Super XE Game Machine

[Gunstar]

I haven't even set up my SpartaDOS for 80 column yet, I've been very happy with it's 64 column mode for use inside Sparta and Turbo Basic and Mac/65. I only use 80 column with TLWP.

[Ely]

For me once you alter the CPU or the custom chips that made the machine what it was from a functional perspective then its no longer that machine I remember. It is instead a different machine. I guess my analogy does not work for the ST > STE or maybe the Amiga OCS > ECS > AGA but somehow that seems different to me for some reason.

[Gunstar]

But it really isn't any different except it's unofficial, which should not matter since there is no "official Atari" even in existence anymore so "official" is whatever we the community decide.

 

The the original Atari is still in there and can be used as usual, from a functional perspective, it just has expanded abilities too. The Antic chip is still there and the VBXE is GTIA compatible, all other chips are still there. The Rapidus replaces the 6502. The 6502 is also there inside the 65816 as well, again, just expanded but with the same 6502 there to use when in 6502 mode, from a functional perspective. And the CPU isn't what made the Atari an Atari, it was the custom chips, otherwise it's as vanilla as an Apple II or BBC micro 6502 machine. And at least the Apple II line got a 65816 upgrade and finally some custom graphics. And Atari's do too now, "unofficially."

Edited January 29, 2019 by Gunstar

[Ely]

Yeah I agree the originals persist and will forever. What I meant was the 6502 was the CPU in the whole 8-Bit range and thus when you change that its no longer part of the 8-Bit range any longer.

[flashjazzcat]

It's a reasonable point of view. Even if the original CPU and custom ICs remain in the machine, if the programmer shifts his whole focus to writing 65C816 applications which exclusively target a VBXE display mode, is he writing programs for the 8-bit Atari?

[Gunstar]

It's a reasonable point of view. Even if the original CPU and custom ICs remain in the machine, if the programmer shifts his whole focus to writing 65C816 applications which exclusively target a VBXE display mode, is he writing programs for the 8-bit Atari?

No, he's writing programs for the new 16-bit Atari that is there too, which has access to the 8-bit hardware too. It's now two machines in one, the original and a new one, like the Commodore 128 but with a much better alter-ego.

Actually, it's four machines in one since you can use the VBXE or Rapidus independently from each other with the rest of the original hardware too or essentially "deactivate" both and just have your original Atari mode.

 

I don't have any experience with an Apple IIGS, but doesn't it have to go into original Apple II mode or something to be compatible too? I am assuming it's still compatible to some extent since it still holds the Apple II namesake.

Edited January 29, 2019 by Gunstar

[flashjazzcat]

Sure: you could fit a Core2Duo and an Nvidia graphics card in there too, and I guess it would still be Atari at its heart, but if you then proceed to focus your time driving the graphics via the DirectX API and writing code which runs on the secondary CPU... well, it brings me back to my original point. It's a lot of fun for the individual, but may not result in the concerted production of a large and varied software base for Intel/Nvidia A8s.

[Gunstar]

Sure: you could fit a Core2Duo and an Nvidia graphics card in there too, and I guess it would still be Atari at its heart, but if you then proceed to focus your time driving the graphics via the DirectX API and writing code which runs on the secondary CPU... well, it brings me back to my original point. It's a lot of fun for the individual, but may not result in the concerted production of a large and varied software base for Intel/Nvidia A8s.

Except that you can get Intel/Nvidia stand-alone computers. You can't get a Rapidus 65816 & VBXE stand-alone computer. This is something unique, made for the original Atari hardware and work with it and not just throwing another computer that already exists inside. So it's just not the same really. It's like doing that or like the Commodore 128, but goes far beyond both in integration and intercompatibility. In fact, you can't have a Rapidus & VBXE standalone machine without the Atari 8-bit hardware, even if your base is the 1088 line.

 

People can come up with illogical excuses and half-baked comparisons all day and I'll run circles around those excuses. It's still a real Atari and more, and there's nothing wrong with programming to use all of the more and programming for the original Atari too. Like ebony and ivory, living in perfect harmony.

Edited January 29, 2019 by Gunstar

[flashjazzcat]

Hmmm... I suspect you can get other machines with 65C816s in them out of the factory and RGB graphics, etc. I think these distinctions are a little tenuous. My hypothetical Intel/Nvidia A8 still has a 6502, ANTIC and GTIA inside, still connects to SIO peripherals and PBI devices, still has the same case, form factor, etc. If that's not sufficient, feel free to replace one of the other arbitrary components in order to create a hardware combo which does not already exist elsewhere. If that's the only requirement, it's easily satisfied.

Edited January 29, 2019 by flashjazzcat

[Gunstar]

Hmmm... I suspect you can get other machines with 65C816s in them out of the factory and RGB graphics, etc. I think these distinctions are a little tenuous. My hypothetical Intel/Nvidia A8 still has a 6502, ANTIC and GTIA inside, still connects to SIO peripherals and PBI devices, still has the same case, form factor, etc. If that's not sufficient, feel free to replace one of the other arbitrary component in order to create a hardware combo which does not already exist elsewhere. If that's the only requirement, it's easily satisfied.

My bad, I didn't know we were back to hypotheticals like the Super XE to begin with. I thought we were discussing real hardware that exists and if adding it and programming for what we added negates it's "Atariness."

 

But yes, you are 100% correct hypothetically, with hypothetical hardware.

[Gunstar]

Oh, and as to the 65C816, yes, you can get stand alone computers, but they aren't compatible with Atari software because they don't have the original Atari hardware that is still needed.

 

And looking more objectively, programming for the VBXE & Rapidus really isn't any different in the end, to someone with a stock Atari than programming extended memory games that they can't use either, or like 64K games are to the stock 400/800 user. Even if the reasons why the programs won't work are completely different. So those who accept memory upgrades but not other enhancements have disingenuous and flawed logic, IMHO. It's all or nothing baby.

Edited January 29, 2019 by Gunstar

[_The Doctor__]

it is the personality along with the character of the OS and how it is used to access the hardware, no matter what is connected, that makes it 'Atari' if it follows the conventions that were set down. That is about as simplistic a view I can make, if the Atari is simply a dumb terminal and it does not use any of the OS, peripherals, vectors, or modular points of the Atari and it's core architecture.. then it's not an 8 bit Atari. When you essentially put a computer in an Atari case and connect the keyboard and power that's not an Atari... It must be an integration, a synergy with the OS as well as hardware of the machine that relies on the base machine that keeps it at the heart an Atari machine... Please look towards what the 600 was to be (yes the 600 not the 600xl). Or even the outline for the super xe as well as the 1400 and 1xxxx series, you can see the 400/800 in them all. It is the architecture as well as the way the os utilizes that architecture that makes it 'Atari'. Even when using an expansion via the PBI/ECI, the expansion still relies on the architecture and OS of the Atari 8 bit line to make it happen. It is still an Atari experience even if it uses a completely different video card, or cpu card in the expansion. There is a level of connection and interaction still involved with the base hardware and os working in tandem. If you don't have that integration, it's not an Atari. You would simply attach a keyboard to the expansion and use it as a stand alone computer... A liber 6809 running nitro OS is an Atari, but how is that? it's a different OS? dig deeper into that os and see how it really interfaces with what is already there...that is stretching things to the very very very very atoms edge of what is still an Atari, you see when you start to program for that liber09 Atari, you find all your familiar friends still there being accessed and programmed in a familiar way ... the streets are the same place for the most part, the car might be a little faster... a street sign or two may have changed, but it's still your hometown.

Edited January 29, 2019 by _The Doctor__

[_The Doctor__]

deleted

Edited January 29, 2019 by _The Doctor__

[flashjazzcat]

...programming for the VBXE & Rapidus really isn't any different in the end, to someone with a stock Atari than programming extended memory games that they can't use either, or like 64K games are to the stock 400/800 user. Even if the reasons why the programs won't work are completely different. So those who accept memory upgrades but not other enhancements have disingenuous and flawed logic, IMHO. It's all or nothing baby.

You'll note I remain on the fence regarding what is and is not a "real" Atari: I think there's a reasonable argument to be made either way regarding what constitutes a radical departure from the character of the machine. I'm primarily talking about the programmer's area of focus and why we don't have a lot of applications and games which - for example - require VBXE some ten years after its release. I reject the "all or nothing" argument with relation to extended memory, since PORTB memory is a scalable resource whose method of access has remained largely unchanged for the past thirty-five years. You need only look at SpartaDOS X, which can run on a 64K machine and yet still offload most of itself into extended RAM where available. By taking advantage of extended RAM, the developer is hardly wasting his time on obscure hardware or severely limiting his user base, especially with a proliferation of 320K, 576K and 1088K machines out in the field. Moreover, the method of accessing PORTB extended RAM being universal, by installing 1MB of RAM, you avail yourself of the entire existing catalogue of software which uses extended RAM. Meanwhile, by installing a VBXE you allow the machine to run the handful of demos and programs written during the past decade which require VBXE, and by installing Rapidus you gain the ability to run all the 65C816 applications which no-one has yet written.

 

So I refute the conflation of Rapidus/VBXE with PORTB extended RAM on the basis of software availability and developer focus. Whether I accept or reject devices like VBXE and Rapidus (I accept them, since I own them) is completely immaterial. The point is that I think nothing of writing a tool for public consumption which uses 1MB of RAM since I know there is a three-figure user base ready to go, and in many cases I can scale the extended RAM usage so that it also works on a stock 130XE. I have no such wiggle room when writing a tool which requires VBXE, much less when coding an application in 65C816 assembly language which also requires VBXE and targets a couple of dozen users. I might do so for my own amusement, but I doubt that this will result in a large and diverse software library emerging for that particular combo, nor for any other similar upgrades.

 

Thankfully this is where drivers come into play. Almost anything I write for the A8 now can - with just a little forward planning - avail itself of the S_VBXE driver and thus the VBXE 80 column display. If the 80 column display isn't there: no biggie - it runs in 40 columns. This is a quite different proposition to - for example - coding your application in 65C816 assembly language. In that case, if the hardware isn't there, the application doesn't run.

[+davidcalgary29]

On a side note, I cant recall any contemporary resistance to the DataQue 65C816 board in 1990 (or the ATR8000 system years earlier) on the basis that it wouldnt be a real A8 ( not that there was much discussion about it all). I think its perhaps easier to create false distinctions today than to think of all of this as the inevitable evolution of the hardware. But I certainly respect those who want to keep pushing the stock hardware, even though that is clearly not what Atari (either of them) wanted with the A8.

[flashjazzcat]

Which underlines what I'm saying. I have no doubt the DataQue board was welcomed just as Rapidus has been welcomed... but twenty-nine years after the DataQue board appeared, there are still no large applications written specifically for the 65C816. I'm interested to know why this will change in the next thirty years.

[_The Doctor__]

the ATR 8000 was used primarily as a host adapter and Multi In out for the Atari, and was sparingly used as a cp/m machine... it used the Atari as a terminal in cp/m but still availed itself of some peripherals and Atari goodness with hacked terminals... hope that explains it.

The other angle was you could use your tools and network to develop on the ATR 8000 for the Atari, and then run your compiled work directly on the Atari that was attached to it. This was a massive time and space saver.

Edited January 29, 2019 by _The Doctor__

[+davidcalgary29]

Which underlines what I'm saying. I have no doubt the DataQue board was welcomed just as Rapidus has been welcomed... but twenty-nine years after the DataQue board appeared, there are still no large applications written specifically for the 65C816. I'm interested to know why this will change in the next thirty years.

Because we’re driven by the “possible” and not the “practical”.

 

the ATR 8000 was used primarily as a host adapter and Multi In out for the Atari, and was sparingly used as a cp/m machine... it used the Atari as a terminal in cp/m but still availed itself of some peripherals and Atari goodness with hacked terminals... hope that explains it.

The other angle was you could use your tools and network to develop on the ATR 8000 for the Atari, and then run your compiled work directly on the Atari that was attached to it.

But it had a Z80 processor, did it not? Antic certainly touted it as a way to acquire “a cheap CP/M” system (not an A8 upgrade, or as an accessory)...when CP/M still meant something.

[flashjazzcat]

Because we’re driven by the “possible” and not the “practical”.

Heh... agreed. It's possible for there to be loads of software, but there's practically none.

Edited January 29, 2019 by flashjazzcat

[+Stephen]

Oh, and as to the 65C816, yes, you can get stand alone computers, but they aren't compatible with Atari software because they don't have the original Atari hardware that is still needed.

 

And looking more objectively, programming for the VBXE & Rapidus really isn't any different in the end, to someone with a stock Atari than programming extended memory games that they can't use either, or like 64K games are to the stock 400/800 user. Even if the reasons why the programs won't work are completely different. So those who accept memory upgrades but not other enhancements have disingenuous and flawed logic, IMHO. It's all or nothing baby.

That's been my point all along. I don't understand the rift here with some upgrades being deemed "ok", and some being "now it's not an atari". Regarding the VBXE, would people still think it's "not atari" if the ANTIC/GTIA did 100% of the display, and the VBXE only provided a simple colour overlay?

[_The Doctor__]

maybe it's come down to things being an extension of the Atari rather than a replacement of what already exists in the Atari for some.

The ATR-8000 in it's multi I O role extended the serial port, floppy drive, and hard drive choices and abilities. These were directly usable and really help in the Business and BBS days. In it other role it was a development platform for the Atari 8 as well as 2600, Apple and TI machines. When attached to the Atari this was a compact streamlined way of developing and using what you created directly without all sorts of hoops involved. (In a way, this resembled an s-100 with critical connection but very compact form factor).

[+mytek]

I see the same attitude about my TK-II project. Some people look at connecting a PS/2 keyboard to your Atari as totally wrong. However I do so by taping into Pokey's keyboard circuits, and in essence translate and synchronize between the two devices. Not much different then hooking up a non-Atari device to the SIO in my opinion. It still uses the original underlying OS. But be it as it may, this is the mentality you sometimes have to deal with. However with that said I do understand the aspect of wanting to relive the original experience, and that's perfectly fine for some folks, but it's not my cup of tea. Egads!!! I could never ever go back to using a cassette, or BBSing at 300 baud . IDE and hopefully a good parallel ethernet on the horizon for me .

 

And I love that one of these:

 

=

[Kyle22]

What we desperately *NEED* are people to write QUALITY software that takes advantage of the 802/816. Same with VBXE. Sure, some people won't be able to run it. I don't yet have a VBXE (in my original 800), but I'd like to see this stuff written. That way more people would buy VBXEs, Rapidus, Sophia, etc. We need Killer Apps to take advantage of this new hardware. That is how the community moves forward. Sure, it would be nice for an app to look at the hardware and load different modules depending on what hardware you have, but I'm not against 802/816 only apps or VBXE only apps.

This is how we move ahead. This is how we beat the Commies to a pulp (more than we already have with stock hardware).

 

Edit: Typo.

Edited January 30, 2019 by Kyle22

[+davidcalgary29]

Absolutely — demonstrations of computing power and ground-breaking graphics tend to win more support than reasoned technical debates. I bought a XEP80 in 1989 for Atariwriter 80, even though I never did see any other real development for it.

 

Back OT: I wonder what the case would have looked like? Any designs found, Curt?

[xxl]

Atari Lynx ready in 1987 sniffed the whole "Super XE Console" project drawn on a handkerchief.

Suzy (16-bit custom CMOS chip running at 16 MHz)

Unlimited number of blitter "sprites" with collision detection

Hardware sprite scaling, distortion, and tilting effects

Hardware decoding of compressed sprite data

Hardware clipping and multi-directional scrolling

Math engine

Hardware 16-bit × 16-bit › 32-bit multiply with optional accumulation; 32-bit ÷ 16-bit › 16-bit divide

Parallel processing of CPU

All this "new atari" with vbxe, rapidus and so, where atari is used as a power supply board,

there is no sentimental value - and only sentiment holds people at 8 bit atari.

if someone wants more efficient equipment with a soul of 8 bit atari, then he should be interested in the amiga.

for some programmers, 8bit constraints are a challenge and motivation for more efficient and creative work - thanks to them we have programs that could be dreamed about in the 80's on a real 8-bit atari