I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new Commodore
"PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing Commodore PC-10
software and is compatible with existing Commodore 8-bit software AND
hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium 4 or Pentium 5 processor and
a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816 co-processor for certain handling many 6500
series apps.

What I also found to be a thought to include FULL package MS-DOS for
backward compatibility with Commodore PC line and a Windows XP partition but
ALSO a new "Commodore Operating System". Now I would look at bringing Tulip
into this for some official aspect.

What I would want in a NEW Commodore OS, a ROCK SOLID and VERY ULTRA-MODERN
OS which is critically rock stable like QNX and capable of easily porting
over stuff from Linux with ease. We can look at clear rock stable hardware
and rock stable software and drivers. But forward looking for future
expansions for the next 10-15 years. Providing Tulip keeps themselves from
going bankrupt. ALSO the ability to program for the baby would be a MUST
!!!! But a variety of applications. A new Commodore branded PC would need to
be distinguishable from existing PCs made by Tulip.

BTW: An official emulator that handles the C64 & C-128 would need to be made
that is TOP of the line and 100% functional free with the system. The
ability to directly plug in a Commodore disk drive right in or even a CMD HD
would be totally perfect.

DISCLAIMER: Tulip, this is a concept and does not reflect any actual
products that I make and would be something that Tulip would want to
possibly look into making. I would help in the progression of Commodore
right into the 21st century. This would not be a C-One but we can use the
technology to help in the compatibility aspects. But the system would INDEED
a PC and a C= all in one. It clearly would have a P4 for the SERIOUS
application use using a New Generation "Commodore Operating System".

Also included in the hardware concept would include a world leading AGP
graphics technology and if I remember my PC-10 right - it was ATI's "All in
Wonder"-like graphics card. So why not an new ATI graphics card ???? Why Not
???? This is a "CONCEPT" for a totally NEW PC series and I would want an OS
that is totally state of the art packaged that is enough to distinguish it
from any other PC.

In order for Commodore to succeed and be revived, an ambitious action would
need to be taken.

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote
in news:107m8md4h410pce@corp.supernews.com: 

> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
> Commodore PC-10 software and is compatible with existing Commodore
> 8-bit software AND hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium 4
> or Pentium 5 processor and a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816 co-processor
> for certain handling many 6500 series apps.
> 
> What I also found to be a thought to include FULL package MS-DOS for
> backward compatibility with Commodore PC line and a Windows XP
> partition but ALSO a new "Commodore Operating System". Now I would
> look at bringing Tulip into this for some official aspect.
> 
> What I would want in a NEW Commodore OS, a ROCK SOLID and VERY
> ULTRA-MODERN OS which is critically rock stable like QNX and capable
> of easily porting over stuff from Linux with ease. We can look at
> clear rock stable hardware and rock stable software and drivers. But
> forward looking for future expansions for the next 10-15 years.
> Providing Tulip keeps themselves from going bankrupt. ALSO the ability
> to program for the baby would be a MUST !!!! But a variety of
> applications. A new Commodore branded PC would need to be
> distinguishable from existing PCs made by Tulip. 
> 
> BTW: An official emulator that handles the C64 & C-128 would need to
> be made that is TOP of the line and 100% functional free with the
> system. The ability to directly plug in a Commodore disk drive right
> in or even a CMD HD would be totally perfect.
> 
> DISCLAIMER: Tulip, this is a concept and does not reflect any actual
> products that I make and would be something that Tulip would want to
> possibly look into making. I would help in the progression of
> Commodore right into the 21st century. This would not be a C-One but
> we can use the technology to help in the compatibility aspects. But
> the system would INDEED a PC and a C= all in one. It clearly would
> have a P4 for the SERIOUS application use using a New Generation
> "Commodore Operating System". 
> 
> Also included in the hardware concept would include a world leading
> AGP graphics technology and if I remember my PC-10 right - it was
> ATI's "All in Wonder"-like graphics card. So why not an new ATI
> graphics card ???? Why Not ???? This is a "CONCEPT" for a totally NEW
> PC series and I would want an OS that is totally state of the art
> packaged that is enough to distinguish it from any other PC.
> 
> In order for Commodore to succeed and be revived, an ambitious action
> would need to be taken.
> 
> 
> 
> 

I kind of like this idea myself.  

Hello Rick,

I haven't spoken with you in a while.

> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
> Commodore PC-10 software and is compatible with existing Commodore
> 8-bit software AND hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium
> 4 or Pentium 5 processor and a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816
> co-processor for certain handling many 6500 series apps.

For such an endeavor as this, I would suspect that it might be better
to consider some sort of PCI card (or even USB or Firewire) device
that would plug into a PC's main-board.

The reason being that with your basic proposal you would be completely
rebuilding a PC which is already easily available in the form of ATX
boards.  Today's main-boards should already be compatible with
yesterday's PC's including the PC-10 unless the program in question
bypasses the BIOS.  The BIOS should mask any indication that the
hardware is different.  Of course there are specific levels in the
BIOS that would read differently, but programs that utilize the DOS
layer, or at the very least use established BIOS routines, should work
fine.

With that in mind, I would probably entertain the idea of a
6502/6510/8502 compatible coprocessor card that would be accessible
from the PC.  This card would basically be a Commodore computer card
that could run the existing CBM stuff.  As for the improved operating
system, one could consider a port of the Wings or Wheels environments
that would run on the more modern CPU and hardware used in the
processor card.

> What I also found to be a thought to include FULL package MS-DOS for
> backward compatibility with Commodore PC line and a Windows XP

The MS-DOS layer could be provided with this open-source DOS
environment:
http://www.freedos.org/

I've used it once or twice and it works pretty good.  I actually
booted it directly from a CD.

Given that you are talking about making it able to run Windows XP, the
coprocessor route does seem to be the most cost-efficient route.

> partition but ALSO a new "Commodore Operating System". Now I would
> look at bringing Tulip into this for some official aspect.

It would probably be fairly simple to set up some sort of 64-HDD type
partition on the HD for use with the Commodore environment.

> What I would want in a NEW Commodore OS, a ROCK SOLID and VERY
> ULTRA-MODERN OS which is critically rock stable like QNX and

For that environment, I would almost definitely prefer something along
the lines of BASIC 2.0 with a larger vocabulary along the lines of
BASIC 7.  The additional commands would need to be turned off to
maintain compatibility with a stock 64.  Something along the lines of
a BASIC extension with an off switch.

In addition, it could have a port of Wheels or Wings

> capable of easily porting over stuff from Linux with ease. We can

There is a LUnix project that exists for the Commodore.  With more
system resources, it could probably become quite comprehensive.

> BTW: An official emulator that handles the C64 & C-128 would need
> to be made that is TOP of the line and 100% functional free with

Has anyone yet determined who is the actual copyright holder of the
Commodore 64 and 128 ROM's?

This would need to be determined first before some "official" emulator
could be released.  I know Tulip owns the Commodore "Brand," but a
brand name and intellectual property are two different things.  If
Tulip doesn't own the intellectual property (BASIC ROM, Kernal ROM,
etc.), then the Commodore brand really doesn't mean much on the
hardware.  It would basically still be "pirated" or "stolen" code even
if it did have the legal use of the Commodore Brand.

> the system. The ability to directly plug in a Commodore disk drive
> right in or even a CMD HD would be totally perfect.

This would be a must.

> In order for Commodore to succeed and be revived, an ambitious
> action would need to be taken.

For the Commodore Brand to survive in the 8-BIT market, it would
require some work.  It would also require real backing from the
company.  Just selling a PC or even a PC with a Commodore emulator
will keep the Commodore brand in the Pentium class market.

As for my personal interests, I would tend to prefer a stand-alone
machine that is based on the Commodore 128.  I have always been
intrigued by the Commodore-One, but being based primarily around the
Commodore 64 has limited my interest.  Yes, I do understand all the
implications of a "reconfigurable" computer.  I know that it could be
made into an enhanced 128 with some work, but my personal interest
would be something like this:

A new Commodore 128 based computer with enhancements to the 128 mode
environment.  The ability to switch to 64 mode just like on the real
128.  And of course an enhanced version of the 64 mode.  Of course,
none of that would mean anything to me without full compatibility with
both the Commodore 64 and 128 and all related accessories.

Additionally, I would want a "clearly legal," licensed version of the
Commodore 64 and 128 ROM pre-installed in the machine.  This would
preferably be with both the approval of the "actual" copyright holder
of the code, as-well as the approval of the company (Tulip) with the
Brand rights.  This would remove liability relating to the products
use of the Commodore ROM and provide the ability to use the Commodore
"Brand" on the machine in question.

If someone was able to clearly establish the current owner of the
Commodore ROM's, this would surely go a long way towards making new
"Commodore-Based" machines appealing to me.

Personally, it's been the lack of a Commodore 128 mode, and the fact
that the C-One requires us to use ROM images which technically are
still someone else's intellectual property, that has kept me from
investing in the C-One project.  This last statement just reflects my
point of view on the code/copyright issue.  It is not intended to
start a debate.

Anyway, that's just my 2-cents worth on this interesting subject.
Being one that prefers using my Commodore 128 & 64 because they are
the real deal, I personally wouldn't make the jump to another system
unless it met the goals I outlined above.  But then again, we're all
different :-)

Talk to you later,

Michael Hunter
mhunter@videocam.net.au

Rick Balkins wrote:
> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
> Commodore PC-10 software and is compatible with existing Commodore
> 8-bit software AND hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium 4
> or Pentium 5 processor and a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816
> co-processor for certain handling many 6500 series apps.

I have inquired some ideas and I think I'd be interested in getting my arse
on Mars, my right hand on the Moon and my left foot on Venus. Do you think
this reply o'mine is worthless? You bet. I wanted it to be way worthless as
your post, Rick, but I failed even reaching the same high uncalled-for level
of it, and it's not mere casualty.

Riccardo

Riccardo Rubini wrote:
|Rick Balkins wrote:
|> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
|> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
|> Commodore PC-10 software and is compatible with existing Commodore
|> 8-bit software AND hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium 4
|> or Pentium 5 processor and a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816
|> co-processor for certain handling many 6500 series apps.
|
|I have inquired some ideas and I think I'd be interested in getting my arse
|on Mars, my right hand on the Moon and my left foot on Venus. Do you think
|this reply o'mine is worthless? You bet. I wanted it to be way worthless as
|your post, Rick, but I failed even reaching the same high uncalled-for level
|of it, and it's not mere casualty.

What about casuistry?

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in
news:qUGec.46589$hc5.2019369@news3.tin.it: 

> Rick Balkins wrote:
>> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
>> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
>> Commodore PC-10 software and is compatible with existing Commodore
>> 8-bit software AND hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium 4
>> or Pentium 5 processor and a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816
>> co-processor for certain handling many 6500 series apps.
> 
> I have inquired some ideas and I think I'd be interested in getting my
> arse on Mars, my right hand on the Moon and my left foot on Venus. Do
> you think this reply o'mine is worthless? You bet. I wanted it to be
> way worthless as your post, Rick, but I failed even reaching the same
> high uncalled-for level of it, and it's not mere casualty.
> 
> Riccardo
> 
> 

A bit mean and disrespectful, are we?

I think if you're going to criticize him, constructive criticism would be 
more effective.

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:qUGec.46589$hc5.2019369@news3.tin.it...

> I have inquired some ideas and I think I'd be interested in getting my
arse
> on Mars, my right hand on the Moon and my left foot on Venus. Do you think
> this reply o'mine is worthless? You bet. I wanted it to be way worthless
as
> your post, Rick, but I failed even reaching the same high uncalled-for
level
> of it, and it's not mere casualty.
>

Is there anything constructive to your criticism ????

If you didn't realize, that ESCOM tried to bring back the Commodore brand by
making just PCs with a Commodore logo on it. Didn't work. Then a PC with an
emulator was tried, failed. A few bought it but it failed. Is it Commodore's
name. NO, otherwise we wouldn't even waste our time even using an emulator.
So I look at something that bridges the gap but you know, I will
single-handedly do this by myself if I had the financing and the facilities.
But you know, I would write the OS too. But I want people in the COMMODORE
community to do something but bickering. TULIP IS OUR COMMODORE now, live
with the FACT that they OWN EVERYTHING OF COMMODORE IN TERMS OF THE RIGHTS
EXCEPT AMIGA. GATEWAY spent $80 Million or so on the AMIGA rights and stock
not for the Commodore. None of the official publications EVER stated that
Gateway was after the Commodore 8 bit, the C= trademarks and the Commodore
PC line. Gateway went after one thing and one thing alone - AMIGA !!!!

Tulip bought the rest of Commodore from ESCOM. Simple as that. UNDERSTOOD
!!!!

Now that Tulip is putting over 30 Million Euros or so. Even though my Dutch
is crappy and mostly a raw translation from an online translator which is
reasonably close for the sake of things as for translating Dutch to English.
I understand English enough to work through the awkward English translation.
30+ Million Euros to relaunch Commodore as for a first phase. Isn't that
considered "serious" intent. So where shall we begin. Take a look at the
website. I hope someone that knows Dutch can translate it to you. Second of
all, I don't believe Commodore can be successfully relaunched without
connecting with EXISTING Commodore users because those people will reject
them for doing so. People even though they are not Commodore users currently
haven't forgotten Commodore and anyone who would recognize the Commodore
logo will recognize it as Commodore and it will ring bells in their heads
within days or even minutes when logo and the word "Commodore" is connected
and the flag word "Commodore 64" will unfold this. Over 100 Million people
have been effected by just the C64 & C-128 alone and many more will
recognize. So take the past record into account which will have an effect.
The name Commodore in itself has more value than Tulip's own name. More
people recognize Commodore than even people know Tulip so maybe Tulip wants
to become Commodore ???? Hard to say ???? Given they bought it. Heck, we
would have to see.

What it takes is a vision. Steve Jobs pulled Apple from death. What it takes
is something a little more ambitious perhaps or simply it is more ambitious
to revive Commodore. In all cases, it takes "DOING". It takes ACTION !!!!
Have anything less than that and you will be wandering your way to a grave.

Could Commodore be revived singly on PDAs, no. Could Commodore be revived
singly on a PC/C= hybrid PC with P4 or P5 technology - No. With a combo of
these in a HIGH QUALITY packaged system with everything and then some. Cool.
What is expected in a new "Commodore Operating System" running on top of a
P4 or P5 processor - NOTHING less than MODERN !!!! The idea is cool, the
idea needs to be done. Can you program ????

I believe in a new Commodore OS with Full Screen Scrollable Editor, CLI and
state of the art GUI and all. Rock steady and YES ULTRA-MODERN and rock
solid drivers and apps which will be MOST extensively tested so it would not
kill the OS and a GREAT API. This means that we need the best talent
involved. Now if Tulip is in anyway would seriously work from these ideas -
they have a way to progress in the future. I know what questions will be
asked by the most voiced and devoted "Commodore Users". I know one of the
most if not the most..... You get the picture that when a guy is fanatically
supporting Commodore it better mean that what he has will not be lost and
that is WHERE to begin and go with that and all. This is what I call for in
a new system.

Rick Balkins wrote:

> Is there anything constructive to your criticism ????

Nope. I - and a load of other people - lost any will to constructively
criticize most of your senseless stuff many many moons ago.

I refuse to read or comment the rest of your post, I am sure it doesn't mean
anything.

Riccardo

Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle wrote:

> A bit mean and disrespectful, are we?

You joined this newsgroup like, what, last week? It's clear you're missing
something. Had you been stayed longer, you would have understood why it's
neither mean neither disrespectful.

> I think if you're going to criticize him, constructive criticism
> would be more effective.

Generally, what you say it's true. Applied to the specific case, it's not,
but rather a waste of time.

Riccardo

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote in
message news:107m8md4h410pce@corp.supernews.com...
> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new Commodore
> "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing Commodore PC-10

Reality check required isle 10...

Hi Riccardo,

> I refuse to read or comment the rest of your post, I am sure it doesn't mean
> anything.

The best way to deal with completely insane posts from
attention-starved individuals is to completely ignore them. ;)

MikeC

"Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:407bb9f6$0$18981$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
>
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote
in
> message news:107m8md4h410pce@corp.supernews.com...
> > I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
Commodore
> > "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing Commodore PC-10
>
> Reality check required isle 10...

Reality check - It isn't a matter of whether it can or can't. I know the
real issue, you like a small town city government - don't want to big
company in the picture. It is like the city government in Astoria, Oregon.
More like it than any of you realize.

This commodore scene is like a small city economy. You guys are like the old
people in this town trying to keep from changing and sticking with the old
even though the old economy of lumber and fishing is NO longer the existant
in the way it was like Commodore is no longer existant. Now its just little
"local" businesses. I think that you are afraid that Tulip would destroy
businesses like Maurice and other businesses built around the ashes of
Commodore making little trinklets. Just like the little shops that formed
after the old industry left and fell apart. Often leaving us in Astoria with
lack of jobs and lack of stuff that you would find in the bigger city. All
we get is price gouged products that we would normally get cheaper or even
better offers for less than the price.

I know the whine is nothing more than the local shops complaining that a big
company coming in would destroy their businesses. In all due respect, that
would not always be the case even with Tulip. You see, there is too many
small businesses in this scene that leaves us with overly priced items that
no one will buy because they can't afford it. Those things belong to and
should be handled by a "company". When a company offers something - is it
bad ????

Tulip - even though gone through some financial troubles but believe it or
not - they have been doing better in the last two years. But even Apple was
there. All it took was a visionary like Steve Jobs. What Tulip/Commodore
needs is a visionary. Without a vision and a roadmap - a company goes
nowhere. To revive Commodore means a vision. Jack Tramiel was more than a
rough and aggressive business man - HE WAS A VISIONARY. He sees the VISION.
It is time to embrace a vision and go with it. To move Commodore from past
to the future. Yes, these are open statements and that is because definition
must be defined not by my own vision but also everyone else here. I only see
you saying - just let Commodore die. You know, just quit using any Commodore
or even Commodore emulators and Commodore software and quit making demos,
apps and games for it and YES Commodore will be dead.

It won't last another 5-10 years since there will be a point where you will
simply give it all up and Commodore be over. How can it be revitalized - TO
bring out something that will move Commodore forward into the 21st century
but you MUST bridge the link from past to present and every solution given
is not reliable enough and does not cover the gap to move Commodore back to
the masses. Note: Commodore as the "company". There is two choices - take
the challenge or quit. You can't discover another a new world by staying in
Spain. You can choose to do nothing or you can choose to move forward.

Now - are Commodore users wanting Tulip to simply bury Commodore and do
nothing and let the scene die in 5-10 years since everybody would no longer
find it worth while. You have two choices - let the Commodore scene die out
and disband or you revitalize it. Every solution that I seen is taking
Commodore users away from Commodore.

Hello Rick,

> Rick Balkins wrote:
> Commodore scene die out and disband or you revitalize it. Every
> solution that I seen is taking Commodore users away from Commodore.

I see two possible marketing / strategy models out there that might
possibly renew interest in the Commodore Branded machines
commercially.

One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing platform
and produce the new "Amiga One" for the future.  Basically, the goal
was to continue to support Amiga "Classic" computers while providing a
logical upgrade path that was built on the strengths of the older
Amiga machines.

The Amiga One was essentially supposed to become the modern day Amiga
with a more powerful OS and Power PC processor at 800 Mhz.  Of course,
to this point the success of the venture has been relatively small.

The other model might use something along the lines of the Macintosh
strategy.  Apple provided a logical upgrade path by enabling the newer
Mac OS X to launch OS 9 in a "Classic" environment.  This allowed you
to use the best of both worlds.  It allowed you to use the more
powerful Mac OS X, while still providing a means to switch into
"Classic" mode and run your OS 9 applications.

Personally, as stated in my previous message in this thread, I would
be more interested in a machine that was Uniquely Commodore and
provided a blend between the Amiga One and Mac OS strategies.

Basically, I would want a machine that picked up where the Commodore
128 left off, and and continued to build on and improve upon it's
strengths.

The 128 in itself kind of followed that strategy when it was designed.
Basically you could look at the 128 mode as the "improved" machine and
the 64 mode as the "Classic" environment.

My dream system would be a very powerful Commodore computer that
clearly drew it's heritage from the Commodore 8-BIT line (just like
you can see the heritage of the Amiga One in OS 4).

I would want my "new" machine to have a "Classic" mode that provided a
Commodore 128 and 64 mode.  Additionally, it would offer the strengths
and benefits of more modern graphics chips and microprocessors.

I think the Commodore-One came close to this, but fell short of my
dream by stepping backwords to the Commodore 64 rather than building
on the product line which ended at the 128.

Of course, as I pointed out in my previous message, the current legal
owner of the Commodore 64 and 128 Kernal and BASIC ROM chips would
need to be "discovered".  Note that the code contained in the ROM
chips does not automatically belong to the company which holds the
Commodore brand name (unless they specifically purchased the code).

Michael Hunter
mhunter@videocam.net.au

> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested [snip]

Rick, the only thing that I really want to know is if you're really 
thinking about all these things you keep posting in various newsgroups 
or if you're trying to win one of those "troll championships". (In that 
case, you've just scored again.)

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in
news:PbOec.47142$hc5.2046236@news3.tin.it: 

> Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle wrote:
> 
>> A bit mean and disrespectful, are we?
> 
> You joined this newsgroup like, what, last week? It's clear you're
> missing something. Had you been stayed longer, you would have
> understood why it's neither mean neither disrespectful.
> 
>> I think if you're going to criticize him, constructive criticism
>> would be more effective.
> 
> Generally, what you say it's true. Applied to the specific case, it's
> not, but rather a waste of time.
> 
> Riccardo
> 
> 
> 
> 

Yeah, I guess I must be missing something.  Oh well...

"Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:407bb9f6$0$18981$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net: 

> 
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com>
> wrote in message news:107m8md4h410pce@corp.supernews.com...
>> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
>> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
>> Commodore PC-10 
> 
> Reality check required isle 10...
> 
> 
> 

I'm sure many people would have said the same thing to some great 
inventors and innovators out there.  

Let the guy dream!  If people didn't dream, much of what we have today 
wouldn't be here!

Joey

Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle wrote:

> I'm sure many people would have said the same thing to some great
> inventors and innovators out there.

True, but trust me: this is not the case. Rick is no Einstein nor Leonardo
Da Vinci ; he's just bored with too much time on his hands ;-)

> Let the guy dream!  If people didn't dream, much of what we have today
> wouldn't be here!

There's nothing wrong with him dreaming in his own room, even sick dreams
like him being CEO of a new found Commodore, a nightmare for the rest of
us...

But, you know, when you go shouting out loud incoherent speech like he just
did, there's no dreaming going on: that's actually called delirium.

Riccardo

"Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle" <josephex@josephexperimental.com> wrote
in message news:Xns94CAB0C2F4DC4josephexjosephexperi@216.77.188.18...
> "Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in
> news:407bb9f6$0$18981$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
>
> >
> > "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com>
> > wrote in message news:107m8md4h410pce@corp.supernews.com...
> >> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
> >> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
> >> Commodore PC-10
> >
> > Reality check required isle 10...
> >
> >
> >
>
> I'm sure many people would have said the same thing to some great
> inventors and innovators out there.

He's neither inventing something new or innovative here. A bunch of cobbled
together old junk with a new PC just isn't going anywhere. Development costs
vs return just isn't there.

> Let the guy dream!  If people didn't dream, much of what we have today
> wouldn't be here!
>

It wasn't dreamers that brought us these things, it was do-ers.

"Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:407c68a5$0$18992$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net: 

> 
> "Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle" <josephex@josephexperimental.com>
> wrote in message
> news:Xns94CAB0C2F4DC4josephexjosephexperi@216.77.188.18... 
>> "Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in
>> news:407bb9f6$0$18981$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
>>
>> >
>> > "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com>
>> > wrote in message news:107m8md4h410pce@corp.supernews.com...
>> >> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
>> >> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
>> >> Commodore PC-10
>> >
>> > Reality check required isle 10...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I'm sure many people would have said the same thing to some great
>> inventors and innovators out there.
> 
> He's neither inventing something new or innovative here. A bunch of
> cobbled together old junk with a new PC just isn't going anywhere.
> Development costs vs return just isn't there.
> 
>> Let the guy dream!  If people didn't dream, much of what we have
>> today wouldn't be here!
>>
> 
> It wasn't dreamers that brought us these things, it was do-ers.
> 
> 
> 
> 

I only partially agree.  The idea had to come from somewhere, then it was 
up to a person to do it.  So the dreamer has something to do with it.  So 
I'd say both the dreamers and the do-ers.

Now could some of the dreamers be a little less lazy and actually be do-
ers?  Of course.  

Anyway if this guy is only posting for attention, people putting him down 
is not going to help.  

mikec_cbm@hotmail.com (mikec) wrote in
news:1121cdb3.0404130530.4ae770de@posting.google.com: 

> Hi Riccardo,
> 
>> I refuse to read or comment the rest of your post, I am sure it
>> doesn't mean anything.
> 
> The best way to deal with completely insane posts from
> attention-starved individuals is to completely ignore them. ;)
> 
> MikeC

Putting people down definitely isn't going to help.  I know that.

"Michael Hunter" <mhunter@videocam.net.au> wrote in message
news:eGXec.17389$K_.513626@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> I think the Commodore-One came close to this, but fell short of my
> dream by stepping backwords to the Commodore 64 rather than building
> on the product line which ended at the 128.

Huh?  Upgraded super-vic and monster-sid, 65816, and a 32-bit or somesuch
address space with separate video coprocessor & RAM is "stepping backwords
to the Commodore 64"?

Granted, it's not going to go solve humanity's computing problems like Rick
might think, may have configurable I/O mapping that Matthew doesn't
understand, and isn't released yet, but it's definitely a system built on
the foundations of the C= 8-bit line.

-- 
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)

The code was sold off along with EVERYTHING ELSE of Commodore that ESCOM
originally bought.

We remember in 1994/1995 that ESCOM bought Commodore/Amiga. A few years
later Amiga and all International Property Rights (which means all inclusive
[patents,trademarks,copyrights,ect.]) pertaining to the Amiga including the
stock ownership of the Amiga subsidiary that ESCOM formed shortly after
buying Commodore - to Gateway.

Gateway bought all rights that pertain to Amiga (trademarks,patents &
copyright) and the Amiga subsidiary that ESCOM formed after buying
Commodore. Now as for the rest of Commodore. Since ESCOM never made a
subsidiary named Commodore (from what I last recall) - Tulip simply bought
all the remaining rights to Commodore which means all trademarks, patents &
copyrights relating to ALL Commodore 8 bit (from PET to C-65), UNIX & PC
series hardware and software and everything else Commodore that ESCOM
originally bought during the 1994-1995 sale of Commodore. This means Tulip
basically bought Commodore and Gateway took Amiga. Gateway had no interest
in the Commodore PC series or the C900 UNIX, or the C= 8 bit. They went
after one thing AMIGA.

Now, this is 1996-1999 timeframe. As for what Gateway done with Amiga - you
can figure that out. As for what Tulip is doing with Commodore is happening
NOW. We know things are happening but we don't know what it be.

As for your idea below - this is much in tune with what I am suggesting just
in other words and more in terms of a business model.



"Michael Hunter" <mhunter@videocam.net.au> wrote in message
news:eGXec.17389$K_.513626@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Hello Rick,
>
> I see two possible marketing / strategy models out there that might
> possibly renew interest in the Commodore Branded machines
> commercially.
>
> One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing platform
> and produce the new "Amiga One" for the future.  Basically, the goal
> was to continue to support Amiga "Classic" computers while providing a
> logical upgrade path that was built on the strengths of the older
> Amiga machines.
>
> The Amiga One was essentially supposed to become the modern day Amiga
> with a more powerful OS and Power PC processor at 800 Mhz.  Of course,
> to this point the success of the venture has been relatively small.
>
> The other model might use something along the lines of the Macintosh
> strategy.  Apple provided a logical upgrade path by enabling the newer
> Mac OS X to launch OS 9 in a "Classic" environment.  This allowed you
> to use the best of both worlds.  It allowed you to use the more
> powerful Mac OS X, while still providing a means to switch into
> "Classic" mode and run your OS 9 applications.
>
> Personally, as stated in my previous message in this thread, I would
> be more interested in a machine that was Uniquely Commodore and
> provided a blend between the Amiga One and Mac OS strategies.
>
> Basically, I would want a machine that picked up where the Commodore
> 128 left off, and and continued to build on and improve upon it's
> strengths.
>
> The 128 in itself kind of followed that strategy when it was designed.
> Basically you could look at the 128 mode as the "improved" machine and
> the 64 mode as the "Classic" environment.
>
> My dream system would be a very powerful Commodore computer that
> clearly drew it's heritage from the Commodore 8-BIT line (just like
> you can see the heritage of the Amiga One in OS 4).
>
> I would want my "new" machine to have a "Classic" mode that provided a
> Commodore 128 and 64 mode.  Additionally, it would offer the strengths
> and benefits of more modern graphics chips and microprocessors.
>
> I think the Commodore-One came close to this, but fell short of my
> dream by stepping backwords to the Commodore 64 rather than building
> on the product line which ended at the 128.
>
> Of course, as I pointed out in my previous message, the current legal
> owner of the Commodore 64 and 128 Kernal and BASIC ROM chips would
> need to be "discovered".  Note that the code contained in the ROM
> chips does not automatically belong to the company which holds the
> Commodore brand name (unless they specifically purchased the code).
>
> Michael Hunter
> mhunter@videocam.net.au
>
>

Hello,

> White Flame (aka David Holz) wrote:
> Huh?  Upgraded super-vic and monster-sid, 65816, and a 32-bit or
> somesuch address space with separate video coprocessor & RAM is
> "stepping backwords to the Commodore 64"?

Obviously, the Commodore One is not a "Backwards" computer.  It does
have many impressive features.

Maybe I mis-stated the point I was trying to make.

I find that I spend a great deal of my time in 128 mode and have
actually come to prefer it to 64 mode.  While I still use 64 mode when
necessary, I don't know that I could sacrifice my 128 mode.

Obviously I could have both a Commodore-One and a 128, but my
preference would be to have an enhanced 128 as opposed to an enhanced
64.

Of course, being a "reconfigurable" computer, it is quite possible
that a 128-mode and an enhanced 128 mode may yet appear on the
Commodore One in the future.  At that point, my interest would
increase significantly.

> definitely a system built on the foundations of the C= 8-bit line.

I completely agree there.  My only complaint is that it's design
evolved from the 64 and not from the 128 (which includes a 64 mode).

I know that the 128's installed base is smaller than that of the 64,
so it's very possible that there is a lesser number of people who
would prefer an evolved 128 system.  I am just one of those people
that accidentally got hooked on my machine's 128 mode after ignoring
it for many years.

Michael Hunter
mhunter@videocam.net.au

The first. I can care less about "troll championship". Indeed, I could never
win the competition. There are clearly worse trolls in the world. I would
need ALOT more scores in order to win. :-))

Believe it or not, Tulip is reading these groups and mail lists. In fact, I
am interested but I don't just want my idea ALONE in the picture. I brought
a concept for a group of people to help in working out so it can really be
brought forth in serious form to Tulip and Tulip can have something to work
with. People just will not buy a Commodore branded PC. It will need more to
it - that makes it "Commodore".

Products are not made by just doers because doers don't dream so they will
not know what to do to begin with. The dreamer comes up with the concept aka
the "task" for the doer.

You can NOT do something without it being dreamed first. So let it be that.
The reason I haven't taken the time to do certain things is because of the
whining noise of the idea.

In order for things to happen it takes to parts. The Dream and the Doing.
Well I would be doing both if the whiners weren't so complaining of ideas.
You see, I am bringing ideas that will be brought forth to Tulip. This is
not a one person job so get real. It will need to be done by a team and if
the idea is liked - IT WILL.

I hear this - you must be DOers. Well, you need to dream the idea before you
do it and if doers want to be of assistance then do so by joining in the
development effort. If it means we do the R&D for Tulip, great. They can
take it from there and take it into full production.

I have received a response back from Harro today and believe it is on the
prior messages and may receive response to this initial message.

NOW, anyone working for Tulip - identify yourself.

"Supertopcheckerbunny" <remove-this-lotek64-and-this@aon.at> wrote in
message news:407c5244$1@e-post.inode.at...

> Rick, the only thing that I really want to know is if you're really
> thinking about all these things you keep posting in various newsgroups
> or if you're trying to win one of those "troll championships". (In that
> case, you've just scored again.)
>

"White Flame \(aka David Holz\)" <whiteflame52@y.a.h.o.o.com> wrote in
news:c5hvqg$1se9$1@barad-dur.nas.com: 

> "Michael Hunter" <mhunter@videocam.net.au> wrote in message
> news:eGXec.17389$K_.513626@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> I think the Commodore-One came close to this, but fell short of my
>> dream by stepping backwords to the Commodore 64 rather than building
>> on the product line which ended at the 128.
> 
> Huh?  Upgraded super-vic and monster-sid, 65816, and a 32-bit or
> somesuch address space with separate video coprocessor & RAM is
> "stepping backwords to the Commodore 64"?
> 
> Granted, it's not going to go solve humanity's computing problems like
> Rick might think, may have configurable I/O mapping that Matthew
> doesn't understand, and isn't released yet, but it's definitely a
> system built on the foundations of the C= 8-bit line.
> 

After looking at Rick's first post again in this thread, I don't see 
where Rick said this would solve humanity's computing problems.  

There is only one way to solve the world's computing problems.  Get rid 
of all computers.

"White Flame (aka David Holz)" <whiteflame52@y.a.h.o.o.com> wrote in message
news:c5hvqg$1se9$1@barad-dur.nas.com...

> Huh?  Upgraded super-vic and monster-sid, 65816, and a 32-bit or somesuch
> address space with separate video coprocessor & RAM is "stepping backwords
> to the Commodore 64"?

Is it when you would also have 8x AGP, 533 MHZ DDR SD-RAM, USB2.0, FireWire
IEEE1394, several PCI and several more. Maybe all the essential guts of the
C-One on a 133 MHz plug in board.

On the C-One plugin board - using a special slot. Now, the PC board would be
a hefty Pentium 4 or even Pentium 5. Don't kid yourself - Intel is making a
follow up to the Pentium 4.

> Granted, it's not going to go solve humanity's computing problems like
Rick
> might think, may have configurable I/O mapping that Matthew doesn't
> understand, and isn't released yet, but it's definitely a system built on
> the foundations of the C= 8-bit line.

Granted when the main PC part of it would be a top quality Pentium 4 or
Pentiun 5 system ?????? Yeah, when it would also have a new "Commodore
Operating System" that is entirely based on modern OS design like MacOS X
and is ROCK SOLID STABLE. This makes me wonder ????

"Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle" <josephex@josephexperimental.com> wrote
in message news:Xns94CAD5B386C9Ejosephexjosephexperi@216.77.188.18...

> After looking at Rick's first post again in this thread, I don't see
> where Rick said this would solve humanity's computing problems.

True, I never really did say that.

It would be a "solution" to bring Commodore back to the masses. I never said
it was for solving humanity's computing problem. Certain things may be
solved but that is not the case of the main case.

Hi Joey,

> Putting people down definitely isn't going to help.  I know that.

True, however, posting such nonsense in a public forum is bound to
generate a lot of negativity. Rick has a track record for talking a
lot but producing nothing, hence the backlash.

MikeC

Hi Michael,


> I see two possible marketing / strategy models out there that might
> possibly renew interest in the Commodore Branded machines

That's funny because no one else does.


> One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing platform

Funny...because this model hasn't worked for Amiga Inc. For all
intensive purposes, they're still dead in the water. Nokia's failed
N-Gage has a larger market size that anything Amiga Inc has done in
the past 10 years.


> The other model might use something along the lines of the Macintosh

Do you really believe in the nonsense you wrote here? Really?

I find it just amazing that people still bother to even talk about a
Commodore resurrection. Commodore is dead. Amiga is dead. They've been
dead for a decade. Neither are coming back. People like you and Rick
seem completely blinded by the reality of things. If anything, the
C-One has demonstrated that things are easier said than done.

Whatever the case, I'm sure the people at Tulip are laughing the heads
off over these posts. I'm sure they're rolling on the floor laughing
very hard. Most of the people reading these posts are torn between
laughing at Rick's unintentional attempt at humor and crying because
people like you who actually seem to agree with him. Ultimately,
Rick's statements do nothing but further discredit him. It's a shame
that your comments will also, in-turn, discredit you.

MikeC

"mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121cdb3.0404132152.2d7e2609@posting.google.com...
> Hi Michael,
>
> That's funny because no one else does.
>
> Funny...because this model hasn't worked for Amiga Inc. For all
> intensive purposes, they're still dead in the water. Nokia's failed
> N-Gage has a larger market size that anything Amiga Inc has done in
> the past 10 years.
>
> Do you really believe in the nonsense you wrote here? Really?
>
> I find it just amazing that people still bother to even talk about a
> Commodore resurrection. Commodore is dead. Amiga is dead. They've been
> dead for a decade. Neither are coming back. People like you and Rick
> seem completely blinded by the reality of things. If anything, the
> C-One has demonstrated that things are easier said than done.
>
> Whatever the case, I'm sure the people at Tulip are laughing the heads
> off over these posts. I'm sure they're rolling on the floor laughing
> very hard. Most of the people reading these posts are torn between
> laughing at Rick's unintentional attempt at humor and crying because
> people like you who actually seem to agree with him. Ultimately,
> Rick's statements do nothing but further discredit him. It's a shame
> that your comments will also, in-turn, discredit you.

Yeah and in 1955 it would be impossible to vision a small printer repair
shop would ever be an international corporation. It just took being
aggressive and business was no less aggressive then as today. Hell, $30
million dollars and a company who has a wide selection of products do indeed
have the capability to revive Commodore. Hey, Tulip announced relaunching
Commodore brand and that means "reviving" Commodore. Hell, look at the
people who revived Atari. Infogrames ? Now they are Atari. Bought the
company and you choose to become it - then YOU are it. If Tulip chooses to
morph then they become it.

Anything can happen and heck give it time and dilligence and some DOING and
it will. Given the task of developing a C64 is "already" going to be already
done - having a C-One daughterboard would not be a huge undertaking. Making
a 133 MHz PCI slot is no serious issue. It is merely an issue of operating
on a 133 MHz clock source instead of a 33 MHz. In order to prevent an
asshole from plugging a standard 33 MHz PCI card into this one special 133
MHz PCI slot is by rotating the PCI connector so the opposite edge is facing
the back. When you look at a PCI - there is a long edge and a short edge.
Just make the short edge face the back instead if normally the long edge
faces the back. Issue solved. Just make sure the solder pad is adjusted and
also make sure the slot is in a different color - which indeed PCI slots do
come in different color. The biggest thing is making a specialized 133 MHz
PCI controller. In this case we can call it "TurboPCI". Bingo - issue
solved. Just have a professional hardware engineer work on solving this and
a contracted a company to work out the host controller or put it on an FPGA.
Whoopy do, a 30K FPGA can be clocked at 133 MHz and that is as fast as you
need it. Also one FPGA is not $300 and for the most part - the machine would
be typically sold in quantities of 10,000-100,000 which is clearly an easy
case for a corporation. All they need to do is make $500 on each unit. Given
it would have alot of software packages and also plenty of free software and
if the next-generation Commodore OS is based around modern UNIX-like OS
architecture - then having good quality and quantity of free software
packaged on CD-ROMs is NOT an issue. Also included would be a line of a
handful of Commodore specific programs and a nice and easy to use User
Interface.

Add that with having "Longhorn" or whatever the next gen Windows OS also
included.

Given also an 8x AGP dual video out AGP card like a modern ATI RADEON 9800
card for the standard video for the PC part of the system.

It is only extending a standard PC board. The OS is just software. To me, I
would buy it. Especially if it is rock solid AND Fast and also allow me to
use my Commodore peripheral with EXTREME ease just like using a PC
peripheral. That is the beauty of what I was thinking. Is that a problem ???
or is it just that some of the people here are just afraid that Tulip could
possibly succeed. BTW: The Next Gen Commodore OS would be a PC based OS but
there would also be the Commodore OS on the the "C64 or C-One" add-on board.

BTW: Many of the people at Tulip are fans of Commodore computers too. If
Commodore is to be relaunched by Tulip - they can't just go make Windows PCs
with Commodore logos. What is the difference than making stickers with the
Commodore logo and sticking it on a plain ol' PC.

Tulip indicated the relaunch. They just haven't brought anything out.

You are simply saying that Tulip should just dump the Commodore rights into
a trash bin and give it up, right ???? That is effectively what it is to
simply do nothing with it. You see, I don't believe in just giving up
something that had more impact on the computing scene than text book writers
(endorsed by Microsoft or written by Microsoft) will ever give credit to.
They even wrote out Commodore as if it NEVER existed as if 22 Million people
just never existed ????

I don't particularly believe in that. There is no way to fight Microsoft but
fighting them to remain. It is not to kill but to survive. Business is war -
remember that. Microsoft operates off of lessons taught to Bill Gates by
Jack Tramiel which fought against IBM and Thomas Watson Jr. which was one of
the most aggressive business man EVER in the computing industry. Most young
people can't relate because it happened before they are were born and young
people always try to revise history and write out the past before them as if
time and the world started when they were born.

History lesson, IBM in the late 50s and early 60s use to literally buy your
products and open a store in front of your store at no price under their
logo or do other seriously aggressive techniques in business. Given that and
virtually the whole industry in that time was aggressive. Some cases that
literally brought about an Anti-trust case then.

Of course it was standard business practices to be aggressive. Survival of
the Fittest. If you survive, you grow stronger otherwise you die. So there
needs to be aggressive perseverence. Oh, BTW: HDs,Monitors, CD drives and
all are already at discounted price if you wanted to know because of
quantity so an additional 10,000 to 100,000 more units per year would only
reduce price on most common parts which would ease it some.

Since the contracted board manufacturer can easily put the addition I/O chip
(a "TurboPCI" controller for the 133 MHZ 'PCI' slot) with just the base
increase for the FPGA or VLSI chip to handle that. Most of the existing
chips on the board would be built around the same common chipset that is
ordered in the masses. IOW, a board manufacturer like Asus can easily be
contracted to add the extra component on a custom board with little to worry
about since most of the components are the same without any difference to
the price. The main difference will come with the added component(s). So it
is no big deal. Just add one chip to specially handle the additional slot
and that's all. No big deal. The main board may increase by maybe $50-75 at
best. Given a $150 motherboard - it be $200-225. Ok, no big deal and a 3.6
GHz CPU for $400-500 with heatsink and fan. Not a big issue of a price in a
year or two. Given quantity order, not a big deal. Depends on the CPU
package and the board. Not a really big issue. You will find that the CPU is
ordered already in high quantity and the motherboard would already benefit
with some price reduction simply because of quantity is more than your 1-100
board runs.

So figure a reasonable system can be put together for $1,500 with the
"C64/C-One" add on board for - erm $300-400. If orders were raised to quanty
runs, the cost would not be an issue as the price would clearly drop right
down to around $150 easily for a "C-One add on card". Take a straight out
C64 add on card with no real special bells and whistle can be done in $150
in single unit - low volume run. At higher volume - Perhaps $99. Right
within a reasonable scope and good choice of a reasonably small FPGA. Say
30K will handle the C64 just by itself without any special bells and
whistle. Maybe $129 for the C-128.

Given the hardware and a bus interface to allow the P4 or P5 to take control
of the bus is well within scope.

mikec wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
>
>> I see two possible marketing / strategy models out there that might
>> possibly renew interest in the Commodore Branded machines
>
> That's funny because no one else does.

As time passes by, fewer and fewer people even recall the Commodore brand.
The new generations, teenagers born 15 years ago, don't even know what a
Commodore 64 is.

10 years of inactivity have erased almost all the legacy Commodore had in
the computer market, and, people, face it: Commodore products were already
facing sunset in 1994, the interest of many was already gone. For years an
inept management pushed sub-par or extinguished products, both in the 8-bit
and Amiga markets, forcing people to move to other platforms.

A PC branded Dell or Commodore makes no difference to me, and this is what
Commodore would be doing it today, had it survived.

This is what current Commodore will do, if Tulip's marketing division
decides to pull out of the closet the brand name, rest your heart in peace
on that.

>> One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing platform
>
> Funny...because this model hasn't worked for Amiga Inc. For all
> intensive purposes, they're still dead in the water. Nokia's failed
> N-Gage has a larger market size that anything Amiga Inc has done in
> the past 10 years.

Amiga Inc. is done. Many documents circulating on the net prove another
bankrupcy is soon on the horizon. since ESCOM died, Gateway, and then Amiga
Inc., have done nothing really relevant for years but putting Amiga users
down rebranding and repackaging run-of-the-mill products.

> I find it just amazing that people still bother to even talk about a
> Commodore resurrection. Commodore is dead. Amiga is dead. They've been
> dead for a decade. Neither are coming back. People like you and Rick
> seem completely blinded by the reality of things. If anything, the
> C-One has demonstrated that things are easier said than done.

I use to think at the C-One as just an home project Jeri enjoyed doing as an
hobby, proving to herself she was able to accomplish the feat of building a
Computer from scratch. If she really, in her minds, thought that a product
like that would have raised more than the occasional interest of few, she
was very wrong. But I don't think so, she has to be a smart girl.

> Whatever the case, I'm sure the people at Tulip are laughing the heads
> off over these posts. I'm sure they're rolling on the floor laughing
> very hard.

I am sure people at Tulip's management don't even know this newsgroup exist,
and those who know, don't even bother reading it. The average employee
reading the occasional thread and commenting this or that doesn't really
matter, it's not the company speaking its heart out.

> Most of the people reading these posts are torn between
> laughing at Rick's unintentional attempt at humor and crying because
> people like you who actually seem to agree with him. Ultimately,
> Rick's statements do nothing but further discredit him. It's a shame
> that your comments will also, in-turn, discredit you.

Nobody could have said this any better than you just did.

Riccardo

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> writes:

> I am sure people at Tulip's management don't even know this
> newsgroup exist, and those who know, don't even bother reading it.

Actually, is there any difference between the Commodore brand and
the former company Commodore Business Machines, abbreviated CBM
just like this newsgroup? 

Maybe few or none of the people in Tulip management and employees 
who know that they hold the rights to the Commodore brand makes 
the connection to CBM and thus would never realize this group.

-- 
Anders Carlsson

Anders Carlsson wrote:
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> writes:
>
>> I am sure people at Tulip's management don't even know this
>> newsgroup exist, and those who know, don't even bother reading it.
>
> Actually, is there any difference between the Commodore brand and
> the former company Commodore Business Machines, abbreviated CBM
> just like this newsgroup?

Commodore Business Machines Inc. was the US subsidiary of Commodore. As you
know, Commodore moved to Bahamas, for fiscal reasons ( taxes ). CBM was also
a trademark, and I suppose that was transferred to Tulip as well.

> Maybe few or none of the people in Tulip management and employees
> who know that they hold the rights to the Commodore brand makes
> the connection to CBM and thus would never realize this group.

Come on, I don't think they are so stupid, Anders. Simply, Tulip doesn't
care that much to have its own people coming here, because we Tulip doesn't
have anything that could be marketable here.

This is about 8-bit computers, Tulip has as much interest in reviving this
market as IBM has to resurrect its System/360 line.

Riccardo

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:HU9fc.51977$hc5.2268620@news3.tin.it...

> As time passes by, fewer and fewer people even recall the Commodore brand.
> The new generations, teenagers born 15 years ago, don't even know what a
> Commodore 64 is.

First - the teenagers are only a small percentage of the world population.

It doesn't require teenagers. What happen to people who are old enough to
use Commodore then. Yeah, did the 20 Million teenagers and young adults in
the 1980s just die or disappear. Just because some of them died (the more
elderly people of that time) does not mean that these people NO longer exist
and second of all - people's memory of Commodore would not be forgotten
"totally" because people human mind remembers patterns and associate them
and DO NOT Forget them that easily. How do you think people can remember
things from the 1940s. Why you don't wear a uniform of German Nazi in front
of those people who fought down to hand to hand with a Nazi. They will
remember that in life - crystal clear.

Yeah, Atari was dead for nearly that long and people do remember Atari. It
really doesn't matter what the teenagers can remember of the 1980s but if
the new line of products do support things of that sort. Of course if you
asked them by words what a Commodore 64 is - they may or maynot recall it.
Then don't kid yourself - a teenager will often act dumb even if they do
remember it. The thing is "visual".

Now, that really doesn't matter whether a teenager of today remembers or
not. All it really take to start the ball rolling is first connecting with
the Commodore commmunity and then expanding with the brand. There are at
least 50 Million people who would have seen the Commodore name and bought a
Commodore product. There would be at least today - 6-10 Million people who
would remember Commodore.

Humans do NOT really forget visual patterns and Commodore 64 will be among
the things the "name" and "symbol" is associated to. It is like people who
use to go to Gemco stores.

How many people would remember the 1982 DeLorean. You ask them by word - it
may be shaky. Ask someone about the GTO or Volkswagon. They will likely
connect with the old 1960s. Especially if they haven't seen a new
Volkswagon. How about a GTO. Names like GTO is a trademark and a name of a
car. You would be suprise. But you don't ask a child to discuss history of
things before they were born. They don't know shit. But we are taking 10
years to 20 years ago not 100-200 years ago. Most of the people are still
alive.

mikec_cbm@hotmail.com (mikec) wrote in news:1121cdb3.0404132120.220ca124
@posting.google.com:

> 
> 

Just ignore him then.  Isn't that simple enough?

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote
in news:107qn8f5i59d6cc@corp.supernews.com: 

> 
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:HU9fc.51977$hc5.2268620@news3.tin.it...
> 
>> As time passes by, fewer and fewer people even recall the Commodore
>> brand. The new generations, teenagers born 15 years ago, don't even
>> know what a Commodore 64 is.
> 
> First - the teenagers are only a small percentage of the world
> population. 
> 
> It doesn't require teenagers. What happen to people who are old enough
> to use Commodore then. Yeah, did the 20 Million teenagers and young
> adults in the 1980s just die or disappear. Just because some of them
> died (the more elderly people of that time) does not mean that these
> people NO longer exist and second of all - people's memory of
> Commodore would not be forgotten "totally" because people human mind
> remembers patterns and associate them and DO NOT Forget them that
> easily. How do you think people can remember things from the 1940s.
> Why you don't wear a uniform of German Nazi in front of those people
> who fought down to hand to hand with a Nazi. They will remember that
> in life - crystal clear. 
> 
> Yeah, Atari was dead for nearly that long and people do remember
> Atari. It really doesn't matter what the teenagers can remember of the
> 1980s but if the new line of products do support things of that sort.
> Of course if you asked them by words what a Commodore 64 is - they may
> or maynot recall it. Then don't kid yourself - a teenager will often
> act dumb even if they do remember it. The thing is "visual".
> 
> Now, that really doesn't matter whether a teenager of today remembers
> or not. All it really take to start the ball rolling is first
> connecting with the Commodore commmunity and then expanding with the
> brand. There are at least 50 Million people who would have seen the
> Commodore name and bought a Commodore product. There would be at least
> today - 6-10 Million people who would remember Commodore.
> 
> Humans do NOT really forget visual patterns and Commodore 64 will be
> among the things the "name" and "symbol" is associated to. It is like
> people who use to go to Gemco stores.
> 
> How many people would remember the 1982 DeLorean. You ask them by word
> - it may be shaky. Ask someone about the GTO or Volkswagon. They will
> likely connect with the old 1960s. Especially if they haven't seen a
> new Volkswagon. How about a GTO. Names like GTO is a trademark and a
> name of a car. You would be suprise. But you don't ask a child to
> discuss history of things before they were born. They don't know shit.
> But we are taking 10 years to 20 years ago not 100-200 years ago. Most
> of the people are still alive.
> 
> 
> 
> 

This reminds me that I know of teenagers getting into 80s style synthpop 
music on one musician's message board.  Also they're getting into classic 
video games, even though they never played many of these games as a kid.  
So maybe teenagers wouldn't totally be ruled out.  However, Atari is a 
more familiar name to them than Commodore 64.

It's really kind of funny when I discuss video game history with some 
teenagers, they think the Atari 2600 was the first ever video game 
console.  lol.  I wasn't around for the stuff before Atari 2600 (I was 
born in 1980) but I've done studying to see what was around before then.

OK, that was off topic.  But it was in my head and it had to come out. 

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:WUafc.52315$hc5.2279117@news3.tin.it...

> Commodore Business Machines Inc. was the US subsidiary of Commodore. As
you
> know, Commodore moved to Bahamas, for fiscal reasons ( taxes ). CBM was
also
> a trademark, and I suppose that was transferred to Tulip as well.

Yeah, that too but a name of a newsgroup like comp.sys.cbm does not infringe
on trademarks.

> Come on, I don't think they are so stupid, Anders. Simply, Tulip doesn't
> care that much to have its own people coming here, because we Tulip
doesn't
> have anything that could be marketable here.
>
> This is about 8-bit computers, Tulip has as much interest in reviving this
> market as IBM has to resurrect its System/360 line.

Well then what is 30 Million Euros from the Equity Credit Line and all going
into reviving the trademark. Just to sit on trademarks. Come on. They EVEN
stated on July 11th. What is not clear about that ????

It is not going to make them money if they do nothing with it. It is not
going to make them any money to just make a bunch of PCs with C= logo on it.
Since it failed for ESCOM and Web Computers International. What does that
mean ? Clear bell - anyone who remembers Commodore would not want a plain
el'cheapo PC with C= logo. It is a disgrace to name. It needs something a
little more. It is the most vile and dishonorable disgrace to the name that
you can do to just make an el'cheapo PC and call it Commodore.

Commodore was about giving the MOST for the least price. Commodore never
built the cheapest but were first to break barriers but they gave you stuff
that only computers 2-4 times the price would offer at the prices they gave
but it is not just technology.

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> writes:

> Yeah, Atari was dead for nearly that long and people do remember Atari.

Interestingly enough, since Infogrames became Atari, I am unable to
find a single mention of the past Atari memories on either of their
web sites. There is no references to the classic games, consoles or 
computers. On the US site, they have a few Flash game remakes, but 
those are newer games. 

I understand if some of the hardware and software rights have been 
dealed away or lost, but certainly _something_ of their back 
catalogue should still be with the company and Atari brand? Maybe
that is as much as you could expect from Tulip/Commodore too, to
maintain the brand and logotype, track down illegal use of what
still could be intellectual property but not put much effort in
showing or supporting the same IP.

-- 
Anders Carlsson

Rick Balkins wrote:
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:WUafc.52315$hc5.2279117@news3.tin.it...
>
>> Commodore Business Machines Inc. was the US subsidiary of Commodore.
>> As you know, Commodore moved to Bahamas, for fiscal reasons ( taxes
>> ). CBM was also a trademark, and I suppose that was transferred to
>> Tulip as well.
>
> Yeah, that too but a name of a newsgroup like comp.sys.cbm does not
> infringe on trademarks.

And who said that, simpleton? After reading another stupid incoherent
sentence like this, I ignore completely the rest of the garbage you have
written. You don't deserve my attention.

Riccardo

Anders Carlsson wrote:
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> writes:
> 
> 
>>Yeah, Atari was dead for nearly that long and people do remember Atari.
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough, since Infogrames became Atari, I am unable to
> find a single mention of the past Atari memories on either of their
> web sites. There is no references to the classic games, consoles or 
> computers. On the US site, they have a few Flash game remakes, but 
> those are newer games. 
> 
> I understand if some of the hardware and software rights have been 
> dealed away or lost, but certainly _something_ of their back 
> catalogue should still be with the company and Atari brand?

I believe the only mention lies in the former Infogrammes line of "Atari 
Collection" emulation games.

> that is as much as you could expect from Tulip/Commodore too, to
> maintain the brand and logotype, track down illegal use of what
> still could be intellectual property but not put much effort in
> showing or supporting the same IP.
> 

I don't doubt this for a second.  It'd be cute if these new machines 
that are simply called 'Commodore' are just boring PCs that might come 
with an emulator for giggles, not like we can't install one ourselves.


What I'm not understanding in this thread is, if anyone wants to build a 
better 65xx era Commodore, why not mangle an emulator to pretend we have 
1 Megabyte C64's or whatever and see what it's like, or how useful it 
would be?  If the emulation works well enough, somebody more 
electronically inclined would probably try to build a real one.

-ch

Rick Balkins wrote:
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:HU9fc.51977$hc5.2268620@news3.tin.it...
>
>> As time passes by, fewer and fewer people even recall the Commodore
>> brand. The new generations, teenagers born 15 years ago, don't even
>> know what a Commodore 64 is.
>
> First - the teenagers are only a small percentage of the world
> population.

Albeit the most important percentage, because teenagers of today are the men
in charge of the world tomorrow, you simpleton. Why do you think the Tobacco
industry targets youngsters and not 80 years old? Has ever crossed your mind
we worship Commodore today because that was our computer back when we were
kids? You bet.

The VIC-20 and C64 were so successful because were very well received by
young people. Those Commodore computers were products targeted for the whole
family, like PC's are today, but weren't back then. I believe that only with
the advent of Windows 95 to millions of desktops the PC parted its
business-only niche and became finally a family product.

I refuse to comment all the rest you have written on the grounds that surely
is as stupid as the rest you've posted in this thread, so far.

Riccardo

mikec wrote:

>> One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing
>> platform
>
> Funny...because this model hasn't worked for Amiga Inc. For all
> intensive purposes, they're still dead in the water. Nokia's failed
> N-Gage has a larger market size that anything Amiga Inc has done in
> the past 10 years.

It is true that Amiga Inc. is basically dead at this point.  They did
give it a good shot though.  It is unfortunate for the Amiga
community. They have watched the repeated attempts and continued
failures to relaunch the company way to many times.  One thing that
can be said for the Amiga community though is that despite repeated
let-downs, they did "support" the more recent attempt.  I'm sure
though at this point that many of the Amiga faithful have finally come
to realize that it may never happen.

I know many Amiga users purchased the Amiga One computer.
Unfortunately, it was never brought to the masses and Amiga Inc. took
way to long bringing OS 4 to market.  This basically left the Amiga
One as another Linux box for a considerable amount of time.  There are
already so many Linux boxes out there that this would hardly be a
selling point.

Combine that with the excessive price that they charged for the Amiga
One mainboard and you do definitely have a recipe for failure.
Basically the price tag is what kept me from purchasing the Amiga One
computer.  There is no way that I would spend the $700 to $1000
(depending on configuration) for just a mainboard.  Of course, there
are very few that would.

If Amiga Inc. had been been able to deliver on their promises faster,
and kept the prices low enough to attract buyers, they might have
stood a chance.  Of course, then you still have the Microsoft giant to
deal with.

Reality would have probably seen the Amiga One selling only to Amiga
fans for a good long time (assuming that they were able to sell enough
to keep in business).  Eventually, they might be able to gain some
market share, but of course they wouldn't have overtaken the PC
industry.

The sad reality of the situation is that Amiga Inc. made to many
promises, took to long to deliver, and charged to much for what they
did deliver.  This most definitely led to their demise.

>> The other model might use something along the lines of the
>> Macintosh
>
> Do you really believe in the nonsense you wrote here? Really?

Basically, the point I was making was: "If someone was really going to
attempt a relaunch, these are two possible strategies that they might
consider."

Of course, they would want to learn from the mistakes made by Amiga
Inc. and improve on the strategies.

I am not operating on the delusion that the Commodore brand will once
again rise to the popularity that it once enjoyed.  I was merely
commenting on what I would "like" to see in such a machine IF Tulip
were to make a good shot at it.

Who knows, it's always "possible" that Tulip "might" make an attempt
similar to what Amiga Inc. tried to do with the Amiga community.  I'm
not holding my breath there.  I was just stating that "if" they did
make another machine, there were a couple of "possible" strategies
they might entertain.

At this point, the statements I have read from Tulip and Ironstone
Partners are way to vague to draw much of a conclusion.

One thing is for sure though, if they simply make another PC clone and
put a Commodore label on it, they will fall short of success.

> I find it just amazing that people still bother to even talk about a
> Commodore resurrection. Commodore is dead. Amiga is dead. They've

Yes, at this point that is a valid statement.

> been dead for a decade. Neither are coming back. People like you
> and Rick seem completely blinded by the reality of things. If

I'm not out of touch with reality.  I maintain the position of "I'll
believe it when I see it."  But, I found the thread to be an
interesting discussion of "what would you want if...."

Perhaps I didn't make that clear enough in my comments.

> anything, the C-One has demonstrated that things are easier said
> than done.

Agreed.  While the Commodore One does actually show potential of
coming to market, they also may suffer from taking to long to bring it
about.  There is something to be said for making announcements to
early in the game.

Hopefully, they will have a market when the machine is finally ready
to be released.  I'm sure that it won't compare to the kind of market
they could've grabbed if they were able to deliver it within 6 months
of their initial public announcement.  But, then again, we'll just
have to wait and see.  Only time will tell how things will turn out
for the Commodore One.  I wish them the best though.

> It's a shame that your comments will also, in-turn, discredit you.

I wasn't seeking validation.  But I do believe that you may have
mis-understood what I was actually thinking.  Make no mistake, I am
not counting on Tulip relaunching the Commodore computer and bringing
it back to the status it once held.  All I was saying is:  "If (and
that's a big IF), they do, what I'd want would be...."

It might be nice, but I'm not counting on it.

Michael Hunter
mhunter@videocam.net.au

You don't deserve mine either. I'll send an email to Harro Tillema and will
ask Tulip to simply forget the Commodore and that no one in the Commodore
scene even WANTS Tulip to produce or even revive Commodore in anyway. They
don't want Commodore to even return even if it is possible. I have pointed
out many times that if you really think - people will buy a good product. If
people buy a PC then why would it be a problem if you get an even BETTER PC
with a bonus of using what you got WITH NO hassle whatsoever. Ever wished
you could read a Commodore disk with an amazing ease and NOT even have to go
to DOS to read the disk or buy fancy little cables and hope your printer
port will support it. Why do that when it can be guaranteed through properly
written software.

You want to disgrace what made Commodore into not even a computer anymore.
Guess what the 5 year olds when they become adults will only think the C64
as just some software. They would not even think it is a computer anymore.
That Commodore Business Machines will have never existed and that the VICE
team invented the C64. Come ON !!!! These kids need to see the real thing or
at least it being a hardware because turning C64 into a software even will
de-value the fact that it was a computer to begin with. The fact is - a kid
will loose the facts if the facts just simply disappear. How hard is that to
understand. Don't you think about steps that your next step will lead you
to. It is the responsibility of you, me and everyone who here who remembered
Commodore for what it is to Defend the crown if we still love this kingdom.
(Paraphrase - think harder. Better yet I'll tell you Sub-simpleton turds)

It is the responsibility of us who still love Commodore to protect it from
being degraded from even being a computer. It is our responsibility to tell
the truth and uphold the facts so the kids would have the facts. The fact
is - you are taking away the "facts". By taking away the fact that a C64 is
a computer by replacing the concept of the C64 as a computer into a software
shell for other software. That is clearly a degradation of what is C64.

You ask a kid what a C64 is and all they know is an emulator. The kid's
response is that is it a software. Wow, what a factual statement that is.
Hahaha ROTFLMAO !!!! Be an example of preserving Commodore. BTW: Commodore
Business Machines aka Commodore Electronics International was a computer
manufacturer and now you want Tulip to turn Commodore into a software
company with nothing valuable. Or do you want Commodore to be forgetten.

First step, remove yourself of any Commodore computers, software, hardware
and emulators. Then this scene can finally die - exactly what your choices
of action on the future of Commodore will be. DEAD & soon enough FORGOTTEN
completely and finally all the sites be removed. Is this the blasphemy that
you want ????

I found some of the suggestions as PURE BLASPHEMY !!!! COMPLETELY EVIL !!!!

"Anders Carlsson" <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in message
news:k2gk70iv8v3.fsf@legolas.mdh.se...

> Interestingly enough, since Infogrames became Atari, I am unable to
> find a single mention of the past Atari memories on either of their
> web sites. There is no references to the classic games, consoles or
> computers. On the US site, they have a few Flash game remakes, but
> those are newer games.
>
> I understand if some of the hardware and software rights have been
> dealed away or lost, but certainly _something_ of their back
> catalogue should still be with the company and Atari brand? Maybe
> that is as much as you could expect from Tulip/Commodore too, to
> maintain the brand and logotype, track down illegal use of what
> still could be intellectual property but not put much effort in
> showing or supporting the same IP.

It can be "expected" but we can help them to not do that but carry on some
aspects but also connect with us. How hard is it for us to assist them in
providing actual history of Commodore. Yes, we can expect that but do we
have to LET that happen that way ????

So far, Tulip is LISTENING. Sometimes they are too busy to listen to all the
noise but the main ones will go through and they will listen. If we can
consolidate on a vision and work from there and that is how a company can be
revived or a brand be revived. We must develop a roadmap to the future and
go from there. This is part of business and how Apple survived.

So what if Commodore may seem like a vampire. Through a little blood into
the vampire and the vampire will revive from sleep. Whatever, with money
brought into the business (Commodore International NV - a subsidiary of
Tulip Computers NV, which is essentially Commodore that was bought by ESCOM
AG and later bought by Tulip from ESCOM AG.

In this case the company is like a car which transfer titleship. It isn't
exactly a close comparison but reasonable for the main point and should not
ever be taken too literally.

PS: I am grateful that some people actually carefully read what is actually
said and this really relieves the headache I get from those who don't bother
reading it correctly or purposely mis-state what I say.

"@(none)" <""tanuki\"@(none)"> wrote in message
news:407d7351$1_2@newspeer2.tds.net...

> I believe the only mention lies in the former Infogrammes line of "Atari
> Collection" emulation games.
>
> I don't doubt this for a second.  It'd be cute if these new machines
> that are simply called 'Commodore' are just boring PCs that might come
> with an emulator for giggles, not like we can't install one ourselves.
>
>
> What I'm not understanding in this thread is, if anyone wants to build a
> better 65xx era Commodore, why not mangle an emulator to pretend we have
> 1 Megabyte C64's or whatever and see what it's like, or how useful it
> would be?  If the emulation works well enough, somebody more
> electronically inclined would probably try to build a real one.

Well, I like the idea of the add-on C64 computer on a plugin board to be a
reasonable concept but pretending with emulation is like lieing. Well the
add-on board would not be a "C64" but a board that consists all of the
physical hardware so you can run C64 games on it with the official original
ROMs. With a 6502 - it would at least have something stemming from the
Commodore line of computer. Hence why I would want that. Hence why a C-One
as an add-on board does appeal to me for this purpose. Since a 65c816 is
indeed a 6502 and clearly is an evolution just like a Pentium 4 is clearly
and evolution of the 8086. You see, by the time this unit would be
eleased  - the R&D of the C-One would be essentially complete with a very
minor issue of adjusting it into an add-on board. Huge part would be already
done so what is the big cry.

Rick Balkins wrote:
> You don't deserve mine either. I'll send an email to Harro Tillema

You can even send an e-mail to Hanna-Barbera, as far as I care. I heard
Scooby Doo needs new dumb spooky characters for his flicks and you surely
don't cut a poor figure among lobotomized zombies  :-)

Riccardo

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:ZBefc.74433$rM4.2962127@news4.tin.it...

> Albeit the most important percentage, because teenagers of today are the
men
> in charge of the world tomorrow, you simpleton. Why do you think the
Tobacco
> industry targets youngsters and not 80 years old? Has ever crossed your
mind
> we worship Commodore today because that was our computer back when we were
> kids? You bet.
>
> The VIC-20 and C64 were so successful because were very well received by
> young people. Those Commodore computers were products targeted for the
whole
> family, like PC's are today, but weren't back then. I believe that only
with
> the advent of Windows 95 to millions of desktops the PC parted its
> business-only niche and became finally a family product.
>
> I refuse to comment all the rest you have written on the grounds that
surely
> is as stupid as the rest you've posted in this thread, so far.

What is the problem with taking that market back ???? Ever thought of a
solution, new OS on a vastly more superior hardware while having the option
to plug in the stuff from the past because it is blatantly OBVIOUS that
among the first buyers will stem from those who bought Commodore. HINT:
TARGET is the FAMILY. HINT: TAKE IT BACK or at least SOME of it back.

Have you ever thought about that ???? Has that ever cross your mind ??? An
easy to use and reliable OS that is capable of anything a modern computer is
expected to do but with the bonus of being able to use old commodore stuff
through an add on board that clearly let's you be able to "directly" plug in
your Commodore peripherals. Also having a new OS that is more reliable than
Windows and having a decent web browser - will solve a huge issue. You
complain about having both in one with something better than software ????
Can I simply plug my Commodore 1541 directly into my Windows XP computer
with the graceful ease of reading it's directly just like reading my 3.5"
Floppy disk. Now, I don't even have to run an emulator to read the
directory. It would be part of the next-gen OS. Support for even a CMD HD.
WOW - isn't that wonderful and you complain ????

Yeah, so all those disks that I bought would no longer have to go to the
dumps because of you guys preventing a reasonable option. Emulators are
software and VICE is a far cry from being able to do the stuff like plugging
a Commodore cassette unit directly into the new "Commodore computer" but
note the new Commodore computer would indeed be a PC with a new ultra-modern
Commodore OS running on top of a P4 or P5. How many times have YOU missed
that. In some due respect - you can think of the OS as a hardware enhanced
emulator/multi-task OS. You missed that - didn't you ?

Rick Balkins wrote:

> So far, Tulip is LISTENING. Sometimes they are too busy to listen to
> all the noise but the main ones will go through and they will listen.

....And after LISTENING to your new "concept for a NEW Commodore PC" the top
management at Tulip got together, locked the doors, discussed, and finally
and ultimately a decision was taken on the fate of the Commodore brand
name...

"Given the absulte lack of IQ and reality nowadays in the Commodore users'
camp, " - said the CEO Captain McCallister ( aka the "Frying Dutchman" ) -
" We decided to license the Commodore brand name for an exciting new line of
frozen fish. The slogan is ready : frozen cod filet for the masses, not for
the classes. Our makerting division predicts a major business success.
William Shatner will endorse the line in TV commercials, along with Spock,
while both fly fishing in Eindhoven"...

Go and grab a clue, Balkins, pleeaze...

Riccardo

P.S. Don't fool yourself I read your whole post...Actually your "LISTENING"
written in capitals caught my attention and I read that one and only.

I do not count on Tulip actually making anywhere in the level that Commodore
produced. Expecting over 4 Million units a year. Maybe not. Maybe something
along the lines of 10,000 to 100,000 in a year.

I expect them to bridge the gap of the past to the present and the proceed
with a new line of Commodore "computers" based on modern hardware (yes a P4
or P5 hardware) and a new OS customly made (based on UNIX) and having a rock
solid stability and you got essentially a MacOS X on a P4/P5. You would have
a new generation Commodore OS. With modern feel. Take a look at the
www.commodore.net and look at the visual graphics and feel. OK, an
ultra-modern GUI feel and all. Take the look and feel and a robust OS and
the ability to use Linux/UNIX and new custom apps. It may not ever be quite
the same glory and I don't expect that but I expect a hell of an effort and
fine tuning past strategies in order to re-build and take the Commodore
community further. Building from the past and what really made Commodore
successful and look at how it can apply today but a plain ol' PC isn't going
to cut it.

People who adore Commodore will never like that. Of course the issue of
Tulip is something more than Amiga situation was after Gateway. Remember
Amiga Inc. is essentially Amino renamed to Amiga after acquiring the Amiga
part from Gateway. Tulip is naturally a larger company with more products
than you can shake a stick at. Tulip is capable of making custom cases and
often do and they are financially capable of doing more than Amiga Inc.
(under Bill McEwen) can do. So working things out - Commodore can slowly but
steadily grow and first bridging the past to new "Commodore" platform - you
may call it. The point is, I want to directly plug my existing Commodore
hardware and move things over with ease and execute them with perhaps a
65c816 (co-processor).

The C-One in its current form may fail commercially due to long wait but the
technology can be taken over and worked over and be part of the new computer
via an add on board that uses a customized 133 MHz PCI slot.  I have figured
a solution to keep people from plugging standard PCI into that slot. Just
change its distance from the back panel and the card would be adjusted and
it's special slot would be wider than the usual slots for just those slots.
So you wouldn't have problems inserting the Serial Cable and other stuff.
The add on board would be "optional" but the new OS would not "require" the
add-on board.

Given Amiga, Inc. is a much smaller company - they done a fine job for its
size but Tulip is significantly larger. Heck - Tulip owns its own
headquarters not rent out a business park. Tulip is the largest European
based PC maker (paring to that of the once ESCOM AG)


"Michael Hunter" <mhunter@videocam.net.au> wrote in message
news:sKefc.23145$K_.618287@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

> It is true that Amiga Inc. is basically dead at this point.  They did
> give it a good shot though.  It is unfortunate for the Amiga
> community. They have watched the repeated attempts and continued
> failures to relaunch the company way to many times.  One thing that
> can be said for the Amiga community though is that despite repeated
> let-downs, they did "support" the more recent attempt.  I'm sure
> though at this point that many of the Amiga faithful have finally come
> to realize that it may never happen.
<<< snip >>>

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...

[snip]
> Hey, Tulip announced relaunching Commodore brand and that means "reviving"
> Commodore. Hell, look at the people who revived Atari. Infogrames ? Now
> they are Atari. Bought the company and you choose to become it - then YOU
> are it. If Tulip chooses to morph then they become it.

Is Atari really revived?  Are there any current Atari computers that can
trace their roots to either the 8-bit Atari or the ST series?

[snip]
> You see, I don't believe in just giving up something that had more impact
> on the computing scene than text book writers (endorsed by Microsoft or
> written by Microsoft) will ever give credit to.  They even wrote out
> Commodore as if it NEVER existed as if 22 Million people just never existed
> ????

There is mention of Commodore in the more or less official history of
Microsoft found in Microsoft's Encarta Encyclopedia.  The sentence containing
Commodore is quoted below.

[start quote]
Microsoft's early customers included fledgling hardware firms such as Apple
Computer, maker of the Apple II computer; Commodore, maker of the PET
computer; and Tandy Corporation, maker of the Radio Shack TRS-80 computer.
[end quote]

[snip]
> Take a straight out C64 add on card with no real special bells and whistle
> can be done in $150 in single unit - low volume run. At higher volume -
> Perhaps $99. Right within a reasonable scope and good choice of a
> reasonably small FPGA. Say 30K will handle the C64 just by itself without
> any special bells and whistle. Maybe $129 for the C-128.

Jeri has already proven you wrong on this one.  You _can not_ put even a
stock C64 on a 30K FPGA.  Doubt it?  Go back and check the early development
of the C=One.

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

Watch yourself, or your
reality check will bounce!

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote ...

> > Whatever the case, I'm sure the people at Tulip are laughing the heads
> > off over these posts. I'm sure they're rolling on the floor laughing
> > very hard.
>
> I am sure people at Tulip's management don't even know this newsgroup
> exist, and those who know, don't even bother reading it. The average
> employee reading the occasional thread and commenting this or that doesn't
> really matter, it's not the company speaking its heart out.

This is hypothetical... but I think the people at Tulip print out Rick's
posts and pass them around.  After everyone has had a good laugh, they put
them in the shredder.

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

UFO's are real.
It's Rick's Super C=One that doesn't exist!

Sam Gillett wrote:

> I think the people at Tulip print out Rick's posts and pass them around.
After everyone has had a good
> laugh, they put them in the shredder.

LOL

Right on, man :-)

Riccardo

Sam Gillett wrote:
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com>
> wrote ...
>
> [snip]
>> Hey, Tulip announced relaunching Commodore brand and that means
>> "reviving" Commodore. Hell, look at the people who revived Atari.
>> Infogrames ? Now they are Atari. Bought the company and you choose
>> to become it - then YOU are it. If Tulip chooses to morph then they
>> become it.
>
> Is Atari really revived?  Are there any current Atari computers that
> can trace their roots to either the 8-bit Atari or the ST series?

Nope, of course. Atari is dead in everything but the name, even the spirit
is six feet under. Almost as much buried as Michael Jackson's career is.

I have to say that I prefer to get nothing, rather than such incoinciliable
idiosyncrasies with a company's legacy as today Atari's.

Riccardo

Riccardo Rubini wrote:

> incoinciliable

"Inconceivable", sorry . I got confused with Italian "inconciliabile"...

Riccardo

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> schreef in bericht
news:oeifc.76033$rM4.3034229@news4.tin.it...
> > Is Atari really revived?  Are there any current Atari computers that
> > can trace their roots to either the 8-bit Atari or the ST series?
>
> Nope, of course. Atari is dead in everything but the name, even the spirit
> is six feet under.

Which happens to be as much as can be expected from a Commodore "revival".
--
Peter van Merkerk
peter.van.merkerk(at)dse.nl

Hi Michael,

> I'm sure though at this point that many of the Amiga faithful have
> finally come to realize that it may never happen.

I was the biggest Commodore and Amiga fan. I've owned a Vic-20,
C-64's, C-64c's, a C-128 and just about every single Amiga ever made,
from the A1000 right on through to the A4000. Heck, I even signed on
as a dealer and CATS developer in 1990.

When CBM filed for bankruptcy, I was already moving towards the
"WinTel" platform. I saw the writing on the wall and I guess so did
Commodore since they were aggressively pitching their PC clones.
Everyone knew that the Amiga was quickly losing its competitive
advantage, both on the technical and price side of things. I had
pretty much given up on the Amiga by 1994 so when I heard news about
the Amiga coming back, I wasn't at all interested.

Besides, look at what the Amiga was competing against in 1994...IBM
released OS/2 v3 WARP and had some impressive PS/2's at the time. I
bought (and still have) an IBM PS/2 Model 90 with a Pentium 60, 64MB
RAM, XGA-2 video card with 3 MB of VRAM (I think), 200 MB SCSI HD w/ 1
MB caching controller, 2.88 MB disk drives, etc. This system
completely blew away my A4000. That same year, Apple launched their
PowerMac line featuring PowerPC processors. Even if Commodore survived
another year or so, Windows 95 would have crushed them and finished
them off, which by the way, ran perfectly on my PS/2. ;)

Amiga never had a chance back then and certainly not today. Anyone who
believes differently is just wasting their time.


> Combine that with the excessive price that they charged for the Amiga
> One mainboard and you do definitely have a recipe for failure.

That's also my fear with the C-One.


> Of course, they would want to learn from the mistakes made by Amiga
> Inc. and improve on the strategies.

I'm not sure I agree with this. After all, most of the computer
companies that existed in the 70's and 80's are all dead or bailed out
of the home computer market all together. It's just like in the 1900's
when we had dozens of car companies in North America. They all
eventually folded or merged into the "Big 3." Besides, Apple made it's
share of mistakes but they're still around. On the other hand, NeXT
didn't do very well. ;)


> One thing is for sure though, if they simply make another PC clone and
> put a Commodore label on it, they will fall short of success.

However, this is what people are buying so I think it is possible but
certainly not if they try and ride on the coat-tails of just the
Commodore name. That would have worked 10 years ago but not today.

I think the Commodore name would attract attention but they still have
to stand on their own technically and from a price perspective. I am
amazed that they haven't tried to do this already. What are (were)
they waiting for?


> believe it when I see it."  But, I found the thread to be an
> interesting discussion of "what would you want if...."

Sure, I understand completely. I, also, like to play the "what if"
game and discuss things on the newsgroup. If his message was "My idea
for a fictitious Commodore PC," I'm sure it would spark a lot of
friendly conversation and debate.

The problem is that Rick actually believes that Commodore can rise
from the ashes and he's the one who can make it happen. He really
believes that his ideas and assumptions are credible. He really
believes that the gang at Tulip are sitting there reading his messages
and getting ready to call him and bring him on-board. He really
believes that his "NEW Commodore PC" could sell in the millions and
recapture the home market. Need I go on?


> I wasn't seeking validation.  But I do believe that you may have
> mis-understood what I was actually thinking.  Make no mistake, I am

My apologies for misunderstanding your position.

MikeC

Hello Mikec,

I must apologize in advance for the length here.  When I got to the
end of my response, I realized it was quite long.

> I was the biggest Commodore and Amiga fan. I've owned a Vic-20,
> C-64's, C-64c's, a C-128 and just about every single Amiga ever
> made, from the A1000 right on through to the A4000. Heck, I even
> signed on as a dealer and CATS developer in 1990.

I myself got started with the VIC-20 when it first came out.  We used
to sit around as a family and play Hangman or Adventure Land &
Pirate's Cove (Scott Adams adventure games).  Those were the good ol'
days ;-)

After the VIC-20, I got one of those shiny silver TI99/4a systems and
a kind of plain looking Apple IIe.

I quickly got frustrated with the TI system because I was unable to
locate a tape drive or floppy drive for it at the time.  I quickly got
tired of having to re-enter any program that I wanted to use every
time the power was interrupted.  Nothing like having to re-write all
those lines of code all the time.

Since the VIC-20 had a cassette drive already, and I just could not
seem to locate TI peripherals no matter how hard I tried, the trusty
VIC returned to it's prominent position and the TI system was sold.

I spent time bouncing back and forth between the Apple IIe and
Commodore VIC-20.  I became quite proficient at programming on the
Apple, but when Apple pulled the plug on the Apple II line there was a
sense of "abandonment."  This was more due to the way Apple went about
killing the Apple II line.  Anyway, the Apple IIe started to collect
dust and I moved on to the PC and also got a Commodore 64 (a bit late
in the game, but still about midway through it's life).

After all these years, I have moved on and basically lost interest in
PC's and Apple II systems, but I have never been able to part with the
old Commodore for some reason.

I still have that old VIC-20 hooked up and it's list of peripherals
grow from time to time.  I once put it up for sale, and received an
offer from a guy in Russia, but at the last minute couldn't bring
myself to sell it.  Maybe it was all those faithful years it has put
in ;-)

Would you believe that to this day, I have still not removed a single
screw from the old VIC's case.  It still looks great and works like
new.  Now that's reliability :-)

Today, my flat 128 with tons of expansion options sits in the more
prominent position and admittedly my old VIC gets relatively little
use.  I have many child oriented games for it, so I am considering
giving it to my young daughter to play with as she grows.

The other day, I actually finished putting together a "beater" c-64
bread-box for her to play with.  Believe it or not, she has just
turned 6 months old, and already has her own Commodore 64.

Of course, I used a case that was pretty rough, and a main-board that
I had repaired after it's previous owner left it outside in the
weather (ever seen a rusty 64?).  But hey, it gives her something to
beat on and have a good time with.  You should have seen her pounding
on the keys and staring at the screen.  I'm thinking I'm going to have
to throw together a custom program for her to play around with.

Of course, now that she's teething, I'm going to have to give her a
"teething-stick" to play those arcade games with ;-)  Now that would
be a sight!!!

Anyway, after that detour, back to the topic at hand:

> When CBM filed for bankruptcy, I was already moving towards the
> "WinTel" platform. I saw the writing on the wall and I guess so did
> Commodore since they were aggressively pitching their PC clones.

Yes, I must admit that at that point in time, I probably would not
have given my Commodore much thought if it wasn't for the huge amount
of software that I had for it compared to my PC.  There were a few
games that made it worth keeping the 64 around.

For the most part though, I also began to drift into PC land.

I'm sure if Commodore had survived it would've sadly ended up focusing
more on the PC market.

I never did actually buy a Commodore PC.  I did have a few offered to
me for free that I did turn down.  I guess it wasn't really Commodore
that I liked as much as it was the 8-BIT machines that they had
produced.

From what I remember of the 80's, that was pretty much the general
feeling.  Very few people liked the Commodore company.  Even people
who loved the machines disliked the company.  It was kind of like the
company that no-one liked produced the product that they just had to
have.  Hmm, that kinda sounds like Microsoft today ;-)

That's pretty much why I stated in my previous messages that if a new
Commodore machine was produced, it would have to display a clear
heritage to the old Commodore 8-BIT machines.  To me, that is more
important than the name.

Now, if by some miracle such a machine was made, and "felt" like an
evolved "Commodore 128" machine; and even had the Commodore brand
stamped to it, that would be absolutely wonderful.

But as it was in the 80's I believe it is more about the "feel" of the
machine and it's features than it is about the name.  I would love to
buy a new "Commodore-Like" machine with the Commodore name on it (more
for nastalgia I guess).

But if the machine didn't have the Commodore name and atleast offered
a legal implementation that "felt" like 2004 version of the old
Commodore 128, I would be interested (of course it would need the
"classic" mode that would run my favorite 64 and 128 software).

> Everyone knew that the Amiga was quickly losing its competitive
> advantage, both on the technical and price side of things. I had

One of the most impressive displays of Amiga power that I ever
witnessed was around 1993 when I was working with a crew putting
together an "American Bandstand" type show.  I was impressed by this
small Amiga system that was editing recorded video on the fly in full
color and real-time.  It was really quite something to watch.

> pretty much given up on the Amiga by 1994 so when I heard news about
> the Amiga coming back, I wasn't at all interested.

The price tag scared me off.  I just can't justify that kind of money
on a bare mainboard and processor.  Ultimately, I think this is what
killed the project off faster than it might have been otherwise.

> survived another year or so, Windows 95 would have crushed them and
> finished them off, which by the way, ran perfectly on my PS/2. ;)

Yes, Windows 95 really killed off pretty much anything that dared to
compete with it.  Microsoft offered some pretty big incentives to get
developers busy writing Windows 95 software.  Of course, what company
in their right mind would turn down an offer like: "Well give you the
money to pay your programmers if they write programs that require our
new operating system."  You'd have to be crazy to turn down a deal
like that.  Basically you'd be able to make money on a program that
someone else paid you to write.

> Amiga never had a chance back then and certainly not today. Anyone

Early on, Amiga intended to put the Amiga stamp on new game consoles.
This tactic might actually work if you're not counting on the Amiga
name to carry you.  Of course, I personally was kind of offended at
the idea of the Amiga becoming a game console.  It just didn't feel
right.

Of course, not like my desire to remember the Amiga as something great
would mean much to a marketing team looking to make money from the new
generation.

I think the problem comes in when the company thinks that brand
loyalty is going to be enough to get people to flock to the machine.
In reality, when we're talking about brands established on Commodore
and Amiga technology, there is going to have to be some sort of
"connection" between the old and the new if they want brand loyalty to
work for them.

Brand loyalty will not do a single thing if they simply produce a new
PC clone or Linux box.

>> Combine that with the excessive price that they charged for the
>> Amiga One mainboard and you do definitely have a recipe for
>> failure.
>
> That's also my fear with the C-One.

I must agree there.  I think the C-One might suffer because of the
relatively high price of it's main board.  Of course $250 is much more
affordable than the $800 Amiga Inc. wanted for the Amiga One board,
but still $250 is a lot of money when I still have to build the rest
of the machine.

Now, if for $250 I got a ready to run setup with a "legal"
implementation of the Commodore Kernal ROM and BASIC ROM preloaded
into the system, then I might be more interested.  I guess what I'm
saying here is that it's a lot of money to spend when I already have
ready access to Commodore 64 computers that are ready to use.

> all eventually folded or merged into the "Big 3." Besides, Apple
> made it's share of mistakes but they're still around. On the other

Valid Point :-)

>> One thing is for sure though, if they simply make another PC clone
>> and put a Commodore label on it, they will fall short of success.
>
> However, this is what people are buying so I think it is possible
> but certainly not if they try and ride on the coat-tails of just the
> Commodore name. That would have worked 10 years ago but not today.

Exactly.  They can easily sell PC clones with whatever name they want
on them.  Brand Loyalty though will only occur if they can convince
all of us from the old days that there is some connection to these old
machines and that we just absolutely have to buy one.

If it's just another PC clone, I'm going to be more concerned with
what's inside it than who's name is on it.

> I think the Commodore name would attract attention but they still

I'm sure it would atleast make headlines for a few days.  Just imagine
those PC Magazine stories ;-)

> have to stand on their own technically and from a price
> perspective. I am amazed that they haven't tried to do this

Of course, if they didn't make themselves stand out as you say, they'd
be forgotten by the next issue.

> already. What are (were) they waiting for?

I know, they've sure taken their time putting the name to use.  Maybe
they'll finally do it :-)

> Sure, I understand completely. I, also, like to play the "what if"
> game and discuss things on the newsgroup. If his message was "My

Every once in a while I have this idea that pops up saying if they
still did things this way.....

Usually it's when I'm waiting 10 minutes for my PC to become "usable"
when I push that power button.  When I'm waiting on my PC to do
something.  When I say hang-up, and it takes 2 minutes to free my
phone line.  And so on.....

Of course, the thing that really made me think was when Microsoft was
pushing that "Instant-On" thing a few years back.  Who were they
kidding there?  Now, the Commodore 64 and 128 (and other 8-BIT
systems) that was truely instant on.  No waiting there (except for the
monitor to warm up).

> My apologies for misunderstanding your position.

No problem.  Of course, now that I've finished this posting, I feel I
must apologize for it's length ;-)

Sorry about that, guess I got carried away :-)

Michael Hunter
mhunter@videocam.net.au


>
> MikeC

> But if the machine didn't have the Commodore name and atleast offered
> a legal implementation that "felt" like 2004 version of the old
> Commodore 128, I would be interested (of course it would need the
> "classic" mode that would run my favorite 64 and 128 software).

I know this doesn't exactly help the cause but nowadays I get that feel 
from running Linux.  The reason for me though, is that what I like most 
about the old 8-bits as well as what Linux gives modern multitasking 
computers is that I have clearly documented information to get a program 
I want to write to do whatever I want.  In Linux this is achieved with 
the open source model, in the Commodore 8-bits it was achieved with 
documentation of the kernel jump points and the occasional rom dissassembly.

In fact, the only thing a Commodore 8-bit gives that a PC running Linux 
does not is a schematic diagram of the mainboard.  If the new Commodore 
wants my business, include a schematic diagram and make sure the OS is 
open.  I'll get over just about anything else.

> Of course, the thing that really made me think was when Microsoft was
> pushing that "Instant-On" thing a few years back.  Who were they
> kidding there?  Now, the Commodore 64 and 128 (and other 8-BIT
> systems) that was truely instant on.  No waiting there (except for the
> monitor to warm up).
> 

Friend of a friend a long time ago told me about a lady that still used 
a cartridge-based C64 for all her sec- I mean administrative assistant 
work.  If anyone dared to doubt her hardware choice, her fast reply was 
"My word processor boots in three seconds."

Best wishes

-Christopher Hunter

PS- Uncertain why my name field isn't working.  If it stays that way, 
I'll write the Mozilla crew.

mikec <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Besides, look at what the Amiga was competing against in 1994...IBM
> released OS/2 v3 WARP and had some impressive PS/2's at the time. I
> bought (and still have) an IBM PS/2 Model 90 with a Pentium 60, 64MB
> RAM, XGA-2 video card with 3 MB of VRAM (I think), 200 MB SCSI HD w/ 1
> MB caching controller, 2.88 MB disk drives, etc. This system

Just 1MB VRAM on the XGA-2 adapter. There were a few other cards with
more, though (from ATI and Matrox among others).


Regards,

Laust

Hello,

> I want to write to do whatever I want.  In Linux this is achieved
> with
> the open source model, in the Commodore 8-bits it was achieved with
> documentation of the kernel jump points and the occasional rom
> dissassembly.

That's actually a pretty good point.  I must confess that I just never
really got into Linux.  I just like programming on my Commodore.  In
recent years I have modified a few programs on the PC to fix things
that shouldn't have been broken, but my "pleasure programming" is done
on my Commodore system.

> In fact, the only thing a Commodore 8-bit gives that a PC running
> Linux does not is a schematic diagram of the mainboard.  If the new

That schematic is pretty handy when it comes to making things happen
on the hardware level.  You can easily see how the signal you're
manipulating "flows" through the hardware and to the destination your
aiming for.  It's one thing to see the technical reference, but it's
another to compare that against the actual hardware.

Understanding the hardware makes programming alot easier than if you
are just going by what the manufacturer says about the OS.  Of course,
I guess you could stay above the Kernal (BIOS) level and not really
need to know the hardware but where's the fun in that.  Besides
manipulating the hardware directly is usually more efficient than
going through a "translation" layer.

Of course, that was one benefit of the Commodore 64, the hardware
pretty much stayed the same.  With PC based systems, you never really
know what hardware your program is going to be using so the layer
provided by the OS is pretty much necessary.  Either that or you'd
have to get really specific when it came to system requirements.
Could you imagine that, a two-page long list of required hardware for
a program?

With the Commodore 64, you could pretty much get away with saying "All
you need is a Commodore 64."

> Commodore wants my business, include a schematic diagram and make
> sure the OS is open.  I'll get over just about anything else.

One of the things I really liked about the Commodore design was the
ability to completely (electronically) switch the kernal and basic ROM
out of the system.  This feature makes it possible to essentially turn
the computer into a completely different system.  Of course the
hardware is the same, but you can completely replace the Kernal and
Basic ROM chips with whatever you wanted when you loaded your program.

In essence, it was probably one of the first "reconfigurable"
computers.  If someone was so inclined, you could for example replace
the BASIC language that was built-in with a PASCAL or C language
interpreter.  Now that would be pretty cool.

> assistant work.  If anyone dared to doubt her hardware choice, her
> fast reply was "My word processor boots in three seconds."

Yea, try and argue with that ;-)  There's just really no way to combat
that kind of logic.

> -Christopher Hunter

I had to double check that for a minute.  One of my younger brothers
has the same name.  For a minute I thought he found me and was messing
with me ;-)

He's more into PC's though, and probably wouldn't have enough
experience with the Commodore systems to pull that kind of bluff.  He
is quite talented with electronics though ;-)

Michael Hunter
mhunter@videocam.net.au

"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:QZhfc.8501$hg1.906@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...

> Is Atari really revived?  Are there any current Atari computers that can
> trace their roots to either the 8-bit Atari or the ST series?
>
> [snip]

> There is mention of Commodore in the more or less official history of
> Microsoft found in Microsoft's Encarta Encyclopedia.  The sentence
containing
> Commodore is quoted below.

Well, not for long - but notice the commercial politics like "fledgling".
Commodore is ALOT older than they are. They were already an establish
internation company while Bill Gates was being slapped in the face when
girls didn't want him as a boyfriend in high school - thinking he was too
geeky - um nerd. Bill Gates wasn't even in highschool when Commodore was in
the printing machines and calculator business. They call it "fledgling".
Yeah Microsoft was making maybe upto $5 million a year and Commodore was
making - um $50 Million. Let's see - who was the fledgling. A company
founded in 1955 and was in business for 25 years or so when Microsoft was
barely even a business. Hell, if it wasn't for Commodore - they would have
never made MS-DOS. Technically, they really didn't make the orignal code.

> [start quote]
> Microsoft's early customers included fledgling hardware firms such as
Apple
> Computer, maker of the Apple II computer; Commodore, maker of the PET
> computer; and Tandy Corporation, maker of the Radio Shack TRS-80 computer.
> [end quote]
>
> [snip]

> Jeri has already proven you wrong on this one.  You _can not_ put even a
> stock C64 on a 30K FPGA.  Doubt it?  Go back and check the early
development
> of the C=One.

Really ???? Ok maybe just the 100K FPGA. If you can cram an Apple II in the
30K - yeah. Also Jeri didn't optimize it any and was doing all that SD-RAM
and SIMM memory. Certainly that wouldn't but for sake - it can on the 100K
FPGA and that is not that expensive. Not for Tulip. Then again, why can't
you use the 65c22 chips to alleviate the I/O issues ????

BTW: 65c22 are available from WDC. Now, who says that you couldn't put it on
there.

Note: Jeri did not have a large amount of professional training in
developing using VHDL. Over time - she did optimize some things. Big
question - how much over 30K would it take. There are 50K FPGAs. So
something inbetween can solve the issues and ever new product that Altera
introduces is going to reduce the price of the FPGA. You call that
progression.

So issue, in about a year or two - a 100K FPGA will cost about as much as
the 30K or just slightly more so what difference does it make ?

"Riccardo Rubini" <rubini@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:q4hfc.75434$rM4.3011469@news4.tin.it...

> ...And after LISTENING to your new "concept for a NEW Commodore PC" the
top
> management at Tulip got together, locked the doors, discussed, and finally
> and ultimately a decision was taken on the fate of the Commodore brand
> name...
<<< snip >>>

Has it been attempted by listening to Commodore users or are Commodore users
just trying to make the Commodore scene their little private club that they
can drink beer and spit over the keyboards. Give me a break. If this is
where Commodore gone then the CEO can use the worthless sheets of paper and
wipe his butt with it because we all have just heard that there are no true
Commodore users left in this world and everybody loves licking the shit off
Bill Gates ass. Why don't you go literally do that.

Guess what, I now have no choice of platform. Guess what - why don't you
take a sacrifice and use a Speccy because that will be the only choice that
you are allowed. If I can only have Windows then you can only use a Speccy
with 1 bit of RAM and that is it.

Since you want to control my choices then I'll control yours. How about
that.

Rick Balkins wrote:

> Since you want to control my choices then I'll control yours. How
> about that.

Have you taken your medication? Hurry up, before you start drooling.

Riccardo

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...

> Hell, if it wasn't for Commodore - they would have never made MS-DOS.
> Technically, they really didn't make the orignal code.

I know the story behind Microsoft's purchase of QDOS (Quick and Dirty
Operating System) and its rework into MS-DOS.  So, tell us Rick, how was
Commodore the driving force behind MS-DOS?


-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

Watch yourself, or your
reality check will bounce!

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...

> You don't deserve mine either. I'll send an email to Harro Tillema and will
> ask Tulip to simply forget the Commodore and that no one in the Commodore
> scene even WANTS Tulip to produce or even revive Commodore in anyway.

I'm sure your email will be printed out and passed around for all to read.
When everyone has finished laughing, it will be shredded.

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

Global warming is caused by the sun.
Duh!

Hi Michael,


> I must apologize in advance for the length here.  When I got to the

No problem...


> Apple, but when Apple pulled the plug on the Apple II line there was a
> sense of "abandonment."  This was more due to the way Apple went about

Yeah, I owned a pair of IIc's (in fact I still have them) so I can
relate. Apple seemed more interested in pushing Macintosh than
anything else so the II line was always neglected. Kind of like
Commodore when they acquired the Amiga. I guess you really can't blame
them.


> I never did actually buy a Commodore PC.  I did have a few offered to
> me for free that I did turn down.  I guess it wasn't really Commodore

They really weren't that competitive but I haven't figured out whether
this helped Commodore or hurt them. I know local Governments, for
example, were keen on Commodore PC's but they certainly showed no
interest in the Amiga. On the other hand, I think the PC line
marginalize the Amiga.


> evolved "Commodore 128" machine; and even had the Commodore brand
> stamped to it, that would be absolutely wonderful.

What about the C-65 (64DX)? Seemed like a pretty cool system since it
combined the technology from Commodore's 8-bit line and the Amiga. If
I was going to bring back some sort of modernized C-64, I'd probably
look seriously at the C-65.


> together an "American Bandstand" type show.  I was impressed by this
> small Amiga system that was editing recorded video on the fly in full

They were probably using a Video Toaster / Flyer or something similar.
I see people doing similar stuff today with notebooks and those Avid
Mojo's. Very cool stuff.

Although the Amiga was great with video and multimedia apps, I know
the interlace flicker on my 1084 would drive me nuts. I eventually got
use to it but I know it turned a lot of people off the platform.
Thankfully, this was fixed in the A3000. ;)

MikeC

Hi Laust,

> Just 1MB VRAM on the XGA-2 adapter. There were a few other cards with

You're right...I was confusing it with my other IBM Image Adapter/A graphics card.

MikeC

Sam Gillett wrote:
> 
> I know the story behind Microsoft's purchase of QDOS (Quick and Dirty
> Operating System) and its rework into MS-DOS.  So, tell us Rick, how was
> Commodore the driving force behind MS-DOS?
> 
> 

It wasn't, however all the home computers of the day came with a BASIC 
that Microsoft wrote for them.  The only exception I can think of at 
this instant is the TI.

So, if all these home computers had gone with FORTH instead, where would 
Microsoft be?

-Christopher Hunter

"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:2apfc.8909$hg1.3266@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote
....
>
> > Hell, if it wasn't for Commodore - they would have never made MS-DOS.
> > Technically, they really didn't make the orignal code.
>
> I know the story behind Microsoft's purchase of QDOS (Quick and Dirty
> Operating System) and its rework into MS-DOS.  So, tell us Rick, how was
> Commodore the driving force behind MS-DOS?
>

The money. An OS company is a nobody unless they have an OEM to have the OS
installed for example. Commodore paying them money and putting their company
initially in business to begin with. Microsoft would have been out of
business if Commodore and others didn't buy their BASIC to begin with. First
Microsoft produced BASIC and that put them in business and that is what
financed the purchase of QDOS. Otherwise, there would be no money which
equals no business. The first buck is the most significant event in a
company or a company's revival. Without it - it is a nobody. You can't go on
to do more if you never had gas to begin with. You car never leaves the
dealership unless it has gas to begin with otherwise - it won't leave the
dealership. Now think really hard what I mean by this parallel.

Hello Mikec,

> relate. Apple seemed more interested in pushing Macintosh than
> anything else so the II line was always neglected. Kind of like
> Commodore when they acquired the Amiga. I guess you really can't
> blame them.

I guess not.  It was the logical move.  The only thing that bugged me
about the way Apple did it was that they had just released the IIe to
IIgs upgrade package, and s new Apple IIgs system.  Then within a
month or so, they pulled the plug and said that they would no longer
support the II line.

It kinda felt like a betrayal to have company take $2000 for a
computer and then say sorry we don't support that machine anymore.
Nothing like having a brand-new machine that Apple says you can't get
any help with.

Of course, I didn't have one of those new machines at the time.  I was
still working with the Apple IIe.  It just bugged me that they would
pull such a tactic.  Atleast wait till the warranty period is up
before you say that's it.

> certainly showed no interest in the Amiga. On the other hand, I
> think the PC line marginalize the Amiga.

It certainly didn't make people believe that the Amiga was the future.
If the Amiga was really better than the PC, why would the company that
produces the Amiga build a PC.  Obviously, it was to make money on the
PC market.  But when Commodore sold PC's, it was kind of like saying
we're moving on.

Now, if they had marketed the PC's as their low-end machines, and the
Amiga's as the high-end (and I mean REALLY marketed things that way),
they might have succeeded in establishing the Amiga.  Of course, that
strategy may have turned-off PC buyers.

> What about the C-65 (64DX)? Seemed like a pretty cool system since

Yes, I have always been kind of intrigued by the C-65.

> it combined the technology from Commodore's 8-bit line and the
> Amiga. If I was going to bring back some sort of modernized C-64,
> I'd probably look seriously at the C-65.

It would be a logical place to look when considering the "new"
Commodore platform.  The only thing that makes it difficult is that we
cannot clearly determine how the machine was intended to operate.

I know there are a few functional units out there, but it sounds like
they differ in some aspects from each other.

With the 128 we have a clearly defined machine.  But I really did like
the concept of building the floppy drive into the C-65.  I wonder how
64 compatible the final revision would have been.

I know that it was conceived to be a significantly enhanced 64.  It
sure would be nice to hear from the developers as to what they were
attempting to do.  That would surely go a long way towards dreaming
about a finished C-65 system (or even building a new enhanced system
that incorporated the spirit of it's design).

> They were probably using a Video Toaster / Flyer or something

I believe it was.  To that point though, I had never seen anything
that handled video so easily.  My top of the line PC still only
displayed fuzzy animated characters at the time.

Michael Hunter
mhunter@videocam.net.au

Michael Hunter wrote:

>>certainly showed no interest in the Amiga. On the other hand, I
>>think the PC line marginalize the Amiga.
> 
> 
> It certainly didn't make people believe that the Amiga was the future.
> If the Amiga was really better than the PC, why would the company that
> produces the Amiga build a PC.  Obviously, it was to make money on the
> PC market.  But when Commodore sold PC's, it was kind of like saying
> we're moving on.

You probably forgot that the x86 PCs were in CBM's line _before_ the Amiga.

> 
> Now, if they had marketed the PC's as their low-end machines, and the
> Amiga's as the high-end (and I mean REALLY marketed things that way),
> they might have succeeded in establishing the Amiga.  Of course, that
> strategy may have turned-off PC buyers.
> 

We still remember how they were pouring the money from underrespected, 
undermarketed, under...manyadjs Amiga to the pothole of the 
"Proffesional Computers" of them. For what? The Amiga was what 
distinguished them from the others at the time...

Well, hard to say. There first IBM PC compatible was in 1985/1986. We are
talking about a matter months. But companies tend to plan their products
lines all in advance. They just didn't know what to do with the AMIGA but
that was you management team at that time.


"silverdr" <silverdr@inet.remove.it.pl> wrote in message
news:407ef1a0@news.inet.com.pl...

> You probably forgot that the x86 PCs were in CBM's line _before_ the
Amiga.
>
> We still remember how they were pouring the money from underrespected,
> undermarketed, under...manyadjs Amiga to the pothole of the
> "Proffesional Computers" of them. For what? The Amiga was what
> distinguished them from the others at the time...

"@(none)" <""tanuki\"@(none)"> wrote ...

> Sam Gillett wrote:
> >
> > I know the story behind Microsoft's purchase of QDOS (Quick and Dirty
> > Operating System) and its rework into MS-DOS.  So, tell us Rick, how was
> > Commodore the driving force behind MS-DOS?
>
> It wasn't, however all the home computers of the day came with a BASIC
> that Microsoft wrote for them.  The only exception I can think of at
> this instant is the TI.
>
> So, if all these home computers had gone with FORTH instead, where would
> Microsoft be?

Selling Visual Forth instead of Visual Basic?    ;-)

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

UFO's are real.
It's the Air Force that doesn't exist!

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...

> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
> news:2apfc.8909$hg1.3266@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> >
> > "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote
> ...
> > > Hell, if it wasn't for Commodore - they would have never made MS-DOS.
> > > Technically, they really didn't make the orignal code.
> >
> > I know the story behind Microsoft's purchase of QDOS (Quick and Dirty
> > Operating System) and its rework into MS-DOS.  So, tell us Rick, how was
> > Commodore the driving force behind MS-DOS?
>
> The money. An OS company is a nobody unless they have an OEM to have the OS
> installed for example. Commodore paying them money and putting their
> company initially in business to begin with. Microsoft would have been out
> of business if Commodore and others didn't buy their BASIC to begin with.
> First Microsoft produced BASIC and that put them in business and that is
> what financed the purchase of QDOS. Otherwise, there would be no money
> which equals no business. The first buck is the most significant event in a
> company or a company's revival. Without it - it is a nobody. You can't go
> on to do more if you never had gas to begin with. You car never leaves the
> dealership unless it has gas to begin with otherwise - it won't leave the
> dealership. Now think really hard what I mean by this parallel.

I understood what you were implying Rick.  Now think about this.  "Commodore
Jack" pulled a fast one on "Microsoft Bill" when he got a license for MS
Basic as a one time deal.  Apple and Tandy both ended up paying much more for
their versions of MS Basic than Commodore did.

If you want to have one of the 8-bit makers of the day responsible for the
existence of MS-DOS, look at Apple, not Commodore.  While we are at it, let's
give IBM credit for Windows.  Without IBM MS-DOS would never have taken off
like it did.  So, following your line of reasoning, IBM paid the bills for
early Windows development.

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

I saw Elvis making crop circles in a UFO!

"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:8TEfc.41683$F9.33061@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...

> I understood what you were implying Rick.  Now think about this.
"Commodore
> Jack" pulled a fast one on "Microsoft Bill" when he got a license for MS
> Basic as a one time deal.  Apple and Tandy both ended up paying much more
for
> their versions of MS Basic than Commodore did.

True but still the money helped Bill pay his bills.  :-))

> If you want to have one of the 8-bit makers of the day responsible for the
> existence of MS-DOS, look at Apple, not Commodore.  While we are at it,
let's
> give IBM credit for Windows.  Without IBM MS-DOS would never have taken
off
> like it did.  So, following your line of reasoning, IBM paid the bills for
> early Windows development.

I think they all had helped in ways directly and indirectly.

Hello,

> You probably forgot that the x86 PCs were in CBM's line _before_
> the Amiga.

You might have me there ;-)

I better double check those dates again.  I thought for sure that the
PC series came in close to the 90's (late 80's), and that the Amiga
was aquired around the time of the 128's introduction.  Of course,
that doesn't mean it came to market right after they aquired it.

I guess I better double check those dates again.  After all these
years, so many dates on the time-line blend together.  Maybe my memory
bank needs reset :-)

Michael Hunter
mhunter@videocam.net.au

Michael Hunter wrote:

>>You probably forgot that the x86 PCs were in CBM's line _before_
>>the Amiga.
> 
> 
> You might have me there ;-)

:-)

> 
> I better double check those dates again.  I thought for sure that the
> PC series came in close to the 90's (late 80's), and that the Amiga
> was aquired around the time of the 128's introduction.  Of course,
> that doesn't mean it came to market right after they aquired it.
> 

The first incarnations of "PC-10" and "PC-20" were introduced to the 
market shortly after the first Atari STs - mid 1985. At that time the 
first Amiga was not yet even presented to the public.

One have to add the fact that CBM didn't create the Amiga but rather 
acquired. This gives more light as to where the CBM's focus was during 
'83-'84.

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote in
message news:107r47k3uohoe5e@corp.supernews.com...
> You don't deserve mine either. I'll send an email to Harro Tillema and
will
> ask Tulip to simply forget the Commodore and that no one in the Commodore
> scene even WANTS Tulip to produce or even revive Commodore in anyway. They
> don't want Commodore to even return even if it is possible. I have pointed
> out many times that if you really think - people will buy a good product.
If
> people buy a PC then why would it be a problem if you get an even BETTER
PC
> with a bonus of using what you got WITH NO hassle whatsoever. Ever wished
> you could read a Commodore disk with an amazing ease and NOT even have to
go
> to DOS to read the disk or buy fancy little cables and hope your printer
> port will support it. Why do that when it can be guaranteed through
properly
> written software.
>
> You want to disgrace what made Commodore into not even a computer anymore.
> Guess what the 5 year olds when they become adults will only think the C64
> as just some software. They would not even think it is a computer anymore.
> That Commodore Business Machines will have never existed and that the VICE
> team invented the C64. Come ON !!!! These kids need to see the real thing
or
> at least it being a hardware because turning C64 into a software even will
> de-value the fact that it was a computer to begin with. The fact is - a
kid
> will loose the facts if the facts just simply disappear. How hard is that
to
> understand. Don't you think about steps that your next step will lead you
> to. It is the responsibility of you, me and everyone who here who
remembered
> Commodore for what it is to Defend the crown if we still love this
kingdom.
> (Paraphrase - think harder. Better yet I'll tell you Sub-simpleton turds)
>
> It is the responsibility of us who still love Commodore to protect it from
> being degraded from even being a computer. It is our responsibility to
tell
> the truth and uphold the facts so the kids would have the facts. The fact
> is - you are taking away the "facts". By taking away the fact that a C64
is
> a computer by replacing the concept of the C64 as a computer into a
software
> shell for other software. That is clearly a degradation of what is C64.
>
> You ask a kid what a C64 is and all they know is an emulator. The kid's
> response is that is it a software. Wow, what a factual statement that is.
> Hahaha ROTFLMAO !!!! Be an example of preserving Commodore. BTW: Commodore
> Business Machines aka Commodore Electronics International was a computer
> manufacturer and now you want Tulip to turn Commodore into a software
> company with nothing valuable. Or do you want Commodore to be forgetten.
>
> First step, remove yourself of any Commodore computers, software, hardware
> and emulators. Then this scene can finally die - exactly what your choices
> of action on the future of Commodore will be. DEAD & soon enough FORGOTTEN
> completely and finally all the sites be removed. Is this the blasphemy
that
> you want ????
>
> I found some of the suggestions as PURE BLASPHEMY !!!! COMPLETELY EVIL
!!!!
>

Todays kids will look back and maybe get nostalgic about a PS2 or Xbox or
Gameboy Advance in years to come, but not a C64 as that was not their time,
that was yours.

And that's the way it should be too.

"Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:4082c8e0$0$83384$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net: 

> 
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com>
> wrote in message news:107r47k3uohoe5e@corp.supernews.com...
>> You don't deserve mine either. I'll send an email to Harro Tillema
>> and 
> will
>> ask Tulip to simply forget the Commodore and that no one in the
>> Commodore scene even WANTS Tulip to produce or even revive Commodore
>> in anyway. They don't want Commodore to even return even if it is
>> possible. I have pointed out many times that if you really think -
>> people will buy a good product. 
> If
>> people buy a PC then why would it be a problem if you get an even
>> BETTER 
> PC
>> with a bonus of using what you got WITH NO hassle whatsoever. Ever
>> wished you could read a Commodore disk with an amazing ease and NOT
>> even have to 
> go
>> to DOS to read the disk or buy fancy little cables and hope your
>> printer port will support it. Why do that when it can be guaranteed
>> through 
> properly
>> written software.
>>
>> You want to disgrace what made Commodore into not even a computer
>> anymore. Guess what the 5 year olds when they become adults will only
>> think the C64 as just some software. They would not even think it is
>> a computer anymore. That Commodore Business Machines will have never
>> existed and that the VICE team invented the C64. Come ON !!!! These
>> kids need to see the real thing 
> or
>> at least it being a hardware because turning C64 into a software even
>> will de-value the fact that it was a computer to begin with. The fact
>> is - a 
> kid
>> will loose the facts if the facts just simply disappear. How hard is
>> that 
> to
>> understand. Don't you think about steps that your next step will lead
>> you to. It is the responsibility of you, me and everyone who here who
> remembered
>> Commodore for what it is to Defend the crown if we still love this
> kingdom.
>> (Paraphrase - think harder. Better yet I'll tell you Sub-simpleton
>> turds) 
>>
>> It is the responsibility of us who still love Commodore to protect it
>> from being degraded from even being a computer. It is our
>> responsibility to 
> tell
>> the truth and uphold the facts so the kids would have the facts. The
>> fact is - you are taking away the "facts". By taking away the fact
>> that a C64 
> is
>> a computer by replacing the concept of the C64 as a computer into a
> software
>> shell for other software. That is clearly a degradation of what is
>> C64. 
>>
>> You ask a kid what a C64 is and all they know is an emulator. The
>> kid's response is that is it a software. Wow, what a factual
>> statement that is. Hahaha ROTFLMAO !!!! Be an example of preserving
>> Commodore. BTW: Commodore Business Machines aka Commodore Electronics
>> International was a computer manufacturer and now you want Tulip to
>> turn Commodore into a software company with nothing valuable. Or do
>> you want Commodore to be forgetten. 
>>
>> First step, remove yourself of any Commodore computers, software,
>> hardware and emulators. Then this scene can finally die - exactly
>> what your choices of action on the future of Commodore will be. DEAD
>> & soon enough FORGOTTEN completely and finally all the sites be
>> removed. Is this the blasphemy 
> that
>> you want ????
>>
>> I found some of the suggestions as PURE BLASPHEMY !!!! COMPLETELY
>> EVIL 
> !!!!
>>
> 
> Todays kids will look back and maybe get nostalgic about a PS2 or Xbox
> or Gameboy Advance in years to come, but not a C64 as that was not
> their time, that was yours.
> 
> And that's the way it should be too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Actually I would be interested in playing with some stuff before my time, 
like the Magnivox Oddysey.  OK, don't know if I spelled that right.  It 
wouldn't be nostalgic for me, but maybe more of an experience with 
computing and gaming history.  

Am I weird, or does anyone else here feel the same?


-- 
       _______
      /  /    / JOSEPH EXPERIMENTAL
     /  /  --/ AN EDGY BLEND OF
  __/  /    / INDUSTRIAL, EBM, AND
 /    /  --/ SYNTHPOP
/____/____/ http://www.josephexperimental.com

> Actually I would be interested in playing with some stuff before my time,
> like the Magnivox Oddysey.  OK, don't know if I spelled that right.  It
> wouldn't be nostalgic for me, but maybe more of an experience with
> computing and gaming history.
>
> Am I weird, or does anyone else here feel the same?

I did once own one of those early TV games, based entirely on standard TTL
chips as opposed to a custom LSI chip found in later models. Those games are
fun for short while, after that they get boring real quick.  Being an
engineer, I like the engineering that went behind early computers (from the
sixties to early eighties). What I like about it is that in those days they
had to be creative to get the most out of just a few simple IC's or
transistors rather than just apply the brute force method to get the job
done.

-- 
Peter van Merkerk
peter.van.merkerk(at)dse.nl

"Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4082c8e0$0$83384$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
>
> Todays kids will look back and maybe get nostalgic about a PS2 or Xbox or
> Gameboy Advance in years to come, but not a C64 as that was not their
time,
> that was yours.
>
> And that's the way it should be too.

I do see this point, though. Certainly, I don't plan to drop off the earth
for another 50-60 years or so. :-)

The world is still our time because our time is not over. Unless you
expecting to drop off the world in another year or too.

Tulip intends to relaunch the Commodore brand. I would want Tulip to bridge
the past to the present. Which means, we can go from where we are and move
forward with the Commodore brand. It may be the only sensible way to
relaunch the Commodore brand. It is clearly sensible not to relaunch the
Commodore brand. Relaunching the Commodore brand would require
distinctiveness. Emulation that allows us to directly plug in Commodore
cartridges and the sort. Yes, PCI and other modern hardware goodies and P4
or P5. Yeah the hardware may be in the basics - a PC with some little
specialties. THINK AmigaOne to classic Amiga. I would think that we would
have something of the sort. I just having trouble seeing how we can do the
"emulation" and allow the use of existing Commodore hardware.

Anyway - this is something I would want in a new "Commodore" branded PC. It
must be more than just a Windows PC with VICE. I could simply buy any ol' PC
with VICE.

It may not make alot of sense to relaunch the Commodore brand - period but
to be honest, there are alot of people who remember the Commodore and heck
it is our time now and will still be ours until we retire or give up. Our
time is not just when we are kids or in our 20s. Our time is now and will be
so for the most part for the most part until 2030. When most the younger
members of the Commodore community get into their mid 40s to mid 50s. At
that point we usually pass on the torch. For the most part our time will be
shared with those from now til 2030 and the ones born today will begin to
start their time in 2020s to 2040s to 2050s. It all depends on where you are
at in the scene. The older members time has been completed or nearing
completion but the younger members of this community can shape the future of
the Commodore community. If Commodore is relaunched then let us have a part
in bridging the heritage we love and move it forward.

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote in
message news:1085nvtko4r1h02@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:4082c8e0$0$83384$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
> >
> > Todays kids will look back and maybe get nostalgic about a PS2 or Xbox
or
> > Gameboy Advance in years to come, but not a C64 as that was not their
> time,
> > that was yours.
> >
> > And that's the way it should be too.
>
> I do see this point, though. Certainly, I don't plan to drop off the earth
> for another 50-60 years or so. :-)
>

No, it's your formative years that later make you feel nostalgic for certain
things, mostly.

"Peter van Merkerk" <merkerk@deadspam.com> wrote in
news:c5umdr$5v93q$1@ID-133164.news.uni-berlin.de: 

>> Actually I would be interested in playing with some stuff before my
>> time, like the Magnivox Oddysey.  OK, don't know if I spelled that
>> right.  It wouldn't be nostalgic for me, but maybe more of an
>> experience with computing and gaming history.
>>
>> Am I weird, or does anyone else here feel the same?
> 
> I did once own one of those early TV games, based entirely on standard
> TTL chips as opposed to a custom LSI chip found in later models. Those
> games are fun for short while, after that they get boring real quick. 
> Being an engineer, I like the engineering that went behind early
> computers (from the sixties to early eighties). What I like about it
> is that in those days they had to be creative to get the most out of
> just a few simple IC's or transistors rather than just apply the brute
> force method to get the job done.
> 

It kind of reminds me of doing electronic music.  It seems that when I 
use synthesizers that aren't top of the line, I tend to be more creative 
to make my music.

-- 
       _______
      /  /    / JOSEPH EXPERIMENTAL
     /  /  --/ AN EDGY BLEND OF
  __/  /    / INDUSTRIAL, EBM, AND
 /    /  --/ SYNTHPOP
/____/____/ http://www.josephexperimental.com

"Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4082e879$0$83370$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
>
> No, it's your formative years that later make you feel nostalgic for
certain
> things, mostly.
>

Would any buy a computer with a Commodore brand ? I saw in the posts that
can go both way.

For the most part it makes no sense to revive Commodore or the brand name
unless it can be done a certain way which is going to be a challenge.

Now, I am not absolutely sure but the people who would in the beginning buy
a product with the Commodore brand will be those who have been familiar with
the name in the past.

If I was to buy a new PC with the Commodore brand - I would want it to do
anything a modern computer is expected but also allow me to use my Commodore
peripherals. My stuff hasn't went the wayside and died yet. What concerns me
with some of the past messages on ideas of moving everything to emulation
can clearly make many just use emulation and not actually buy the hardware
even though some. Would it kill businesses like Maurice ??? You see, I am
NOT interested in having to make the hardware stuff. That is what companies
are for.

I would love to see a system that would allow me to use my peripherals and
all. You may wonder why I am adamently about such a system. It is only a
matter of time for my C-128D even though it may still be going strong.

Commodore name and heritage does have a heritage and it would be a mistake
for Tulip to relaunch the Commodore brand without connecting with us first
because they would have NO market with that brand. Certainly they can evolve
the brand towards a new "Commodore" platform running a new "Commodore" OS on
a P4 base hardware. I was thinking of a "structural" basis for a new modern
"Commodore" OS - NetBSD/FreeBSD. Just like MacOS X is based around MACH. I
think this fits a concept for convergence base but having the ability for me
to plug in my peripherals. Let's say that if I had TONs of files on a CMD
HD. It would be clearly cool to be able to mount it whether I am in the
virtual C64 environment shell with the ability to directly plug C= devices
in as I have them and it is more than just disk drives. There is Casette
Units and other.

"Clockmeister" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote ...

> Todays kids will look back and maybe get nostalgic about a PS2 or Xbox or
> Gameboy Advance in years to come, but not a C64 as that was not their time,
> that was yours.

Really, the C64 was _after_ my time.  The first computer I bought was a
Timex/Sinclair... because it was cheap.  I didn't buy it to do anything
useful with, more as an adult toy.  However, I feel no nostalgia what-so-ever
for that membrane keyboard!    ;-)

Later on, I bought a Plus/4.  It looked like a more advanced toy that might
also have some usefulness.  But the built-in software was anything but user
friendly, so it was used mostly as a toy.  When it started locking up
frequently I upgraded to a C128, a really advanced toy that really was useful
also.

I kept the C128 and added an XT clone to my computer desk.  It didn't turn
out to be a very good toy, but it was _really_ useful.  The first word
processor I tried on it (Professional Write) was much better than anything I
had tried on the C128.

However, I feel no nostalgia at all toward my early PC's, or the software
that I used on them.  I do enjoy a nostalgic feeling about my Commodore 128.
It has been the best toy that I have had as an adult.  I spent many hours
playing with it, and still enjoy it.

When it comes to game systems, I might have a little nostalgia for the old
Atari 2600.

The only think I still enjoy from my teenage years is that old time Rock &
Roll music.  Elvis might have been king, but Fats Domino and Chuck Berry were
sure contenders for the crown!

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

Change is inevitable,
except from vending machines!

Hi,

I have read this whole thread, and I have something to say:

I don't believe Tulip is doing anything at all, or else there would
have
been news.

The right thing to do is this:

Make a card for PC with a real C64 on it + 1541/1581 + D64/T64/PRG +
cartridge file support.

Make a breadbox to put it in also, If people will better like to use
that
instead. This will offcourse have to have up to date audio/video out.

If they really want to do something that can be sold, this is it.

They should hire people from VICE team, CCS64, HardSID and SIDplay 2,
if
they need any help.

C64 has survived only because of the scene and the illegal spreading
of software. Without software, there would never have been anyone who
would keep the computer.

They provide the hardware,
WE provide the software.

nmioaon@hotmail.com (Jan Harries  rambones) wrote in 
news:f0571012.0404181744.3a8823e0@posting.google.com:

> Hi,
> 
> I have read this whole thread, and I have something to say:
> 
> I don't believe Tulip is doing anything at all, or else there would
> have
> been news.
> 
> The right thing to do is this:
> 
> Make a card for PC with a real C64 on it + 1541/1581 + D64/T64/PRG +
> cartridge file support.
> 
> Make a breadbox to put it in also, If people will better like to use
> that
> instead. This will offcourse have to have up to date audio/video out.
> 
> If they really want to do something that can be sold, this is it.
> 
> They should hire people from VICE team, CCS64, HardSID and SIDplay 2,
> if
> they need any help.
> 
> C64 has survived only because of the scene and the illegal spreading
> of software. Without software, there would never have been anyone who
> would keep the computer.
> 
> They provide the hardware,
> WE provide the software.
> 

I think I would buy that card!  That's a good thought there.  The 
challenge though would be fitting the ports all onto that card...I would 
think it would require at least 2 cards to do that.  Take a look at the 
widths of the C64 ports.  The serial port will be no problem, but the 
problem would be with the other two.

I know a lot of people believe that PCI slots are going away soon.  How 
about put this stuff in a box and connect it via USB?  I know older 
computers without USB ports wouldn't be able to use this but most people 
using PCs these days have USB ports.  

-- 
       _______
      /  /    / JOSEPH EXPERIMENTAL
     /  /  --/ AN EDGY BLEND OF
  __/  /    / INDUSTRIAL, EBM, AND
 /    /  --/ SYNTHPOP
/____/____/ http://www.josephexperimental.com

I have came to a potential solution - a PC based system with a new
"Commodore Operating System" built around a modern OS core infrastructure
like MacOS X is built around the Mach architecture. Also integrated in the
package would be a hardware assisted "Emulator". I will be taking some time
to work out the "New OS" to build a concept version. The Emulation mechanism
would be supportive of all the LOVELY features expected in a top of the line
Commodore Emulation package BUT with addition features that will allow one
to directly plug the actual hardware. I do not expect Tulip to "manufacture"
new 1541s but as long as they are still running - we would be using them. I
would even consider the mounting of a CMD HD to the OS. Then we are talking
UNIX/LINUX/BSD talk.

Jan, I am in contact with Tulip. Anyway, I do have my interest in a system
that takes off from 1994 and move the Commodore brand into a new direction
while at least bridging the gap. Basically a road from 1994 to 2004 to 2014.
Giving a vision for moving forward. Tulip has been "slowly" working on the
funding part and other stuff. Considering proceeds from the 8 tranche of the
ECL is being brought forth to funding the relaunch of the Commodore brand.
Tulip moves slowly but steadily. All is part of a Equity Credit Line and
things are being brought forth. Look for bigger news happening throughout
this year and beginning of 2005. Maybe by Matthew's december 2005 infamouse
date projection, we would have such a system but we need to really
coordinate ourselves and get alot done for this but I might find this to be
on reason for a credited work. I will look into putting my time and effort
in the works but I would want to see some assistance in the future.


"Jan Harries rambones" <nmioaon@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f0571012.0404181744.3a8823e0@posting.google.com...
> Hi,
>
> I have read this whole thread, and I have something to say:
>
> I don't believe Tulip is doing anything at all, or else there would
> have
> been news.
>
> The right thing to do is this:
>
> Make a card for PC with a real C64 on it + 1541/1581 + D64/T64/PRG +
> cartridge file support.
>
> Make a breadbox to put it in also, If people will better like to use
> that
> instead. This will offcourse have to have up to date audio/video out.
>
> If they really want to do something that can be sold, this is it.
>
> They should hire people from VICE team, CCS64, HardSID and SIDplay 2,
> if
> they need any help.
>
> C64 has survived only because of the scene and the illegal spreading
> of software. Without software, there would never have been anyone who
> would keep the computer.
>
> They provide the hardware,
> WE provide the software.

Hi Jan,

>I don't believe Tulip is doing anything at all

Exactly, other than maybe rebranding minor items with the Commodore
name and logo.


> Make a card for PC with a real C64 on it + 1541/1581 + D64/T64/PRG +
> cartridge file support.

I'm not sure what the incentive is for anyone to build this type of a
device. You can easily run emulation software that works 99.99%, is,
generally, free and available on a number of different platforms
including Windows, Mac and PocketPC, and Palm.

After all, just about every single program available for the C-64 is
available for download somewhere on the Internet. Same with cartridges
(so who cares about a cartridge port), programs published in magazine,
etc. You name it and you can easily find it with Google.

You want to connect a 1541 to a PC? Get a X1541 cable and go for it.

There are also PCI cards where you can pop in a real SID. I find this
ironic since most people are really picky about the sound quality of
the SID, however, the SID found in a C-64 and C-64c did sound
different. So, what is real SID suppose to sound like? I guess it
depends on the experience with your original hardware.

Anyway, I'm sure you know all this so why bother to carry on with this
discussion thread? This talk of new hardware is pure nonsense.

Besides, who's going to buy this sort card? What is the market size or
potential? Please don't listen to Rick because he's in fantasy land
and he tends to misrepresent things. He said that he's "in contact
with Tulip." Yeah, right! He probably sent them an e-mail, which they
never responded to or he received some generic or canned automated
reply. A few years back, he claimed to be "buddy, buddy" with Jeri and
Jens and "involved" in the C-One project but that hasn't proven to be
even remotely true. He just isn't credible. Take whatever he says as
opinion rather than fact or truth.

Regardless, what I've noticed over the years is that the Commodore
community has divided into two camps: one camp predominately runs
original hardware while the other predominately runs emulation
software. People running original equipment aren't going to buy this
PCI card or anything PC related while those running emulation aren't
going to spend a penny on hardware because free software emulation is
good enough for their needs and interests. Sure, there are those who
are in the middle who run both environments equally but are they going
to bother with a PCI or breadboard solution? I doubt it.

The best chance for any new hardware was the C-One but over the years,
I've seen opinions flip from "I'm definitely buying it" to "I've given
up." All this talk about new hardware ideas and PCI cards has come
from people giving up on the C-One. It's more of a backlash than any
credible commercial opportunity.


> C64 has survived only because of the scene and the illegal spreading
> of software.

I'd call it more abandonware but the same is true for most retro
platforms. Apple and Atari have very active 8-bit communities. For
example, I stumbled on a site a few years ago that was selling an
IDE/CompactFlash interface for the Apple IIe. Look at projects like
the one stuffing an Atari 2600 and 32 games into an Atari 2600
joystick that plugs directly into your TV. The efforts on the C-64
aren't exclusive to the Commodore community. At least other retro
communities tend to be more pragmatic about things. No one has yet to
seriously suggested an AppleOne or AtariOne platform or rant about a
retro platform revival.

From the outside looking in, it makes the Commodore community look
like a bunch of lunatics.

MikeC

"mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote ...

> Apple and Atari have very active 8-bit communities. For
> example, I stumbled on a site a few years ago that was selling an
> IDE/CompactFlash interface for the Apple IIe. Look at projects like
> the one stuffing an Atari 2600 and 32 games into an Atari 2600
> joystick that plugs directly into your TV. The efforts on the C-64
> aren't exclusive to the Commodore community. At least other retro
> communities tend to be more pragmatic about things. No one has yet to
> seriously suggested an AppleOne or AtariOne platform or rant about a
> retro platform revival.
>
> From the outside looking in, it makes the Commodore community look
> like a bunch of lunatics.

Maybe we need a new newsgroup, just for Rick's new Commodore resurrection
platform.  The first thing we need is a name for it.  How does
comp.sys.loony.bin sound?    ;-)

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

I saw Elvis in a UFO delivering a load of new Commodores to Toys'R'Us!

"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:LNVgc.16568$L31.15222@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>

> Maybe we need a new newsgroup, just for Rick's new Commodore resurrection
> platform.  The first thing we need is a name for it.  How does
> comp.sys.loony.bin sound?    ;-)

You don't relaunch a brand like "Commodore" without something that would
revive the brand name. "Relaunch" = "Resurrection". Perhaps it is. Tulip may
take awhile but they are doing something with it but the PDAs are only part
of it.

Got to remember that Tulip is known to be ambitious and they making a
message of relaunching the Commodore brand on July 11th, 2003 is ambitious
perhaps. It takes moving from a point and moving forward. You look at Robert
Bernardo and Lord Ronin, if you want LR to replace and through away all his
software and hardware that you spent money on and replace it with a PC that
will not allow him to use what he has then you better compensate.

Why should he or anyone "HAVE" to buy a X1541. It is quasi functional and is
not going to handle all the stuff. So in other words, why should anyone go
for a semi-functional option.

What I see here is Windows LOVERS ripping this scene apart. I remember the
days of Nick Rossi and CMD and people supporting the scene. I remember the
1980s. Now what I see here is those PC users telling us that we must replace
what we have and that we can't use what we have. Why should I have to
download something that I already have the disks for. Why should I or anyone
else "have" to do that. Give us a choice. I made it clear, if I am going to
upgrade or replace my existing C= - it BETTER support what I already have in
my Commodore collection as a base. There is PC and there is Commodore. If a
PC is to replace my Commodore - the PC better handle what have in my
Commodore collection as they are.

Sure I may DL them but that should be a choice - not a requirement. I have
used Commodore's for 15+ years. I have used it and used software for it for
that long. WHY should I HAVE to replace everything that I have. Tulip would
need to bridge that gap as that is the responsibility of the company. Just
as if Dell was to buy Apple. Dell would be responsible to supporting the
Apple users and if Dell wishes to make a new Mac - it better be able to
support Mac stuff. Get the idea. You either leave it alone or you support
the users.

Why is that too hard to understand from a user's standpoint. Oh, I am a loon
to still use my Commodore hardware. Wow, before the emulator people came in
and f*cked with the scene - that was what a Commodore user was. A user of
Commodore products. Hence, a user of Commodore computers. Am I a loon to
still use it. It is the same demand 10 years ago, it is still today. I will
not replace my C-128D computer with a PC unless the PC allows me to use my
C-128D's stuff as they are. I didn't replace my C-128D. I didn't get rid of
it. Got the idea guys. Why should I have to replace the stuff. The stuff is
in my collection.

Commodore produces to Commodore users. If Tulip doesn't do so with their
Tulip division - they might as well forget relaunching it.

Plain and simple. Is that being a loon or simply calling for something and
not bending over and kissing "Bill Gates" ass. I don't replace my C= with
PCs. I have PCs but they are not a "replacement" even with the VICE
emulator.

If everyone here had forsaken their Commodore's in favor of Windows then
they should take the next step and forget emulating Commodore computers -
spend your effort on Windows and be a Windows user 100%. If you are too
humiliated to use a C= then you should not stay here in this scene.
Commodore users are users of Commodore computers. Heck, I even went as far
as to accept emulation but I added a criteria which would simply EXTEND the
emulation to handle the real hardware being plugged in. Even to turn on and
off the card to make it safe to remove cartridges without having to actually
turn the whole computer off.

Now is that really a silly idea to have essentially a NetBSD based C=
branded PC that can allow you to run real Commodore software and peripherals
as well as emulate. It is mostly extending VICE to support actual physical
hardware. Call it the "official" C= Classic Emulator which would support
EVERY model of Commodore 8 bit. Be it a specialized PC.

What did you do with your collection - throw it away / got rid of it ?
Didn't you know that makes you using an emulator with the ROMs "illegal".

Sam Gillett <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote:

> Maybe we need a new newsgroup, just for Rick's new Commodore resurrection
> platform.  The first thing we need is a name for it.  How does
> comp.sys.loony.bin sound?    ;-)

Don't get him started on newsgroup creation procedures again, *please*...


Regards,

Laust

No I won't. Just too much trouble and not enough people here to do so
according to recent procedure. Enough said.

"Laust Brock-Nannestad" <laustbn@diku.dk> wrote in message
news:c61rk7$j2k$1@news.net.uni-c.dk...

> Don't get him started on newsgroup creation procedures again, *please*...
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Laust

Hi Sam,

> Maybe we need a new newsgroup, just for Rick's new Commodore resurrection
> platform.  The first thing we need is a name for it.  How does
> comp.sys.loony.bin sound?    ;-)

As the story goes, there was a comp.sys.loony.bin set up specifically
for Rick. It was quite an active group. It consisted of messages that
Rick would write then he'd go and post two or three different replies
to himself. The next day, he would reply to those replies. This was a
daily cycle. He even posted many different message threads all on
different topics and then reply to himself.

Some of the most active threads were:

Rick's Picks: The C-One will sell 50,000 units in 2005.
- 726 messages over 4 months

VR-OS (aka Commodore Operating System v3.0D)
- 819 message over 3 months

The Ultimate Commodore Concept Computer (aka C-1DX)
- 833 messages over 6 months

First-hand C-One Performance Benchmarks (blows away both Intel and G5)
- 579 messages over 3 weeks

Some of the more memorable quotes:

"Rick: If I was a troll, Rick, you'd be the first to know."

"Let me explain NTSC to everyone here..." (this was beginning of the
longest newsgroup message ever written)

"It is possible to connect any combination of 6 processors to the
C-One using the Balkins Bridgeboard and have them all work in
parallel." (this led to the development of the C-1DX)

"I'm here to confirm that I've been personally in touch with the
executives at Sony and they have agreed to use the C-1DX as a
reference design for the PlayStation 4. The PSX will also be renamed
to the CBM and feature VR-OS as its operating system."

Rick would also post binary attachments of various documents, white
papers, case studies, mock ups, and diagrams. Unfortunately, most
ISP't could afford to carry or support this newsgroup because of the
massive bandwidth demands so they shut it down.

Now you know the rest of the story.

MikeC

"mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121cdb3.0404190804.22715947@posting.google.com...
> Hi Jan,

> Exactly, other than maybe rebranding minor items with the Commodore
> name and logo.
>
> I'm not sure what the incentive is for anyone to build this type of a
> device. You can easily run emulation software that works 99.99%, is,
> generally, free and available on a number of different platforms
> including Windows, Mac and PocketPC, and Palm.
>
> After all, just about every single program available for the C-64 is
> available for download somewhere on the Internet. Same with cartridges
> (so who cares about a cartridge port), programs published in magazine,
> etc. You name it and you can easily find it with Google.

Are you going to pay me for the cost of my "cartridges", my cassette unit,
my Koala Pad and other stuff that I have. I have these things and why should
I simply not use it. Why should I have to make the adapter interfaces for
the PCs. That is the responsibility of a company not a user. A user
shouldn't have to pay an arm and a leg and half of their life making the
stuff and it be 10x that of what a company like Tulip can do. Heck - they
can manufacture the stuff at 10th the cost because the only produce a few
prototypes and then when its finalize - they produce in bulk quanities.
Hence they price breaks they receive. Why should a Commodore user like
Robert Bernardo "HAVE" to do the manufacturing. X1541 somewhat works but
does it allow me to use my datasette. Does these adapters allow me to use my
Koala Pad and all ???? Why not a card that allows you to directly hook the
stuff up.

> You want to connect a 1541 to a PC? Get a X1541 cable and go for it.

Depends on your printer port. Sometimes it doesn't fully work out easily.
Why even do that if your next PC upgrade could have it already built in
along with everything else a PC can have. Then you give me the statement
that simply comes down to the principle that I might through away what I
already have because the PC doesn't do it 100%. 99.99% isn't entirely that
it says. Sorry but how can you "virtualize" my Koala pad ???? Excuse me but
where is the pad. Oh, I can't use my "Koala Pad because the emulator won't
recognize it and nor would Windows and I have to use some adapter which may
be risky. Wow, now where is the Windows driver and how does Windows handle
it ???? Hmmm... Linux ???? Hmmm.... Nope. Geez, now I have to spend a bunch
of money to buy one of those new pads like this:

http://www.spectraintl.com/xcic/ci-285.html
http://www.compuvisor.com/sal20rebjams.html

Wow, $35 for the later. Ok, now guess what - I have to buy one of those just
to do what I already have. Hey, I already have a Koala Pad. Why should I
have to buy all new.

Short, are you going to compensate me for the stuff I already bought to
replace my Commodore equipment with a PC w/emulator. Yeah, I already do have
that PC but not as a replacement of what I already have. Replace implies
removal of the older with another.

Like replacing your old car with a new one. Guess what - it implies removal
of the old. Certainly some let something rust or collect dust until it is no
longer usable and then you would have to remove it because of that. Wow.

> There are also PCI cards where you can pop in a real SID. I find this
> ironic since most people are really picky about the sound quality of
> the SID, however, the SID found in a C-64 and C-64c did sound
> different. So, what is real SID suppose to sound like? I guess it
> depends on the experience with your original hardware.
>
> Anyway, I'm sure you know all this so why bother to carry on with this
> discussion thread? This talk of new hardware is pure nonsense.
>
> Besides, who's going to buy this sort card? What is the market size or
> potential? Please don't listen to Rick because he's in fantasy land
> and he tends to misrepresent things. He said that he's "in contact
> with Tulip." Yeah, right! He probably sent them an e-mail, which they
> never responded to or he received some generic or canned automated
> reply. A few years back, he claimed to be "buddy, buddy" with Jeri and
> Jens and "involved" in the C-One project but that hasn't proven to be
> even remotely true. He just isn't credible. Take whatever he says as
> opinion rather than fact or truth.

I sent you an example of a message response to a message I sent to Tulip but
on one of the other topics. I can explain details to you but I think that is
not necassary but if I have to - I will as far as I really need to.

> Regardless, what I've noticed over the years is that the Commodore
> community has divided into two camps: one camp predominately runs
> original hardware while the other predominately runs emulation
> software. People running original equipment aren't going to buy this
> PCI card or anything PC related while those running emulation aren't
> going to spend a penny on hardware because free software emulation is
> good enough for their needs and interests. Sure, there are those who
> are in the middle who run both environments equally but are they going
> to bother with a PCI or breadboard solution? I doubt it.
>
> The best chance for any new hardware was the C-One but over the years,
> I've seen opinions flip from "I'm definitely buying it" to "I've given
> up." All this talk about new hardware ideas and PCI cards has come
> from people giving up on the C-One. It's more of a backlash than any
> credible commercial opportunity.

I will send a letter to Tulip to discontinue and forget the Commodore brand
use as this idea of relaunching the Commodore brand is totally unwanted.
Everybody just wants Commodore dead. Why are people wasting their time even
emulating. Isn't PC games sufficient enough to waste their time.

> I'd call it more abandonware but the same is true for most retro
> platforms. Apple and Atari have very active 8-bit communities. For
> example, I stumbled on a site a few years ago that was selling an
> IDE/CompactFlash interface for the Apple IIe. Look at projects like
> the one stuffing an Atari 2600 and 32 games into an Atari 2600
> joystick that plugs directly into your TV. The efforts on the C-64
> aren't exclusive to the Commodore community. At least other retro
> communities tend to be more pragmatic about things. No one has yet to
> seriously suggested an AppleOne or AtariOne platform or rant about a
> retro platform revival.
>
> From the outside looking in, it makes the Commodore community look
> like a bunch of lunatics.

Good question but HOW long will the current C='s last. Something that caught
my attention is something 65xx Terbium Coming Soon??? Terbium ? What is this
???? I asked so far but news is not yet ready for public release. It kind of
catching a concept. I will not be able to say much on the Terbium thing as
of yet.

MikeC, EVERYTHING YOU WROTE below is INACCURATE.

You want something, I'll write you one fucking program just to show you.
Personally, I hate to program through an emulator because the keycaps are
not labeled with Commodore graphics symbols and all.


"mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121cdb3.0404192212.1489c344@posting.google.com...
> Hi Sam,
>
> As the story goes, there was a comp.sys.loony.bin set up specifically
> for Rick. It was quite an active group. It consisted of messages that
> Rick would write then he'd go and post two or three different replies
> to himself. The next day, he would reply to those replies. This was a
> daily cycle. He even posted many different message threads all on
> different topics and then reply to himself.
>
> Some of the most active threads were:
>
> Rick's Picks: The C-One will sell 50,000 units in 2005.
> - 726 messages over 4 months
>
> VR-OS (aka Commodore Operating System v3.0D)
> - 819 message over 3 months
>
> The Ultimate Commodore Concept Computer (aka C-1DX)
> - 833 messages over 6 months
>
> First-hand C-One Performance Benchmarks (blows away both Intel and G5)
> - 579 messages over 3 weeks
>
> Some of the more memorable quotes:
>
> "Rick: If I was a troll, Rick, you'd be the first to know."
>
> "Let me explain NTSC to everyone here..." (this was beginning of the
> longest newsgroup message ever written)
>
> "It is possible to connect any combination of 6 processors to the
> C-One using the Balkins Bridgeboard and have them all work in
> parallel." (this led to the development of the C-1DX)
>
> "I'm here to confirm that I've been personally in touch with the
> executives at Sony and they have agreed to use the C-1DX as a
> reference design for the PlayStation 4. The PSX will also be renamed
> to the CBM and feature VR-OS as its operating system."
>
> Rick would also post binary attachments of various documents, white
> papers, case studies, mock ups, and diagrams. Unfortunately, most
> ISP't could afford to carry or support this newsgroup because of the
> massive bandwidth demands so they shut it down.
>
> Now you know the rest of the story.
>
> MikeC

mikec <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Some of the most active threads were:
[snip]

Ahaha. Dammit, I almost spilled my tea because this! :-)

Fiction or not, the characterization is spot on.


Regards,

Laust

> MikeC, EVERYTHING YOU WROTE below is INACCURATE.

Maybe you should look up the words "parody" and "satire" in the
dictionary and then respond.

Perhaps but it may come on a borderline to insult and sarcasm.

"mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121cdb3.0404200535.4fcd855e@posting.google.com...
> > MikeC, EVERYTHING YOU WROTE below is INACCURATE.
>
> Maybe you should look up the words "parody" and "satire" in the
> dictionary and then respond.

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote in
message news:1089h1jj5m7kae2@corp.supernews.com...
> Are you going to pay me for the cost of my "cartridges", my cassette unit,
> my Koala Pad and other stuff that I have. I have these things and why
should
> I simply not use it. Why should I have to make the adapter interfaces for
> the PCs. That is the responsibility of a company not a user. A user
> shouldn't have to pay an arm and a leg and half of their life making the
> stuff and it be 10x that of what a company like Tulip can do. Heck - they
> can manufacture the stuff at 10th the cost because the only produce a few
> prototypes and then when its finalize - they produce in bulk quanities.
> Hence they price breaks they receive. Why should a Commodore user like
> Robert Bernardo "HAVE" to do the manufacturing. X1541 somewhat works but
> does it allow me to use my datasette. Does these adapters allow me to use
my
> Koala Pad and all ???? Why not a card that allows you to directly hook the
> stuff up.
>

That is a ridiculous statement. Technology advances, you cannot expect
everything you've ever bought to be supported by the manufacturers in new
hardware. Was the 64 pin compatible with VIC cartridges? was the VIC
compatible with unmodified PET basic 4.0 programs?  If you want to use your
cassette deck, or your Koala Pad, use it on a real 64, which is where the
hardware will shine.

X1541 is a great boon to the commodore community, both for real commodore
users, in preserving aging disks on other media formats like CD-ROM, and for
those who use emulators. You are correct though, your datasette can't be
attached to it, however you can simply hook a standard tape deck to your
audio in port of your computer, and copy in your cassettes that way, so
what's the issue?

"Laust Brock-Nannestad" <laustbn@diku.dk> wrote ...

> mikec <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Some of the most active threads were:
> [snip]
>
> Ahaha. Dammit, I almost spilled my tea because this! :-)

I hope Cameron wasn't drinking Dr Pepper when he read that parody!    ;-)

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

UFO's are real.
It's the Air Force that doesn't exist!

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...

> "mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1121cdb3.0404200535.4fcd855e@posting.google.com...
> > > MikeC, EVERYTHING YOU WROTE below is INACCURATE.
> >
> > Maybe you should look up the words "parody" and "satire" in the
> > dictionary and then respond.
>
> Perhaps but it may come on a borderline to insult and sarcasm.

Don't know if you are old enough to remember "Celebrity Roast" on television,
hosted by Dean Martin, where a different celebrity was "roasted" each week.

Guess what Rick?  You have been the guest of honor at MikeC's "Frequent
Poster Roast" this week!  Smile for the hidden webcam!    ;-)

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

I saw Elvis playing MULE on a C=One emulator running on a 750 Gigahertz Lunix
Windows box.  (Lunix Windows is the operating system that will have replaced
both MS Windows and Unix 10 years from now.)

"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:7ddhc.28851$L31.8765@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
> Don't know if you are old enough to remember "Celebrity Roast" on
television,
> hosted by Dean Martin, where a different celebrity was "roasted" each
week.
>
> Guess what Rick?  You have been the guest of honor at MikeC's "Frequent
> Poster Roast" this week!  Smile for the hidden webcam!    ;-)

Ok, I'll take it as a humorous joke but let's just say - get over the
roasting.

I even in my initial message stated that this was generally an opinion of a
"concept". I get roasted even for giving an opinion. In the US, I have a
right to speak my opinion and it is unconstitutional to have laws that
violate the constitutional bill of rights.

If we can look for a new Commodore branded personal computer - we generally
have one CPU platform at this time to go with and that's Pentium 4/AMD
Athlon XP.

Now, I would wait to see more details on this Terbium. This is ambigous and
does not contain enough detail to say what it is. I can't even say if it is
a new CPU from Western Design Center. I do find it interesting they use this
name now. Since for over 20 years - WDC never referred to it by Terbium or
even have the name Terbium attached to the number 6502 (Terbium 6502 for an
example). So far it is just referred to as Terbium 65xx. As something coming
soon. I will simply have to wait and see. I have actually been in contact
with Bill Mensch from time to time. Like I actually have been in contact
with Harro Tillema and I actually have been in contact with Jeri before.
Jens is more anal to me than Jeri is.

"Me" <t-e-k-n-i-c-a-l@r-o-g-e-r-s.c-o-m> wrote in message
news:iwchc.160953$2oI1.155191@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
>
> That is a ridiculous statement. Technology advances, you cannot expect
> everything you've ever bought to be supported by the manufacturers in new
> hardware. Was the 64 pin compatible with VIC cartridges? was the VIC
> compatible with unmodified PET basic 4.0 programs?  If you want to use
your
> cassette deck, or your Koala Pad, use it on a real 64, which is where the
> hardware will shine.

It can and can be done reasonable inexpensive. Say, an edge slot is just a
cut of the PCB board. In fact, many manfacturers use custome PCB
manufacturers to manufacture boards for them and get the boards made cheaply
if you add quanity to the bunch instead of dicking around with quanities of
10 or 20. 9 pin connectors - hey, the part is dirt cheap. They are already
available. Making a PCB board that simply allows me to link the connections
in. If we need a chip (WDC has them - 65c22s). If we need to do up the 6526
again - not much of an issue. They have the design - they just need a
foundry to produce the chips. WOW !!!! - just two chips. How about one
custom CPLD that functions like the two 6526s. Just for the physical element
and you just have to map them into the emulation RAM. If need be - we can
emulate the SID and VIC-II stuff. We can have a FPAA or a simple ADC to
convert the analog input signals and link it to the virtual SID and have the
SID VM utilize the actual ADC to handle the issue. Maybe $99. Maybe less. It
could be down to as low as $50 depending on the CPLD and the FPAA and the
PCB manufacturing Guess what - that solves the issues pretty quick doesn't
it. Then we have the base motherboard with a "new OS". Since Tulip already
produces Windows, why not a new "Commodore OS" based on NetBSD for example.

The DINs are not a problem to find as the raw connector is commonly
available and can be had cheaply. The USER Port is the ONLY thing that may
pose a little challenge and the "Cartridge port and maybe the Cassette but
that is just an edge.

> X1541 is a great boon to the commodore community, both for real commodore
> users, in preserving aging disks on other media formats like CD-ROM, and
for
> those who use emulators. You are correct though, your datasette can't be
> attached to it, however you can simply hook a standard tape deck to your
> audio in port of your computer, and copy in your cassettes that way, so
> what's the issue?

Why have to do that if you can directly plug the Commodore drive in. You
then would have the printer port for stuff that may use the printer port.

Without anything to distinguish Commodore from the rest - then it would just
be ridiculous for Tulip to even bother to use the Commodore brand name. In
other words, Tulip would have to do something with the Commodore brand like
this to some extent or simply forget the Commodore brand altogether as it
would be just a waste of time.

In other words - how can there be any serious reason to relaunch the
Commodore brand. They have no need to. They have their Conceptronics brand
so why "Commodore". It would be clearly a waste of time and money. Does the
Commodore scene just want Commodore to be dead and stay dead ???? Is this
what the Commodore scene wants ? If so, my only suggestion is that if this
is what the scene wants then the people here should really consider to quit
programming for it. Quit using the emulation and move on. If moving on is
what you want then do so for sake. Sell or throw away you Commodores if you
do not intend to use it anymore. Just keep the ROM chips. As for demo
coders, why don't they just demo for Windows or Linux and forget Commodore
altogether.

Then I come to think of it - HEY - there are Commodore users still around
but why do people not want the Commodore "business" back in business even if
it is a subsidiary of Tulip ?

At least we don't have Irving Gould and Medhi Ali.

It is not a matter of whether or not it can or can't be done. The matter is
if there is the will then there is a way. The point here is that I think
that Commodore really doesn't mean all that much to you guys. How many ours
a day or week do you guys play with a Commodore or even an emulator. Maybe
an hour a week then why chit chat is this newsgroup. Why should demo coders
make demos for people who only use their Commodore just for maybe an hour.

Good question to ask - Why should people like Maurice and others even bother
making the hardware. Nobody is out to make money and nobody is willing to
spend money. You just want to spend your money on that PC. If you quit
spending so much money on the PC all the time - you would have money to buy
stuff for your Commodore.

Final question - What should Tulip do with the Commodore brand ?

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...

> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
> news:7ddhc.28851$L31.8765@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
> >
> > Guess what Rick?  You have been the guest of honor at MikeC's "Frequent
> > Poster Roast" this week!  Smile for the hidden webcam!    ;-)
>
> I even in my initial message stated that this was generally an opinion of a
> "concept". I get roasted even for giving an opinion. In the US, I have a
> right to speak my opinion and it is unconstitutional to have laws that
> violate the constitutional bill of rights.

Remember this Rick, the same constitution gives others the right to satirize
your opinion.    :-)

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

I saw Elvis spreading BBQ sauce over second hand retro computing concepts!

Hi Richard,

You really need to grow up and get a life. You have way too much time
on your hands and you'd be better off doing something more
constructive and useful with your time.


> Are you going to pay me for the cost of my "cartridges", my cassette unit,

This is just plain stupid. Eventually, all your Commodore equipment is
going to fail and die. You drives are going to misalign or the parts
are going go wear out. Your disks are going to be worn and die. Where
can you buy a box of new 5.25" disks these days? All the software I
have on disk is perfectly preserved as .d64 files. All my cartridges
from my games to my Epyx Fastload are also preserved as .crt files.
What you fail to understand is that emulation software and devices
like the X/XE-1541 are there to preserve things.


> Sorry but how can you "virtualize" my Koala pad ???? Excuse me but where
> is the pad. Oh, I can't use my "Koala Pad because the emulator won't

If you want it so bad, you go and do it. Do something instead of just
complaining about it. Make a contribution to the community. Use your
"masterful" programming and hardware skills and build an interface and
code the drivers or whatever. Please stop being so dramatic about
things.


> I sent you an example of a message response to a message I sent to Tulip but
> on one of the other topics. I can explain details to you but I think that is

Yeah, it had nothing to do with the topic we were discussing and I got
the sense that you were pestering the guy more than anything else. To
quote him, "Of what I understood of your 5 e-mail messages from last
weekend" LOL...5 message in one weekend! Poor guy.


> I will send a letter to Tulip to discontinue and forget the Commodore brand

Actually, if you sent them a letter saying that you would discontinue
your rants and forget about the Commodore brand, I'm sure they would
be very happy...and have their weekends free.


> Why are people wasting their time even emulating.

....because it's fun and we enjoy it. That what retro computing is all
about but you seemed to have turn it into a religion or a cause. Some
people go and feed starving children in 3rd world countries, other
save whales or trees but your quest seems to be all about saving
Commodore. Please, grow up and get some perspective!

People are just sick of arguing with you so they just turn to satire.
Ironically, you can't even see the difference between reality and
satire, which makes it even more humorous.

I said this before but if want people's respect, you need to earn it.
The best way to earn it is to actually do something. You always seem
to want to generate the ideas and get others to do the work for you.
First, your ideas aren't realistic. Second, people don't respect you
or your ideas so no one is going to take you seriously. Third, you
have no track record or success so why should people even bother to
listen to your ideas (aka rants).

My problem with you is that you're all talk and you fail to back your
talk with any action. I'm pretty sure that's how most people feel
about you and we're all just sick of it.

MikeC

Hi Laust,

> Ahaha. Dammit, I almost spilled my tea because this! :-)

When I was writing it, my wife looked over at me and said, "Oh no,
what are you writing? You have that same look on your face that kids
have when they're pulling the wings off a bug."

MikeC

"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:xsfhc.30236$L31.22667@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...

> Remember this Rick, the same constitution gives others the right to
satirize
> your opinion.    :-)
>

Ok.

"mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121cdb3.0404201214.193ed2d1@posting.google.com...
> Hi Richard,
>
> You really need to grow up and get a life. You have way too much time
> on your hands and you'd be better off doing something more
> constructive and useful with your time.
>
> This is just plain stupid. Eventually, all your Commodore equipment is
> going to fail and die. You drives are going to misalign or the parts
> are going go wear out. Your disks are going to be worn and die. Where
> can you buy a box of new 5.25" disks these days? All the software I
> have on disk is perfectly preserved as .d64 files. All my cartridges
> from my games to my Epyx Fastload are also preserved as .crt files.
> What you fail to understand is that emulation software and devices
> like the X/XE-1541 are there to preserve things.

How will this help in relaunching the Commodore brand. Nada. Not one iota.
Yeah and an X/XE-1541 is totally useless without C= drives. But my Commodore
cables aren't going to fail anytime soon. Just use a steel file (sp?) and
brush it across the tip of the pin and voila (shiny points) and guess what -
signal will pass through. Then again - I can always make more DIN cables.
Now, why do that when I can simply plug it directly into the PC that allows
actual hardware connection. Second of all - a resistor may fail but so may a
capacitor but those can be replaced but hell, what about the more
contemporary FD-2000 I bought a few years ago on the disks I bought in
1996-1998 and archived onto. I did my archiving backup runs then and have my
FD-2000. Now, is that now going to have to be thrown away ???? I hope not.

If Tulip is going to market the Commodore brand - it must be something more
than what they already do and SINCE I sent you one evidence of communication
with Tulip. You need to understand there is a level of credibility there.
Now, what you missed reading is that I would go for a C= PC with an
emulation package that allows me to directly plug in my stuff and why should
I LOOSE my parallel printer port. I do have a Flatbed Scanner that uses that
port. Yeah - it is fairly new and not heavily used.

You see what I am saying. Yeah it is a PC with everything a PC would have
and a modern "Commodore" OS based around NetBSD (a UNIX variant). You see,
why should I be forced to download stuff that I have that still work. Why
should I be "forced" to say that they don't work. Don't you think that I
kept my peripherals in good condition. Just because other people's stuff has
"failed" doesn't mean mind will fail now. It may or may not for another 20
years. It depends on the condition that I keep it in. You see, I do backup
but I do have stuff that I would do find with the real thing. Heck I have
programs of mind on them.

I would simply say it like it is.

Can you at least make a suggestion that will help make the Commodore brand
be relaunched and have at least some sort of distinguishibility in product
line that is more than just having VICE installed. That was pretty much
attempted with Web.it with some emulator. To be able to emulate the drive
and also be able to mount the real hardware - that would be something that I
would want to see. People still have functioning hardware. Why should they
have to stop using it ????

> > Sorry but how can you "virtualize" my Koala pad ???? Excuse me but where
> > is the pad. Oh, I can't use my "Koala Pad because the emulator won't
>
> If you want it so bad, you go and do it. Do something instead of just
> complaining about it. Make a contribution to the community. Use your
> "masterful" programming and hardware skills and build an interface and
> code the drivers or whatever. Please stop being so dramatic about
> things.

Why should I as a user. Why should a Commodore user have to resort to that.
Commodore users didn't "have" to do it when Commodore was in business and
you as a user don't "have" to do it. I will only bother writing the
emulation package and developing the hardware if I am going to be contracted
into making the hardware package and emulation system for a new Commodore
PC. I am not going to spend $300 making it as I can only get the parts in
marked up "retail prices". I don't get price breaks until I order in
quanities of 300-5000 units. I also don't develop stuff for other people for
absolute free. If you want it - you buy it. At least with a company like
Tulip - they can at least commission me and actual pay me for my time.

> > I sent you an example of a message response to a message I sent to Tulip
but
> > on one of the other topics. I can explain details to you but I think
that is
>
> Yeah, it had nothing to do with the topic we were discussing and I got
> the sense that you were pestering the guy more than anything else. To
> quote him, "Of what I understood of your 5 e-mail messages from last
> weekend" LOL...5 message in one weekend! Poor guy.

Nah, not really. It was in relation to the multiple things going on.

> ...because it's fun and we enjoy it. That what retro computing is all
> about but you seemed to have turn it into a religion or a cause. Some
> people go and feed starving children in 3rd world countries, other
> save whales or trees but your quest seems to be all about saving
> Commodore. Please, grow up and get some perspective!

Commodore was more like a kingdom in which you had loyal users using their
products. Why shouldn't the kingdom be rebuilt. Remember - the loyal
Commodore users were the people defending the kingdom of Commodore users and
protecting the crown. Ok - this is a parody. But Commodore users are users
of Commodore computers and from what I last recall - they used official
Commodore branded products. Ok, some had used some drives from CMD and other
third party but they did use Commodore computers. Now, why would I write a
demo for an "emulator". It is like writing a demo in that Jave virtual
computer. If I am going to write a demo that is ran on a PC, it would be for
the PC. I don't find it fun to write the demos on some emulator. It is not
entertaining to me. I don't find it compelling because it ran on an
emulator. I find it compelling because it runs on the real hardware. I find
demo written for the PC compelling because it is made to test the hardware.
To break limits. I found it entertaining to stretch the limits of the
hardware in terms of demo. Demos that breaks myths like Dawnfall - doing 3d
Vector graphic rotations. rotation of 3d Vector graphics. I find that
interesting because it is new and is stretching the limits of the hardware.

I could work on the board to allow a new "Commodore" PC to use existing
Commodore peripherals but I am not interested in spending all that money
when I can let a company that would plan to produce it and have it as part
of there package. You see, it would cost 3 times as much for me to produce
the one prototype then what it would cost a company to produce 5000 boards.
You see, if it would cost a company $100. It would cost me $300. Likely, for
me - it would cost about $25,000 because I have to acquire equipment and
stuff that most manufacturing companies already have. I am not going to
spend maybe $150,000 just for one prototype. There better be around 5,000 -
10,000 unit a year runs expected at least. For this, I rather have a company
manufacture this. Like many of you Commodore enthusist guys wouldn't buy a 5
or 8 GHz Pentium 5 PC that allows you to do plug in real hardware as well as
handle anything VICE can handle. Come on. Think about it. You guys have
Pentium III and Pentium 4s and since many of you would spend money to
upgrade your PCs in the future. Then upgrade the PC with one that has this
card and heck even have a C= logo on it.

Why not since you think that you "must" do this and that and can never be
satisfied with what you already got.

> People are just sick of arguing with you so they just turn to satire.
> Ironically, you can't even see the difference between reality and
> satire, which makes it even more humorous.
>
> I said this before but if want people's respect, you need to earn it.
> The best way to earn it is to actually do something. You always seem
> to want to generate the ideas and get others to do the work for you.
> First, your ideas aren't realistic. Second, people don't respect you
> or your ideas so no one is going to take you seriously. Third, you
> have no track record or success so why should people even bother to
> listen to your ideas (aka rants).

Why should I have to custom manufacture a Pentium 5 PC with a 133 MHz
PCI-like slot and do all this including manufacturing of a special board. I
may do a contracted job with Tulip but I sure the hell am NOT going to
manufacture all this. Tulip has a hell of alot bigger financing budget.

> My problem with you is that you're all talk and you fail to back your
> talk with any action. I'm pretty sure that's how most people feel
> about you and we're all just sick of it.

Would you actually buy a software product that I manufacture ? Would you
spend money on a CMD HD from Maurice ? Would you actually buy a SuperCPU if
you already have it in VICE. No, not likely. People don't buy if they can
get it for free. How can I justify spending 8-12 hours and spending
thousands of dollards making products and get not one iota. Sorry but this
is totally unrealistic. How can anyone afford it ?

People will no longer develop hardware for the Commodore platform. No more
IDE64 like projects and no more Turbo232 or TFE projects. It will be all
over and no one with real Commodore hardware will get these things because
it is all just software patches to VICE and not any real hardware. Are
Commodore developers going to forsake the Commodore users with the real
hardware that refuses to use Windows or Linux. Lord Ronin for one will NEVER
use a PC unless you 1. Compensate him for every software title and hardware
products that he has. 2. Provide him with a fully functional PC with an
emulator that allows him to use what he gots and 3. Pay him to use the
Windows or Linux software and hardware per minute.

I believe I am missing something else. Simply put, no one really values
Microsoft that much to actually do so. Are you willing to pay him for using
a machine he despise using. Pay for the machine and also compensate him for
all the software and hardware. Oh, almost forgot - come over and teach him
how to use Windows or Linux. Are you willing to go that far on a Windows
machine.Didn't I forget to mention that you have to slowly teach him by
starting at word 1, of first page in the book. Remember, you have to teach
it as if you were going to teach a dumb orc. In other word - start in the
beginning and slowly and clearly teach it.

Are you willing to go this far for Windows ???? Sorry but this is factual. A
person has a right to put whatever demand he or she feels. You either put up
with the demand or you give up trying to convert him to Windows. Some people
don't value the progress the same way. I don't see anything close to
"instant on" with a PC even after a nearly full HD. Even with a 4 GByte HD
for a C= - it still up in a second (sometimes you have to wait for the
monitor to warm up just like on any CRT monitor).

Rick,

Can you use your influence with Tulip to make them support VIC-20 and
PET computers. Maybe even add support for the Tandy CoCo while they
are at it?

You see, I have a lot of PET software and VIC-20 cartridges that I
feel I should not have to simply stop using because I don't want to
simply buy a PET or VIC-20.  I also have almost every peripheral Radio
Shack ever sold for te TRS computers.   

As I've always said, "Why should anybody need an antique computer in
order to use all the antique perpherals that were designed for it?" 

You're absof'inglutely right!  Anybody who buys the name of a defunct
company should be sensible and support *all* the stuff it used to
make, even if the defunct company stopped suporting the stuff long
before it went under.

I'd contact Tulip myself, but I don't have the influence with them
that you do.  Besides, all my time is tied up in attempting to get TV
manufacturers to make their TV's compatible with tubes because I have
50 bushel baskets full of TV tubes in my attic I cannot part with, so
I feel that modern TV's should be able to use the old tubes when the
transisitors and IC's in them burn out.  

So keep up the good work!  Just because the world is changing, people
shouldn;t be forced to change with it!!!

Norbert 

"Norbert Nocode" <nocode@hotmale.coom> wrote in message
news:hh8b80l3ovgk13h7n8e237j89cdh13o2s3@4ax.com...
>
>
> Rick,
>
> Can you use your influence with Tulip to make them support VIC-20 and
> PET computers. Maybe even add support for the Tandy CoCo while they
> are at it?

I am not entirely sure Tulip could officially do the CoCo
(trademark/patent/copyright issues may come to play) but the PET and VIC-20
is well within means. The VIC-20's expansion port connector is
electronically similar if not the same as the C64's expansion port except
for physical connector but this is well within general scope - though.

> You see, I have a lot of PET software and VIC-20 cartridges that I
> feel I should not have to simply stop using because I don't want to
> simply buy a PET or VIC-20.  I also have almost every peripheral Radio
> Shack ever sold for te TRS computers.

I could talk to them on that since the idea can use "emulation" with a level
of hardware to assist. Generally speaking - it is not really a big issue as
there would be an invisible layer of software interfacing between the
emulation and the actual hardware but in the end would fuction.

> As I've always said, "Why should anybody need an antique computer in
> order to use all the antique perpherals that were designed for it?"

I agree in this. We have modern technology and techniques and we have plenty
of means to work the issues out but why should you need an antique computer
to use it while if you had a PET, you can use the software and not try to
release the ghost in your PET. We know the hardware is aging but why not a
machine that can allow you to transistion the stuff to new disks that is
"ready to use and ready for direct plugging in". So why not have something
that can do this. There are alot of people who have C= equipment but no easy
way to move it all to new equipment. Also why not play them while you have
them. There is alot of options that can be looked at.

> You're absof'inglutely right!  Anybody who buys the name of a defunct
> company should be sensible and support *all* the stuff it used to
> make, even if the defunct company stopped suporting the stuff long
> before it went under.
>
> I'd contact Tulip myself, but I don't have the influence with them
> that you do.  Besides, all my time is tied up in attempting to get TV
Hmmmm.......--------------------------------------|____________________|
> manufacturers to make their TV's compatible with tubes because I have
|______________|----------------- Hmmm.......
> 50 bushel baskets full of TV tubes in my attic I cannot part with, so
> I feel that modern TV's should be able to use the old tubes when the
> transisitors and IC's in them burn out.

Tulip can technically do what they will but we should help them build off
from what we have and also allows us to make use of both new and old.

> So keep up the good work!  Just because the world is changing, people
> shouldn;t be forced to change with it!!!

I agree with the general points above. It is like people telling us what we
can do and not do. I am not sure how the TV tube issues is done.

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote
in news:108bg9uia5t8v7c@corp.supernews.com: 

> 
> "Norbert Nocode" <nocode@hotmale.coom> wrote in message
> news:hh8b80l3ovgk13h7n8e237j89cdh13o2s3@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> Rick,
>>
>> Can you use your influence with Tulip to make them support VIC-20 and
>> PET computers. Maybe even add support for the Tandy CoCo while they
>> are at it?
> 
> I am not entirely sure Tulip could officially do the CoCo
> (trademark/patent/copyright issues may come to play) but the PET and
> VIC-20 is well within means. The VIC-20's expansion port connector is
> electronically similar if not the same as the C64's expansion port
> except for physical connector but this is well within general scope -
> though. 
> 
>> You see, I have a lot of PET software and VIC-20 cartridges that I
>> feel I should not have to simply stop using because I don't want to
>> simply buy a PET or VIC-20.  I also have almost every peripheral
>> Radio Shack ever sold for te TRS computers.
> 
> I could talk to them on that since the idea can use "emulation" with a
> level of hardware to assist. Generally speaking - it is not really a
> big issue as there would be an invisible layer of software interfacing
> between the emulation and the actual hardware but in the end would
> fuction. 
> 
>> As I've always said, "Why should anybody need an antique computer in
>> order to use all the antique perpherals that were designed for it?"
> 
> I agree in this. We have modern technology and techniques and we have
> plenty of means to work the issues out but why should you need an
> antique computer to use it while if you had a PET, you can use the
> software and not try to release the ghost in your PET. We know the
> hardware is aging but why not a machine that can allow you to
> transistion the stuff to new disks that is "ready to use and ready for
> direct plugging in". So why not have something that can do this. There
> are alot of people who have C= equipment but no easy way to move it
> all to new equipment. Also why not play them while you have them.
> There is alot of options that can be looked at. 
> 
>> You're absof'inglutely right!  Anybody who buys the name of a defunct
>> company should be sensible and support *all* the stuff it used to
>> make, even if the defunct company stopped suporting the stuff long
>> before it went under.
>>
>> I'd contact Tulip myself, but I don't have the influence with them
>> that you do.  Besides, all my time is tied up in attempting to get TV
> Hmmmm.......--------------------------------------|____________________
> | 
>> manufacturers to make their TV's compatible with tubes because I have
>|______________|----------------- Hmmm.......
>> 50 bushel baskets full of TV tubes in my attic I cannot part with, so
>> I feel that modern TV's should be able to use the old tubes when the
>> transisitors and IC's in them burn out.
> 
> Tulip can technically do what they will but we should help them build
> off from what we have and also allows us to make use of both new and
> old. 
> 
>> So keep up the good work!  Just because the world is changing, people
>> shouldn;t be forced to change with it!!!
> 
> I agree with the general points above. It is like people telling us
> what we can do and not do. I am not sure how the TV tube issues is
> done. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Actually Rick, I think he was being sarcastic.  Am I wrong, Norbert?

-- 
       _______
      /  /    / JOSEPH EXPERIMENTAL
     /  /  --/ AN EDGY BLEND OF
  __/  /    / INDUSTRIAL, EBM, AND
 /    /  --/ SYNTHPOP
/____/____/ http://www.josephexperimental.com

"Norbert Nocode" <nocode@hotmale.coom> wrote ...

> Rick,
>
> I'd contact Tulip myself, but I don't have the influence with them
> that you do.  Besides, all my time is tied up in attempting to get TV
> manufacturers to make their TV's compatible with tubes because I have
> 50 bushel baskets full of TV tubes in my attic I cannot part with, so
> I feel that modern TV's should be able to use the old tubes when the
> transisitors and IC's in them burn out.

Keep working on the TV manufacturers.  I'll work on Ford and other automobile
makers to get them to put 8 track tape players in all their new cars.  People
who have old 8 track tapes shouldn't be forced to pay for extra hardware just
so they can listen to them in their cars.

I know they could just copy them to CD's, but they shouldn't be forced to do
that either.

BTW, so far Ford's response hasn't been that good.  They told me where I
could put my old 8 track tapes, but I'm not exactly fond of their idea.

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

Out of my mind.  Back in 5 minutes!

On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 00:53:54 GMT, Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
<josephex@josephexperimental.com> wrote:

>
>Actually Rick, I think he was being sarcastic.  Am I wrong, Norbert?

I think he might have been starting to catch on when I started talking
about TV toobz, but he lost tracking within seconds.

Do you think that if I newgrouped comp.sys.fantasyland he'd move there
(along with Matthew) and the signal-to-noise ratio here would improve
dramatically?  

Absolutely like I was suspecting. I wait for basic confirmation. I simply
told you that it is possible to do up these things. Heck when most of the
components will not cost anything significant.

I did catch on but I wasn't letting you know whether I did but I just wait a
second for tracking to stabilize.

"Norbert Nocode" <nocode@hotmale.coom> wrote in message
news:8aib80tqihbanbd1ktgulskeisr4hhbbgj@4ax.com...

> I think he might have been starting to catch on when I started talking
> about TV toobz, but he lost tracking within seconds.
>
> Do you think that if I newgrouped comp.sys.fantasyland he'd move there
> (along with Matthew) and the signal-to-noise ratio here would improve
> dramatically?

"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:PXjhc.31519$L31.18252@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...

> Keep working on the TV manufacturers.  I'll work on Ford and other
automobile
> makers to get them to put 8 track tape players in all their new cars.
People
> who have old 8 track tapes shouldn't be forced to pay for extra hardware
just
> so they can listen to them in their cars.
>
> I know they could just copy them to CD's, but they shouldn't be forced to
do
> that either.
>
> BTW, so far Ford's response hasn't been that good.  They told me where I
> could put my old 8 track tapes, but I'm not exactly fond of their idea.
>

Yeah but Commodore stopped in 1994 and Tulip should start from right there
and use todays technology to go from that. No one wants a Commodore branded
windrone. I don't and why would anyone else but a Windrone LOVER who is only
one step from making love with it.

No Commodore user will ever want a Windrone with NOTHING that connects them
to their new line of products. You see - Tulip will make just the same
failing mistake ESCOM and Web Computers International. Hell, Web.It was
around when the idea of a "WebTV" kind of computing devices were hot.
Commodore's WHOLE entire Computer System division was fundamentally built on
the success of the Commodore 8 bit line so evolving from that is EXACTLY
what made Commodore what it is. Without it - it is a meaningless brand and
will NEVER be successful even with VICE pre-installed as no one would
bother. What incentive is there. Why would someone by a "Commodore" branded
PC if there is nothing distinguishable of it. Commodore was never about
being just a Gateway. Otherwise - there would have never been a Commodore
128 or a 128D and they would have never made the Amigas and they would have
never even started on the C65. Even Commodore's PC series was not much your
"plain" typical IBM XT. It was always a little more and above average.
Commodore never was that kind of company. Never worked out for Commodore or
ESCOM and yeah - there was PCs. Then why in the late 90s - Web.it failed.
Just because it had a Commodore serial port. NO!!!! Actually the Commodore
Serial port was the thing that was most compelling about it and was the
shining thing about it but it MISSED several things and YEAH VICE already
HAD cartridge emulation and that sort for the C64. What did it missed - THE
actual Cartridge port, Cassette Port and User Port. BTW: X/XE-1541 is not
that compelling and every suggestion/concept on this topic of a new
Commodore PC - I would spend the money to BUY it. Maybe more than the C-One.

I would have found that it would be more compelling then the C-One.

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote
in news:108bo48r1tdu1d7@corp.supernews.com: 

> 
> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
> news:PXjhc.31519$L31.18252@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
> 
>> Keep working on the TV manufacturers.  I'll work on Ford and other
> automobile
>> makers to get them to put 8 track tape players in all their new cars.
> People
>> who have old 8 track tapes shouldn't be forced to pay for extra
>> hardware 
> just
>> so they can listen to them in their cars.
>>
>> I know they could just copy them to CD's, but they shouldn't be
>> forced to 
> do
>> that either.
>>
>> BTW, so far Ford's response hasn't been that good.  They told me
>> where I could put my old 8 track tapes, but I'm not exactly fond of
>> their idea. 
>>
> 
> Yeah but Commodore stopped in 1994 and Tulip should start from right
> there and use todays technology to go from that. No one wants a
> Commodore branded windrone. I don't and why would anyone else but a
> Windrone LOVER who is only one step from making love with it.
> 
> No Commodore user will ever want a Windrone with NOTHING that connects
> them to their new line of products. You see - Tulip will make just the
> same failing mistake ESCOM and Web Computers International. Hell,
> Web.It was around when the idea of a "WebTV" kind of computing devices
> were hot. Commodore's WHOLE entire Computer System division was
> fundamentally built on the success of the Commodore 8 bit line so
> evolving from that is EXACTLY what made Commodore what it is. Without
> it - it is a meaningless brand and will NEVER be successful even with
> VICE pre-installed as no one would bother. What incentive is there.
> Why would someone by a "Commodore" branded PC if there is nothing
> distinguishable of it. Commodore was never about being just a Gateway.
> Otherwise - there would have never been a Commodore 128 or a 128D and
> they would have never made the Amigas and they would have never even
> started on the C65. Even Commodore's PC series was not much your 
> "plain" typical IBM XT. It was always a little more and above average. 
> Commodore never was that kind of company. Never worked out for
> Commodore or ESCOM and yeah - there was PCs. Then why in the late 90s
> - Web.it failed. Just because it had a Commodore serial port. NO!!!!
> Actually the Commodore Serial port was the thing that was most
> compelling about it and was the shining thing about it but it MISSED
> several things and YEAH VICE already HAD cartridge emulation and that
> sort for the C64. What did it missed - THE actual Cartridge port,
> Cassette Port and User Port. BTW: X/XE-1541 is not that compelling and
> every suggestion/concept on this topic of a new Commodore PC - I would
> spend the money to BUY it. Maybe more than the C-One. 
> 
> I would have found that it would be more compelling then the C-One.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

I kind of have agreements with both of you.

We need to keep up to date with Technology.  At the same time if 
something is going to be branded "Commodore" I don't think people are 
going to want it to be an exact clone of a Windows based PC.  The 
Commodore hobbyists out there are going to want it to be something that 
can connect with the earlier stuff in some way.  

I don't know what kind of plans Tulip has with Commodore.

-- 
       _______
      /  /    / JOSEPH EXPERIMENTAL
     /  /  --/ AN EDGY BLEND OF
  __/  /    / INDUSTRIAL, EBM, AND
 /    /  --/ SYNTHPOP
/____/____/ http://www.josephexperimental.com

You are absolutely right. If the cheap, 486 set top box has just had a tape
drive and cartridge port, THAT would've made all the difference. In fact, I
predict that if that had happend, I would currently be typing out this
message on a web.it box.

The web.it failed because the commodore market is now a niche market, and a
mainstream computer/web appliance touting to be compatible with a 1982
computer will not attract the majority of buyers. Now don't get me wrong,
enlightened folks who frequent comp.sys.cbm may applaud it, but you have to
think to yourself Rick.... The people who are *really* into the commodore
already either already own 1, 2, or 20 real machines, or they have emulators
up the wazoo.... So where is the market for producing a peecee with a 64
cartridge port and tape deck?


The only other question I REALLY feel the need to ask is.... If I plug my
super snapshot into my tulip peecee/64 hybrid, will my 80gig hard drive load
programs 15 times faster? :)


'nuff said.

Cheers
Tony

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote in
message news:108bo48r1tdu1d7@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
> news:PXjhc.31519$L31.18252@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
> > Keep working on the TV manufacturers.  I'll work on Ford and other
> automobile
> > makers to get them to put 8 track tape players in all their new cars.
> People
> > who have old 8 track tapes shouldn't be forced to pay for extra hardware
> just
> > so they can listen to them in their cars.
> >
> > I know they could just copy them to CD's, but they shouldn't be forced
to
> do
> > that either.
> >
> > BTW, so far Ford's response hasn't been that good.  They told me where I
> > could put my old 8 track tapes, but I'm not exactly fond of their idea.
> >
>
> Yeah but Commodore stopped in 1994 and Tulip should start from right there
> and use todays technology to go from that. No one wants a Commodore
branded
> windrone. I don't and why would anyone else but a Windrone LOVER who is
only
> one step from making love with it.
>
> No Commodore user will ever want a Windrone with NOTHING that connects
them
> to their new line of products. You see - Tulip will make just the same
> failing mistake ESCOM and Web Computers International. Hell, Web.It was
> around when the idea of a "WebTV" kind of computing devices were hot.
> Commodore's WHOLE entire Computer System division was fundamentally built
on
> the success of the Commodore 8 bit line so evolving from that is EXACTLY
> what made Commodore what it is. Without it - it is a meaningless brand and
> will NEVER be successful even with VICE pre-installed as no one would
> bother. What incentive is there. Why would someone by a "Commodore"
branded
> PC if there is nothing distinguishable of it. Commodore was never about
> being just a Gateway. Otherwise - there would have never been a Commodore
> 128 or a 128D and they would have never made the Amigas and they would
have
> never even started on the C65. Even Commodore's PC series was not much
your
> "plain" typical IBM XT. It was always a little more and above average.
> Commodore never was that kind of company. Never worked out for Commodore
or
> ESCOM and yeah - there was PCs. Then why in the late 90s - Web.it failed.
> Just because it had a Commodore serial port. NO!!!! Actually the Commodore
> Serial port was the thing that was most compelling about it and was the
> shining thing about it but it MISSED several things and YEAH VICE already
> HAD cartridge emulation and that sort for the C64. What did it missed -
THE
> actual Cartridge port, Cassette Port and User Port. BTW: X/XE-1541 is not
> that compelling and every suggestion/concept on this topic of a new
> Commodore PC - I would spend the money to BUY it. Maybe more than the
C-One.
>
> I would have found that it would be more compelling then the C-One.
>
>
>
>

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...

> Yeah but Commodore stopped in 1994 and Tulip should start from right there
> and use todays technology to go from that. No one wants a Commodore branded
> windrone. I don't and why would anyone else but a Windrone LOVER who is
> only one step from making love with it.
>
> No Commodore user will ever want a Windrone with NOTHING that connects them
[snip]

All that vinegar from someone who is posting with a Windows machine.  (Your
header is a dead giveaway)  Your credibility level is slipping rapidly below
zero.

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

I saw Elvis making crop circles outside an Oregon MacDonalds.

"Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle" <josephex@josephexperimental.com> wrote
in message news:Xns94D1EF960BA56josephexjosephexperi@216.77.188.18...

>
> I kind of have agreements with both of you.
>
> We need to keep up to date with Technology.  At the same time if
> something is going to be branded "Commodore" I don't think people are
> going to want it to be an exact clone of a Windows based PC.  The
> Commodore hobbyists out there are going to want it to be something that
> can connect with the earlier stuff in some way.
>
> I don't know what kind of plans Tulip has with Commodore.

That is EXACTLY what I was aiming at in all respect with a NetBSD based OS
which would suit a new "Commodore OS" (C=BSD (tm reserved) aka Commodore
BSD) which would be a UNIX based OS just like Linux and MacOS X. An
Integrated "Emulation" system and Device Mounting System for handling C=
peripherals, ect. Commodore does NOT have to make new peripheral using this
bus except for maybe a NEW Commodore Color Laser Printer that allows the use
of a ULTRA modern printer with classic and this system. Heck - How about
Turbo Clock mode which would allow for operations of the port in the BSD
native mode to speeds of upto say - 133 MHz. Depending on the cable wiring.
Not sure what the maximum clock timer that can be feed over the cable but
who knows but this is ONLY for use as a BURST style mode under special
protocols but god only knows but I think the speed would be reasonably fast
though if over clocking the base timing is desired. Following the C-128's
Fast Serial Bus concept.

"Me" <t-e-k-n-i-c-a-l@r-o-g-e-r-s.c-o-m> wrote in message
news:Sbmhc.171520$2oI1.75319@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> You are absolutely right. If the cheap, 486 set top box has just had a
tape
> drive and cartridge port, THAT would've made all the difference. In fact,
I
> predict that if that had happend, I would currently be typing out this
> message on a web.it box.
>
> The web.it failed because the commodore market is now a niche market, and
a
> mainstream computer/web appliance touting to be compatible with a 1982
> computer will not attract the majority of buyers. Now don't get me wrong,
> enlightened folks who frequent comp.sys.cbm may applaud it, but you have
to
> think to yourself Rick.... The people who are *really* into the commodore
> already either already own 1, 2, or 20 real machines, or they have
emulators
> up the wazoo.... So where is the market for producing a peecee with a 64
> cartridge port and tape deck?
>
> The only other question I REALLY feel the need to ask is.... If I plug my
> super snapshot into my tulip peecee/64 hybrid, will my 80gig hard drive
load
> programs 15 times faster? :)
>

Well, I would say you may receive that over the Commodore peripherals hooked
up and if you drive mapping of an 1541 on say device 11 (Ok, you have a
drive on 8,9 & 10 but not all. But even all the connected drives should
benefit from the benifit when you use "true drive emulation for device #11
(the emulated drive). Of course, we have the challenge of warping just
specific drives but you have to remember that not ALL drives can be emulated
like that but let's say we want to get sick and EVIL and emulate the CMD HD
and have it as device #11 and we emulate a 4.5 GBYTES CMD HD. Guess what -
YOU have a CMD HD on device #8 and an emulated CMD HD on #9. Give us another
scenerio. We would need to find a way to "warp throttling" with real devices
and warp when accessing emulated devices. Call it "intellegent" warp and do
a forced time sync. This would be a real challenge but a thought and is not
tested.

I have read the above and taking a little bit of thought and find it as an
interesting point.

Well, I could give a cheap answer - you get a Pentium 5 which I know that
none of you have unless you are an Intel employee working on a prototype.
In other words, you get to upgrade your PC as you usually do.

Heck - this kind of integration brings out other thoughts.

"Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:Ytmhc.15893$Aq.8999@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
>

> All that vinegar from someone who is posting with a Windows machine.
(Your
> header is a dead giveaway)  Your credibility level is slipping rapidly
below
> zero.

Since, I await a simple and cheap solution for hooking my Commodore 64 to
the broadband internet connection that allows for graphical browsing and an
inexpensive CPU accelerator. $300 for a 65c816 which cost under $25. Wow,
quite expensive it is. Then the wait for the long awaited C-One. Wow, what a
wait that was. Then I hear the news of relaunching of the Commodore brand.
Finally a possible hope to get stuff to upgrade my Commodore equipment. A
C128 is an upgrade to the C64. But a PC is not an upgrade. It is either an
additional computer or a replacement. So it is an additional computer but
not a replacement and not an upgrade. Since the PC has no connection to the
Commodore even with VICE.

Given that I clearly await an option that doesn't charge $300 for a $30
device. This is why alot of these products should just remain as projects
not products. Unless you can can provide something within the price scope of
any computer - please don't charge 5 to 10 times the price as that of
commercial products. Where can I find an ethernet board that I don't have to
buy parts which (funnyly are no longer in production by the time these
projects are finished - leaving me to have to reinvent the god damn wheel).
By having to reproduce with new parts means that I have to re-do the work
someone else did. Then I have to rewrite HyperLink (Cameron's program) just
to make it work. Wow, what happen to people aiming to be operating like a
company. Why haven't all these talents just get together and become a
company.

We have all these people here and why not just unit and be part of one
company that universally serves the world as a unit.

Yes, I understand Maurice's position but it is frankly a case that at such a
price - the market just will not be there. At such a price - we could find a
troublesome thing of having to re-invent the wheel. Why should I have to
manufacture something that someone supposingly produces (example IDE64). Too
many projects and not enough "products". The problem is - we are not
operating like a company so a company appears and that's Tulip with their
July 11th announcement. What did they expect - to not have our attention
????

How can you muddle with the brand name Commodore and we don't notice. I
support Commodore and the company in the 80s and it is of dire importance to
have a company role in a scene in order to have "products". I want products
for my Commodore. I don't want to have to make them. I am more interested in
the using not having to develop. Seeing the shambles of a scene that is not
guided at all in any direction. Then we have someone like Jens. Hmmm... I
can speak great praises with equal level of Booing. He lacks the general
sense of looking in any long term role. With a great project like the
C-One - we got long delays. Now, let's see - is this a short sightedness.
Hmmm.... Is this just gearheads moving too slowly - so they must add more
features and ultimately raise the price because they took too slowly and not
just go at the target ???? Perhaps in somes own opinion but from my stand
point - I'll let the fact lay as they are.

The project should stay as a project and not be produced and I will look
into what Tulip can offer as they are a company about making products not
selling us homebrew projects.

This is precisely where I am going to look at it. Due to the lack and
constant "5 years behind the ball" is devastational but we or Tulip need to
hit today while bring our past with us. That is the aspect that a relaunched
"Commodore" brand needs to work from. Connecting the past to the present and
move forward but Commodore has a legacy and many people are going to end up
selling many of their Commodores and have to keep the software and hardware
and duplicates be sold. That is what the She Who Must Be Obeyed wants.
Downsize and maybe replacement that consolidates the main PC and C= into one
system and getting an actual upgraded PC while doing so. Beauty - ONE PC,
BOTH COMMODORE & UNIX based software. EVEN Windows emulation environment
from what I recall. The beauty is the consolidation of equipment.

"Rick Balkins" <rickbalkins.nospam@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote in
message news:108c2m5e9kgb574@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Sam Gillett" <samgillettnospam@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
> news:Ytmhc.15893$Aq.8999@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
> >
>
> > All that vinegar from someone who is posting with a Windows machine.
> (Your
> > header is a dead giveaway)  Your credibility level is slipping rapidly
> below
> > zero.
>
> Since, I await a simple and cheap solution for hooking my Commodore 64 to
> the broadband internet connection that blah blah blah

Shut up Rick, you are making a complete fool out of yourself.

Rick Balkins wrote:

> Absolutely like I was suspecting. I wait for basic confirmation. I simply
> told you that it is possible to do up these things. Heck when most of the
> components will not cost anything significant.
> 
> I did catch on but I wasn't letting you know whether I did but I just wait a
> second for tracking to stabilize.
> 
> "Norbert Nocode" <nocode@hotmale.coom> wrote in message
> news:8aib80tqihbanbd1ktgulskeisr4hhbbgj@4ax.com...
> 
> 
>>I think he might have been starting to catch on when I started talking
>>about TV toobz, but he lost tracking within seconds.
>>
>>Do you think that if I newgrouped comp.sys.fantasyland he'd move there
>>(along with Matthew) and the signal-to-noise ratio here would improve
>>dramatically?
> 
> 
> 

Why don't you just accept the kind advice you receive from some people 
around this newsgroup who try to put some sense in you and who bother to 
engage into rational conversations or even have fun with your arguments?

"Nick Axel" <njaxel@netscape.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:c67593$8tbt4$1@ID-206009.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> Why don't you just accept the kind advice you receive from some people
> around this newsgroup who try to put some sense in you and who bother to
> engage into rational conversations or even have fun with your arguments?
>

Ok, that can be but I don't think some of the questions I asked were
answered because the answers that I get do not relate to the question.

I asked - Should Tulip just drop the Commodore brand or do something with it
?
*Not really got answered with a straight answer.*

I asked - If they are against Tulip or any company to relaunch the Commodore
brand to explain why they are against it ?

* Not answered * Then I simply would say - You have a choice to buy a
product or not. Why do you buy and spend money on Windows. What platform do
you love more ? Commodore or Windows ? If Windows, why don't they just go to
Windows and forget everything Commodore.

I don't go on the web with a Windows because its Windows. I simply say that
the Commodore scene became alot of projects and all and not products. I
don't want to look at some crappy ASCII art diagram or try to read someone's
texual explanation. I want to see some pictures with it. I also rather buy
one assembled at a reasonable price. Then again alot of good apps don't
support the stuff and by the time the apps are supporting the hardware - the
hardware is no longer being produced and the components needed are no longer
produced. Considering that - it really sucks. The scene is what I feel needs
some level of improvement though I love the Commodore platform but I have to
spend $300 for a unit that I would be able to make - technically for less
just to use the new software and even have 16 MBYTES of RAM support. I know
the SuperCPU is a great piece of hardware and Maurice is doing a great job
for one person. I think it would be neccassary to find a way to reduce to
manufacturing cost on the unit in some form. Then again - we need to be
passionate about buying products for our Commodore which I feel is lacking
here. I feel there is a lack of passion of spending money to buy stuff for
the Commodore. I made a suggested opinion on a concept for a new system from
Tulip if they are serious about relaunching the Commodore brand.

If they built a small setop box that uses modern technology and use of say a
new modern CPU built from the 65xx series CPU with modern CPU functionality
and a easy, fast and reliable design and a modern OS with modern apps
"optimized" for it with speeds in modern specifications. Say 4-8 or 8-16 GHz
(given the date of launch) and 64-BIT architecture.

If it has the support of the old stuff with a myriad of support for modern
stuff then this is ABSOLUTELY would be fabulous and I would buy it. A
company may be capable of contracting specialist in the field to work out
designs but remember it would not be just limited to the scope of a class.
Remember Commodore produces computers for the masses not the classes and
therefore must NOT forget masses. A relaunched "Commodore" company must NOT
forget where its name and legacy comes from and go forward with a bridge
between the past and the future. Otherwise, a relaunched Commodore company
will utterly fail worse. Tulip may not fail in itself but the venture would
be of utter pointlessness as Tulip already produced Windows compatible PCs
under the Tulip brand.

It is like - you wouldn't see much in lines of Compaq now because HP owns
them. Since Compaq and HP are just ordinary Windows PC makers and there is
nothing special in doing such.

It may make no sense to have new platforms anymore but why are people just
want the same "McDonald's Cheeseburger" PC. What happen to the want for
choice. I rather have a choice and not just the same ol'. Why I use a
Windows is that it is just a means to an end. To use the web. I was actually
had interest in possibly buying a Web.it if it was reasonably available in
the US then. If it had the cartridge port, User Port, Casette port and other
PC add-ons (It would have been the COOLEST thing and if Tulip does something
like this than I would be interested).

Now, my suggestion is to the company. I would not be able as a person to
finance the cost because I would have to spend money in getting all the
tools and a facility for such production but this is not the case at this
time. I would have to DO alot of financing before producing the stuff but
why should we have tech heads making all the suggestions as the tech heads
here are in their own personal interest and give a shit less of what
Commodore users want. This is quite a bit in why we have alot of projects
and no products. They are not in the business of supporting Commodore users.

Rick Balkins wrote:

> "Nick Axel" <njaxel@netscape.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:c67593$8tbt4$1@ID-206009.news.uni-berlin.de...
> 
>>Why don't you just accept the kind advice you receive from some people
>>around this newsgroup who try to put some sense in you and who bother to
>>engage into rational conversations or even have fun with your arguments?
>>
> 
> 
> Ok, that can be but I don't think some of the questions I asked were
> answered because the answers that I get do not relate to the question.
> 
> I asked - Should Tulip just drop the Commodore brand or do something with it
> ?
> *Not really got answered with a straight answer.*
> 

I reckon that as soon as anyone is involved with your arguments, all he 
gets is long vapourware essays about freedom of choice, why Tulip 
doesn't do this, why Tulip doesn't do that, why must I throw away the 
peripherals, why don't you people comply with my demands etc.

Make the effort to get yourself together for a second and understand 
that while freedom of choice and Commodore are endearing to all of us, 
the reality is quite different and we all try our wee bit to change it.

Should you want things to change, do things like:
(a) Build something yourself and stop rambling.
(b) Work for Tulip at the Commodore department (God help us all), and 
stop rambling.
(c) Finance a Commodore project and stop rambling.
(d) Any combination of the above and stop rambling.
(e) None of the above and stop rambling.
(f) Stop rambling.

(f) is compulsory, but feel free to choose any of the other options. 
It's the only way to have a constructive exchange of opinions and ideas, 
plus save your precious Commodore.

If you don't get the message now, there's definately something wrong 
with you. Seek professional help asap.

Fine !!!! As long as the costs can be compensated for in the end. My concern
is cost factors and the end factor may cost my thousands for nothing if
everybody stops using C='s and goes to emulation and then the emulations
will sport virtual add-ons like a virtual SuperCPU with integrated PCI and
sport a 640x400 video mode in 16 Million colors but guess what it is all
virtual and have nothing to do with the real Commodore and the demo coders
would be making demos for that and who is left to support the Commodore
computers ?????

These are my concerns and certainly some people here do know MY even more
serious concerns.

If I produce "virtual" hardware for an emulator, AM I supporting Commodore
computers ?

I'll choose one of the options from A-F.

"Nick Axel" <njaxel@netscape.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:c67lap$7nhba$1@ID-206009.news.uni-berlin.de...

> I reckon that as soon as anyone is involved with your arguments, all he
> gets is long vapourware essays about freedom of choice, why Tulip
> doesn't do this, why Tulip doesn't do that, why must I throw away the
> peripherals, why don't you people comply with my demands etc.
>
> Make the effort to get yourself together for a second and understand
> that while freedom of choice and Commodore are endearing to all of us,
> the reality is quite different and we all try our wee bit to change it.
>
> Should you want things to change, do things like:
> (a) Build something yourself and stop rambling.
> (b) Work for Tulip at the Commodore department (God help us all), and
> stop rambling.
> (c) Finance a Commodore project and stop rambling.
> (d) Any combination of the above and stop rambling.
> (e) None of the above and stop rambling.
> (f) Stop rambling.
>
> (f) is compulsory, but feel free to choose any of the other options.
> It's the only way to have a constructive exchange of opinions and ideas,
> plus save your precious Commodore.
>
> If you don't get the message now, there's definately something wrong
> with you. Seek professional help asap.
>
>

Hi Nick,

> I reckon that as soon as anyone is involved with your arguments, all he 
> gets is long vapourware essays about freedom of choice, why Tulip 

The biggest problem that the Commodore community faces is people like
Rick who contribute nothing but waste a lot of time, bandwidth and
space on the newsgroups. It's unfortunate that new people to this
newsgroup seem to take him seriously and engage in (pointless)
discussions. This thread is a perfect example!

Rick has never released any software, hardware, lines of code or even
contributed to anyone else's project. He has no credibility or track
record to speak of. When I challenged him to produce something, his
response was: "Why should I as a user. Why should a Commodore user
have to resort to that" and "I also don't develop stuff for other
people for absolute free."

The truth is that Rick hasn't developed anything and probably never
will. That's because he's part leech and part troll.

I'm sorry to say, but Rick will continue to ramble (as long as people
continue to reply to him) and produce nothing. If we all just ignore
him, maybe then he'll actually create something meaningful. Until
then, he'll just spend all his time on this newsgroup, replying to
everyone and making up nonsense.

MikeC

mikec wrote:

> Hi Nick,
> 
> 
>>I reckon that as soon as anyone is involved with your arguments, all he 
>>gets is long vapourware essays about freedom of choice, why Tulip 
> 
> . . .
 >
> I'm sorry to say, but Rick will continue to ramble (as long as people
> continue to reply to him) and produce nothing. If we all just ignore
> him, maybe then he'll actually create something meaningful. Until
> then, he'll just spend all his time on this newsgroup, replying to
> everyone and making up nonsense.
> 
> MikeC

Hello MikeC,

Being fairly new to this newsgroup, I guess I've been more tolerant to 
his behaviour. I have come to realise now that many of his remarks have 
been totally out of place with regard to the nature of c.s.cbm, and his 
messages abso-f-ing-lutely meaningless. My patience rapidly ran out in 
this thread.

As to the treatment he deserves, spot on.

Catch you all later.

Nick

OK. Quite frankly. I'm a little tired of the Rick bashing.

So he's an idealistic dreamer.
If that's a crime, you should hang me too.

I honestly don't know enough to know how much Rick knows or doesn't.
At my best I'm a solder monkey cause my math skills are complete ass.
I will probably not live long enough to take the time to learn the
true inner working of half the stuff I use to my satisfaction.

From my time in these groups though it seems that Rick is nothing more
than a verbal scratching post. If he HAD a cool idea, would any one
even read enough to notice?

I just don't see why everyone has such venom toward him. Even if he's
wrong, he's ussally fairly polite. Given his treatment I would say
he's a gentleman about the whole thing.

I'm not saying that I agree with everything he says. Some of his
idea's seem a little out there even for me.

Maybe he's misguided. Maybe he's just plain wrong. Maybe he doesn't
know what he is talking about in many cases. I don't really know.

I do know that forming a "Let's verbaly slug Rick, again" line isn't
going to help the Commodore community at all.

People who don't know the situation just think were a bunch of closed
minded assholes, and people that do whould know better by now.

Rick does contribute something to this group that is in very short
supply. Enthusiasm. Given the state of C= right now, a little overly
optimistic day dreaming  should hardly be a crime.

That's my take on this.

If you really can't stand Rick for some reason, fine. Killfile him and
ingnore him. But waisting your energy just to make him feel like
shit... what's the point.

"silverdr" <silverdr@inet.remove.it.pl> wrote in message
news:407fb06e$1@news.inet.com.pl...
> Michael Hunter wrote:
>
> >>You probably forgot that the x86 PCs were in CBM's line _before_
> >>the Amiga.
> >
> >
> > You might have me there ;-)
>
> :-)
>
> >
> > I better double check those dates again.  I thought for sure that the
> > PC series came in close to the 90's (late 80's), and that the Amiga
> > was aquired around the time of the 128's introduction.  Of course,
> > that doesn't mean it came to market right after they aquired it.
> >
>
> The first incarnations of "PC-10" and "PC-20" were introduced to the
> market shortly after the first Atari STs - mid 1985. At that time the
> first Amiga was not yet even presented to the public.

There also was a PC-1 and PC-5.

Regards,

Clockmeister.

Rick Balkins wrote:
> Fine !!!! As long as the costs can be compensated for in the end. My
> concern is cost factors and the end factor may cost my thousands for
> nothing if everybody stops using C='s and goes to emulation and then
> the emulations will sport virtual add-ons like a virtual SuperCPU
> with integrated PCI and sport a 640x400 video mode in 16 Million
> colors but guess what it is all virtual and have nothing to do with
> the real Commodore and the demo coders would be making demos for that
> and who is left to support the Commodore computers ?????

Translation: Fine!!!! (ramble ramble ramble) I may not be able to afford to
build the things I want to build, and it may be wasted money. (ramble
ramble) I don't like emulators. (ramble ramble)

> These are my concerns and certainly some people here do know MY even
> more serious concerns.

Translation: Not only can I not afford it, I may not have the skills.
(ramble)

> If I produce "virtual" hardware for an emulator, AM I supporting
> Commodore computers ?

Translation: I don't like emulators. (ramble)

> I'll choose one of the options from A-F.

Translation: I will not stop rambling.

Hi Clockmeister,

> There also was a PC-1 and PC-5.

After looking at the PC-1, I was wondering if this was Commodore's
attempt to lead C-64/C-128 owners over to the PC market? After all, it
looks alot like a C-128D.

If you look at the specs, it was more than twice as fast as a C-128,
had a lot more memory and similar graphics capability. Had the ability
to add a relatively cheap hard drive. The only area it fell sort was
audio...and I suppose software (which is big). Any idea what this went
for in terms of price when compared to a C-128/1571 or C-128D?

MikeC

Rick Balkins wrote:

> (ramble)
>
> Q1. What products do Commodore users want for their Commodore
> computers ?

IDE64. 64HDD. GEOS. Wheels. Wave. RetroReplay(-Net). WiNGS. SuperCPU.
RAMlink. FD2000. And software, software, softtware.

> Q2. If Tulip is to build new Commodore branded personal computers -
> what kind of product would you buy in terms of personal computers and
> why in full detail ?

I'd want it to be inexpensive. Compatibility with any product line other
than the PC-clone systems is completely optional.

> Q3. Would you want a Commodore branded modern personal computer that
> allows the use of Commodore peripherals and other modern personal
> computer peripherals and accessories ?

I no longer own any Commodore peripherals or accessories, so the question is
moot.

> Note: Please be open and creative as to what you would want that
> would be something reasonable and would be something that you would
> "actually" spend money on. Suggestions that oneself would not spend
> money to buy is just a waste of time.

What I want is a system that is reminiscent of past computers without being
tied down to compatibility requirements.

Give me an OS that boots from ROM in 2 seconds. Give me a programming
language in that ROM that has powerful graphics and sound commands. Give me
at least: digital sound at 16-bit 44kHz quality, and graphics at VGA
resolution and 16-bit color depth. Give me useful disk commands. Give me
1.4M floppies and IDE mass storage. Give me USB 1.1 at least. Give me a
32-bit processor and the capability to support large amounts of RAM. Give me
a disk-based OS that the ROM can hand control over to that features
multitasking and supports internet access. Give me an ANSI C compiler for
the machine under the disk-based OS.

Give me all this in the base computer, with the actual mass storage DEVICES
sold separately.

> (ramble ramble ramble ramble)

PC-1 was introduced in at around 1987 as a low end consumer version of the
PC-10. The Colt in 1988 and PC-5 was sometime before or after the Colt. The
PC-10~PC-30 and on was their desktop medium to high end PC system.

Commodore had a tri-market strategy (that was not efficiently worked out
though). This was the PC series for the business market. There replacement
to the PET/CBM/B-Series systems.  The 8 bit  C64/c128 was still their
consumer market system and the Amiga was its own category. Commodore was
aiming to get into the PC market but were still not ready to leave the
Commodore 8 bit. Given that Commodore had a very limited advertising
operation since Jack Tramiel left. This given - hence limited sales on any
of their systems. I would have seen a transistion system which would have
been the convergence sometime by 1995-1996. Of course Tulip appears to have
an interest in the use of the Commodore brand.

"mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121cdb3.0404240733.5efa0b6c@posting.google.com...
> Hi Clockmeister,
>
> > There also was a PC-1 and PC-5.
>
> After looking at the PC-1, I was wondering if this was Commodore's
> attempt to lead C-64/C-128 owners over to the PC market? After all, it
> looks alot like a C-128D.
>
> If you look at the specs, it was more than twice as fast as a C-128,
> had a lot more memory and similar graphics capability. Had the ability
> to add a relatively cheap hard drive. The only area it fell sort was
> audio...and I suppose software (which is big). Any idea what this went
> for in terms of price when compared to a C-128/1571 or C-128D?
>
> MikeC

Phueque <Phueque@antisocial.com> wrote in 
news:b8si80li5if6cceft6h4uvpk45d3m9sjfa@4ax.com:

> OK. Quite frankly. I'm a little tired of the Rick bashing.
> 
> So he's an idealistic dreamer.
> If that's a crime, you should hang me too.
> 
> I honestly don't know enough to know how much Rick knows or doesn't.
> At my best I'm a solder monkey cause my math skills are complete ass.
> I will probably not live long enough to take the time to learn the
> true inner working of half the stuff I use to my satisfaction.
> 
> From my time in these groups though it seems that Rick is nothing more
> than a verbal scratching post. If he HAD a cool idea, would any one
> even read enough to notice?
> 
> I just don't see why everyone has such venom toward him. Even if he's
> wrong, he's ussally fairly polite. Given his treatment I would say
> he's a gentleman about the whole thing.
> 
> I'm not saying that I agree with everything he says. Some of his
> idea's seem a little out there even for me.
> 
> Maybe he's misguided. Maybe he's just plain wrong. Maybe he doesn't
> know what he is talking about in many cases. I don't really know.
> 
> I do know that forming a "Let's verbaly slug Rick, again" line isn't
> going to help the Commodore community at all.
> 
> People who don't know the situation just think were a bunch of closed
> minded assholes, and people that do whould know better by now.
> 
> Rick does contribute something to this group that is in very short
> supply. Enthusiasm. Given the state of C= right now, a little overly
> optimistic day dreaming  should hardly be a crime.
> 
> That's my take on this.
> 
> If you really can't stand Rick for some reason, fine. Killfile him and
> ingnore him. But waisting your energy just to make him feel like
> shit... what's the point.
> 

Agreed.

-- 
       _______
      /  /    / JOSEPH EXPERIMENTAL
     /  /  --/ AN EDGY BLEND OF
  __/  /    / INDUSTRIAL, EBM, AND
 /    /  --/ SYNTHPOP
/____/____/ http://www.josephexperimental.com

Clockmeister wrote:


>>
>>The first incarnations of "PC-10" and "PC-20" were introduced to the
>>market shortly after the first Atari STs - mid 1985. At that time the
>>first Amiga was not yet even presented to the public.
> 
> 
> There also was a PC-1 and PC-5.
> 

True. So what? To my knowledge the PC-10 and PC-20 were the first PC 
compatibles introduced by CBM.

I didn't have a PC-5 but I still happen to have docs and service manuals 
from the PC-1 I had and expanded to connect the HDD without the extra 
box. The design sheets are dated October 1987 there.

mikec wrote:

> After looking at the PC-1, I was wondering if this was Commodore's
> attempt to lead C-64/C-128 owners over to the PC market? After all, it
> looks alot like a C-128D.
> 

On the same logic you can say that the Amiga 4000 was an attempt to lead 
the Commodore PC owners to the Amiga market. After all it looks a lot 
like a PC-50 aka Commodore 386SX-16 ...

> If you look at the specs, it was more than twice as fast as a C-128,
> had a lot more memory and similar graphics capability. Had the ability
> to add a relatively cheap hard drive. The only area it fell sort was
> audio...and I suppose software (which is big). Any idea what this went
> for in terms of price when compared to a C-128/1571 or C-128D?

It was one of those stupid things they poured the C-64 and Amiga money 
into. Of course it flopped...

Kelli Halliburton -

A message to you - Enough and Shut up. I said I will choose one of the
options as the basis.

You can interpret anything as ramble. Since you omit the important parts too
much like many others and focus ONLY on the ramble.

As for ramble - that is an interpretation. This newsgroup is unmoderated and
many of the messages from people (that are not me) is just ramble as it is
not of my interest.

PS: If you need to respond PLEASE respond ONLY to this questions below as
the above is not needed of any response.

Q1. What products do Commodore users want for their Commodore computers ?

Q2. If Tulip is to build new Commodore branded personal computers - what
kind of product would you buy in terms of personal computers and why in full
detail ?

Q3. Would you want a Commodore branded modern personal computer that allows
the use of Commodore peripherals and other modern personal computer
peripherals and accessories ?

Note: Please be open and creative as to what you would want that would be
something reasonable and would be something that you would "actually" spend
money on. Suggestions that oneself would not spend money to buy is just a
waste of time.

I seriously would hope that Commodore would be revived to something more and
better than just a el cheapo PC maker that will only last 2 years and then
disappear. Let's look at a vision for 10 years to 15 years. Since "leaders"
lead with a vision of now and tomorrow. So yes, a little bit of creative
visioning is needed. Commodore was a leader and that is exactly what
Commodore must build itself back to. It must not be a sheep but a leader
with a stable operations. Reality is - it will take time to build up but
that is something to look for.

Translation - Why be lead if you can be leading !!!! When Jack Tramiel was
operating Commodore it was in its golden days. For one reason - Business is
war and Jack Tramiel does not believe in comprimise but believe in Winning.
That is a LEADER type. Commodore will need to be leading. We as users of
Commodore products will need to be assisting in that. BTW: Commodore is a
subsidiary of Tulip. (Commodore International NV.)

Kelli Halliburton wrote:
|Rick Balkins wrote:
|
|> (ramble)
|>
|> Q1. What products do Commodore users want for their Commodore
|> computers ?
|
|IDE64. 64HDD. GEOS. Wheels. Wave. RetroReplay(-Net). WiNGS. SuperCPU.
|RAMlink. FD2000. And software, software, softtware.

Absolutely Bizarre.

You and Rick are the flipsides of the same coin, aren't you?

Rick Balkins wrote:
|Q1. What products do Commodore users want for their Commodore computers ?

Something new, something different.  And if the users are expected to buy
software, then they are going to want the fully commented source code,
too.

|Q2. If Tulip is to build new Commodore branded personal computers - what
|kind of product would you buy in terms of personal computers and why in
|full detail ?

How about a 65816-based triple disk drive?  It would be a combination 3.5
inch drive, CDrom drive, and DVD reader/writer, with a tray for each.  It
wouldn't be that fast, but it might be a real workhorse if it's got 16
megs of RAM sitting around.  Tulip might want to engage in a preemptive
buy-out before somebody else does that?

|Q3. Would you want a Commodore branded modern personal computer that
|allows the use of Commodore peripherals and other modern personal
|computer peripherals and accessories ?

Some truly 'Commodore' compatible flatbed scanners would be nice, and
that means that the data would not be coming through some kind of 'PC'
compatible USB.

A revamped Commodore serial bus (TALK/LISTEN compatible) with some
'U' commands for initializing a 32 line SCSI-type cable port for
passing data in parallel would be handy.

Kelli Halliburton wrote:
|Give me an OS that boots from ROM in 2 seconds.

Less than 2 seconds.

|Give me a programming language in that ROM that has powerful graphics
|and sound commands.

And a speech interface, right?

|Give me at least: digital sound at 16-bit 44kHz quality,

Pass.

|and graphics at VGA resolution and 16-bit color depth.

Pass.

|Give me useful disk commands.

Exactly!  There is NOTHING worse than entering a LOAD command, only
to discover that the file is not there, but must be hiding in some other
directory, and it may take all day to figure out what directory it is
in.  Life is easier if the stuff is on a properly labeled 3.5 inch
disk.

|Give me 1.4M floppies and IDE mass storage.

So long as there is no FAT.

|Give me USB 1.1 at least.

Pass.

|Give me a 32-bit processor and the capability to support large amounts
|of RAM.

Graphics engines should be kept off-board, and communicated with purely
by issuing TALK/LISTEN commands.  Boy, wouldn't *that* put some of those
arrogant PC users to shame.  If you need to save data from a graphics
engine to a harddrive, then put a big 32 line SCSI type cable between
the graphics engine and the harddrive, there is absolutely no reason to
clutter up the C-128's memory by importing all that stuff directly.

Finally, a properly working TALK/LISTEN system entertains the possibility
that you can unplug the C-128 and go home at the end of the day, allowing
the graphics engine and the DVD reader/writer to do its own thing through
the night.

I should be able to put as many 32 bit graphics engines on the end
of my serial bus daisy chain as I feel like, and they can all do their
thing, all day long or night, or whatever.

If you can't figure out how to load the graphics engine up with data,
remember what I said about the 32 line SCSI-like cable (see above),
just run it over to the scanner, and issue the right TALK/LISTEN
commands, and BINGO, the graphics engine has all the data it needs.

Sigh.

This is something that I am aiming at. Thank You. I will forward this basic
info that you suggested to Harro Tillema. I will snip my parts and the parts
saying "Ramble" for general sake. This is giving a free survey for Tulip.
Anyone else is welcome to answer the basic questions. The important stuff.
Absolutely agree with you on these suggestions. This will be what I would
want to provide Tulip with so they got something to really aim at.

Thank You.

"Kelli Halliburton" <kelli217@crosswinds.not> wrote in message
news:c6ehcl$is5@dispatch.concentric.net...
> Rick Balkins wrote:
>
> > (ramble)
> >
> > Q1. What products do Commodore users want for their Commodore
> > computers ?
>
> IDE64. 64HDD. GEOS. Wheels. Wave. RetroReplay(-Net). WiNGS. SuperCPU.
> RAMlink. FD2000. And software, software, softtware.
>
> > Q2. If Tulip is to build new Commodore branded personal computers -
> > what kind of product would you buy in terms of personal computers and
> > why in full detail ?
>
> I'd want it to be inexpensive. Compatibility with any product line other
> than the PC-clone systems is completely optional.
>
> > Q3. Would you want a Commodore branded modern personal computer that
> > allows the use of Commodore peripherals and other modern personal
> > computer peripherals and accessories ?
>
> I no longer own any Commodore peripherals or accessories, so the question
is
> moot.
>
> > Note: Please be open and creative as to what you would want that
> > would be something reasonable and would be something that you would
> > "actually" spend money on. Suggestions that oneself would not spend
> > money to buy is just a waste of time.
>
> What I want is a system that is reminiscent of past computers without
being
> tied down to compatibility requirements.
>
> Give me an OS that boots from ROM in 2 seconds. Give me a programming
> language in that ROM that has powerful graphics and sound commands. Give
me
> at least: digital sound at 16-bit 44kHz quality, and graphics at VGA
> resolution and 16-bit color depth. Give me useful disk commands. Give me
> 1.4M floppies and IDE mass storage. Give me USB 1.1 at least. Give me a
> 32-bit processor and the capability to support large amounts of RAM. Give
me
> a disk-based OS that the ROM can hand control over to that features
> multitasking and supports internet access. Give me an ANSI C compiler for
> the machine under the disk-based OS.
>
> Give me all this in the base computer, with the actual mass storage
DEVICES
> sold separately.
>
> > (ramble ramble ramble ramble)
>
>

Matthew, when I was thinking about NetBSD like any other UNIX/Linux OS - FAT
is an optional format. Linux naturally has its own disk format. If I
understand right NetBSD doesn't use FAT but does support handling FAT but is
optional. On a typical Linux/Unix/BSD(NetBSD, FreeBSD,OpenBSD) based system,
FAT is only used when dealing with 3.5" Floppies or in a system where you
optionally install a partition for Windows/MS-DOS on the harddrive and have
a multiboot menu. Typically FAT is optional and are typically not used for
the most part unless you want it.

In other words, it supports FAT but FAT is generally not used unless you
want to use it.

"Matthew Montchalin" <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0404241337580.11346-100000@lab.oregonvos.net...
> Kelli Halliburton wrote:
> |Give me an OS that boots from ROM in 2 seconds.
>
> Less than 2 seconds.
>
> |Give me a programming language in that ROM that has powerful graphics
> |and sound commands.
>
> And a speech interface, right?
>
> |Give me at least: digital sound at 16-bit 44kHz quality,
>
> Pass.
>
> |and graphics at VGA resolution and 16-bit color depth.
>
> Pass.
>
> |Give me useful disk commands.
>
> Exactly!  There is NOTHING worse than entering a LOAD command, only
> to discover that the file is not there, but must be hiding in some other
> directory, and it may take all day to figure out what directory it is
> in.  Life is easier if the stuff is on a properly labeled 3.5 inch
> disk.
>
> |Give me 1.4M floppies and IDE mass storage.
>
> So long as there is no FAT.
>
> |Give me USB 1.1 at least.
>
> Pass.
>
> |Give me a 32-bit processor and the capability to support large amounts
> |of RAM.
>
> Graphics engines should be kept off-board, and communicated with purely
> by issuing TALK/LISTEN commands.  Boy, wouldn't *that* put some of those
> arrogant PC users to shame.  If you need to save data from a graphics
> engine to a harddrive, then put a big 32 line SCSI type cable between
> the graphics engine and the harddrive, there is absolutely no reason to
> clutter up the C-128's memory by importing all that stuff directly.
>
> Finally, a properly working TALK/LISTEN system entertains the possibility
> that you can unplug the C-128 and go home at the end of the day, allowing
> the graphics engine and the DVD reader/writer to do its own thing through
> the night.
>
> I should be able to put as many 32 bit graphics engines on the end
> of my serial bus daisy chain as I feel like, and they can all do their
> thing, all day long or night, or whatever.

I am still trying to figure what you are trying to say here ?

Matthew, in order for serial to move data - as fast as the 32 bit parallel -
you may need to clock the serial side 32x that of the parallel to break the
bottleneck. Considering the SCSI may be operating at 33 MHz or 66 MHz. A
1.056 GHz ~ 2.112 Ghz Serial timer ????

Have to look at the detailed specs - otherwise you have a bottleneck. With
the use of a classic 1970s/1980s Zener diode timing circuit - I might be
able to set the timer to such a speed but I would need custom I/O chips to
match that up. Anyway, I can look for the peripheral devices like that
perhaps. Your most serious sounding idea is the drive and the scanner.
Remember, it is reasonble to use the 65c22 chips from WDC to handle the
communications since the VIC-II could be emulated and thus would not
directly effect the I/O but timing can be simulated in an "emulation"
mechanism. The 65c22s can be clock down to 1 MHz and upto say 20 Mhz
reliably. 16 MHz is a reasonable timing base of a typical $6.53 chip. Two is
what we would need for supporting the ports properly. Heck, the Fast Serial
Bus like technique can be handled by the 65c22 if we need to.

"Matthew Montchalin" <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0404241324160.11346-100000@lab.oregonvos.net...
> Rick Balkins wrote:
> |Q1. What products do Commodore users want for their Commodore computers ?
>
> Something new, something different.  And if the users are expected to buy
> software, then they are going to want the fully commented source code,
> too.
>
> |Q2. If Tulip is to build new Commodore branded personal computers - what
> |kind of product would you buy in terms of personal computers and why in
> |full detail ?
>
> How about a 65816-based triple disk drive?  It would be a combination 3.5
> inch drive, CDrom drive, and DVD reader/writer, with a tray for each.  It
> wouldn't be that fast, but it might be a real workhorse if it's got 16
> megs of RAM sitting around.  Tulip might want to engage in a preemptive
> buy-out before somebody else does that?
>
> |Q3. Would you want a Commodore branded modern personal computer that
> |allows the use of Commodore peripherals and other modern personal
> |computer peripherals and accessories ?
>
> Some truly 'Commodore' compatible flatbed scanners would be nice, and
> that means that the data would not be coming through some kind of 'PC'
> compatible USB.
>
> A revamped Commodore serial bus (TALK/LISTEN compatible) with some
> 'U' commands for initializing a 32 line SCSI-type cable port for
> passing data in parallel would be handy.
>
>

Rick Balkins wrote:
|Matthew, when I was thinking about NetBSD like any other UNIX/Linux OS - FAT
|is an optional format.

Well, I'll pass on your idea of some kind of weird glorified UNIX/FAT
beast lumbering around on a C-64 substrate.

|Linux naturally has its own disk format.

Of course, we'll want to leave Linux to Linux-heads.

|If I understand right NetBSD doesn't use FAT but does support handling
|FAT but is optional.

See above.

   <Linux/FAT nonsense snipped outright>

|> Finally, a properly working TALK/LISTEN system entertains the possibility
|> that you can unplug the C-128 and go home at the end of the day, allowing
|> the graphics engine and the DVD reader/writer to do its own thing through
|> the night.
|>
|> I should be able to put as many 32 bit graphics engines on the end
|> of my serial bus daisy chain as I feel like, and they can all do their
|> thing, all day long or night, or whatever.
|
|I am still trying to figure what you are trying to say here ?

Graphics engines are like outboard motors.  Allow me to be figurative
here: You can stick them on the end of a leash and walk them like a dog;
the Commodore serial bus is like a leash because it is skinny and a few
feet long, and you can tie things onto the end of them.  Remember
daisy-chaining?  And like the Alaskan Huskies that you put on a dog team,
you can tie a whole bunch of graphics engines onto the end of your sleigh
and really take off.

Finally, why would you want more than one graphics engine?  Perhaps
you are rendering in more than one bit-plane, and each one involves
a fair amount of mathematical grunt work.  Remember the pythagorean
theorem?  If you are doing a lot of 3D graphics (say, for a children's
television show), you would want to render a virtual object in multiple
planes before your slap them all together.

That's why.

Rick Balkins wrote:
|Matthew, in order for serial to move data - as fast as the 32 bit parallel -
|you may need to clock the serial side 32x that of the parallel to break the
|bottleneck.

Think of a diesel tractor-trailer rig.  The trailer part can hold a
hundred tons of cargo, but you sure wouldn't want to store it up front,
you put it way back somewhere else so that the driver doesn't have to
worry about boxes falling onto his lap every time he changes gear.  The
same thing applies to "off-board" engines tied onto the serial bus,
all the big heavy stuff goes way back somewhere else so you don't have
to worry about it.

|Considering the SCSI may be operating at 33 MHz or 66 MHz. A
||1.056 GHz ~ 2.112 Ghz Serial timer ????

What for?  Why not have the daisy bus machines talk to each other
in parallel?  It's not like the C-64 has to keep track of *every*
little bit that is passing back and forth from the graphics engine
to the DVD-burner (although that may be fun in and of itself).  If
the 'new' parallel bus is a private palatial estate dedicated solely to
advanced intelligent machines like the graphics engine and the dvd
burner, all you would really have to do is pass commands through the
standard serial bus telling these machines to behave themselves:

10 open15,19,15              : rem flatbed scanner
20 open2,19,2,"field1,p,w"
30 pR2,"process0:field1,p,w" : rem fills up field1 with data
40 close2                    :
50 open15,20,15              : rem talk to DVD reader/writer
60 open2,20,2
70 pR2,"create:field1,p,w"  :
80 pR15,"bus-negotiate"+chr$(19)+chr$(20)+"field1"
90 close2
100 close15

Device 20 negotiates with device 19 for a copy of field1.  You will
note that the C-128 itself stays away from the 32-line parallel bus;
it has better things to do with its time.  All the C-128 had to do
was pass commands to the other devices.

||I am still trying to figure what you are trying to say here ?
|
|Graphics engines are like outboard motors.  Allow me to be figurative
|here: You can stick them on the end of a leash and walk them like a dog;
|the Commodore serial bus is like a leash because it is skinny and a few
|feet long, and you can tie things onto the end of them.  Remember
|daisy-chaining?  And like the Alaskan Huskies that you put on a dog team,
|you can tie a whole bunch of graphics engines onto the end of your sleigh
|and really take off.

If I may add to that, let me say that a team of Alaskan Huskies can
be tied to the post so that the guy who is yelling 'mush' can go to
sleep for the night.  The Huskies may still have plenty of energy,
but they can stay in place until the next morning when the guy gets
back to work.  Now, the only difference, here, is that on a daisy-bus
system, you can turn off the C-128 without turning all the peripherals
off, they can keep chugging until the next morning when the C-128 gets
turned back on again.

But you might want to cut the RESET line on the serial bus so you
don't mess any of the calculations up when you turn the C-128 on
in the morning.

"silverdr" <silverdr@inet.remove.it.pl> wrote in message
news:408abf18$1@news.inet.com.pl...
> Clockmeister wrote:
>
>
> >>
> >>The first incarnations of "PC-10" and "PC-20" were introduced to the
> >>market shortly after the first Atari STs - mid 1985. At that time the
> >>first Amiga was not yet even presented to the public.
> >
> >
> > There also was a PC-1 and PC-5.
> >
>
> True. So what? To my knowledge the PC-10 and PC-20 were the first PC
> compatibles introduced by CBM.

The PC-1 could have been first maybe?

> I didn't have a PC-5 but I still happen to have docs and service manuals
> from the PC-1 I had and expanded to connect the HDD without the extra
> box. The design sheets are dated October 1987 there.

Thanks for sharing.

In other words, something similar to the print spooling that Maurice was
talking about on the CMD HD. Since every controller board is essentially a
computer - why not give it more intellegence. You got an interesting
concept.

"Matthew Montchalin" <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0404241733530.28094-100000@lab.oregonvos.net...
> Rick Balkins wrote:
> |Matthew, in order for serial to move data - as fast as the 32 bit
parallel -
> |you may need to clock the serial side 32x that of the parallel to break
the
> |bottleneck.
>
> Think of a diesel tractor-trailer rig.  The trailer part can hold a
> hundred tons of cargo, but you sure wouldn't want to store it up front,
> you put it way back somewhere else so that the driver doesn't have to
> worry about boxes falling onto his lap every time he changes gear.  The
> same thing applies to "off-board" engines tied onto the serial bus,
> all the big heavy stuff goes way back somewhere else so you don't have
> to worry about it.
>
> |Considering the SCSI may be operating at 33 MHz or 66 MHz. A
> ||1.056 GHz ~ 2.112 Ghz Serial timer ????
>
> What for?  Why not have the daisy bus machines talk to each other
> in parallel?  It's not like the C-64 has to keep track of *every*
> little bit that is passing back and forth from the graphics engine
> to the DVD-burner (although that may be fun in and of itself).  If
> the 'new' parallel bus is a private palatial estate dedicated solely to
> advanced intelligent machines like the graphics engine and the dvd
> burner, all you would really have to do is pass commands through the
> standard serial bus telling these machines to behave themselves:
>
> 10 open15,19,15              : rem flatbed scanner
> 20 open2,19,2,"field1,p,w"
> 30 pR2,"process0:field1,p,w" : rem fills up field1 with data
> 40 close2                    :
> 50 open15,20,15              : rem talk to DVD reader/writer
> 60 open2,20,2
> 70 pR2,"create:field1,p,w"  :
> 80 pR15,"bus-negotiate"+chr$(19)+chr$(20)+"field1"
> 90 close2
> 100 close15
>
> Device 20 negotiates with device 19 for a copy of field1.  You will
> note that the C-128 itself stays away from the 32-line parallel bus;
> it has better things to do with its time.  All the C-128 had to do
> was pass commands to the other devices.
>

Rick Balkins wrote:
|In other words, something similar to the print spooling that Maurice was
|talking about on the CMD HD.

I am not familiar with what Maurice was talking about, but if he was
talking about exporting duties to a device sitting on the serial bus,
he must be talking about something similar.

|Since every controller board is essentially a computer - why not give
|it more intellegence. You got an interesting concept.

I know that I could make use of a digitizing scanner on the serial
bus, especially if it could be told to pump the information it
generates into a DVD reader/writer that it has intimate access
to.

|> 10 open15,19,15              : rem flatbed scanner
|> 20 open2,19,2,"field1,p,w"
|> 30 pR2,"process0:field1,p,w" : rem fills up field1 with data
|> 40 close2                    :
|> 50 open15,20,15              : rem talk to DVD reader/writer
|> 60 open2,20,2
|> 70 pR2,"create:field1,p,w"  :
|> 80 pR15,"bus-negotiate"+chr$(19)+chr$(20)+"field1"
|> 90 close2
|> 100 close15
|>
|> Device 20 negotiates with device 19 for a copy of field1.  You will
|> note that the C-128 itself stays away from the 32-line parallel bus;
|> it has better things to do with its time.  All the C-128 had to do
|> was pass commands to the other devices.

This kind of arrangement ought to be especially appealing to a 'C'
programmer who only has to define the process in some way - I think
they do it with a special 'std.io' file they can refer to in the
course of a compilation.  Anyway, once the process for relating to
the flatbed scanner and the DVD reader/writer is sufficiently
defined, a label can be assigned to the 'process' and forever after
the label makes for a shorthand reference.  (Um, unless 'C' allows
you to redefine processes without reference to a std.io (?) file...)

||> 10 open15,19,15              : rem flatbed scanner
||> 20 open2,19,2,"field1,p,w"
||> 30 pR2,"process0:field1,p,w" : rem fills up field1 with data
||> 40 close2                    :
||> 50 open15,20,15              : rem talk to DVD reader/writer
||> 60 open2,20,2
||> 70 pR2,"create:field1,p,w"  :
||> 80 pR15,"bus-negotiate"+chr$(19)+chr$(20)+"field1"
||> 90 close2
||> 100 close15

There is perhaps a less than obvious difficulty in line 30.  It's easier
said than done!  And even if you had a digitizer with 16 megs of RAM,
where will the data go if you don't buy a DVD reader/writer to go with
it?  Don't most programmers want to touch up their scans before they
burn them onto a DVD?  If you will recall, I suggested a super-dooper
whizbang graphics engine on the serial bus.  No need to clutter up
the C-128's memory, just tell the Graphics Engine to "bus-negotiate"
with the Digitizing Scanner, and always make sure that there is a
32-line SCSI-like cable connecting the Scanner with the Graphics Engine.

The idea isn't that original, anybody who has a modicum of experience
with the Commodore serial bus has probably sat back and wondered why
there aren't more peripherals out there, custom-tailored for special
functions.

And before I get to ask, does anybody know if there are there still SCSI
devices out there with removeable media?  Like the 21 meg Flopticals (tm)
that Insite Peripherals used to sell, way back in 1991?  Man, I couldn't
believe they were charging me $40 bucks for one of those little
'Floptical' diskettes.  Don't tell me the Floptical (tm) eventually gave
rise to the CDROM technology of the year 2000?

|||> 10 open15,19,15              : rem flatbed scanner
|||> 20 open2,19,2,"field1,p,w"
|||> 30 pR2,"process0:field1,p,w" : rem fills up field1 with data
|||> 40 close2                    :
|||> 50 open15,20,15              : rem talk to DVD reader/writer
|||> 60 open2,20,2
|||> 70 pR2,"create:field1,p,w"  :
|||> 80 pR15,"bus-negotiate"+chr$(19)+chr$(20)+"field1"
|||> 90 close2
|||> 100 close15
|
|There is perhaps a less than obvious difficulty in line 30.

   <snip>

BASIC 2.0 programmers will note that line 50 will crash if you
don't CLOSE 15 first.

Hi Silverdr,

> On the same logic you can say that the Amiga 4000 was an attempt to lead the
> Commodore PC owners to the Amiga market. After all it looks a lot 

It is a fact that Commodore did move into a cost-cutting direction
with the A4000 and incorporated a lot of "PC" standardization in its
design.

Anyway, I was just speculating the motive for developing the PC-1 in
the first place since it did follow the PC10/20 line.


> It was one of those stupid things they poured the C-64 and Amiga money into.
> Of course it flopped...

You can't really assume that for sure. How many units did they sell?
What was the retail price? It's "failure" could have been due to other
factors, such as pricing and other competitors in the same
marketplace. I had never heard of the PC-1 until recently and I was
even a Commodore dealer...or maybe I did and I just ignored it. ;)

Besides, Commodore pumped a lot of money into worse failures than the
PC-1. For example, the whole TED line (Plus/4 and C-16) must have been
a colossal money loser and I'm sure damaged Commodore's image. I
wonder how many people bought a C-16 or Plus/4 only to feel burnt by
Commodore and never buy another one of their products again? How many
of these people would have been C-64 customers if the TED line was
never released? The way I see it, the TED line just cannibalized on
their own sales, at least in North America.

MikeC

mikec wrote:
> Hi Silverdr,
> 
> 
>>On the same logic you can say that the Amiga 4000 was an attempt to lead the
>>Commodore PC owners to the Amiga market. After all it looks a lot 
> 
> 
> It is a fact that Commodore did move into a cost-cutting direction
> with the A4000 and incorporated a lot of "PC" standardization in its
> design.
> 
> Anyway, I was just speculating the motive for developing the PC-1 in
> the first place since it did follow the PC10/20 line.
> 
> 
> 
>>It was one of those stupid things they poured the C-64 and Amiga money into.
>>Of course it flopped...
> 
> 
> You can't really assume that for sure.

Sure. I can't assume it for sure :-)

> How many units did they sell?
> What was the retail price? It's "failure" could have been due to other
> factors, such as pricing and other competitors in the same
> marketplace.

By "pouring the money into" I mean exactly doing costly R&D plus design 
in the market where there was no money to be made (especially with such 
models). The market didn't want a decent and expensive design of 
yesterday's hardware.  The market wanted either the cheapest crap or a 
high end bleeding edge hardware novelties.

> I had never heard of the PC-1 until recently and I was
> even a Commodore dealer...or maybe I did and I just ignored it. ;)

It was a well made and nice looking piece of crappy PC. Not crappy of 
the CBM production standard, which was quite good at that time. Crappy 
due to the inherited terrible architecture of the IBM PC. Also quite 
obsolete as of 1988 and crippled in many ways too.

> 
> Besides, Commodore pumped a lot of money into worse failures than the
> PC-1.
 >

Those were quickly dropped. The PC line was there till the end while 
Amiga fans screamed to tears to get built-in harddrives, HD floppies or 
at least a RTC in their new machines right out of the box... :-( Not to 
mention some further development...

> For example, the whole TED line (Plus/4 and C-16) must have been
> a colossal money loser and I'm sure damaged Commodore's image. I
> wonder how many people bought a C-16 or Plus/4 only to feel burnt by
> Commodore and never buy another one of their products again? How many
> of these people would have been C-64 customers if the TED line was
> never released? The way I see it, the TED line just cannibalized on
> their own sales, at least in North America.
> 

The 116 was a disaster. The 16 was not _that_ bad. And the Plus/4 was 
quite a good machine but (again) there was no place for just another 
(and not revolutionary) 8bitter competing with its own brothers. Just 
one more of the stupid things CBM management was doing after Tramiels 
departure. :-(

"mikec" <mikec_cbm@hotmail.com> wrote ...

> Besides, Commodore pumped a lot of money into worse failures than the
> PC-1. For example, the whole TED line (Plus/4 and C-16) must have been
> a colossal money loser and I'm sure damaged Commodore's image. I
> wonder how many people bought a C-16 or Plus/4 only to feel burnt by
> Commodore and never buy another one of their products again? How many
> of these people would have been C-64 customers if the TED line was
> never released? The way I see it, the TED line just cannibalized on
> their own sales, at least in North America.

For the most part, this is probably true.  I'm sure a lot of C16 customers
were disgruntled by the lack of software and saw one of the Atari 8-bits, or
even a TRS-80, as a better upgrade path than the C64 or C128.  Many Plus/4
owners were also unhappy about lack of software and either went to an Atari
ST or a PC clone (not a Commodore clone either!).

There were exceptions.  On my part, I enjoyed my Plus/4.  Mostly, I played
around with type in programs from Compute!'s Gazette, and some books with
Basic programs in them that I got from a local bookstore.

When the C128 came out I found it interesting, because it would run C64
software, of which there was an abundance.  Plus, it could run most of the
Basic programs I had for the Plus/4, with little or no modification.  And,
shortly after the C128's introduction, software began to appear for it.

The first productivity software I bought for the C128 was "Jane" from
Commodore.  Perhaps not a great productivity suite, but not bad for a low
priced package.  Jane was more than adequate for writing letters, and simple
databases.

Overall, I agree that the TED series did more harm than good for Commodore.
Many C64 users told me that they wouldn't upgrade to the C128 because they
were afraid that it was another "Plus/4 fiasco".  Some of them went to Amiga,
but others went to the PC because the open architecture pretty much
guaranteed that it would be around for years to come.

-- 
Best regards,

Sam Gillett

Change is inevitable,
except from vending machines!

|If you will recall, I suggested a super-dooper whizbang graphics engine
|on the serial bus.

If Tulip were paying attention, a Graphics Engine has to be more than
merely TALK/LISTEN compatible.  It should also have:

   16 megs of RAM
   ROM routines for implementing traditional 40 bit floating point
   ROM routines for implementing IEEE 64 bit floating point
   an empty socket so you can plug an IEEE "math coprocessor" in
   256 'VICII' style sprites
   at least two cursors (with TALK/LISTEN commands for turning them on)
   8 CHRROM fonts, in PETASCII and Int'l PETASCII
   expansion port for additional Character ROMs on cartridge

Of course, a 32-line SCSI-like cable should be available for
supplementary communications outside the scope of ordinary
TALK/LISTEN relations.  That's because the Graphics Engine
should be able to negotiate directly with a DVD reader/writer
or a CDROM reader/writer.  The C-128 need only pass orders to
the Graphics Engine and then be freed up to do other things
elsewhere and not have to oversee all of the minutia in
managing the supplementary bus.

"Matthew Montchalin" <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0404242213460.13095-100000@lab.oregonvos.net...

> I am not familiar with what Maurice was talking about, but if he was
> talking about exporting duties to a device sitting on the serial bus,
> he must be talking about something similar.

It has been a little while since I last read the docs on it. Maurice can
clarify any details.

> |Since every controller board is essentially a computer - why not give
> |it more intellegence. You got an interesting concept.
>
> I know that I could make use of a digitizing scanner on the serial
> bus, especially if it could be told to pump the information it
> generates into a DVD reader/writer that it has intimate access
> to.

Why can't the controller be a 16 bit MPU based controller with all the power
to control the stuff. To be cool - I would say that being able to mount all
the devices to it would be incredible and to have a 16 MBytes buffer system.
I would think that it would be reasonable to scan then print all in one.
With intellegent peripheral technology - we would essentially could have a
Commodore version of the HP PSC-2210. Until the specs come out to describe
what WDC's "Terbium" is. If it is 32 or 64 bit processor/controller then we
got something on an incredibly interesting scope of possibility. Beauty - to
control the system and do a direct scan to print at upto 2400x2400 dpi.
Wonderful, eh ? and in 48 bit resolution depth. Hell - and be a HD as well.
(Hell an IDE is fine enough). All you would need to do is pipe in commands
over the OPEN command - then move on to other stuff.

The thing that will get slow is with the data coming into the computer. If
you need not do anything of that sort than that is totally fine. I call it
an interesting concept.

Matthew Montchalin wrote:
> Some truly 'Commodore' compatible flatbed scanners would be nice, and
> that means that the data would not be coming through some kind of 'PC'
> compatible USB.

USB has nothing to do with the PC, you damned backward-looking idiot.

The Macintosh uses USB, and it is not a PC.

The new AmigaOne uses USB, and it is not a PC.

It's only a technology standard, nothing to do with your stupid broken
Compaq that you won't admit you got snookered into taking.

Kelli Halliburton wrote:
|Matthew Montchalin wrote:
|> Some truly 'Commodore' compatible flatbed scanners would be nice, and
|> that means that the data would not be coming through some kind of 'PC'
|> compatible USB.
|
|USB has nothing to do with the PC, you damned backward-looking idiot.

Touched a raw nerve, perhaps?

|The Macintosh uses USB, and it is not a PC.

So what?

|The new AmigaOne uses USB, and it is not a PC.

Big deal, why would I want the USB?

In short, I'll pass, I don't want one, period.  Let's go for a brand new
bus instead, with a wholly different protocol.  And you, Kelli darling,
could schedule meetings with Rick to teach you how to use it.

|It's only a technology standard, nothing to do with your stupid broken
|Compaq that you won't admit you got snookered into taking.

Ho hum.  My C-128 can race circles around my Compaq.

"Matthew Montchalin" <mmontcha@OregonVOS.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0404261334000.29056-100000@lab.oregonvos.net...
> Kelli Halliburton wrote:
> |Matthew Montchalin wrote:
> |> Some truly 'Commodore' compatible flatbed scanners would be nice, and
> |> that means that the data would not be coming through some kind of 'PC'
> |> compatible USB.
> |
> |USB has nothing to do with the PC, you damned backward-looking idiot.
>
> Touched a raw nerve, perhaps?
>
> |The Macintosh uses USB, and it is not a PC.
>
> So what?
>
> |The new AmigaOne uses USB, and it is not a PC.
>
> Big deal, why would I want the USB?
>
> In short, I'll pass, I don't want one, period.

OK.  But, nobody was actually offering you it either.  To be quite frank,
cause nobody has actually said "Do you wan't USB on this new dream
Commodore?".  In the rare case that the machine disscussed about on this
thread ever materialises, and in the near impossible possibility of you
actually purchasing one, even if it does have USB, who says that yoiu have
to use it?  My c64 has a user port, never used it in my life and most likely
won't but it dosen't stop me from enjoying the machine.

And on a closing note, why all this talk about a new C= PC, I would rather
have a easy and cheap to build ram expansion for my C64.......


--
"I'm programmed to never perform any extraneous tasks."
I am currently listening to: Big O, Big O O O, Big O.....
Please change 'nospam' to jcom to reply.
----- http://jcom.shorturl.com ----

"Phueque" <Phueque@antisocial.com> wrote in message
news:b8si80li5if6cceft6h4uvpk45d3m9sjfa@4ax.com...
> OK. Quite frankly. I'm a little tired of the Rick bashing.
>
> So he's an idealistic dreamer.
> If that's a crime, you should hang me too.
>
> I honestly don't know enough to know how much Rick knows or doesn't.
> At my best I'm a solder monkey cause my math skills are complete ass.
> I will probably not live long enough to take the time to learn the
> true inner working of half the stuff I use to my satisfaction.
>
> From my time in these groups though it seems that Rick is nothing more
> than a verbal scratching post. If he HAD a cool idea, would any one
> even read enough to notice?
>
> I just don't see why everyone has such venom toward him. Even if he's
> wrong, he's ussally fairly polite. Given his treatment I would say
> he's a gentleman about the whole thing.
>
> I'm not saying that I agree with everything he says. Some of his
> idea's seem a little out there even for me.
>
> Maybe he's misguided. Maybe he's just plain wrong. Maybe he doesn't
> know what he is talking about in many cases. I don't really know.
>
> I do know that forming a "Let's verbaly slug Rick, again" line isn't
> going to help the Commodore community at all.
>
> People who don't know the situation just think were a bunch of closed
> minded assholes, and people that do whould know better by now.
>
> Rick does contribute something to this group that is in very short
> supply. Enthusiasm. Given the state of C= right now, a little overly
> optimistic day dreaming  should hardly be a crime.
>
> That's my take on this.
>
> If you really can't stand Rick for some reason, fine. Killfile him and
> ingnore him. But waisting your energy just to make him feel like
> shit... what's the point.

He doesn't listen, just waffles on about things he clearly has no
understanding of and does nothing but.

And annoying, like Chinese water torture is annoying.