Jump to content
JKK

The real fight Atari versus Commodore

Recommended Posts

Just now, Mclaneinc said:

Not involved in the rest of the discussion, I know nothing of Fujinet bar the basics..

 

But the 1541++ truly is the best bit of kit a C64 owner could have, there's some cart types it can't run (yet) but apart from boiling an egg it can do pretty much anything a C64 user would want..

 

The nearest we have on the Atari is the glorious AVG but there's no direct networking on that nor extra pokey emulation..Both brilliant bits of carts tho..As is the Side3

What carts can't you run Macleneinc?

 

I'll give them a go when I get time. Still playing with my freshly expanded 600XL ATM!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forget the name of them but the 1541++ throws up a message re them not being supported..I think there's two cart types that don't work as yet..

 

I'll have a play later and find the details.

 

Paul...

 

PS that 600XL of yours has turned out very nicely...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I sure didn't mean to crap on the Fujinet, as I know most of my problem are probably a big case of PEBKAC as anything else. 

I think a simple one or two page instruction instead of the small business card would've been nice. I'll give it another go this weekend with the help of the Fujinet website on an old laptop (My classic computers aren't in the same room as my PC/Mac which makes browsing for FAQ a bit complicated).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tuxon86 said:

And I sure didn't mean to crap on the Fujinet, as I know most of my problem are probably a big case of PEBKAC as anything else. 

I think a simple one or two page instruction instead of the small business card would've been nice. I'll give it another go this weekend with the help of the Fujinet website on an old laptop (My classic computers aren't in the same room as my PC/Mac which makes browsing for FAQ a bit complicated).

To be perfectly honest, I don't see anyone crapping on anything.

 

The C64 and A8 are different platforms but similar in many ways, basically trying to achieve the same basic goal, in slightly different directions with different methodologies. Neither is right, neither is wrong, neither coulda/shoulda/woulda been the better platform - As it's all ended 30+ years ago.

 

I highlighted that many A8 users here are clueless when it comes to the advancements made on the C64 platform, and I did it in the hope that those developing hardware might think that something being done on another platform so simply, might be achievable on the opposing platform. I wasn't wrong when it comes to clueless A8 users, and I'm not too sure where all the angst regarding something I apparently said, but didn't say, about FujiNet came from.

 

If you want to make a Swiss army knife for the A8, you need to pay attention to the 1541 UII+. However, if that's not what you want, don't let me stop you.

 

I'm quite happy with my 600XL, U1MB, SIDE3, 64k expansion and chroma/luma/RF modulator mods - The next step is getting it online. I'm not at all interested in FB or Twitter, I can do that easily now via third party proxies simply and easily and yet I don't as it doesn't interest me in the slightest - I'm interested in the retro experience of the Atari ATASCII BBS scene in all it's glory. The real question as the consumer is: What product allows me to do that simply, easily and reliably? Because that's the case on my C64 and has been for a vast number of years now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably go with a WifiModem/WiModem232 or something of that nature and an R:Verter (or an 850/P:R: Connection if you can find one inexpensively and really want to go old school).  I've had decent luck with the Lantronix boxes, but some have had less stellar experiences (and I'm hearing the WifiModems/WiModem232 route is better... I just haven't tested mine yet).

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mazzspeed said:

The C64 and A8 are different platforms but similar in many ways, basically trying to achieve the same basic goal,

 

Well, the reality the nature of these advancements is a direct result of the underlying architecture of the host platforms themselves (!) And, in that context, the differences are SUBSTANTIAL. 

 

In reality, The Ultimate-II cart is:

  1. surrogate PROCESSOR / SERVER that performs (externally) a host of storage, interfacing and I/O functions on behalf of its host (C64) well beyond the C64's own processing power, and what you would typically perform with an I/O HD interface and its media.
  2. To get an idea of how far this concept is stretched, the Ultimate-II cart operates with its OWN, embedded DOS, for directly handling access its internal file-system (!), and separate from the rudimentary / host "JiffyDOS".
  3. Optimal I/O performance and integration between C64 and Ultimate-II requires use of modified Disk-Drive ROMS (because part of the DOS resides on the DRIVE !), and system "kernals", (e.g. a rudimentary 8KB firmware that mimics the role to of Atari's larger OS). This is the OLD / obsolete approach on the Atari camp., without mentioning how bizarre is the notion of having DOS residing internally on floppy-drives ROMs (!)
  4. Available resources such as "RAM", implemented as REU, are much more local to the Ultimate-II cart, than what it is for the host C64. To such an extent, that even its embedded DOS also includes commands to load from its locally-attached storage into REU's "RAM", which in the context of the C64's local processor is, in reality, "fake" RAM as it cannot be directly accessed by it, without Ultimate's II DMA supporting controller (!)

On the Atari side, however, the Ultimate-1MB/SIDE3 or Incognito/800 picture is actually VERY different, because the design and implementation is following a very different concept:

 

  1. First and foremost, the 6502 and ANTIC remain in charge, procedurally, square-and-center. Because they are fast enough on the A8, they call ALL the shots, except bus-logic control and ROM/RAM "mapping structure", which is implemented with aid of CPLDs, which in turn, serve a surrogate purpose of internal (and existing) MMUs. In short, it is essentially the same formula as originally conceived when designing these systems 35+ years ago (!) PBI port remains free for any other use.
  2. The RAM and ROM expansions provided by U1MB and Incognito is actual, REAL extended RAM, directly accessible by the CPU, residing separately and internally in the host system, and controlled by actual (established) control-registers (PIA PORTB, $CFFF). What that means is that you may not have an internal hard-drive, you may not have a cartridge-emulator, and you would still provide any externally SIO-loaded program with these ROM/RAM facilities. 
  3. In the case of U1MB-implementation, HD storage (and now Cartridge-emulation) is provided separately and externally. That means, you may have not have extended memory, extended ROM or MMU-emulation provided by U1MB, but you can certainly and quickly load any executable that fits in on-board RAM via SIDE2 loader (and also carts, via SIDE3). On the 800/Incognito, and its non-blocking architecture, you can afford the luxury of even further abstraction: RAM, ROM and HD reside internally on Slot-0 board, and Left-cart port can be used for Ultimate/SD multi-cart, which can be accessed and commanded directly from SDX prompt, and independent from Incognito's HD, and SDX built-in cart. Mounting any given cart (or removing multi-cart from system-bus) is possible seamlessly from SDX prompt, directly.
  4. U1MB's and Incognito-residing SDX is the system DOS, completely separate from Atari's own OS, SIO or HD storage, like in a real computer system (but aware of its PBI extensions). This DOS, in turn, is presented to the system via ROM-Disk (present on 6502-bus address space and directly paged / accessed and executed by it, all day long, 7x24). Up to 320 KBytes of SDX internal ROM-disk. JiffyDOS, in comparison, is a toy next to SDX's implementation and architecture (which is a total tour-de-force in the 64KB-address space, banked-ram, 8-bit world).
  5. Due to the architecture of the Atari OS and its PBI facilities, as well as the low-level integration provided by U1MB / Incognito BIOS, there is NO NEED to alter or change the Atari OS load (XL/XE). This, in turns means, that with a stock XL/XE OS, you can:
    • drive SIO peripherals at at up to 12 KBytes/sec
    • mount universal .ATR images of floppies and "hard drives" and access them at 30+ KBytes/sec reads,
    • access a PBI-compliant HD at 90+ KBytes/sec reads
    • all of this without ever leaving the SDX prompt, and without the need of any other external I/O processor, other than the HD controller.
    • Even future Fujinet core drivers may be implemented and provided via OS PBI facilities (!)
  6. Furthermore, you can perform direct FILE-level or SECTOR-level read/writes between any SIO-attached, mounted .ATRs, or (in the case of the 800's architecture) between DIFFERENT Hard Drives (!) And all of this ran and directed from the 6502 central processor. This means, for example, you can load an entire U1MB / Incognito ROM-image (512KB) into system ram, from any media (SIO, .ATRs, HD), and then flash it directly to host U1MB / Incognito rom-space. Like a real, modern computer / system.

 

6 hours ago, Mazzspeed said:

I highlighted that many A8 users here are clueless when it comes to the advancements made on the C64 platform,

 

Your comments (hinting at an unsolicited "literacy" crusade on the A8-domain) are reminiscent of Cervantes' inspiring "Don Quijote de La Mancha"... A noble, wobbly guy chasing "monsters" (eg. actually wind-mills) on-board a malnourished horse in company of a fat, chubby partner, riding a slow-as-molasses donkey... al of this at a time where the world had already moved away from heavy, old-clunky wearable body-armors... 

 

People are smart enough about finding things on their own. No need (whatsoever) to wage crusades on this (ATARI) forum, in the name of a foreign system. No need to be a "Don Quijote". There are plenty of advantages already present on the A8 architecture, worth highlighting, worth discussing, and not needing any imaginary (and constant) validation on the C64 camp. Such validation sounds now more like a sort of inferiority tit-for-tat complex, rather than an Atari-centric discussion.

 

And the best is probably yet to come, here.

 

 

 

Edited by Faicuai
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FujiNet is pretty awesome and I'd suggest that any Atari enthusiast that hasn't bought into this yet go out and buy one right away.

 

It is actually very quick and easy to get running with the FujiNet but there is a lot under the hood that isn't necessarily obvious right off the bat.  Some very talented people put a lot of time and pain into the project, and they continue to do so, and it really is a game-changing device.  It is worth putting some time into using the device and playing around with it.

 

 

8 hours ago, Mazzspeed said:

I highlighted that many A8 users here are clueless when it comes to the advancements made on the C64 platform

Does that make these A8 users bad people? Many people will have had no interest in advancements made on the C64 or the Spectrum, or the Dragon 32... because they didn't or don't own one - not because they curse the Commodore logo every night before going to bed. How many C64 enthusiasts would be well versed in advancements for the the Atari 8-Bit? Probably not many, and does it matter? - Not really.

 

Anyway, FujiNet rocks for anyone that is still on the fence. Support it and the guys behind it so that it can continue to develop. FujiNet isn't just about connecting to a BBS - you can do that with an SIO2PCUSB cable, notebook and Bobterm - or just go dialup! FujiNet is the biggest thing to hit the Atari 8-bit since the Atari 1050. I do not have shares in FujiNet.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Faicuai said:

surrogate PROCESSOR / SERVER that performs (externally) a host of storage, interfacing and I/O functions on behalf of its host (C64) well beyond the C64's own processing power, and what you would typically perform with an I/O HD interface and its media.

So essentially no different to a 1541 or even an A8 FDD, hence the reason your IndusGT has a Z80 processor. You see, both the A8 and the C64 ran 'smart peripherals', with CPU's and even RAM - The IEC and SIO interfaces essentially used these peripherals on a rudimentary network of sorts. Both machines could copy data between devices with the computer disconnected once the process had begun.

 

So your point is moot, the way the 1541 UII+ does things is no different to any other storage peripheral available for the C64. There's no need to use the machine's slow CPU when the devices CPU is a magnitude faster and you can multitask using Ultimax mode.

 

3 hours ago, Faicuai said:

The RAM and ROM expansions provided by U1MB and Incognito is actual, REAL extended RAM, directly accessible by the CPU, residing separately and internally in the host system, and controlled by actual (established) control-registers (PIA PORTB, $CFFF). What that means is that you may not have an internal hard-drive, you may not have a cartridge-emulator, and you would still provide any externally SIO-loaded program with these ROM/RAM facilities.

Likewise, the RAM provided by the 1541 Ultimate II+ is real ram, I have no idea why you'd think otherwise?

 

It contains real memory that can be used by implementing a DMA chip as Commodore's memory expansions did, which opens up a world of possibilities and is faster than bank switching. Or, you can run the memory expansion in a bank switched configuration, essentially no different to the A8.

 

Of course, everyone uses memory via it's own DMA controller as it's more versatile on a machine like the C64 that can essentially clear it's whole memory map for use by the user with the exception of a small amount of IO space. Essentially, the base machine has all the memory it needs to be impressive and useful.

 

3 hours ago, Faicuai said:

U1MB's and Incognito-residing SDX is the system DOS, completely separate from Atari's own OS, SIO or HD storage, like in a real computer system (but aware of its PBI extensions). This DOS, in turn, is presented to the system via ROM-Disk (present on 6502-bus address space and directly paged / accessed and executed by it, all day long, 7x24). Up to 320 KBytes of SDX internal ROM-disk. JiffyDOS, in comparison, is a toy next to SDX's implementation and architecture (which is a total tour-de-force in the 64KB-address space, banked-ram, 8-bit world).

Yeah, U1MB is good, hence why I bought one. SDX is also good, so is JiffyDOS with the CMD-HD expansions. I happened to buy a SIDE3 as I want it's extended cart functionality and DMA access as that's what I'm used to on my C64 and it's fantastic. JiffyDOS with extended CMD-HD commands is not a toy at all, it's simply a DOS implemented differently on a machine that's not as fragmented, and it's 100% compatible with all Commodore software - No tricks needed. Once again, as stated above, the A8 isn't the only machine that can bank switch.

 

3 hours ago, Faicuai said:
  • Due to the architecture of the Atari OS and its PBI facilities, as well as the low-level integration provided by U1MB / Incognito BIOS, there is NO NEED to alter or change the Atari OS load (XL/XE). This, in turns means, that with a stock XL/XE OS, you can:
    • drive SIO peripherals at at up to 12 KBytes/sec
    • mount universal .ATR images of floppies and "hard drives" and access them at 30+ KBytes/sec reads,
    • access a PBI-compliant HD at 90+ KBytes/sec reads
    • all of this without ever leaving the SDX prompt, and without the need of any other external I/O processor, other than the HD controller.
    • Even future Fujinet core drivers may be implemented and provided via OS PBI facilities (!)
  •  

But you are changing the way the machine boots. I just installed U1MB, I removed my OS and BASIC ROM's and replaced them with the U1MB - That's given me the BIOS and allows more versatility regarding the way the machine is used. The 1541 UII+ does the same thing, the only difference is I don't have to do anything internally, the 1541 UII+ also provides a menu to effectively configure the C64.

 

In terms of storage speeds, I've proven that I can achieve speeds that are just as fast if not faster using either the system bus or the IEC connector in other threads, absolutely no different to the A8. I can mount virtual D64 floppies and hard drives no problem, i can transfer data via the system bus at basically the same speeds if not higher no problem.

 

I can also copy between devices at the JiffyDOS prompt, thing is: I don't want to as it's slower than doing the same thing via the interface of the 1541 Ultimate II+ by an order of magnitude. However, as stated, copying data by flipping into Ultimax mode and pausing my task, initializing the copy process, only to be able to return to my task in the exact same state at the press of a button is absolutely no different to two 1541 'smart drives' in the day that contained their own DOS ROM, their own CPU and their own memory - It's just far easier to jump into and out of the drives themselves and allows for a level of multitasking. The way you believe the archaic processor present in 8bit machines simply has to be involved all the time is quite odd. which basically covers point 6.

 

However, I will state that if the A8 had a cartridge like the 1541 UII+ that operated in the same way, I have no doubt you'd be singing it's praises.

 

1 hour ago, svenski said:

Does that make these A8 users bad people?

Absolutely not, I never stated it did. However, your points above highlight why I believe certain A8 users are clueless when it comes to the C64. I am doing everything i can to learn about the architecture of the A8 and it's various enhancements and operation, to the point where I bought and restored a 600XL and just added all of my upgrades and am in the process of configuring them - It's fascinating. It's obvious you haven't done the same regarding the C64 and here you are sprouting opinion like it's fact, and don't try to claim you have - Because it's flatly obvious you haven't.

 

They are both great machines, similar in many ways but approaching the issues of their ageing design differently. It's that simple.

Edited by Mazzspeed
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tillek said:

Probably go with a WifiModem/WiModem232 or something of that nature and an R:Verter (or an 850/P:R: Connection if you can find one inexpensively and really want to go old school).  I've had decent luck with the Lantronix boxes, but some have had less stellar experiences (and I'm hearing the WifiModems/WiModem232 route is better... I just haven't tested mine yet).

 

 

I am going to look into this as I have SIDE2 as my storage device so I don't really need a method to mount virtual floppies. Thank you for your advice.

 

On the C64 and even the Amiga, WiModem's work great and they're cheap. So if I can implement the same on the A8 that would be very handy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:
1 hour ago, svenski said:

Does that make these A8 users bad people?

Absolutely not, I never stated it did. However, your points above highlight why I believe certain A8 users are clueless when it comes to the C64. I am doing everything i can to learn about the architecture of the A8 and it's various enhancements and operation, it's obvious you haven't done the same regarding the C64 and here you are sprouting opinion like it's fact.

 

They are both great machines, similar in many ways but approaching the issues of their ageing design differently. It's that simple.

Erm... what were my points and opinions that I was sprouting as fact? Maybe I was a tad enthusiastic about FujiNet ?

 

Just because you have the desire, time and or inclination to find out about the A8 doesn't mean that other people should do the same with the C64 or whatever else - that doesn't make them clueless. Is there a law that says I must learn everything I can about the C64 architecture, enhancements and operation? Is my doing that going to change the world? I bet you haven't taken the time to study the architecture, enhancements and operation of the Oric-1 , Oric Atmos and Dragon 32, or subscribed to the Airfix model club... but does that make you clueless ?

 

16 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

They are both great machines, similar in many ways but approaching the issues of their ageing design differently. It's that simple.

It is that simple, so makes this whole thing mute really - and certainly no need to fall out over it.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, svenski said:

Erm... what were my points and opinions that I was sprouting as fact? Maybe I was a tad enthusiastic about FujiNet ?

 

Just because you have the desire, time and or inclination to find out about the A8 doesn't mean that other people should do the same with the C64 or whatever else - that doesn't make them clueless. Is there a law that says I must learn everything I can about the C64 architecture, enhancements and operation? Is my doing that going to change the world? I bet you haven't taken the time to study the architecture, enhancements and operation of the Oric-1 , Oric Atmos and Dragon 32, or subscribed to the Airfix model club... but does that make you clueless ?

 

It is that simple, so makes this whole thing mute really - and certainly no need to fall out over it.

 

 

 

You didn't. Sorry, I confused posts.

 

However, if someone isn't interested in running both machines in question full time in order to experience specifically the above mentioned upgrades - Then the individual shouldn't be sprouting opinion as fact.

 

Furthermore, I 100% agree that arguments such as this are pointless and vastly moot. They're both great platforms.

Edited by Mazzspeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

So essentially no different to a 1541 or even an A8 FDD, hence the reason your IndusGT has a Z80 processor.

It is VERY different. it seems that one of the key reasons the Ultimate-II exists and is presented (mainly) as a 1541 "cycle-exact" drive server / emulator, is because of that bizarre architecture, and the idea of burying DOS into the drive (for God's sake!). What that means (so our audience can grasp the implications) is that you are forever dependent on that dumb-ass drive for anything DOS-related (and all the ensuing SW that depends on it). And most likely, hence the need to bring them "on-board" the Ultimate-II, including the need (I suspect) to run their ROMs as well (so the tiny JiffyDos can actually operate as intended while simultaneously getting rid of the drives). This model has little to do with how DOS is implemented on Atari and its related functions, fortunately. 

 

35 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

I can also copy between devices at the JiffyDOS prompt, thing is: I don't want to as it's slower than doing the same thing via the interface of the 1541 Ultimate II+ by an order of magnitude

Thank you. You have just re-affirmed the (very) different / architectural nature of a solution like Ultimate-II and its functional scope. And I understand that you may be inclined to use the Ultimate's own processor, because the C64's seems like too slow for this type of work.

 

37 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

In terms of storage speeds, I've proven that I can achieve speeds that are just as fast if not faster

You have not proven anything. And the reason is simple: you will never achieve the procedural I/O speeds that can be attained on the A8 platform (as tiny or insignificant as they may be today), especially when running a complex framework like SDX and a local HD (even though there is no such thing as SDX on the Ultimate-II). Your Ultimate-II core-processor, however, will be able to do so, with any media you decide attaching to it, for sure.

 

1 hour ago, Mazzspeed said:

However, I will state that if the A8 had a cartridge like the 1541 UII+ that operated in the same way, I have no doubt you'd be singing it's praises

However, if the C64 could handle what the A8-platofmr handles today, with its own resources, I would de-classify it as a kiddie, dancing-sprites computer, and consider it more seriously around these parts. Hope you can accept this opinion, here, in an ATARI forum. 😃

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mazzspeed said:

I am going to look into this as I have SIDE2 as my storage device so I don't really need a method to mount virtual floppies. Thank you for your advice.

 

On the C64 and even the Amiga, WiModem's work great and they're cheap. So if I can implement the same on the A8 that would be very handy.

I'm hearing the WiModem 232 works well on the Atari too but I just haven't tried mine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

It is VERY different. it seems that one of the key reasons the Ultimate-II exists and is presented (mainly) as a 1541 "cycle-exact" drive server / emulator, is because of that bizarre architecture, and the idea of burying DOS into the drive (for God's sake!). What that means (so our audience can grasp the implications) is that you are forever dependent on that dumb-ass drive for anything DOS-related (and all the ensuing SW that depends on it). And most likely, hence the need to bring them "on-board" the Ultimate-II, including the need (I suspect) to run their ROMs as well (so the tiny JiffyDos can actually operate as intended while simultaneously getting rid of the drives). This model has little to do with how DOS is implemented on Atari and its related functions, fortunately. 

Once again, wrong.

 

The DOS is contained within the kernel but provided by the 1541 UII+, the drive contains the needed drivers which can involve extended commands specific to the device if needed. For instance, I run S-JiffyDOS ROM's on my real and emulated 1541's (which are absolutely no different to real 1541's as they both communicate via the IEC bus) and JiffyDOS on the C64 as I don't like the command structure of S-JiffyDOS. This gives me the DOS I want with the considerable speed improvements of the S-JiffyDOS ROM's on my drives. Sometimes I run the Hyperspeed kernel as I can switch operating systems via the 1541 UII+, no different to the U1MB.

 

Different does not = 'Bizzare' simply because it's something you're not familiar with.

 

As far as JiffyDOS is concerned, the virtual 1541's are real drives in every sense of the word communicating via the same IEC serial connector. The A8 line has devices implemented identically.

 

36 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

Thank you. You have just re-affirmed the (very) different / architectural nature of a solution like Ultimate-II and its functional scope. And I understand that you may be inclined to use the Ultimate's own processor, because the C64's seems like too slow for this type of work.

Well this is a nice attempt at elitest pun, no different to your post regarding CCGMS which you obviously have never used. Fact is, both devices are slow as shit using their archaic CPU's - It doesn't change the fact we still love them.

 

I have never felt limited in the slightest regarding the speed of the 6510 on my C64. Both the C64 and A8 use slightly different architectures, with ANTIC constantly stealing clock cycles meaning the realistic speed of the A8 is closer to 1.3Mhz, this is not the case on the C64. 

 

It really is a stupid argument when the architectures differ and I have proven that I can get storage speeds that are just as fast if not faster than your A8 - But really, Who cares?

 

36 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

You have not proven anything. And the reason is simple: you will never achieve the procedural I/O speeds that can be attained on the A8 platform (as tiny or insignificant as they may be today), especially when running a complex framework like SDX and a local HD (even though there is no such thing as SDX on the Ultimate-II). Your Ultimate-II core-processor, however, will be able to do so, with any media you decide attaching to it, for sure.

And yet your ignorance is blinding you, as I am achieving such speeds and have taken screenshoots proving this to be the case and posed them in other threads. Furthermore, the benchmarks posted are performed on virtual 1541's via the IEC serial bus exactly as a real 1541 would be connected. The benchmarks re: Data transferred via the parallel bus using DMA are naturally leveraging the increased speeds of the parallel bus itself and are just as fast if not faster than the A8. Yes, it's using DMA, as the C64 has a DMA pin on the cartridge port intended to be used for this exact purpose by the Commodore engineers themselves.

 

You act like this is cheating, and yet it's not - It's how the system was designed from the onset.

 

36 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

However, if the C64 could handle what the A8-platofmr handles today, with its own resources, I would de-classify it as a kiddie, dancing-sprites computer, and consider it more seriously around these parts. Hope you can accept this opinion, here, in an ATARI forum. 😃

And yet it is using it's own resources the way Commodore engineers intended. The fact is, while both devices share some striking similarities, both are architecturally different in many areas. That doesn't mean one way of doing things is right and one way of doing things is wrong - It simply highlights that these are different machines.

 

I don't know what else to say? Do you want a picture of the IEC serial lead running from the 1541 UII+ to the C64? Would that convince you that as far as the C64 is concerned these virtual 1541's are presented as very real drives using the exact same connector a real 1541 would use?

 

I use both the A8 and the C64 with what I consider to be the best expansions available on both platforms, it's obvious you do not. Because a lot of what you claim regarding the C64 and UII+ is just hyperbole and not true.

Edited by Mazzspeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

Because a lot of what you claim regarding the C64 and UII+ is just hyperbole and not true

Setting aside the emotional distress..

 

I took the liberty to read JiffyDOS documents, as well as Ultimate-IIs'. Just like anyone else can read U1MBs, BIOS, Altirra HW Reference Manual, and SDX's documentation stash (of course). 

 

No amount of cheerleading will change my opinion. Trust me. 

 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

Setting aside the emotional distress..

 

I took the liberty to read JiffyDOS documents, as well as Ultimate-IIs'. Just like anyone else can read U1MBs, BIOS, Altirra HW Reference Manual, and SDX's documentation stash (of course). 

 

No amount of cheerleading will change my opinion. Trust me. 

 


 

 

And that's all that needs to be said really, isn't it?

 

You have never used the hardware in question, all you've ever done is read some documentation, and everything you claim regarding the 1541 UII+ is wrong and you post silly pictures of women.

 

You don't even really understand the architecture of the C64.

 

Now if you don't mind, I'm busy hands on learning about the A8 trying to resolve an issue. I'm not interested in your pointless crusade anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

And that's all that needs to be said really, isn't it?

If you hover over a username, you have an option to "Ignore User".  Trust me... it makes all the difference.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

41 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

and everything you claim regarding the 1541 UII+ is wrong

😂😂 Yeah, right... NO way I could possibly be right im anything! 

 

Well, at least something funny, in tonight's late drama! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

 

😂😂 Yeah, right... NO way I could possibly be right im anything! 

 

Well, at least something funny, in tonight's late drama! 

 

It's not so much about being right, it's about having a clue via experience. You have no clue when it comes to the C64, you're an A8 fanboi.

 

Which is fine, just don't go posting opinion as fact when its bullshit. Reading the JiffyDOS manual will not explain the CMD-HD extended commands, of which there are many - Just as an example.

Edited by Mazzspeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

You have never used

 

51 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

all you've ever done is read

 

53 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

You don't even really understand the architecture

 

53 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

your pointless crusade

 

4 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

You have no clue when it comes to the C64, you're an A8 fanboi.

 

Understood. I can clearly see the pattern. 😎

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is that discussion about the 1541 UII+ at all?

 

It's an external device, using modern "electronics". 

What is the special stuff about that?

 

Back in the 80s I was using the ST as an intelligent Disk Server and communication device on the SIO Bus. 

People might know the "XL-ST Schiffeversenken". 

If once a communication is build, the "other device" always can act as a Server of all connected devices.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

 

 

 

 

 

Understood. I can clearly see the pattern. 😎

Good, because every quote there describes your attitude perfectly. The problem here isn't me, it isn't the C64, it isn't the A8 - The problem here is your ignorance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

Good, because every quote there describes your attitude perfectly. The problem here isn't me, it isn't the C64, it isn't the A8 - The problem here is your ignorance.

 

Dude... seriously... take my advice on this and block them.

 

All I saw in this thread, was you... yelling at the wall.

 

Stress melts away.  You can create a world where they don't exist with just a few clicks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Tillek said:

Dude... seriously... take my advice on this and block them.

 

All I saw in this thread, was you... yelling at the wall.

 

Stress melts away.  You can create a world where they don't exist with just a few clicks.

 

I'm not stressed, I'm not in the slightest bit emotional. I'm stating facts, the other party is stating inexperienced opinion as fact. Facts don't necessitate the need for emotion, but opinion does.

 

I'm done here, as stated I'm not interested in advancing another individual's crusade whatsoever. But if he promotes hyperbole, I think that the facts need to be pointed out.

 

They're both great platforms, hence why I own and use both.

Edited by Mazzspeed
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mazzspeed said:

Good, because every quote there describes your attitude perfectly

Well, it was you who wrote all that... simply because I described the UII nature for what is (and quite accurately).

 

And you did not like it. Sorry for having brought "darkness and despair" into your world...

 

If you are really true to your cause, Let's see if you wage your emotional literacy-crusade on your own C64 forum, chasing down users' opinion of Atari...

 

I would like to see that. 🤔😎

Edited by Faicuai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...