It's downright vexing how good MSX artists were at designing for 9918 graphics

[pixelpedant]

It will always be my position that the TI-99 was a marketing, manufacturing, distribution and financial mess which computer enthusiasts are insistent on explaining in terms of individual architectural and design decisions, because these interest them far more than any of the things that actually made its long term success impossible.  And because these allow for an appealing (but make-believe) storyline in which there was one critical engineering decision which, were it not for that, might have seen the platform achieve enduring success. 

 

The 99/4 barely achieved anything that could be called mass-production and mass-market distribution in its first year.  The release of its most critical supporting products (PEB expansion, Extended BASIC, Editor/Assembler, Mini Memory) saw chronic delays and disastrous supply issues.  None of those must-have upgrades were released to the mass market until over two years after the TI-99 debuted, and even then, not in sufficient quantities. 

 

People want to explain the poor sales of and lacking interest in products and solutions you literally could not buy in terms of whether the system used one chip or another, or used one memory architecture or another.  And it's downright silly. 

 

The TI-99 was a development, marketing, manufacturing, distribution, and (in the end) financial mess which you cannot "solve" by replacing one chip with another chip, as appealing as that idea might be. 

 

In any case, we can be thankful that the system is as "weird" as it is today.  Because in the end, that's what makes it interesting. 

[oddemann]

1 minute ago, pixelpedant said:

It will always be my position that the TI-99 was a marketing, manufacturing, distribution and financial mess which computer enthusiasts are insistent on explaining in terms of individual architectural and design decisions, because these interest them far more than any of the things that actually made its long term success impossible. 

And YET... here we are 2022, talking TI! So even if a lot of mistakes was made... Why do we still love this computer. Is it JUST because it was our first computer?

For me, I could be creative and make my own stuff on it. And yet it was my first. But I also had a Amiga500 with "Deluxe Paint" and I LOOOOVED that program. But I go back to the TI. Amiga was super cool and letting me have so much more creative freedom. I think there is something magical with the TI. The company and there mistakes... not important to me. But that shiny metal box with a keyboard... so cool!

Why do you guys love and keep on using and having fun with the TI?

[pixelpedant]

1 hour ago, oddemann said:

And YET... here we are 2022, talking TI! So even if a lot of mistakes was made... Why do we still love this computer. Is it JUST because it was our first computer?

For me, I could be creative and make my own stuff on it. And yet it was my first. But I also had a Amiga500 with "Deluxe Paint" and I LOOOOVED that program. But I go back to the TI. Amiga was super cool and letting me have so much more creative freedom. I think there is something magical with the TI. The company and there mistakes... not important to me. But that shiny metal box with a keyboard... so cool!

Why do you guys love and keep on using and having fun with the TI?

 

Well said, Oddemann.  The TI does have plenty that makes it special.  And if the TI-99 was just a very early and therefore almost inevitably inferior Z80/9918 system, it's hard to believe there would be much to arouse our interest in it today. 

 

A weird minicomputer CPU architecture and peripheral bus, and the strange role of GPL in the mix, and a non-Microsoft BASIC - those are the things that make it interesting. 

 

To me, it would be weird to wish that it were, in essence, a much shittier proto-MSX. 

 

[GDMike]

I find it interesting to try and get something to work on the machine at different levels, I mean, yes, it does work with all it's strangeness and all. And it does it well when it does work, depending of course what that is, now take that and put it on something even faster in a cpu, ram, and storage and the strangeness gets faster.

[+Lee Stewart]

6 hours ago, oddemann said:

Why do you guys love and keep on using and having fun with the TI?

 

TI Forth. I had vanishingly little interest in the TI-99/4A (except as a teaching tool for my kids) until I laid my eyes on TI Forth. Most computer languages I have learned have been out of need and/or utility and by then, I knew Fortran, Algol, PL/1, Pascal, DATABUS, C, various dialects of Basic, and probably others I have forgotten, but, though marginally aware of it, I had never had the need to learn Forth. When TI released TI Forth into the public domain in December of 1983, I figured the $25 to DCUG (later, MANNERS) for the manual and disks to see what it was all about was worth a shot. It took me no time at all to get hooked on Forth.

 

Four major projects over the years have brought me to where I am today with fbForth:

• Clean up and make easier to use, with an index and anything else I could imagine to make it better, the TI Forth Instruction Manual (2012 – 2013). A detailed TOC is as far as I got with the index goal (see TI FORTH and TI Forth Instruction Manual in PDF Format (edited & expanded)).
• Convert TI Forth from sector-based block (screen) I/O to file-based block I/O. This became fbForth 1.0 (2013) (see fbForth—TI Forth with File-based Block I/O).
• Hoist fbForth into cartridge space (result of a challenge by @Willsy). This became fbForth 2.0 (2014) (see last link above).
• Publish fbForth 2.0: A File-Based Cartridge Implementation of TI Forth (2017), available on Amazon.com (see last link above).

With all the changes since publishing fbForth 2.0: A File-Based Cartridge Implementation of TI Forth, it may be time for a second edition.

 

...lee

 

[GDMike]

I've always been fascinated by Forth.

The power of the TI is there for the taking.

[Tuxon86]

16 minutes ago, GDMike said:

I've always been fascinated by Forth.

The power of the TI is there for the taking.

I raise my hat to our Ti afficionado here on AtariAge! I've great respect for that community.

 

But. unless I'm mistaken, Forth is pretty much available on just about every retro computers... It was even the native language on at leats one, the Jupiter Ace. You can easily find a version of it and start enjoying it!

[+mizapf]

Back in the 80ies, my father bought us the TI-99/4A in 1982, but since he did not find the programs he sought on the TI, he then changed to Commodore computers, like VC-20*, C-64, C-128, Amiga 1000, 2000. Although I gave him some support on those platforms, I stayed with the TI; later, in 1990, I got my Geneve. The usual story I told was that I used the Commodore computers for gaming, while working productively on the TI.**

 

There are mainly two reasons why I stayed with the TI:

 

1. At that time, by the end of the 80ies, I was already quite skilled with various programming languages on the TI, i.e. BASIC, Assembly language, C99, some TurboPasc', and even Forth. I felt that I actually understood the machine to a comprehensive extent. Although the Amiga would have been a possibly interesting challenge, I considered it far more complex, and later, my student career did not leave enough time to dig deeper. Also, the PC era began for us around 1992, and this was the point where I turned from a programmer to a "simple user".

2. In 1990 I got the Geneve, and by its vastly expanded capabilities compared to the TI-99/4A - while still being compatible - I had enough playground for more deep digging. Although I did not power up my TI console anymore, I still counted myself as a TI user.

 

Due to my work at the university, I started programming on the PC in Java around 1996, and stayed with it until today. This meant that my needs for programming shifted to the PC platform, but in contrast to my works with the TI/Geneve, they stayed at the application level.

 

(*The name VIC-20 was deliberately not used in Germany because it sounded like the <beep> word; remember that "V" is pronounced like an "F" in German.)

(** Replace Commodore by Windows, and TI by Linux, and you easily get my follow-up story.)

[Tuxon86]

29 minutes ago, mizapf said:

Back in the 80ies, my father bought us the TI-99/4A in 1982, but since he did not find the programs he sought on the TI, he then changed to Commodore computers, like VC-20*, C-64, C-128, Amiga 1000, 2000. Although I gave him some support on those platforms, I stayed with the TI; later, in 1990, I got my Geneve. The usual story I told was that I used the Commodore computers for gaming, while working productively on the TI.**

 

There are mainly two reasons why I stayed with the TI:

 

1. At that time, by the end of the 80ies, I was already quite skilled with various programming languages on the TI, i.e. BASIC, Assembly language, C99, some TurboPasc', and even Forth. I felt that I actually understood the machine to a comprehensive extent. Although the Amiga would have been a possibly interesting challenge, I considered it far more complex, and later, my student career did not leave enough time to dig deeper. Also, the PC era began for us around 1992, and this was the point where I turned from a programmer to a "simple user".

2. In 1990 I got the Geneve, and by its vastly expanded capabilities compared to the TI-99/4A - while still being compatible - I had enough playground for more deep digging. Although I did not power up my TI console anymore, I still counted myself as a TI user.

 

Due to my work at the university, I started programming on the PC in Java around 1996, and stayed with it until today. This meant that my needs for programming shifted to the PC platform, but in contrast to my works with the TI/Geneve, they stayed at the application level.

 

(*The name VIC-20 was deliberately not used in Germany because it sounded like the <beep> word; remember that "V" is pronounced like an "F" in German.)

(** Replace Commodore by Windows, and TI by Linux, and you easily get my follow-up story.)

The Ti-99 PEB was priced out of reach for me even if I wanted one so bad when I was young. It looked so professional and rad! So the only people I knew who were into Ti had only the base unit and a few carts. A few had a tape cassette. 
I was tempted but in the end, most of my friends/contacts were Commodore, Atari or CoCo users. I got a deal on a refurb C64 and benefited from an Atari price cut and got the 130xe. With my landlord giving me is old CoCo2, I went from the pour guy who couldn’t afford anything, to the nerd calling BBS with the CoCo, gaming on the C64 and coding on the 130xe.

 

Today, I’m waiting on my 65XE coding machine to come back from her trans Atlantic vacation where it’ll be fitted with U1MB and VBXE to finish my setup and restart my bare metal coding trip. I have a PAL 800XL who travelled from Egypt to me that I’ll be fitting a Sophia 2 once available and will be used as a test/spare machine.

[PeteE]

On 2/8/2022 at 6:55 PM, pixelpedant said:

But up close, no tile segment ever contains more than two colours:

 

What is the editor/viewer that puts the segments arrayed like this?  Maybe we lack the right tools to do good artworks like this... I want to learn to produce something this good.  Magellan is great for character based maps, but lacking for full bitmaps.  Does anyone know what they used BITD?

 

 

[pixelpedant]

9 minutes ago, PeteE said:

What is the editor/viewer that puts the segments arrayed like this?  Maybe we lack the right tools to do good artworks like this... I want to learn to produce something this good.  Magellan is great for character based maps, but lacking for full bitmaps.  Does anyone know what they used BITD?

 

 

I use GIMP myself and that's where I get that grid from.  I use a custom 15 colour TI-99 palette of course, then set my grid dimensions to 8x1 or 8x8 or 6x8 as needed (depending on target graphics mode).  And you can also set pixel aspect ratio to a non-square ratio, if you want to be seriously picky.  Though I'd say that's only necessary for 80 column mode (where the pixel aspect ratio is truly bonkers). 

[+OLD CS1]

9 minutes ago, PeteE said:

Does anyone know what they used BITD?

Graph paper.

[GDMike]

26 minutes ago, OLD CS1 said:

Graph paper.

Exactly what I used to draw snoopy bitd. And it worked..I was still surprised..

I need a graphic title for Foxit (3 colors, red, black and white) hmmm

 

[PeteE]

44 minutes ago, OLD CS1 said:

Graph paper.

You're not wrong about that.  Light pens and digitizers too.  It took me a while to refind that link.

[wierd_w]

Magellan is a great modern tool for the 9918 VDP.  It has a compositing window, and a hard-bound edit window for the current tile. The thing you have to keep track of is how much of the character set you have burned; The skill becomes keeping your tileset terse and versatile.

 

Graph paper does have a certain tactile appeal though.  At some point, you still have to actually digitize the design.  I find it profitable to skip the tactile step, if I have access to digital tools in a portable form. (and I do.)

[Elia Spallanzani fdt]

https://raphael.js99er.net/

[+Lee Stewart]

4 hours ago, wierd_w said:

The thing you have to keep track of is how much of the character set you have burned; The skill becomes keeping your tileset terse and versatile.

 

Not for the graphic under discussion. Bitmap was the mode in use. The limitation there is not the character set, but rather the 2 colors for each 8x1-pixel tile.

 

...lee

[PeteE]

4 hours ago, Elia Spallanzani fdt said:

https://raphael.js99er.net/

 

Thanks!  I had forgotten about this one, and didn't realize @Asmusr made it so you could set the 8x1 or 8x8 restriction modes.  Man, this is perfect.

[Asmusr]

2 hours ago, PeteE said:

Man, this is perfect.

Not quite, it's a difficult mode to handle. For instance, if you have one red pixel in a row of 8 on a black background, and you put a blue pixel next to it, what should happen? Should the black background pixels turn red or should the existing red pixel turn blue? Raphael still needs some work before this will be handled in the most useful way.

[Reciprocating Bill]

The TI 99/4a was my first computer, and it would be easy to say that my current fascination with it stems from fuzzy nostalgia. And that is in part true.

 

But it’s not simple. Ownership of the 99/4a in 1982-83 was a sometimes painful experience. I loved the thing, but was often dismayed to discover it’s limitations relative to its competitors. You know - all the familiar problems - an excruciatingly slow built in BASIC (particularly printing and listing), the almost complete absence of CPU RAM, no assembly access at the outset, wait-states galore, limited software, and near invisibility in the computer press (e.g. BYTE magazine, etc.). Sometimes it just felt like it wasn’t a Real Boy.

 

So it was a sometimes painful ownership. I did eventually acquire a PEB, some actual CPU RAM (first vis  Minimemory and later 32k), some speed (Wycove Forth, Assembler via the E/A), etc., and the unearthing of hidden hardware (e.g. bitmap mode).  Then came TI’s withdrawal from the market. Ouch. I moved on to the Mac (its own roller coaster for many years).

 

So some of my current TI interest takes the form of a “corrective emotional expeirence.” One bit of healing was the installation of 32k on the 16-bit bus, disentangilng the 9900 from its 8-bit, wait-stated straight jacket. Once that was done I found the 9900 running assembly generally at least as fast as its contemporaries - that’s all I really wanted in 1982. A Real Boy. Plus I find its minicomputer heritage and PDP-11-like assembly language cool. Similar good feels come from Cortex Basic (generally 3x faster than XB) and the several Forths available.  Adding the FinalGrom at one end and the TIPI at the other seals the deal, removing much of the awkwardness of use of any computer of that era, and at last connecting the TI to the outside world.

 

Lastly, I find a lot that is clever in it’s weird architecture - like the near plug and play and device independence of peripheral access, the interesting potential of GPL and GROM when used as a supplement to (not a replacement of) assembly code, and essentially the first implementation of sprites anywhere.

 

Really lastly:  My first hands on experience of any kind with a personal computer was in 1979. A friend of mine had purchased a 99/4, complete with the obligatory monitor. I had to see it, although I can’t say I knew what I was looking at. First thing I asked was, “It’s a computer - make it do something fast!” “Like what?” he asks. “Like printing numbers or something.” So he writes a For-Next loop to print numbers from 1 to 100 in TI-BASIC. Needless to say, I was underwhelmed.

 

I’ve never seen a 99/4 in the flesh since that time. Yet photos of the thing - chicklet keyboard and all - pull on my guts in an indescribable way. I think I knew even in 1979 that what I was seeing - an instance of a computer that an individual could own - heralded a new era.

 

 

Edited February 11, 2022 by Reciprocating Bill
Its. Not It's.

[Asmusr]

It's impressive what they have done on the MSX with the 9918A, and I have often thought about porting one of those games.

When considering games to convert to the TI-99/4A, the cool thing about the ZX Spectrum is that a lot of effort has gone into creating disassembled, commented source codes: https://skoolkit.ca/links/ That's what I used to bring Pyjamarama to the TI. (I don't think anyone has proceeded very far in the game, so most of my effort was wasted. ?)

I have never seen anything like that for other machines, and for the MSX I have never found any source code at all, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

R-TYPE is a game we miss on the TI-99/4A. Here's a comparison of MSX and Spectrum. Which version do you think is the best?

 

wh

 

[youxia]

MSX is let down by the shabby horizontal scrolling, as per usual. So even though it might have somewhat better gfx, ZX wins.

 

Ok, ok, I'm a Spectrum fanboi too - but still. That R-Type port was a monumental achievement, alongside Renegade one of the best showcases of what this little machine and its savant coders could do.

[pixelpedant]

Yeah, it's understandable that commented source isn't as available for Japanese games from major Japanese corporate developers. 

 

Here's a bit of fun though: it looks like a bunch of the source for Dragon Quest (MSX) was preserved with partial comments in the release.

 

[Tursi]

41 minutes ago, youxia said:

MSX is let down by the shabby horizontal scrolling, as per usual. So even though it might have somewhat better gfx, ZX wins.

 

Ok, ok, I'm a Spectrum fanboi too - but still. That R-Type port was a monumental achievement, alongside Renegade one of the best showcases of what this little machine and its savant coders could do.

There's a free book on the creation of R-Type for the Spectrum by the author, it's a fun read.

 

http://bizzley.com/

 

[Asmusr]

On 2/10/2022 at 7:45 PM, Asmusr said:

Not quite, it's a difficult mode to handle. For instance, if you have one red pixel in a row of 8 on a black background, and you put a blue pixel next to it, what should happen? Should the black background pixels turn red or should the existing red pixel turn blue? Raphael still needs some work before this will be handled in the most useful way.

I made a fix to Raphael: if you have already used two colors, and you draw a pixel in a 3rd color on top of the selected background color, it will change other pixels that are not background color to the new color. If, on the other hand, the selected background color is different from the color you draw on top of, it will use the old behavior where it changes all pixels of the background color to the new color. Perhaps difficult to grasp in writing, but it seems to be working well, at least for images where it makes sense to talk about a background color.