f



The C64 is crap

Let's look at the evidence:

Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites to
make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How
I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely fast
3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip grating
away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior??? What
are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the worst
basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's that
stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a program in
basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding mistakes.
Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold around the
world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only manage
about 22 million.
Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer to load
a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being superbly
designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge keys
(required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
small, light, powerful!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
-1
The
7/15/2003 10:51:37 AM
comp.sys.cbm 14331 articles. 0 followers. dunric (341) is leader. Post Follow

274 Replies
3976 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 20

Looking to pick a fight?  You got one.....

Let me ship you a large jar of good American Vaseline, and your boyfriends can
do some "gliding" of their own........

CT
-1
ferrousp
7/15/2003 10:56:59 AM
here we go again...

R.
http://www.funxiun.com

..dark.elektronix.
0
Roland
7/15/2003 11:11:15 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:11:15 +0200, "Roland (.funxiun.)"
<NOSPAMusenetNOSPAM@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)> wrote:

>here we go again...
>
That's the best counter-argument you could come up with. In that case, I am
right. The C64 was, is and always will be crap.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/15/2003 11:14:00 AM
In article <9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com>,
The Starglider  <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Let's look at the evidence:

>64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.

66046 bytes of RAM when you include the 1024 nybbles of color RAM.
All accessible with a bit of 6510 assembly.

Maybe you should take part in the 1k game competition to prove your
points?:-)

-Pasi

-- 
"When I marry, I want it to be for love."
"Ah, a radical?"
	-- Vir and Lyndisty in Babylon 5:"Sic Transit Vir"
0
albert
7/15/2003 11:23:47 AM
Crap as opposed to what? Or is this simply a sad attempt at trolling?

PeterV


0
Peter
7/15/2003 11:24:07 AM
Oh, opposed to the Spectrum...

Well, let's say that I own 3 C64's and 2 speccies. Both speccies have all
sorts of technical problems and remind me of Lada's: you have to keep
working at them to keep them running, and the occasional bash will help. The
C64's remind me of Nissan's: nobody actually wants them because they are
ugly, but they offer the best value that money can buy.

PeterV


0
Peter
7/15/2003 11:26:46 AM
Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene), but they are
speaking of hardware too.

PeterV


0
Peter
7/15/2003 11:28:32 AM
"Peter de Vroomen" <peterv@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> wrote in message
news:3f13e4f6$0$49111$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
> Oh, opposed to the Spectrum...
>
> Well, let's say that I own 3 C64's and 2 speccies. Both speccies have all
> sorts of technical problems and remind me of Lada's: you have to keep
> working at them to keep them running,


I never had any trouble with mine (apart from, of course, all the millions
of 'c90' games I used).


0
Phil
7/15/2003 11:54:51 AM
> they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene


That's alright, most people didn't know one existed!

;o)


0
Phil
7/15/2003 11:55:51 AM
Peter de Vroomen wrote:

> Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
> software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene),

Now that will take some doing, if it's going to be successful. Especially
when you got the excellent open-source VICE Commodore emulator, available
on most OSs.

Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
Linux, Fuse. 

> but they are speaking of hardware too.

Depends on the market their aiming at I suppose. I believe the Peters-Plus
Sprinter Speccy compatible has been somewhat successful in Russia, etc.

-- 
Paul S
0
paul
7/15/2003 11:57:13 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:51:37 +0100, The Starglider
<the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Let's look at the evidence:


<snip>

Who plays a computer like this?

David, it's over to you.




-- 
www.ferg.tk - Oh, look, I just can't be arsed.
0
Lister
7/15/2003 12:22:30 PM
"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com...
> Let's look at the evidence:

Aw, you're just jealous.

Ownership of one of those "Spackdrum" units breeds in the owner such a sense
of inferiority that they are compelled to chronic disbelief of the 64's
superiority.

Sill


0
James
7/15/2003 12:39:58 PM
���/On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:38:42 +0100,�(�) Frodo Morris 
<graham.lee@wadham.ox.invalid.ac.uk> ������/wrote:

> Sinclair QL wrote:
>> ���/On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:28:32 +0200,�(�) Peter de Vroomen 
>> <peterv@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> ������/wrote:
>>
>>> Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
>>> software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, 
>>> which
>>> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene), but they are
>>> speaking of hardware too.
>>>
>>> PeterV
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> See.... you're running by yourselves and still managed to finish last ;-)
>> Although Amstrad hasn't (technically) got the Sinclair name anymore, ZX
>
> Hmmm, seems like the internet has passed you by....
>
> http://webdb4.patent.gov.uk/tm/number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=1191859
> http://webdb4.patent.gov.uk/tm/number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=1196410
>
> Amstrad *has* got the Sinclair name these days, and I claim my five (R) 
> symbols.
>

Hehe, actually I was trying to find that info for some time but for some 
reason I couldn't get the UK patent office to return anything on the 
search.... it's besides the point anyway. (Just for the heck of it, I based 
my belief on the fact that Sinclair started trading again under the 
Sinclair Research name.... of course that demands a huge discussion in 
legalese, but nonetheless I admit I was misguided in my assertion and 
therefore here are your five (R)s :-).
That would also explain why Sir Clive never got back into computers anymore 
after the Z88...
Oh well...

And of course none of this changes the fact that a C64 IS CRAP.

(That cannot be said for an Amiga of course as ... a: It's not technically 
a Commodore creation and b: its OS was designed on a Sinclair QL :-) (Of 
course)

Phoebus



-- 
One Motorola a day, makes the doctor go away :-)
For mail remove the obvious crap from the email below:
mailto:ql@dokos-grCHOKEONTHIS=SPAMMER.net
0
Sinclair
7/15/2003 12:47:24 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:23:47 +0000 (UTC), albert@pikkukorppi.cs.tut.fi (Ojala
Pasi 'Albert') wrote:

>In article <9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com>,
>The Starglider  <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>Let's look at the evidence:
>
>>64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
>
>66046 bytes of RAM when you include the 1024 nybbles of color RAM.
>All accessible with a bit of 6510 assembly.
>
>Maybe you should take part in the 1k game competition to prove your
>points?:-)
>
But 64K is 65536 bytes, so it only proves again that you never had access to the
full memory!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/15/2003 12:57:08 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:24:07 +0200, "Peter de Vroomen"
<peterv@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> wrote:

>Crap as opposed to what? Or is this simply a sad attempt at trolling?
>
Not at all! The C64 is crap. It's the truth, can you not handle the truth?

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/15/2003 12:57:34 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:26:46 +0200, "Peter de Vroomen"
<peterv@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> wrote:

>Oh, opposed to the Spectrum...
>
>Well, let's say that I own 3 C64's and 2 speccies. Both speccies have all
>sorts of technical problems and remind me of Lada's: you have to keep
>working at them to keep them running, and the occasional bash will help. The
>C64's remind me of Nissan's: nobody actually wants them because they are
>ugly, but they offer the best value that money can buy.
>
Well, I've never had any problems with my speccy, but I have seen loads of
knackered commodes.

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/15/2003 12:58:36 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:28:32 +0200, "Peter de Vroomen"
<peterv@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> wrote:

>Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
>software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
>will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene), but they are
>speaking of hardware too.
>
As opposed to the Speccy, which has been revived already in the Emailer, and at
the same time, our emulators are legal.

So the C64 is still crap!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/15/2003 12:59:29 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:57:13 GMT, paul s <nospam@nospam.forme> wrote:

>Peter de Vroomen wrote:
>
>> Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
>> software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
>> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene),
>
>Now that will take some doing, if it's going to be successful. Especially
>when you got the excellent open-source VICE Commodore emulator, available
>on most OSs.
>
>Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
>emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
>and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
>Linux, Fuse. 
>
Yes, there was, Z80 did very well.

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/15/2003 1:00:12 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:00:48 +0100, Carl Woffenden
<carl@bigredswitch.co.REMOVETHISBIT.uk> wrote:

>When I was a young lad being a Speccy owner meant bashing the Commodore 
>crowd simply 'because'... but then one day I actually used my mate's 
>64... and was amazed! Really! I'm a big fan of the Speccy and all things 
>Clive but I gotta say the 64 is a great machine.
>
They're great for doorstops, draught excluders, or to keep a good fire going (as
we found out a while ago), but really, no use at all for anything else.

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/15/2003 1:11:01 PM
"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> schreef in bericht
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com...
> Let's look at the evidence:

Ok. Even though it's obvious this guy is trolling i'm going to defend my
beloved c64 step by step. I guess i'm just bored.

> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites
to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.

Slow compared to... the spectrum? Compared to current PCs? Obviously a c64
is slower than a PC. The system is 15 years old for crying out loud.
Nevertheless, it runs 2 layers of parallax with a large number of sprites
without any problems (take the game No Mercy for example, or the excellent
game Hawkeye).

> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky
graphics. How
> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!

Again, terrible compared to... what? The IFLI modes looks pretty good for
the limited pallette the c64 offers.

> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely
fast

Good games: Last Ninja, Batman The Caped Crusader, Spy vs Spy, Outrun
Europe, Ghostbusters, Batman the Movie, Spikey in Transylvania, No Mercy,
Operation Wolf, Giana Sisters... shall i continue?

> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?

Commodore had at least 2 3D games. Elite and Castle Master.

> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior???
What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?

The SID chip even played samples (with pretty decent quality i might add).

> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.

Yes we had.

> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the
worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's
that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode.

Oh well. It worked for me.

> At least we could type a program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding
mistakes.
> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
around the
> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
manage
> about 22 million.

Last thing i heard 6 million people are still using the c64. And Tulip is
now resurrecting them. I don't see anyone resurrect the Spectrum.

> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer
to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.

Have to agree there. The 1541 is horrid slow. A speed loader cartridge
helps.

> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.

Maybe, but that's not a good point why the MACHINE ITSELF sucks. And
besides, it's now 15 years later; you can get one with a pack of milk now.

> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge
keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!

Personally i love the looks of the commodore. In the old days i especially
liked the Amiga-style box. Nowadays i prefer the older model because it
stores a better sid chip. I have both models by the way.

Floris


0
Floris
7/15/2003 1:35:52 PM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com>...
> Let's look at the evidence:
> 
Competition: IBM PC/XT
Graphics: Hercules Monochrome
          CGA  4 colors selectable from 16 available
Sound:    built in speaker (This high tech sound device
           is still installed in today's PC's just select
           PC speaker :)

For another well thought out bash there was Jerry Pournelle's review
of the Amiga 1000 in Byte magazine years ago.  He gave it 2 thumbs
down at the time since the review machine had no hard drive installed.

His opinion was: Full GUI ... who needs it?
                 512k memory...His PC had 640k! So memory was lousy
                 Multitasking...Who will ever need to run more than
                  one program at atime?
                 All of the above from 880k floppies...Requires 2
                   floppies one after the other to boot. MS-DOS does
                   it with one 360k disk & besides a real PC has a
                   hard disk
Summary: Pass on the MultiTasking, Windowed OS that runs from floppy
or hard disk, you will never need it.

He writes an MS Windows column nowadays.

Of course Windows is much better it REQUIRES a hard disk and 128M
memory.  Not the puny floppy & 1/4M of memory the Amiga could use (His
review machine had extra memory)

Afterthought: MS Windows to this day has no task priority setting. 
The Amiga 1000 allowed you to run background tasks at low priority to
so they didn't interfere with what ever else you were doing or run
critical task at high priority so the game you were playing wouldn't
interfere.  This feature was prominently displayed in the review in
Transactor magazine :)

Fritz
0
fritzr
7/15/2003 1:36:02 PM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com>...
> Let's look at the evidence:
> 
As for the Speccy I didn't note it in my first post as it didn't exist
for many years after...it's competition is the Commodore Amiga series

Read a bit of the official Sinclair history at:
http://www.worldofspectrum.org/sinclairbasic/history.html

Remember that first home computer under 100 pounds sterling (ZX-80/81)
or $100 dollars (TS-1000)

They really beat Commodore in price...

Fritz
0
fritzr
7/15/2003 1:44:01 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:48:16 +0200, "D.B." <sorry@no.spam> wrote:

>X-Archive-No:Yes
>
>"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com...
>> [snip crap]
>>
>mmmm
>yawn
>[shrugs]
>�*PLONK*
>

So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???

Poor show dear boy!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/15/2003 2:32:07 PM
"Floris van den Berg" <flvdbergMASTER@NOSPAMwxs.nl> wrote in message
news:3f140287$0$149$edd6591c@news.versatel.net...

> Ok. Even though it's obvious this guy is trolling i'm going to defend my
> beloved c64 step by step. I guess i'm just bored.

You don't understand. This is "tradition" - only Starglider has gone and done it
a bit differently. The Annual flamewar should start with a crosspost "The C64
was crap - Discuss" to c.s.c. We then start with petty bickering, until the real
techy guys get involved, when we start having some well informed, interesting
arguments about he relative merits of each machine.

It's just fun, really. The last couple were excellent reading.

> Slow compared to... the spectrum?

Technically, yes, it was slower than a spectrum.

> Last thing i heard 6 million people are still using the c64. And Tulip is
> now resurrecting them. I don't see anyone resurrect the Spectrum.

I take it you have a large graveyard vote then? And Peters Plus are resurrecting
the spectrum with the Sprinter, Amstrad recently released the emailer, Dave (the
lurker) is doing the USB interface, Yarek (sp?) has done the YaBus and other
mods...

And there's a demo and coding scene for the spectrum just as large as the
commode's.

D.



0
Dunny
7/15/2003 2:48:55 PM
The Starglider wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:48:16 +0200, "D.B." <sorry@no.spam> wrote:
> 
> 
>>X-Archive-No:Yes
>>
>>"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com...
>>
>>>[snip crap]
>>>
>>
>>mmmm
>>yawn
>>[shrugs]
>>�*PLONK*
>>
> 
> 
> So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
> 
> Poor show dear boy!
Probably csc's answer to Lister, and has never actually *used* a C64.

-- 
Frodo Morris				http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wadh1342
All your bast are belong to us		 AKA Graham Lee, Wadham College
SpectrumSofts currently on show at URL/speccy/: Speccy@Home SETI Client
Also the home of iloveyou.bas, the first PC virus ported to the ZX82!!!

0
Frodo
7/15/2003 3:03:32 PM
"Dunny" <paul.dunn4@ntlworld.com> writes:

> And there's a demo and coding scene for the spectrum just as large 
> as the commode's.

Currrent number of 2003 MiniGames: Commodore 5, Sinclair 2, Amstrad 1
with 2.5 months to go before the deadline. :-)

-- 
Anders Carlsson
0
Anders
7/15/2003 3:11:24 PM
Why oh why?
These 'discussions' are so boring.

R.
http://www.funxiun.com

..dark.elektronix.
0
Roland
7/15/2003 3:32:44 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:14:00 +0100, The Starglider
<the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:11:15 +0200, "Roland (.funxiun.)"
><NOSPAMusenetNOSPAM@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)> wrote:
>
>>here we go again...
>>
>That's the best counter-argument you could come up with. In that case, I am
>right. The C64 was, is and always will be crap.

Let Google decide:
http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Commodore+64&q2=Sinclair+Spectrum&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us

R.
(*sigh*)
http://www.funxiun.com

..dark.elektronix.
0
Roland
7/15/2003 3:50:12 PM
"Shaddy" <shad0w1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2bVQa.24874$Nf.65486@sea-read.news.verio.net...
> "The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message...
>
> > So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
>
> Hi.
>
> What is a speccy?  Sorry for my ignorance, but I never even heard of it.


That's alright, most people haven't heard of a C64 either!

;o)


0
Phil
7/15/2003 4:02:04 PM
"Roland (.funxiun.)" <NOSPAMusenetNOSPAM@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)>
wrote in message news:vj88hvsiak1fu76cjis78cucdom5uagssd@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:14:00 +0100, The Starglider
> <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:11:15 +0200, "Roland (.funxiun.)"
> ><NOSPAMusenetNOSPAM@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)> wrote:
> >
> >>here we go again...
> >>
> >That's the best counter-argument you could come up with. In that case, I
am
> >right. The C64 was, is and always will be crap.
>
> Let Google decide:
>
http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Commodore+64&q2=Sinclair+Spectrum&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us


Decide what? I'm sure the word 'and' will get more hits than the word 'tits'
but is it really a better word?


0
Phil
7/15/2003 4:04:09 PM
On 15 Jul 2003 16:32:43 GMT, Doctor J. Frink <frink@homer.cmp.liv.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>!Z80 on RISC OS

Oops, that should have been !Z80em.

Frink (doh)

-- 
Doctor J. Frink     : 'Rampant Ribald Ringtail'
See his mind here   : http://www.cmp.liv.ac.uk/frink/
Annoy his mind here : pjf at cmp dot liv dot ack dot ook
"Joy!" - Stimpy
0
frink
7/15/2003 4:44:46 PM
"Roland (.funxiun.)" wrote:
> 
> Let Google decide:

I think MicroMart already decided this one. If I remember correctly, the
Amstrad CPC also beat the C64 in their Best Computer of all time
competition!

Richard
0
Richard
7/15/2003 5:09:25 PM
On 15 Jul 2003, The Starglider wrote:

[snip]

*yawn*

-- 
Hey, hey, 16K, what does that get you today?
0
7/15/2003 5:38:05 PM
This is a test.

Starglider hates tests.

-- 
"If you send a letter to 'Cunt, London' it'll get to the 
 Director-General of the BBC, you can be sure of that."
                                          --  Peter Cook  
0
A
7/15/2003 5:41:37 PM
Richard Wilson <rich@bitwise-systems.com> writes:

>> Currrent number of 2003 MiniGames: Commodore 5, Sinclair 2, Amstrad 1
>> with 2.5 months to go before the deadline. :-)
> At least 1 of those is for VIC-20, not C-64.

Two to be exact. On the other hand, there seems to be no entry for the
48K Spectrum, or are we comparing Commodore 64 with Spectrum 128K rather
than the classic 48K model?

-- 
Anders Carlsson
0
Anders
7/15/2003 5:48:56 PM
Fritz Reinders wrote:

>
> Afterthought: MS Windows to this day has no task priority setting.

What? Are you kidding? Go to Task Manager, and right click on a process.


0
A
7/15/2003 6:13:51 PM
In message <slrnbh8b5b.hrc.frink@homer.cmp.liv.ac.uk>
          frink@homer.cmp.liv.ac.uk (Doctor J. Frink) wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:00:12 +0100, The Starglider
> <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:57:13 GMT, paul s <nospam@nospam.forme> wrote:
> >>
> >>Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
> >>emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
> >>and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
> >>Linux, Fuse. 
> >>
> >Yes, there was, Z80 did very well.
> 
> !Z80 on RISC OS was very 'swish' indeed and seemed to be doing quite
> well last time I was in those waters. Dunno how it stacked up in the
> great scheme of emulation seeing as there aren't that many RISC OS users
> to start with, let alone with Spectrum fever, and even fewer willing to
> shell out 15 quid or so. But it must have been quite good cos it's one
> of the very few applications I've ever paid money for (and, no, I don't
> pirate) and I don't remember any PD or shareware emulators even working 
> post RISC OS 3.50.
>
It compared very well a few years ago but other emulators have since
appeared and become superior.
Spec128 has recently shown signs of life from its author on the
AcornArcade message boards though.
Cheers!
-- 
Graham
The RISC OS software site - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/software
The RISC OS hardware guide - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/hardware
Deathzone Emulation - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/emulation
The Main Control Room - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk
0
The
7/15/2003 6:43:39 PM
In message <bf0u11$fdu$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>
          Carl Woffenden <carl@bigredswitch.co.REMOVETHISBIT.uk> wrote:

> When I was a young lad being a Speccy owner meant bashing the Commodore 
> crowd simply 'because'... but then one day I actually used my mate's 
> 64... and was amazed! Really! I'm a big fan of the Speccy and all things 
> Clive but I gotta say the 64 is a great machine.
> 
Really??!?!?
I could believe what a lucky escape I'd had when I first used a C64
emulator (VICE) and played the C64 versions of the games I had for my
Speccy. They were such crap!

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of C64 games that I
think are better than their Speccy counterparts.

When I was choosing my first computer I wanted a C64 (cos most people in
my school had them) but we couldn't afford one (�240) so had to 'make
do' with a speccy instead (�69). I'm so glad we were poor!
Cheers!

-- 
Graham
The RISC OS software site - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/software
The RISC OS hardware guide - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/hardware
Deathzone Emulation - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/emulation
The Main Control Room - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk
0
The
7/15/2003 6:56:15 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:57:13 GMT, there was a flash of lightening and a clap
of thunder. A voice, believed to be the voice of God (but later turned
out to just be paul s trying out a karaoke machine and having a few
electrical problems) boomed out:

> Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
> emulators?

How about the Em@iler?

Chris

-- 
+-------------------------------------------+
| Unsatisfactory Software - "because it is" |
|  http://www.unsatisfactorysoftware.co.uk  |
| Your Sinclair: A Celebration              |
+-- http://www.ysac.cjb.net/ --ICQ:28784166-+

DISCLAIMER: I may be making all this stuff up again.
0
chrisy (143)
7/15/2003 7:11:14 PM
Ah ha but

if you fight Commodore vs Sinclair

http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Commodore&q2=Sinclair&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us

Sir Clive Wins

Niall

"Roland (.funxiun.)" <NOSPAMusenetNOSPAM@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)>
wrote in message news:vj88hvsiak1fu76cjis78cucdom5uagssd@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:14:00 +0100, The Starglider
> <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:11:15 +0200, "Roland (.funxiun.)"
> ><NOSPAMusenetNOSPAM@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)> wrote:
> >
> >>here we go again...
> >>
> >That's the best counter-argument you could come up with. In that case, I
am
> >right. The C64 was, is and always will be crap.
>
> Let Google decide:
>
http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Commodore+64&q2=Sinclair+Spectrum&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
> R.
> (*sigh*)
> http://www.funxiun.com
>
> .dark.elektronix.


0
Niall
7/15/2003 7:18:17 PM
Fritz Reinders <fritzr@dc4pc.net> wrote:

> review of the Amiga 1000 

Yawn. Has anyone mentioned the Amiga? It wasn't even made by CBM.
So, the reply to "the c64 is crap" is "The Amiga was better than the
PC/XT"? Nice try, Commode User.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/15/2003 7:41:50 PM
Fritz Reinders <fritzr@dc4pc.net> wrote:

> The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> > Let's look at the evidence:
> > 
> As for the Speccy I didn't note it in my first post as it didn't exist
> for many years after.

c64: 1981
Spectrum: 1982

I guess you still do your maths on a c64.

> ..it's competition is the Commodore Amiga series

As you wish. But the c64 is still crap.

> Read a bit of the official Sinclair history at:
> http://www.worldofspectrum.org/sinclairbasic/history.html

And the c64 is crappity crap even compared to the ZX81.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/15/2003 7:41:56 PM
Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.



0
shephed
7/15/2003 8:47:16 PM
"shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com> wrote in message
news:oLZQa.796$ib2.120539@twister.neo.rr.com...
> Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.


No, you would be physically disabled. Retarded is when you have something
wrong with your mind, a situation I'm sure you are quite used to.


0
Phil
7/15/2003 9:14:45 PM
shephed <smokey@twist1up.com> wrote:

> Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.

Ohhh. *This* is the real stuff. You showed him!

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/15/2003 9:18:26 PM
> At least 1 of those is for VIC-20, not C-64.

A VIC-20, had one of those before i got my spectrum 128K. Spent zillions
of hours typing if i wanted to play a game :-) after the taperecorder
broke down : I couldn't afford another :-( . 
0
gearc
7/15/2003 9:38:14 PM
Just a simple reply: If you don't like a certain (8-bit) machine, then just 
don't use it rather than complaining about others who like their C64 (I do 
and I don't really care about what you say). Every machine has it's own 
spirit. Some like it and others do not. If you're in love with your speccy: 
fine, that's your business - not ours.

Regards
0
Thomas
7/15/2003 9:42:15 PM
"Phil-on-a-hill" <malcnospam@gothcorp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7a_Qa.12187$nP.485@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net...
>
> "shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com> wrote in message
> news:oLZQa.796$ib2.120539@twister.neo.rr.com...
> > Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> > Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>
>
> No, you would be physically disabled. Retarded is when you have something
> wrong with your mind, a situation I'm sure you are quite used to.
>
You win! LOL


0
shephed
7/15/2003 9:58:54 PM
> >
> 
> So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
> 
> Poor show dear boy!

Depends on the standard you're judging by.  At the time it was
introduced and
for several years after it was a very advanced game & small business
system.

By the time the Spectrum 128 came out it was just about ready to
retire.  To judge it by how well it handled the standards of 8 to 10
years after it's introduction it fares poorly on benchmarks.

Of course you need to judge it by how well it actually handles what it
is used for.  On that standard it does quite well.  Demo coders are
still getting the C64 to do new things, and within the limits of 3
channel sound (6 if the 2d SID modification is made) it has very good
music synthesis capabilities.

It's not able to handle VGA screens natively.  So it might be said
that it's graphics are poor.  That's a matter of the standard you're
judging by again.  Commodore was pushing the limits of what could be
done with a home game console when they designed the Ultimax and
luckily for us the 'Max was expanded into a full blown small business
system that was also a state of the art game console

Of course there have been many hardware & software projects that added
to the many capabilities of the C-64.  80 column hi res screens,
multimeg memories, IBM compatibles harnessed as disk drives, internest
connectivity to name a few.

Of course the things that an 8bit 'can't' do such as a Windows OS
(GEOS is one), a Unix knockoff (LUnix).  I'm sure that there are many
more 'impossibilities' running around out there and of course the
severak multitasking/multiuser OSes running on C-64

Personally I'd use longevity of the system on the open market as the
best judge of the quality machines.  The 64 to this day has the best
claim to the best selling and longest market life of any computer
made.

The Apples went through many models offering partial compatibility
with their predecessors.  The Sinclairs and Ataris also limited
compatibility between models as they changed regularly.  The C64 made
a few cosmetic changes to lower chip count & a case redesign, but it
remained a C-64.  Even it's successor the C-128 family offered a C-64
compatability that only a very few hardware intensive programs could
break.

All of this has been well covered here and elsewhere...didn't think a
rehash was needed :)

Fritz
0
fritzr
7/15/2003 10:00:17 PM
Thomas M�ller wrote:
> Just a simple reply: If you don't like a certain (8-bit) machine,
> then just don't use it rather than complaining about others who like
> their C64 (I do and I don't really care about what you say).

Wooooossshhhh!!!

<ducks>

Jeez, that bugger was low! What was that? Eh? There was bags of height left?
Maybe over *your* head there was :-)

D.



0
Dunny
7/15/2003 10:17:22 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:47:16 GMT, "shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com>
wrote:

>Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.

At time of writing, this cliche has been used about 5,060 times on
Usenet[1]. Please find something original to say.

[1] According to google - http://tinyurl.com/h1pp

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
Peter
7/15/2003 11:02:41 PM

The Starglider wrote:

> Let's look at the evidence:
>
>   Remove "wibble" in
>           E Mail address
>          TO REPLY.

Why would I want to remove the wibble?   It's is appropriate for you.

wibble, v. [...] 2. intr. Brit. slang. To speak or write, especially at great
length, without saying anything important; to
                                                     witter or waffle; to talk
drivel. Freq. with on. Also trans. with direct speech as object.




0
Axell
7/15/2003 11:35:09 PM
> > Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> > Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.

Typical flame war crap from the 80's... Same crap grammer and spelling
issues..

Pay attention class!   If you fan the flame war, check your grammer.

Note: "You might win, but your still retarted."

Corrected: "You might win, but you're still retarded."

===============
From Dictionary.com
===============
your

\Your\ ([=u]r), pron. & a. [OE. your, [yogh]our, eowr, eower, AS. e['o]wer,
originally used as the gen. of ge, g[=e], ye; akin to OFries. iuwer your,
OS. iuwar, D. uw, OHG. iuw[=e]r, G. euer, Icel. y[eth]ar, Goth. izwara,
izwar, and E. you. [root]189. See You.] The form of the possessive case of
the personal pronoun you.

Note: The possessive takes the form yours when the noun to which it refers
is not expressed, but implied; as, this book is yours. ``An old fellow of
yours.'' --Chaucer.

      you're          (yr; yr when unstressed)

        Contraction of you are.




begin 666 oobreve.gif
M1TE&.#EA#0`6`/ ``/___P```"'Y! $`````+ `````-`!8```(DA(^IR^T>
@0HLFVOORHH@#^1V@!%:A6(:IIW9G.:()J]7VC1,H`#L`
`
end

begin 666 schwa.gif
M1TE&.#EA!@`/`/ ``/___P```"'Y! $`````+ `````&``\```(0A(^I>^$6
,&H@2N7MK9AP0% `[
`
end

0
Jeff
7/15/2003 11:44:01 PM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 19:44:01 -0400, "Jeff Ledger" <jeff@NOSPAM.com>
wrote:

>> > Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>> > Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>Typical flame war crap from the 80's... Same crap grammer and spelling
>issues..

Typical ISP-rule breaching crap from Jeff Ledger... Binary attachments
posted even though these are text-only newsgroups!

Pay attention Jess!   If you post attachments on text-only newsgroups,
your ISP account is at risk.

>Pay attention class!   If you fan the flame war, check your grammer.
>Note: "You might win, but your still retarted."
>Corrected: "You might win, but you're still retarded."

Note: "check your grammer."
Corrected: "check your grammar."

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
Peter
7/15/2003 11:56:00 PM
On 15 Jul 2003 16:32:43 GMT, frink@homer.cmp.liv.ac.uk (Doctor J.
Frink) wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:00:12 +0100, The Starglider
><the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:57:13 GMT, paul s <nospam@nospam.forme> wrote:
>>>
>>>Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
>>>emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
>>>and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
>>>Linux, Fuse. 
>>>
>>Yes, there was, Z80 did very well.
>
>!Z80 on RISC OS was very 'swish' indeed and seemed to be doing quite
>well last time I was in those waters. Dunno how it stacked up in the
>great scheme of emulation seeing as there aren't that many RISC OS users
>to start with, let alone with Spectrum fever, and even fewer willing to
>shell out 15 quid or so. But it must have been quite good cos it's one
>of the very few applications I've ever paid money for (and, no, I don't
>pirate) and I don't remember any PD or shareware emulators even working 
>post RISC OS 3.50.

Going back a few years, but !Speccy by Carsten Witt ran hapily under
RO3.5 - in fact one of the versions I tested had an amusing bug which
meant that it would *only* run under either RO2, or RO3.5 - nothing
inbetween.

I paid for both !Speccy *and* !Z80Em.





Outta here,

Russ Juckes - Atari Jaguar, Jamma Cabinet & Sinclair ZX Spectrum Owner
-- 
http://www.russandem.co.uk                        "Knowledge is power"
0
russ
7/16/2003 12:10:46 AM
:roll:

i wont bother reading all the followups.




[ //\ //\//\ | G O ]

http://mondodizzy.members.easyspace.com/
Pixeling ( Mostly 8-bit ) - ***Updated 14 July 2003***

http://dizzypetition.members.easyspace.com/
Bring Back that Loveable EGG!


"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com...
> Let's look at the evidence:
>
> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites
to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky
graphics. How
> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely
fast
> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior???
What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the
worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's
that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a
program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding
mistakes.
> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
around the
> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
manage
> about 22 million.
> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer
to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge
keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!
>
> --
>           ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble"
in
>           *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail
address
>           *                                             *      TO REPLY.
>           *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
>           *                                             *    /_  _\
>           ***********************************************   | O  O |
>
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo_______
____
>


0
amigo
7/16/2003 12:24:42 AM
Phil-on-a-hill wrote:
> 
> Games?

Some games are better on the Spectrum, some games are better on the CPC,
and some games are better on the C64. All depends who developed it in
the first place. IMO, all Hewson games are best on the CPC, most Ocean
games are better on the CPC. Very few games used the CPC to its full
potential, for example, only one game I know of uses a hardware
pixel-scroll and split screen (ZTB - Mission Genocide).

Richard
0
Richard
7/16/2003 1:04:23 AM
Jeff Ledger wrote:
> 
> From Dictionary.com

Is there a real English dictionary there? Or just a yankee one? Bet it
doesn't have "Grammer" in it, unless they've started listing actor
surnames.
0
Richard
7/16/2003 1:13:52 AM
WOW!!! what a pointless argument we have here

"Fritz Reinders" <fritzr@dc4pc.net> wrote in message
news:40433c66.0307151400.23475837@posting.google.com...
> > >
> >
> > So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
> >
> > Poor show dear boy!
>
> Depends on the standard you're judging by.  At the time it was
> introduced and
> for several years after it was a very advanced game & small business
> system.
>
> By the time the Spectrum 128 came out it was just about ready to
> retire.  To judge it by how well it handled the standards of 8 to 10
> years after it's introduction it fares poorly on benchmarks.
>
> Of course you need to judge it by how well it actually handles what it
> is used for.  On that standard it does quite well.  Demo coders are
> still getting the C64 to do new things, and within the limits of 3
> channel sound (6 if the 2d SID modification is made) it has very good
> music synthesis capabilities.
>
> It's not able to handle VGA screens natively.  So it might be said
> that it's graphics are poor.  That's a matter of the standard you're
> judging by again.  Commodore was pushing the limits of what could be
> done with a home game console when they designed the Ultimax and
> luckily for us the 'Max was expanded into a full blown small business
> system that was also a state of the art game console
>
> Of course there have been many hardware & software projects that added
> to the many capabilities of the C-64.  80 column hi res screens,
> multimeg memories, IBM compatibles harnessed as disk drives, internest
> connectivity to name a few.
>
> Of course the things that an 8bit 'can't' do such as a Windows OS
> (GEOS is one), a Unix knockoff (LUnix).  I'm sure that there are many
> more 'impossibilities' running around out there and of course the
> severak multitasking/multiuser OSes running on C-64
>
> Personally I'd use longevity of the system on the open market as the
> best judge of the quality machines.  The 64 to this day has the best
> claim to the best selling and longest market life of any computer
> made.
>
> The Apples went through many models offering partial compatibility
> with their predecessors.  The Sinclairs and Ataris also limited
> compatibility between models as they changed regularly.  The C64 made
> a few cosmetic changes to lower chip count & a case redesign, but it
> remained a C-64.  Even it's successor the C-128 family offered a C-64
> compatability that only a very few hardware intensive programs could
> break.
>
> All of this has been well covered here and elsewhere...didn't think a
> rehash was needed :)
>
> Fritz



0
Rick
7/16/2003 1:57:04 AM
"Phil-on-a-hill" <malcnospam@gothcorp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:AZ%Qa.12253$nP.8874@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net...
> > So it should, the CPC is a good computer. The only reason the Spectrum
> came
> > second was due to its larger user base. C64 compared to Spectrum, well
to
> me
> > its a hard one, depends on what you looking for in a computer I guess.
But
> > CPC against the Spectrum, well the CPC win in every respect, well  I
can't
> > honestly think of one thing that the Spectrum was better at?
>
>
> Games?

You never played an Amstrad did you? Both computers share the same processor
and sound chip so both versions of the same game would be more or less equal
sometimes the spectrum version is better, other times it the CPC version.
This got more to do with the programmers talents than the computers.

Now on to the graphics. If a game was designed on the Amstrad to use all it
graphical features it just blows the spectrum away,  however a lot of the
games were designed for the weakest computer so that porting over to
different formats would be easier and cheaper, hence many Amstrad games look
like Spectums dull O' graphics amd don't take advantage of the full 16
colours on screen (more on the PLUS).

Correct me if I'm wrong?

Oh by the way I don't hate Spectrums or anything.


0
John
7/16/2003 4:07:31 AM
big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) writes:

> c64: 1981
> Spectrum: 1982

I thought both were released during 1982. Was the C64 available 
anywhere in the world (US, Japan?) already in the end of 1981?

-- 
Anders Carlsson
0
Anders
7/16/2003 6:00:50 AM
Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote:

> big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) writes:
> 
> > c64: 1981
> > Spectrum: 1982
> 
> I thought both were released during 1982. Was the C64 available 
> anywhere in the world (US, Japan?) already in the end of 1981?

Keine Ahnung :-)
"C64 history" pages state 1981. Even if this was true, it's hardly "many
years" before the birth of the Speccy, right?

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 6:32:52 AM
Fritz Reinders <fritzr@dc4pc.net> wrote:

> By the time the Spectrum 128 came out it was just about ready to
> retire.

Why do you insist in comparing the c64 with the Spectrum 128? The 64 is
crap even compared to the original 16K.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 6:32:52 AM
Jeff Ledger <jeff@NOSPAM.com> wrote:

> Pay attention class!   If you fan the flame war, check your grammer.

What's wrong with my grand-m�re?

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 6:32:53 AM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 00:17:37 +0100, "John Kavanagh" <johnkavanagh@cpcoxygen.net>
wrote:

>
>"Richard Wilson" <rich@bitwise-systems.com> wrote in message
>news:3F14353E.9728899@bitwise-systems.com...
>> "Roland (.funxiun.)" wrote:
>> >
>> > Let Google decide:
>>
>> I think MicroMart already decided this one. If I remember correctly, the
>> Amstrad CPC also beat the C64 in their Best Computer of all time
>> competition!
>>
>> Richard
>
>So it should, the CPC is a good computer. The only reason the Spectrum came
>second was due to its larger user base. C64 compared to Spectrum, well to me
>its a hard one, depends on what you looking for in a computer I guess. But
>CPC against the Spectrum, well the CPC win in every respect, well  I can't
>honestly think of one thing that the Spectrum was better at?
>
Sales?

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:02:51 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 19:18:17 +0000 (UTC), "Niall Wallace"
<niallarab@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Ah ha but
>
>if you fight Commodore vs Sinclair
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Commodore&q2=Sinclair&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
>Sir Clive Wins
>
I wouldn't expect any other result. It's obvious!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:04:13 AM
On 15 Jul 2003 19:48:56 +0200, Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se>
wrote:

>Richard Wilson <rich@bitwise-systems.com> writes:
>
>>> Currrent number of 2003 MiniGames: Commodore 5, Sinclair 2, Amstrad 1
>>> with 2.5 months to go before the deadline. :-)
>> At least 1 of those is for VIC-20, not C-64.
>
>Two to be exact. On the other hand, there seems to be no entry for the
>48K Spectrum, or are we comparing Commodore 64 with Spectrum 128K rather
>than the classic 48K model?

Well, yes. I can't see the point of comparing with the Commode 128, because that
was even worse!

I have never seen anything that was specifically written for the commode 128.
Maybe there is now, but not when the machine was being sold!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:07:04 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:03:08 +0200, "Steppe"
<steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote:

>The Starglider wrote:
>> Ah! The typical American response. Not even bothering to look outside
>> of their own country to see what else happens in the world. I bet you
>> think WW2 started in 1942 as well, didn't you? The Commode 64 was not
>> the leader, simple as that!
>
>Although I'm German and don't really feel offended by that, I feel that if
>arguments like that enter the discussion it deserves a short and painless
>*PLONK*
>
If he had bloody read the post, he would see that I was critisizing the
Americans, not the Germans!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:09:54 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 21:57:04 -0400, "Rick" <gonz9856@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>WOW!!! what a pointless argument we have here
>
As I side issue here, why the fuck did you:

a) Top post
b) Top post with one line of text, but leaving the rest of the post in???
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:11:58 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 18:41:37 +0100, A. J. Moss
<ajmoss@macpaint.fsworld.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

>This is a test.
>
BASTARD!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:12:31 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:07:08 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:

>
>The Starglider wrote ...
>
>[crap snipped]
>
>That's strange.  There is nothing left to reply to.
>
>Flame war finished!
>
>Best regards,
>
>Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
>     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!
>
Ah! Te delayed wit of trying to end the flamewar quickly! You were too slow my
friend!

BTW... Commode lives? It's a machine! It has no soul! Get with it! It's crap!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:13:35 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:47:16 GMT, "shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com> wrote:

>Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>
Again, this is the post that wins the "Crossed the line of taste" by offending
several people who are disabled who post here.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:14:36 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 21:42:15 +0000 (UTC), "Thomas M�ller" <eous@gmx.de> wrote:

>Just a simple reply: If you don't like a certain (8-bit) machine, then just 
>don't use it rather than complaining about others who like their C64 (I do 
>and I don't really care about what you say). Every machine has it's own 
>spirit. Some like it and others do not. If you're in love with your speccy: 
>fine, that's your business - not ours.
>
But it is simply my job to ensure you all realise that the Commode 64 is utter
crap. It was a useless machine, ugly, expensive, and just plain crap.

Once you all realise this, you will lead happier lives.

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:16:17 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 19:44:01 -0400, "Jeff Ledger" <jeff@NOSPAM.com> wrote:

>> > Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>> > Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>
>Typical flame war crap from the 80's... Same crap grammer and spelling
>issues..
>
>Pay attention class!   If you fan the flame war, check your grammer.
>
>Note: "You might win, but your still retarted."
>
>Corrected: "You might win, but you're still retarded."
>
And Jeff wins the award for "Trying to stop a flamewar, but making it worse by
posting binaries to non-binary groups, which is a worse offense".
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:17:52 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 23:35:09 GMT, Axell <Axell@nosp.rogers.com> wrote:

>
>
>The Starglider wrote:
>
>> Let's look at the evidence:
>>
>>   Remove "wibble" in
>>           E Mail address
>>          TO REPLY.
>
>Why would I want to remove the wibble?   It's is appropriate for you.
>
>wibble, v. [...] 2. intr. Brit. slang. To speak or write, especially at great
>length, without saying anything important; to
>                                                     witter or waffle; to talk
>drivel. Freq. with on. Also trans. with direct speech as object.
>
I know, that's why I used it.

But my argument still stands. The Commode 64 is crap. Always will be. Now don't
try to change the subject.

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:19:21 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 19:57:03 -0500, "Dave Dahle" <dd-ah-le@dtg.net> wrote:

>"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com...
>> Let's look at the evidence:
>
>Shut up, you mindless, mouth-breathing, UTTER bastard.
>
Mouth-breathing? How else would I breath (apart from my nose)? Through my
ears???

This is one of the funniest fuck-ups in a reply I have ever seen! Thank you
Dave!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:20:38 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 22:22:58 -0400, "Glenn P.," <C128User@FVI.Net> wrote:

>On 15-Jul-03 at 11:51am +0100, <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Let's look at the evidence:
>
>[ Snip! ]
>
>Rates an 8.7 out of 10 on the TrollScale[tm].

Damn! Must try harder!

THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS
CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE
C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP! THE C64 IS CRAP!
>
>--_____   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%  "Glenn P.," <C128User@FVI.Net>  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Oh, and your sig separator does not work.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 7:21:39 AM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> writes:

> I have never seen anything that was specifically written for the
> commode 128. Maybe there is now, but not when the machine was being sold!

Off my head, I can only name three games I know existed in C128 
versions: Kikstart (?), The Last V8 and a cricket (!) game by Audiogenic.
The last one was one of the very few I saw a review of in the Swedish
speaking magazine I used to read. They didn't grasp much of the game.

-- 
Anders Carlsson
0
Anders
7/16/2003 7:33:18 AM
Jeff Ledger wrote:


I can't speak for csc, but in css there is a simple rule (and of course 
you read the FAQ before posting, didn't you?  I thought so) and it goes 
like this...

*THWAP*!  NO BINARIES!!!

abuse at athenanews dot com are being put on standby....

-- 
Frodo Morris				http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wadh1342
All your bast are belong to us		 AKA Graham Lee, Wadham College
SpectrumSofts currently on show at URL/speccy/: Speccy@Home SETI Client
Also the home of iloveyou.bas, the first PC virus ported to the ZX82!!!

0
Frodo
7/16/2003 7:34:08 AM
Anders Carlsson wrote:

> Off my head, I can only name three games I know existed in C128
> versions: Kikstart (?), The Last V8 and a cricket (!) game by Audiogenic.
> The last one was one of the very few I saw a review of in the Swedish
> speaking magazine I used to read. They didn't grasp much of the game.

Echelon had a C128 version.

-- 
Etienne von Wettingfeld                                 [SuSE Linux]
Voice mail & Fax: +31 (84) 8835157    -//-     www.doomdark.demon.nl

           { -*- Nam Et Ipsa Scientia Potestas Est -*- }       MMIII
0
Etienne
7/16/2003 7:40:24 AM
"John Kavanagh" <johnkavanagh@cpcoxygen.net> wrote in message
news:bf2k6l$vsa$1@kermit.esat.net...
>
> "Phil-on-a-hill" <malcnospam@gothcorp.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:AZ%Qa.12253$nP.8874@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net...
> > > So it should, the CPC is a good computer. The only reason the Spectrum
> > came
> > > second was due to its larger user base. C64 compared to Spectrum, well
> to
> > me
> > > its a hard one, depends on what you looking for in a computer I guess.
> But
> > > CPC against the Spectrum, well the CPC win in every respect, well  I
> can't
> > > honestly think of one thing that the Spectrum was better at?
> >
> >
> > Games?
>
> You never played an Amstrad did you?

Yes, I did.

> Both computers share the same processor
> and sound chip so both versions of the same game would be more or less
equal
> sometimes the spectrum version is better, other times it the CPC version.
> This got more to do with the programmers talents than the computers.
>
> Now on to the graphics. If a game was designed on the Amstrad to use all
it
> graphical features it just blows the spectrum away,


YOU DON'T SAY! Next, you'll be telling me that the PC has better graphics
than an Amiga (which obviously makes it a better machine in every respect
known to man ... not).

> however a lot of the
> games were designed for the weakest computer so that porting over to
> different formats would be easier and cheaper

Either that, or many more people made games for the 'weakest' computer
because many more people bought, played and enjoyed the games more than they
did on other formats?

>hence many Amstrad games look
> like Spectums dull O' graphics amd don't take advantage of the full 16
> colours on screen (more on the PLUS).

Hardly anything in the history of man took advantage of the Amstrad's full
potential ... I wonder why that is?

> Correct me if I'm wrong?

I did.

> Oh by the way I don't hate Spectrums or anything.
>
>


0
Phil
7/16/2003 7:50:44 AM
"Axell" <Axell@nosp.rogers.com> wrote in message
news:3F1490A3.FE69E14@nosp.rogers.com...
>
>
> The Starglider wrote:
>
> > Let's look at the evidence:
> >
> >   Remove "wibble" in
> >           E Mail address
> >          TO REPLY.
>
> Why would I want to remove the wibble?   It's is appropriate for you.
>
> wibble, v. [...] 2. intr. Brit. slang. To speak or write, especially at
great
> length, without saying anything important; to
>                                                      witter or waffle; to
talk
> drivel. Freq. with on. Also trans. with direct speech as object.


See: Jim Davidson


0
Phil
7/16/2003 8:17:46 AM
> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior??? What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?

Ah well, at least there are now two hardware-based synthesizers that use the good
old SID to produce the sound and i must tell you those things really kick ass. So
there must be something good about the SID-sound otherwise these synths would not be
on the market. Sure, one SID does not sound like another but then again, if you
compare two Roland Juno 60's with each other they do not sound the same either. So
stop bitching the SID, it's a very famous chip with a very special sound that is
still liked by many artists and some still use SID's for their music. Haven't seen
anybody on stage with a Speccy to make music. Seen a lot of C64's and SID-Stations
recently on stage.

Olaf.

0
Olaf
7/16/2003 8:30:38 AM
"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 15 Jul 2003 19:48:56 +0200, Anders Carlsson
<anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se>
> wrote:
>
> >Richard Wilson <rich@bitwise-systems.com> writes:
> >
> >>> Currrent number of 2003 MiniGames: Commodore 5, Sinclair 2,
Amstrad 1
> >>> with 2.5 months to go before the deadline. :-)
> >> At least 1 of those is for VIC-20, not C-64.
> >
> >Two to be exact. On the other hand, there seems to be no entry for
the
> >48K Spectrum, or are we comparing Commodore 64 with Spectrum 128K
rather
> >than the classic 48K model?
>
> Well, yes. I can't see the point of comparing with the Commode 128,
because that
> was even worse!
>
> I have never seen anything that was specifically written for the
commode 128.
> Maybe there is now, but not when the machine was being sold!

You are probably one of those people who still think the earth is flat.
The fact that you didn't see something doesn't mean it does not exist.

Even when the C128 was sold there was software specifically written for
it. Though I admit it was mostly serious stuff like wordprocessors,
databases, disk copiers...etc which benefitted most from the additional
capabilities (memory, 80-column screen) of the C128. All improvements of
the C128 over C64 are in the business use area. Besides the extra memory
and maybe the faster diskdrive the C128 has little extra to offer for
games compared to a C64. Considering that and the near perfect
compatibilty with the C64, it makes little sense to write a game
specifically for the C128. For minigames I cannot think of single reason
why one would make one specifically for the C128 instead of the a C64
version.



0
Peter
7/16/2003 8:31:58 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 21:38:14 GMT, gearc <troubles@the.door> wrote:
>> At least 1 of those is for VIC-20, not C-64.
>
>A VIC-20, had one of those before i got my spectrum 128K. Spent zillions
>of hours typing if i wanted to play a game :-) after the taperecorder
>broke down : I couldn't afford another :-( . 

Behold my breathtaking stupidity:

I also used to spend ages typing stuff in for my own programs but was 
never able to save them, the taperecorder just didn't seem to want to 
record onto anything, the record button wouldn't even go down (clue). So 
I just put up with always losing my programs.

Many moons later, after the spectrum had given up the ghost, I finally
realised the tape recorder would record happily if I actually put a tape
it without the record-protect tab broken! The "argh!" could be heard in
the next village.

Frink

-- 
Doctor J. Frink     : 'Rampant Ribald Ringtail'
See his mind here   : http://www.cmp.liv.ac.uk/frink/
Annoy his mind here : pjf at cmp dot liv dot ack dot ook
"Joy!" - Stimpy
0
frink
7/16/2003 9:18:53 AM
big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) wrote in message news:<1fy6khg.1pvmtwzxrhml9N%big-go@dplanet.ch>...
> Peter Thomas <see-my-sig@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:47:16 GMT, "shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > >Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> > >Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
> > 
> > At time of writing, this cliche has been used about 5,060 times on
> > Usenet[1].
> 
> And another 30 times in the last 7 hours. This is the most stupid, most
> conceptually incorrect "tag line" I ever happened to read in my life.
> How can it be so popular?

Because it is true.

ZY
PS: Shouldnt it read "Even if you win, you are still retarded." ?
0
yihq
7/16/2003 12:21:09 PM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<q5v7hv0iurr8hcv60c4pph2admgiq1g77a@4ax.com>...
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:23:47 +0000 (UTC), albert@pikkukorppi.cs.tut.fi (Ojala
> Pasi 'Albert') wrote:
> 
> >In article <9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com>,
> >The Starglider  <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >>Let's look at the evidence:
>  
> >>64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
> >
> >66046 bytes of RAM when you include the 1024 nybbles of color RAM.
> >All accessible with a bit of 6510 assembly.
> >
> As an additional, does the fact that you can't count and 65536 bytes plus 1024
> nybbles equals 66048 bytes (and not 66046)?

Well, the first 2 memory addresses are extremely hard to write to[1], so 
Albert subtracted them.

ZY
[1] At least if you want to access the RAM, not the Configuration.
0
yihq
7/16/2003 12:27:47 PM
Steppe wrote:
> Frodo Morris wrote:
> 
>>>Y The Starglider wrote:
>>>If he had bloody read the post, he would see that I was critisizing
>>>the Americans, not the Germans!
>>
> 
> And I wanted to point out that I'm not feeling offended by that BECAUSE I'm
> German. I noticed that it was directed at the Americans.
> 
> 
>>Oh come on, you know that you Don't Mention the War when there are
>>Germans around - they either get upset or use it as a chance to
>>advertise their new ZX81 membranes they have in stock.
> 
> 
> Hehe, I think those times are over. Most of the younger folks here are able
> to cope with the matter in an objective way. It's not the fact that WWII was
> mentioned, but that argument just didn't fit the discussion.

True, true; my original post was a bit of a css in-joke though (cf the 
bit about ZX81 membranes), also Dont Mention The War is a famous quote 
by John Cleese in Fawlty Towers.  I have it on good authority that of 
the twelve episodes made, the DMTW one was the only one not translated 
into German for your TV so you may not have seen it.  Very funny, 
nonetheless.

> It seems that
> when Starglider is running out of arguments he has to throw around insults
> that
> are way beyond the waistline...
> 
Oh yeah?  Well your mother was a hamster and your father smells of 
elderberries :-P

Only joking...

-- 
FM

0
Frodo
7/16/2003 1:19:51 PM
The Starglider wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 08:31:51 +0100, Frodo Morris
> <graham.lee@wadham.ox.invalid.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> 
>>The Starglider wrote:
> 
> 
>>>If he had bloody read the post, he would see that I was critisizing the
>>>Americans, not the Germans!
>>
>>Oh come on, you know that you Don't Mention the War when there are 
>>Germans around - they either get upset or use it as a chance to 
>>advertise their new ZX81 membranes they have in stock.
> 
> 
> Ooh! Cutting! Very cutting! I like this post!

Oh dear, a complement, in the middle of a flame war.  Are you losing 
your sting, SG?  :-D
-- 
FM

0
Frodo
7/16/2003 1:21:03 PM
"Biggo" <big-go@dplanet.ch> schreef in bericht
news:1fy5omr.1kdg2b31v5y3riN%big-go@dplanet.ch...
> Floris van den Berg <flvdbergMASTER@NOSPAMwxs.nl> wrote:

> > Slow compared to... the spectrum? Compared to current PCs? Obviously a
c64
> > is slower than a PC.
>
> *And* it's slower than a Spectrum too.

Ok. Fair enough. Can't argue with that then. Still, lots of great software
came out for the c64.

> To the Speccy. What were they thinking at CBM when they decided to give
> the 64 16 shades of brown?

You nicely evaded by comment about IFLI.

> > Last thing i heard 6 million people are still using the c64. And Tulip
is
> > now resurrecting them. I don't see anyone resurrect the Spectrum.
>
> No need to resurrect something that's alive. New Spectrums are still
> sold today. *New* Spectrums, not second-hand brown doorstops.

If there are still 6 million people using the c64 (which seems like an
unrealistically large number by the way), the c64 is clearly not dead. With
"resurrecting" i meant new machines will be produced.

> > Personally i love the looks of the commodore.
>
> Ha! No wonder you manage to stand c64 graphics. You need glasses.

If we all had the same taste, most women would be single.

Floris


0
Floris
7/16/2003 2:44:48 PM
Phil-on-a-hill wrote:
> 
> YOU DON'T SAY! Next, you'll be telling me that the PC has better graphics
> than an Amiga (which obviously makes it a better machine in every respect
> known to man ... not).
> 
Only through third-party upgrades, the PC's native graphics capability 
is a pile of toss.

-- 
Frodo Morris				http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wadh1342
All your bast are belong to us		 AKA Graham Lee, Wadham College
SpectrumSofts currently on show at URL/speccy/: Speccy@Home SETI Client
Also the home of iloveyou.bas, the first PC virus ported to the ZX82!!!

0
Frodo
7/16/2003 2:58:19 PM
"Frodo Morris" <graham.lee@wadham.ox.invalid.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:bf3p70$2sh$1@news.ox.ac.uk...
> Phil-on-a-hill wrote:
> >
> > YOU DON'T SAY! Next, you'll be telling me that the PC has better
graphics
> > than an Amiga (which obviously makes it a better machine in every
respect
> > known to man ... not).
> >
> Only through third-party upgrades, the PC's native graphics capability
> is a pile of toss.


Er .... yeah.


0
Phil
7/16/2003 3:03:11 PM
Phil-on-a-hill wrote:
> "Frodo Morris" <graham.lee@wadham.ox.invalid.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:bf3p70$2sh$1@news.ox.ac.uk...
> 
>>Phil-on-a-hill wrote:
>>
>>>YOU DON'T SAY! Next, you'll be telling me that the PC has better
> 
> graphics
> 
>>>than an Amiga (which obviously makes it a better machine in every
> 
> respect
> 
>>>known to man ... not).
>>>
>>
>>Only through third-party upgrades, the PC's native graphics capability
>>is a pile of toss.
> 
> 
> 
> Er .... yeah.
> 
> 
OK, remove any and all expansion cards from your PCI, AGP and ISA slots, 
and tell me how good your PC's graphics capability is.

Users of intel i810 systems need not participate.

-- 
Frodo Morris				http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wadh1342
All your bast are belong to us		 AKA Graham Lee, Wadham College
SpectrumSofts currently on show at URL/speccy/: Speccy@Home SETI Client
Also the home of iloveyou.bas, the first PC virus ported to the ZX82!!!

0
Frodo
7/16/2003 3:26:41 PM
> >>Only through third-party upgrades, the PC's native graphics
capability
> >>is a pile of toss.
> >
> OK, remove any and all expansion cards from your PCI, AGP and ISA
slots,
> and tell me how good your PC's graphics capability is.

Do the led's on the keyboard count as graphics?

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


0
Peter
7/16/2003 3:30:33 PM
Peter van Merkerk wrote:
>>>>Only through third-party upgrades, the PC's native graphics
> 
> capability
> 
>>>>is a pile of toss.
>>>
>>OK, remove any and all expansion cards from your PCI, AGP and ISA
> 
> slots,
> 
>>and tell me how good your PC's graphics capability is.
> 
> 
> Do the led's on the keyboard count as graphics?
> 

Only if you can get a higher resolution than the Speccy :-)

-- 
Frodo Morris				http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wadh1342
All your bast are belong to us		 AKA Graham Lee, Wadham College
SpectrumSofts currently on show at URL/speccy/: Speccy@Home SETI Client
Also the home of iloveyou.bas, the first PC virus ported to the ZX82!!!

0
Frodo
7/16/2003 3:39:32 PM
All of us who frequently visit the comp.sys.cbm news group love the C64 and
we don't really care about your "evidence", which in big parts is incorrect
or very subjective (at least I don't). We are going to continue to love the
C64 no matter what you say. I have never used a Spectrum but it might be a
good computer as well. I don't want to say that a particular home computer
is better than another than. I think it has much to do with which computer
you grew up with which one you think is best.

/Christian


"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com...
> Let's look at the evidence:
>
> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites
to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky
graphics. How
> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely
fast
> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior???
What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the
worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's
that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a
program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding
mistakes.
> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
around the
> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
manage
> about 22 million.
> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer
to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge
keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!
>
> -- 
>           ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble"
in
>           *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail
address
>           *                                             *      TO REPLY.
>           *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
>           *                                             *    /_  _\
>           ***********************************************   | O  O |
>
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo_______
____


0
Christian
7/16/2003 5:24:33 PM
Christian Johansson wrote:
> All of us who frequently visit the comp.sys.cbm news group love the
> C64 and we don't really care about your "evidence", which in big
> parts is incorrect or very subjective (at least I don't). We are
> going to continue to love the C64 no matter what you say. I have
> never used a Spectrum but it might be a good computer as well. I
> don't want to say that a particular home computer is better than
> another than. I think it has much to do with which computer you grew
> up with which one you think is best.

<stands up, slowly applauding>
Folks, grow up and get a life! I think nobody really likes those stupid
flamewars, so stop bugging us.

/Steppe


0
Steppe
7/16/2003 5:27:34 PM
Frodo Morris <graham.lee@wadham.ox.invalid.ac.uk> writes:

> Users of intel i810 systems need not participate.

Neither does users of Nforce and some VIA KM266 systems then? Both
are available with onboard VGA, just like many of the older PS/2
and 486-based systems. At least when it came to resolution, and in
many cases palette these integrated low-end VGAs beat the shit out
of both the Commode 64 and the Spackdrum series (AFAIK, that is).

-- 
Anders Carlsson
0
Anders
7/16/2003 5:58:35 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:44:48 +0200, there was a flash of lightening and a clap
of thunder. A voice, believed to be the voice of God (but later turned
out to just be Floris van den Berg trying out a karaoke machine and having a few
electrical problems) boomed out:

> If we all had the same taste, most women would be single.

Statistically, aren't they anyway?

Chris

-- 
+-------------------------------------------+
| Unsatisfactory Software - "because it is" |
|  http://www.unsatisfactorysoftware.co.uk  |
| Your Sinclair: A Celebration              |
+-- http://www.ysac.cjb.net/ --ICQ:28784166-+

DISCLAIMER: I may be making all this stuff up again.
0
Chris
7/16/2003 6:16:02 PM
Soni tempori elseu romani yeof helsforo nisson ol sefini ill des Wed, 16 Jul
2003 08:14:36 +0100, sefini jorgo geanyet des mani yeof do comp.sys.sinclair,
yawatina tan reek esk The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> fornis
do marikano es bono tan el:

>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:47:16 GMT, "shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com> wrote:
>
>>Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>>Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>>
>Again, this is the post that wins the "Crossed the line of taste" by offending
>several people who are disabled who post here.

Also, "shephed" should note that disabled != retarded.

deKay
-- 
 + Lofi Gaming - www.lofi-gaming.org.uk  AC: deKay in Sponge
 |- ugvm Magazine - www.ugvm.org.uk      Gamertag: deKay 01
 |- My computer runs at 3.5MHz and I'm proud of that
 |- Fave game this week: Windows 2000 Server (PC)
0
deKay
7/16/2003 6:16:15 PM
A C64 manifesto !!!

The following message is not intended to morons like 'The
Starglider','Biggo' and other people like this from both the Spectrum
and the Commodore world, they all lack my respect. What can you admire
in a soul that finds satisfaction and pleasure in some low and dirty
actions like these ones. Instead of focusing your energy in something
creative on the machine you love, you came here and throw with dirt
and crap on us, only because you belive in the superiority of your
computer. Who gives you the right to act like this? I often wonder how
old are actually the people that start those stupid flamewars. If
they're teenagers, than there is almost nothing to blame them for,
we've all been like this in our lives. But what if they are grown up
people, matures, what then? It is now when you really begin to pittyfy
them. What small and insignificant pleasure they find in those
actions? Those are the actions of a complexed character, someone
affected and driven by his inferiority complexes. Is that sort of
person, which never had any real friends when he was small, which was
desperate to get a girl, but all he could managed was to masturbate
constantly, telling to him how good he was and how nobody deserved
him. It is like this how those guys get here and do those sort of
things. The satisfaction and the illusion of making some noise, is the
only thing they find pleasure in. But enough with this psichology
crap, it's not what I wanted to say in the first place. I want to
express my views on those 2 computer, Commodore and Spectrum.

I myself  have been a Commodore user for a long time, I can say that I
grew up with this computer. And that's why I can say that I know it's
powers very well. Also since a couple of years ago, I became
interested in the Spectrum scene (mostly the russian side, the only
part that is still creating for the Spectrum,  since all the rest of
the Spectrum scene seem to be driven only by frustrated englishmen). I
want to tell to every flamewar-ist wannabe to go and actually check
what the machine can really do, instead of coming here and acting like
an ape. So, please dear Spectrum users, go and see what the Commodore
can do, go and download an emulator (Vice) and look at Krestology
demo, look there for the quality of the graphics and the amazing
music, try to capture the flow of that demo, can you see the
masterpiece? Move on to Deus ex machina, by the same crew, watch and
drool at what the Commodore can do, look at the full screen photos,
look at the amazing effect-music syncronization, go on then and check
Royal Arte,+H2k, Soiled Legacy, Dutch Breeze, Digital Magic... (grab
them from www.c64.ch). Have you done that? Look at how fast it loads
using those mighty 2 bit irq loaders, I hope now you are convinced of
how fast the 1541 drive can be. the Ok, now take you Spectrums, with
which you probably can't do anything important these days, because
most of the actual stuff produced for the Speccy runns on the russians
clones, if you are unlucky, get yourself an Speccy emulator and start
looking at the Spectrum demos. I have seen most of them, so I can pin
point you to the best of them. So start with Dogma, Inbetween, Shit
for brainz, Binary Love, ... etc. Are you shocked yet? Have you
finally seen what the Spectrum can really do? Check that blocky
graphics carefully, those giant pixels of the speccy are really scary
no? :) look at the graphics, and compare them with Krestology and Deus
ex machina? What do you say now? The only solution for you guys to
enjoy the Spectrum demos is to get really drunk or watch them from 3
or 4 meters so to see those ugly chunky effects in a better quality.
Ok, enough with the graphics. What about the sound? Sid vs Ay? Here
the difference is smaller. Most of the C64 sids rock, look at HVSC
collection for them, and if you wanna be amazed listen to the ones
from Mitch&Dane, GRG, Jeff, DJB ... I have that collection of 9000
tunes of Speccy music. I have listen to most of it. Well from what I
heard, nothing impressed me very much, the sound of the Ay simply
lacks the melody of the Sid, it's to coarse, to metallic, it's to
monotone, most of the speccy tunes use the same instruments and they
sound almost the same (that fast style with ugly drums). But I must
admit that a few speccy melodies captured me  (covered amiga tunes)
and I listen them very much. But overall, the Speccy can do very few
with it's weak Ay/Ym chips (have in mind that the original spectrum
didn't even had such a chip, it came with a beeper, now that's
hillaroius, I simply don't know how those frustrated speccy users have
the guts to even talk about this).  Now, the last thing, the CPU, the
main argument in every flamewar so far. Yes the z80 is faster than the
6510. But that doesn't mean much. Because of the simpler architecture,
the z80 eats a lot of tacts for it opcodes and it looses a lot of
precious time with this. Also, the z80 inside a spectrum looses a lot
of time with the graphics part, lacking a custom made graphics chip,
like the Vic2 is on the C64. The speed advantage is insignificat, it's
only noticeable in vectored graphics. Which are used in the demos
only, the games in this mode simply suck. Let's go on to the games
now. The spectrum fanatics brag and yell everytime that their games
were better. They often compare the same games (the one that runns on
the speccy vs the one that runns on the C64). Most of the time they
are right, some games that were good on the Speccy, really suck on the
C64. But this is only because the coders were lazy, and they ported
the z80 code to the C64, instead of doing an optimized c64 version.
It's not the fault of the computer, it's the fault of the programmers.
Blame them. But this wasn't always the case. I'll start with some
older games. Look at how Green Beret was on C64 and how dull and
colorless was in the Speccy. Then look at masterpieces like Mayhem in
monsterland, look at the colors (it had new colors on the c64, using
all kinds of tricks), look at the Creatures series, Turrican (have you
guys actually played Turrican on the speccy, it's hillarious) games
that were impossible to create on the speccy, because it lacked way to
many features. Look at the new games on the C64, look at what Cadaver
did with the Metal Warrior series and BOFH, and wait for the upcoming
4-th MW game, which will blow everything away. Some of the spectrum
users said that the spectrum is still sold, but the quantities are so
small that it doesn't even matter.  Some say the c64 is ugly? Are you
guys insane, have you actually saw a C64c? Just look at how beautiful
the spectrum rusian clones are, they seem to be designed with an axe
not with a machine. Didn't you found  amusing how frustrated the
speccy users are (this doesn't come as a surprise for me, as I too
once had a Spectrum, in my youth, and I perfectly rememeber the moment
when my dad smashed it to the wall, that damn thing reseted too often
by itself). I didn't saw a commodore users starting a flamewar now,
what is the purpose of this when you are perfectly satisfied with your
computer? Look at how spread the Commodore is in the world, it's
practically everywhere (all of Europe, US, Canada, South America, 
Australia (even Tasmania), even China, where the reds illegally cloned
it massively, and in the end Iraq :))

There are so many things happening in the Commodore world, the
Spectrum user can only dream at what the commodore did and does. Let
me tell you now about the modern things the C64 does today. As both
the scenes are involved in improving their computers with hardware
addons, I will talk about the SCPU. Yes, I am a happy user of such a
device. A C=64 with a scpu kicks the Sprinter computer right in the
balls, having 20 Mhz+16 Mb ram, while still maintaining most of the
compatibility with a regular C64. I am curious to see how many
Spectrum users had actually went online with their computer, using a
16 bit multitasking Operating system which is both a GUI and a CLI.
Who of them managed to get on irc, read/send emails, telnet to a shell
account, using ftp, having their computer hosting a website and
serving it with a http server, listening to an amiga mod, .xm, .s3m,
or a .wav (in 8 bit quality with the Digimax), or looking at a JPG, or
streaming a 5 Mb wav or Jpg directly in the SCPU Ram of a fellow C64
users situated on the otherside of the world, and this in the same
time, only with a C64+SCPU running multitasking Wings OS. You speccy
users can only dream about those things. And there are more features
developing for this OS.


Indeed, the Spectrum scene is just a 'sect', but Commodore Scene is a
religion !!!


Please don't take my message as an insult to your computer, I have
absolutly no problems or issues with the Speccy, I respect it for what
it does. But please, stop being such morons and attack the C64 driven
only by the hate that your computer is not so powerful and versatile
as our C64 is. Let it be, use your Speccys quietly(learn this from the
rusians speccy users, which are smart enough to igonore you and don't
have your problems) or better come join the C64 scene :)))))

Peace,
Mihai

PS. In the end, everything depends on the man behind the computer, be
it Commodore or Spectrum, it is only him who can do the magic.
0
hannibal
7/16/2003 7:03:36 PM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<dnu9hv0khd2tc47dnucijsm4k7hpp9mthj@4ax.com>...
> BTW... Commode lives? It's a machine! It has no soul! Get with it! It's crap!

#It's a livin' thing, it's a terrible thing to lose... :-)

(When I first heard that song (_Livin' Thing_ by the Electric Light
Orchestra, in case you're wondering), my first thought (and second and
third) was, due to the lyrics, what a great horror-movie theme song it
would make!) :-)
0
korax1214
7/16/2003 8:01:36 PM
Zed Yago <yihq@2nybbles.com> wrote:

> big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) wrote in message news:<1fy6khg.1pvmtwzxrhml9N%big-go
> > This is the most stupid, most
> > conceptually incorrect "tag line" I ever happened to read in my life.
> > How can it be so popular?
> 
> Because it is true.

It isn't. Special Olympics are for physically disabled persons, while
"retarded" refers to mentally handicapped persons.
True or not, it's a stupid thing to say, not because you're telling
someone "you're retarded" (which, in fact, you're not), but because
you're putting down an entire "class" of people who have nothing to do
with the discussion.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 8:04:34 PM
Biggo wrote:

> It isn't. Special Olympics are for physically disabled persons, while
> "retarded" refers to mentally handicapped persons.
> True or not, it's a stupid thing to say, not because you're telling
> someone "you're retarded" (which, in fact, you're not), but because
> you're putting down an entire "class" of people who have nothing to do
> with the discussion.

They don't? I thought they were in the Speccy camp.

-- 
Etienne von Wettingfeld                                 [SuSE Linux]
Voice mail & Fax: +31 (84) 8835157    -//-     www.doomdark.demon.nl

           { -*- Nam Et Ipsa Scientia Potestas Est -*- }       MMIII
0
Etienne
7/16/2003 8:07:40 PM
Etienne von Wettingfeld <etienne@xs4none.nl> wrote:

> Biggo wrote:
> 
> > you're putting down an entire "class" of people who have nothing to do
> > with the discussion.
> 
> They don't? I thought they were in the Speccy camp.

Sure. Even mentally challenged persons can productively use a simple yet
powerful machine.
The C64 sure is not powerful at all, and that's a *FACT*, but it's also
so poorly engineered it's useless. If you actually feel you've done
great things with a C64, your expectations must be incredibly *low*.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big-go (236)
7/16/2003 8:16:13 PM
I demand that Zed Yago may or may not have written...

[snip]
> PS: Shouldnt it read "Even if you win, you are still retarded." ?

PS. Shouldn't it read "Shouldn't it read"? :-)

-- 
| Darren Salt | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington,
| RISC OS,    | s zap,tartarus,org            | Northumberland
| Linux       | @                             | Toon Army
|   I don't ask for much, just untold riches...

Consider your reputation. Try changing your name and moving to a new town.
0
Darren
7/16/2003 8:39:52 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 08:32:53 +0200, big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) wrote:

>> >Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>> >Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>> At time of writing, this cliche has been used about 5,060 times on
>> Usenet[1].
>And another 30 times in the last 7 hours. This is the most stupid, most
>conceptually incorrect "tag line" I ever happened to read in my life.
>How can it be so popular?

"Get a life" is another one that needs to be culled. The only people
who say that nowadays are those in need of its advice.

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
Peter
7/16/2003 8:40:13 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 08:20:38 +0100, The Starglider
<the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>>Shut up, you mindless, mouth-breathing, UTTER bastard.
>Mouth-breathing? How else would I breath (apart from my nose)? Through my
>ears???
>This is one of the funniest fuck-ups in a reply I have ever seen! Thank you
>Dave!

Oh, shut up you finger-typing eye-seeing ear-hearing git!

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
Peter
7/16/2003 8:42:07 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 22:07:40 +0200, Etienne von Wettingfeld <etienne@xs4none.nl>
wrote:

>Biggo wrote:
>
>> It isn't. Special Olympics are for physically disabled persons, while
>> "retarded" refers to mentally handicapped persons.
>> True or not, it's a stupid thing to say, not because you're telling
>> someone "you're retarded" (which, in fact, you're not), but because
>> you're putting down an entire "class" of people who have nothing to do
>> with the discussion.
>
>They don't? I thought they were in the Speccy camp.

Couldn't be. We have class, and taste, and that's why we know that the C64 is
crap.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 8:56:01 PM
So, so far, not one single commode user has come up with a decent argument to
attempt to prove to us that the Commode 64 was actually any good (which it
isn't).

So, that must mean, that there is a lot of truth in what I said about it. Crap
games, crap graphics, crap sound, crap design, crap cost (when released).

I'm utterly stunned it lasted as long as it did!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 8:59:01 PM
Oh god the Speculum shovelers are at it again...
You're wasting your time, it's not really about the C64 being crap. The
title to this thread translates to read: "The C64 is crap because my parents
couldn't afford a C64 or an Atari 8-bit or even a BBC Micro, so they got me
the Spectrum."

It's all to do with jealously pure and simple. They know the C64 is good,
but they'll swear theirs is better because of gameplay, only because that's
the only thing they can say about their machine. (Yes I know the BASIC is
better on the speccy before you jump in...) good games, big deal...

Another reason they defend the Speccy is, it's British and the C64 is
American. A few of the Brits are jealous of the US, this is just another
angle for them to make fun of the USofA and to make themselves feel better.

I love the Spectrum, it's a great little machine for what is was designed to
do (and I own nearly all the models except the ZX80, 81 and the QL)  I just
find it a pity that the regulars on comp.sys.sinclair have this silly
attitude. Sometimes I feel embarrassed to be a speccy fan to be honest. You
can't even say "Commodore" without calling it commode, for gods sake!
The people on comp.sys.cbm or the Amstrad newsgroup don't say spackdrum or
speculum every time we mention the Spectrum, but you just can't let it go
can you?  I bet you were going to say, "You're taking too seriously blah
blah, it's just a bit of fun!"  Well I can't be bothered with your so called
'fun and games' because it isn't, it's more than the C64 vs. the speccy.
There's no point for comp.sys.cbm'ers to defend the C64, we know what our
machines can do, and we don't have to prove anything. Even if we did, you
still choose to believe in the crap you're saying. I wonder if the Iraqi
info minister owned a Spectrum... Similar mindset if you ask me...


0
Bill
7/16/2003 9:14:43 PM
hannibal <hannibal@videocam.net.au> wrote:

> go and see what the Commodore can do

I see: it can render a man verbose, dull and incredibly lacking in the
humour department. Oh, and it's crap, btw. Discuss.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 9:17:20 PM
Christian Johansson <c64@combort.se> wrote:

> We are going to continue to love the C64 no matter what you say. 

That's the spirit. 

I'm sure you're also going to continue to top post, and to quote all of
the preceeding message at the bottom of your replies.

Strong opinions: I like this.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 9:17:20 PM
Derek Jolly. Tuesday. comp.sys.sinclair. Tch, eh?

> "shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com> wrote in news:oLZQa.796$ib2.120539
> @twister.neo.rr.com:
> 
>> You might win, but your still retarded.
> 
> My still retarded what?

It would appear that the verb "to retard" isn't transitive in this sense;
possibly it's some kind of technical term used in distilling industry:
"Jings! All mah whisky got spoiled efter the still retarded. Er... Hoots
mon, or something". Clearly, victory gained at such expense to one's
machinery would have to be considered somewhat phyrric.

Er, do you own a distillery?

-- 
Duncan Snowden. 

F Invalid file name, 530:4 
0
Duncan
7/16/2003 9:25:05 PM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<ipu9hv0e4va0s1oi1ojh85fgo0pm1q2m3k@4ax.com>...
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:47:16 GMT, "shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com> wrote:
> 
> >Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> >Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
> >
> Again, this is the post that wins the "Crossed the line of taste" by offending
> several people who are disabled who post here.

ALARM! Political Correctness offended!
Thanks, Starglider, for pointing out, that jokes about disabled,
strangecolored and/or too old/too young People are strongly forbidden
in a Flamewar.

The Speckdrum might have the more queer Fellowship,
but it still has only a Z80.

ZY
0
yihq
7/16/2003 9:27:54 PM
Bill Bertram <ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:

> I wonder if the Iraqi
> info minister owned a Spectrum... Similar mindset if you ask me...

Good argument, it closes oh so beautifully your "we're smarter than
this" post.

This is he point where I bring up Adolf Hitler and the thread stops,
right? You know, Hitler, the guy who was Evil personified until another
ex-friend of the USA started to act weird? Remember? He came before
Osama, before Saddam, even before Noriega and Khomeini and (sorry if I
seem to be over-explaining myself, pals, I'm replying to an AOLer after
all).

Naaaah, not even Hitler, fscked up as he could be, would have bought a
c64. <gdrlh>

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 9:45:07 PM
> I may very well be. But I can't judge the Speccy because Holland is a
> wealthy country so everybody had C64s in my days.


Holland's wealthy? Compared to who? Estonia?


0
malcnospam (55)
7/16/2003 9:52:41 PM
Which one is frustrated???


"hannibal" <hannibal@videocam.net.au> schreef in bericht
news:4f35449c.0307161103.1dd921e@posting.google.com...
> A C64 manifesto !!!
>
> The following message is not intended to morons like 'The
> Starglider','Biggo' and other people like this from both the Spectrum
> and the Commodore world, they all lack my respect. What can you admire
> in a soul that finds satisfaction and pleasure in some low and dirty
> actions like these ones. Instead of focusing your energy in something
> creative on the machine you love, you came here and throw with dirt
> and crap on us, only because you belive in the superiority of your
> computer. Who gives you the right to act like this? I often wonder how
> old are actually the people that start those stupid flamewars. If
> they're teenagers, than there is almost nothing to blame them for,
> we've all been like this in our lives. But what if they are grown up
> people, matures, what then? It is now when you really begin to pittyfy
> them. What small and insignificant pleasure they find in those
> actions? Those are the actions of a complexed character, someone
> affected and driven by his inferiority complexes. Is that sort of
> person, which never had any real friends when he was small, which was
> desperate to get a girl, but all he could managed was to masturbate
> constantly, telling to him how good he was and how nobody deserved
> him. It is like this how those guys get here and do those sort of
> things. The satisfaction and the illusion of making some noise, is the
> only thing they find pleasure in. But enough with this psichology
> crap, it's not what I wanted to say in the first place. I want to
> express my views on those 2 computer, Commodore and Spectrum.
>
> I myself  have been a Commodore user for a long time, I can say that I
> grew up with this computer. And that's why I can say that I know it's
> powers very well. Also since a couple of years ago, I became
> interested in the Spectrum scene (mostly the russian side, the only
> part that is still creating for the Spectrum,  since all the rest of
> the Spectrum scene seem to be driven only by frustrated englishmen). I
> want to tell to every flamewar-ist wannabe to go and actually check
> what the machine can really do, instead of coming here and acting like
> an ape. So, please dear Spectrum users, go and see what the Commodore
> can do, go and download an emulator (Vice) and look at Krestology
> demo, look there for the quality of the graphics and the amazing
> music, try to capture the flow of that demo, can you see the
> masterpiece? Move on to Deus ex machina, by the same crew, watch and
> drool at what the Commodore can do, look at the full screen photos,
> look at the amazing effect-music syncronization, go on then and check
> Royal Arte,+H2k, Soiled Legacy, Dutch Breeze, Digital Magic... (grab
> them from www.c64.ch). Have you done that? Look at how fast it loads
> using those mighty 2 bit irq loaders, I hope now you are convinced of
> how fast the 1541 drive can be. the Ok, now take you Spectrums, with
> which you probably can't do anything important these days, because
> most of the actual stuff produced for the Speccy runns on the russians
> clones, if you are unlucky, get yourself an Speccy emulator and start
> looking at the Spectrum demos. I have seen most of them, so I can pin
> point you to the best of them. So start with Dogma, Inbetween, Shit
> for brainz, Binary Love, ... etc. Are you shocked yet? Have you
> finally seen what the Spectrum can really do? Check that blocky
> graphics carefully, those giant pixels of the speccy are really scary
> no? :) look at the graphics, and compare them with Krestology and Deus
> ex machina? What do you say now? The only solution for you guys to
> enjoy the Spectrum demos is to get really drunk or watch them from 3
> or 4 meters so to see those ugly chunky effects in a better quality.
> Ok, enough with the graphics. What about the sound? Sid vs Ay? Here
> the difference is smaller. Most of the C64 sids rock, look at HVSC
> collection for them, and if you wanna be amazed listen to the ones
> from Mitch&Dane, GRG, Jeff, DJB ... I have that collection of 9000
> tunes of Speccy music. I have listen to most of it. Well from what I
> heard, nothing impressed me very much, the sound of the Ay simply
> lacks the melody of the Sid, it's to coarse, to metallic, it's to
> monotone, most of the speccy tunes use the same instruments and they
> sound almost the same (that fast style with ugly drums). But I must
> admit that a few speccy melodies captured me  (covered amiga tunes)
> and I listen them very much. But overall, the Speccy can do very few
> with it's weak Ay/Ym chips (have in mind that the original spectrum
> didn't even had such a chip, it came with a beeper, now that's
> hillaroius, I simply don't know how those frustrated speccy users have
> the guts to even talk about this).  Now, the last thing, the CPU, the
> main argument in every flamewar so far. Yes the z80 is faster than the
> 6510. But that doesn't mean much. Because of the simpler architecture,
> the z80 eats a lot of tacts for it opcodes and it looses a lot of
> precious time with this. Also, the z80 inside a spectrum looses a lot
> of time with the graphics part, lacking a custom made graphics chip,
> like the Vic2 is on the C64. The speed advantage is insignificat, it's
> only noticeable in vectored graphics. Which are used in the demos
> only, the games in this mode simply suck. Let's go on to the games
> now. The spectrum fanatics brag and yell everytime that their games
> were better. They often compare the same games (the one that runns on
> the speccy vs the one that runns on the C64). Most of the time they
> are right, some games that were good on the Speccy, really suck on the
> C64. But this is only because the coders were lazy, and they ported
> the z80 code to the C64, instead of doing an optimized c64 version.
> It's not the fault of the computer, it's the fault of the programmers.
> Blame them. But this wasn't always the case. I'll start with some
> older games. Look at how Green Beret was on C64 and how dull and
> colorless was in the Speccy. Then look at masterpieces like Mayhem in
> monsterland, look at the colors (it had new colors on the c64, using
> all kinds of tricks), look at the Creatures series, Turrican (have you
> guys actually played Turrican on the speccy, it's hillarious) games
> that were impossible to create on the speccy, because it lacked way to
> many features. Look at the new games on the C64, look at what Cadaver
> did with the Metal Warrior series and BOFH, and wait for the upcoming
> 4-th MW game, which will blow everything away. Some of the spectrum
> users said that the spectrum is still sold, but the quantities are so
> small that it doesn't even matter.  Some say the c64 is ugly? Are you
> guys insane, have you actually saw a C64c? Just look at how beautiful
> the spectrum rusian clones are, they seem to be designed with an axe
> not with a machine. Didn't you found  amusing how frustrated the
> speccy users are (this doesn't come as a surprise for me, as I too
> once had a Spectrum, in my youth, and I perfectly rememeber the moment
> when my dad smashed it to the wall, that damn thing reseted too often
> by itself). I didn't saw a commodore users starting a flamewar now,
> what is the purpose of this when you are perfectly satisfied with your
> computer? Look at how spread the Commodore is in the world, it's
> practically everywhere (all of Europe, US, Canada, South America,
> Australia (even Tasmania), even China, where the reds illegally cloned
> it massively, and in the end Iraq :))
>
> There are so many things happening in the Commodore world, the
> Spectrum user can only dream at what the commodore did and does. Let
> me tell you now about the modern things the C64 does today. As both
> the scenes are involved in improving their computers with hardware
> addons, I will talk about the SCPU. Yes, I am a happy user of such a
> device. A C=64 with a scpu kicks the Sprinter computer right in the
> balls, having 20 Mhz+16 Mb ram, while still maintaining most of the
> compatibility with a regular C64. I am curious to see how many
> Spectrum users had actually went online with their computer, using a
> 16 bit multitasking Operating system which is both a GUI and a CLI.
> Who of them managed to get on irc, read/send emails, telnet to a shell
> account, using ftp, having their computer hosting a website and
> serving it with a http server, listening to an amiga mod, .xm, .s3m,
> or a .wav (in 8 bit quality with the Digimax), or looking at a JPG, or
> streaming a 5 Mb wav or Jpg directly in the SCPU Ram of a fellow C64
> users situated on the otherside of the world, and this in the same
> time, only with a C64+SCPU running multitasking Wings OS. You speccy
> users can only dream about those things. And there are more features
> developing for this OS.
>
>
> Indeed, the Spectrum scene is just a 'sect', but Commodore Scene is a
> religion !!!
>
>
> Please don't take my message as an insult to your computer, I have
> absolutly no problems or issues with the Speccy, I respect it for what
> it does. But please, stop being such morons and attack the C64 driven
> only by the hate that your computer is not so powerful and versatile
> as our C64 is. Let it be, use your Speccys quietly(learn this from the
> rusians speccy users, which are smart enough to igonore you and don't
> have your problems) or better come join the C64 scene :)))))
>
> Peace,
> Mihai
>
> PS. In the end, everything depends on the man behind the computer, be
> it Commodore or Spectrum, it is only him who can do the magic.


0
Mike
7/16/2003 9:54:49 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 22:14:43 +0100, "Bill Bertram"
<ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:

>Oh god the Speculum shovelers are at it again...
>You're wasting your time, it's not really about the C64 being crap. The
>title to this thread translates to read: "The C64 is crap because my parents
>couldn't afford a C64 or an Atari 8-bit or even a BBC Micro, so they got me
>the Spectrum."

Oh yes, that was it, we have loads of money, so we'll sepnd more on a vastly
inferior machine!
>
>It's all to do with jealously pure and simple. They know the C64 is good,
>but they'll swear theirs is better because of gameplay, only because that's
>the only thing they can say about their machine. (Yes I know the BASIC is
>better on the speccy before you jump in...) good games, big deal...

As stated elsewhere, yes we do agree that the Commode 64 was good - as a
doorstop, paperweight, draught excluder and for barbeques.
>
>Another reason they defend the Speccy is, it's British and the C64 is
>American. A few of the Brits are jealous of the US, this is just another
>angle for them to make fun of the USofA and to make themselves feel better.

Everyone in the world *knows* they are better than the USA.
>
>I love the Spectrum, it's a great little machine for what is was designed to
>do (and I own nearly all the models except the ZX80, 81 and the QL)  I just
>find it a pity that the regulars on comp.sys.sinclair have this silly
>attitude. Sometimes I feel embarrassed to be a speccy fan to be honest. You
>can't even say "Commodore" without calling it commode, for gods sake!
>The people on comp.sys.cbm or the Amstrad newsgroup don't say spackdrum or
>speculum every time we mention the Spectrum, but you just can't let it go
>can you?  I bet you were going to say, "You're taking too seriously blah
>blah, it's just a bit of fun!"  Well I can't be bothered with your so called
>'fun and games' because it isn't, it's more than the C64 vs. the speccy.
>There's no point for comp.sys.cbm'ers to defend the C64, we know what our
>machines can do, and we don't have to prove anything. Even if we did, you
>still choose to believe in the crap you're saying. I wonder if the Iraqi
>info minister owned a Spectrum... Similar mindset if you ask me...

I think you'll find that there are some who constantly refer to the little black
wonder as a "spackdrum". I find it most funny that they can't actually find a
legitimate word that puts it down that rhymes!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 9:57:03 PM
>The Speckdrum might have the more queer Fellowship,
>but it still has only a Z80.

Which part of the Z80 is a problem?  The fact it has more registers, a
faster clock speed or that the instruction set was more comprehensive
and let you save ram?

[)amien

0
Damien
7/16/2003 10:07:45 PM
I demand that Etienne von Wettingfeld may or may not have written...

> The Starglider wrote:
[snip]
>> We have class, and taste, and that's why we know that the C64 is crap.

> I may very well be. But I can't judge the Speccy because Holland is a
> wealthy country so everybody had C64s in my days.

What? No BBCs? Strange people...

-- 
| Darren Salt | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington,
| RISC OS,    | s zap,tartarus,org            | Northumberland
| Linux       | @                             | Toon Army
|   Has Ian Collier caught up yet?

You can never find any given item until you replace it or no longer need it.
0
Darren
7/16/2003 10:16:40 PM
Frodo Morris wrote ...

>OK, remove any and all expansion cards from your PCI, AGP and ISA slots,
>and tell me how good your PC's graphics capability is.

My newest PC has 1280 x 1024 pixels at 32-bit color depth on the
motherboard.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!







0
Sam
7/16/2003 10:22:19 PM
The Starglider wrote ...

>But it is simply my job to ensure you all realise that the Commode 64 is
>utter crap. It was a useless machine, ugly, expensive, and just plain crap.
>
>Once you all realise this, you will lead happier lives.

Typical babbling of 12 year-old gibberish.

Once Starglider realizes this, he/she/it will lead a happier life.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!







0
Sam
7/16/2003 10:22:20 PM
"Mike Leenders" <mikeleenders@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
news:bf4hq6$9kj$1@reader08.wxs.nl...
> Which one is frustrated???


>snip 10k message<

Which one's a top posting n00b?


0
Phil
7/16/2003 10:29:30 PM
Bill Bertram <ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:

> I mentioned the
> Iraqi info minister because he spouts the total opposite of truth, like you
> flamers do... Has nothing to do with dictators...

I mentioned dictators because US people have this habit of equating
Evil=x, where "x" is the last pin-up enemy their president decides to
invent. You live in the same nation as George Pinocchio Bush, and you
talk about "truth"? Come on.

> lets see if they the go for the obvious insult, and you didn't disappoint,

Hey, it's a flame war, it's supposed to be *made* of obvious insults.
Play by the rules, bring up cheese or cows or watches, or anything you
consider an obvious insult.

> You know you're right, we actually agree on something... only sane people by
> C64s

Yep. One wonders why they decided to get mad on a breadbox. Spectrum
users are still sane *after* they got their Speccy. :-P

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 10:30:24 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 22:22:20 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:

>
>The Starglider wrote ...
>
>>But it is simply my job to ensure you all realise that the Commode 64 is
>>utter crap. It was a useless machine, ugly, expensive, and just plain crap.
>>
>>Once you all realise this, you will lead happier lives.
>
>Typical babbling of 12 year-old gibberish.
>
>Once Starglider realizes this, he/she/it will lead a happier life.
>
I realised when I was 12, that no matter how much I tried, I couldn't find any
use for the commode.

After that, I was much happier.

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/16/2003 10:36:16 PM
"Biggo" <big-go@dplanet.ch> wrote in message
news:1fy7spa.d2rabe11omc9nN%big-go@dplanet.ch...
> Bill Bertram <ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:

> You live in the same nation as George Pinocchio Bush, and you
> talk about "truth"? Come on.

Last time I checked, Tony Blair was the leader of my nation...

>> Yep. One wonders why they decided to get mad on a breadbox. Spectrum
> users are still sane *after* they got their Speccy. :-P

Nah, you missed "in" in front of that sane bit, mate. :-P


0
Bill
7/16/2003 10:41:50 PM
Duncan Snowden <dss@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in 
news:Yam2NN.AmigaOS.1C576420.13391FA3@tnt-6-20.easynet.co.uk:

> Derek Jolly. Tuesday. comp.sys.sinclair. Tch, eh?
> 
>> "shephed" <smokey@twist1up.com> wrote in news:oLZQa.796$ib2.120539
>> @twister.neo.rr.com:
>> 
>>> You might win, but your still retarded.
>> 
>> My still retarded what?
> 
> It would appear that the verb "to retard" isn't transitive in this sense;
> possibly it's some kind of technical term used in distilling industry:
> "Jings! All mah whisky got spoiled efter the still retarded. Er... Hoots
> mon, or something". Clearly, victory gained at such expense to one's
> machinery would have to be considered somewhat phyrric.
> 
> Er, do you own a distillery?

No.  I think if I did the shortfall after the years in storage would be a 
little too much to blame on the angels.
-- 
Derek Jolly (derek at rivetsoft dot freeserve dot co dot uk)
Leaner, cleaner homepage: http://rivet.50megs.com/
comp.sys.sinclair folklore FAQ: http://rivet.50megs.com/cssfolk.html
YASPIC v1.5.1: http://rivet.50megs.com/speccy.html
0
Derek
7/16/2003 10:47:34 PM
Bill Bertram <ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:

> "Biggo" <big-go@dplanet.ch> wrote in message
> news:1fy7spa.d2rabe11omc9nN%big-go@dplanet.ch...
> > You live in the same nation as George Pinocchio Bush, and you
> > talk about "truth"? Come on.
> 
> Last time I checked, Tony Blair was the leader of my nation...

Erm... it's not a thing to be proud of, actually.

You live outside the US and you use AOL? My God, the world's at an end.

> Nah, you missed "in" in front of that sane bit, mate. :-P

Naah, the c64 is crap. :-P

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/16/2003 11:03:59 PM
Just because you say it doesn't make it so.

Is this really all you can find to do?

        --Decimal Cat

"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:oeo7hvsj6gufcf2ff2ntiv162rrq05m29q@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:11:15 +0200, "Roland (.funxiun.)"
> <NOSPAMusenetNOSPAM@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)> wrote:
>
> >here we go again...
> >
> That's the best counter-argument you could come up with. In that case, I
am
> right. The C64 was, is and always will be crap.
> -- 
>           ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble"
in
>           *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail
address
>           *                                             *      TO REPLY.
>           *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
>           *                                             *    /_  _\
>           ***********************************************   | O  O |
>
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo_______
____


0
Decimal
7/16/2003 11:26:16 PM
Hi Mike,

thanks for the fullquote, I actually was into the mood of reading it again.
Thanks so much!

*rolls eyes*

/Steppe


0
Steppe
7/16/2003 11:48:00 PM
On 16 Jul 2003 12:03:36 -0700, hannibal@videocam.net.au (hannibal)
wrote:

> since all the rest of
>the Spectrum scene seem to be driven only by frustrated englishmen).

The most prolific supplier of Spectrum hardware is an organisation
called Sintech. They're from that well known part of England, called
"Germany".

Aye thank yew.

>Ok, now take you Spectrums, with
>which you probably can't do anything important these days,

I like the way you said that after talking about music demos on the
64.

> because
>most of the actual stuff produced for the Speccy runns on the russians
>clones,

Runs only on the Russian clones? I don't think so.

The bulk of Spectrum software is from the machine's commercial heyday
- the 1980s and early 1990s - all intended for the Spectrum 48/128.

>if you are unlucky, get yourself an Speccy emulator and start
>looking at the Spectrum demos. I have seen most of them, so I can pin
>point you to the best of them. So start with Dogma, Inbetween, Shit
>for brainz, Binary Love, ... etc. Are you shocked yet? Have you
>finally seen what the Spectrum can really do? Check that blocky
>graphics carefully, those giant pixels of the speccy are really scary
>no? :)

The C64 has the chunky pixels, not the Speccy.

>I'll start with some
>older games. Look at how Green Beret was on C64 and how dull and
>colorless was in the Speccy.

Colours != game.

> Then look at masterpieces like Mayhem in
>monsterland, look at the colors (it had new colors on the c64, using
>all kinds of tricks), look at the Creatures series, Turrican (have you
>guys actually played Turrican on the speccy, it's hillarious) 

Turbo Espirt on the 64.
Feud on the 64.
Target Renegade on the 64.

My, how we laughed...

>Some of the spectrum
>users said that the spectrum is still sold, but the quantities are so
>small that it doesn't even matter.

I guess VHS is better than Betamax then...

>  Some say the c64 is ugly? Are you
>guys insane, have you actually saw a C64c? Just look at how beautiful
>the spectrum rusian clones are, they seem to be designed with an axe
>not with a machine.

They aren't official.

> Didn't you found  amusing how frustrated the
>speccy users are (this doesn't come as a surprise for me, as I too
>once had a Spectrum, in my youth, and I perfectly rememeber the moment
>when my dad smashed it to the wall, that damn thing reseted too often
>by itself). I didn't saw a commodore users starting a flamewar now,
>what is the purpose of this when you are perfectly satisfied with your
>computer? Look at how spread the Commodore is in the world, it's
>practically everywhere

Or was. Status of Commodore? Or was it Escom? Hmm...

> (all of Europe, US, Canada, South America, 
>Australia (even Tasmania), even China, where the reds illegally cloned
>it massively, and in the end Iraq :))

Iraq has suffered enough!

>There are so many things happening in the Commodore world, the
>Spectrum user can only dream at what the commodore did and does.

Yes, I always wanted my disks to load in longer than 3 seconds. I
could only wish the Spectrum's graphics look like they were done on a
teletext system. I really wish the Spectrum's game library was far
less than the current ~10,000 it is at the moment.

>Indeed, the Spectrum scene is just a 'sect', but Commodore Scene is a
>religion !!!

I agree, as religion holds back the progress of the world.

>Please don't take my message as an insult to your computer, I have
>absolutly no problems or issues with the Speccy, I respect it for what
>it does. But please, stop being such morons and attack the C64 driven
>only by the hate that your computer is not so powerful and versatile
>as our C64 is.

Mhz?

> Let it be, use your Speccys quietly(learn this from the
>rusians speccy users, which are smart enough to igonore you and don't
>have your problems) or better come join the C64 scene :)))))

I tried joining the C64 scene, but I had better things to do than wait
for a C64 game to load, like having a couple of birthdays.

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
Peter
7/16/2003 11:51:02 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 23:22:34 +0200, Etienne von Wettingfeld
<etienne@xs4none.nl> wrote:

>>>> It isn't. Special Olympics are for physically disabled persons, while
>>>> "retarded" refers to mentally handicapped persons.
>>>> True or not, it's a stupid thing to say, not because you're telling
>>>> someone "you're retarded" (which, in fact, you're not), but because
>>>> you're putting down an entire "class" of people who have nothing to do
>>>> with the discussion.
>>>They don't? I thought they were in the Speccy camp.
>> Couldn't be. We have class, and taste, and that's why we know that the C64
>> is crap.
>I may very well be. But I can't judge the Speccy because Holland is a
>wealthy country

Anyone got a URL that shows the value of the pound to the Euro?

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
see-my-sig5 (712)
7/17/2003 12:01:45 AM
The Starglider wrote ...

>On 16 Jul 2003 14:27:54 -0700, yihq@2nybbles.com (Zed Yago) wrote:
>>The Speckdrum might have the more queer Fellowship,
>>but it still has only a Z80.
>>
>Which was still more advanced and faster the the piece of shit that ran
>your commodes.

Your commodes over there have microprocessors?  Do the world a favor.  Place
your head in the bowl and press the FLUSH key.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!







0
Sam
7/17/2003 12:13:38 AM
The Starglider wrote ...

>Couldn't be. We have class, and taste, and that's why we know that the C64
is
>crap.

Oh?  What class do you have?  3rd grade?

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!







0
Sam
7/17/2003 12:13:39 AM
The Starglider aka Wibble wrote ...

>I think you'll find that there are some who constantly refer to the little
>black wonder as a "spackdrum". I find it most funny that they can't
>actually find a legitimate word that puts it down that rhymes!

spackdrum
rectum

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!













0
Sam
7/17/2003 12:13:39 AM
The Starglider aka Wibble wrote ...

>So, so far, not one single commode user has come up with a decent argument
>to attempt to prove to us that the Commode 64 was actually any good (which
>it isn't).
>
>So, that must mean, that there is a lot of truth in what I said about it.
>Crap games, crap graphics, crap sound, crap design, crap cost (when
>released).
>
>I'm utterly stunned it lasted as long as it did!

Stuff like that, written by the winner of the "Wibble of the Year" award, is
a good endorsement for the greatness of the Commodore 64.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!









0
Sam
7/17/2003 12:13:40 AM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 23:07:13 +0100, "Bill Bertram"
<ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:

>> > I wonder if the Iraqi
>> > info minister owned a Spectrum... Similar mindset if you ask me...
>> Good argument, it closes oh so beautifully your "we're smarter than
>> this" post.
>Why thank you, how gracious of you... ;-)

>> This is he point where I bring up Adolf Hitler and the thread stops,
>> right? You know, Hitler, the guy who was Evil personified until another
>> ex-friend of the USA started to act weird? Remember? He came before
>> Osama, before Saddam, even before Noriega and Khomeini and
>No this is where you go off on a tangent about dictators... I mentioned the
>Iraqi info minister because he spouts the total opposite of truth, like you
>flamers do... Has nothing to do with dictators...

The Iraqi Information Minister has nothing to do with dictators? Eh?

I'm pretty sure that he was seen a few months back with one of the
world's most famous blood-thirsty civilian-killing fascists.

If you're looking for a pic, see this...

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2002/US/09/30/sproject.irq.regime.change/rumsfeld.80s.jpg

....although I'm not sure which blood-thirsty civilian-killing fascist
it is. I do get confused.

>>(sorry if I seem to be over-explaining myself, pals, I'm replying to an
>AOLer after
>> all).
>Ooh, how cutting, I'm a AOL user...

Yes. Why?

> Made my day that has, you people are so
>predictable, I was going to use another email address, but then I thought,
>lets see if they the go for the obvious insult, and you didn't disappoint,
>lol

Is that e-mail address part of a permanent AOL account? I mean, I know
loads of people who have used AOL, I first started out with it. You
know, just about everyone messes around with the "X hours free!" demo
they get, then they cancel the service and move to a real ISP.

I see no real reason to use AOL unless you like big bright colours and
pop-ups.

>> Naaaah, not even Hitler, fscked up as he could be, would have bought a
>> c64. <gdrlh>
>You know you're right, we actually agree on something... only sane people by
>C64s

Yeah, that Stephen Hawking swears by 'em.

I too swear by Commodores... usually "they're f**king s**t!".

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
Peter
7/17/2003 12:20:03 AM
"Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote in message
news:TSlRa.14459$kI5.4831@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>
> The Starglider aka Wibble wrote ...
>
> >I think you'll find that there are some who constantly refer to the
little
> >black wonder as a "spackdrum". I find it most funny that they can't
> >actually find a legitimate word that puts it down that rhymes!
>
> spackdrum
> rectum

You forgot the best one of all "Speculum" lol


0
Bill
7/17/2003 12:26:19 AM
> Yes, I did.

I'm happy for you! :-)

> > Both computers share the same processor
> > and sound chip so both versions of the same game would be more or less
> equal
> > sometimes the spectrum version is better, other times it the CPC
version.
> > This got more to do with the programmers talents than the computers.
> >
> > Now on to the graphics. If a game was designed on the Amstrad to use all
> it
> > graphical features it just blows the spectrum away,
>
>
> YOU DON'T SAY! Next, you'll be telling me that the PC has better graphics
> than an Amiga (which obviously makes it a better machine in every respect
> known to man ... not).

Ok, think of it like this, the Amstrad has one up on the Spectrum due to
graphics, but what is it that the Spectrum has up on the Amstrad? i know
what you saying, like I prefer my CPC more than my Amiga also cause I'm not
too happy about swapping floppies every few seconds for the OS etc. But the
Amiga is surely the better computer overall. Let me know what the Spectrum
has over the Amstrad, then I can die happy or something, lol


> > however a lot of the
> > games were designed for the weakest computer so that porting over to
> > different formats would be easier and cheaper
>
> Either that, or many more people made games for the 'weakest' computer
> because many more people bought, played and enjoyed the games more than
they
> did on other formats?

Why would they enjoy the game more on a Spectrum, it depends on the game in
question. By the way, is it not Commodore 64 that had more sales? Terrible
machine.

> >hence many Amstrad games look
> > like Spectums dull O' graphics amd don't take advantage of the full 16
> > colours on screen (more on the PLUS).
>
> Hardly anything in the history of man took advantage of the Amstrad's full
> potential ... I wonder why that is?

Cause they just too good maybe? lol

> > Correct me if I'm wrong?
>
> I did.

No you did not. In fact I corrected you.

No need to thank me, it's my pleasure :-p

John


0
John
7/17/2003 12:35:46 AM
> >So it should, the CPC is a good computer. The only reason the Spectrum
came
> >second was due to its larger user base. C64 compared to Spectrum, well to
me
> >its a hard one, depends on what you looking for in a computer I guess.
But
> >CPC against the Spectrum, well the CPC win in every respect, well  I
can't
> >honestly think of one thing that the Spectrum was better at?
> >
> Sales?

Yes you got something, nothing technical but still it's something. See I
knew every computer is good at something. Well Done! Now I can go around
saying my Nissan is better than a Ferrari cause of "Sales" :-)

NOTE: Not saying that Amstrad/Spectrum/Whatever is the Ferrari of computers
or anything.
>
> --
>           ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble"
in
>           *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail
address
>           *                                             *      TO REPLY.
>           *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
>           *                                             *    /_  _\
>           ***********************************************   | O  O |
>
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo_______
____


0
John
7/17/2003 12:39:33 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 01:26:19 +0100, "Bill Bertram"
<ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:

>> >I think you'll find that there are some who constantly refer to the
>little
>> >black wonder as a "spackdrum". I find it most funny that they can't
>> >actually find a legitimate word that puts it down that rhymes!
>> spackdrum
>> rectum
>You forgot the best one of all "Speculum" lol

But that doesn't rhyme.

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
Peter
7/17/2003 12:45:44 AM
The Starglider wrote ...

>I realised when I was 12, that no matter how much I tried, I couldn't find
>any use for the commode.

Are you paper trained, or do you go outside?

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!







0
Sam
7/17/2003 2:19:03 AM
More like once Starglider realizes this, s/h/it will lead a happier life. .

        --Decimal Cat


"Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote in message
news:wekRa.14104$kI5.7833@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>
> The Starglider wrote ...
>
> >But it is simply my job to ensure you all realise that the Commode 64 is
> >utter crap. It was a useless machine, ugly, expensive, and just plain
crap.
> >
> >Once you all realise this, you will lead happier lives.
>
> Typical babbling of 12 year-old gibberish.
>
> Once Starglider realizes this, he/she/it will lead a happier life.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
>      Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


0
Decimal
7/17/2003 2:48:02 AM
Peter Thomas wrote:
> 
> I'm pretty sure that he was seen a few months back with one of the
> world's most famous blood-thirsty civilian-killing fascists.
> 
> If you're looking for a pic, see this...
> 
> http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2002/US/09/30/sproject.irq.regime.change/rumsfeld.80s.jpg
> 
> ...although I'm not sure which blood-thirsty civilian-killing fascist
> it is. I do get confused.

When was he last seen with Rumsfeld?
0
Richard
7/17/2003 2:50:20 AM
And you haven't yet come up with a single decent argument to prove to us
that the Commodore 64 was actually a bad system at all, other than that it's
your half-baked opinion.  Saying "it's crap" over and over doesn't
constitute factual proof - only opinion. :)

But anyway. If we're going to go by Starglider logic, the moon is made of
green cheese and I drove my car to Mars this morning. Since nobody has put
up an argument against this, it must be truth.

        --Decimal Cat


"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:51fbhvcr8bmn4tredrr430jlvvni4672a8@4ax.com...
> So, so far, not one single commode user has come up with a decent argument
to
> attempt to prove to us that the Commode 64 was actually any good (which it
> isn't).
>
> So, that must mean, that there is a lot of truth in what I said about it.
Crap
> games, crap graphics, crap sound, crap design, crap cost (when released).
>
> I'm utterly stunned it lasted as long as it did!
> -- 
>           ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble"
in
>           *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail
address
>           *                                             *      TO REPLY.
>           *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
>           *                                             *    /_  _\
>           ***********************************************   | O  O |
>
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo_______
____


0
Decimal
7/17/2003 2:58:57 AM
I've always thought the two scenes could benefit more from a friendly
competition than from a "my platform is better than your platform" war.
Competition drives development, and friendly competition allows the sharing
of ideas under some circumstances. I've never even seen a Speccy, let alone
used one - so I can only comment on the technical side of the C64 when this
takes place. But until people get their heads out of their rectums and
realize that personal attacks don't amount to anything more than a penis
size contest (sorry ladies, no sexism involved - you can substitute in
"breast size contest" or whatever), I just sit back and generally mock both
sides of the argument.

Who cares what's better? Use what you like. By the logic some of the people
in this thread are using, your 8-bits are all crap because my P3/1GHZ@1030
with a GeForce II MX and 256MB of Mushkin RAM at 2-2-2 and a 60GB Maxtor HD
is better than your computers.

        --Decimal Cat


"Dunny" <paul.dunn4@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:bf148n$9r19a$1@ID-106816.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> You don't understand. This is "tradition" - only Starglider has gone and
done it
> a bit differently. The Annual flamewar should start with a crosspost "The
C64
> was crap - Discuss" to c.s.c. We then start with petty bickering, until
the real
> techy guys get involved, when we start having some well informed,
interesting
> arguments about he relative merits of each machine.
>
> It's just fun, really. The last couple were excellent reading.
>


0
Decimal
7/17/2003 4:27:30 AM
Darren Salt wrote:

>> I may very well be. But I can't judge the Speccy because Holland is a
>> wealthy country so everybody had C64s in my days.
> 
> What? No BBCs? Strange people...

Well, one guy did have an Elcorn Electron, claiming it to be superiour to
the C64. But he bought a C64 when he had the money so he could play games
like everybody else.

-- 
Etienne von Wettingfeld                                 [SuSE Linux]
Voice mail & Fax: +31 (84) 8835157    -//-     www.doomdark.demon.nl

           { -*- Nam Et Ipsa Scientia Potestas Est -*- }       MMIII
0
Etienne
7/17/2003 4:58:59 AM
"Biggo" <big-go@dplanet.ch> wrote in message
news:1fy7pfd.vqtdr356svifN%big-go@dplanet.ch...
> hannibal <hannibal@videocam.net.au> wrote:
>
> > go and see what the Commodore can do
>
> I see: it can render a man verbose, dull and incredibly lacking in the
> humour department. Oh, and it's crap, btw. Discuss.

Simply unbelievable.

Here someone gave you a point-by-point comparision / contrast between the 64
and Spectrum yet all you have to offer in exchange is THAT?

Y'know, not only did you Spackdrum lusers LAUNCH this pissing contest, you
Sinclair-heads have YET to tell us WHY the Spectrum is oh so much better
than the 64 - all you guys have done is sling insults. To me, the Spectrum
is and always will be JUST a ZX81 with color - I have owned one in the past,
so I know of what I speak.

Simply unbelievable.

Dave


0
Dave
7/17/2003 5:42:34 AM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9cd2v0ran797pmplro@4ax.com>...

Are U refering to ZX Spectrum48 vs C64? HA HA HA HA!

That rubber thing cannot be considered as a computer. What a Troll.

> Let's look at the evidence:
> 
> Slow. A poxy slow processor,

Wow!

"6502 uses a single clock cycle (the base cycle, plus a cycle rotated
90 degrees out of phase) to generate the timing for four internal
execution stages, so that there were instructions which executed in
one external 'cycle' (this is different from clock-doubling, which
uses a phase-locked-loop to generate a faster internal clock which is
synchronised with an external clock). Z80, uses the external clock
directly, so an equivalent instruction would take four cycles, meaning
a 2MHz 6502 would be roughly equivalent to a 8MHz Z80."

I happen to have learned machine code from the book "Z80 & 6502
Machine Code". Have you noticed that 6502 machine instructions execute
in minimum 2, maximum 6 machine cycles, while Z80 machine instructions
execute in minimum 6 (or was it 8?), maximum 20+ machine cycles.

> hence the reliance on hardware based sprites to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.

I bet you'll say the same thing about procesors in the last 20 years.
"They are all crap. They use FPUs."

Hardware sprites are a great idea, since sprites are common thing.

> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How
> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely fast
> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior??? 

beep, beep! hi hi.

> What
> are you all on?

Common sence.

> Or are you all tine deaf?
> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.

You never had access to the full 64K of RAM, because you don't know
how, i have.
It's quite simple, you'll just have to figure out.

> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the > worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer.

Me too. :) Anyway, all old style interpreted Basic on 8-bit computers
are infunctional. You can only play around with it.

> Even typing nothing on it get's that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding > mistakes.

Basic? How old are U? 4th grade?
What if you have to type Pascal? You redefine the whole rubberboard?
Axiom: Old style C64 has the best keyboard ever.

> Sales - The commode is dead.

commode? I have no problem with that. :)

> At least Spectrums are still being sold around the
> world.

As postcards. :))

> Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only manage
> about 22 million.

There's got to be a lot of postcards around the world.

> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.

1st you have to find it's position on the tape with your walkman.
I've seen C64 load 64K in 10-20 sec, from disk. Seriosly, you could
understand the advantiges of disk's only if you had one. Even if the
disk is 50 times slower than tape.

> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.

One Z80 rubber wraped.

> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!

Useless.
0
spacerogue5
7/17/2003 6:30:20 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:13:39 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:

>
>The Starglider aka Wibble wrote ...
>
>>I think you'll find that there are some who constantly refer to the little
>>black wonder as a "spackdrum". I find it most funny that they can't
>>actually find a legitimate word that puts it down that rhymes!
>
>spackdrum
>rectum
>
I'll give you rectrum, but Spackdrum? What the fuck is a spackdrum?

Oh, and the C64 is still crap.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 6:42:43 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:42:34 -0500, "Dave Dahle" <dd-ah-le@dtg.net> wrote:

>"Biggo" <big-go@dplanet.ch> wrote in message
>news:1fy7pfd.vqtdr356svifN%big-go@dplanet.ch...
>> hannibal <hannibal@videocam.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> > go and see what the Commodore can do
>>
>> I see: it can render a man verbose, dull and incredibly lacking in the
>> humour department. Oh, and it's crap, btw. Discuss.
>
>Simply unbelievable.
>
>Here someone gave you a point-by-point comparision / contrast between the 64
>and Spectrum yet all you have to offer in exchange is THAT?
>
>Y'know, not only did you Spackdrum lusers LAUNCH this pissing contest, you
>Sinclair-heads have YET to tell us WHY the Spectrum is oh so much better
>than the 64 - all you guys have done is sling insults. To me, the Spectrum
>is and always will be JUST a ZX81 with color - I have owned one in the past,
>so I know of what I speak.
>
Did you not *READ* the original post??? Our reasons is because our computer is
not what yours is. I shall repost:

Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites to
make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How
I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely fast
3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip grating
away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior??? What
are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the worst
basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's that
stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a program in
basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding mistakes.
Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold around the
world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only manage
about 22 million.
Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer to load
a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being superbly
designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge keys
(required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
small, light, powerful!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 6:45:46 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:51:02 +0100, Peter Thomas <see-my-sig@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On 16 Jul 2003 12:03:36 -0700, hannibal@videocam.net.au (hannibal)
>wrote:

>> Then look at masterpieces like Mayhem in
>>monsterland, look at the colors (it had new colors on the c64, using
>>all kinds of tricks), look at the Creatures series, Turrican (have you
>>guys actually played Turrican on the speccy, it's hillarious) 
>
>Turbo Espirt on the 64.
>Feud on the 64.
>Target Renegade on the 64.
>
>My, how we laughed...
>
Don't forget:

Starglider 64
Carrier Command 64

Truly disasters of epic proportions.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 6:49:47 AM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:14:53 -0500, "Dave Dahle" <dd-ah-le@dtg.net> wrote:


>
>And there you have it. It all comes down to what each user is used to.
>Whether it's poking away on a rubber chiclet keyboard or merrily tapping
>away on a typewriter-style keyboard... if you're comfortable with it, hey,
>why gripe about what the other side uses? If you can't think of anything
>nice to say, then just don't say anything!
>
>Now - a historical question - since this is apparently an "annual"
>"tradition", I wonder which side has inaugurated more flamewars?
>
We have (or rather I have), and damned proud of it too!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 6:50:31 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:13:40 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:

>
>The Starglider aka Wibble wrote ...
>
>>So, so far, not one single commode user has come up with a decent argument
>>to attempt to prove to us that the Commode 64 was actually any good (which
>>it isn't).
>>
>>So, that must mean, that there is a lot of truth in what I said about it.
>>Crap games, crap graphics, crap sound, crap design, crap cost (when
>>released).
>>
>>I'm utterly stunned it lasted as long as it did!
>
>Stuff like that, written by the winner of the "Wibble of the Year" award, is
>a good endorsement for the greatness of the Commodore 64.
>
If you wanna use the "Crap games, crap graphics etc..." bit for an endorsement,
go right ahead! It'll be the first time a commode user has said something
truthful.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 6:51:54 AM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 22:58:57 -0400, "Decimal Cat" <wells@acadia.net> wrote:

>And you haven't yet come up with a single decent argument to prove to us
>that the Commodore 64 was actually a bad system at all, other than that it's
>your half-baked opinion.  Saying "it's crap" over and over doesn't
>constitute factual proof - only opinion. :)
>
>But anyway. If we're going to go by Starglider logic, the moon is made of
>green cheese and I drove my car to Mars this morning. Since nobody has put
>up an argument against this, it must be truth.

The proof was in the original post. Here it is again for those who missed it.
>
Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites to
make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How
I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely fast
3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip grating
away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior??? What
are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the worst
basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's that
stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a program in
basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding mistakes.
Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold around the
world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only manage
about 22 million.
Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer to load
a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being superbly
designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge keys
(required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
small, light, powerful!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 6:53:15 AM
"Shaddy" <shad0w1@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2bVQa.24874$Nf.65486@sea-read.news.verio.net>...
> "The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message...
> 
> > So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
> 
> Hi.
> 
> What is a speccy?  Sorry for my ignorance, but I never even heard of it.  I
> do remember a time in the 80s where the C64 was intensely popular.  When I
> was at one point consumed in everything C64, I never bothered to notice any
> other systems because I guess they really weren't contenders in terms of
> popularity.  I do remember the TI-99, the Tandy CRS-80, but they were all
> garbage.  I think you and your speccy are an analogy comparable to OS/2 vs
> Windows.

Hey, i like OS/2 better than Windows.

>  Let's say that thing you call speccy or spectrum or whatever the
> heck it is, let's say it is better technically, who really cares?

Better technically? :))
It's a useless rubber shit, with no i/o ports.
Have anyone seen RS232 or Centronix on ZX Spectrum?
You can connect C64 on a PLC if you want and make it usefull.

As for Amiga, it had ChangeTaskPri 10 years before anyone thinking
ever changeing task priorities on PC. Even in 1995, only posible with
a hammer. :)

>  The
> leader was always C64, like Windows was over OS/2.
> 
> Now go play with your speccy, you little child.

over + out.
0
spacerogue5
7/17/2003 7:03:57 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 01:35:46 +0100, "John Kavanagh" <johnkavanagh@cpcoxygen.net>
wrote:


>
>Ok, think of it like this, the Amstrad has one up on the Spectrum due to
>graphics, but what is it that the Spectrum has up on the Amstrad? i know
>what you saying, like I prefer my CPC more than my Amiga also cause I'm not
>too happy about swapping floppies every few seconds for the OS etc. But the
>Amiga is surely the better computer overall. Let me know what the Spectrum
>has over the Amstrad, then I can die happy or something, lol

Sales, userbase, games, software, expansion. There, I think that's pretty damned
important.

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 7:04:19 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:27:30 -0400, "Decimal Cat" <wells@acadia.net> wrote:


>
>Who cares what's better? Use what you like. By the logic some of the people
>in this thread are using, your 8-bits are all crap because my P3/1GHZ@1030
>with a GeForce II MX and 256MB of Mushkin RAM at 2-2-2 and a 60GB Maxtor HD
>is better than your computers.
>
Unless you compare it to my 3.2Ghz P4, with 1Gb RAM, 200Gb Hard drive,
Soundblaster Audigy 5.1 Digital soundcard, GeForce FX 256Mg Gfx card and DVD
writer drive.

Which then makes your computer worse than mine.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 7:08:29 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 02:19:03 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:

>
>The Starglider wrote ...
>
>>I realised when I was 12, that no matter how much I tried, I couldn't find
>>any use for the commode.
>
>Are you paper trained, or do you go outside?

No, I go outside to the commode, looks like a little beige box with crap specs
and piss all over it.
>

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 7:09:36 AM
Richard Wilson <rich@bitwise-systems.com> wrote:

> I'll go off on that tangent! I thought it was the US dictator that
> spouted the total opposite of the truth. You know, the confused Robin
> Hood wannabee who robs from the poor to give to the rich.

Mmmmmm, trolls rolled into trolls!
Arguing about one's president is the "yo' momma so fat" of the 3rd
millennium. Endless fun!

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/17/2003 7:22:52 AM
Dave Dahle <dd-ah-le@dtg.net> wrote:

> Here someone gave you a point-by-point comparision / contrast between the 64
> and Spectrum yet all you have to offer in exchange is THAT?

Just what I needed, a point-by-point endless, boring, unconvincing rant.
You can't compare an empty breadbox with a classy computer. A big, slow,
smelly, heavy, gas-hungry American car vs. a lightning-fast European
scooter. The Speccy simply runs circles around the c64. It's so easy,
it's not even fun.

> you Sinclair-heads have YET to tell us WHY the Spectrum is oh so much better
> than the 64 

Why should we? Buy a Spectrum and discover its superiority for
yourselves.

> Simply unbelievable.

Here's where I agree with you. After all these years on the 'net, I had
lost any hopes for a good ol' pissing contest.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/17/2003 7:22:53 AM
"Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote in message
news:USlRa.14460$kI5.14332@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>
> The Starglider aka Wibble wrote ...
>
> >So, so far, not one single commode user has come up with a decent
argument
> >to attempt to prove to us that the Commode 64 was actually any good
(which
> >it isn't).
> >
> >So, that must mean, that there is a lot of truth in what I said about it.
> >Crap games, crap graphics, crap sound, crap design, crap cost (when
> >released).
> >
> >I'm utterly stunned it lasted as long as it did!
>
> Stuff like that, written by the winner of the "Wibble of the Year" award,
is
> a good endorsement for the greatness of the Commodore 64.


Most of the world doesn't even know it exists though, and those that do
generally just sneer at an overly expensive, painfully slow loading computer
which mainly subsisted on conversions from other machines.


0
Phil
7/17/2003 7:47:23 AM
> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based
sprites to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.

....and the lack of decent video hardware means that the Spectrum spends
most of its CPU cycles to generate a video signal making it slower in
spite of a (slightly) faster processor.

> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown,

If you would take your head out of your ass you would see other colors
as well.

> and really *REALLY* blocky graphics.

Resolution Commodore 64: 320x200 (can be increased by opening up the
borders)
Resolution Spectrum: 256x192

> My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip grating
> away at some tune.

I'm sure you think the beeper of the spectrum is better. Apparently you
judge the rest by the same standards which explains why you believe the
Spectrum is better than the C64.

> It's not clean, and you people think that's superior??? What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?

No, but you obviously are.

> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.

As others explained to you, you have access to 66046 bytes of RAM as
opposed to 16K or 48K on the Spectrum.

> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be
the worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer.

Real programmers don't need BASIC.

> Even typing nothing on it get's that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode.

Maybe you should learn to spell. Sir Sinclair anticipated that people
like you would buy a Spectrum, so he invented a system that didn't
require its users spell BASIC keywords.

> At least we could type a program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy

That is if you bothered to figure out all those shift key combinations
before you smacked it against the wall.

> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
around the
> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
manage
> about 22 million.

.....Lies, lies and statistics...even the Guinness Book of Records
disagrees with you on this one...

> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes
longer to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.

Considering the ignorance you have demonstrated so far you will probably
never have heard of fast loader software which would speed up loading up
to 25 times and were used by the vast majority of the C64 users.

> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.

You get what you pay for, in the case of the ZX Spectrum crappy
hardware.

> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with
huge keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype).
Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!

....and not to forget colorfull like a toy for a three year old kid
(which happend to be its intended audience, though some people seem to
have missed that point).



0
Peter
7/17/2003 8:34:54 AM
The Starglider wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:27:30 -0400, "Decimal Cat" <wells@acadia.net>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>
>>Who cares what's better? Use what you like. By the logic some of the
>>people in this thread are using, your 8-bits are all crap because my
>>P3/1GHZ@1030 with a GeForce II MX and 256MB of Mushkin RAM at 2-2-2 and a
>>60GB Maxtor HD is better than your computers.
>>
> Unless you compare it to my 3.2Ghz P4, with 1Gb RAM, 200Gb Hard drive,
> Soundblaster Audigy 5.1 Digital soundcard, GeForce FX 256Mg Gfx card and
> DVD writer drive.

And it still don't run Spectaculator, Spin, Fuse, VICE, or MAME/MESS any
better than my modest PIII 550MHz, 512meg, 40+20gig HDs, Gforce 3 TI, SB
Live! Value.
 
> Which then makes your computer worse than mine.

I probably got the slowest computer of all these, less money on the computer
means more beer money. :-)
-- 
Paul S
0
paul
7/17/2003 9:51:16 AM
The Starglider wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:27:30 -0400, "Decimal Cat" <wells@acadia.net>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>
>>Who cares what's better? Use what you like. By the logic some of the
>>people in this thread are using, your 8-bits are all crap because my
>>P3/1GHZ@1030 with a GeForce II MX and 256MB of Mushkin RAM at 2-2-2 and a
>>60GB Maxtor HD is better than your computers.
>>
> Unless you compare it to my 3.2Ghz P4, with 1Gb RAM, 200Gb Hard drive,
> Soundblaster Audigy 5.1 Digital soundcard, GeForce FX 256Mg Gfx card and
> DVD writer drive.

And it still don't run Spectaculator, Spin, Fuse, VICE, or MAME/MESS any
better than my modest PIII 550MHz, 512meg, 40+20gig HDs, Gforce 3 TI, SB
Live! Value.
 
> Which then makes your computer worse than mine.

I probably got the slowest computer of all these, less money on the computer
means more beer money. :-)
-- 
Paul S
0
paul
7/17/2003 9:54:11 AM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<k1ichvcvkqrtoberi94mb3n8lhkpo6bijq@4ax.com>...
> On 16 Jul 2003 23:30:20 -0700, spacerogue5@yahoo.com (Vasko Altiparmakov) wrote:
> 
> ...
> >
> >Are U refering to ZX Spectrum48 vs C64? HA HA HA HA!
> >
> >That rubber thing cannot be considered as a computer. What a Troll.
> 
> Actually, either the 48k or the 128k, both were well within the lifespan of the
> commode 64.

It's silly to se a man working on ZX Spectrum 48. It looks like a
calculator. It's imposible to type on a rubber keyboard. Havent seen
Spectrum 128k, but i am sure it has many advanteges over C64. Simply
it's a machine produced in 1985+, however it has no chance against
A1000.

> >
> >> Let's look at the evidence:
> >> 
> >> Slow. A poxy slow processor,
> >
> >Wow!
> >
> >"6502 uses a single clock cycle (the base cycle, plus a cycle rotated
> >90 degrees out of phase) to generate the timing for four internal
> >execution stages, so th
> [snipped!]
> 
> Don't bother with the techno-babble. It's already been well proved that even
> though the 6502 uses less clock cycles, the z80 had better programming methods,
> making it easily possible to still outperform the 6502.

Easy? It's imposible to outperform the 6502 in simple codeing especaly
in lowlevel hardware programing. Maybe in some math calculations, but
you probably refer to Basic programing. True, Spectrum has a better
Basic interpreter than Commodore, but bouth are inpractical as for
that matter any 8bit Basic interpreter.

6502 is a 8bit RISC procesor of that time. You don't seem to uderstand
the power grasp to have basic fetch, increment, shifting, addition
etc. instructions that execute in 3x or 6x less machine cycles, since
that are 80% of the instructions in every program.
Example of good design: Intel made the i80486 to execute MOV
instruction in 1 cycle for the cost of makeing some obsolete
instructions execute in more cycles than on the i80286. That's a good
design.

> >
> >I happen to have learned machine code from the book "Z80 & 6502
> >Machine Code". Have you noticed that 6502 machine instructions execute
> >in minimum 2, maximum 6 machine cycles, while Z80 machine instructions
> >execute in minimum 6 (or was it 8?), maximum 20+ machine cycles.
> 
> Must've been a crap book then.

It's not the book that's important. It's imporatant that a know how
Z80 works better than you. I sugest you check on the internet for
Z80's instruction execution times. + add what i have already said
about the 6502's 4x execution in 1 external clock.

I'll be honest to say this. Z80 is far more comfortable for
programing. Maybe this reflex in the Spectrum's better Basic than
Commodore's. But microsoft has a great reputation for dull programing.
The same thing was with microsoft Amiga Basic. Even enthusiast made
far more usefull Basic's than microsoft.
When it comes to practice raw speed, there is hardly a comercial 8bit
procesor to outpreform 6510.

In addition C64 has many lots of hi-level lang. and OS's. Have you
tried Simons Basic? I have, and even if is as good as Spectrum's Basic
or less or better, no matter, you can only fool around with 8bit
interpreter Basic's. With all Basic's for that matter.

> >
> >> hence the reliance on hardware based sprites to
> >> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
> >
> >I bet you'll say the same thing about procesors in the last 20 years.
> >"They are all crap. They use FPUs."
> >
> >Hardware sprites are a great idea, since sprites are common thing.
> 
> Not that common anymore. Most gaming designs are slowly adapting to 3D now. And
> 3D was something the Commode 64 was shite at.

How do you mean "slowly adapting to 3D"? On a ZX Spectrum?
Quantity? 5000 arcade games on 1 3D game.

> >> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How
> >> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
> >> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely fast
> >> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
> >> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip grating
> >> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior??? 
> >
> >beep, beep! hi hi.
> 
> Beep beep, or with Tim Follin, 6 channel sound with various sound waveforms. Or
> with the AY, 3 channel "clean" goodness, not that grating awful sound the SID
> produces.

I only have heard of 1 chanel beeper noicy sound. Usualy slowing the
rest of the work when playing.

> 
> >> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
> >
> >You never had access to the full 64K of RAM, because you don't know
> >how, i have. It's quite simple, you'll just have to figure out.
> 
> No, we dealt with 128k instead, with a 128k machine that was supported, unlike
> the total lack of software for the commode 128.

C128 is not for games, and came in a bad time when it was mutch smater
to drop it in favour of the Amiga.

> >> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the > worst
> >> basic I have ever seen on any computer.
> >
> >Me too. :) Anyway, all old style interpreted Basic on 8-bit computers
> >are infunctional. You can only play around with it.
> 
> Yes, I don't think I should've included that point in the argument, as it is
> seriously true. Well, you do have the advantage of being able to blame Microsoft
> for that one.
> >
> >> Even typing nothing on it get's that
> >> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a program in
> >> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding > mistakes.
> >
> >Basic? How old are U? 4th grade?
> >What if you have to type Pascal? You redefine the whole rubberboard?
> 
> Er... no, we typed in Pascal. Simple!

At a rate of 1/2 chars per second. :))

> >> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer to load
> >> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
> >
> >1st you have to find it's position on the tape with your walkman.
> >I've seen C64 load 64K in 10-20 sec, from disk. Seriosly, you could
> >understand the advantiges of disk's only if you had one. Even if the
> >disk is 50 times slower than tape.
> 
> that's good to hear. Likewise, I love being able to load 128k into my machine in
> about 3-5 seconds from disk.

I don't understand this... You obvious talk of a 128k Spectrum.
How can a machine designed in 1981 compete to one designed in 1985?
By the time, componets were available at a mutch lower price + there
are 5 years of expirience to fix the mistakes and take better moves.
By that time Apple, Atari and Commodore made 32bit machines, with GUI.
Amiga has the 1st colorfull GUI.
Things were gone that far when the Spectrum 128k came to the world.

As for C64 and ZX48, they are prety mutch at the same time. Year +/-
does not make mutch of a diference in the early 80's. Development was
slow at that time. Time was running mutch slower.

At the Churchill Hotel on Friday the 23rd of April 1982 was the
presentation of ZX Spectrum.
The time Spectrum128k was presented Motorola was in with MC68020 and
Intel with i80386. All 8bit was obsolete. They are inferor for
calculations and hi-level programing. They can be used as controlers
on machines successfuly as in the Commodore and Robotics posting, but
i don't think the Spectrum (48k) can be used mutch, since i don't
think it has implementation for standard i/o ports.
0
spacerogue5
7/17/2003 11:27:45 AM
spacerogue5@yahoo.com (Vasko Altiparmakov) writes:

[1985]
> By that time Apple, Atari and Commodore made 32bit machines, with GUI.

Sinclair did too, namely the QL (as long as the production was not
delayed). Some people believe that if the QL had not been released
in 1984, all the other 16-bitters would not have been released until
several years later if at all.

-- 
Anders Carlsson
0
Anders
7/17/2003 11:43:30 AM
Vasko,

I appreciate that you slapped the butt of this uneducated, poor fellow with
your well-founded arguments. But still, this guy is a troll, probably a 30
year old frustrated programmer that pretends to be 12 just to revive a
stupid flamewar tradition (or the more I think about it, he's probably not
doing it for traditions sake). All I can say is: Don't feed the troll.  ;-)

Regards,
Steppe


0
Steppe
7/17/2003 12:07:14 PM
Anders Carlsson wrote:

> paul s <nospam@nospam.forme> writes:
> 
>> less money on the computer means more beer money. :-)
> 
> The latest computer I spent money to acquire was my Amiga 1200/HDD/1084
> for ~$100. The latest computer I bought new was my Amiga 500+ in 1992.
> 
> Some days I'm contemplating replacing my 200 MHz PC with something new,
> but then I realize I don't have any needs for more processing power, so
> I let it be.

Yup thats why I'm sticking to this PIII system, running both Linux and XP.

The last computer I bought a couple of weeks ago was a Amstrad NC200
notebook cost �3. Yippee I finally bought a laptop.
-- 
Paul S
0
paul
7/17/2003 1:16:51 PM
Vasko Altiparmakov <spacerogue5@yahoo.com> wrote:

> It's imposible to type on a rubber keyboard.

Why should one need to "type"? It's so obvious that the Spectrum isn't a
typewriter.

<big snip>

> I only have heard of 1 chanel beeper noicy sound. Usualy slowing the
> rest of the work when playing.

See? You shouldn't argue about things you haven't even heard of. :-D

> i don't think the Spectrum (48k) can be used mutch, since i don't
> think it has implementation for standard i/o ports.

Ths is a funny thing to say after all the technobabble in your post.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/17/2003 1:18:18 PM
Vasko Altiparmakov wrote:

> The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:<k1ichvcvkqrtoberi94mb3n8lhkpo6bijq@4ax.com>...
>> On 16 Jul 2003 23:30:20 -0700, spacerogue5@yahoo.com (Vasko Altiparmakov)
>> wrote:
>> 
>> ...
>> >
>> >Are U refering to ZX Spectrum48 vs C64? HA HA HA HA!
>> >
>> >That rubber thing cannot be considered as a computer. What a Troll.
>> 
>> Actually, either the 48k or the 128k, both were well within the lifespan
>> of the commode 64.
> 
> It's silly to se a man working on ZX Spectrum 48. It looks like a
> calculator. It's imposible to type on a rubber keyboard. Havent seen
> Spectrum 128k, but i am sure it has many advanteges over C64. Simply
> it's a machine produced in 1985+, however it has no chance against
> A1000.

Of course the Spectrum 128k was a damn sight cheaper than a A1000 in 1985,
like a Ford Sierra was cheaper than a Porsch 911. Both will take you from A
to B but one will get there quicker.

-- 
Paul S
0
paul
7/17/2003 1:28:04 PM
big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) writes:

> It's so obvious that the Spectrum isn't a typewriter.

But you have word processor(s), at least the Tasword series. A magazine
reviewing word processors on various computers ignored looking for one
on the Spectrum, but a few issues later had to recapitulate after
finding Tasword. Approximate apology quote: 

"The reason we didn't look for a word processor was that we thought 
 the Spectrum has as much use for one as a fish has use for a bicycle."

-- 
Anders Carlsson
0
Anders
7/17/2003 1:56:15 PM

> And Jeff wins the award for "Trying to stop a flamewar, but making it
worse by
> posting binaries to non-binary groups, which is a worse offense".


Not intentional, I do know the rules...  I didn't do enough weeding on my
"dictionary.com" cut & paste.   Like a typical felon, I will blame someone
else...  DARN GOOGLE NEWGROUP interface!   Yeah, It's their fault. <smirk>

Jeff


--
HTML Lesson #47 [The Only Legitimate use for BLINK]
Schrodinger's Cat is <BLINK>NOT</BLINK> dead.



0
Jeff
7/17/2003 2:24:42 PM
> Is there a real English dictionary there? Or just a yankee one? Bet it
> doesn't have "Grammer" in it, unless they've started listing actor
> surnames.

Busted... <grin>

Jeff


--
HTML Lesson #47 [The Only Legitimate use for BLINK]
Schrodinger's Cat is <BLINK>NOT</BLINK> dead.



0
Jeff
7/17/2003 2:27:03 PM
Your so-called "argument" is nothing but a bunch of ridiculous opinions
strung together with little to no fact contained therein. It has been
debunked several times in this thread, so no matter how many more times you
post it, it doesn't matter - it makes it no less valid, and it makes you no
less of a simpleton. It's quite clear that you don't crave acceptance of
your machine or ideals, you just crave attention, and once again it's proven
beyond any shadow of a doubt that negative attention is better than none at
all. Not a single one of you has presented one legitimate argument yet to
prove that the Speccy is inherently "better". All any of you have managed to
offer by way of rebuttal is "it's crap".

But hey - want your paper-thin argument trashed all to hell again? Let's
have at it.


"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9thchv08uri2j3aqkvc8tbrjgi6s8s7ad2@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 22:58:57 -0400, "Decimal Cat" <wells@acadia.net>
wrote:
> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites
to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.

Oh, better throw away your PC then - a lot of those 3-D games rely on
hardware acceleration.

> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown,

16 colors. Wipe the layer of dust off your monitor.

> and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How

Opinion.

> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely
fast

Still opinion.

> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?

Can't comment here - but you'll more than likely use my inexperience in this
area as some way within your fractured mind to "prove" that it's wrong.

> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior???
What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?

<Homer-AngryDad> THAT'S NOT FACT, THAT'S OPINION! </Homer-AngryDad>

> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.

Nonsense.

> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the
worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's
that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode.

No, typing nothing on it and then pressing enter sends the cursor down to
the next line.

 At least we could type a program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding
mistakes.

Proofreader, if you speak of program listings.

> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
around the
> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
manage
> about 22 million.

Also can't comment here, because I've never seen or heard of a Speccy here
in the USA. ( Sure. Go ahead and rip on my nationality because I didn't go
searching for other computers from other countries to use, make yourself
look like even more of an idiot than you already do. )

> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer
to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.

Can't argue there - the drives are sluggish, but JiffyDOS fixes that in no
time.

> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.

I for one got a C64 I could easily repair off eBay along with two dead
boards for $1.75 + shipping.

> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge
keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype).

Do you have any facts to support your argument, or just opinion?

Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!
> -- 

Not very good as a doorstop, then. Maybe as a flotation device if you
caulked the ports.

Next time you feel the need to start a huge trolling war to make you feel
better about your own size? Go buy a big pair of shoes. You know what they
say about men with big feet, don't you?

            --Decimal Cat


0
Decimal
7/17/2003 2:45:57 PM
Your so-called "argument" is nothing but a bunch of ridiculous opinions
strung together with little to no fact contained therein. It has been
debunked several times in this thread, so no matter how many more times you
post it, it doesn't matter - it makes it no more valid, and it makes you no
less of a simpleton. It's quite clear that you don't crave acceptance of
your machine or ideals, you just crave attention, and once again it's proven
beyond any shadow of a doubt that negative attention is better than none at
all. Not a single one of you has presented one legitimate argument yet to
prove that the Speccy is inherently "better". All any of you have managed to
offer by way of rebuttal is "it's crap".

But hey - want your paper-thin argument trashed all to hell again? Let's
have at it.


"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9thchv08uri2j3aqkvc8tbrjgi6s8s7ad2@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 22:58:57 -0400, "Decimal Cat" <wells@acadia.net>
wrote:
> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites
to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.

Oh, better throw away your PC then - a lot of those 3-D games rely on
hardware acceleration.

> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown,

16 colors. Wipe the layer of dust off your monitor.

> and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How

Opinion.

> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely
fast

Still opinion.

> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?

Can't comment here - but you'll more than likely use my inexperience in this
area as some way within your fractured mind to "prove" that it's wrong.

> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior???
What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?

<Homer-AngryDad> THAT'S NOT FACT, THAT'S OPINION! </Homer-AngryDad>

> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.

Nonsense.

> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the
worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's
that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode.

No, typing nothing on it and then pressing enter sends the cursor down to
the next line.

 At least we could type a program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding
mistakes.

Proofreader, if you speak of program listings.

> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
around the
> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
manage
> about 22 million.

Also can't comment here, because I've never seen or heard of a Speccy here
in the USA. ( Sure. Go ahead and rip on my nationality because I didn't go
searching for other computers from other countries to use, make yourself
look like even more of an idiot than you already do. )

> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer
to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.

Can't argue there - the drives are sluggish, but JiffyDOS fixes that in no
time.

> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.

I for one got a C64 I could easily repair off eBay along with two dead
boards for $1.75 + shipping.

> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge
keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype).

Do you have any facts to support your argument, or just opinion?

Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!
> -- 

Not very good as a doorstop, then. Maybe as a flotation device if you
caulked the ports.

Next time you feel the need to start a huge trolling war to make you feel
better about your own size? Go buy a big pair of shoes. You know what they
say about men with big feet, don't you?

            --Decimal Cat



0
Decimal
7/17/2003 3:44:58 PM
The Starglider wrote:

> Let's look at the evidence:
> 
> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites
> to make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky
> graphics.

Still it was better than IBM's CGA 'Crap Graphics Adaptor', Black, White, 
Turquoise, and Pink, with *really* blocky graphics

-- 
Paul S
0
paul
7/17/2003 4:06:00 PM
spacerogue5@yahoo.com (Vasko Altiparmakov) wrote in message news:<b052b774.0307162230.4b2ad893@posting.google.com>...

> > Slow. A poxy slow processor,
 
> Wow!
> 
> "6502 uses a single clock cycle (the base cycle, plus a cycle rotated
> 90 degrees out of phase) to generate the timing for four internal
> execution stages, so that there were instructions which executed in
> one external 'cycle' (this is different from clock-doubling, which
> uses a phase-locked-loop to generate a faster internal clock which is
> synchronised with an external clock). Z80, uses the external clock
> directly, so an equivalent instruction would take four cycles, meaning
> a 2MHz 6502 would be roughly equivalent to a 8MHz Z80."

Vasko, since you are so learned, you must realize the fallacies in
this statement: ".. Z80, uses the external clock directly, so  an
equivalent instruction would take four cycles, meaning a 2MHz 6502
would be roughly equivalent to a 8MHz Z80".  This would be true if the
Z80 was a 6502.  The Z80 is not a 6502 and has a very different
instruction set architecture and a very different hardware
architecture.  It does not do things the same way a
6502 does them.  I would have serious doubts about any book that made
claims like that.

A past flamewar found that a 1 MHz 6502 is roughly equivalent to a 2
MHz Z80.  In my opinion this is being very kind to the 6502.  Included
among the examples used to derive this figure was a BCD accumulator. 
BCD arithmetic is nearly useless in the grand scheme of things and
since the 6502 has a BCD 'mode', it managed to perform well in that
particular instance; no comparison was made for BCD
multiplications/divisions for which the Z80 has special instructions. 
Not enough emphasis was placed on real algorithms that access main
memory, which the Z80 is much quicker at than a 6502 and which would
have a large impact on cpu performance.  For a 6502 to operate at this
2:1 ratio, it must also use absolute zero page addressing, which I
suppose is fine and good for apps that take control of the system and
are written by one person.

Using this 2:1 ratio, the original Spectrum is 75% faster than a C64.

> I happen to have learned machine code from the book "Z80 & 6502
> Machine Code". Have you noticed that 6502 machine instructions execute
> in minimum 2, maximum 6 machine cycles, while Z80 machine instructions
> execute in minimum 6 (or was it 8?), maximum 20+ machine cycles.

Minimum 4 cycles.  Programmers use 4-cycle instructions and 7-cycle
memory access instructions predominantly and only use 20+ cycle
instructions on rare occasions.  In the old days, the maximum speed
6502 available was 2MHz, versus an 8MHz Z80.  The plain Z80 has since
been upgraded to 20MHz; I don't know if they bothered to move the 6502
to a more modern process.

There are good reasons why the Z80 became the dominant 8-bit general
purpose cpu back in the day (have I managed to exclude the 8051
here?).  It was more suitable for "real systems", be it embedded or
high-end computing due to a number of factors including: availability
of a comprehensive set of quality peripheral chips, ease of
interfacing, speed and an ISA that supported code sharing, fast task
switching and up to 128 peripherals without degrading performance. 
The 6502's main attraction was on price.  When it first came out at
$25, competitor processors were selling at $180.

> > hence the reliance on hardware based sprites to
> > make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
> 
> I bet you'll say the same thing about procesors in the last 20 years.
> "They are all crap. They use FPUs."
> 
> Hardware sprites are a great idea, since sprites are common thing.

Hardware sprites are great if you don't have the power to do it in
software.  But if there is the choice, it is ALWAYS better to do it in
software.

> > 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
> 
> You never had access to the full 64K of RAM, because you don't know
> how, i have.
> It's quite simple, you'll just have to figure out.

Z80 programs are half the size of 6502 programs.  Should be able to
spot that one in your book :-)

> > Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the > worst
> > basic I have ever seen on any computer.
> 
> Me too. :) Anyway, all old style interpreted Basic on 8-bit computers
> are infunctional. You can only play around with it.

There is a fundamental difference in the original purpose of the C64
and the Spectrum.  The C64 is clearly a game computer; Basic or any
kind of introduction to computing is secondary.  The primary purpose
of the Spectrum is an introduction to computing, hence some effort was
put into incorporating a decent version of Basic, providing syntax
checking on every line entered for novice programmers, and supplying
one-touch key entry since no one at that time could type.
 
> > Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only manage
> > about 22 million.

In truth it's very hard to estimate Spectrum sales.  Some 2 dozen
Spectrum variants, authorized clones and illegal clones have been made
around the world, with very large followings in the UK, Portugal,
Spain and all the eastern block countries.  I wouldn't be surprised if
Spectrum sales topped 20 million but I wouldn't wager that they passed
C64 sales, simply because the Spectrum did not exist in the American
market for more than 4 months (during which time 160,000 units sold). 
What makes it close is that the Spectrum was dominant in the Soviet
Union.

> > Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer to load
> > a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
> 
> 1st you have to find it's position on the tape with your walkman.
> I've seen C64 load 64K in 10-20 sec, from disk. Seriosly, you could
> understand the advantiges of disk's only if you had one. Even if the
> disk is 50 times slower than tape.

You have to admit the 64 had some of the worst peripherals of all the
8 bits.  They also cost the most.  I would rather have tape than a
$200+ disk system that performed worse than tape.  But you are right,
most people forked over the extra $ for a fastload cartridge to fix
the hardware bugs.  Even then, the disk drive only performed as well
as a stringy floppy.

Personally, I had/have a disk system with DD 5.25" and 3.5" drives. 
Transfer rate is 250kbps, if I remember right (it's been a while)
which allows the loading of memory snapshots in a couple of seconds,
including access time.


Cheers,
Alvin
0
A936
7/17/2003 4:15:01 PM
���/On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 11:44:58 -0400,�(�) Decimal Cat <wells@acadia.net> 
������/wrote:

<snip>
>
>> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown,
>
> 16 colors. Wipe the layer of dust off your monitor.
>
>> and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How
>
> Opinion.

Not opinion. Check games like Uridium (Hewson) on the Commodore and the 
Spectrum and you'll see the difference.

<snip>
> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the
>> Commode?
>
> Can't comment here - but you'll more than likely use my inexperience in 
> this
> area as some way within your fractured mind to "prove" that it's wrong.
>

The fact of the matter is that the Commode wasn't exploited at all, not to 
mention that it was so difficult to program, you needed to pass Torture 
Endurance school in order to do it ;-)

>> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
> grating
>> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's 
>> superior???
> What
>> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
>
> <Homer-AngryDad> THAT'S NOT FACT, THAT'S OPINION! </Homer-AngryDad>

Here I have to agree I liked the SID pretty much, although it was only 
REALLY audible with an external amp. The fact of the matter is that it is 
so midrange it sounds like a Rockman guitar effect... Without a decent 
Aural Exciter/Equalizer you can't really hear anything out of it.

<snip>

>> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
> around the
>> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
> manage
>> about 22 million.
>
> Also can't comment here, because I've never seen or heard of a Speccy 
> here
> in the USA. ( Sure. Go ahead and rip on my nationality because I didn't 
> go
> searching for other computers from other countries to use, make yourself
> look like even more of an idiot than you already do. )

That's because you weren't probably involved in computing around 82-83.
The Spectrum did sell in the US under the Timex/Sinclair badge. The US 
model (TS 2068) had also 64K ram and better graphics (and colors) than the 
Commode.

>
>> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer
> to load
>> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
>
> Can't argue there - the drives are sluggish, but JiffyDOS fixes that in 
> no
> time.

You try a Disciple/PlusD disk i/f on the Speccy, you'll see even 
Turbocharged the C64 can't even come close.
The fact is that the C64 speedloaders on tape were slower than the standard 
Spectrum load routines :-)
Oh and by the way, in order to make a PERFECT backup of almost any C64 tape 
is to feed it thru a Spectrum Mic->Ear port. Perfect C64 backups all the 
time (Did it for many friends with C64s back in the day). The cost of 
buying a Spectrum to do so, was cheaper than any decent C64 copier ;-)

>
>> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
> superbly
>> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
>
> I for one got a C64 I could easily repair off eBay along with two dead
> boards for $1.75 + shipping.

He meant when they were current. Who cares how much they sell now for. 
We're saying then. With the cost of a C64 you could probably buy two used 
Spectrums plus have enough money to take your girl out for a week ;-) Not 
to mention that users of Spectrum tend to HAVE girlfriends as opposed to 
some C64 users we all know ;-)

>
>> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with 
>> huge
> keys
>> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype).
>
> Do you have any facts to support your argument, or just opinion?

Hehe you're quasi right here. The keyboard was okay however the damn thing 
looks like a donut that sits in the bottom of the pile at Walmart ;-)
>
> Spectrum,
>> small, light, powerful!
>> --
>
> Not very good as a doorstop, then. Maybe as a flotation device if you
> caulked the ports.

Depends. You forget that in Europe doors are real and not flimsy cardboard 
;-) (Been there I was amazed) (also most of the time, walls are walls and 
not stupid #$@%@#%@#%@# drywall... ). So to effectively stop that door you 
need something of massive proportions like the C64 ;-)

<snip>





-- 
One Motorola a day, makes the doctor go away :-) For mail remove the 
obvious crap from the email below:
mailto:ql@dokos-grCHOKEONTHIS=SPAMMER.net
0
Sinclair
7/17/2003 4:21:58 PM
The Starglider wrote:
> 
> Sales, userbase, games, software, expansion. There, I think that's pretty damned
> important.
> 

Sales - as mentioned elsewhere means very little. It's like comparing a
Nissan Pulsar to a Ferrari 355, or Eminem to Eric Clapton.

Userbase just means more people are using it. So what? Obvious really
since there were more sales. It's not as if I'm going to make
substantial profits from selling my software on either machine.

Games - Well there may be more of them, but out of the 2000 plus
Spectrum games, how many are still worth playing 15 years on? 10 or 20
maybe?

Software - Assuming you mean software that isn't games, you've gotta be
joking if you think there is more serious stuff for the Spectrum. It
doesn't even have a 40 column mode, never mind an 80 column mode, which
IMO is required to do any serious WP/DTP/Spreadsheets etc.

And expansion. There may be a few extra expansions for the Spectrum, but
my CPC Plus had 576K, 3" floppy, 2x5.25" floppies (with ParaDOS, 800K
DOS), TV Tuner, Light Pen, Speech Synth, Mouse, real keyboard, RGB
display, Multiface II, RAM Drive, Fully populated 8 slot ROM box with
Maxam, Protext etc, etc back in about 1993.

Richard
0
Richard
7/17/2003 5:23:55 PM
I demand that Etienne von Wettingfeld may or may not have written...

> Darren Salt wrote:
>>> I may very well be. But I can't judge the Speccy because Holland is a
>>> wealthy country so everybody had C64s in my days.
>> What? No BBCs? Strange people...

> Well, one guy did have an Elcorn Electron, claiming it to be superiour to
> the C64.

Well, it *is*. It has a far superior BASIC. (And you mean "Acorn".)

> But he bought a C64 when he had the money so he could play games like
> everybody else.

It must be, then, that all of these non-C64 games which I have here never
actually existed... hmm, that means that I'm stuck with only Repton 3, Elite
(I think), Wizball and a few others...

No, that can't be right.

-- 
| Darren Salt | nr. Ashington, | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk
| RISC OS,    | Northumberland | s zap,tartarus,org
| Linux       | Toon Army      | @
|   The second RISC OS version of JSW.

If this is time-sharing, give me my share right now. It's not time yet.
0
Darren
7/17/2003 5:46:58 PM
On 17 Jul 2003 00:03:57 -0700, spacerogue5@yahoo.com (Vasko Altiparmakov) wrote:


>Better technically? :))
>It's a useless rubber shit, with no i/o ports.
>Have anyone seen RS232 or Centronix on ZX Spectrum?
>You can connect C64 on a PLC if you want and make it usefull.

Yes, and more. Or did you miss the obvious expansion slot on the back?


-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 5:56:44 PM
On 17 Jul 2003 09:15:01 -0700, A936@hotmail.com (Alvin) wrote:


>Vasko, since you are so learned, you must realize the fallacies in
>this statement: ".. Z80, uses the external clock directly, so  an
>equivalent instruction would take four cycles, meaning a 2MHz 6502
>would be roughly equivalent to a 8MHz Z80".  This would be true if the
>Z80 was a 6502.  The Z80 is not a 6502 and has a very different
>instruction set architecture and a very different hardware
>architecture.  It does not do things the same way a
>6502 does them.  I would have serious doubts about any book that made
>claims like that.
>
[Rest snipped]

And Alvin wins the award this year for the first "most informed and technically
correct counter argument".
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/17/2003 6:09:09 PM
> Sales, userbase, games, software, expansion. There, I think that's pretty
damned
> important.

Sales... ya, Userbase... ya...... games... ya but only for game released
1984 and before. Software? No way ,the CPC has more software, especially
serious stuff, oh and CP/M. Expansion? Nah I don't think so but of course it
not so clear cut these days.



0
John
7/17/2003 6:46:59 PM
Hi Sinclair,

You seem fairly reasonable, unlike a lot of the others from both sides that
posted in this thread. It's like I've always said, I don't think the Speccy
is a bad computer - I CAN'T say that, because I've never even seen one. I
guess I'll have to grab an emulator one of these days. . I just take offense
to Starglider insulting it for no other reason than to start a pointless
flamewar.

*snip*

> >> and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How
> >
> > Opinion.
>
> Not opinion. Check games like Uridium (Hewson) on the Commodore and the
> Spectrum and you'll see the difference.
>

I will, if I ever get around to checking out a Speccy emulator. But the
VIC-II chip was still fairly impressive for it's time, especially
considering that according to Bil Herd, it was hand-designed by their
engineers.

> The fact of the matter is that the Commode wasn't exploited at all, not to
> mention that it was so difficult to program, you needed to pass Torture
> Endurance school in order to do it ;-)
>

You might want to try out one of the high-level languages written for it
sometime. I'll admit the BASIC language is a bit. . well. . archaic. They
didn't change much of it from the VIC-20, from what I saw. The biggest
headache this ever gave me in programming was that there were no "read disk
directory" or "read error channel" commands in native basic, but a few
subroutines at the bottom of the program solved that.

> >> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
> > grating
> >> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's
> >> superior???
> > What
> >> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
> >
> > <Homer-AngryDad> THAT'S NOT FACT, THAT'S OPINION! </Homer-AngryDad>
>
> Here I have to agree I liked the SID pretty much, although it was only
> REALLY audible with an external amp. The fact of the matter is that it is
> so midrange it sounds like a Rockman guitar effect... Without a decent
> Aural Exciter/Equalizer you can't really hear anything out of it.
>

I don't know if you have a real C64 from which to judge this from, but the
rudimentary audio amp circuit for the SID may be bad - in all my tests, the
SID gave pretty good volume with or without an amp when inside a C64. 8580
SID, or 6581 SID? (Usually a difference of whether you've got the older
breadbin style, or the 64C, the more streamlined model. )

>
> >> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
> > around the
> >> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
> > manage
> >> about 22 million.
> >
> > Also can't comment here, because I've never seen or heard of a Speccy
> > here
> > in the USA. ( Sure. Go ahead and rip on my nationality because I didn't
> > go
> > searching for other computers from other countries to use, make yourself
> > look like even more of an idiot than you already do. )
>
> That's because you weren't probably involved in computing around 82-83.
> The Spectrum did sell in the US under the Timex/Sinclair badge. The US
> model (TS 2068) had also 64K ram and better graphics (and colors) than the
> Commode.
>

Well, I would've been involved in computing then, but, see. . in 82 I wasn't
born yet, and in 83 I was 1.

> >
> >> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes
longer
> > to load
> >> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
> >
> > Can't argue there - the drives are sluggish, but JiffyDOS fixes that in
> > no
> > time.
>
> You try a Disciple/PlusD disk i/f on the Speccy, you'll see even
> Turbocharged the C64 can't even come close.
> The fact is that the C64 speedloaders on tape were slower than the
standard
> Spectrum load routines :-)
> Oh and by the way, in order to make a PERFECT backup of almost any C64
tape
> is to feed it thru a Spectrum Mic->Ear port. Perfect C64 backups all the
> time (Did it for many friends with C64s back in the day). The cost of
> buying a Spectrum to do so, was cheaper than any decent C64 copier ;-)
>

Hmm. . interesting.

Out of curiousity, have their been any hard drive interfaces made for the
Speccy? We have a couple (IDE64, CMD commercial), and they're both way
faster than the regular floppy drives. Because of the obvious limitations of
tape/floppy drives now, a lot of us use hard drives.

> >> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with
> >> huge
> > keys
> >> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype).
> >
> > Do you have any facts to support your argument, or just opinion?
>
> Hehe you're quasi right here. The keyboard was okay however the damn thing
> looks like a donut that sits in the bottom of the pile at Walmart ;-)

The newer model, the 64C that I mentioned above looked better and had a more
ergonomic design.

> >
> > Spectrum,
> >> small, light, powerful!
> >> --
> >
> > Not very good as a doorstop, then. Maybe as a flotation device if you
> > caulked the ports.
>
> Depends. You forget that in Europe doors are real and not flimsy cardboard
> ;-) (Been there I was amazed) (also most of the time, walls are walls and
> not stupid #$@%@#%@#%@# drywall... ). So to effectively stop that door you
> need something of massive proportions like the C64 ;-)
>

Let's just compromise, and use Starglider as a doorstop. :)

        --Decimal Cat


0
Decimal
7/17/2003 6:47:12 PM
Την/On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 14:47:12 -0400,ο(η) Decimal Cat <wells@acadia.net> 
έγραψε/wrote:

> Hi Sinclair,
>
> You seem fairly reasonable, unlike a lot of the others from both sides 
> that
> posted in this thread. It's like I've always said, I don't think the 
> Speccy
> is a bad computer - I CAN'T say that, because I've never even seen one. I
> guess I'll have to grab an emulator one of these days. . I just take 
> offense
> to Starglider insulting it for no other reason than to start a pointless
> flamewar.
>
> *snip*

Try RealSpec which emulates even the ZX Spectrum +3e (a nice mod with Hard 
drive :-)

<snip>
>
> I will, if I ever get around to checking out a Speccy emulator. But the
> VIC-II chip was still fairly impressive for it's time, especially
> considering that according to Bil Herd, it was hand-designed by their
> engineers.

True but if you get into the custom chip argument, then you got to see 
MGT's Sam Coupé (a direct derivative of the Spectrum) which at its time 
blew away the competition and with a Z80 inside you could put it on the 
same league with
32/16 bit mainstream machines like the Amiga and the Atari ST (BTW despite 
what anyone may say and since you're younger you should know that Amiga is 
NOT a Commodore designed machine).

<snip>
>
> You might want to try out one of the high-level languages written for it
> sometime. I'll admit the BASIC language is a bit. . well. . archaic. They
> didn't change much of it from the VIC-20, from what I saw. The biggest
> headache this ever gave me in programming was that there were no "read 
> disk
> directory" or "read error channel" commands in native basic, but a few
> subroutines at the bottom of the program solved that.
>

True, but then again you can say the same thing for the Spectrum and even 
more. YS MegaBasic IMHO was an exquisite flavor of basic let alone the 
Sinclair masterpiece: the QL SuperBasic (which still is by far the best 
basic around... and it's STILL around btw). And of course there is a host 
of compilers/interpreters around for almost every language that existed at 
the time (I believe there was also a home-brewn COBOL at some point)


<sid stuff snipped>

>
> I don't know if you have a real C64 from which to judge this from, but 
> the
> rudimentary audio amp circuit for the SID may be bad - in all my tests, 
> the
> SID gave pretty good volume with or without an amp when inside a C64. 
> 8580
> SID, or 6581 SID? (Usually a difference of whether you've got the older
> breadbin style, or the 64C, the more streamlined model. )
>

Yes I owned several C64s and C128s (and a Plus 4 btw which was pretty damn 
good machine for a C64 reincarnation) due to the fact that I was working at 
a computer store and was able to get broken machines and repair them ;-) 
(The only affordable way to buy a commodore back then)

<snip regarding age stuff>

> Well, I would've been involved in computing then, but, see. . in 82 I 
> wasn't
> born yet, and in 83 I was 1.
>

Pretty understandable. And since you're American (as opposed to semi- 
American that I am) you don't know the huge battle of the micros that raged 
in the 80s. Flamewars like the current one are pretty toned down, I assure 
you compared to what was going on at the time ;-)


<snip regarding Speccy use as a C64 copier>
> Hmm. . interesting.
>

Discovered this after fiddling with an Oscilloscope while the Spectrum was 
loading. The signal was "cleaned up" by the circuitry and fed out the "EAR" 
position -Another difference between the C64 and the Spectrum: You didn't 
HAVE to buy a Data-recorder... although later that was fixed by 
introduction of compatible hardware on the C64-. There were program loaders 
around 95 that defeated that and actually distorted the output signal (I 
don't remember which one but I am sure that Spectrum gurus in the ng will 
be sure to remember) but the C64 tapes were unrecognizable anyways ;-)

> Out of curiousity, have their been any hard drive interfaces made for the
> Speccy? We have a couple (IDE64, CMD commercial), and they're both way
> faster than the regular floppy drives. Because of the obvious limitations 
> of
> tape/floppy drives now, a lot of us use hard drives.

Plenty and all free DIY designs.

<snip about the ugliness of the C64>
> The newer model, the 64C that I mentioned above looked better and had a 
> more
> ergonomic design.

Yep but it was a copycat of the C128 (and the A500). It was about freakin' 
time too as the original C64 was an eyesore.
The +4 was pretty neat looking IMHO, then again I believe that the "Black 
Is Beautiful" trend pioneered by Sinclair was THE way to go with computers 
(and thus my opinion of the +4). (ZX81, Spectrum, QL and Z88). The PC world 
finally caught up about 15 years later... losers ;-)

The worse however disadvantage of the C64 was that it forced you to do 
several things a certain way, while the Speccy was extremely open. Moreover 
due to the "British school" of programming (ie if the program doesn't fit 
the machine... MAKE it fit as opposed to the now predominant "American 
school" of programming which says if the program doesn't fit the machine 
BUY a BIGGER machine) programmers squeezed out of the Spectrum even things 
the designers couldn't fathom that were possible! Ie Karnov (anyone 
remembers that coin-op conversion?). Or three-channel sound from a computer 
WITHOUT a dedicated sound chip!

-- 
One Motorola per day, makes the doctor go away :-)
For mail remove the obvious crap from the email below:
mailto:ql@dokos-grCHOKEONTHIS=SPAMMER.net
0
Sinclair
7/17/2003 7:12:54 PM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 01:37:22 +0100, "Bill Bertram"
<ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:

>> >No this is where you go off on a tangent about dictators... I mentioned
>the
>> >Iraqi info minister because he spouts the total opposite of truth, like
>you
>> >flamers do... Has nothing to do with dictators...
>> The Iraqi Information Minister has nothing to do with dictators? Eh?
>> I'm pretty sure that he was seen a few months back with one of the
>> world's most famous blood-thirsty civilian-killing fascists.
>> If you're looking for a pic, see this...
>>http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2002/US/09/30/sproject.irq.regime.change/rumsfeld.80s.jpg
>> ...although I'm not sure which blood-thirsty civilian-killing fascist
>> it is. I do get confused.
>Duh! of course he's got something to do with a dictator! 

You said he "Has nothing to do with dictators". Here you are saying
the opposite.

You also said "the C64 is good" too.

>You've taken what
>I've said out of context. Biggo was talking about dictators, when I was only
>referring to the info minister. But you knew that anyway didn't you...
>Pedant.

Hardly. He does have SOMETHING to do with a dictator, and we both knew
he wasn't a dictator.

>> Is that e-mail address part of a permanent AOL account? I mean, I know
>> loads of people who have used AOL, I first started out with it. You
>> know, just about everyone messes around with the "X hours free!" demo
>> they get, then they cancel the service and move to a real ISP.
>I was with freeserve dial-up for a few years, until recently.
>> I see no real reason to use AOL unless you like big bright colours and
>> pop-ups.
>Wanna reason? It's FREE broadband for a year! Sure it's shit, but it does
>the job...

Okay, fairy nuff then. I'd still buy a domain name to semi-hide the
AOL e-mail address.

-- 
pete [at]  � In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe  � You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen]   � Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot]  � down it.
co [dot] uk� 
0
Peter
7/17/2003 7:17:46 PM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:12:54 GMT, Sinclair QL <ql@dokos-gr.net> wrote:

>Try RealSpec which emulates even the ZX Spectrum +3e (a nice mod with Hard 
>drive :-)

I can think of at least one more Windows based emulator that supports
the +3e. And I have a hunch that another will be turning up rather
soon :)

Luckily, adding +3e support actually turns out to be rather easy :-)

0
Woody
7/17/2003 7:24:12 PM
Την/On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:12:54 GMT,ο(η) Sinclair QL <ql@dokos-gr.net> 
έγραψε/wrote:
<SNIP>
> .... There were program loaders around 95 that defeated that....


OF course here I meant 85 :-) (Damn figner paralysis!)



-- 
One Motorola per day, makes the doctor go away :-)
For mail remove the obvious crap from the email below:
mailto:ql@dokos-grCHOKEONTHIS=SPAMMER.net
0
Sinclair
7/17/2003 7:24:38 PM
"John Kavanagh" <johnkavanagh@cpcoxygen.net> wrote in message
news:bf6s47$6j1$1@kermit.esat.net...
>
> > Sales, userbase, games, software, expansion. There, I think that's
pretty
> damned
> > important.
>
> Sales... ya, Userbase... ya...... games... ya but only for game released
> 1984 and before.

?

>Software? No way ,the CPC has more software, especially
> serious stuff

But who ever used it?

>oh and CP/M. Expansion? Nah I don't think so but of course it
> not so clear cut these days.
>
>
>


0
Phil
7/17/2003 7:26:23 PM
���/On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 20:26:23 +0100,�(�) Phil-on-a-hill 
<malcnospam@gothcorp.co.uk> ������/wrote:

<snip>
>> Software? No way ,the CPC has more software, especially
>> serious stuff
>
> But who ever used it?

Actually a lot of people. We were selling CPCs by the truckload in mid 80s 
for small to mid sized companies that wanted a floppy and serious software 
but they couldn't afford either high-end CP/M machines or IBM PCs. One 
reason that Amstrad tried to kill off the QL (which it didn't thank God as 
it is still produced in the Qx0 form <URL:http://www.q40.de/> ) was that it 
couldn't update it with a floppy and directly compete with its CPC and PCW 
ranges (The PC1512 and 1640 were total crap compared to the QL for speed 
and versatility btw.... to illustrate a GoldCard equipped QL with PC 
Conqueror SE is FASTER than a PC 1512/1640! not to mention that it even 
supports HD drives that the PC1512 couldnt!, so they don't count anyway!)



-- 
One Motorola per day, makes the doctor go away :-)
For mail remove the obvious crap from the email below:
mailto:ql@dokos-grCHOKEONTHIS=SPAMMER.net
0
Sinclair
7/17/2003 7:38:32 PM
I demand that Vasko Altiparmakov may or may not have written...

[snip]
> Have anyone seen RS232 or Centronix on ZX Spectrum? [...]

Yes (Interface 1, and the 128K machines; though the ports aren't necessarily
9-pin D); and yes (+2A and +3, and possibly 3rd-party interfaces).

-- 
| Darren Salt | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington,
| RISC OS,    | s zap,tartarus,org            | Northumberland
| Linux       | @                             | Toon Army
|   We've got Shearer, you haven't

It is Fortune, not Wisdom, that rules man's life.
0
Darren
7/17/2003 9:33:06 PM
"Alvin" <A936@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1a3493d2.0307170933.1b2d5111@posting.google.com...
> hannibal@videocam.net.au (hannibal) wrote in message
news:<4f35449c.0307161103.1dd921e@posting.google.com>...
>
> > older games. Look at how Green Beret was on C64 and how dull and
> > colorless was in the Speccy.
>
> Funny that eh?  I think the Sperctrum version of Green Beret is miles
> better than the C64 version.  I prefer the detailed graphics to
> low-res and colourful.  Different strokes for different folks I
> suppose.

I seem to remember that the 64 version had a cool flamethrower sound
effect - and the Green Beret music is legendary. Not sure what it sounded
like on the Speccy though so maybe it was cool there too. All in all a great
game.

Sam


0
Sam
7/17/2003 9:38:42 PM
The Starglider wibbled in message ...

>On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 02:19:03 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>Are you paper trained, or do you go outside?
>
>No, I go outside to the commode, looks like a little beige box with crap
specs
>and piss all over it.

Sorry to hear that your ZX faded so much from being left out in the weather
so long.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!





0
Sam
7/17/2003 9:48:21 PM
Vasko Altiparmakov wrote:

> Better technically? :))
> It's a useless rubber shit, with no i/o ports.
> Have anyone seen RS232 or Centronix on ZX Spectrum?

It has got a versatile expansion port, and into this I plugged a Disciple,
and into that a parallel Epson printer, and a ham-radio TNC via RS232.
-- 
Paul S
0
paul
7/17/2003 10:15:16 PM
I demand that Sam Gillett may or may not have written...

> The Starglider wibbled in message ...
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 02:19:03 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Are you paper trained, or do you go outside?
>> No, I go outside to the commode, looks like a little beige box with crap
>> specs and piss all over it.

> Sorry to hear that your ZX faded so much from being left out in the weather
> so long.

It occurs to me that C64s have an advantage here: they were sold pre-faded...

-- 
| Darren Salt | nr. Ashington, | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk
| RISC OS,    | Northumberland | s zap,tartarus,org
| Linux       | Toon Army      | @
|   When replying: "news"->"ds", "cu"->"co.uk", and validate

You're all over it, like a cheap suit.
0
Darren
7/18/2003 12:34:21 AM
Jeff Ledger wrote:
> 
> > Is there a real English dictionary there? Or just a yankee one? Bet it
> > doesn't have "Grammer" in it, unless they've started listing actor
> > surnames.
> 
> Busted... <grin>

Busted? What?
0
Richard
7/18/2003 1:45:19 AM
> >Software? No way ,the CPC has more software, especially
> > serious stuff
>
> But who ever used it?

I do, in fact I can type up a large document in my CPC faster and with less
fuss than using a modern PC based MS word processor. It got the all
important 80 x 25 characters at 640 x 200 pixels, that's a nice size to work
with and since the Amstrad CPC has hardware scrolling, it's fast.

............ and don't let me start on the other software :-)

John


0
John
7/18/2003 2:04:03 AM
The Great Wibble  wrote ...

>On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 19:26:16 -0400, "Decimal Cat" <wells@acadia.net> wrote:
>
>>Just because you say it doesn't make it so.
>>
>>Is this really all you can find to do?
>>
>Well, since I've put up a decent argument, why don't you come up with some
>valid points, instead of just saying "Oh, is that all you can do?". It just
>shows that you actually have nothing worthwhile to say.

What decent argument?  All I've seen is the same harebrained, preposterous
crap you posted in the last flamewar you started.  Absurd lunatic rambling
that was shown to be wrong on point after point.

BTW, it would do no good to post facts.  You are in such a state of denial
that your poor numb brain can not absorb facts.

Why did you start this flamewar?  Do you enjoy the utter humiliation that it
will bring to you?

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!













0
Sam
7/18/2003 2:26:31 AM
The Great Wibble wrote ...

>On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:14:53 -0500, "Dave Dahle" <dd-ah-le@dtg.net> wrote:
>
>>Now - a historical question - since this is apparently an "annual"
>>"tradition", I wonder which side has inaugurated more flamewars?
>>
>We have (or rather I have), and damned proud of it too!

I noticed that at least two "amateur" trolls tried to start a flamewar, but
failed.  How does it feel to be a Professional Troll?

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!





0
Sam
7/18/2003 4:35:18 AM
The Great Wibble wrote ...

>Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky
>graphics.

If you weren't wearing that fur ring around your neck, you might be able to
see something other than brown.  Try it.  Pull your head out.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!






0
Sam
7/18/2003 4:35:18 AM
Decimal Cat wrote ...

>Let's just compromise, and use Starglider as a doorstop. :)

That is the best idea that I have seen in this entire thread!

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!





0
Sam
7/18/2003 4:35:19 AM
A936@hotmail.com (Alvin) wrote in message news:<1a3493d2.0307170815.3d697c24@posting.google.com>...
> spacerogue5@yahoo.com (Vasko Altiparmakov) wrote in message news:<b052b774.0307162230.4b2ad893@posting.google.com>...

In my posts i always compare C64 to ZX Spectrum 48, not to Spectrum
128.

> Vasko, since you are so learned, you must realize the fallacies in
> this statement: ".. Z80, uses the external clock directly, so  an
> equivalent instruction would take four cycles, meaning a 2MHz 6502
> would be roughly equivalent to a 8MHz Z80".  This would be true if the
> Z80 was a 6502.

It said "roughly equivalent". It's clear meaning is in generic clock
cycles. If Z80 and 6502 had the same instruction set, then it would be
equivalent.

> The Z80 is not a 6502 and has a very different
> instruction set architecture and a very different hardware
> architecture.

*You already have mentioned the main reason i belive they are so
different.

Z-80 generates its own RAM refresh signals, easier design and lower
system cost.

In the C64, VIC chip refreshes the RAM.

i8080 compatibility, and CP/M, the first standard microprocessor
operating system, made it the first choice of many systems.


> It does not do things the same way a
> 6502 does them.  I would have serious doubts about any book that made
> claims like that.

Why? I don't have, and i can tell you why. Because it is not writen to
take it down on Z80. 6502 and Z80 are concidered separatly. The book
starts with Z80 and i've got preaty scared when i realized that 6502
has only 3 registers. The design requires carefull re-thinking when
makeing programs, but it's not a crippled CPU.

> A past flamewar found that a 1 MHz 6502 is roughly equivalent to a 2
> MHz Z80.

Flame wars aren't objective.

> In my opinion this is being very kind to the 6502.  Included
> among the examples used to derive this figure was a BCD accumulator. 
> BCD arithmetic is nearly useless in the grand scheme of things and
> since the 6502 has a BCD 'mode', it managed to perform well in that
> particular instance;

I have never made use of it.

> no comparison was made for BCD
> multiplications/divisions for which the Z80 has special instructions. 
> Not enough emphasis was placed on real algorithms that access main
> memory, which the Z80 is much quicker at than a 6502 and which would
> have a large impact on cpu performance.  For a 6502 to operate at this
> 2:1 ratio, it must also use absolute zero page addressing, which I
> suppose is fine and good for apps that take control of the system and
> are written by one person.

Zero page addressing is not a workaround on 6502. It's a feature, and
a good one. It has to be used to access the main memory if you want
the same effect you are used to on Z80. It's in the disign of the CPU,
and not a bad habbit. System variables are on the Zero Page but there
are purposely free locations left, that act as an extra 'registers'.
Infact you only need 2 bytes for source and 2 for destination, out of
$ff bytes.

We will get to the point that yourself explain a lot in two wrds that
has to be explained why 6502 is the way it is.

> Using this 2:1 ratio, the original Spectrum is 75% faster than a C64.

It may be, but it is usless.

> Minimum 4 cycles.  Programmers use 4-cycle instructions and 7-cycle
> memory access instructions predominantly and only use 20+ cycle
> instructions on rare occasions.

Minimum 4 like the LD register, register'
But it is not a particulary usefull one.
LD register, memory takes 7 cycles.

6502's LDA memory and LDA memory,x take 4 cycles. LDA zeropage 3
cycles and the most complex of all lda (zeropage,x) takes 6 cycles.

> In the old days, the maximum speed
> 6502 available was 2MHz, versus an 8MHz Z80.  The plain Z80 has since
> been upgraded to 20MHz;

Are you sure about that, or do we have to add some extra zeroes to
Z80. :)

> I don't know if they bothered to move the 6502
> to a more modern process.

They did, you just don't know.

> There are good reasons why the Z80 became the dominant 8-bit general
> purpose cpu back in the day (have I managed to exclude the 8051
> here?).  It was more suitable for "real systems", be it embedded or
> high-end computing due to a number of factors including: availability
> of a comprehensive set of quality peripheral chips, ease of
> interfacing, speed and an ISA that supported code sharing, fast task
> switching and up to 128 peripherals without degrading performance. 
> The 6502's main attraction was on price.

*Here you say it.

> When it first came out at
> $25, competitor processors were selling at $180.

So now you have to think twice before makeing judgement. Was is a good
design for that cost? I know it was. The Semaphore has a clever design
avoiding drowback from the fact that has only 3 registers and no 16
general purpose or indexing register, and that's it. Many things were
conmpesated by that Zero Page you think it is some kind of programer
discovered mechanisam to achive imposible things.

> Hardware sprites are great if you don't have the power to do it in
> software.

Even if you do have the power. On a P4 with win98, the mouse pointer
still flickers. On the other hand it's a mater of programing.

> But if there is the choice, it is ALWAYS better to do it in
> software.

I don't see why? You could make sprites the size you want, but on 8MHz
Z80 you don't have the choice. Seems that you opose hardware sprites
just because C64 has it. Realy, they are a great thing. You always
need a sprite or two, even in 'serious' aplications.

> Z80 programs are half the size of 6502 programs.  Should be able to
> spot that one in your book :-)

I'll try.

> There is a fundamental difference in the original purpose of the C64
> and the Spectrum.

You bet.

> The C64 is clearly a game computer;

C64 is clearly a computer. It has all the required i/o, it's solid.
It has gameing caipabilities of that time, to make it more attractive.

> Basic or any
> kind of introduction to computing is secondary.

I don't know why this is so clear to me but not to you. Think of
another way. Don't think it over and over the way 'ZX vs C='. C64 is a
computer. You can load Pascal if you like, or some new OS's made by
anthusiast. You can load GEOS, a GUI. Most important of all you can
interconect with other other pheriperials and machines to crosstalk.

> The primary purpose
> of the Spectrum is an introduction to computing, hence some effort was
> put into incorporating a decent version of Basic, providing syntax
> checking on every line entered for novice programmers, and supplying
> one-touch key entry since no one at that time could type.

Everithing is good, exept that last one. That rubber keybord made it a
must do for the one-touch key entry. All the words on the keyboard
look silly, especialy if you put some other hi-level lang.

> In truth it's very hard to estimate Spectrum sales.  Some 2 dozen
> Spectrum variants, authorized clones and illegal clones have been made
> around the world, with very large followings in the UK, Portugal,
> Spain and all the eastern block countries.

I AM from the eastern block countries. The debate Spectrum vs
Commodore totaly ended in the late 80's. There was nothing more to
say. It probubly ended earlier in the west, since we were and are
unable to buy a discent computer.

> I wouldn't be surprised if
> Spectrum sales topped 20 million but I wouldn't wager that they passed
> C64 sales, simply because the Spectrum did not exist in the American
> market for more than 4 months (during which time 160,000 units sold). 
> What makes it close is that the Spectrum was dominant in the Soviet
> Union.

> You have to admit the 64 had some of the worst peripherals of all the
> 8 bits.

They're not bad. C64's serial bus protocols speed was bad.

> They also cost the most.  I would rather have tape than a
> $200+ disk system that performed worse than tape.

That's because you can't have a standard 5.25" or 3.5" disc drive on
the ZX.

> But you are right,
> most people forked over the extra $ for a fastload cartridge to fix
> the hardware bugs.

Bugs? What bugs?

> Even then, the disk drive only performed as well
> as a stringy floppy.

Hmm... Althou this bothers me to write it down, i will do so simply
coz you of all Spectrumers make most sence.

The speed of 5.25" disk drive is <= of the tape with turbo program.
If you load a turbo program for the disk drive, it is uncomparable.
It's not only the speed, it's the access of removable memmory that
counts. Even if the disk drive is 10 times slower than tape, it
better.

> Personally, I had/have a disk system with DD 5.25" and 3.5" drives. 
> Transfer rate is 250kbps, if I remember right (it's been a while)
> which allows the loading of memory snapshots in a couple of seconds,
> including access time.

Was it on a ZX Spectrum 48k?

> Cheers,
> Alvin

Z80 is a better CPU than 6502, for most of the people not haveing
neither ZX or C=, simple enuff it's more expensive and has more
features. But i like 6502 better than Z80, and that's my subjective
thought.
For C=64, was it good or bad, it does not matter, but seriously you
can't expect ZX Spectrum 48 to be considered as a computer. Honestly.

Cheers

ps - I can't see why you have pleasure in cross-posting your holly war
on comp.sys.cbm, but maybe it's just me.

++no carrier
0
spacerogue5
7/18/2003 7:20:47 AM
"Steppe" <steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote in message news:<3f16917b$1@news.nefonline.de>...
> Vasko,
> 
> I appreciate that you slapped the butt of this uneducated, poor fellow with
> your well-founded arguments. But still, this guy is a troll, probably a 30
> year old frustrated programmer that pretends to be 12 just to revive a
> stupid flamewar tradition (or the more I think about it, he's probably not
> doing it for traditions sake). All I can say is: Don't feed the troll.  ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> Steppe

I feel shtupid about feeding the trolls and have noticed that nobody
else does. That 1st post left me so amazed that i reacted instantly,
but in a comic way more than serious. I havent seen this kind of
arguing since primary school.

I am over now.

Vasko
0
spacerogue5
7/18/2003 7:28:46 AM
> The worse however disadvantage of the C64 was that it forced you to do
> several things a certain way, while the Speccy was extremely open.
Moreover
> due to the "British school" of programming (ie if the program doesn't
fit
> the machine... MAKE it fit as opposed to the now predominant "American
> school" of programming which says if the program doesn't fit the
machine
> BUY a BIGGER machine) programmers squeezed out of the Spectrum even
things
> the designers couldn't fathom that were possible! Ie Karnov (anyone
> remembers that coin-op conversion?). Or three-channel sound from a
computer
> WITHOUT a dedicated sound chip!

Then you haven't been following the C64 demo scene. Some of the demos
let the VIC and SID chips do things that are way beyond what its
designers could have ever dreamed of. After watching those demos I'm
often left wondering how they pulled that effect off (what the
hell...the VIC chip can't do that....?)

Surprisingly (or maybe not) most of the critisism Spectrum users have on
the C64 is based on misconceptions or just plain ignorance.

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


0
Peter
7/18/2003 8:58:21 AM
> > Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based
sprites
> > to make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
> > Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky
> > graphics.
>
> Still it was better than IBM's CGA 'Crap Graphics Adaptor', Black,
White,
> Turquoise, and Pink, with *really* blocky graphics

But still has a higher resolution than the spectrum....

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


0
merkerk (462)
7/18/2003 9:09:38 AM
Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote:

> big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) writes:
> 
> > It's so obvious that the Spectrum isn't a typewriter.
> 
<snip>
> 
> "The reason we didn't look for a word processor was that we thought 
>  the Spectrum has as much use for one as a fish has use for a bicycle."

Exactly. Because the Spectrum isn't a typewriter.
Should I wonder why there isn't a steering wheel for my TV?

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/18/2003 11:00:35 AM
OK, I'll stop trolling, here are some serious things to discuss.

Vasko Altiparmakov <spacerogue5@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Flame wars aren't objective.

ZX vs. CBM wars are. Honest. The main purpose of these childish fights
is to discover, though in a funny (for some people) / stupid (for other
people) way, flaws and advantages of other systems.
If I posted to the cbm group asking "why did the c64 have hardware
sprites? Wasn't it powerful enough to do it in software?" I'd start a
flame nevertheless. A declared flame war is more fun, IMO.

> > Using this 2:1 ratio, the original Spectrum is 75% faster than a C64.
> 
> It may be, but it is usless.

Wahay! This *is* a flamebait, right? :-)
64'ers here have (some of them *proudly*) stated that they never saw nor
used a Spectrum. This reminds me of the PC vs. Mac debates, where PC
users bash the Mac without even knowing how a Mac looks like. Most Mac
users *know* about PCs, most of them are forced to use one every day,
and that's why they feel a Mac is better suited to them. Most Spectrum
users have had the chance to use a C64, be it a real one or an emulator,
and still they feel that the Spectrum works better for them.

In a time when home computers were not only new, but also still
considered a bad idea (come on, who will want a computer at home?
Accountants working late hours? Part-time scientists?), the C64 was a
"real computer" (so the ads stated). A real computer was useless indeed:
who wants to go home and do accounting or word processing? I want to
turn my machine on and learn something, and the C64 was clearly designed
to make you run applications. They even put a key - the only one-touch
key in the whole machine - to LOAD and RUN a program, just in case you
had problems remembering the two commands. The base idea was to have a
"computer", with a monitor, a real printer, a disk drive; something that
mimicked an office machine. Bad idea, IMO: you ended up with an
expensive game console; I'd rather pull out the old typewriter than
write a letter on a 64 (on *any* 1982 home computer, actually), then
print it out on a 9-pin tractor-feed printer. Most users wanted to have
fun. Some of them got into "demos" and "intros" and sucking the most out
of the beast. And here they surely had lots of hardware to suck from.

The Spectrum, otoh, was designed as an educational machine: its goal was
to hook people into computers. It was cheap, it was BASIC (in all
senses) and it wasn't a replacement for a "real computer": more an
extension, a way to do things that you *couldn't* do on a real computer.

The success of both machines proved that both Sinclair and CBM were
wrong: most people didn't want to work on a computer, neither to learn
something new - they wanted GAMES. And in this respect, Sinclair was a
half-winner: you had to work a lot to squeeze more than a few ugly
sprites and lame beeps from a Spectrum. The relative ease you could put
a C64 to work with should have made it 1000 times more successful than
the Spectrum; it wasn't so. I've always felt 64ers were lazy because of
the dedicated hardware instead of being excited about all the marvellous
things they could force it to do.

> C64 is a
> computer. You can load Pascal if you like, or some new OS's made by
> anthusiast. You can load GEOS, a GUI. Most important of all you can
> interconect with other other pheriperials and machines to crosstalk.

You can do all this on a Spectrum too. There were/are alternative
languages, serial/parallel connections etc., even a network interface.
Wait: not a third-party, late-coming network interface. *Sinclair* made
it, and it made it in the early '80s. Network and disk commands are
printed on the keys, not a half-hack concocted by some "enthusiast".

> All the words on the keyboard
> look silly, especialy if you put some other hi-level lang.

Silly? It's the closest thing to a GUI's menu I can imagine. Everything
you can write on a command line is there, with no possibility of a
typing error (= zero debugging time). If you use any other language (why
a hi-level one? Why not assembly?), you simply ignore the "menu", just
as you do with any modern GUI. You don't need the command, you don't
give the command.

> > You have to admit the 64 had some of the worst peripherals of all the
> > 8 bits.
> 
> They're not bad. C64's serial bus protocols speed was bad.

The tape recorder was a joke, too. You couldn't even breathe while
loading a tape without getting (20 minutes later) a "LOAD ERROR".
The printers (CBM or Seikosha or any other cheap printer "designed for
C64") were pathetic. The monitor was so ugly that I preferred to use a
TV set.

> > They also cost the most.  I would rather have tape than a
> > $200+ disk system that performed worse than tape.
> 
> That's because you can't have a standard 5.25" or 3.5" disc drive on
> the ZX.

Not true. The Disciple (while not a Sinclair product, it's considered
the standard disk I/F for the Spectrum, AFAIK) will happily run an Atari
disk drive or a PC one. I used them both, in this order :-)
Tapes were largely used only because they were fast enough. You didn't
*need* a disk drive. The "official" microdrives were as good an idea as
a 300 baud floppy drive :-D

> The speed of 5.25" disk drive is <= of the tape with turbo program.
> If you load a turbo program for the disk drive, it is uncomparable.

I remember I waited 4 minutes for a program to load from the 1541 disk
drive. This is roughly the time you have to wait for a 48K program to
load from a standard cassette player into the Spectrum. I guess turbo
loaders were available for the Spectrum, too. I honestly can't remember
if I've ever seen one, but I'm sure I have typed-in and extensively used
turbo loaders on the 64 :-)
The fastload cartridge I hooked to my breadbox sure speeds things up. A
64K program loads in roughly 5 seconds. That's speed! But it's still
*half* the speed I reach on the Speccy with a "standard" Disciple and
disc drive. No fastloader needed.

> > Personally, I had/have a disk system with DD 5.25" and 3.5" drives.
> > Transfer rate is 250kbps, if I remember right (it's been a while)
> > which allows the loading of memory snapshots in a couple of seconds,
> > including access time.
> 
> Was it on a ZX Spectrum 48k?

I guess yes. On a 128K it would take roughly 4 seconds at 250kbps :-)

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/18/2003 11:00:36 AM
Anders Carlsson wrote:

> big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) writes:
> 
>> It's so obvious that the Spectrum isn't a typewriter.
> 
> But you have word processor(s), at least the Tasword series. A magazine
> reviewing word processors on various computers ignored looking for one
> on the Spectrum, but a few issues later had to recapitulate after
> finding Tasword. Approximate apology quote:
> 
> "The reason we didn't look for a word processor was that we thought
>  the Spectrum has as much use for one as a fish has use for a bicycle."

I done a couple of successful CVs on Tasword, with a 48k Spectrum+,
Disciple, and Amstrad printer. 

-- 
Paul S
0
paul
7/18/2003 11:09:06 AM
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 04:35:18 GMT, "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:

>
>The Great Wibble wrote ...
>
>>On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:14:53 -0500, "Dave Dahle" <dd-ah-le@dtg.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Now - a historical question - since this is apparently an "annual"
>>>"tradition", I wonder which side has inaugurated more flamewars?
>>>
>>We have (or rather I have), and damned proud of it too!
>
>I noticed that at least two "amateur" trolls tried to start a flamewar, but
>failed.  How does it feel to be a Professional Troll?
>
When it comes to the annual C64 Vs. Spectrum flamewar, there's none that can
compete with me.

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/18/2003 11:34:30 AM
On 18 Jul 2003 00:28:46 -0700, spacerogue5@yahoo.com (Vasko Altiparmakov) wrote:

>"Steppe" <steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote in message news:<3f16917b$1@news.nefonline.de>...
>> Vasko,
>> 
>> I appreciate that you slapped the butt of this uneducated, poor fellow with
>> your well-founded arguments. But still, this guy is a troll, probably a 30
>> year old frustrated programmer that pretends to be 12 just to revive a
>> stupid flamewar tradition (or the more I think about it, he's probably not
>> doing it for traditions sake). All I can say is: Don't feed the troll.  ;-)
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Steppe
>
>I feel shtupid about feeding the trolls and have noticed that nobody
>else does. That 1st post left me so amazed that i reacted instantly,
>but in a comic way more than serious. I havent seen this kind of
>arguing since primary school.
>
You see, this is exactly the attitude you should have, it's fun! That's why we
have this war every year! It's tradition!

-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/18/2003 11:37:12 AM
Sinclair QL <ql@dokos-gr.net> wrote:

> due to the "British school" of programming (ie if the program doesn't fit
> the machine... MAKE it fit as opposed to the now predominant "American
> school" of programming which says if the program doesn't fit the machine
> BUY a BIGGER machine)

Dead bang on. This, IMHO, is the reason why most Spectrum fans are
Spectrum fans. If you can walk to your workplace in 10 minutes, why
should you drive 5 minutes, then spend 5 minutes to find a parking?
You've got a car, you've got the money for the parking; you just feel
it's nicer to walk. Not having to get stuck in the traffic largely
compensates for the odd shower :-)

> programmers squeezed out of the Spectrum even things 
> the designers couldn't fathom that were possible!

To be honest, the same thing happened with the 64. Here is where you
really see the superiority of the 64's dedicated hardware. But you also
see the superiority of the Spectrum's programmers (or the "British way",
as you call it). 

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/18/2003 12:31:49 PM
Peter van Merkerk <merkerk@deadspam.com> wrote:

> > I've always felt 64ers were lazy because of
> > the dedicated hardware instead of being excited about all the  
> > marvellous things they could force it to do.
> 
> Again an opinion based on ignorance.You should take a look at the demos
> which take the C64 way beyond what it is designed to be able to do. 

I know. I never saw any of those techniques used in a game or commercial
program, though. Enthusiasts are *never* lazy. Official programmers used
the C64 at its worst. It's like if every program on the Spectrum was
written in BASIC. On a Spectrum, you *had* to take the machine to its
limits. (See another thread somewhere for the theory of the "British
way" and "American way").

> In this respect the Spectrum and C64 scenes are quite similar,
> both have fun trying to squeeze most out of the hardware they have.

Yep.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/18/2003 12:31:49 PM
> Then you haven't been following the C64 demo scene.


What lately? Of course we haven't. It's a pity no one pushed the C64 to its
limits when it was still for sale in the shops.


>Some of the demos
> let the VIC and SID chips do things that are way beyond what its
> designers could have ever dreamed of. After watching those demos I'm
> often left wondering how they pulled that effect off (what the
> hell...the VIC chip can't do that....?)
>
> Surprisingly (or maybe not) most of the critisism Spectrum users have on
> the C64 is based on misconceptions or just plain ignorance.
>
> --
> Peter van Merkerk
> peter.van.merkerk(at)dse.nl
>
>


0
Phil
7/18/2003 12:42:48 PM
> I know. I never saw any of those techniques used in a game or
commercial
> program, though. Enthusiasts are *never* lazy. Official programmers
used
> the C64 at its worst.

I think that is a gross generalization. Of course there was plenty of
commercial crap for the C64 that barely touched its potential. Then
again there was also quite a few commercial software titles that did use
at least some of those techniques. Popular techniques like opening up
the borders (which commodore claimed to be impossible) and sprite
multiplexing were commonly used in commercial games. Other techniques
weren't too practical in games, some consume too many CPU cycles, others
are too timing sensitive so it would not work on NTSC or PAL versions of
the C64. Another reason is that the C64 programmers didn't _have_ to
rely on undocumented or complicated techniques to obtain acceptable
graphics and sound. On the other hand they did have to deal with the
6502 which is (as Speccy fans are eager to point out) a bit of kludge
compared to programming a Z80.

> It's like if every program on the Spectrum was
> written in BASIC. On a Spectrum, you *had* to take the machine to its
> limits. (See another thread somewhere for the theory of the "British
> way" and "American way").

I read that. In fact the efficient engineering behind Sinclair products
is what I like most of it. I did dig into the schematics of the ZX
Spectrum and ZX81, and I think it is amazing what those machines do with
so few (non dedicated) parts. Commodore had the advantage it could
design and produce its own dedicated chips, so it didn't have rely as
much on efficient engineering. From the engineering point of view I
don't consider the C64 to be particularly elegant (I'm not to thrilled
about looks of the first model either). Nevertheless it was the computer
that I enjoyed most over the years, even though the PC I use nowadays is
in every respect at least 1000x more powerful. I'm sure many Spectrum
enthousiasts feel the same about their machine.

> > In this respect the Spectrum and C64 scenes are quite similar,
> > both have fun trying to squeeze most out of the hardware they have.
>
> Yep.

I think part of the fun of vintage computing is in dealing with the
limitations/weaknesses of the machine. In that sense a machine having
weaknesses is not necessarilly a bad thing. The sense of achievement one
gets when overcoming a limitation of the machine is hard to match.

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


0
Peter
7/18/2003 2:28:06 PM
> > Then you haven't been following the C64 demo scene.
>
> What lately? Of course we haven't. It's a pity no one pushed the C64
to its
> limits when it was still for sale in the shops.

Again ignorance, even in the eighties there were plenty of demos that
push the C64 over its designed limits. In fact the vast majority of
undocumented effects were discovered when the machine was still being
sold.

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


0
Peter
7/18/2003 2:28:14 PM
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:28:06 +0200, "Peter van Merkerk" <merkerk@deadspam.com>
wrote:

>> I know. I never saw any of those techniques used in a game or
>commercial
>> program, though. Enthusiasts are *never* lazy. Official programmers
>used
>> the C64 at its worst.
>
>I think that is a gross generalization. Of course there was plenty of
>commercial crap for the C64 that barely touched its potential. Then
>again there was also quite a few commercial software titles that did use
>at least some of those techniques. Popular techniques like opening up
>the borders (which commodore claimed to be impossible) and sprite
>multiplexing were commonly used in commercial games. Other techniques
>weren't too practical in games, some consume too many CPU cycles, others
>are too timing sensitive so it would not work on NTSC or PAL versions of
>the C64. Another reason is that the C64 programmers didn't _have_ to
>rely on undocumented or complicated techniques to obtain acceptable
>graphics and sound. On the other hand they did have to deal with the
>6502 which is (as Speccy fans are eager to point out) a bit of kludge
>compared to programming a Z80.
>
And Peter wins the award for "Managing to turn the annual flamewar into the
respected comparisons between two machines", which always happens. This is the
point where the real facts and figures now come into play!

The Annual C64 Vs. Spectrum - regular as clockwork!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/18/2003 6:06:10 PM
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 19:06:10 +0100, The Starglider
<the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>The Annual C64 Vs. Spectrum - regular as clockwork!

Or a lemur eating mangoes.[1]

Frink

[1] Ripe mangoes are moderately laxative; something I didn't realise 
until the following morning. Move over Senakot!

-- 
Doctor J. Frink     : 'Rampant Ribald Ringtail'
See his mind here   : http://www.cmp.liv.ac.uk/frink/
Annoy his mind here : pjf at cmp dot liv dot ack dot ook
"Joy!" - Stimpy
0
frink
7/18/2003 8:42:01 PM
Peter van Merkerk wrote in <bf8ca5$c6m7n$1@ID-133164.news.uni-berlin.de>:

>There are unofficial graphics modes (FLI) which allow you to use 2
>colors in a 8x1 pixel block in hires mode, effectively increasing the
>color resolution by 8. However these modes require a lot of processor
>cycles, and I have never seen them used in actual games. I've heard that
>there is something similar for the spectrum, but that that was a
>hardware solution.

Presumably it's Multitech you're referring to. The same thing is possible on 
the Spectrum entirely in software, but only across half the screen width. I 
can't think of any really good examples where this has been used - but imagine 
this screen
http://members.chello.at/ursula.chmielewski/bmp2scr/bmw-mlt-cod-bri.gif
chopped in half vertically and you'll get the idea.

>Anyway, unlike screenshots from some C64 games/demos, I haven't seen
>really impressive screenshots from Spectrum games/demos. I'm still
>inclined to believe that a C64 pushed to its limits can do better than a
>Spectrum pushed to its limits in the graphics department.

I think this would be a good time to mention
http://www.zxdemo.org/item.php?id=4801 ...

>> Here I have to agree I liked the SID pretty much, although it was only
>> REALLY audible with an external amp. The fact of the matter is that it
>is
>> so midrange it sounds like a Rockman guitar effect... Without a decent
>> Aural Exciter/Equalizer you can't really hear anything out of it.
>
>You should visit a doctor, your hearing has been impaired by that
>spectrum beeper

Well, personal taste and all that, but my experience of the SID is that it's 
good for squeally guitar effects and not much else. I doubt I could stand 
listening to an entire album of SID noise (and I've been to enough cross-
platform demo parties to know...) - whereas the AY/YM chips have projects like 
(blatant plug alert!) http://ayriders.zxdemo.org/ devoted to them. Is there 
anything similar for the SID? I'm not aware of it.
(The fact that the C64 has a huge community devoted to remaking the classic 
tracks with proper instruments is the real giveaway, though :-) )

-- 
http://www.zxdemo.org/ - the home of the Spectrum demo scene
"there's a breach in security, a disturbance in the chuntey"
0
gasman
7/18/2003 11:31:36 PM
"Matthew Westcott" <gasman@raww.org> wrote in message
news:93BD544Dgasmanrawworg@127.0.0.1...
> I think this would be a good time to mention
> http://www.zxdemo.org/item.php?id=4801 ...

I urge people to view this on an emulator or the real thing.  I've never
seen that much flicker in a pic, ever. :-P  C'mon, Deus Ex Machina (
http://noname.c64.org/csdb/release/?id=47 ) is already 3 years old.  It's
kinda short, but is a nice example of some great interlaced pics without
harsh strobing, contained in a very well put-together demo.  (for best
emulator viewing, I recommend fullscreen 640x400 res, single-sized)  I
presume that a lot of speccy pics flicker that badly because they're run
through converter programs, and not hand-drawn as laced pictures?

In the C64 side of things, "wiring" pictures isn't that well accepted in
compos, and most C64 artists draw directly in the screenmode that the pic is
going to be displayed in.  So there's far less of a "market" for converters
and ditherers in the 64 side of things than the spectrum, though since this
is merely software conversion, and both machines can do 2-color 8x1
pixel-cell modes, I can't think of anything that the speccy can do with
converted interlaced pics that the 64 can't.

> (The fact that the C64 has a huge community devoted to remaking the
classic
> tracks with proper instruments is the real giveaway, though :-) )

and the fact that there are multiple hardware sequencers still being
produced today that use the SID, as well as live groups using C64s and other
SID-based sounds should also tell you something.  The reason people use
"proper" instruments for old SID tunes is simply because they really enjoy
the tune and, as musicians, want to be able to recreate those sounds using
their own skills.

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


0
White
7/19/2003 4:08:45 AM
Matthew Westcott wrote ...

>Sam Gillett wrote in <9OKRa.16692$EZ2.3684@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>:
>
>>>> Stuff like that, written by the winner of the "Wibble of the Year"
>>>> award
>
>[...]
>
>>Sounds as though you have been brainwashed by The Great Wibble and know
>>little of the truth.
>
>I expect you're not too bothered about catching up on two decades of
>Sinclair folklore at this point, but a bit of friendly advice here: the
>concept of "wibble" is in fact one of the Spectrum's finest contributions
>to geek culture (look, it's in the Jargon File and everything -
>http://www.faqs.org/docs/jargon/W/wibble.html ) . As such, attempting to
>use it as an insult is likely to be about as effective as, say, the use of
>the word 'breadbin' in reference to the C64.

As I understand it, the dictionary definition of wibble is something like
this:

[paraphrased]

British slang; v. to speak or write evasively; n. one who speaks or writes
evasively.

It is in the latter sense that I use the word wibble.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!
















0
Sam
7/19/2003 8:05:57 AM
The Starglider wrote ...

[discussion by others about the stupidity of a "tradition" flamewar snipped]

>You see, this is exactly the attitude you should have, it's fun!

Perhaps to your demented brain.

>That's why we have this war every year!

We missed a year while you were gone.  Why don't you go back to wherever you
were?

>It's tradition!

And a harebrained one at that.  But your tradition nevertheless.

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!







0
Sam
7/19/2003 8:05:58 AM
> >Anyway, unlike screenshots from some C64 games/demos, I haven't seen
> >really impressive screenshots from Spectrum games/demos. I'm still
> >inclined to believe that a C64 pushed to its limits can do better than a
> >Spectrum pushed to its limits in the graphics department.
>
> I think this would be a good time to mention
> http://www.zxdemo.org/item.php?id=4801 ...

Cool! It is better than what I've seen so far, and it is certainly
impressive considering it is comming out of a spectrum (which is for me the
fun part: the demo vs. the capabilities of the machine). But even after
seeing the screenshot and running that demo on an emulator, I'm still
convinced that the C64 can do better than that. Even Interlaced FLI (a mode
to create extra colors by alternating them every frame) demos don't flicker
that badly on the C64.

> >> Here I have to agree I liked the SID pretty much, although it was only
> >> REALLY audible with an external amp. The fact of the matter is that it
> >is
> >> so midrange it sounds like a Rockman guitar effect... Without a decent
> >> Aural Exciter/Equalizer you can't really hear anything out of it.
> >
> >You should visit a doctor, your hearing has been impaired by that
> >spectrum beeper
>
> Well, personal taste and all that, but my experience of the SID is that
it's
> good for squeally guitar effects and not much else. I doubt I could stand
> listening to an entire album of SID noise (and I've been to enough cross-
> platform demo parties to know...) - whereas the AY/YM chips have projects
like
> (blatant plug alert!) http://ayriders.zxdemo.org/ devoted to them. Is
there
> anything similar for the SID? I'm not aware of it.

Yes there is. By the way; the Spectrum I own doesn't have that chip, just a
beeper. And if you are talking about the Spectrum 128, you might as well
compare it against Commodore 128 (which is as far as sound is concerned no
better than a C64, but is faster, has higher resolution graphics and even
has a Z80 for goodness sake!). At the time of its introduction the SID chip
was pretty impressive though. And frankly I can think of no sound chip used
in home computers of that era, including the popular AY-3-8912, I could
stand listing to for more than an hour or so.

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


0
Peter
7/19/2003 3:04:37 PM
spacerogue5@yahoo.com (Vasko Altiparmakov) wrote in message news:<b052b774.0307172320.520ec47@posting.google.com>...

> In my posts i always compare C64 to ZX Spectrum 48, not to Spectrum
> 128.

Me too.  I only speak about the original 48K Spectrum and not the
enhanced clones or the 128 and its clones.
 
> > It does not do things the same way a
> > 6502 does them.  I would have serious doubts about any book that made
> > claims like that.
> 
> Why? I don't have, and i can tell you why. Because it is not writen to
> take it down on Z80. 6502 and Z80 are concidered separatly. The book
> starts with Z80 and i've got preaty scared when i realized that 6502
> has only 3 registers. The design requires carefull re-thinking when
> makeing programs, but it's not a crippled CPU.

I believe you.  I'm not saying the book isn't an honest introduction
to the 6502 and Z80.  It's just that an obviously incorrect and
misleading claim made like the one you quoted from the book makes me
doubt that the author knows what he is talking about.  An author with
any amount of experience programming the 6502 AND the Z80 (as one
would expect from someone writing a book covering both topics) or an
author that knows a little bit about computer architecture would know
that a 4:1 "rough equivalence" derived in this manner is just bonkers.
 Had this margin really existed, everyone would have thrown out their
Z80s/8080s/6800s and bought 6502s.  I know I would.

You also misunderstand me.  I do not *at all* think of the 6502 as a
"crippled" cpu.  The 6502 was a clever design that managed to reduce
gate count to such an extent that its die size was much smaller than
all the other 8 bits.  This small die size equated to higher yield +
cheaps/wafer and made it possible to sell a 6502 at a fraction of the
cost of other 8-bitters.  It was quite a coup at the time, I would
imagine.  So much so that Motorola felt threatened enough to attempt
to sue it out of existence (they claimed the 6502 copied the 6800
instruction set and lost).  However, I do claim that gate reduction
does come with compromise.

> > have a large impact on cpu performance.  For a 6502 to operate at this
> > 2:1 ratio, it must also use absolute zero page addressing, which I
> > suppose is fine and good for apps that take control of the system and
> > are written by one person.
> 
> Zero page addressing is not a workaround on 6502. It's a feature, and
> a good one.

I didn't say it was :)  It probably made no difference 25 years ago,
but tying processor speed to external memory speed is a colossally bad
idea today and doesn't bode well for a cpu's useful lifetime.  Again
small die size is probably the reason they didn't just move the zero
page on-chip.

> It has to be used to access the main memory if you want
> the same effect you are used to on Z80. It's in the disign of the CPU,
> and not a bad habbit. System variables are on the Zero Page but there
> are purposely free locations left, that act as an extra 'registers'.
> Infact you only need 2 bytes for source and 2 for destination, out of
> $ff bytes.

What I meant was in order to get the best performance out of the 6502,
you have to use absolute zero page addressing.  I mean: you need to
reserve #0 for variable A, #1 for variable B, #2 for variable C, etc. 
Now suppose you want to use Bill's math lib in your program.  He's
reserved #0 for variable F0 and #1 for variable #f1, etc.  Clearly
your two programs don't play well together.  One of you is going to
have to modify your program to play well together.

I'm sure you can write source code to automatically reserve portions
of the zero page for sections of the code so that it is relatively
easy to use other people's source code in your own program, but in the
real world with a real operating system (eg, CP/M), source code is not
always available and you don't have months to sit down, disassemble
and reassemble someone's programs to play well with yours.

The 6502 does support an indexed zero page addressing mode that treats
the zero page as a stack.  This *can* be used in the instances I
mention above.  But instead of having instructions only 2 cycles long,
you get instructions that are 3 cycles long.  Suddenly the 6502
doesn't look so good next to other 8-bitters performance-wise.  This
is what I meant by ".. it must also use absolute zero page addressing,
which I suppose is fine and good for apps that take control of the
system and are written by one person."

> > Using this 2:1 ratio, the original Spectrum is 75% faster than a C64.
> 
> It may be, but it is usless.

Vasko, I thought this was flamebait but this post and others made by
you has convinced me that maybe you honestly don't know that the
Spectrum has an expansion connector (a Z80 bus) on the back.  Many
peripherals were made for the Spectrum while it was still commercial
including mice, DD disk systems, LAN networks, speech synthesizers,
etc.  By virtue of being inexpensive, having a Z80 and having the Z80
signals out the back, the Spectrum is almost an ideal machine for
tinkerers.

> > Minimum 4 cycles.  Programmers use 4-cycle instructions and 7-cycle
> > memory access instructions predominantly and only use 20+ cycle
> > instructions on rare occasions.
> 
> Minimum 4 like the LD register, register'
> But it is not a particulary usefull one.
> LD register, memory takes 7 cycles.

4 cycle instructions:

* LD register,register'
(despite what you say, I use them quite often; the Z80 instruction set
is not orthogonal, you see)
* exchange instructions
* 8-bit arithmetic (ADD, ADC, SUB, SBC, INC, DEC)
* 8-bit logical (AND, OR, XOR, CPL)
* some 8-bit rotations (RLCA, RLA, RRA, RRCA)
* indirect jumps - JP(HL)

The Z80 register set is used just like you would use absolute zero
page addressing on the 6502.  IE- an awful lot of instructions happen
between registers and not solely between registers and memory.

This topic interests me actually; I may one day go through all my Z80
source and find out the average cycle length of instructions I use.
 
> 6502's LDA memory and LDA memory,x take 4 cycles. LDA zeropage 3
> cycles and the most complex of all lda (zeropage,x) takes 6 cycles.

Unfortunately you've got 64K of memory and not 256 bytes :)
 
> > In the old days, the maximum speed
> > 6502 available was 2MHz, versus an 8MHz Z80.  The plain Z80 has since
> > been upgraded to 20MHz;
> 
> Are you sure about that, or do we have to add some extra zeroes to
> Z80. :)

Yes I'm sure :).  Look up the Z84C15 part on Zilog's website.  The Z80
family spawned a large set of descendants: Z800, Z8000, Z80000, Z180,
Z280, Z380, eZ80.

> > I don't know if they bothered to move the 6502
> > to a more modern process.
> 
> They did, you just don't know.

I'd appreciate a pointer, as I don't think they continued to update
the 6502. Once the cost advantage disappeared, the only reason to use
'em was to build C64s.  I suppose the low gate count might have made
them briefly attractive when IP started to be integrated into ASICs
and small FPGAs.  I do believe Rockwell used the 6502 core in some of
its modem products.  The other problem they may have had is that the
6502's architecture ties processor speed and external memory speed
together.  Memory speed grows much more slowly than processors, hence
cache :)

> > Hardware sprites are great if you don't have the power to do it in
> > software.
> 
> Even if you do have the power. On a P4 with win98, the mouse pointer
> still flickers. On the other hand it's a mater of programing.
> 
> > But if there is the choice, it is ALWAYS better to do it in
> > software.
> 
> I don't see why? You could make sprites the size you want, but on 8MHz
> Z80 you don't have the choice. Seems that you opose hardware sprites
> just because C64 has it. Realy, they are a great thing. You always
> need a sprite or two, even in 'serious' aplications.

Because once it's in hardware it's unchangeable.  The hardware
designers make the following decisions for you: sprite size, sprite
resolution and number of sprites.  IF you can do it in software you
have no such restrictions.  IF you can do it in software you wonder
why the hell you paid for hardware that gave you useless sprites. 
Perhaps the money could have been better spent elsewhere?

Hardware sprites certainly make it easier on the programmer but the
software sprite will get you better results.  I bet the SCPU folks are
doing wonders with the 65816 without the 64's hardware sprites.  I can
imagine full screen scrolling IFLI games with that.
 
> > The C64 is clearly a game computer;
 
> C64 is clearly a computer. It has all the required i/o, it's solid.
> It has gameing caipabilities of that time, to make it more attractive.

Two joystick connectors -- mandatory for the word processor in the
office.  A fancy sound chip in the SID -- necessary for the 'bell'
when an error is made.  The VIC-II -- gotta have 40-column text,
multiple sprites for those quality word processors, spreadsheets and
database programs.  A 6502 to run those CP/M apps.

I say this all with a smiley -- Every piece of the C64 hardware --
where the money went -- is for playing games.  Perhaps the keyboard
made it look solid for potential consumers.  The i/o is a slow
non-standard serial port (am I wrong?) and a cartridge port for
expansion, hardly anything more than a stock 48K Spectrum.

> Everithing is good, exept that last one. That rubber keybord made it a
> must do for the one-touch key entry. All the words on the keyboard
> look silly, especialy if you put some other hi-level lang.

Rubber keyboard or one-touch entry is a chicken and egg question.  The
rubber keyboard was necessary to keep the price down.  But did that
make it so impossible to type on, that Sinclair needed a one-touch
entry?  I don't think so -- I really think the one-touch entry system
was there to help novices type.  You have to remember what year this
is -- 1982.  Today typing is a common skill.  Then, no one could type
except secretaries.  I grew up on the one-touch system (though not the
rubber keyboard) and grew to love it.  I could enter programs a
million miles an hour on that thing.

> > You have to admit the 64 had some of the worst peripherals of all the
> > 8 bits.
> 
> They're not bad. C64's serial bus protocols speed was bad.

Sorry, they were very expensive and they performed badly.  Perhaps the
serial interface wasn't the best choice?  The disk drive is a computer
in its own right, just as powerful computation wise as the C64; that's
why it cost so much. The Commodore printer was less impressive than
other commercial dot matrix generic printers that were on the market
at the same time.

> Bugs? What bugs?

The reason why it takes 5 minutes to load a game from a 1541 disk
drive without a fastload cartridge.  Perhaps it's more accurate to
call it a firmware bug?  I just use the terminology you C64 folk use.

> > Even then, the disk drive only performed as well
> > as a stringy floppy.
> 
> Hmm... Althou this bothers me to write it down, i will do so simply
> coz you of all Spectrumers make most sence.
> 
> The speed of 5.25" disk drive is <= of the tape with turbo program.
> If you load a turbo program for the disk drive, it is uncomparable.
> It's not only the speed, it's the access of removable memmory that
> counts. Even if the disk drive is 10 times slower than tape, it
> better.

I have seen many C64s in action in my lifetime and I have seen the
1541 operated without fastload cartridge, with fastload cartridge,
with turbo loaders and without turboloaders so I do know what you are
talking about.

Sinclair's official mass storage device was the interface 1 and
microdrives.  The interface 1 added LAN networking ability (up to 64
Spectrums, and later, Sinclair QLs), a joystick interface and a
microdrive interface.  Microdrives are stringy-floppy devices:
basically high-speed tape.  You could load a Spectrum program in about
20 seconds in a random-access manner just like a disk drive; this is
what I compare the 1541's performance too above.  These peripherals
were added by Sinclair in his attempt to win a British schools
contract.  He lost to the BBC computer (he was very bitter about this)
and then left the Spectrum to grow on its own as he pursued his other
projects (the portable Z88 computer and the 68008 Sinclair QL business
computer).

(As an aside, Sinclair's range is a cool-looking lot.  A single
microdrive is the size of a cigarette package and uses cartridges that
are the size of a matchbook).
 
> > Personally, I had/have a disk system with DD 5.25" and 3.5" drives. 
> > Transfer rate is 250kbps, if I remember right (it's been a while)
> > which allows the loading of memory snapshots in a couple of seconds,
> > including access time.
> 
> Was it on a ZX Spectrum 48k?

My machine is the TS2068, made in 1983.  Its main features:
48K RAM, 24K ROM, two joystick connectors, AY chip for sound, four
display modes (Spectrum, double buffered Spectrum, 256x192 and 32x192
colour -- what you call IFLI, and 512x192 monochrome), a composite
monitor output (to which many people attached a Commodore monitor) and
a rear expansion connector.

However, you do not realize that there were several disk systems
available for the 48K Spectrum.  The most popular in the West was the
Disciple/+D that also used standard DD drives.  In Russia TRDOS became
dominant, which is based on the British Beta Disk interface.

Timex also made a 3" disk system for the TC2048 which also works on
the standard 48K Spectrum.  This added the ability to run CP/M 2.2, a
couple of standard RS232 ports and a parellel port.  However, just as
with every other low end 8-bit computer, most users used the Spectrum
to run games.


Alvin
0
A936
7/19/2003 8:13:36 PM
> I'd appreciate a pointer, as I don't think they continued to update
> the 6502. Once the cost advantage disappeared, the only reason to use
> 'em was to build C64s.  I suppose the low gate count might have made
> them briefly attractive when IP started to be integrated into ASICs
> and small FPGAs.  I do believe Rockwell used the 6502 core in some of
> its modem products.  The other problem they may have had is that the
> 6502's architecture ties processor speed and external memory speed
> together.  Memory speed grows much more slowly than processors, hence
> cache :)

GTE built some descendants, like the G65SC802 / G65SC816, which are fully 
compatible with the original 65xx design. Max. clock is 8 MHz. Rockwell had 
the R650x / R651x line with clock speeds up to 3 MHz. Commdore had the 
65CE02 (used in the C65, for example, fully 6502 compatible), up to 10 
MHz...

Thomas
0
Thomas
7/19/2003 11:46:09 PM
"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hgu9hv8it0g6hh5cn4hbhj6b7lf7roas0v@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:03:08 +0200, "Steppe"
> <steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote:
>
> >The Starglider wrote:
> >> Ah! The typical American response. Not even bothering to look outside
> >> of their own country to see what else happens in the world. I bet you
> >> think WW2 started in 1942 as well, didn't you? The Commode 64 was not
> >> the leader, simple as that!
> >
> >Although I'm German and don't really feel offended by that, I feel that
if
> >arguments like that enter the discussion it deserves a short and painless
> >*PLONK*
> >
> If he had bloody read the post, he would see that I was critisizing the
> Americans, not the Germans!

Typical short-tempered German. They're always ready to walk off in a huff
(and annex the Sudatenland).

Oh dear, that fell just a smidgin short of invoking Godwin's Law.  :-)


Marc Walters


0
Marc
7/20/2003 6:16:25 AM
Dave Dahle wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Now - a historical question - since this is apparently an "annual"
> "tradition", I wonder which side has inaugurated more flamewars?

probably us ;)

-- 
_ __/|   ___  ___ __ _________    irc-> irc.astrolink.org #speccy 16384
\`O_o'  / _ \/ -_) // / __/ _ \   faq-> http://sinclairfaq.org/cssfaq/
=(_ _)=/_//_/\__/\_,_/_/  \___/ woscd-> http://neurodiscs.co.uk/woscd/
   U - Ack! Phttpt! Thhbbt!     @ well.com :: William Anderson


0
neuro
7/21/2003 11:21:45 PM
There were a few mild attempts by Paul Allen Panks and a couple others, but
it takes good ol' Starglider to really get things rolling every year, it
seems. *g*

            --Decimal Cat

"neuro" <neuro@well.egg.bacon.chips.spam> wrote in message
news:b59uu-jd1.ln1@outbound.news.zensoft.net...
> Dave Dahle wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > Now - a historical question - since this is apparently an "annual"
> > "tradition", I wonder which side has inaugurated more flamewars?
>
> probably us ;)
>
> -- 
> _ __/|   ___  ___ __ _________    irc-> irc.astrolink.org #speccy 16384
> \`O_o'  / _ \/ -_) // / __/ _ \   faq-> http://sinclairfaq.org/cssfaq/
> =(_ _)=/_//_/\__/\_,_/_/  \___/ woscd-> http://neurodiscs.co.uk/woscd/
>    U - Ack! Phttpt! Thhbbt!     @ well.com :: William Anderson
>
>


0
Decimal
7/22/2003 2:24:43 AM
Decimal Cat wrote ...

>There were a few mild attempts by Paul Allen Panks and a couple others, but
>it takes good ol' Starglider to really get things rolling every year, it
>seems. *g*

And that is why, instead of flaming the Spectrum, we should flame The
Starglider.    ;-)

Best regards,

Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
     Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!







0
Sam
7/22/2003 2:58:13 AM
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 22:24:43 -0400, "Decimal Cat" <wells@acadia.net> wrote:

>There were a few mild attempts by Paul Allen Panks and a couple others, but
>it takes good ol' Starglider to really get things rolling every year, it
>seems. *g*
>
It seems that the day I decide to retire from being the C64 Vs. Spectrum
Flamewar Official Flamebait poster, I will have to train up a successor.

deKay - "Starglider, I'll try to start a flamewar."
SG - "Do, or do not. There is no try!".

Spike - "I just can't do it. It's impossible!"
SG - "That is why you failed."

Hmmm, selection may be difficult. I will have to carry on for a while longer
then.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/22/2003 12:47:38 PM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> deKay - "Starglider, I'll try to start a flamewar."
> SG - "Do, or do not. There is no try!".
> 
> Spike - "I just can't do it. It's impossible!"
> SG - "That is why you failed."
> 
> Hmmm, selection may be difficult. I will have to carry on for a while longer
> then.

"Why should I *try* to start a flamewar? Writing a technically rigorous
article - e.g. 'The c64 is crap. Discuss.' - is more than enough"

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/22/2003 1:04:19 PM
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 15:04:19 +0200, big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) wrote:

>The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> deKay - "Starglider, I'll try to start a flamewar."
>> SG - "Do, or do not. There is no try!".
>> 
>> Spike - "I just can't do it. It's impossible!"
>> SG - "That is why you failed."
>> 
>> Hmmm, selection may be difficult. I will have to carry on for a while longer
>> then.
>
>"Why should I *try* to start a flamewar? Writing a technically rigorous
>article - e.g. 'The c64 is crap. Discuss.' - is more than enough"

What is it with all this "Discuss" bollocks in the subject? That was never in it
originally.
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/22/2003 2:21:30 PM
The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 15:04:19 +0200, big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) wrote:
> 
> >"Why should I *try* to start a flamewar? Writing a technically rigorous
> >article - e.g. 'The c64 is crap. Discuss.' - is more than enough"
> 
> What is it with all this "Discuss" bollocks in the subject? That was never in
> it originally.

Whoops. I seem to be in need of more teaching, Master.

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/22/2003 2:33:35 PM
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 16:33:35 +0200, big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) wrote:

>The Starglider <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 15:04:19 +0200, big-go@dplanet.ch (Biggo) wrote:
>> 
>> >"Why should I *try* to start a flamewar? Writing a technically rigorous
>> >article - e.g. 'The c64 is crap. Discuss.' - is more than enough"
>> 
>> What is it with all this "Discuss" bollocks in the subject? That was never in
>> it originally.
>
>Whoops. I seem to be in need of more teaching, Master.

Give me time, young apprentice. You will learn :)
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/23/2003 8:26:10 AM
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 12:39:16 +0100, "John Moore"
<butter_pat_head@jcom.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:


>
><not so polite>
>Now until one of you c.s.s morons actually back up your (insert expletive of
>your choice) insane ranting with some real facts in the same way we have
>been doing, your current counter arguments will have the same effect as a
>Kuriboh will have against a Labyrinth Wall in defence mode will!
></not so polite>

Oh dear, someone just doesn't get it, do they?

The point of the annual flamewar, is to get two groups fired up about the things
they love. The lack of facts is not the issue here. I don't care what I use to
get people going, but as long as it does, I will still keep posting that way!

Eventually, the flamewar develops into quite an interesting technical
comparison, with details and examples of how things are done. We have found on
CSS that the most definite information has occured from the flamewars. Nothing
else has come close.

So sit back, and enjoy the ride! If you don't like it, don't read it. Simple!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
7/23/2003 8:29:49 AM
"Alvin" <A936@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1a3493d2.0307191031.47d0c1f5@posting.google.com...
> "Sam Smith" <hollyvonnie@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<3f171733_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>...
>

> But, yes, it was a fine game.  One of my favourite arcade conversions.
>  I played the Spectrum version before I realized that it was an arcade
> game (Rush'N'Attack, not too subtle is it?) and was delighted to see
> how well the Spectrum version matched the original.  All the baddies
> were in the same places and all the tricks that worked on the Spectrum
> also worked on the arcade machine.  A very good conversion.

I always knew that there was a Green Beret arcade but never realised that it
was called 'Rush N Attack'. A quick look shows that this only happened with
the American version - a play on words that may have been more popular at
the time ;)

I also found this page on the Speccy version:
http://www.btinternet.com/~joffa.smifff/greenberet.html which is very
interesting.

Sam


0
Sam
7/23/2003 7:40:04 PM
I demand that The Starglider may or may not have written...

> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 12:39:16 +0100, "John Moore"
> <butter_pat_head@jcom.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>> <not so polite> Now until one of you c.s.s morons actually back up your
>> (insert expletive of your choice) insane ranting with some real facts in
>> the same way we have been doing, your current counter arguments will have
>> the same effect as a Kuriboh will have against a Labyrinth Wall in defence
>> mode will! </not so polite>

> Oh dear, someone just doesn't get it, do they?

> The point of the annual flamewar,
[snip]

Hmm. Meta-flamewar... :-)

-- 
| Darren Salt | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington,
| RISC OS,    | s zap,tartarus,org            | Northumberland
| Linux       | @                             | Toon Army
|   How many recently-released games fit in 16K?

Follow the good side right to the fire, but not into it.
0
Darren
7/23/2003 8:11:49 PM
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 22:12:01 +0200, Linards Ticmanis
<ticmanis@coli.uni-sb.de> wrote:

>The Starglider wrote:
>> Simple!
>
>NOT IT ISNT!

You were doing just great until than point! :-)

0
Woody
7/24/2003 8:36:09 PM
Woody wrote:

>>The Starglider wrote:
>>
>>>Simple!
>>
>>NOT IT ISNT!
> 
> 
> You were doing just great until than point! :-)
> 

NO I WASNT!

-- 

Linards Ticmanis

 The Master said, "The business of laying on the colors follows the
preparation of the plain ground."




0
Linards
7/24/2003 8:55:09 PM
Darren Salt wrote:

>>>>>Simple!
>>>>
>>>>NOT IT ISNT!
>>>
>>>You were doing just great until than point! :-)
> 
>>NO I WASNT!
> 
> Is this the five-minute argument or the full half hour?

Sorry, time's up. I'm not allowed to argue that point.

-- 

Linards Ticmanis

 The Master said, "The business of laying on the colors follows the
preparation of the plain ground."




0
Linards
7/26/2003 2:02:38 AM
I demand that Linards Ticmanis may or may not have written...

> Darren Salt wrote:
>>>>>> Simple!
>>>>> NOT IT ISNT!
>>>> You were doing just great until than point! :-)
>>> NO I WASNT!
>> Is this the five-minute argument or the full half hour?

> Sorry, time's up. I'm not allowed to argue that point.

.... No it isn't.

-- 
| Darren Salt | nr. Ashington, | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk
| RISC OS,    | Northumberland | s zap,tartarus,org
| Linux       | Toon Army      | @
|   The RISC OS version of Mindtrap.

Windows 98. An OS, a browser or a virus?
0
Darren
7/26/2003 3:27:17 PM
Now I owned a Vic-20 first and that was an okay machine by Commodore, just
step back from the speccy for a while and check out what some of the top
demoists are doing with 3.5k of memory or at most 32k(expanded Vic)This
machine can be put into the same love catogory as the rubber speccy? I still
own a +2 which I think shit over c-64 anyway, but we should have had the
option of a plug in disk drive for the +2. No we did not want the +2a it
just made the +2 into an obsolete tape loading bollock. Thank Mr. A. Sugar
for that one.
"The Starglider" <the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8bibhv8je3sp98qta89ss13cjon850tal2@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 22:14:43 +0100, "Bill Bertram"
> <ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >Oh god the Speculum shovelers are at it again...
> >You're wasting your time, it's not really about the C64 being crap. The
> >title to this thread translates to read: "The C64 is crap because my
parents
> >couldn't afford a C64 or an Atari 8-bit or even a BBC Micro, so they got
me
> >the Spectrum."
>
> Oh yes, that was it, we have loads of money, so we'll sepnd more on a
vastly
> inferior machine!
> >
> >It's all to do with jealously pure and simple. They know the C64 is good,
> >but they'll swear theirs is better because of gameplay, only because
that's
> >the only thing they can say about their machine. (Yes I know the BASIC is
> >better on the speccy before you jump in...) good games, big deal...
>
> As stated elsewhere, yes we do agree that the Commode 64 was good - as a
> doorstop, paperweight, draught excluder and for barbeques.
> >
> >Another reason they defend the Speccy is, it's British and the C64 is
> >American. A few of the Brits are jealous of the US, this is just another
> >angle for them to make fun of the USofA and to make themselves feel
better.
>
> Everyone in the world *knows* they are better than the USA.
> >
> >I love the Spectrum, it's a great little machine for what is was designed
to
> >do (and I own nearly all the models except the ZX80, 81 and the QL)  I
just
> >find it a pity that the regulars on comp.sys.sinclair have this silly
> >attitude. Sometimes I feel embarrassed to be a speccy fan to be honest.
You
> >can't even say "Commodore" without calling it commode, for gods sake!
> >The people on comp.sys.cbm or the Amstrad newsgroup don't say spackdrum
or
> >speculum every time we mention the Spectrum, but you just can't let it go
> >can you?  I bet you were going to say, "You're taking too seriously blah
> >blah, it's just a bit of fun!"  Well I can't be bothered with your so
called
> >'fun and games' because it isn't, it's more than the C64 vs. the speccy.
> >There's no point for comp.sys.cbm'ers to defend the C64, we know what our
> >machines can do, and we don't have to prove anything. Even if we did, you
> >still choose to believe in the crap you're saying. I wonder if the Iraqi
> >info minister owned a Spectrum... Similar mindset if you ask me...
>
> I think you'll find that there are some who constantly refer to the little
black
> wonder as a "spackdrum". I find it most funny that they can't actually
find a
> legitimate word that puts it down that rhymes!
>
> --
>           ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble"
in
>           *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail
address
>           *                                             *      TO REPLY.
>           *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
>           *                                             *    /_  _\
>           ***********************************************   | O  O |
>
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo_______
____


0
miles
7/28/2003 10:40:51 PM
"Bill Bertram" <ADSR6581_removethis_@aol.com> wrote in message...

> Oh god the Speculum shovelers are at it again...
> You're wasting your time, it's not really about the C64 being crap. The
> title to this thread translates to read: "The C64 is crap because my
> parents couldn't afford a C64 or an Atari 8-bit or even a BBC Micro,
> so they got me the Spectrum."

I agree. Flamewars are just a stupid attempt to being all this unnecessary
conversation to the newsgroups. It's like one of those stupid e-mails which
tells you to send this huge e-mail to all your friends (any of which could
easily plant an virus that you don't know about until it's too late).

Best thing to do with them is ignore them.

> It's all to do with jealously pure and simple. They know the C64 is good,
> but they'll swear theirs is better because of gameplay, only because
> that's the only thing they can say about their machine. (Yes I know
> the BASIC is better on the speccy before you jump in...) good games,
> big deal...

Yes it could be jealously, but if they really loved their machine & were
happy with it, then these stupid flamewars aren't necessary.

> Another reason they defend the Speccy is, it's British and the C64 is
> American. A few of the Brits are jealous of the US, this is just another
> angle for them to make fun of the USofA and to make themselves feel
> better.

Well a foreign business who wants to trade overseas has the right (that
should apply anything I should think), when people start selling our local
produce to overseas companies then I'd start to quobble (since our Govt has
been doing it for many years & only in the last few people are starting to
see what's happening). Our country has also seen the introduction of foreign
supermarkets, my views on this are irrelevant, but where I shop is where I
choose to shop. The same can be said about computers, the computers I use
are the ones I choose to use (as a matter of preference).

> I love the Spectrum, it's a great little machine for what is was designed
> to do (and I own nearly all the models except the ZX80, 81 and the QL)
> I just find it a pity that the regulars on comp.sys.sinclair have
> this silly attitude. Sometimes I feel embarrassed to be a speccy fan to
> be honest. You can't even say "Commodore" without calling it commode,
> for gods sake!

And a silly flamewar won't change that. Unless this sinclair user don't
quit!

> The people on comp.sys.cbm or the Amstrad newsgroup don't say spackdrum or
> speculum every time we mention the Spectrum, but you just can't let it go
> can you?  I bet you were going to say, "You're taking too seriously blah
> blah, it's just a bit of fun!"  Well I can't be bothered with your so
> called 'fun and games' because it isn't, it's more than the C64 vs.
> the speccy.

I don't see it as fun & games. People who are new to the groups see these
flamewars, treat them as a regular thing down in our 8bit newsgroups.

I don't see this kind of behaviour when I read alt.folklore.computers. This
is where all the people there get together talk about various earlier
generation computers.

> There's no point for comp.sys.cbm'ers to defend the C64, we know what our
> machines can do, and we don't have to prove anything. Even if we did, you
> still choose to believe in the crap you're saying. I wonder if the Iraqi
> info minister owned a Spectrum... Similar mindset if you ask me...

Agreed,
Ross.


0
Ross
7/29/2003 10:56:23 AM
Ross Simpson <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au> wrote:

> I don't see this kind of behaviour when I read alt.folklore.computers. This
> is where all the people there get together talk about various earlier
> generation computers.

Let me guess: they closed the ng. No, erm, your ISP doesn't carry it
anymore. No, wait, hmmmmmm, they're all dead. Or sleeping. Or, er,
maybe, hm, ah, vacations, yes! They're all at the sea and you're afraid
of water and (we got the picture -Ed.[what?! I didn't send any! -Graphic
Ed.])

-- 
||_ (o) __  __  __  |   Biggo. <mailto:big-go@dplanet.ch> 
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ |   On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
       /_/ /_/      |   way of your success.                  (Todd H.)
0
big
7/29/2003 1:45:41 PM
Ross Simpson wrote in <3f26536a$0$1207$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>:

>Flamewars are just a stupid attempt to being all this
>unnecessary conversation to the newsgroups. It's like one of those
>stupid e-mails which tells you to send this huge e-mail to all your
>friends (any of which could easily plant an virus that you don't know
>about until it's too late). 
>
>Best thing to do with them is ignore them.

Pointless things to do on Usenet, number 244923: Post to a thread 
encouraging people to ignore the thread.

People are perfectly capable of ignoring threads by themselves, you know. 
And more to the point, they *already have done*. You do realise you've 
replied to a two week old post, don't you?

As for the rest of us (on both sides), we're happy to hang around until the 
conversation turns to objective technical comparisons and the exchange of 
ideas that sparks off projects like the Minigame competition. Feel free to 
join us, or not as the case may be.

-- 
http://www.zxdemo.org/ - the home of the Spectrum demo scene
"there's a breach in security, a disturbance in the chuntey"
0
gasman
7/29/2003 6:37:33 PM
"Matthew Westcott" <gasman@raww.org> wrote in message...

> >Flamewars are just a stupid attempt to being all this
> >unnecessary conversation to the newsgroups. It's like one of those
> >stupid e-mails which tells you to send this huge e-mail to all your
> >friends (any of which could easily plant an virus that you don't know
> >about until it's too late).

> >Best thing to do with them is ignore them.

> Pointless things to do on Usenet, number 244923: Post to a thread
> encouraging people to ignore the thread.

Yes, I will in future.

> People are perfectly capable of ignoring threads by themselves, you know.
> And more to the point, they *already have done*. You do realise you've
> replied to a two week old post, don't you?

Yes, so?

> As for the rest of us (on both sides), we're happy to hang around until
> the  conversation turns to objective technical comparisons and the
> exchange of  ideas that sparks off projects like the Minigame
> competition. Feel free to  join us, or not as the case may be.

Oh I see.


0
Ross
7/29/2003 10:15:09 PM
"Biggo" <big-go@dplanet.ch> wrote in message...

> > I don't see this kind of behaviour when I read alt.folklore.computers.
> > This is where all the people there get together talk about various
> > earlier generation computers.

> Let me guess: they closed the ng. No, erm, your ISP doesn't carry it
> anymore. No, wait, hmmmmmm, they're all dead. Or sleeping. Or, er,
> maybe, hm, ah, vacations, yes! They're all at the sea and you're afraid
> of water and (we got the picture -Ed.[what?! I didn't send any! -Graphic
> Ed.])

What, do you want me to post there to prove something?

Subscribe there, if you don't believe me!


0
Ross
7/29/2003 10:17:07 PM
"Ross Simpson" <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message...

> > >Flamewars are just a stupid attempt to being all this
> > >unnecessary conversation to the newsgroups. It's like one of those
> > >stupid e-mails which tells you to send this huge e-mail to all your
> > >friends (any of which could easily plant an virus that you don't know
> > >about until it's too late).

> > >Best thing to do with them is ignore them.

> > Pointless things to do on Usenet, number 244923: Post to a thread
> > encouraging people to ignore the thread.

> Yes, I will in future.

Oops, I forgot to read the posting rules for this newsgroup, where it states
ignoring won't be tollerated...

> > People are perfectly capable of ignoring threads by themselves, you
> > know.
> > And more to the point, they *already have done*. You do realise you've
> > replied to a two week old post, don't you?

....Replies will only have one respondent, so no doubbling up on opinions,
it's first in best dressed! :-)

> > As for the rest of us (on both sides), we're happy to hang around until
> > the  conversation turns to objective technical comparisons and the
> > exchange of  ideas that sparks off projects like the Minigame
> > competition. Feel free to  join us, or not as the case may be.

Oh yeah, this is neat. I'll have to be careful what I say in future, I did
want to make a minigame, but not in BASIC :-(

No-one cared to answer me in relation to my question on just writing a Turbo
Pascal program. A compiled program is at least 10k! Naturally, if I wrote
one I would have provided a link for the Turbo Pascal compiler - for people
to download & they tell you which system it's for.
I think my question was valid, if I provided the source code, then I believe
the source should have been the program judged to be 1k because it can be
run just as that program is from the Turbo Pascal program (compiling it is
another thing) & it doesn't have to use the extra units like the later
versions do. But I just guess that posting those questions in newsgroups
rather than sending e-mails to the person running it is a tad silly.

Sorry for breaking the rules! :-(
Ross.


0
Ross
7/29/2003 10:48:03 PM
"Ross Simpson" <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message news:<3f26fa3e$0$3867$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> "Ross Simpson" <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message...
[snip]
> No-one cared to answer me in relation to my question on just writing a Turbo
> Pascal program. A compiled program is at least 10k! Naturally, if I wrote
> one I would have provided a link for the Turbo Pascal compiler - for people
> to download & they tell you which system it's for.

If this was allowed, then I want to write a compiler that compiled,
say, my Brand New Programming Language (I made it up just now).
The character 'a' is a bitmap display token which compiles into lda #0
: sta$d020 : sta$d021 .... sta $d018,  and the char 'b' is a JuliaSet
bitmap token which compiles into a nice 160x200 bitmap image.
Char 'c' is, erm, a token for a Standard Scrolly Message in the bottom
border.

My sourcecode is, then:
..include MyReallyBigLibrary
begin
 a;
 b;
 c;
end;

About 45 bytes including the indent spaces.
Do I win?  :-)

> I think my question was valid, if I provided the source code, then I believe
> the source should have been the program judged to be 1k because it can be
> run just as that program is from the Turbo Pascal program (compiling it is
> another thing) & it doesn't have to use the extra units like the later
> versions do. But I just guess that posting those questions in newsgroups
> rather than sending e-mails to the person running it is a tad silly.

Well, the rules are that it has to be executed on the 64 or emulator,
and there are some rules regarding the header and decompression, etc -
i would guess that from these it could be inferred that the compiler
is part of your submission then, and its size would be added to the
size of your sourcecode.

Aside from the Rules of the competition, there is also the Spirit of
the competition to consider. But your point was an interesting one and
certainly gave a few people (and hopefully the competition organisers)
something to think about.


Marc Walters
0
marc
8/1/2003 3:02:13 AM
"Matthew Westcott" <gasman@raww.org> wrote in message...

> >No-one cared to answer me in relation to my question on just writing a
> >Turbo Pascal program. A compiled program is at least 10k! Naturally, if
> >I wrote one I would have provided a link for the Turbo Pascal compiler -
> >for people to download & they tell you which system it's for.
> >I think my question was valid, if I provided the source code, then I
> >believe the source should have been the program judged to be 1k because
> >it can be run just as that program is from the Turbo Pascal program
> >(compiling it is another thing) & it doesn't have to use the extra units
> >like the later versions do. But I just guess that posting those
> >questions in newsgroups rather than sending e-mails to the person
> >running it is a tad silly.

> While I don't have any involvement with the compo this year (aside from
> possibly being an entrant, if I get my act together), I'd say that
> entering  1K of Turbo Pascal source wouldn't be permitted by the rules.
> Well, not unless "PC with Turbo Pascal preinstalled on it" were one of the
> approved platforms, and that would hardly be in the spirit of the compo
> (after all, what would be stopping me from requesting "PC with
> MySuperDuper3DGraphicsEngine preinstalled on it" as a platform?)

But you see that's the thing, I've written TP programs which are machine
specific for the Amstrad. Other PC's don't understand the firmware which
Amstrad uses. Some Z80 inline m/c may have some of those 16bit assembly
programmers scratching their head! :-)

> Anyhow, people on the demoscene have managed to get various high-level
> languages to compile to tiny file sizes -
> http://www.syndeecate.cz/syn03res.txt mentions an intro called "4k
> Delphi intro is POSSiBLE!"...

Delphi isn't Turbo Pascal, I don't think anyone would get a Turbo Pascal
'com' file down to 1k, you're simply asking me (which does some dabbling
into the low-level aspect of programming), to understand the file structure
of a 'com' file for which it produces & compress it.

> Incidentally, is this the Turbo Pascal for DOS made by Borland that you're
> talking about, or another package with a coincidentally similar name? In
> view of your previous comments about PCs in recent crossposts, I'd be
> surprised if it's the former :-)

No, I'm talking about the Turbo Pascal for CP/M made by Borland which works
on various 8bit CP/M based machines (Amstrad's being one of those).

What I do with Turbo Pascal for DOS or CP/M-86 bears no relevance here. Just
so we're clear about this, I'm talking about Turbo Pascal 3 (the last
version available for CP/M).

Cheers,
Ross.


0
Ross
8/1/2003 10:09:25 PM
"Marc Walters" <marc@objectconnections.com> wrote in message...

> [snip]

> > No-one cared to answer me in relation to my question on just writing a
> > Turbo Pascal program. A compiled program is at least 10k! Naturally,
> > if I wrote one I would have provided a link for the Turbo Pascal
> > compiler - for people to download & they tell you which system it's
> > for.

> If this was allowed, then I want to write a compiler that compiled,
> say, my Brand New Programming Language (I made it up just now).
> The character 'a' is a bitmap display token which compiles into lda #0
> : sta$d020 : sta$d021 .... sta $d018,  and the char 'b' is a JuliaSet
> bitmap token which compiles into a nice 160x200 bitmap image.
> Char 'c' is, erm, a token for a Standard Scrolly Message in the bottom
> border.

> My sourcecode is, then:
> .include MyReallyBigLibrary
> begin
>  a;
>  b;
>  c;
> end;

> About 45 bytes including the indent spaces.
> Do I win?  :-)

Sure, once someone creates a minilanguage compo. Sadily, it doesn't qualify
as a game, or does it?

> > I think my question was valid, if I provided the source code, then I
> > believe the source should have been the program judged to be 1k because
> > it can be run just as that program is from the Turbo Pascal program
> > (compiling it is another thing) & it doesn't have to use the extra units
> > like the later versions do. But I just guess that posting those
> > questions in newsgroups rather than sending e-mails to the person
> > running it is a tad silly.

> Well, the rules are that it has to be executed on the 64 or emulator,
> and there are some rules regarding the header and decompression, etc -
> i would guess that from these it could be inferred that the compiler
> is part of your submission then, and its size would be added to the
> size of your sourcecode.

Sorry, I wasn't referning towards the C64. TP is for CP/M, naturally a C64
'can' run CP/M with a Z80 cartridge, but to follow the guidelines of being
machine specific, I'll have to learn some of those machine specifics.

CP/M doesn't have headers in it's files, is this a problem?

The only way I might compress an ASCII text file (with TP program in), would
be to uuencode it (I think). But would mean telling everone to download the
uudecode (to uncompress it), which is too much of a hassle.

Your not allowed to compress the file, if there were some CP/M crunchers
which shrink the 'com' file.

No, I'm talking about writing a text file (under 1024 bytes) which might
throw in a machine specific (Amstrad code) which might be a simple game.

The only doubt I have towards this, is downloading the language seperate
(which is available). Generally, the minigame compo generally suggests (to
me) that it requires the language to be available on power-up of the
computer or emulator.

Then there are issues towards you good folks obtaining the software, loading
it & telling the emulator (in most cases) to load the file & running it.
Writing a document, If I correctly recall, goes towards that 1k. It all
counts I guess.

> Aside from the Rules of the competition, there is also the Spirit of
> the competition to consider. But your point was an interesting one and
> certainly gave a few people (and hopefully the competition organisers)
> something to think about.

Then again, it could be a bad thing suggesting this. The rules (to me) seem
to define that in order to run a program (once the user has obtained the
emulator or computer), all the user has to do (at the machine prompt) is
'load program' then 'run' it. It doesn't say anything about:

1) Download Turbo Pascal here: ftp://ftp.someoneinhere.com.fr/turbopas.zip
(bogus address)
2) Load CP/M (|CPM)
3) Press Enter at 'A:turbo' prompt.
4) Insert program in Drive B (once Turbo Pascal menu is up)
5) Log in Drive B (Press L, type 'B:')
6) Run program (Press 'R').

This is also just off the top of my head! ;-)

It also just opens the corridor towards other games being written in other
languages & people will get frustrated at the fact that they cannot just
simply downloaad the emulator & run the dam thing. So I guess it's not so
great after all.

Maybe I should just learn Forth on the Jupiter Ace & send in the programs
(after all, it's the Aces primary language). :-)

Cheers,
Ross.


0
Ross
8/1/2003 11:00:48 PM
"Ross Simpson" <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au> writes:

> Generally, the minigame compo generally suggests (to me) that it
> requires the language to be available on power-up of the computer
> or emulator.

�2. The game should autostart or start with (LOAD +) RUN from the 
    BASIC prompt. On a CP/M machine you'd just type the name of the
    executable on the command line. Loaders count toward the size.

So, if you need some extra software (BASIC extenders, other languages 
etC), I believe that puts your entry out of the competition. I believe
there are a few computers out there where you can't run machine code
programs without extra hard- or software (TI99 comes to my mind).

The separate documentation (typically file.txt) does not count towards
the size of the executable. The platform sponsor will hopefully give
hints where to find an emulator and how to operate it if it is beyond
self-explanatory.

If you feel hampered, lobby for a wild class where you can compile your
Turbo Pascal games into 48K modules, although I'm not sure a such class
will ever be included to the MiniGame compo (not very mini anymore).

-- 
Anders Carlsson

"Please not to close to the hair, finger, clothes to run about the
 inside's vehicle, in order to prevent quilt involvement." -- Bit Racer
0
Anders
8/2/2003 12:20:09 PM
"Anders Carlsson" <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in message...

> > Generally, the minigame compo generally suggests (to me) that it
> > requires the language to be available on power-up of the computer
> > or emulator.

> �2. The game should autostart or start with (LOAD +) RUN from the
>     BASIC prompt. On a CP/M machine you'd just type the name of the
>     executable on the command line. Loaders count toward the size.

> So, if you need some extra software (BASIC extenders, other languages
> etC), I believe that puts your entry out of the competition. I believe
> there are a few computers out there where you can't run machine code
> programs without extra hard- or software (TI99 comes to my mind).

Yes, I heard of this elsewhere TI's problem with address machine code
without the extra hardware.

The rule sounds fair, after establishing it myself that if introducing other
languages into the compo, could bring in other issues. Unfortunately for
myself I choose Turbo Pascal over BASIC! :-)

> The separate documentation (typically file.txt) does not count towards
> the size of the executable. The platform sponsor will hopefully give
> hints where to find an emulator and how to operate it if it is beyond
> self-explanatory.

Why isn't the document included? It could be a 10 page document about why
your game is better than the others! :-) Heh!

> If you feel hampered, lobby for a wild class where you can compile your
> Turbo Pascal games into 48K modules, although I'm not sure a such class
> will ever be included to the MiniGame compo (not very mini anymore).

Well, it'll just be a question where I post the stuff! :-)

Bit of a pity TP didn't really take off on the Amstrad, CP/M was't generally
well recieved either.

Ross.


0
Ross
8/2/2003 1:40:10 PM
"Ross Simpson" <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au> writes:

> Why isn't the document included? It could be a 10 page document about why
> your game is better than the others! :-) Heh!

I don't think the game testers would care about ten pages of bragging.
At least it would not make a positive impression. The only case I can
see where a lot of documentation might enhance your game is if you're
writing an adventure game, and instead of including all that text in
the game, give short references to the manual:

You are in [R:A12]. You can see: [O:52X, L7N, 11A].
Obvious exits are: N, S, W.

What now?

although this adventure game would be unbearingly hard to play and
probably scores low on all elements but copy protection. :)

-- 
Anders Carlsson

"Please not to close to the hair, finger, clothes to run about the
 inside's vehicle, in order to prevent quilt involvement." -- Bit Racer
0
Anders
8/2/2003 3:27:41 PM
"Ross Simpson" <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message news:<3f2bbfd7$0$4189$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> "Anders Carlsson" <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in message...
> 
> > > Generally, the minigame compo generally suggests (to me) that it
> > > requires the language to be available on power-up of the computer
> > > or emulator.
>  
> > �2. The game should autostart or start with (LOAD +) RUN from the
> >     BASIC prompt. On a CP/M machine you'd just type the name of the
> >     executable on the command line. Loaders count toward the size.
>  
> > So, if you need some extra software (BASIC extenders, other languages
> > etC), I believe that puts your entry out of the competition. I believe
> > there are a few computers out there where you can't run machine code
> > programs without extra hard- or software (TI99 comes to my mind).
> 
> Yes, I heard of this elsewhere TI's problem with address machine code
> without the extra hardware.
> 


Just in case anyone is curious:
The TI console has 16k RAM for the graphics chip that is used to store
the graphic tables, the TI Basic program/data, and can be used by the
Graphics Programming Language interpreter that is built-in.
Of course, to utilize GPL for the compo, you'd need a Gram Kracker or
Gram simulation device (HSGPL, PGRAM). This would stretch the rules
too far.
The machine has only 256 bytes of RAM that are CPU addressable in the
console for assembly. But no way to load or run an assembly program
from TI BASIC without some extension (like a Mini Memory cartridge
which adds POKE/PEEK/LOAD/INIT/LINK routines, and another 4k of CPU
RAM).
The basic TI assembly system consists of a 32k card with an
Editor/Assembler module, and Editor/Assembler on disk. This allows you
to edit/assemble/link&load a program in object code format. But the
file contains linker information, so it will be much bigger than a
memory dump. So you'd use the SAVE utility to save it in memory image
format, which can be executed by Editor Assembler option #5. This is
what I did last year.
BTW: I wouldn't expect to see any TI entries this year...

Ben
0
anoneds
8/2/2003 6:58:48 PM
anoneds@netscape.net (Ben Yates) writes:

> The machine has only 256 bytes of RAM that are CPU addressable in 
> the console for assembly. But no way to load or run an assembly 
> program from TI BASIC without some extension

It sounds like the TI computer was built (in 1979) as a video game 
with keyboard and some kind of BASIC programming language. Maybe it 
was on purpose, so not too many third-party software developers 
would compete with TI themselves, releasing unlicensed games.

-- 
Anders Carlsson

"Please not to close to the hair, finger, clothes to run about the
 inside's vehicle, in order to prevent quilt involvement." -- Bit Racer
0
Anders
8/2/2003 8:13:38 PM
"Anders Carlsson" <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in message...

> > Why isn't the document included? It could be a 10 page document about
> > why your game is better than the others! :-) Heh!

> I don't think the game testers would care about ten pages of bragging.
> At least it would not make a positive impression. The only case I can
> see where a lot of documentation might enhance your game is if you're
> writing an adventure game, and instead of including all that text in
> the game, give short references to the manual:

> You are in [R:A12]. You can see: [O:52X, L7N, 11A].
> Obvious exits are: N, S, W.

> What now?

> although this adventure game would be unbearingly hard to play and
> probably scores low on all elements but copy protection. :)

I wouldn't care to write another adventure game for CP/M, there's enough of
that as there is. If I ever did, I write a manual with the complete solution
inside! :-)

Cheers,
Ross.


0
Ross
8/3/2003 1:23:03 AM
In <k2gsmojzukt.fsf@legolas.mdh.se> Anders Carlsson wrote:
> anoneds@netscape.net (Ben Yates) writes:
> 
> > The machine has only 256 bytes of RAM that are CPU addressable in 
> > the console for assembly. But no way to load or run an assembly 
> > program from TI BASIC without some extension
> 
> It sounds like the TI computer was built (in 1979) as a video game 
> with keyboard and some kind of BASIC programming language. Maybe it 
> was on purpose, so not too many third-party software developers 
> would compete with TI themselves, releasing unlicensed games.
> 

Can't agree. TI had a bunch of rules for third parties about the deepness 
of menus etc. And when you take a closer look at all the solid state 
modules, it was definitely not targeted as a video gaming machine.


Henry


--

----------------------------------------------------------------------
snail mail : Henry Koplien                             \|/
             From the Center of Nowhere              o(O O)o
---- eMail : Henry@NiKo-Internetpraesenz.de ----ooOo---(_)---oOoo-----

0
Henry
8/3/2003 7:23:29 AM
Henry@Koplien.de wrote in message news:<bgid9h$ondh2$1@ID-77876.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> In <k2gsmojzukt.fsf@legolas.mdh.se> Anders Carlsson wrote:
> > anoneds@netscape.net (Ben Yates) writes:
> > 
> > > The machine has only 256 bytes of RAM that are CPU addressable in 
> > > the console for assembly. But no way to load or run an assembly 
> > > program from TI BASIC without some extension
> > 
> > It sounds like the TI computer was built (in 1979) as a video game 
> > with keyboard and some kind of BASIC programming language. Maybe it 
> > was on purpose, so not too many third-party software developers 
> > would compete with TI themselves, releasing unlicensed games.
> > 
> 
> Can't agree. TI had a bunch of rules for third parties about the deepness 
> of menus etc. And when you take a closer look at all the solid state 
> modules, it was definitely not targeted as a video gaming machine.
> 

I'm not sure that Anders isn't correct. The early history is a bit
fuzzy, but there was a close relationship between TI and Milton
Bradley. One of the early cartridges was a collection of MB games for
the "Gamevision" (??) for the TI.
And the early 99/4 was envisioned to have not just the calculator
keyboard and wired joysticks, but two wireless keypads for the two
players, one that duplicated the left side of the keyboard, one for
the right.
These MB games were later released as separate titles - I don't
remember them all at the moment (I remember Yahtzee, Blackjack/Poker,
I believe Connect Four and maybe Zero Zap), but there were four games
in the one module.
So, I have to wonder if MB was planning a "Gamevision" console for
games (like Mattel's Intellivision), developed a partnership with TI,
and it evolved into the TI-99.
I'm glad for the partnership, whatever it was, because even though the
early games weren't the best ever written for the platform (early
games never are), they certainly were very well written and enjoyable.
Now I am wondering how many MB games were written for the TI? And then
toward the end was the MB expansion system, with it's collection of
great games... got one of those myself :)

Ben
0
anoneds
8/3/2003 1:01:35 PM
anoneds@netscape.net (Ben Yates) writes:

> These MB games were later released as separate titles

What I referred to is I tend to remember that software was forced
(or encouraged?) to go through official TI licensing, just like
many other systems, in particular video games, have done later.
Did that only apply to cartridge games maybe?

-- 
Anders Carlsson

"Please not to close to the hair, finger, clothes to run about the
 inside's vehicle, in order to prevent quilt involvement." -- Bit Racer
0
Anders
8/3/2003 1:46:48 PM
In <k2g8yqalupj.fsf@legolas.mdh.se> Anders Carlsson wrote:
> anoneds@netscape.net (Ben Yates) writes:
> 
> > These MB games were later released as separate titles
> 
> What I referred to is I tend to remember that software was forced
> (or encouraged?) to go through official TI licensing, just like
> many other systems, in particular video games, have done later.
> Did that only apply to cartridge games maybe?
> 
> 

I am not sure. I have to dig out an article in the attic where I have all 
my TI stuff. But my understanding (quite a long time ago, don't give too 
much on it...) it was for modules only.

Henry
--

----------------------------------------------------------------------
snail mail : Henry Koplien                             \|/
             From the Center of Nowhere              o(O O)o
---- eMail : Henry@NiKo-Internetpraesenz.de ----ooOo---(_)---oOoo-----

0
Henry
8/3/2003 5:13:27 PM
Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@mds.mdh.se> wrote in message news:<k2g8yqalupj.fsf@legolas.mdh.se>...
> anoneds@netscape.net (Ben Yates) writes:
> 
> > These MB games were later released as separate titles
> 
> What I referred to is I tend to remember that software was forced
> (or encouraged?) to go through official TI licensing, just like
> many other systems, in particular video games, have done later.
> Did that only apply to cartridge games maybe?

Maybe there is a good reason for this.
A few people have heard of the V2.2 99/4A consoles, those that
required a GROM chip to work. All part of TI's plan to control the
software of the TI, right?
Well, the V2.2 code was more or less a return to the original 99/4
code. Both V2.2 and the 99/4 GPL powerup code do not search for
program headers in the cartridge ROM space, only the cartridge GROM
space. Therefore, only cartridges with GROMS could be utilized. And
since GROM technology was entirely TI controlled (for whatever
reason), that meant third-party offerings _had_ to go through TI
licensing.
The TI-99/4A powerup GPL was rewritten to search the ROM area as well,
before they introduced the V2.2 consoles in late '83.
So, yes, it only applied to cartridge games. However, early
development of TI software required a 990 minicomputer from TI, until
the Editor Assembler came out (I think it was 1981 or '82). So, once
that came out, anyone could write disk-based assembly programs. But
no-one could write GPL programs without a 990 system and a GPL
compiler. It was much later ('85 or '86) that someone wrote a GPL
compiler, and none of them follow the TI standards...

Ben

P.S. - You'd think the extra control TI had would prevent TI users
from being exposed to lousy cartridge software. No, even TI had some
offerings that were pretty lousy...
0
anoneds
8/3/2003 7:49:54 PM
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 23:31:57 +0000 (UTC), Brock Landers <brock@jackhorner.xxx>
wrote:

>It ("the starglider") is far too imbecilish to warrant a followup, so
>simply urinate on it virtually, by plonking it, as I am doing now.
>
>No, scratch the urinating part - if a drop of my urine touched the flesh
>of starglider, then, combined with it, it would drastically raise
>starglider's IQ, up to a full 100 (my urine's IQ being 99), thereby
>making starglider potentially dangerous. 

(Back from my hols)

Does that mean that your urine is some 4000 times more intelligent than you
then? Wow, you must be pretty fucking thick!
-- 
          ****************The Starglider*****************  Remove "wibble" in  
          *   Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com   *    E-Mail address
          *                                             *      TO REPLY.
          *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk*     _WW_
          *                                             *    /_  _\
          ***********************************************   | O  O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
0
The
8/6/2003 7:15:14 AM
/me resurrects the thread, to the sound of a thousand killfiles

....but I figured that this might be a good opportunity to tell you that the 
Assembly oldskool compos will be (as far as I'm aware) the first time the 
C64 and Speccy have gone head-to-head in a major demo competition, so the 
eternal argument can be resolved. In a completely unreliable and non-
objective way, of course.

Follow it live tonight on http://www.assemblytv.net/ shortly after midnight 
Finnish time (10pm BST) if you're feeling particularly enthusiastic.

-- 
http://www.zxdemo.org/ - the home of the Spectrum demo scene
"there's a breach in security, a disturbance in the chuntey"
0
gasman
8/8/2003 5:03:36 PM
"Matthew Westcott" <gasman@raww.org> wrote in message
news:93D1CCE45gasmanrawworg@130.133.1.4...
> ...but I figured that this might be a good opportunity to tell you that
the
> Assembly oldskool compos will be (as far as I'm aware) the first time the
> C64 and Speccy have gone head-to-head in a major demo competition, so the
> eternal argument can be resolved. In a completely unreliable and non-
> objective way, of course.

hmm, seems like the ancestor of the C64 (and thus might be considered by
some to be even more "crap" than the 64) beat the speccy hands-down. :)
Wasn't too much of a compo, though, definitely not showing the best of any
of the other platforms.

And speccy's got such blocky graphics with that continual use of 32x24
resolution effects...

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


0
White
8/11/2003 8:05:16 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Peter de Vroomen wrote:

> Oh, opposed to the Spectrum...
>
> Well, let's say that I own 3 C64's and 2 speccies. Both speccies have all
> sorts of technical problems and remind me of Lada's: you have to keep
> working at them to keep them running, and the occasional bash will help. The
> C64's remind me of Nissan's: nobody actually wants them because they are
> ugly, but they offer the best value that money can buy.

While IMHO C=64 IS crap (as opposed to the Speccy), I have to agree that
original, Sinclair-manufactured spectrums are very unreliable and they do
need maintenance. BUT the whole beauty of Spectrum is that it's just a
glorified Z80: throw in some ROM, RAM, a simple video system, and voila,
instant magic.

The Sinclair ULA can be perfectly replaced by discrete logic, and then you
have a computer that literally works FOR EVER. The Z80 is one of the most
durable pieces of silicon mankind has ever produced.

Amstrad did a fairly good job at making reliable speccies, and so did some
clone manufacturers in Eastern Europe. Actually, even modding the original
Sinclair (ISSUE 4 or later) motherboards and giving them a decent
keyboard can yield acceptable results.

BUT:

Real men build their speccies themselves!

-- 
Daniel

0
Nagy
8/30/2003 8:08:39 AM
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Carl Woffenden wrote:

> When I was a young lad being a Speccy owner meant bashing the Commodore
> crowd simply 'because'... but then one day I actually used my mate's
> 64... and was amazed! Really! I'm a big fan of the Speccy and all things
> Clive but I gotta say the 64 is a great machine.

I used to OWN a C=64, yet I still believe it to be CRAP. I mean 900kHz
processors with 256 byte stack just don't cut it.

-- 
Daniel

0
Nagy
8/30/2003 8:17:01 AM
We are proud of you Daniel.  Continue to use your speccy if it's your
machine of choice.  I would like to speak on behalf of the group by
saying "GET LOST"

news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0308301018470.29079-100000@sziami.cs.bme.hu...
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Floris van den Berg wrote:
>
> > Ok. Even though it's obvious this guy is trolling i'm going to
defend my
> > beloved c64 step by step. I guess i'm just bored.
>
> Same here.
>
> > Slow compared to... the spectrum?
>
> Yes: a 3.54 MHz Z80 is a LOT faster than a 900kHz MC6510.
>
> > Commodore had at least 2 3D games. Elite and Castle Master.
>
> Compare ELITE on the C64 and on Spectrum. The former is hardly
playable at
> the 1 fps framerate.
>
> > Last thing i heard 6 million people are still using the c64. And
Tulip is
> > now resurrecting them. I don't see anyone resurrect the Spectrum.
>
> Google a bit for Sprinter. Manufactured, sold and developed for.
>
> > Have to agree there. The 1541 is horrid slow. A speed loader
cartridge
> > helps.
>
> Very little. Even the WD1772-based floppy controllers for the Speccy
> filled up the entire RAM in 5 to 6 seconds. My self-built IDE
interface (a
> very simple thing, indeed, the IDE bus is very similar to that of
the Z80)
> loaded full-size games in much less than a second.
>
> The thing I loved most about the Speccy is the fact that you had the
> entire processor bus, all clock signals and voltages available on
the
> expansion slot in the back. Expanding the speccy was very easy and
> efficient, whereas the commodore was a hardware hacker's hell.
>
> --
> Daniel
>


0
Trepain
8/30/2003 1:27:33 PM
I demand that Christian Potzinger may or may not have written...

> Trepain wrote...
>> We are proud of you Daniel.  Continue to use your speccy if it's your
>> machine of choice.  I would like to speak on behalf of the group by saying
>> "GET LOST"

> Please speak only on your own Behalf. There are 8Bit Machines out there who
> are 'better' than the C64

No argument there :-)

> (and if its only in "there's" Opinions ;)

"there's"? Do you mean "their"?

> But everyone should be possible to criticise...

Oh yes. Definitely. I can criticise you for your poor English, for a start...
<gd&r>

-- 
| Darren Salt | nr. Ashington, | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk
| RISC OS,    | Northumberland | s zap,tartarus,org
| Linux       | Toon Army      | @
|   Post HTML or binary => risk being reported to your ISP.

You are in a twisting maze of little passages, all different.
0
Darren
8/30/2003 6:29:52 PM
Please let this, my humble post, be the last to this thread, for even I have
become bored with it.


0
Phil
8/30/2003 9:22:32 PM
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 22:22:32 +0100, "Phil-on-a-hill"
<malcnospam@gothcorp.co.uk> wrote:

>Please let this, my humble post, be the last to this thread, for even I have
>become bored with it.
>


Me too



-- 
"Much as it pains me to admit it, my brother and I
spent a good twenty minutes weeing on each 
other in the loos in the basement..."
Tim Miller, ugvm   -----  www.ugvm.org.uk
0
Lister
8/30/2003 10:35:47 PM
Darren Salt wrote...

>> (and if its only in "there's" Opinions ;)
> 
> "there's"? Do you mean "their"?

My Mistake...

>> But everyone should be possible to criticise...
> 
> Oh yes. Definitely. I can criticise you for your
> poor English, for a start...

English isn't my native Language. I learned just a
few Words by watching Movies. So there is no Reason
for me to be ashamed ;)

><gd&r>

?
-- 
ryl: [SF|G'Kar] [ www.SeniorFragger.de ] &
[ www.RavenClaw.at ]
0
Christian
8/31/2003 12:11:43 AM

"Trepain" <trepain@trepainnospam.com> wrote in message
news:Pfm5b.256629$cF.81004@rwcrnsc53...
> So what was better about the speccy aside from the processing power?
> What could you do that I could not with my 64?
>
Come and join the gang at irc.astrolink.org #c64 :)




0
david
9/3/2003 10:46:39 PM
Reply:

Web resources about - The C64 is crap - comp.sys.cbm

Craps - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Craps is a dice game in which the players make wagers on the outcome of the roll, or a series of rolls, of a pair of dice. Players may wager ...

Facebook ‘Crap Be Gone’ App: Social Fixer
“I love every single Facebook feature and every spammy post that shows up in my News Feed ,” said NO ONE EVER. No matter if you are a dilettante ...

Cool it with the Stalinist purge crap
With all due respect Bill, you're not purging anyone. http://theothermccain.com/2011/02/06/hey-remember-that-crazy-conspiracy-theory-glenn- ...


Crap Taxidermy (@CrapTaxidermy) on Twitter
Sign in Sign up To bring you Twitter, we and our partners use cookies on our and other websites. Cookies help personalize Twitter content, tailor ...

Aw Craps! on the App Store on iTunes
Get Aw Craps! on the App Store. See screenshots and ratings, and read customer reviews.

"Crap Sweets & Rude Staff" - Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Explore Zaki Grant's photos on Flickr. Zaki Grant has uploaded 419 photos to Flickr.

Your business card is CRAP! - YouTube
http://www.JoelBauerEvents.com Wow?? Check out Joel Bauer's training! His videos on his site are pretty insane. Looks like he knows his sh*t ...

Netflix Australia: How our crap internet delayed the launch
Australia's slow internet, illicit downloaders, and why Netflix hated the word 'binge': we interview Ted Sarandos, the guy who decides what you ...

Beetle faces crap job in WA wine region
Holding a wine glass in one hand and swatting away flies with the other could be a thing of the past for West Australians visiting the South ...

Resources last updated: 3/4/2016 2:24:42 AM