+mizapf Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I imagine, like OLD CS1 mentioned, there would have been more integration and fewer components just to reduce unit cost if nothing else. What TI would have added, could be debated. I doubt they would have put speech internal though, their marketing plan seems to have been designed towards add-on devices... and the revenue they generate. One thing that became visible in the last period of TI's involvement was to migrate to the Hexbus peripheral system. I think I remember reading some memo about that, maybe it was mentioned in the Hexbus specification. The Hexbus interface card for the PEB was only intended as a transient solution. IIRC the TI-99/5 did not have any I/O port anymore. [... just checked, yes, it was on Fabrice's website, http://www.ti99.com/ti995.htm...] 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Lee Stewart Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 ... A built-in speech synthesizer is also ok, but not important, because I use this rarely. (But this little device is too small for a slot in the PEB ... See New Speech in PEB adapter card. ...lee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omega-TI Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 ... the TI-99/5 did not have any I/O port anymore. [... just checked, yes, it was on Fabrice's website, http://www.ti99.com/ti995.htm...] NOOOOOOOOOOO! I love that TANK of an expansion box! Getting rid it that seems like a crime.... IMHO. Seriously, that is one nice website. Looks like that computer found just the right home. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omega-TI Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 You know as an evolutionary expansion, with SMT size and density, it's now possible to make a single card for the P-Box that has five or six slots... smaller 'mini-expansion cards' could be designed to fit into the slots on that card. Sure, a populated board would take up three slots, but the extra slots on the 'mother card' would make it a net gain. Smaller projects would be cheaper and easier to design and produce. Just another idea.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manic1975 Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 I think we should try to make FPGA version of TI99/4a. Lotharek here has bord and someone should develope core for MIST FPGA. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabrice montupet Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 (edited) Thank you! The TI-99/5 was a part of the new TI-99 family planned to be unveiled fall 1983. This family was composed of three computers: The Basic Computer 99/2, the Home Computer 99/5 and the (Advanced Home) Computer 99/8. Note their name, there are in relation to the target market that they were made for. The 99/5 was the mid-range computer, planned to replace the (old) Home Computer TI-99/4A. As its target market was the home computing, Texas Instruments offered all the necessary features to do the job (TMS-9995 10Mhz, 32Kb RAM expandable to 48Kb at least, 16Kb dedicated VRAM, Hexbus, Speech Synthesizer ) but not too much features because this computer should not encroach the 99/8 lands. This is why the 99/5 didn't have the I/O side port, this port was supposed to be reserved for advanced use, so for the 99/8.Of course, the pebox is a fantastic peripheral (bus access and a big receptacle for various extensions cards) but it (and the cards) cost the price of a kidney. In the case of the 99/5, already well supplied, its acquisition was clearly less vital. Hexbus was a good idea, cheap and effective for many uses (communication, printing, aquisition, low cost storages) . Equal to USB today, finaly.The 99/5 and the 99/8 computers had speech synthesizer built-in. the cost increase was absorbed by the intensive use of gate-arrays (TAL0004 and others). If these computers have been marketed, the downside for users would have been the impossiblity to repair their broken down computer themselves. And I pray all days that one of the gate arrays in my 99/2, 99/5 et 99/8 don't die...@Manic1975: Making a FPGA version of TI-99/4a will surely be an impressive work. Just a thought: In this case, since all original TI-99/4A hardware will be replaced, why not directly use TI-99/4A emulators like Classic99, MESS or TI-PI thanks to a Raspberry or other else? Edited June 23, 2015 by fabrice montupet 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+mizapf Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 @Manic1975: Making a FPGA version of TI-99/4a will surely be an impressive work. Just a thought: In this case, since all original TI-99/4A hardware will be replaced, why not directly use TI-99/4A emulators like Classic99, MESS or TI-PI thanks to a Raspberry or other else? We had some discussion about using a Raspi for running an emulation, and you'll find the discussion thread in this forum easily. I managed to compile and run MESS on a Raspberry, and it turned out, as I already suspected, that our poor Raspi would require roughly 20 times of its performance for running the TI MESS emulation. Thus, MESS is not an option for such a project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plastik Posted June 23, 2015 Author Share Posted June 23, 2015 We had some discussion about using a Raspi for running an emulation, and you'll find the discussion thread in this forum easily. I managed to compile and run MESS on a Raspberry, and it turned out, as I already suspected, that our poor Raspi would require roughly 20 times of its performance for running the TI MESS emulation. Thus, MESS is not an option for such a project. I'd love a raspberry pi for emulation but I hate dealing with one OS to emulate another. If there was a full OS option I'd be all about it. I use classic99 and its great but I'd like a raspberry that I'd turn on and be at the TI main screen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabrice montupet Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 We had some discussion about using a Raspi for running an emulation, and you'll find the discussion thread in this forum easily. Yes, I have read that discussion some times ago. Since my first connexion to Internet in 1996, one of my focus is to read all news about the TI-99/4A around the web, for my culture I will try to clarify the meaning of my sentence. In fact, I placed myself in the position of a lambda user, not a developer. For a person who does not use a real TI-99/4A, that the computer is used in a form of an emulator (Mame / Classic 99, TI-PI or others) or in the form of an FPGA is the same for him. Apart from the fact of doing a FPGA version is a funny project for the developper, the practice interest for users is minor because an emulation solution already exists. My question was more: where could be the plus value of a TI-99/4A in a FPGA. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manic1975 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 visit MIST page https://code.google.com/p/mist-board/wiki/FaQ Here is something from MIST page: An emulator is a software that recreates the behaviour of one machine on another one. The MIST (like all other FPGA based approaches) re-implements the hardware or at least implements a hardware that behaves like the original machine. Plus would be little board with no need to install or configure OS. You only need core to have TI99/4a. Everything else can be loaded from sd card (programs). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+mizapf Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 OIC. (Had to look up what is a lambda user, and what makes him special compared to a mu or kappa one :-) ) Right - this seems to strongly depend on the personal point of view. For me, there is virtually no difference between using MESS and the real Geneve that I own. Other people say that only the "real iron" is the true thing. I guess that Geneve owners like me got used to a simulated TI pretty early, and thus do not have such strong bounds to the real machine (more to its "spirit"). Hence, the FPGA may be felt like some emulation in disguise. You see your TI, but in fact something else is working under the hood. I have to admit, though, that I got a similar sensation when I build my USB-TI keyboard interface. You press the real key, and although my interface and MESS did the rest, it seems as if you were working on the real machine. Finally, maybe a similarly important point, you have the same usage experience with a FPGA-TI from the very start. Turn it on, there it is. No booting of another computer, no hassle whatsoever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabrice montupet Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 visit MIST page https://code.google.com/p/mist-board/wiki/FaQ Here is something from MIST page: An emulator is a software that recreates the behaviour of one machine on another one. The MIST (like all other FPGA based approaches) re-implements the hardware or at least implements a hardware that behaves like the original machine. Plus would be little board with no need to install or configure OS. You only need core to have TI99/4a. Everything else can be loaded from sd card (programs). I know the difference between an emulator and MIST I just talk about the feeling in the use of both them, they are equal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabrice montupet Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 OIC. (Had to look up what is a lambda user, and what makes him special compared to a mu or kappa one :-) ) Right - this seems to strongly depend on the personal point of view. For me, there is virtually no difference between using MESS and the real Geneve that I own. Other people say that only the "real iron" is the true thing. I guess that Geneve owners like me got used to a simulated TI pretty early, and thus do not have such strong bounds to the real machine (more to its "spirit"). Hence, the FPGA may be felt like some emulation in disguise. You see your TI, but in fact something else is working under the hood. I have to admit, though, that I got a similar sensation when I build my USB-TI keyboard interface. You press the real key, and although my interface and MESS did the rest, it seems as if you were working on the real machine. Finally, maybe a similarly important point, you have the same usage experience with a FPGA-TI from the very start. Turn it on, there it is. No booting of another computer, no hassle whatsoever. Lambda user is average user. Did I used a french expression? I Don't know Yes, FPGA systems offers more confort in terms on use and they are the closest solution to imitate a real computer. All is illusion. For me, using a real TI-99/Geneve and using them virtually is totally different in terms of feeling. I use (sometimes) emulators only for quick tests because they are very handy but the finality is always on real computers. I love to touch the real hardware, the metalic or beige plastic chassis, real keyboards, cartridges, extensions, ear the "clic" of the keys or floppy disk accesses, etc. I love to know that there are the venerables TMS-9900, TMS-9918 or TMS-9995 who are still beating thanks to an antic crystal, to know that each old RAM chips and each other old components are always alive to offer me great sensations, the same as I had the first days I have used this fantastic computers, in 1982. :') Feelings are so impalpables, differents for each one 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMole Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I know the difference between an emulator and MIST I just talk about the feeling in the use of both them, they are equal. I get why you would say that, but to me there's a world of difference between emulators and FPGA implementations. Different strokes for different folks, right... I'm not a purist by any means, but there's surely gradations for me: "Classic" Real Iron > Mixed setup with newer components (e.g. F18A, Lotharek, NanoPeb) > Full-on FPGA implementation ala MIST > Emulation 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabrice montupet Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 (edited) I don't use CF7+ or HxC, I don't use F18A too. All are absolutely great work but not for me.As I said, we are all differents, have différents sort of feelings It's also that makes the charm! Edited June 25, 2015 by fabrice montupet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opry99er Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I have no option at this point... I MUST use emulation, as I have no physical room for a real setup. In all my programming and testing, Classic99 IS my /4A. However...I realize, during all of this, that the ultimate goal is to get it running on real hardware. In the past--when I have HAD a real setup operational-- I still used Classic99 as my development platform due to the features like "PASTE" and "LIST CLIP" but tested everything on my 4A. If something did not work up to my liking on the hardware, I would edit and re-run the program on hardware until I was satisfied. I guess what I am saying is, for me... Everything I do in emulation is designed to transfer to iron and run... Otherwise I would just do my junk in Python and get rid of all my TI gear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesD Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I've thought for a long time that the TI was a prime candidate for a replacement motherboard.I think if you are going with a full FPGA based system you are better off dumping the old console completely because you don't need to have a cart or expansion connector and the original keyboard is a bit cramped for some of us anyway. There are open source cores for everything but the CPU and speech module.For a replacement board though, given how much can fit on a current CPLD and how cheap they are, I don't see using anything else for most of the glue logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabrice montupet Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 @Opry99er:I'm agree with you. TI-99 items take a lot of place, mainly the Pebox and side-car peripherals ! I have the chance to dispose of 24 m2 room dedicated for the hardware, software and the library, plus a garage. Alas, everybody can't have to possiblity to have some space for a storage and install the computer and all the peripherals in order to use. When no (or few) room is available, emulation is a good way to satisfy its passion. Today, emulation is also the serious solution to develop software. it would be long and difficult (crazy?) to continue to programm software in good conditions using only the material of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davvel Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Yes, they're fantastic. I love my SNUG system, I'm taking it with me when I die. Gazoo Dearest Gazoo, may you rest in peace, you were truly a great man who deserved much more than a SNUG system in TI heaven where you probably are now and hopefully one day we will all meet up. Your dedication towards the TI is something we can never fully describe or forget. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omega-TI Posted December 3, 2015 Share Posted December 3, 2015 Jim put an XB2.7S cartridge in his casket IIRC. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Ksarul Posted December 4, 2015 Share Posted December 4, 2015 I did. . .and once they knew what it was, his family thought it was a good idea too. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.