Jump to content
IGNORED

80 column Atari 8's?


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, phaeron said:

This is a myth. The versioning APIs in Windows don't return a version string like "Windows 95", they return a version number. This number was 4.0 for Windows 95, not 9.0. The only piece of code that anyone has actually pointed to with the problem you describe is Java code interpreting an OS version string produced by the JVM itself and not Windows. None of the APIs that Microsoft has shimmed for specific applications to fix versioning issues return a version string of the pertinent form.

 

But even if that were an issue, there was already a strategy in place to solve it. All versions of Windows past Windows 8 lie about their version number in APIs and report themselves as Windows 8 (6.2) unless you specifically mark the program as compatible in the executable manifest. Windows 8.1 (6.3) had a specific compatibility mark for this, and Windows 10 required a separate one.  So even if there were an issue as you describe, it wouldn't have affected older applications as they would have continued to read Windows 8 or Windows 8.1 as the OS version. Rebranding the product to fix a technical issue wouldn't have made sense, especially since Windows 10 shipped with the version-lie mechanism anyway.

 

Sadly, this rumor has spread so far that it has become self-sustaining, and for some reason people are apt to believe it rather than the simpler explanation that it was a branding issue.

 

Is it a lie?  Or exceptions, like Java, where people coded something wrong.  Not saying it was an issue with Windows API necessarily.  

 

I have met plenty of shitty coders.  Example was when they hardcode the Windows directory to C:\Windows instead of using %SystemRoot%

So I could totally see people doing that.  If that is a lie, why did they skip Windows 9?

 

Ha, I haven't heard this theory, but my other one about why it was Windows 10 was because macOS had X and so they thought 'oooh, we need to be 10 too!' but now that macOS finally moved onto 11 and now up to 13, Microsoft had to release Windows 11, and I think 12 is rumored to come out next year.  Reminds me of Linux releases just randomly jumping numbers for no reason other than to see bigger than others. 

Edited by leech
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, leech said:

Is it a lie?  Or exceptions, like Java, where people coded something wrong.  Not saying it was an issue with Windows API necessarily.  

 

You said: "Because Microsoft, in their finite wisdom, had a bunch of stuff where you could code your software to detect windows 9x." But Microsoft didn't provide that, at least not in the form described in the myth. In order for it to be a problem, the following scenario would have needed to occur:

  • Program was written for Windows 95 and 98.
  • Program still runs on new Windows 9.
  • Program is updated specifically for the new Windows 9, with the compatibility entry so it can see the updated version info.
  • Program internally translates the version number provided by Windows into a name not provided by Windows.
  • Program uses a substring check to match "Windows 9" against Windows 95/98, and still kept this code after being specifically updated for Windows 9.
  • Program does something internally that breaks on this decision, besides just reporting the wrong version number in UI (which Microsoft already wasn't concerned about, since they broke everyone's diagnostics with the version mask in 8.1).
  • The best solution determined for this issue is to publicly rename the entire Windows product, instead of shimming the specific problematic programs using the application compatibility framework that already existed.

 

As opposed to the alternate explanation:

  • Windows 10 is a better name than Windows 9.

 

It's possible, but no one has identified a program that would actually break, much less important enough to warrant such a sledgehammer solution. Not to mention all of the other ways that a program originally written for Windows 95 can already run into problems on Windows 10.

 

Note that the version reporting strategy used by Windows that largely avoids this mythical issue is what also causes the program reported earlier in this thread -- because Windows doesn't provide its branding string, programs have to synthesize it themselves. Which means they have to have their internal logic updated in order to properly report the name of new version of Windows.

Edited by phaeron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, phaeron said:

 

You said: "Because Microsoft, in their finite wisdom, had a bunch of stuff where you could code your software to detect windows 9x." But Microsoft didn't provide that, at least not in the form described in the myth. In order for it to be a problem, the following scenario would have needed to occur:

  • Program was written for Windows 95 and 98.
  • Program still runs on new Windows 9.
  • Program is updated specifically for the new Windows 9, with the compatibility entry so it can see the updated version info.
  • Program internally translates the version number provided by Windows into a name not provided by Windows.
  • Program uses a substring check to match "Windows 9" against Windows 95/98, and still kept this code after being specifically updated for Windows 9.
  • Program does something internally that breaks on this decision, besides just reporting the wrong version number in UI (which Microsoft already wasn't concerned about, since they broke everyone's diagnostics with the version mask in 8.1).
  • The best solution determined for this issue is to publicly rename the entire Windows product, instead of shimming the specific problematic programs using the application compatibility framework that already existed.

 

As opposed to the alternate explanation:

  • Windows 10 is a better name than Windows 9.

 

It's possible, but no one has identified a program that would actually break, much less important enough to warrant such a sledgehammer solution. Not to mention all of the other ways that a program originally written for Windows 95 can already run into problems on Windows 10.

 

Note that the version reporting strategy used by Windows that largely avoids this mythical issue is what also causes the program reported earlier in this thread -- because Windows doesn't provide its branding string, programs have to synthesize it themselves. Which means they have to have their internal logic updated in order to properly report the name of new version of Windows.

Right.  It is just easier to blame the big gorilla, than for people to get that some programs were just coded poorly, or used stuff that was already planned to be deprecated.  It is one of the reasons I tend to prefer open source software.  At least then others can patch / recompile it to work on newer operating systems.

At least MS tries at some backward compatibility.   Apple just tells people that large swaths of their software will stop working because Devs haven't updated to 64bit...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying like an 80-column GTIA with an 80-column ANTIC running at 2x speed. It would need it's own VRAM though and 16K would be nice. We could even have 16 color registers, 8 players, and so much more. And at a modest price! Heck, I could even come up with the design myself.

 

We can include:

16 color capabilities

80 column mode(s)

enhanced 40 column/normal modes

Less DMA (or, in 40 column mode, NO dma)

More VRAM (so we don't need LMS)

Better scrolling

I can go on. 

BUT- with one thing in mind. It must be LIKE the origonal ANTIC+GTIA. We can't go crazy like the VBXE otherwise that defeats the purpose.

n

If you want, I can create a design sometime. I can't fabricate it but I've created blueprints for stuff like this before that would work if someone could get a display and the timings for the display.

 

Someone would need to create the HSYNC/VSYNC/Composite color stuff though, I'm no good with CRTs.

Edited by Ecernosoft
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Ecernosoft said:

Yes, but more "atari-like". The VBXE is very OP. It makes the atari into a monster, CX16 level 8bit. Especially when you combine that with the 65816.

I think of the VBXE+Rapidus+U1MB+Stereo Pokey as the Atari equivalent of the Apple IIGS that we never got.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi!

27 minutes ago, Ecernosoft said:

I'm saying like an 80-column GTIA with an 80-column ANTIC running at 2x speed. It would need it's own VRAM though and 16K would be nice. We could even have 16 color registers, 8 players, and so much more. And at a modest price! Heck, I could even come up with the design myself.

 

We can include:

16 color capabilities

80 column mode(s)

enhanced 40 column/normal modes

Less DMA (or, in 40 column mode, NO dma)

More VRAM (so we don't need LMS)

Better scrolling

I can go on. 

You are describing the VBXE.

 

27 minutes ago, Ecernosoft said:

BUT- with one thing in mind. It must be LIKE the origonal ANTIC+GTIA. We can't go crazy like the VBXE otherwise that defeats the purpose.

Why is VBXE crazy??? it is just the things you wanted.

 

Have Fun!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ecernosoft said:

It's not, just I think it's a little much for an 8 bit. Then again, ok. 

So rather than using an upgrade we already have, someone should invent another one, but not as powerful.  That will make for more software for sure!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Stephen said:

So rather than using an upgrade we already have, someone should invent another one, but not as powerful.  That will make for more software for sure!

Yeah, I already have one VBXE system (with Rapidus / U1MB and Stereo Pokey), and an 800XL with VBXE and U1MB on the way.  Also an ACE80 and ACE80XL for 80 column mode. 

 

Kind of want more and more software for the VBXE, it just about brings up the graphics capability of the A8 to 16 bit levels, it's a sweet upgrade.  Made even better by the fact you can tweak the palette, and has an amazing output quality.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, leech said:

Yeah, I already have one VBXE system (with Rapidus / U1MB and Stereo Pokey), and an 800XL with VBXE and U1MB on the way.  Also an ACE80 and ACE80XL for 80 column mode. 

 

Kind of want more and more software for the VBXE, it just about brings up the graphics capability of the A8 to 16 bit levels, it's a sweet upgrade.  Made even better by the fact you can tweak the palette, and has an amazing output quality.

Ok, VBXE only then. I'll design a sound upgrade! (8 channel * 8 bit? 16 channel * 16 bit maybe, but with an 8 bit volume channel and 8 bit samples?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ecernosoft said:

It's not, just I think it's a little much for an 8 bit. Then again, ok. 

In my view the VBXE is in the spirit of the Atari.  I find this section of the VBXE manual to be of interest "The colour attribute map allows to locally (i.e. within a field of 8x1 up to 32x32 pixels of GR.8) change the colours PF0, PF1 and PF2, override the main Overlay priority over the ANTIC/GTIA to one of four predefined priorities, change the local colour palette for both ANTIC and Overlay screen modes, and change the resolution of the display generated by the ANTIC/GTIA from ANTIC hires (GR.8) to CCR (Colour Clock Resolution = GR.15) or vice versa.

 

Consequently, the attribute map greatly extends the graphic capabilities of your Atari machine even if the proper Overlay modes are not in use
 

In other words, one can literally just use it to extend the capabilities of the GTIA and not even use its overlay mode.


However, I would at least use the 80 column text overlay, since that's what you want.

 

 

 

Edited by Mark2008
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mark2008 said:

In my view the VBXE is in the spirit of the Atari.  I find this section of the VBXE manual to be of interest "The colour attribute map allows to locally (i.e. within a field of 8x1 up to 32x32 pixels of GR.8) change the colours PF0, PF1 and PF2, override the main Overlay priority over the ANTIC/GTIA to one of four predefined priorities, change the local colour palette for both ANTIC and Overlay screen modes, and change the resolution of the display generated by the ANTIC/GTIA from ANTIC hires (GR.8) to CCR (Colour Clock Resolution = GR.15) or vice versa.

 

Consequently, the attribute map greatly extends the graphic capabilities of your Atari machine even if the proper Overlay modes are not in use
 

In other words, one can literally just use it to extend the capabilities of the GTIA and not even use its overlay mode.


However, I would at least use the 80 column text overlay, since that's what you want.

 

anyway, I did some programming wiht the 80 column mode an kickc, which is not unlike cc65 in that it is another c compiler for the Atari....not that I would say I used any libraries, I just literally turned on the overlay and used it.

reminder: I'm not the one who asked for this.....

I appreciate it, but to be totally honest...

image.thumb.png.82d760f601fd08e827b4dcba4fa878c9.pngI still think the VBXE is awesome, but I'm a limit-pusher, not a limit-remover kind of person to be honest. That's the fun of Atari (At least for me). One day you might see a VBXE game come out of me though ;)

Edited by Ecernosoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kenames99 said:

there is also now the 1090XL with the 80 column video card.

Are those available to order yet?  I have been somewhat following along, but wasn't sure if it was purchasable yet.

I imagine a day when we can get a 1090XL and the upgrades are converted to plugin cards... would be amazing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Ecernosoft

 

21 hours ago, Ecernosoft said:

I'll design a sound upgrade! (8 channel * 8 bit? 16 channel * 16 bit maybe, but with an 8 bit volume channel and 8 bit samples?)

 

We already have the PokeyMax and the SimpleStereoV4.

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...