The Commodore 64 sure does rule, duddn't it?

[MacbthPSW]

The Apple allowed internal expansion, you plugged in your disk drive or hard drive, card into the system and you were done. Wanted to add a mouse, add the card, plug in the mouse and your done. The possibilities were endless.

You can call non-A2 computers "toys" all you want, but when you try to back it up with factual arguments, "internal expansion" is the only reason you have?

 

As I've already explained, the C64 is every bit as expandable, it just doesn't happen inside the case. To me, that's cosmetic.

 

The Atari's and C64, you had to plug everything into the joystick port, and then plug it into the wall with it's own power supply.

This really shows your ignorance. Modems plugged into the expansion port, joysticks, lightpens and mice plugged into the joystick ports, disk drives (including most C64 compatible hard drives) plugged into the IEC port, and most everything else would go in the expansion port.

 

With the exception of disk drives, all the devices I mentioned above ran off the C-64's power supply; no extra power supplies were needed. Even if they were, that hardly shows how the A2 was a "real computer".

 

In 1986, in the Apple II community, we were already using USR Courier HST 9600 baud modems, while Atari's were chugging along with 300 baud modems and 40 columns. Ever try downloading wares with 300 baud? Its impossible, especially if you called long distance.

Yes, I started with a 300 baud modem on my C64, and worked my way up to a 33.6k modem in 1996 or so (on the C64). Nowadays a lot of C64 users are using ethernet with the RR-Net.

 

You cannot compare Apple II's to C64, and Atari. It's a totally different league as far as computing goes.

This is laughable and a textbook example of A2 snobbery.

[supercat]

Commodore 64's and Atari 8 bit computers were all toys.

 

The only significant way in which the Apply ][+ was better than the Commodore 64 was the design of its disk drives. While it would not have been possible for the C64 to do things quite the same way the Apple did because of VIC-II cycle stealing, they could have made the drive a lot faster and more powerful with little if any extra cost. Actually, if they'd designed a drive controller that plugged into the expansion port they could probably have achieved pretty good performance for less cost than the controller system they in fact used.

 

Given that the 1540 wasn't compatible with the C64, I wonder why Commodore kept essentially the same communications bus rather than tweaking it to be much more functional?

[deadmeow]

Any machine with a cartridge slot, and less than a 80 column text display,and no internal expandability, is a toy. Atari's and Commodores were designed to be hooked up to television sets just like an Atari VCS.

 

Go into a computer store today, how many computers accept game cartridges? How many have less than 80 column text display? How many cannot be internally expanded?

 

Atari's and Commodores were made to play Pac Man and Space Invaders on a television set. How may computers today come with an RF TV/Game connector out of the box?

 

Case closed.

Edited December 31, 2006 by deadmeow

[supercat]

Any machine with a cartridge slot, and less than a 80 column text display,and no internal expandability, is a toy. Atari's and Commodores were designed to be hooked up to television sets just like an Atari VCS.

 

The Apple //e offered, after awhile, 80-column 7x8 text (the C64 can display 80 columns using a 4x8 font) and 128K RAM. Prior to that, the highest standard text mode one could get on the Apple would be 40 columns (well, maybe 70 if software displayed a 4x8 font, but such a display would be much slower than an "80-column" display on the C64).

 

What did many people put into the Apple that wasn't available on the Commodore? I would suggest that (aside from its horribly slow "serial port") the Commodore 64 was better equipped out of the box than the vast majority of Apple ][+ machines were ever equipped to be.

 

Go into a computer store today, how many computers accept game cartridges? How many have less than 80 column text display? How many cannot be internally expanded?

 

Lack of internal expandability is not terribly uncommon, given the emergence of USB. Graphics have of course evolved to the point that even 800x600 is considered sub-minimum.

 

Atari's and Commodores were made to play Pac Man and Space Invaders on a television set. How may computers today come with an RF TV/Game connector out of the box?

 

A fair number of computers come with composite video outputs, actually. They don't come with RF for the same reason that video game systems no longer come with RF--the vast majority of television sets have composite or S-video inputs.

[MacbthPSW]

Any machine with a cartridge slot, and less than a 80 column text display,and no internal expandability, is a toy.

Where did you pull that definition from?

 

The "cartridge slot" on the C64 is just the same thing that's available inside the A2. And for the third time, "internal expandability" means very little, when you have comparable expandability externally.

 

re: 80 column display, that wasn't built-in until the IIe, which was released *after* the C64. Are you calling pre-IIe machines toys? And is the C128D not a toy because it does 80 column and has a bigger case with detachable keyboard?

 

Atari's and Commodores were designed to be hooked up to television sets just like an Atari VCS.

They were designed to be hooked up to both monitors and TVs, unlike an Atari VCS.

Edited December 31, 2006 by MacbthPSW

[jbanes]

Atari's and Commodores were designed to be hooked up to television sets just like an Atari VCS.

May I show you something? Below is a photograph of the back of a GeForce 7800GS graphics card, which is pretty high-end stuff at the moment. (Click on the image for a larger version.)

I'd like you to pay attention to the connectors. The red arrows point to not one, but TWO separate television output ports. The one on the left is an SVideo output designed to interface with Standard Definition televisions. The one on the right is a DVI output designed to interface with High Definition television screens. If you check the back of your computer, you may just find that either or both connector exists on your PC at this very moment.

 

Go into a computer store today, how many computers accept game cartridges?

Not many. The Cartridge slot on the PCjr was the last time that PCs had cartridges for software, as the format was too expensive for the relatively little space it provided. Cartridges were replaced with a new form of ROM in game consoles: CD-ROMs and DVDs. Now by your logic, every computer that ships with a CD-ROM or DVD drive must, by definition, be a toy. Correct?

 

How many have less than 80 column text display?

The IBM PCjr had a 40 column display, and was capable of being hooked up to a television. The need for such low resolution was lost as graphics improved. Similarly, monitors became less expensive, allowing consumers to stop tying up their television.

 

How many cannot be internally expanded?

Over 60% of the market at this point. Laptops have external expansion ports. PCMCIA is a modern cartridge port, still in use today. And the Universal Serial Bus (USB) is still used to hook up external floppy drives, flash drives, external hard disks, and external DVD-ROM drives.

 

Case closed.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Edited December 31, 2006 by jbanes

[PressureCooker2600]

this topic has now officially gotten too technical for my dumbass

[ZylonBane]

But the Apple II is still superior because it has a TRUE FRAME BUFFER, right?

[jbanes]

But the Apple II is still superior because it has a TRUE FRAME BUFFER, right?

Aw, Zylon! I didn't know you cared!

 

*HUGZ*

[deadmeow]

Earlier I refered only to the RF Modulator "TV/Game box", which pre crash video game systems used, not Super Video or Composite video.

 

We all know what a hit the PC Jr was@! (even though it did have 80 column display)

[MacbthPSW]

Earlier I refered only to the RF Modulator "TV/Game box", which pre crash video game systems used, not Super Video or Composite video.

In addition to RF, the A8 and C64 both have composite video, and the C64 has SVideo as well (though with a different connector than what has now become common). Having RF available is a nice bonus on these computers, not a strike against them.

[Student Driver]

The argument regarding the inclusion of RF video is funny since Wozniak wanted to include onboard RF on the Apple II, but his design gave off too much interference to garner FCC approval... so he slipped the RF plans to a 3rd party manufacturer, whence the 3rd party "Sup'R'Mod" RF adaptor. Therefore, the inherent lack of RF marks a design deficiency carried over from the original II, and is not a "feature."

 

Source at Apple II History; the incident was also noted in the Levy book Hackers.

 

(It's also notable that much of the Apple II design-- especially the existence of color and sound-- exists because Woz specifically wanted the II to be able to play games.)

[deadmeow]

I don't think anything you can buy at K-Mart, qualifies as a "real" computer.

Edited December 31, 2006 by deadmeow

[jbanes]

I don't think anything you can buy at K-Mart, qualifies as a "real" computer.

 

You really need to stop insulting your computer.

 

http://www.kmart.com/catalog/product.jsp?p...9&nomerch=1

[ZylonBane]

In addition to RF, the A8 and C64 both have composite video, and the C64 has SVideo as well (though with a different connector than what has now become common).

The A8 also supports S-Video.

[MacbthPSW]

The A8 also supports S-Video.

Interesting. I've just never had the right cable with any of my A8s then. Interesting write-up about A8 display possibilities here: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/atari-8-bit/faq/section-16.html

 

It seems that only some models directly support S-Video.

[MacbthPSW]

I don't think anything you can buy at K-Mart, qualifies as a "real" computer.

Snob!

 

In Canada at least, the Amiga 500 was sold at K-Mart too, and I think you've already admitted that the Amiga was a real computer. Or maybe only the Amiga 2000 was a real computer in your books, even though it's basically identical to the 500 as far as processor/ram/video/sound go.

[Zonie]

The C64 also supported S-video. We just didn't call it that back then. S-video consists of separate chroma and Luma outputs. The 1701 monitor supported this input style on the rear and regular video input on the front.

[ZylonBane]

The C64 also supported S-video.

MacbthPSW already said that.

[Inky]

I don't think anything you can buy at K-Mart, qualifies as a "real" computer.

 

 

Opinions are like assholes....

 

And you're wrong

[Zonie]

The C64 also supported S-video.

MacbthPSW already said that.

Must have missed that. Thank you for pointing that out.

[deadmeow]

At least Atari's and C64's were better than those TRS80 CoCo 2's. I think we can agree on that.

[deadmeow]

You just had more options with an Apple II+ or later an Apple IIe. You could add more speed with a Transwarp card or many other brands of accelerator cards, you could add tons of memory, you could add a Z-80 card and run CP/M, you could add a PC Transporter Card, and run IBM PC applications (that required more than 40 columns). There were other co-processor cards available. You options with sound cards, the mouse was a popular add on with MousePaint.

 

There is really no overall comparison.

[Bill Brasky]

What's the big deal about 80 column displays?

[deathtrappomegranate]

Enough already. My car's sat-nav system pwns all 8-bit computers. My daughter's Pixelchix thing makes the C64 look like an abacus.

 

So feckin' what?

 

Happy New Year everyone!