Artlover Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 which generation of the A8 are you referring to? 400/800, XL, or XE. 3 different styles there, and the Jack Tremial designed both the C64 and XE series. The 2nd generation of C64 & C128D have a lower profile and look similar to the XL/XEs. Exactly. Can't believe people are just looking at the 400/800 and saying the C64 is has a better keyboard and look without mentioning the XL/XE models. Only because other people are/were only looking at the XL/XE models as a basis to say the A8 was nicer/sleeker in comparison to the C64 breadbox. So don't single C64er's out here. It works both ways. Also it should be noted the XL/XE series came after the C64. So for the time, and for what computer the C64 was meant to compete against, the only comparison was 400/800 style vs C64 breadbox style. To that end, comparing the 800XL to the C64 breadbox is also unfair. 800XL didn't exist when the C64 came out, it was a redesigned 800 that came later. If you want to compare "redesigns", then compare the 800XL with the C64C, CBM's redesigned C64. Here's a question. Since people liked to point out that Atari redesigned the 800 because of how Commodore set the industry standard for cost reduction and stuff, if the C64 never came out, would the 800 have been redesigned into the 800XL? Its a matter of opinion Yup. It's subjective. Never liked the older/taller profile of the Vic-20, C64, Atari 800. Wow, someone without bias!!! Oh did you know the Atari 400 and Commodore Pets were on the list of worst keyboards? Actually, PET was on their twice. Once for the horrible chiclet keyboard. 100% valid. But again with the later models with the real keyboard complaining about keyplacement. That starts venturing into the realm of subjectivity and context of the era. Home/Private computers were new, there wasn't what anyone could really call a set standard for how things should be done. Would a 1960's mainframe keyboard be any better in some of these regards? It's real easy to complain about stuff like that in hindsight after you've seen/used something better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miker Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 (edited) then why do you go on endlessly with the a8 is nicer etc bullshit ? Because it is, just because. I've reread all your posts and sang this one with Shania Twain. Commodore has some nice features but we prefer Atari, so don't try to convert anyone from A-age, bcoz you'll probably fail in it. It's rather not the best method for pe*is-enlargement or other Viagra-like-shit; machine is just a machine, without man it's like mass of crap (thanks ThomSW for dictionary-support! ). And now... i wish the thread will do back to the topic which it had on its first (10?) pages (dreams, i know). Edited December 9, 2008 by miker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 '85 ? why? i can run zx emulator on '79 atari, apple2 emu also, so bbc micro/acorn electron (cpc soon) (thanks antic) :-) c64 can emulate one of this machine? even on '85 commy? why xl/xe from 85 and the later home soldered 320k ram I have to compare my c64 to, 99% of the time when babbling here? and then everyone boasts that its a 78' machine. nothing stops me using the c128 then. and yes the c64 can emulate anything the a8 can. why do you think it cant? they use the same cpu, so porting over the code is no problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 xxl, don't worry. You did great work with ZX and Apple emulators already. Knowing that you are preparing BBC and CPC emulators, njami. Just ignore these insults made by Oswald, don't bother. We all know it is impossible to do that stuff on C64. It does not count for C64 guys. If the CPU is not fast enough, no problem. Just leave some parts of the needed for the look of having it running fast enough, and every C64 guy is happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 xxl, don't worry. You did great work with ZX and Apple emulators already. Knowing that you are preparing BBC and CPC emulators, njami. Just ignore these insults made by Oswald, don't bother. We all know it is impossible to do that stuff on C64. a little secret: the c64 could better emulate the speccy gfx. and as the cpus are the same how would it be impossible ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gury Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 '85 ? why? i can run zx emulator on '79 atari, apple2 emu also, so bbc micro/acorn electron (cpc soon) (thanks antic) :-) c64 can emulate one of this machine? even on '85 commy? why xl/xe from 85 and the later home soldered 320k ram I have to compare my c64 to, 99% of the time when babbling here? and then everyone boasts that its a 78' machine. nothing stops me using the c128 then. and yes the c64 can emulate anything the a8 can. why do you think it cant? they use the same cpu, so porting over the code is no problem. Did you forget that emulating those machines would be terribly slow on C64? Even emulating BASIC of any of those machines would be slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastRobPlus Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 (edited) The 800xl was light years better in construction than C64, at least they used actual steel sheilding, the c64 used tinfoil cardboard, it was laughable I think the steel shielding is laughable when a tinfoil cardboard is enough. why would anyone want kgs of steel in a machine ?! This is a stupid point to still be arguing: My computer's shielding is better made than your computer's shielding. I know, let's compare the rubber feet! I agree. add case design, keyboard quality, etc. Yeah, but at least case design and keyboard were external things that affected the user to some degree. Complaining about shielding is like lamenting the brand of resistors used. I mentioned them because in my eyes there's no true difference. Actually - let's address the root reason this insipid argument was brought up. C64 fanboys in this thread have stated that light and cheap was more desirable to end users and the Atari’s over-shielding was an example of where the C64 is “good enough.” IEEE Spectrum, the journal of the electronic engineering institute does not seem to agree: "After a redesign in 1983, the VIC-II was encased in a plastic DIL package, which reduced costs substantially, but it did not totally eliminate the heat problem. Without a ceramic package, the VIC-II required the use of a heatsink. To avoid extra cost, the metal RF shielding doubled as the heatsink for the VIC, although not all units shipped with this type of shielding. Most C64s in Europe shipped with a cardboard RF shield, coated with a layer of metal foil. The effectiveness of the cardboard was highly questionable, and worse still it acted as an insulator, blocking airflow which trapped heat generated by the SID, VIC and PLA chips." - Wikipedia quoting IEEE magazine’s C64 design case history. Edited December 9, 2008 by FastRobPlus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 @oswald... then show an zx emu running games? you are claiming that MK has no idea regarding capabilities and never coded stuff but now you are on the same side... you say...where is Turrican, and A8 can not do it...now XXL (talented scene coder so don't try to fool him... ) you are claiming "out of the blue" that c64 can do the same... well...where is the proof? I doubt it...simply because the CPU might be too slow to pull the emulation off? I mean using a C64... not a C128... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 '85 ? why? i can run zx emulator on '79 atari, apple2 emu also, so bbc micro/acorn electron (cpc soon) (thanks antic) :-) c64 can emulate one of this machine? even on '85 commy? why xl/xe from 85 and the later home soldered 320k ram I have to compare my c64 to, 99% of the time when babbling here? and then everyone boasts that its a 78' machine. nothing stops me using the c128 then. and yes the c64 can emulate anything the a8 can. why do you think it cant? they use the same cpu, so porting over the code is no problem. Did you forget that emulating those machines would be terribly slow on C64? Even emulating BASIC of any of those machines would be slow. its already terribly slow on the a8, did YOU forget ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gury Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 (edited) its already terribly slow on the a8, did YOU forget ? It is quite ok. When optimized, it will be even better. For now, you simply use speed feature of, for example, Atari800Win, pressing F7. The action is like in original. Edited December 9, 2008 by Gury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Here's a question. Since people liked to point out that Atari redesigned the 800 because of how Commodore set the industry standard for cost reduction and stuff, if the C64 never came out, would the 800 have been redesigned into the 800XL? Well, consider that the 1200XL/1400XL/1450XLD were all designed before the 64 came out. Atari was certainly going for slimmer, but not cheaper. The plan was to introduce new built-in peripherals and expansion features (1090) and go directly after Apple. Once the 64 hit, the whole plan proved too risky and the 1200XL was whittled down into the more affordable 600XL and 800XL. The 65XE and 130XE only existed to give Atari a "new" line and to buy time for the ST. The XE also served as a trial of the ST case design elements. Atari had several vendors for the XL keyboards, but none were as bad as the XE ones. The case was reduced to 2 pieces (compare that to the XL case which has a separate bezel, clear strip next to the function keys, metal cartridge door, etc...) and the circuit boards even seemed flimsier. The 130XE was based on an unreleased 128K 800XL prototype, and the XF551 was originally called the 1050CR for cost-reduced. The Atari crowd all seemed pretty stoked from the hype surrounding the XE's but once again we really got nothing new. Anyway, the first time I picked one up I was unimpressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gury Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 a little secret: the c64 could better emulate the speccy gfx. and as the cpus are the same how would it be impossible ? It IS impossible. Would you like to emulate fast ZX spectrum action games on C64 with static screens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Actually - let's address the root reason this insipid argument was brought up. C64 fanboys in this thread have stated that light and cheap was more desirable to end users and the Atari’s over-shielding was an example of where the C64 is “good enough.” IEEE Spectrum, the journal of the electronic engineering institute does not seem to agree: it was good enough for me. never a problem with my old c64. funny how much problem caused to you being an a8 owner. you just cant stop with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 come on...where is Jet Pack & Knight Lore "terrible slow"? Jesus... you are high end scener but sometimes really strange... maybe I am looking at some of your parts done on c64 and look what kind of code you have produced... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 @oswald... then show an zx emu running games? you are claiming that MK has no idea regarding capabilities and never coded stuff but now you are on the same side... you say...where is Turrican, and A8 can not do it...now XXL (talented scene coder so don't try to fool him... ) you are claiming "out of the blue" that c64 can do the same... well...where is the proof? I doubt it...simply because the CPU might be too slow to pull the emulation off? I mean using a C64... not a C128... how come 1.77 mhz is enough to emulate a 3.5mhz speccy, but 1mhz is terribly slow ?! I have NOT said it can do the same. I said it can do it somewhat slower, come on its the same cpu, same amount of ram, whats soooo impossible ?! and the c128 will do it much faster and with colors too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxl Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 and yes the c64 can emulate anything the a8 can. why do you think it cant? they use the same cpu, so porting over the code is no problem. no :-) c64 cant emulate anything a8 can, because of antic :-) cpu is not so important, dont belive? try heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 (edited) a little secret: the c64 could better emulate the speccy gfx. and as the cpus are the same how would it be impossible ? It IS impossible. Would you like to emulate fast ZX spectrum action games on C64 with static screens? so the a8 is allowed to run in an emulator at 1000000000% speed, while the c64 should do it using a real machine? come on I'm not gonna eat this shit Edited December 9, 2008 by Oswald Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artlover Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 The case itself is nicer Subjective. If it was a matter of fact, then everyone could agree. They don't. heavy sheilding Who cares. I don't even want it at all. Unless you're using RF on a TV and are set up like 5 feet away from another TV with an antenna that you're trying to watch at the same time, it don't even matter. better kb Subjective. If it was a matter of fact, then everyone could agree. They don't. just the feel of quality. Subjective. If it was a matter of fact, then everyone could agree. They don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastRobPlus Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Also it should be noted the XL/XE series came after the C64. So for the time, and for what computer the C64 was meant to compete against, the only comparison was 400/800 style vs C64 breadbox style. And let us be very clear: Forget about the XL or XE. The Atari 800 looks better, is built better, and is more reliable than the brown breadbox Commodore 64. I'm not sure how some of you 64 guys can claim "It's subjective." It isn't. The Atari 800 was built to look like a high-tech computer of the 1970s. The Commodore PET was built to look like a computer of the 1970s. They would have been at home on the set of any 1970s or early 80s Sci-Fi TV show. The Commodore VIC and Commdore 64 were built to house a keybaord and mainboard, nothing more. Did they do that job well enough? Seems like it. Just don't go comparing them aesthetically - especially not on Atari Age - and expect more than a handful to even agree they are in the same class in this regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 come on...where is Jet Pack & Knight Lore "terrible slow"? Jesus... you are high end scener but sometimes really strange... maybe I am looking at some of your parts done on c64 and look what kind of code you have produced... I was talking of emulating a machine, and not about ported games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomSW Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 LOL just though about ANTIC-equipped C64 @miker: oh c'mon - buy c64, play SID, enlarge your bulge, make Oswald happier! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 and yes the c64 can emulate anything the a8 can. why do you think it cant? they use the same cpu, so porting over the code is no problem. no :-) c64 cant emulate anything a8 can, because of antic :-) cpu is not so important, dont belive? try heh. sure it can. if a8 is allowed emulate speccy so that it only displays 2 (two) colors, then the c64 can do similar "stunts". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 My Atari came upholstered in genuine Corinthian leather and smelled like potpourri. The first C64 I got smelled like cat pee and was covered in a skin-eating fungus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 and yes the c64 can emulate anything the a8 can. why do you think it cant? they use the same cpu, so porting over the code is no problem. no :-) c64 cant emulate anything a8 can, because of antic :-) cpu is not so important, dont belive? try heh. sure it can. if a8 is allowed emulate speccy so that it only displays 2 (two) colors, then the c64 can do similar "stunts". Oswald...you really should read the polish Atari Wiki and the forums at Atariarea... sad in polish but then you know that Antic is the key here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 sure it can. if a8 is allowed emulate speccy so that it only displays 2 (two) colors, then the c64 can do similar "stunts". Give Oswald some colours and he is happy. Alike how crap anything else is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts