Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Commander X16

commanderx16.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 116 posts

Re: Commander X16

#31

Post by talideon »

chalcolithic wrote: post #18

While I love, love, love retrocomputing I don't understand why 99% of it is "retro-next" computing - instead of designing computer from some era people like to design much beefier next-gen machines. 2MB of RAM? 640x480? Why not use Amiga instead? Designing a machine that would beat c64 is insanely appealing to me. Designing a machine that would beat c64 because it came out a decade later and had larger ram chips and…

Most of isn't "retro-next" computing. There are a _very_ small number of projects of that kind, most notably the X16, the Mega65, and the Spectrum Next. The Maximites might fall into that, as might the MiST and MiSTer boards, but that's debatable. What _most_ people do are extensions to existing hardware (like the Amiga Vampire), replacements for failing chips (which might also include extra features because there's space still left on the FPGA), &c. Arguably, I wouldn't include the Mega65 in the list because it's meant to be more or less what was intended to be released as the Commodore 65, which basically leaves the X16 and Spectrum Next. The X16 and Spectrum Next are meant to be idealised forms of the respective machines they're based on, with the Next maintaining compatibility.

What most people build are things like Z80-based SBCs that behave like the CP/M machines of the past, but can take advantage of things like CompactFlash and higher clock speeds, but are essentially period accurate otherwise. Personally, I'd love to build a Jupiter Ace with all the random glue logic reduced down to a PLD, expanded enough to support an ~80-column display.

Re: Commander X16

#32

Post by talideon »

selfhoster11 wrote: post #27
chalcolithic wrote: post #18

While I love, love, love retrocomputing I don't understand why 99% of it is "retro-next" computing - instead of designing computer from some era people like to design much beefier next-gen machines. 2MB of RAM? 640x480? Why not use Amiga instead? Designing a machine that would beat c64 is insanely appealing to me. Designing a machine that would beat c64 because it came out a decade later and had larger ram chips and…

At a guess, it's harder to get your hands on weaker chips in larger quantities. Larger chips are dirt-cheap, while for weaker ones you'd either have to raid NOS from warehouses, or fab it yourself (which is expensive, and sometimes outright impossible - I don't think we've got the tech to fab a SID chip any more, for instance).

The SID's major difficulties are due to it being an analogue-digitial hybrid. That's why most of the efforts have went down the emulation route, though there's apparently an FPGA SID replacement in development that's pretty close. The original 6581 is super impractical as each of those is different, but the later 8580 is much more practical to rebuild in FPGA form, even if emulating the analogue side is still awkward.

Re: Commander X16

#33

Post by codeflo »

selfhoster11 wrote: post #29
mysterydip wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly what you want but there's Dosbian which boots the Pi to a dosbox instance, no login or desktop.

AFAIK, the "instant on" aspect is a big part of the draw. Linux boot time doesn't cut it.

And it's not just Linux. A little known fact is that during startup, before running a single instruction of Linux kernel code, the Pi spends the first several seconds booting the closed source OS that runs the weird Broadcom "VideoCore". Only then does it initialize the ARM processor and start the Linux kernel.

Re: Commander X16

#34

Post by codeflo »

chalcolithic wrote: post #18

While I love, love, love retrocomputing I don't understand why 99% of it is "retro-next" computing - instead of designing computer from some era people like to design much beefier next-gen machines. 2MB of RAM? 640x480? Why not use Amiga instead? Designing a machine that would beat c64 is insanely appealing to me. Designing a machine that would beat c64 because it came out a decade later and had larger ram chips and…

That sounds interesting, what are the exact rules of this game? Are you only allowed to use components that actually existed at the time, or ones that might have existed? I.e., do you have to use a 6502, or can you design a better CPU, using modern knowledge, but considering old fabrication techniques?

Re: Commander X16

#35

Post by selfhoster11 »

talideon wrote: post #32
selfhoster11 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a guess, it's harder to get your hands on weaker chips in larger quantities. Larger chips are dirt-cheap, while for weaker ones you'd either have to raid NOS from warehouses, or fab it yourself (which is expensive, and sometimes outright impossible - I don't think we've got the tech to fab a SID chip any more, for instance).

The SID's major difficulties are due to it being an analogue-digitial hybrid. That's why most of the efforts have went down the emulation route, though there's apparently an FPGA SID replacement in development that's pretty close. The original 6581 is super impractical as each of those is different, but the later 8580 is much more practical to rebuild in FPGA form, even if emulating the analogue side is still awkward…

That's part of what I was referring to. The analogue-digital hybrid is one of the things that's difficult to replicate with the current manufacturing technology for fabbing new chips.

Re: Commander X16

#36

Post by selfhoster11 »

codeflo wrote: post #33
selfhoster11 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK, the "instant on" aspect is a big part of the draw. Linux boot time doesn't cut it.

And it's not just Linux. A little known fact is that during startup, before running a single instruction of Linux kernel code, the Pi spends the first several seconds booting the closed source OS that runs the weird Broadcom "VideoCore". Only then does it initialize the ARM processor and start the Linux kernel.

That's weird. I thought that VideoCore boots fairly fast.

Re: Commander X16

#37

Post by mattowen_uk »

kwanbix wrote: post #26

What I would love is an affordable Amiga 500 clone. Extra points if it can also work as an Atari ST. Anyone knows if such thing exists? By affordable I mean 100~200 USD. HDMI and SATA for SSD/HDD. Thanks1

The MiST does all of that:

https://amigastore.eu/en/358-mist-midi-fpga-computer-with-mi...

221,95 Euro (Approx 271 USD)

Re: Commander X16

#38

Post by mattowen_uk »

When David Murray (8-bit-guy) first announced his 'dream computer' I was quite excited. His early descriptions were akin to something like a C128 but with more colours, faster CPU and modern connections, all in a single case, like the C128(not D) or C64. Plug into a screen or TV and just 'go'.

Somewhere along the way serious scope-creep happened, and now we've got something that looks and feels just like a mini-ITX Desktop PC running some sort of BASIC 'shell' (even though it's not). It just doesn't exude any Retro-vibes. I could build something almost identical out of off-the-shelf parts, and run a bare-metal Retro-OS emulator on it, and the end experience would be 99% the same.

It's a real shame... and like other commenters have said, I can't see this ending up as a commercial success.

Re: Commander X16

#39

Post by crb »

aniou wrote: post #13

Speaking of "modern retro computing" there is already a player in the town: C256 Foenix [1]. Based on 65c816, affordable, powerful and - most important - already available and well tested. It definitively deserve for user interest. For curious - there is an emulator available [2] (even one-and-half, because mine [3] is rather limited and created mostly for Forth [6, 7] development). 320x240 (double-pixel), 640x480, 8…

David "The 8-Bit Guy" Murray, the initiator of the Commander X16, has a blog post about why he wasn't satisfied with the C256 Foenix: http://www.the8bitguy.com/3543/my-dream-computer-part-2/

> Stefany and I disagree over some of the design at the moment. For example she has an integrated floppy drive, MIDI ports, SID chips, and a whole host of other things that I don’t feel are necessary and will inflate the cost of the computer.

> Even if she agreed to all of my design changes, it would still be a computer that would be $80 or more for somebody to buy, well above the original price point I was hoping to target.

Re: Commander X16

#40

Post by nottorp »

> Multiple output formats (VGA, NTSC Composite, NTSC S-Video, RGB video) at a fixed resolution of 640x480@60Hz

Hmm. Please HDMI? Please wide screen? (I mean 853x480 or even 426x240 not 1080p).

I don't see the retro monitor this is supposed to be paired with for sale.

Post reply on HN