive.

Nice way to gloss over the 500+ on tape

 

Then again, it's the only valid media for a pissant system

pissant eh? Atari had a 2 year head start and yet the Vic was the first break a million - hardly insignificant. Of course during that time frame even the Atari had everything on cartridge or tape as floppy drives were still extremely expensive and rare.

 

with a measly 5K RAM.

Sure 5K wasn't much, but it was easy to add more RAM (and no soldering required). Mine had 32K of RAM when I ran my BBS on it. There were 64K expansions available for it as well.

 

VIC-20 really was the worst computer of the 80s (or at least a tie with the Timex Sincalir 1000.)

I was one of the 2.5 million who bought it ($40 at Toys 'r' Us in late '83) and I felt like I'd been ripped off.

The VIC-20 had a average median price of under $100 for all of 1983 - and like the Timex a bit later, this was not in the same price realm as the real home computers. For me (and I suspect many others) the VIC was a brief mistake before going out and buying a viable home computer.

 

There are a lot of people out there who will tell you that the handheld LCD Sonic Tennis game was a big hit becuse so many were sold. It sold as well as the Nintendo DS! The problem with that logic is, the Sonic LCD game came free with a MacDonalds happy meal, but somebody paid real money for the Nintendo DS. Within a day that Sonic LCD game is forotten between the seat cushions of mom's minivan, but th DS still gets played.

The VIC-20 was free MacDOnalds happy meal toy of the home computer era.

Edited April 14, 2009 by FastRobPlus

[dwhyte]

The Commodore lovers must be trying to get this thread to 200 pages so they can win a free Atari...

[slampam]

The Commodore lovers must be trying to get this thread to 200 pages so they can win a free Atari...

Did I win? Oh wait..."Commodore lovers"...I should read first.

[+SpiceWare]

VIC-20 really was the worst computer of the 80s (or at least a tie with the Timex Sincalir 1000.)

That's either funny or willfully ignorant.

 

I was one of the 2.5 million who bought it ($40 at Toys 'r' Us in late '83) and I felt like I'd been ripped off.

It was a poor choice in late 83, I know I wouldn't have purchased one then. It was, however, a fine choice 2 years prior.

 

There are a lot of people out there who will tell you that the handheld LCD Sonic Tennis game was a big hit becuse so many were sold. It sold as well as the Nintendo DS! The problem with that logic is, the Sonic LCD game came free with a MacDonalds happy meal, but somebody paid real money for the Nintendo DS. Within a day that Sonic LCD game is forotten between the seat cushions of mom's minivan, but th DS still gets played.

The VIC-20 was free MacDOnalds happy meal toy of the home computer era.

way to miss the point.

[Fröhn]

I was one of the 2.5 million who bought it ($40 at Toys 'r' Us in late '83) and I felt like I'd been ripped off.

Yeps, the people at Toys'r'Us really should have explained you that if you pay $40 for a computer, you will get a $40 computer.

[+SpiceWare]

The Commodore lovers must be trying to get this thread to 200 pages so they can win a free Atari...

 

Don't wish to have an Atari, other than my VCS that is. I just find it interesting that so many of those that are "upset with those biased Commodore owners" are in fact so biased themselves that they refuse to see any value in other systems as shown by their views on the VIC 20. Nowhere has anyone said the VIC said to be best technology, but to call it insignificant is misguided at best. Hell, even Linus Torvalds got his start on a Vic 20.

[atariksi]

...

You know that hardware can theoricaly calculate faster than an Atari or a C64.

Some japanese guy managed to prove that.

So , according to Atariksi and few others criterias ti means this hardware is more powerfull than Atari 800. (and of course infinitly more powerfull than a C64).

 

Sorry, you misunderstood this thread and me. You need to use logic here: Whatever that abacus can compute, Atari does it better than C64 since it has a faster CPU. So all math calculations favor Atari. There's one way you can get out of it-- write a better algorithm and not show anyone and run it on a C64 and show the C64 is better.

[atariksi]

...

fandal etc. Which machine was my son able to get his honors science project done on? The Atari helped him to an A+ and to be inducted into the National Junior Honor Society of Secondary Schools. My daughter did the same thing. Both of them felt the Atari was better. Both were able to use the machines to a good purpose.

...

Perhaps, you can get them to write "Thanks to Atari 800" on the certificate. I also used to participate in science fairs when I was in high school and there was always a whole bunch of Apple projects, some C64 and some Atari 8-bit and some PCs. All the first place winners were always from Atari 8-bit or PCs and second were C64 or PCs and never saw anyone with with an Apple. I saw once someone control a walking robot from an Atari 800XL w/256K memory expansion.

 

wow, and what does that proove? I didnt even know 8bit atari computer's exists into the 2000's. I had an amiga, the only thing I knew about atari that its some kind of crap 16bit machine.

 

It's an observation of mine that Atari 8-bits won (me and others) science fairs. Presentations were more colorful for one thing with nice scrolling title screens. I never stated it was in 2000s; it was actually in 1980s. I also used amigas in science fairs in late 1980s and early 1990s. Later the projects were incorporated into results you see here:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=320359212377

 

I can state a true observation without getting emotionally biased toward one machine unlike you.

 

I have also just stated a true observetion, without getting emotionally biased, and a bonus: without personal attacks.

 

As I stated I prefer logic and true observations. If I made personal attacks on you-- I would say something like "I prefer VRAM and SRAM over Wolfram."

[atariksi]

Now, let's say somebody forces you to see some GTIA images enhanced with GPRIOR effects/overlays

Feel free to post some. I don't mind being forced to see some colourful pics!

 

High color content (or shades) makes up for lack of resolution as far as human perception goes.

Yes, that's true to a certain extent, but when you make the resolution too low, the loss of detail leads to an overly blurry looking image.

..

Okay, I will post some images once I am at home...

Regarding resolution vs color depth: majority of images (digitized gray-scale and paintings) I have worked with and experimented with do show up better with more shades than less shades at double horizontal resolution. As long as you don't drop the resolution too much-- you can go from example from a 160*200*4 image to a better 96*200*16 overscanned image. Then you can still enhance it by overlaying player 5 in areas which gives you another set of 16 shades on top.

[Heaven/TQA]

300 cartridges. Impressive.

Nice way to gloss over the 500+ on tape

 

Then again, it's the only valid media for a pissant system

pissant eh? Atari had a 2 year head start and yet the Vic was the first break a million - hardly insignificant. Of course during that time frame even the Atari had everything on cartridge or tape as floppy drives were still extremely expensive and rare.

 

with a measly 5K RAM.

Sure 5K wasn't much, but it was easy to add more RAM (and no soldering required). Mine had 32K of RAM when I ran my BBS on it. There were 64K expansions available for it as well.

 

VIC-20 really was the worst computer of the 80s (or at least a tie with the Timex Sincalir 1000.)

I was one of the 2.5 million who bought it ($40 at Toys 'r' Us in late '83) and I felt like I'd been ripped off.

The VIC-20 had a average median price of under $100 for all of 1983 - and like the Timex a bit later, this was not in the same price realm as the real home computers. For me (and I suspect many others) the VIC was a brief mistake before going out and buying a viable home computer.

 

There are a lot of people out there who will tell you that the handheld LCD Sonic Tennis game was a big hit becuse so many were sold. It sold as well as the Nintendo DS! The problem with that logic is, the Sonic LCD game came free with a MacDonalds happy meal, but somebody paid real money for the Nintendo DS. Within a day that Sonic LCD game is forotten between the seat cushions of mom's minivan, but th DS still gets played.

The VIC-20 was free MacDOnalds happy meal toy of the home computer era.

 

nope... my parents got me a vic20 because they could not afford a big one like c64 & atari but I had a lot of fun with it (plus 16kb ram) and I got many games on cart plus copied on tape (the good $a000/$8000 binaries) from a friend... I learned first time 6502 assembler and rasters (when seeing Atlantis...) I guess 1,5 years later I switched to 800xl.

 

 

so... I don't see why it should be in the same category like the ZX81 (sinclair 1000) or was this the ZX Spectrum?

 

the vic had a lot more than the a8 had... again the colour ram...

[emkay]

Nowhere has anyone said the VIC said to be best technology, but to call it insignificant is misguided at best. Hell, even Linus Torvalds got his start on a Vic 20.

 

 

Hm... Does this mean, The VIC 20 is guilty that Linux has befallen the PC?

[youki]

VIC-20 really was the worst computer of the 80s (or at least a tie with the Timex Sincalir 1000.)

I was one of the 2.5 million who bought it ($40 at Toys 'r' Us in late '83) and I felt like I'd been ripped off.

The VIC-20 had a average median price of under $100 for all of 1983 - and like the Timex a bit later, this was not in the same price realm as the real home computers. For me (and I suspect many others) the VIC was a brief mistake before going out and buying a viable home computer.

 

the VIC 20 the worst computer of the 80s????

 

hum... just have a look to these demos , done on a UNEXPANDED vic 20 ...(it means 3.5k of ram) .. seing the production on Atari 800...to do the same thing (suposing it is possible) you would surely need 320k extension... but as stated previously... 320k is the standard on A800...

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6tWm3kwE7E

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocQIA3zKqXs

 

 

 

 

And don't forget to wath with the sound!!

Edited April 14, 2009 by youki

[emkay]

Sorry, you misunderstood this thread and me. You need to use logic here: Whatever that abacus can compute, Atari does it better than C64 since it has a faster CPU. So all math calculations favor Atari. There's one way you can get out of it-- write a better algorithm and not show anyone and run it on a C64 and show the C64 is better.

 

Well, the Amiga has the superior chipset, compared to the ST. But the small advantage of clocking the CPU at 8MHz instead of "only" 7.19MHz made the ST superior for showing 3D. No 3D animation on the ECS AMIGA can reach the speed/resolution quota of the ST.

It's an interesting fact, isn't it? The ST only clocks 1.1 times faster and beats the "double feature" of the ECS Amiga' CPU and hardware Blitter/Copper in 3D....

 

The Atari has the 1.8 times faster CPU, compared to the C64, AND it has the (more than ) clearly better hardware for displaying it on the screen.

Thats why 3D movement on the A8 can run in 2x2 pixel resolution, where the C64 has it's fights at 4x8 pixel resolution.

 

It's like comparing a PC from 2009 with a PC from 2000...

Edited April 14, 2009 by emkay

[emkay]

VIC-20 really was the worst computer of the 80s (or at least a tie with the Timex Sincalir 1000.)

I was one of the 2.5 million who bought it ($40 at Toys 'r' Us in late '83) and I felt like I'd been ripped off.

The VIC-20 had a average median price of under $100 for all of 1983 - and like the Timex a bit later, this was not in the same price realm as the real home computers. For me (and I suspect many others) the VIC was a brief mistake before going out and buying a viable home computer.

 

the VIC 20 the worst computer of the 80s????

 

hum... just have a look to these demos , done on a UNEXPANDED vic 20 ...(it means 3.5k of ram) .. seing the production on Atari 800...to do the same thing (suposing it is possible) you would surely need 320k extension... but as stated previously... 320k is the standard on A800...

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6tWm3kwE7E

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocQIA3zKqXs

 

 

 

 

And don't forget to wath with the sound!!

 

 

I didn't know that the Vic 20 was THAT bad.

 

Just a reminder of what the Atari could have done several years before

 

 

Edited April 14, 2009 by emkay

[Heaven/TQA]

VIC-20 really was the worst computer of the 80s (or at least a tie with the Timex Sincalir 1000.)

I was one of the 2.5 million who bought it ($40 at Toys 'r' Us in late '83) and I felt like I'd been ripped off.

The VIC-20 had a average median price of under $100 for all of 1983 - and like the Timex a bit later, this was not in the same price realm as the real home computers. For me (and I suspect many others) the VIC was a brief mistake before going out and buying a viable home computer.

 

the VIC 20 the worst computer of the 80s????

 

hum... just have a look to these demos , done on a UNEXPANDED vic 20 ...(it means 3.5k of ram) .. seing the production on Atari 800...to do the same thing (suposing it is possible) you would surely need 320k extension... but as stated previously... 320k is the standard on A800...

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6tWm3kwE7E

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocQIA3zKqXs

 

 

 

 

And don't forget to wath with the sound!!

 

Jesus...we could start again...

 

for games... I was esp. disappointed when playing on A8 compared to the vic-versions:

 

- Thorn Emi:Submarine (forget the crappy A8 version...)

- Choplifter (the 800 version...not the XE one)

- all Tom Griner games (he kicked ass!)

- Protector

- AE

- Shamus

 

etc...

[youki]

I didn't know that the Vic 20 was THAT bad.

 

Just a reminder of what could Atari could have done several years before

 

 

 

Give 128k to a Vic20 , and i'm sure you can do something close to your space harrier.

 

And in 1979 , 2 year before the vic20 , you couldn't even imagine be able to afford 128k for ram... first Atari 800 had 16k .

[emkay]

I didn't know that the Vic 20 was THAT bad.

 

Just a reminder of what could Atari could have done several years before

 

 

 

Give 128k to a Vic20 , and i'm sure you can do something close to your space harrier.

 

And in 1979 , 2 year before the vic20 , you couldn't even imagine be able to afford 128k for ram... first Atari 800 had 16k .

 

 

... at a resolution of 40x25 ... surely.

 

You Commie guys put TOO much miracles into the RAM expansion.

 

This one comes with a 12K EXE. So from it's size it would run on the VIC 20.

 

[youki]

I didn't know that the Vic 20 was THAT bad.

 

Just a reminder of what could Atari could have done several years before

 

 

 

Give 128k to a Vic20 , and i'm sure you can do something close to your space harrier.

 

And in 1979 , 2 year before the vic20 , you couldn't even imagine be able to afford 128k for ram... first Atari 800 had 16k .

 

 

... at a resolution of 40x25 ... surely.

 

You Commie guys put TOO much miracles into the RAM expansion.

 

This one comes with a 12K EXE. So from it's size it would run on the VIC 20.

 

 

the Vic20 had only 3.5k .

 

Seems Atari can do only kind of plasma effect. All demo i see have poor colors and plasma. Strange for a machine with 128 or 256 colors...

 

Anyway, i don't say that the VIC20 is better than an Atari 800. I just say it is an honorable machine and surely not the worst computer of 80's as somebody said previously.

[emkay]

the Vic20 had only 3.5k .

 

You could split the demo and load the single parts from disk.

 

Seems Atari can do only kind of plasma effect. All demo i see have poor colors and plasma. Strange for a machine with 128 or 256 colors...

 

I know why we have always debates.

It has something to do with "knowledge". The Atari calculates in realtime a tunnel plus a 16 shades (gouraud shading) depth multi polygonic object, and you name it "kind of Plasma"... neither the VIC 20 nor the C64 can even go any near to this.

 

Poor colours? Well, perhaps at your taste. The Atari's colour were chosen to fit best to NTSC TV sets.

But, if you want 256 colours, here they are (realtime depacked animations)

 

 

Anyway, i don't say that the VIC20 is better than an Atari 800. I just say it is an honorable machine and surely not the worst computer of 80's as somebody said previously.

 

Actually, the VIC 20 has features the C64 doesn't have.

[emkay]

About "only" 3,5K free for programming....

 

This one has "only" 64bytes

 

http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=30923

 

But you will never see it on the VIC and also not on the C64.

 

Yes, I know, C64 can do things the Atari cannot do....bla...bla...bla...

But the Atari is the older machine >designwise<

Edited April 14, 2009 by emkay

[Wolfram]

You think the 3-voice C64 is viable for making commercial music outside of "chip tunes" in 2009? Gimme a hit of that shit, then let's get some Sound Blaster Audigy (or whatever the hell they're up to now) cards for our PC. Or are you still consumed with the fantasy that you Commie's 3-voice FM schlock is world class? What year is it? I don't know emkay, but you bode well for his sanity if he disagrees. Maybe your philosophy will prevail, and they'll re-release "Van Halen 1984" and the synth tunes will sound as revolutionary as they did then... Better yet, they should re-dub the album with a Commie64 sounds and set the music industry on its ear, and then it'd really rock! BWAH HA HA HA HA!

 

wow, you have no idea what you are making fun of.

 

there are quite a few commercial hits which are based on the 3 voice c64 sound. one case is even on court as timbaland stole a whole SID music and put it in the background in one of his hits songs (he also stole another one and sold it as a ringtone). there's a dutch composer who used a famous c64 composer's drum sound in his hit song, and after things were straightened he had to pay royalties for using it (!). So here's your hit of that shit:

 

 

c64 music is played today by orchestras:

 

 

and c64 music fan bands:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LK-52QzEDA

 

and classic c64 game music idols does play/mix sid music on parties:

 

jeroen tel:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UccfIsAj0uA

 

reyn ouwehand the one man band:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=er3aQAafH2U

 

c64 music has its OWN remix scene:

 

http://remix.kwed.org/

http://www.remix64.com/

 

c64 music has its internet radio podcast sites:

 

http://www.slayradio.org/home.php

 

SID used as a music device on its own:

 

(this one is a MUST to watch and hear, pure SID chip sound of 8 SID chips!!! SID here sounds better than in your worst nightmares )

 

 

 

 

the SID chip alone of the c64 has given birth to various fan communities, its HUGE.

[Wolfram]

The Atari calculates in realtime a tunnel plus a 16 shades (gouraud shading) depth multi polygonic object, and you name it "kind of Plasma"... neither the VIC 20 nor the C64 can even go any near to this.

 

 

are you sure? here you can see bigger gouraud shaded objects, with a more complex tunnel....

 

 

(its in the same resolution as the a8 one, the video is shitty doesnt shows that)