16-bit C64/128?
in [Commodore]
|
From: David Murray on 11 Apr 2008 16:09 > What do you think? Good idea, or not? It would have been cool in 1987.. but not today. It would have as many users as the Commodore One (all 3 of them) and about zero software.
From: Eric on 11 Apr 2008 17:05 On Apr 11, 1:09 pm, christianlott1 <christianlo...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > for my part i'm trying to find a graphics solution for this wireless > 16bit msp430 ti gave me. I love msp430's but that particular set of boards is terrible. The quality of workmanship sucks and the range is incredibly short. Do yourself a favor and replace it with an Atmel RZRaven kit. Much higher quality, open source friendly, and the removes have LCD screens. Eric
From: Mark McDougall on 11 Apr 2008 20:14 Harry Potter wrote: > I would like somebody to do what Apple did with the IIgs and make a > C64/128-compatible 16-bit computer. It would have the following > features: > > * A version of the 65816 processor > * 16-bit graphics/sound > * hardware-based 1571 burst mode > * compatibility with CMD drives and CBM devices > * modular 8-bit and 16-bit BASICs > * in-ROM compression and text editing > * RGB monitor > * math coprocessor > * character and bitmapped graphics modes and sprites > > What do you think? Good idea, or not? I subscribe to a reasonable variety of different retro newsgroups, mailing lists and forums for a range of machines and I can tell you that - without exception - every group has a similar idea/proposal put forward by someone like yourself. Don't get me wrong - I think it's a cool idea - but I've yet to see anything get off the ground, bar the C-one of course, and that's currently floundering at best. There are numerous FPGA-based implementations of a host of retro micros available now, and they're by far the best candidates for receiving a make-over - yet no-one has bothered. And software emulators are even more suited (and accessible) as prototype platforms - again, nothing. IMHO the biggest barrier to success is the lack of software support - no-one is interested in a machine that has no software, regardless of its origins or its coolness factor. A shiny new 16-bit Commodore BASIC prompt is only interesting when you first see it at a retro get-together... Regards, -- | Mark McDougall | "Electrical Engineers do it | <http://members.iinet.net.au/~msmcdoug> | with less resistance!"
From: Sam Gillett on 11 Apr 2008 23:49 "Joe Forster/STA" wrote ... > This sounds like another core for the Commodore One. And, that sounds like about the only way it will ever happen. :-) -- Best regards, Sam Gillett Change is inevitable, except from vending machines!
From: BruceMcF on 11 Apr 2008 23:50
On Apr 11, 8:14 pm, Mark McDougall <msmcd...(a)no.spam.iinet> wrote: > IMHO the biggest barrier to success is the lack of software support - no-one > is interested in a machine that has no software, regardless of its origins > or its coolness factor. A shiny new 16-bit Commodore BASIC prompt is only > interesting when you first see it at a retro get-together... I see no point in a 65816 BASIC ... its still BASIC. If you have a 65816 soft core, you have a 6502 by default ... but you need some reason for the 65816. Maybe it runs ELKS, but inside a joystick that hooks up to a television through an AV jack ... if ELKS targets a 1MB address space processor with 64K banks on 16 byte boundaries, surely it can target a 16MB address space processor with 64K banks on 256 byte boundaries! How to get a Chinese (or Malaysian or ...) manufacturer interested in making it? SNES is the only lure I could see, but SNES+C64 with a SD Flash ram socket. So, C64+SuperCPU+SNES+Contiki+ELKS. Make sure it includes enough of a soft core CIA to be able to run an SPI bus at 1/4 the system bus, which in SuperCPU mode would be 5Mb/s or better than 512KB/s. And at least the start of a code base. |