A concept for a NEW Commodore PC
Rick Balkins
"PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing Commodore PC-10
software and is compatible with existing Commodore 8-bit software AND
hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium 4 or Pentium 5 processor and
a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816 co-processor for certain handling many 6500
series apps.
What I also found to be a thought to include FULL package MS-DOS for
backward compatibility with Commodore PC line and a Windows XP partition but
ALSO a new "Commodore Operating System". Now I would look at bringing Tulip
into this for some official aspect.
What I would want in a NEW Commodore OS, a ROCK SOLID and VERY ULTRA-MODERN
OS which is critically rock stable like QNX and capable of easily porting
over stuff from Linux with ease. We can look at clear rock stable hardware
and rock stable software and drivers. But forward looking for future
expansions for the next 10-15 years. Providing Tulip keeps themselves from
going bankrupt. ALSO the ability to program for the baby would be a MUST
!!!! But a variety of applications. A new Commodore branded PC would need to
be distinguishable from existing PCs made by Tulip.
BTW: An official emulator that handles the C64 & C-128 would need to be made
that is TOP of the line and 100% functional free with the system. The
ability to directly plug in a Commodore disk drive right in or even a CMD HD
would be totally perfect.
DISCLAIMER: Tulip, this is a concept and does not reflect any actual
products that I make and would be something that Tulip would want to
possibly look into making. I would help in the progression of Commodore
right into the 21st century. This would not be a C-One but we can use the
technology to help in the compatibility aspects. But the system would INDEED
a PC and a C= all in one. It clearly would have a P4 for the SERIOUS
application use using a New Generation "Commodore Operating System".
Also included in the hardware concept would include a world leading AGP
graphics technology and if I remember my PC-10 right - it was ATI's "All in
Wonder"-like graphics card. So why not an new ATI graphics card ???? Why Not
???? This is a "CONCEPT" for a totally NEW PC series and I would want an OS
that is totally state of the art packaged that is enough to distinguish it
from any other PC.
In order for Commodore to succeed and be revived, an ambitious action would
need to be taken.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
in news:107m8md...@corp.supernews.com:
I kind of like this idea myself.
Michael Hunter
I haven't spoken with you in a while.
> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
> Commodore PC-10 software and is compatible with existing Commodore
> 8-bit software AND hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium
> 4 or Pentium 5 processor and a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816
> co-processor for certain handling many 6500 series apps.
For such an endeavor as this, I would suspect that it might be better
to consider some sort of PCI card (or even USB or Firewire) device
that would plug into a PC's main-board.
The reason being that with your basic proposal you would be completely
rebuilding a PC which is already easily available in the form of ATX
boards. Today's main-boards should already be compatible with
yesterday's PC's including the PC-10 unless the program in question
bypasses the BIOS. The BIOS should mask any indication that the
hardware is different. Of course there are specific levels in the
BIOS that would read differently, but programs that utilize the DOS
layer, or at the very least use established BIOS routines, should work
fine.
With that in mind, I would probably entertain the idea of a
6502/6510/8502 compatible coprocessor card that would be accessible
from the PC. This card would basically be a Commodore computer card
that could run the existing CBM stuff. As for the improved operating
system, one could consider a port of the Wings or Wheels environments
that would run on the more modern CPU and hardware used in the
processor card.
> What I also found to be a thought to include FULL package MS-DOS for
> backward compatibility with Commodore PC line and a Windows XP
The MS-DOS layer could be provided with this open-source DOS
environment:
http://www.freedos.org/
I've used it once or twice and it works pretty good. I actually
booted it directly from a CD.
Given that you are talking about making it able to run Windows XP, the
coprocessor route does seem to be the most cost-efficient route.
> partition but ALSO a new "Commodore Operating System". Now I would
> look at bringing Tulip into this for some official aspect.
It would probably be fairly simple to set up some sort of 64-HDD type
partition on the HD for use with the Commodore environment.
> What I would want in a NEW Commodore OS, a ROCK SOLID and VERY
> ULTRA-MODERN OS which is critically rock stable like QNX and
For that environment, I would almost definitely prefer something along
the lines of BASIC 2.0 with a larger vocabulary along the lines of
BASIC 7. The additional commands would need to be turned off to
maintain compatibility with a stock 64. Something along the lines of
a BASIC extension with an off switch.
In addition, it could have a port of Wheels or Wings
> capable of easily porting over stuff from Linux with ease. We can
There is a LUnix project that exists for the Commodore. With more
system resources, it could probably become quite comprehensive.
> BTW: An official emulator that handles the C64 & C-128 would need
> to be made that is TOP of the line and 100% functional free with
Has anyone yet determined who is the actual copyright holder of the
Commodore 64 and 128 ROM's?
This would need to be determined first before some "official" emulator
could be released. I know Tulip owns the Commodore "Brand," but a
brand name and intellectual property are two different things. If
Tulip doesn't own the intellectual property (BASIC ROM, Kernal ROM,
etc.), then the Commodore brand really doesn't mean much on the
hardware. It would basically still be "pirated" or "stolen" code even
if it did have the legal use of the Commodore Brand.
> the system. The ability to directly plug in a Commodore disk drive
> right in or even a CMD HD would be totally perfect.
This would be a must.
> In order for Commodore to succeed and be revived, an ambitious
> action would need to be taken.
For the Commodore Brand to survive in the 8-BIT market, it would
require some work. It would also require real backing from the
company. Just selling a PC or even a PC with a Commodore emulator
will keep the Commodore brand in the Pentium class market.
As for my personal interests, I would tend to prefer a stand-alone
machine that is based on the Commodore 128. I have always been
intrigued by the Commodore-One, but being based primarily around the
Commodore 64 has limited my interest. Yes, I do understand all the
implications of a "reconfigurable" computer. I know that it could be
made into an enhanced 128 with some work, but my personal interest
would be something like this:
A new Commodore 128 based computer with enhancements to the 128 mode
environment. The ability to switch to 64 mode just like on the real
128. And of course an enhanced version of the 64 mode. Of course,
none of that would mean anything to me without full compatibility with
both the Commodore 64 and 128 and all related accessories.
Additionally, I would want a "clearly legal," licensed version of the
Commodore 64 and 128 ROM pre-installed in the machine. This would
preferably be with both the approval of the "actual" copyright holder
of the code, as-well as the approval of the company (Tulip) with the
Brand rights. This would remove liability relating to the products
use of the Commodore ROM and provide the ability to use the Commodore
"Brand" on the machine in question.
If someone was able to clearly establish the current owner of the
Commodore ROM's, this would surely go a long way towards making new
"Commodore-Based" machines appealing to me.
Personally, it's been the lack of a Commodore 128 mode, and the fact
that the C-One requires us to use ROM images which technically are
still someone else's intellectual property, that has kept me from
investing in the C-One project. This last statement just reflects my
point of view on the code/copyright issue. It is not intended to
start a debate.
Anyway, that's just my 2-cents worth on this interesting subject.
Being one that prefers using my Commodore 128 & 64 because they are
the real deal, I personally wouldn't make the jump to another system
unless it met the goals I outlined above. But then again, we're all
different :-)
Talk to you later,
Michael Hunter
mhu...@videocam.net.au
Riccardo Rubini
> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
> Commodore PC-10 software and is compatible with existing Commodore
> 8-bit software AND hardware like the HDs and clearly has a Pentium 4
> or Pentium 5 processor and a couple of FPGAs and a 65c816
> co-processor for certain handling many 6500 series apps.
I have inquired some ideas and I think I'd be interested in getting my arse
on Mars, my right hand on the Moon and my left foot on Venus. Do you think
this reply o'mine is worthless? You bet. I wanted it to be way worthless as
your post, Rick, but I failed even reaching the same high uncalled-for level
of it, and it's not mere casualty.
Riccardo
Matthew Montchalin
What about casuistry?
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:qUGec.46589$hc5.2...@news3.tin.it:
A bit mean and disrespectful, are we?
I think if you're going to criticize him, constructive criticism would be
more effective.
Rick Balkins
"Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:qUGec.46589$hc5.2...@news3.tin.it...
> I have inquired some ideas and I think I'd be interested in getting my
arse
> on Mars, my right hand on the Moon and my left foot on Venus. Do you think
> this reply o'mine is worthless? You bet. I wanted it to be way worthless
as
> your post, Rick, but I failed even reaching the same high uncalled-for
level
> of it, and it's not mere casualty.
>
Is there anything constructive to your criticism ????
If you didn't realize, that ESCOM tried to bring back the Commodore brand by
making just PCs with a Commodore logo on it. Didn't work. Then a PC with an
emulator was tried, failed. A few bought it but it failed. Is it Commodore's
name. NO, otherwise we wouldn't even waste our time even using an emulator.
So I look at something that bridges the gap but you know, I will
single-handedly do this by myself if I had the financing and the facilities.
But you know, I would write the OS too. But I want people in the COMMODORE
community to do something but bickering. TULIP IS OUR COMMODORE now, live
with the FACT that they OWN EVERYTHING OF COMMODORE IN TERMS OF THE RIGHTS
EXCEPT AMIGA. GATEWAY spent $80 Million or so on the AMIGA rights and stock
not for the Commodore. None of the official publications EVER stated that
Gateway was after the Commodore 8 bit, the C= trademarks and the Commodore
PC line. Gateway went after one thing and one thing alone - AMIGA !!!!
Tulip bought the rest of Commodore from ESCOM. Simple as that. UNDERSTOOD
!!!!
Now that Tulip is putting over 30 Million Euros or so. Even though my Dutch
is crappy and mostly a raw translation from an online translator which is
reasonably close for the sake of things as for translating Dutch to English.
I understand English enough to work through the awkward English translation.
30+ Million Euros to relaunch Commodore as for a first phase. Isn't that
considered "serious" intent. So where shall we begin. Take a look at the
website. I hope someone that knows Dutch can translate it to you. Second of
all, I don't believe Commodore can be successfully relaunched without
connecting with EXISTING Commodore users because those people will reject
them for doing so. People even though they are not Commodore users currently
haven't forgotten Commodore and anyone who would recognize the Commodore
logo will recognize it as Commodore and it will ring bells in their heads
within days or even minutes when logo and the word "Commodore" is connected
and the flag word "Commodore 64" will unfold this. Over 100 Million people
have been effected by just the C64 & C-128 alone and many more will
recognize. So take the past record into account which will have an effect.
The name Commodore in itself has more value than Tulip's own name. More
people recognize Commodore than even people know Tulip so maybe Tulip wants
to become Commodore ???? Hard to say ???? Given they bought it. Heck, we
would have to see.
What it takes is a vision. Steve Jobs pulled Apple from death. What it takes
is something a little more ambitious perhaps or simply it is more ambitious
to revive Commodore. In all cases, it takes "DOING". It takes ACTION !!!!
Have anything less than that and you will be wandering your way to a grave.
Could Commodore be revived singly on PDAs, no. Could Commodore be revived
singly on a PC/C= hybrid PC with P4 or P5 technology - No. With a combo of
these in a HIGH QUALITY packaged system with everything and then some. Cool.
What is expected in a new "Commodore Operating System" running on top of a
P4 or P5 processor - NOTHING less than MODERN !!!! The idea is cool, the
idea needs to be done. Can you program ????
I believe in a new Commodore OS with Full Screen Scrollable Editor, CLI and
state of the art GUI and all. Rock steady and YES ULTRA-MODERN and rock
solid drivers and apps which will be MOST extensively tested so it would not
kill the OS and a GREAT API. This means that we need the best talent
involved. Now if Tulip is in anyway would seriously work from these ideas -
they have a way to progress in the future. I know what questions will be
asked by the most voiced and devoted "Commodore Users". I know one of the
most if not the most..... You get the picture that when a guy is fanatically
supporting Commodore it better mean that what he has will not be lost and
that is WHERE to begin and go with that and all. This is what I call for in
a new system.
Riccardo Rubini
> Is there anything constructive to your criticism ????
Nope. I - and a load of other people - lost any will to constructively
criticize most of your senseless stuff many many moons ago.
I refuse to read or comment the rest of your post, I am sure it doesn't mean
anything.
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> A bit mean and disrespectful, are we?
You joined this newsgroup like, what, last week? It's clear you're missing
something. Had you been stayed longer, you would have understood why it's
neither mean neither disrespectful.
> I think if you're going to criticize him, constructive criticism
> would be more effective.
Generally, what you say it's true. Applied to the specific case, it's not,
but rather a waste of time.
Riccardo
Clockmeister
> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new Commodore
> "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing Commodore PC-10
Reality check required isle 10...
mikec
> I refuse to read or comment the rest of your post, I am sure it doesn't mean
> anything.
The best way to deal with completely insane posts from
attention-starved individuals is to completely ignore them. ;)
MikeC
Rick Balkins
"Clockmeister" <no-...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:407bb9f6$0$18981$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
Reality check - It isn't a matter of whether it can or can't. I know the
real issue, you like a small town city government - don't want to big
company in the picture. It is like the city government in Astoria, Oregon.
More like it than any of you realize.
This commodore scene is like a small city economy. You guys are like the old
people in this town trying to keep from changing and sticking with the old
even though the old economy of lumber and fishing is NO longer the existant
in the way it was like Commodore is no longer existant. Now its just little
"local" businesses. I think that you are afraid that Tulip would destroy
businesses like Maurice and other businesses built around the ashes of
Commodore making little trinklets. Just like the little shops that formed
after the old industry left and fell apart. Often leaving us in Astoria with
lack of jobs and lack of stuff that you would find in the bigger city. All
we get is price gouged products that we would normally get cheaper or even
better offers for less than the price.
I know the whine is nothing more than the local shops complaining that a big
company coming in would destroy their businesses. In all due respect, that
would not always be the case even with Tulip. You see, there is too many
small businesses in this scene that leaves us with overly priced items that
no one will buy because they can't afford it. Those things belong to and
should be handled by a "company". When a company offers something - is it
bad ????
Tulip - even though gone through some financial troubles but believe it or
not - they have been doing better in the last two years. But even Apple was
there. All it took was a visionary like Steve Jobs. What Tulip/Commodore
needs is a visionary. Without a vision and a roadmap - a company goes
nowhere. To revive Commodore means a vision. Jack Tramiel was more than a
rough and aggressive business man - HE WAS A VISIONARY. He sees the VISION.
It is time to embrace a vision and go with it. To move Commodore from past
to the future. Yes, these are open statements and that is because definition
must be defined not by my own vision but also everyone else here. I only see
you saying - just let Commodore die. You know, just quit using any Commodore
or even Commodore emulators and Commodore software and quit making demos,
apps and games for it and YES Commodore will be dead.
It won't last another 5-10 years since there will be a point where you will
simply give it all up and Commodore be over. How can it be revitalized - TO
bring out something that will move Commodore forward into the 21st century
but you MUST bridge the link from past to present and every solution given
is not reliable enough and does not cover the gap to move Commodore back to
the masses. Note: Commodore as the "company". There is two choices - take
the challenge or quit. You can't discover another a new world by staying in
Spain. You can choose to do nothing or you can choose to move forward.
Now - are Commodore users wanting Tulip to simply bury Commodore and do
nothing and let the scene die in 5-10 years since everybody would no longer
find it worth while. You have two choices - let the Commodore scene die out
and disband or you revitalize it. Every solution that I seen is taking
Commodore users away from Commodore.
Michael Hunter
> Rick Balkins wrote:
> Commodore scene die out and disband or you revitalize it. Every
> solution that I seen is taking Commodore users away from Commodore.
I see two possible marketing / strategy models out there that might
possibly renew interest in the Commodore Branded machines
commercially.
One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing platform
and produce the new "Amiga One" for the future. Basically, the goal
was to continue to support Amiga "Classic" computers while providing a
logical upgrade path that was built on the strengths of the older
Amiga machines.
The Amiga One was essentially supposed to become the modern day Amiga
with a more powerful OS and Power PC processor at 800 Mhz. Of course,
to this point the success of the venture has been relatively small.
The other model might use something along the lines of the Macintosh
strategy. Apple provided a logical upgrade path by enabling the newer
Mac OS X to launch OS 9 in a "Classic" environment. This allowed you
to use the best of both worlds. It allowed you to use the more
powerful Mac OS X, while still providing a means to switch into
"Classic" mode and run your OS 9 applications.
Personally, as stated in my previous message in this thread, I would
be more interested in a machine that was Uniquely Commodore and
provided a blend between the Amiga One and Mac OS strategies.
Basically, I would want a machine that picked up where the Commodore
128 left off, and and continued to build on and improve upon it's
strengths.
The 128 in itself kind of followed that strategy when it was designed.
Basically you could look at the 128 mode as the "improved" machine and
the 64 mode as the "Classic" environment.
My dream system would be a very powerful Commodore computer that
clearly drew it's heritage from the Commodore 8-BIT line (just like
you can see the heritage of the Amiga One in OS 4).
I would want my "new" machine to have a "Classic" mode that provided a
Commodore 128 and 64 mode. Additionally, it would offer the strengths
and benefits of more modern graphics chips and microprocessors.
I think the Commodore-One came close to this, but fell short of my
dream by stepping backwords to the Commodore 64 rather than building
on the product line which ended at the 128.
Of course, as I pointed out in my previous message, the current legal
owner of the Commodore 64 and 128 Kernal and BASIC ROM chips would
need to be "discovered". Note that the code contained in the ROM
chips does not automatically belong to the company which holds the
Commodore brand name (unless they specifically purchased the code).
Michael Hunter
mhu...@videocam.net.au
Supertopcheckerbunny
Rick, the only thing that I really want to know is if you're really
thinking about all these things you keep posting in various newsgroups
or if you're trying to win one of those "troll championships". (In that
case, you've just scored again.)
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
Yeah, I guess I must be missing something. Oh well...
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:407bb9f6$0$18981$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
I'm sure many people would have said the same thing to some great
inventors and innovators out there.
Let the guy dream! If people didn't dream, much of what we have today
wouldn't be here!
Joey
Riccardo Rubini
> I'm sure many people would have said the same thing to some great
> inventors and innovators out there.
True, but trust me: this is not the case. Rick is no Einstein nor Leonardo
Da Vinci ; he's just bored with too much time on his hands ;-)
> Let the guy dream! If people didn't dream, much of what we have today
> wouldn't be here!
There's nothing wrong with him dreaming in his own room, even sick dreams
like him being CEO of a new found Commodore, a nightmare for the rest of
us...
But, you know, when you go shouting out loud incoherent speech like he just
did, there's no dreaming going on: that's actually called delirium.
Riccardo
Clockmeister
"Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle" <jose...@josephexperimental.com> wrote
in message news:Xns94CAB0C2F4DC4jo...@216.77.188.18...
> "Clockmeister" <no-...@nowhere.com> wrote in
> news:407bb9f6$0$18981$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
>
> >
> > "Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com>
> > wrote in message news:107m8md...@corp.supernews.com...
> >> I have inquired some ideas and I think I be interested in a new
> >> Commodore "PC" which is clearly backward compatible with existing
> >> Commodore PC-10
> >
> > Reality check required isle 10...
> >
> >
> >
>
> I'm sure many people would have said the same thing to some great
> inventors and innovators out there.
He's neither inventing something new or innovative here. A bunch of cobbled
together old junk with a new PC just isn't going anywhere. Development costs
vs return just isn't there.
> Let the guy dream! If people didn't dream, much of what we have today
> wouldn't be here!
>
It wasn't dreamers that brought us these things, it was do-ers.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:407c68a5$0$18992$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
I only partially agree. The idea had to come from somewhere, then it was
up to a person to do it. So the dreamer has something to do with it. So
I'd say both the dreamers and the do-ers.
Now could some of the dreamers be a little less lazy and actually be do-
ers? Of course.
Anyway if this guy is only posting for attention, people putting him down
is not going to help.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:1121cdb3.04041...@posting.google.com:
Putting people down definitely isn't going to help. I know that.
White Flame (aka David Holz)
news:eGXec.17389$K_.5...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> I think the Commodore-One came close to this, but fell short of my
> dream by stepping backwords to the Commodore 64 rather than building
> on the product line which ended at the 128.
Huh? Upgraded super-vic and monster-sid, 65816, and a 32-bit or somesuch
address space with separate video coprocessor & RAM is "stepping backwords
to the Commodore 64"?
Granted, it's not going to go solve humanity's computing problems like Rick
might think, may have configurable I/O mapping that Matthew doesn't
understand, and isn't released yet, but it's definitely a system built on
the foundations of the C= 8-bit line.
--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)
Rick Balkins
originally bought.
We remember in 1994/1995 that ESCOM bought Commodore/Amiga. A few years
later Amiga and all International Property Rights (which means all inclusive
[patents,trademarks,copyrights,ect.]) pertaining to the Amiga including the
stock ownership of the Amiga subsidiary that ESCOM formed shortly after
buying Commodore - to Gateway.
Gateway bought all rights that pertain to Amiga (trademarks,patents &
copyright) and the Amiga subsidiary that ESCOM formed after buying
Commodore. Now as for the rest of Commodore. Since ESCOM never made a
subsidiary named Commodore (from what I last recall) - Tulip simply bought
all the remaining rights to Commodore which means all trademarks, patents &
copyrights relating to ALL Commodore 8 bit (from PET to C-65), UNIX & PC
series hardware and software and everything else Commodore that ESCOM
originally bought during the 1994-1995 sale of Commodore. This means Tulip
basically bought Commodore and Gateway took Amiga. Gateway had no interest
in the Commodore PC series or the C900 UNIX, or the C= 8 bit. They went
after one thing AMIGA.
Now, this is 1996-1999 timeframe. As for what Gateway done with Amiga - you
can figure that out. As for what Tulip is doing with Commodore is happening
NOW. We know things are happening but we don't know what it be.
As for your idea below - this is much in tune with what I am suggesting just
in other words and more in terms of a business model.
"Michael Hunter" <mhu...@videocam.net.au> wrote in message
news:eGXec.17389$K_.5...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Hello Rick,
Michael Hunter
> White Flame (aka David Holz) wrote:
> Huh? Upgraded super-vic and monster-sid, 65816, and a 32-bit or
> somesuch address space with separate video coprocessor & RAM is
> "stepping backwords to the Commodore 64"?
Obviously, the Commodore One is not a "Backwards" computer. It does
have many impressive features.
Maybe I mis-stated the point I was trying to make.
I find that I spend a great deal of my time in 128 mode and have
actually come to prefer it to 64 mode. While I still use 64 mode when
necessary, I don't know that I could sacrifice my 128 mode.
Obviously I could have both a Commodore-One and a 128, but my
preference would be to have an enhanced 128 as opposed to an enhanced
64.
Of course, being a "reconfigurable" computer, it is quite possible
that a 128-mode and an enhanced 128 mode may yet appear on the
Commodore One in the future. At that point, my interest would
increase significantly.
> definitely a system built on the foundations of the C= 8-bit line.
I completely agree there. My only complaint is that it's design
evolved from the 64 and not from the 128 (which includes a 64 mode).
I know that the 128's installed base is smaller than that of the 64,
so it's very possible that there is a lesser number of people who
would prefer an evolved 128 system. I am just one of those people
that accidentally got hooked on my machine's 128 mode after ignoring
it for many years.
Michael Hunter
mhu...@videocam.net.au
Rick Balkins
win the competition. There are clearly worse trolls in the world. I would
need ALOT more scores in order to win. :-))
Believe it or not, Tulip is reading these groups and mail lists. In fact, I
am interested but I don't just want my idea ALONE in the picture. I brought
a concept for a group of people to help in working out so it can really be
brought forth in serious form to Tulip and Tulip can have something to work
with. People just will not buy a Commodore branded PC. It will need more to
it - that makes it "Commodore".
Products are not made by just doers because doers don't dream so they will
not know what to do to begin with. The dreamer comes up with the concept aka
the "task" for the doer.
You can NOT do something without it being dreamed first. So let it be that.
The reason I haven't taken the time to do certain things is because of the
whining noise of the idea.
In order for things to happen it takes to parts. The Dream and the Doing.
Well I would be doing both if the whiners weren't so complaining of ideas.
You see, I am bringing ideas that will be brought forth to Tulip. This is
not a one person job so get real. It will need to be done by a team and if
the idea is liked - IT WILL.
I hear this - you must be DOers. Well, you need to dream the idea before you
do it and if doers want to be of assistance then do so by joining in the
development effort. If it means we do the R&D for Tulip, great. They can
take it from there and take it into full production.
I have received a response back from Harro today and believe it is on the
prior messages and may receive response to this initial message.
NOW, anyone working for Tulip - identify yourself.
"Supertopcheckerbunny" <remove-this-lo...@aon.at> wrote in
message news:407c5244$1...@e-post.inode.at...
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:c5hvqg$1se9$1...@barad-dur.nas.com:
> "Michael Hunter" <mhu...@videocam.net.au> wrote in message
> news:eGXec.17389$K_.5...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> I think the Commodore-One came close to this, but fell short of my
>> dream by stepping backwords to the Commodore 64 rather than building
>> on the product line which ended at the 128.
>
> Huh? Upgraded super-vic and monster-sid, 65816, and a 32-bit or
> somesuch address space with separate video coprocessor & RAM is
> "stepping backwords to the Commodore 64"?
>
> Granted, it's not going to go solve humanity's computing problems like
> Rick might think, may have configurable I/O mapping that Matthew
> doesn't understand, and isn't released yet, but it's definitely a
> system built on the foundations of the C= 8-bit line.
>
After looking at Rick's first post again in this thread, I don't see
where Rick said this would solve humanity's computing problems.
There is only one way to solve the world's computing problems. Get rid
of all computers.
Rick Balkins
"White Flame (aka David Holz)" <whitef...@y.a.h.o.o.com> wrote in message
news:c5hvqg$1se9$1...@barad-dur.nas.com...
> Huh? Upgraded super-vic and monster-sid, 65816, and a 32-bit or somesuch
> address space with separate video coprocessor & RAM is "stepping backwords
> to the Commodore 64"?
Is it when you would also have 8x AGP, 533 MHZ DDR SD-RAM, USB2.0, FireWire
IEEE1394, several PCI and several more. Maybe all the essential guts of the
C-One on a 133 MHz plug in board.
On the C-One plugin board - using a special slot. Now, the PC board would be
a hefty Pentium 4 or even Pentium 5. Don't kid yourself - Intel is making a
follow up to the Pentium 4.
> Granted, it's not going to go solve humanity's computing problems like
Rick
> might think, may have configurable I/O mapping that Matthew doesn't
> understand, and isn't released yet, but it's definitely a system built on
> the foundations of the C= 8-bit line.
Granted when the main PC part of it would be a top quality Pentium 4 or
Pentiun 5 system ?????? Yeah, when it would also have a new "Commodore
Operating System" that is entirely based on modern OS design like MacOS X
and is ROCK SOLID STABLE. This makes me wonder ????
Rick Balkins
> After looking at Rick's first post again in this thread, I don't see
> where Rick said this would solve humanity's computing problems.
True, I never really did say that.
It would be a "solution" to bring Commodore back to the masses. I never said
it was for solving humanity's computing problem. Certain things may be
solved but that is not the case of the main case.
mikec
> Putting people down definitely isn't going to help. I know that.
True, however, posting such nonsense in a public forum is bound to
generate a lot of negativity. Rick has a track record for talking a
lot but producing nothing, hence the backlash.
MikeC
mikec
> I see two possible marketing / strategy models out there that might
> possibly renew interest in the Commodore Branded machines
That's funny because no one else does.
> One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing platform
Funny...because this model hasn't worked for Amiga Inc. For all
intensive purposes, they're still dead in the water. Nokia's failed
N-Gage has a larger market size that anything Amiga Inc has done in
the past 10 years.
> The other model might use something along the lines of the Macintosh
Do you really believe in the nonsense you wrote here? Really?
I find it just amazing that people still bother to even talk about a
Commodore resurrection. Commodore is dead. Amiga is dead. They've been
dead for a decade. Neither are coming back. People like you and Rick
seem completely blinded by the reality of things. If anything, the
C-One has demonstrated that things are easier said than done.
Whatever the case, I'm sure the people at Tulip are laughing the heads
off over these posts. I'm sure they're rolling on the floor laughing
very hard. Most of the people reading these posts are torn between
laughing at Rick's unintentional attempt at humor and crying because
people like you who actually seem to agree with him. Ultimately,
Rick's statements do nothing but further discredit him. It's a shame
that your comments will also, in-turn, discredit you.
MikeC
bud
Group: comp.sys.cbm Date: Tue, Apr 13, 2004, 9:14am (CDT+5) From:
rub...@despammed.com (Riccardo Rubini)
script:
>>I think if you're going to criticize
>>him, constructive criticism would
>>be more effective.
>
>Generally, what you say it's true.
>Applied to the specific case, it's
>not, but rather a waste of time.
So very, very, very true. As proved many times over the past years.
That's why weird, wild, Balkins-star occupies my killfilter.
(I'm not as tolerant as Riccardo is.) :-))
dowcom
--
To e-mail me, add the character zero to "dowcom". i.e.:
dowcom(zero)(at)webtv(dot)net.
http://community.webtv.net/dowcom/DOWCOMSAMSTRADGUIDE
MSWindows is television,… Linux is radar.
Rick Balkins
"mikec" <mike...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121cdb3.04041...@posting.google.com...
> Hi Michael,
>
> That's funny because no one else does.
>
> intensive purposes, they're still dead in the water. Nokia's failed
> N-Gage has a larger market size that anything Amiga Inc has done in
> the past 10 years.
>
>
> I find it just amazing that people still bother to even talk about a
> Commodore resurrection. Commodore is dead. Amiga is dead. They've been
> dead for a decade. Neither are coming back. People like you and Rick
> seem completely blinded by the reality of things. If anything, the
> C-One has demonstrated that things are easier said than done.
>
> Whatever the case, I'm sure the people at Tulip are laughing the heads
> off over these posts. I'm sure they're rolling on the floor laughing
> very hard. Most of the people reading these posts are torn between
> laughing at Rick's unintentional attempt at humor and crying because
> people like you who actually seem to agree with him. Ultimately,
> Rick's statements do nothing but further discredit him. It's a shame
> that your comments will also, in-turn, discredit you.
Yeah and in 1955 it would be impossible to vision a small printer repair
shop would ever be an international corporation. It just took being
aggressive and business was no less aggressive then as today. Hell, $30
million dollars and a company who has a wide selection of products do indeed
have the capability to revive Commodore. Hey, Tulip announced relaunching
Commodore brand and that means "reviving" Commodore. Hell, look at the
people who revived Atari. Infogrames ? Now they are Atari. Bought the
company and you choose to become it - then YOU are it. If Tulip chooses to
morph then they become it.
Anything can happen and heck give it time and dilligence and some DOING and
it will. Given the task of developing a C64 is "already" going to be already
done - having a C-One daughterboard would not be a huge undertaking. Making
a 133 MHz PCI slot is no serious issue. It is merely an issue of operating
on a 133 MHz clock source instead of a 33 MHz. In order to prevent an
asshole from plugging a standard 33 MHz PCI card into this one special 133
MHz PCI slot is by rotating the PCI connector so the opposite edge is facing
the back. When you look at a PCI - there is a long edge and a short edge.
Just make the short edge face the back instead if normally the long edge
faces the back. Issue solved. Just make sure the solder pad is adjusted and
also make sure the slot is in a different color - which indeed PCI slots do
come in different color. The biggest thing is making a specialized 133 MHz
PCI controller. In this case we can call it "TurboPCI". Bingo - issue
solved. Just have a professional hardware engineer work on solving this and
a contracted a company to work out the host controller or put it on an FPGA.
Whoopy do, a 30K FPGA can be clocked at 133 MHz and that is as fast as you
need it. Also one FPGA is not $300 and for the most part - the machine would
be typically sold in quantities of 10,000-100,000 which is clearly an easy
case for a corporation. All they need to do is make $500 on each unit. Given
it would have alot of software packages and also plenty of free software and
if the next-generation Commodore OS is based around modern UNIX-like OS
architecture - then having good quality and quantity of free software
packaged on CD-ROMs is NOT an issue. Also included would be a line of a
handful of Commodore specific programs and a nice and easy to use User
Interface.
Add that with having "Longhorn" or whatever the next gen Windows OS also
included.
Given also an 8x AGP dual video out AGP card like a modern ATI RADEON 9800
card for the standard video for the PC part of the system.
It is only extending a standard PC board. The OS is just software. To me, I
would buy it. Especially if it is rock solid AND Fast and also allow me to
use my Commodore peripheral with EXTREME ease just like using a PC
peripheral. That is the beauty of what I was thinking. Is that a problem ???
or is it just that some of the people here are just afraid that Tulip could
possibly succeed. BTW: The Next Gen Commodore OS would be a PC based OS but
there would also be the Commodore OS on the the "C64 or C-One" add-on board.
BTW: Many of the people at Tulip are fans of Commodore computers too. If
Commodore is to be relaunched by Tulip - they can't just go make Windows PCs
with Commodore logos. What is the difference than making stickers with the
Commodore logo and sticking it on a plain ol' PC.
Tulip indicated the relaunch. They just haven't brought anything out.
You are simply saying that Tulip should just dump the Commodore rights into
a trash bin and give it up, right ???? That is effectively what it is to
simply do nothing with it. You see, I don't believe in just giving up
something that had more impact on the computing scene than text book writers
(endorsed by Microsoft or written by Microsoft) will ever give credit to.
They even wrote out Commodore as if it NEVER existed as if 22 Million people
just never existed ????
I don't particularly believe in that. There is no way to fight Microsoft but
fighting them to remain. It is not to kill but to survive. Business is war -
remember that. Microsoft operates off of lessons taught to Bill Gates by
Jack Tramiel which fought against IBM and Thomas Watson Jr. which was one of
the most aggressive business man EVER in the computing industry. Most young
people can't relate because it happened before they are were born and young
people always try to revise history and write out the past before them as if
time and the world started when they were born.
History lesson, IBM in the late 50s and early 60s use to literally buy your
products and open a store in front of your store at no price under their
logo or do other seriously aggressive techniques in business. Given that and
virtually the whole industry in that time was aggressive. Some cases that
literally brought about an Anti-trust case then.
Of course it was standard business practices to be aggressive. Survival of
the Fittest. If you survive, you grow stronger otherwise you die. So there
needs to be aggressive perseverence. Oh, BTW: HDs,Monitors, CD drives and
all are already at discounted price if you wanted to know because of
quantity so an additional 10,000 to 100,000 more units per year would only
reduce price on most common parts which would ease it some.
Since the contracted board manufacturer can easily put the addition I/O chip
(a "TurboPCI" controller for the 133 MHZ 'PCI' slot) with just the base
increase for the FPGA or VLSI chip to handle that. Most of the existing
chips on the board would be built around the same common chipset that is
ordered in the masses. IOW, a board manufacturer like Asus can easily be
contracted to add the extra component on a custom board with little to worry
about since most of the components are the same without any difference to
the price. The main difference will come with the added component(s). So it
is no big deal. Just add one chip to specially handle the additional slot
and that's all. No big deal. The main board may increase by maybe $50-75 at
best. Given a $150 motherboard - it be $200-225. Ok, no big deal and a 3.6
GHz CPU for $400-500 with heatsink and fan. Not a big issue of a price in a
year or two. Given quantity order, not a big deal. Depends on the CPU
package and the board. Not a really big issue. You will find that the CPU is
ordered already in high quantity and the motherboard would already benefit
with some price reduction simply because of quantity is more than your 1-100
board runs.
So figure a reasonable system can be put together for $1,500 with the
"C64/C-One" add on board for - erm $300-400. If orders were raised to quanty
runs, the cost would not be an issue as the price would clearly drop right
down to around $150 easily for a "C-One add on card". Take a straight out
C64 add on card with no real special bells and whistle can be done in $150
in single unit - low volume run. At higher volume - Perhaps $99. Right
within a reasonable scope and good choice of a reasonably small FPGA. Say
30K will handle the C64 just by itself without any special bells and
whistle. Maybe $129 for the C-128.
Given the hardware and a bus interface to allow the P4 or P5 to take control
of the bus is well within scope.
Riccardo Rubini
> (I'm not as tolerant as Riccardo is.) :-))
Well, calling me tolerant sounds like an oximoron, because in real life I am
as tolerant as a Nazi is :-))
No, seriously, I have been tolerant with Rick in the past because I thought
he probably needed some time to find a place in this newsgroup. Of course
every community has a village idiot, but for some reason I thought it was a
waste for him to take that place. I was wrong. I thought he needed just some
time and things would have worked out for him.
Some guys thought, and I did as well in certain circumstances, that arguing
with him, paragraph by paragraph, sentence by sentence, and proving him
wrong many times, would have lead to some result, like Rick understanding
people are restless towards him because something is wrong with his antics -
my very own aim -, or, what the majority desired, Rick's definitive
departure from this community. Wrong.
It's important to understand that Rick isn't interested in winning any
argument, neither giving any contribution to this place. Instead, the only
thing he does is keeping himself busy posting any kind of shite that crosses
his mind, because probably he got no better thing to do in that very
circumstance. That's it.
I think Rick really needs a rude awakening to see how much people are
exausthed by his behaviour, that's why I suggest not to kill filter him,
but, rather, to be rude and intolerant and kicking his ass on regular basis,
whenever he brings out useless shite like this thread out. As Clockmeister
said, anyone who believes there something solid in his original post, needs
a reality check. What he wrote is solid actually, but in the way a turd is.
Closing the argument : like when your dog takes a crap on your precious
carpet, and you have to stick its mouth in the shit and spank its ass, same
shall be done with Rick, so he understands he shall not shit on the carpet
again. You don't argue with your pet, because "if you prove him wrong he
might eventually not shit on the carpet again" ( an overrated school of
thought, here ), don't you?
Riccardo
Clockmeister
"Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:zf9fc.51805$hc5.2...@news3.tin.it...
LOL You have a wonderful way with words...
> Closing the argument : like when your dog takes a crap on your precious
> carpet, and you have to stick its mouth in the shit and spank its ass,
same
> shall be done with Rick, so he understands he shall not shit on the carpet
> again. You don't argue with your pet, because "if you prove him wrong he
> might eventually not shit on the carpet again" ( an overrated school of
> thought, here ), don't you?
>
We operate on the same level I think :-)
Riccardo Rubini
> Hi Michael,
>
>
>> I see two possible marketing / strategy models out there that might
>> possibly renew interest in the Commodore Branded machines
>
> That's funny because no one else does.
As time passes by, fewer and fewer people even recall the Commodore brand.
The new generations, teenagers born 15 years ago, don't even know what a
Commodore 64 is.
10 years of inactivity have erased almost all the legacy Commodore had in
the computer market, and, people, face it: Commodore products were already
facing sunset in 1994, the interest of many was already gone. For years an
inept management pushed sub-par or extinguished products, both in the 8-bit
and Amiga markets, forcing people to move to other platforms.
A PC branded Dell or Commodore makes no difference to me, and this is what
Commodore would be doing it today, had it survived.
This is what current Commodore will do, if Tulip's marketing division
decides to pull out of the closet the brand name, rest your heart in peace
on that.
>> One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing platform
>
> Funny...because this model hasn't worked for Amiga Inc. For all
> intensive purposes, they're still dead in the water. Nokia's failed
> N-Gage has a larger market size that anything Amiga Inc has done in
> the past 10 years.
Amiga Inc. is done. Many documents circulating on the net prove another
bankrupcy is soon on the horizon. since ESCOM died, Gateway, and then Amiga
Inc., have done nothing really relevant for years but putting Amiga users
down rebranding and repackaging run-of-the-mill products.
> I find it just amazing that people still bother to even talk about a
> Commodore resurrection. Commodore is dead. Amiga is dead. They've been
> dead for a decade. Neither are coming back. People like you and Rick
> seem completely blinded by the reality of things. If anything, the
> C-One has demonstrated that things are easier said than done.
I use to think at the C-One as just an home project Jeri enjoyed doing as an
hobby, proving to herself she was able to accomplish the feat of building a
Computer from scratch. If she really, in her minds, thought that a product
like that would have raised more than the occasional interest of few, she
was very wrong. But I don't think so, she has to be a smart girl.
> Whatever the case, I'm sure the people at Tulip are laughing the heads
> off over these posts. I'm sure they're rolling on the floor laughing
> very hard.
I am sure people at Tulip's management don't even know this newsgroup exist,
and those who know, don't even bother reading it. The average employee
reading the occasional thread and commenting this or that doesn't really
matter, it's not the company speaking its heart out.
> Most of the people reading these posts are torn between
> laughing at Rick's unintentional attempt at humor and crying because
> people like you who actually seem to agree with him. Ultimately,
> Rick's statements do nothing but further discredit him. It's a shame
> that your comments will also, in-turn, discredit you.
Nobody could have said this any better than you just did.
Riccardo
Anders Carlsson
> I am sure people at Tulip's management don't even know this
> newsgroup exist, and those who know, don't even bother reading it.
Actually, is there any difference between the Commodore brand and
the former company Commodore Business Machines, abbreviated CBM
just like this newsgroup?
Maybe few or none of the people in Tulip management and employees
who know that they hold the rights to the Commodore brand makes
the connection to CBM and thus would never realize this group.
--
Anders Carlsson
Riccardo Rubini
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> writes:
>
>> I am sure people at Tulip's management don't even know this
>> newsgroup exist, and those who know, don't even bother reading it.
>
> Actually, is there any difference between the Commodore brand and
> the former company Commodore Business Machines, abbreviated CBM
> just like this newsgroup?
Commodore Business Machines Inc. was the US subsidiary of Commodore. As you
know, Commodore moved to Bahamas, for fiscal reasons ( taxes ). CBM was also
a trademark, and I suppose that was transferred to Tulip as well.
> Maybe few or none of the people in Tulip management and employees
> who know that they hold the rights to the Commodore brand makes
> the connection to CBM and thus would never realize this group.
Come on, I don't think they are so stupid, Anders. Simply, Tulip doesn't
care that much to have its own people coming here, because we Tulip doesn't
have anything that could be marketable here.
This is about 8-bit computers, Tulip has as much interest in reviving this
market as IBM has to resurrect its System/360 line.
Riccardo
Rick Balkins
> As time passes by, fewer and fewer people even recall the Commodore brand.
> The new generations, teenagers born 15 years ago, don't even know what a
> Commodore 64 is.
First - the teenagers are only a small percentage of the world population.
It doesn't require teenagers. What happen to people who are old enough to
use Commodore then. Yeah, did the 20 Million teenagers and young adults in
the 1980s just die or disappear. Just because some of them died (the more
elderly people of that time) does not mean that these people NO longer exist
and second of all - people's memory of Commodore would not be forgotten
"totally" because people human mind remembers patterns and associate them
and DO NOT Forget them that easily. How do you think people can remember
things from the 1940s. Why you don't wear a uniform of German Nazi in front
of those people who fought down to hand to hand with a Nazi. They will
remember that in life - crystal clear.
Yeah, Atari was dead for nearly that long and people do remember Atari. It
really doesn't matter what the teenagers can remember of the 1980s but if
the new line of products do support things of that sort. Of course if you
asked them by words what a Commodore 64 is - they may or maynot recall it.
Then don't kid yourself - a teenager will often act dumb even if they do
remember it. The thing is "visual".
Now, that really doesn't matter whether a teenager of today remembers or
not. All it really take to start the ball rolling is first connecting with
the Commodore commmunity and then expanding with the brand. There are at
least 50 Million people who would have seen the Commodore name and bought a
Commodore product. There would be at least today - 6-10 Million people who
would remember Commodore.
Humans do NOT really forget visual patterns and Commodore 64 will be among
the things the "name" and "symbol" is associated to. It is like people who
use to go to Gemco stores.
How many people would remember the 1982 DeLorean. You ask them by word - it
may be shaky. Ask someone about the GTO or Volkswagon. They will likely
connect with the old 1960s. Especially if they haven't seen a new
Volkswagon. How about a GTO. Names like GTO is a trademark and a name of a
car. You would be suprise. But you don't ask a child to discuss history of
things before they were born. They don't know shit. But we are taking 10
years to 20 years ago not 100-200 years ago. Most of the people are still
alive.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
@posting.google.com:
>
>
Just ignore him then. Isn't that simple enough?
Rick Balkins
> Commodore Business Machines Inc. was the US subsidiary of Commodore. As
you
> know, Commodore moved to Bahamas, for fiscal reasons ( taxes ). CBM was
also
> a trademark, and I suppose that was transferred to Tulip as well.
Yeah, that too but a name of a newsgroup like comp.sys.cbm does not infringe
on trademarks.
> Come on, I don't think they are so stupid, Anders. Simply, Tulip doesn't
> care that much to have its own people coming here, because we Tulip
doesn't
> have anything that could be marketable here.
>
> This is about 8-bit computers, Tulip has as much interest in reviving this
> market as IBM has to resurrect its System/360 line.
Well then what is 30 Million Euros from the Equity Credit Line and all going
into reviving the trademark. Just to sit on trademarks. Come on. They EVEN
stated on July 11th. What is not clear about that ????
It is not going to make them money if they do nothing with it. It is not
going to make them any money to just make a bunch of PCs with C= logo on it.
Since it failed for ESCOM and Web Computers International. What does that
mean ? Clear bell - anyone who remembers Commodore would not want a plain
el'cheapo PC with C= logo. It is a disgrace to name. It needs something a
little more. It is the most vile and dishonorable disgrace to the name that
you can do to just make an el'cheapo PC and call it Commodore.
Commodore was about giving the MOST for the least price. Commodore never
built the cheapest but were first to break barriers but they gave you stuff
that only computers 2-4 times the price would offer at the prices they gave
but it is not just technology.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
in news:107qn8f...@corp.supernews.com:
This reminds me that I know of teenagers getting into 80s style synthpop
music on one musician's message board. Also they're getting into classic
video games, even though they never played many of these games as a kid.
So maybe teenagers wouldn't totally be ruled out. However, Atari is a
more familiar name to them than Commodore 64.
It's really kind of funny when I discuss video game history with some
teenagers, they think the Atari 2600 was the first ever video game
console. lol. I wasn't around for the stuff before Atari 2600 (I was
born in 1980) but I've done studying to see what was around before then.
OK, that was off topic. But it was in my head and it had to come out.
White Flame (aka David Holz)
> Closing the argument : like when your dog takes a crap on your precious
> carpet, and you have to stick its mouth in the shit and spank its ass,
same
> shall be done with Rick, so he understands he shall not shit on the carpet
> again. You don't argue with your pet, because "if you prove him wrong he
> might eventually not shit on the carpet again" ( an overrated school of
> thought, here ), don't you?
Ah, but to use the same analogy to support kill-filtering, I don't let the
dog into my house. If nobody let the dog into their house, it would simply
have to go somewhere else. You're trying to train the dog, which may or may
not work.
--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
Anders Carlsson
> Yeah, Atari was dead for nearly that long and people do remember Atari.
Interestingly enough, since Infogrames became Atari, I am unable to
find a single mention of the past Atari memories on either of their
web sites. There is no references to the classic games, consoles or
computers. On the US site, they have a few Flash game remakes, but
those are newer games.
I understand if some of the hardware and software rights have been
dealed away or lost, but certainly _something_ of their back
catalogue should still be with the company and Atari brand? Maybe
that is as much as you could expect from Tulip/Commodore too, to
maintain the brand and logotype, track down illegal use of what
still could be intellectual property but not put much effort in
showing or supporting the same IP.
--
Anders Carlsson
Riccardo Rubini
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:WUafc.52315$hc5.2...@news3.tin.it...
>
>> Commodore Business Machines Inc. was the US subsidiary of Commodore.
>> As you know, Commodore moved to Bahamas, for fiscal reasons ( taxes
>> ). CBM was also a trademark, and I suppose that was transferred to
>> Tulip as well.
>
> Yeah, that too but a name of a newsgroup like comp.sys.cbm does not
> infringe on trademarks.
And who said that, simpleton? After reading another stupid incoherent
sentence like this, I ignore completely the rest of the garbage you have
written. You don't deserve my attention.
Riccardo
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:407d2953$0$18997$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
Well I'm a Christian and I intend on acting in a Christlike manner. Just
want you to know that. So I'm not going to participate in the putting
down of another person just because you may think he's an idiot. He
might even say idiodic things, but don't we all? I'm guilty of saying
idiodic things from time to time. I'd just say let he without sin cast
the first stone.
" >
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> writes:
>
>
>>Yeah, Atari was dead for nearly that long and people do remember Atari.
>
>
> Interestingly enough, since Infogrames became Atari, I am unable to
> find a single mention of the past Atari memories on either of their
> web sites. There is no references to the classic games, consoles or
> computers. On the US site, they have a few Flash game remakes, but
> those are newer games.
>
> I understand if some of the hardware and software rights have been
> dealed away or lost, but certainly _something_ of their back
> catalogue should still be with the company and Atari brand?
I believe the only mention lies in the former Infogrammes line of "Atari
Collection" emulation games.
> that is as much as you could expect from Tulip/Commodore too, to
> maintain the brand and logotype, track down illegal use of what
> still could be intellectual property but not put much effort in
> showing or supporting the same IP.
>
I don't doubt this for a second. It'd be cute if these new machines
that are simply called 'Commodore' are just boring PCs that might come
with an emulator for giggles, not like we can't install one ourselves.
What I'm not understanding in this thread is, if anyone wants to build a
better 65xx era Commodore, why not mangle an emulator to pretend we have
1 Megabyte C64's or whatever and see what it's like, or how useful it
would be? If the emulation works well enough, somebody more
electronically inclined would probably try to build a real one.
-ch
Riccardo Rubini
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:HU9fc.51977$hc5.2...@news3.tin.it...
>
>> As time passes by, fewer and fewer people even recall the Commodore
>> brand. The new generations, teenagers born 15 years ago, don't even
>> know what a Commodore 64 is.
>
> First - the teenagers are only a small percentage of the world
> population.
Albeit the most important percentage, because teenagers of today are the men
in charge of the world tomorrow, you simpleton. Why do you think the Tobacco
industry targets youngsters and not 80 years old? Has ever crossed your mind
we worship Commodore today because that was our computer back when we were
kids? You bet.
The VIC-20 and C64 were so successful because were very well received by
young people. Those Commodore computers were products targeted for the whole
family, like PC's are today, but weren't back then. I believe that only with
the advent of Windows 95 to millions of desktops the PC parted its
business-only niche and became finally a family product.
I refuse to comment all the rest you have written on the grounds that surely
is as stupid as the rest you've posted in this thread, so far.
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> Well I'm a Christian and I intend on acting in a Christlike manner.
Then let me remind you the immortal words of Clint Eastwood in "The Good,
the Bad and the Ugly":
"God hates idiots too..."
Riccardo
Michael Hunter
>> One is the model used by Amiga Inc. to build on the existing
>> platform
>
> Funny...because this model hasn't worked for Amiga Inc. For all
> intensive purposes, they're still dead in the water. Nokia's failed
> N-Gage has a larger market size that anything Amiga Inc has done in
> the past 10 years.
It is true that Amiga Inc. is basically dead at this point. They did
give it a good shot though. It is unfortunate for the Amiga
community. They have watched the repeated attempts and continued
failures to relaunch the company way to many times. One thing that
can be said for the Amiga community though is that despite repeated
let-downs, they did "support" the more recent attempt. I'm sure
though at this point that many of the Amiga faithful have finally come
to realize that it may never happen.
I know many Amiga users purchased the Amiga One computer.
Unfortunately, it was never brought to the masses and Amiga Inc. took
way to long bringing OS 4 to market. This basically left the Amiga
One as another Linux box for a considerable amount of time. There are
already so many Linux boxes out there that this would hardly be a
selling point.
Combine that with the excessive price that they charged for the Amiga
One mainboard and you do definitely have a recipe for failure.
Basically the price tag is what kept me from purchasing the Amiga One
computer. There is no way that I would spend the $700 to $1000
(depending on configuration) for just a mainboard. Of course, there
are very few that would.
If Amiga Inc. had been been able to deliver on their promises faster,
and kept the prices low enough to attract buyers, they might have
stood a chance. Of course, then you still have the Microsoft giant to
deal with.
Reality would have probably seen the Amiga One selling only to Amiga
fans for a good long time (assuming that they were able to sell enough
to keep in business). Eventually, they might be able to gain some
market share, but of course they wouldn't have overtaken the PC
industry.
The sad reality of the situation is that Amiga Inc. made to many
promises, took to long to deliver, and charged to much for what they
did deliver. This most definitely led to their demise.
>> The other model might use something along the lines of the
>> Macintosh
>
> Do you really believe in the nonsense you wrote here? Really?
Basically, the point I was making was: "If someone was really going to
attempt a relaunch, these are two possible strategies that they might
consider."
Of course, they would want to learn from the mistakes made by Amiga
Inc. and improve on the strategies.
I am not operating on the delusion that the Commodore brand will once
again rise to the popularity that it once enjoyed. I was merely
commenting on what I would "like" to see in such a machine IF Tulip
were to make a good shot at it.
Who knows, it's always "possible" that Tulip "might" make an attempt
similar to what Amiga Inc. tried to do with the Amiga community. I'm
not holding my breath there. I was just stating that "if" they did
make another machine, there were a couple of "possible" strategies
they might entertain.
At this point, the statements I have read from Tulip and Ironstone
Partners are way to vague to draw much of a conclusion.
One thing is for sure though, if they simply make another PC clone and
put a Commodore label on it, they will fall short of success.
> I find it just amazing that people still bother to even talk about a
> Commodore resurrection. Commodore is dead. Amiga is dead. They've
Yes, at this point that is a valid statement.
> been dead for a decade. Neither are coming back. People like you
> and Rick seem completely blinded by the reality of things. If
I'm not out of touch with reality. I maintain the position of "I'll
believe it when I see it." But, I found the thread to be an
interesting discussion of "what would you want if...."
Perhaps I didn't make that clear enough in my comments.
> anything, the C-One has demonstrated that things are easier said
> than done.
Agreed. While the Commodore One does actually show potential of
coming to market, they also may suffer from taking to long to bring it
about. There is something to be said for making announcements to
early in the game.
Hopefully, they will have a market when the machine is finally ready
to be released. I'm sure that it won't compare to the kind of market
they could've grabbed if they were able to deliver it within 6 months
of their initial public announcement. But, then again, we'll just
have to wait and see. Only time will tell how things will turn out
for the Commodore One. I wish them the best though.
> It's a shame that your comments will also, in-turn, discredit you.
I wasn't seeking validation. But I do believe that you may have
mis-understood what I was actually thinking. Make no mistake, I am
not counting on Tulip relaunching the Commodore computer and bringing
it back to the status it once held. All I was saying is: "If (and
that's a big IF), they do, what I'd want would be...."
It might be nice, but I'm not counting on it.
Michael Hunter
mhu...@videocam.net.au
Riccardo Rubini
> Ah, but to use the same analogy to support kill-filtering, I don't
> let the dog into my house. If nobody let the dog into their house,
> it would simply have to go somewhere else. You're trying to train
> the dog, which may or may not work.
Truth is, David, even if you kill-filter him, you will always end up reading
him quoted elsewhere, since he's the most prolific "writer" in the
newsgroup. He's not in the top ten, he is FIRST in the top ten posters, a
disgraced accident that strengthens the common "quality not quantity" loud
cry from people.
The analogy in filtering Balkins, then, is like you want to get rid of the
dog, and you kick it in the arse all the way out the door, aim a final kick
and let it take off, but, during its flight in air suddendly does a 180° and
renters home through the window, smashing the glasses. You can't really get
rid of it.
Better then try to train Rick to behave like a normal, average IQ gifted man
and not as a stoned dog with a flatulence habit - with no offense intended
towards the dog category.
Riccardo
Rick Balkins
rid of all humans as they ALL including YOU and everyone on this world are
ALL IDIOTS compared to him.
That is a movie and does not relate at all to anything in the bible
whatsoever.
"Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:vEefc.74445$rM4.2...@news4.tin.it...
Rick Balkins
ask Tulip to simply forget the Commodore and that no one in the Commodore
scene even WANTS Tulip to produce or even revive Commodore in anyway. They
don't want Commodore to even return even if it is possible. I have pointed
out many times that if you really think - people will buy a good product. If
people buy a PC then why would it be a problem if you get an even BETTER PC
with a bonus of using what you got WITH NO hassle whatsoever. Ever wished
you could read a Commodore disk with an amazing ease and NOT even have to go
to DOS to read the disk or buy fancy little cables and hope your printer
port will support it. Why do that when it can be guaranteed through properly
written software.
You want to disgrace what made Commodore into not even a computer anymore.
Guess what the 5 year olds when they become adults will only think the C64
as just some software. They would not even think it is a computer anymore.
That Commodore Business Machines will have never existed and that the VICE
team invented the C64. Come ON !!!! These kids need to see the real thing or
at least it being a hardware because turning C64 into a software even will
de-value the fact that it was a computer to begin with. The fact is - a kid
will loose the facts if the facts just simply disappear. How hard is that to
understand. Don't you think about steps that your next step will lead you
to. It is the responsibility of you, me and everyone who here who remembered
Commodore for what it is to Defend the crown if we still love this kingdom.
(Paraphrase - think harder. Better yet I'll tell you Sub-simpleton turds)
It is the responsibility of us who still love Commodore to protect it from
being degraded from even being a computer. It is our responsibility to tell
the truth and uphold the facts so the kids would have the facts. The fact
is - you are taking away the "facts". By taking away the fact that a C64 is
a computer by replacing the concept of the C64 as a computer into a software
shell for other software. That is clearly a degradation of what is C64.
You ask a kid what a C64 is and all they know is an emulator. The kid's
response is that is it a software. Wow, what a factual statement that is.
Hahaha ROTFLMAO !!!! Be an example of preserving Commodore. BTW: Commodore
Business Machines aka Commodore Electronics International was a computer
manufacturer and now you want Tulip to turn Commodore into a software
company with nothing valuable. Or do you want Commodore to be forgetten.
First step, remove yourself of any Commodore computers, software, hardware
and emulators. Then this scene can finally die - exactly what your choices
of action on the future of Commodore will be. DEAD & soon enough FORGOTTEN
completely and finally all the sites be removed. Is this the blasphemy that
you want ????
I found some of the suggestions as PURE BLASPHEMY !!!! COMPLETELY EVIL !!!!
Rick Balkins
"Anders Carlsson" <anders....@mds.mdh.se> wrote in message
news:k2gk70i...@legolas.mdh.se...
> Interestingly enough, since Infogrames became Atari, I am unable to
> find a single mention of the past Atari memories on either of their
> web sites. There is no references to the classic games, consoles or
> computers. On the US site, they have a few Flash game remakes, but
> those are newer games.
>
> I understand if some of the hardware and software rights have been
> dealed away or lost, but certainly _something_ of their back
> catalogue should still be with the company and Atari brand? Maybe
> that is as much as you could expect from Tulip/Commodore too, to
> maintain the brand and logotype, track down illegal use of what
> still could be intellectual property but not put much effort in
> showing or supporting the same IP.
It can be "expected" but we can help them to not do that but carry on some
aspects but also connect with us. How hard is it for us to assist them in
providing actual history of Commodore. Yes, we can expect that but do we
have to LET that happen that way ????
So far, Tulip is LISTENING. Sometimes they are too busy to listen to all the
noise but the main ones will go through and they will listen. If we can
consolidate on a vision and work from there and that is how a company can be
revived or a brand be revived. We must develop a roadmap to the future and
go from there. This is part of business and how Apple survived.
So what if Commodore may seem like a vampire. Through a little blood into
the vampire and the vampire will revive from sleep. Whatever, with money
brought into the business (Commodore International NV - a subsidiary of
Tulip Computers NV, which is essentially Commodore that was bought by ESCOM
AG and later bought by Tulip from ESCOM AG.
In this case the company is like a car which transfer titleship. It isn't
exactly a close comparison but reasonable for the main point and should not
ever be taken too literally.
PS: I am grateful that some people actually carefully read what is actually
said and this really relieves the headache I get from those who don't bother
reading it correctly or purposely mis-state what I say.
Rick Balkins
"@(none)" <""tanuki\"@(none)"> wrote in message
news:407d7351$1...@newspeer2.tds.net...
> I believe the only mention lies in the former Infogrammes line of "Atari
> Collection" emulation games.
>
> I don't doubt this for a second. It'd be cute if these new machines
> that are simply called 'Commodore' are just boring PCs that might come
> with an emulator for giggles, not like we can't install one ourselves.
>
>
> What I'm not understanding in this thread is, if anyone wants to build a
> better 65xx era Commodore, why not mangle an emulator to pretend we have
> 1 Megabyte C64's or whatever and see what it's like, or how useful it
> would be? If the emulation works well enough, somebody more
> electronically inclined would probably try to build a real one.
Well, I like the idea of the add-on C64 computer on a plugin board to be a
reasonable concept but pretending with emulation is like lieing. Well the
add-on board would not be a "C64" but a board that consists all of the
physical hardware so you can run C64 games on it with the official original
ROMs. With a 6502 - it would at least have something stemming from the
Commodore line of computer. Hence why I would want that. Hence why a C-One
as an add-on board does appeal to me for this purpose. Since a 65c816 is
indeed a 6502 and clearly is an evolution just like a Pentium 4 is clearly
and evolution of the 8086. You see, by the time this unit would be
eleased - the R&D of the C-One would be essentially complete with a very
minor issue of adjusting it into an add-on board. Huge part would be already
done so what is the big cry.
Riccardo Rubini
> Hehehe, then why haven't Thou simply shatter the world to assunder
> and get rid of all humans as they ALL including YOU and everyone on
> this world are ALL IDIOTS compared to him.
Now you're speaking on God's behalf, Rick? Is this the last chapter in your
omnipotence delirium?
You found your God in the bottom of a bottle of Jack, Rick, don't ya?
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> You don't deserve mine either. I'll send an email to Harro Tillema
You can even send an e-mail to Hanna-Barbera, as far as I care. I heard
Scooby Doo needs new dumb spooky characters for his flicks and you surely
don't cut a poor figure among lobotomized zombies :-)
Riccardo
Rick Balkins
> Albeit the most important percentage, because teenagers of today are the
men
> in charge of the world tomorrow, you simpleton. Why do you think the
Tobacco
> industry targets youngsters and not 80 years old? Has ever crossed your
mind
> we worship Commodore today because that was our computer back when we were
> kids? You bet.
>
> The VIC-20 and C64 were so successful because were very well received by
> young people. Those Commodore computers were products targeted for the
whole
> family, like PC's are today, but weren't back then. I believe that only
with
> the advent of Windows 95 to millions of desktops the PC parted its
> business-only niche and became finally a family product.
>
> I refuse to comment all the rest you have written on the grounds that
surely
> is as stupid as the rest you've posted in this thread, so far.
What is the problem with taking that market back ???? Ever thought of a
solution, new OS on a vastly more superior hardware while having the option
to plug in the stuff from the past because it is blatantly OBVIOUS that
among the first buyers will stem from those who bought Commodore. HINT:
TARGET is the FAMILY. HINT: TAKE IT BACK or at least SOME of it back.
Have you ever thought about that ???? Has that ever cross your mind ??? An
easy to use and reliable OS that is capable of anything a modern computer is
expected to do but with the bonus of being able to use old commodore stuff
through an add on board that clearly let's you be able to "directly" plug in
your Commodore peripherals. Also having a new OS that is more reliable than
Windows and having a decent web browser - will solve a huge issue. You
complain about having both in one with something better than software ????
Can I simply plug my Commodore 1541 directly into my Windows XP computer
with the graceful ease of reading it's directly just like reading my 3.5"
Floppy disk. Now, I don't even have to run an emulator to read the
directory. It would be part of the next-gen OS. Support for even a CMD HD.
WOW - isn't that wonderful and you complain ????
Yeah, so all those disks that I bought would no longer have to go to the
dumps because of you guys preventing a reasonable option. Emulators are
software and VICE is a far cry from being able to do the stuff like plugging
a Commodore cassette unit directly into the new "Commodore computer" but
note the new Commodore computer would indeed be a PC with a new ultra-modern
Commodore OS running on top of a P4 or P5. How many times have YOU missed
that. In some due respect - you can think of the OS as a hardware enhanced
emulator/multi-task OS. You missed that - didn't you ?
Riccardo Rubini
> So far, Tulip is LISTENING. Sometimes they are too busy to listen to
> all the noise but the main ones will go through and they will listen.
...And after LISTENING to your new "concept for a NEW Commodore PC" the top
management at Tulip got together, locked the doors, discussed, and finally
and ultimately a decision was taken on the fate of the Commodore brand
name...
"Given the absulte lack of IQ and reality nowadays in the Commodore users'
camp, " - said the CEO Captain McCallister ( aka the "Frying Dutchman" ) -
" We decided to license the Commodore brand name for an exciting new line of
frozen fish. The slogan is ready : frozen cod filet for the masses, not for
the classes. Our makerting division predicts a major business success.
William Shatner will endorse the line in TV commercials, along with Spock,
while both fly fishing in Eindhoven"...
Go and grab a clue, Balkins, pleeaze...
Riccardo
P.S. Don't fool yourself I read your whole post...Actually your "LISTENING"
written in capitals caught my attention and I read that one and only.
Rick Balkins
produced. Expecting over 4 Million units a year. Maybe not. Maybe something
along the lines of 10,000 to 100,000 in a year.
I expect them to bridge the gap of the past to the present and the proceed
with a new line of Commodore "computers" based on modern hardware (yes a P4
or P5 hardware) and a new OS customly made (based on UNIX) and having a rock
solid stability and you got essentially a MacOS X on a P4/P5. You would have
a new generation Commodore OS. With modern feel. Take a look at the
www.commodore.net and look at the visual graphics and feel. OK, an
ultra-modern GUI feel and all. Take the look and feel and a robust OS and
the ability to use Linux/UNIX and new custom apps. It may not ever be quite
the same glory and I don't expect that but I expect a hell of an effort and
fine tuning past strategies in order to re-build and take the Commodore
community further. Building from the past and what really made Commodore
successful and look at how it can apply today but a plain ol' PC isn't going
to cut it.
People who adore Commodore will never like that. Of course the issue of
Tulip is something more than Amiga situation was after Gateway. Remember
Amiga Inc. is essentially Amino renamed to Amiga after acquiring the Amiga
part from Gateway. Tulip is naturally a larger company with more products
than you can shake a stick at. Tulip is capable of making custom cases and
often do and they are financially capable of doing more than Amiga Inc.
(under Bill McEwen) can do. So working things out - Commodore can slowly but
steadily grow and first bridging the past to new "Commodore" platform - you
may call it. The point is, I want to directly plug my existing Commodore
hardware and move things over with ease and execute them with perhaps a
65c816 (co-processor).
The C-One in its current form may fail commercially due to long wait but the
technology can be taken over and worked over and be part of the new computer
via an add on board that uses a customized 133 MHz PCI slot. I have figured
a solution to keep people from plugging standard PCI into that slot. Just
change its distance from the back panel and the card would be adjusted and
it's special slot would be wider than the usual slots for just those slots.
So you wouldn't have problems inserting the Serial Cable and other stuff.
The add on board would be "optional" but the new OS would not "require" the
add-on board.
Given Amiga, Inc. is a much smaller company - they done a fine job for its
size but Tulip is significantly larger. Heck - Tulip owns its own
headquarters not rent out a business park. Tulip is the largest European
based PC maker (paring to that of the once ESCOM AG)
"Michael Hunter" <mhu...@videocam.net.au> wrote in message
news:sKefc.23145$K_.6...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> It is true that Amiga Inc. is basically dead at this point. They did
> give it a good shot though. It is unfortunate for the Amiga
> community. They have watched the repeated attempts and continued
> failures to relaunch the company way to many times. One thing that
> can be said for the Amiga community though is that despite repeated
> let-downs, they did "support" the more recent attempt. I'm sure
> though at this point that many of the Amiga faithful have finally come
> to realize that it may never happen.
<<< snip >>>
Sam Gillett
"Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...
[snip]
> Hey, Tulip announced relaunching Commodore brand and that means "reviving"
> Commodore. Hell, look at the people who revived Atari. Infogrames ? Now
> they are Atari. Bought the company and you choose to become it - then YOU
> are it. If Tulip chooses to morph then they become it.
Is Atari really revived? Are there any current Atari computers that can
trace their roots to either the 8-bit Atari or the ST series?
[snip]
> You see, I don't believe in just giving up something that had more impact
> on the computing scene than text book writers (endorsed by Microsoft or
> written by Microsoft) will ever give credit to. They even wrote out
> Commodore as if it NEVER existed as if 22 Million people just never existed
> ????
There is mention of Commodore in the more or less official history of
Microsoft found in Microsoft's Encarta Encyclopedia. The sentence containing
Commodore is quoted below.
[start quote]
Microsoft's early customers included fledgling hardware firms such as Apple
Computer, maker of the Apple II computer; Commodore, maker of the PET
computer; and Tandy Corporation, maker of the Radio Shack TRS-80 computer.
[end quote]
[snip]
> Take a straight out C64 add on card with no real special bells and whistle
> can be done in $150 in single unit - low volume run. At higher volume -
> Perhaps $99. Right within a reasonable scope and good choice of a
> reasonably small FPGA. Say 30K will handle the C64 just by itself without
> any special bells and whistle. Maybe $129 for the C-128.
Jeri has already proven you wrong on this one. You _can not_ put even a
stock C64 on a 30K FPGA. Doubt it? Go back and check the early development
of the C=One.
--
Best regards,
Sam Gillett
Watch yourself, or your
reality check will bounce!
Sam Gillett
"Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote ...
> > Whatever the case, I'm sure the people at Tulip are laughing the heads
> > off over these posts. I'm sure they're rolling on the floor laughing
> > very hard.
>
> I am sure people at Tulip's management don't even know this newsgroup
> exist, and those who know, don't even bother reading it. The average
> employee reading the occasional thread and commenting this or that doesn't
> really matter, it's not the company speaking its heart out.
This is hypothetical... but I think the people at Tulip print out Rick's
posts and pass them around. After everyone has had a good laugh, they put
them in the shredder.
--
Best regards,
Sam Gillett
UFO's are real.
It's Rick's Super C=One that doesn't exist!
Riccardo Rubini
> I think the people at Tulip print out Rick's posts and pass them around.
After everyone has had a good
> laugh, they put them in the shredder.
LOL
Right on, man :-)
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com>
> wrote ...
>
> [snip]
>> Hey, Tulip announced relaunching Commodore brand and that means
>> "reviving" Commodore. Hell, look at the people who revived Atari.
>> Infogrames ? Now they are Atari. Bought the company and you choose
>> to become it - then YOU are it. If Tulip chooses to morph then they
>> become it.
>
> Is Atari really revived? Are there any current Atari computers that
> can trace their roots to either the 8-bit Atari or the ST series?
Nope, of course. Atari is dead in everything but the name, even the spirit
is six feet under. Almost as much buried as Michael Jackson's career is.
I have to say that I prefer to get nothing, rather than such incoinciliable
idiosyncrasies with a company's legacy as today Atari's.
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> incoinciliable
"Inconceivable", sorry . I got confused with Italian "inconciliabile"...
Riccardo
Peter van Merkerk
news:oeifc.76033$rM4.3...@news4.tin.it...
> > Is Atari really revived? Are there any current Atari computers that
> > can trace their roots to either the 8-bit Atari or the ST series?
>
> Nope, of course. Atari is dead in everything but the name, even the spirit
> is six feet under.
Which happens to be as much as can be expected from a Commodore "revival".
--
Peter van Merkerk
peter.van.merkerk(at)dse.nl
Clockmeister
"Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle" <jose...@josephexperimental.com> wrote
in message news:Xns94CB82FC1CC07jo...@216.77.188.18...
You are going to be the exception?
Besides christ is quite dead, are you going to act dead?
Supertopcheckerbunny
I'm without sin.
mikec
> I'm sure though at this point that many of the Amiga faithful have
> finally come to realize that it may never happen.
I was the biggest Commodore and Amiga fan. I've owned a Vic-20,
C-64's, C-64c's, a C-128 and just about every single Amiga ever made,
from the A1000 right on through to the A4000. Heck, I even signed on
as a dealer and CATS developer in 1990.
When CBM filed for bankruptcy, I was already moving towards the
"WinTel" platform. I saw the writing on the wall and I guess so did
Commodore since they were aggressively pitching their PC clones.
Everyone knew that the Amiga was quickly losing its competitive
advantage, both on the technical and price side of things. I had
pretty much given up on the Amiga by 1994 so when I heard news about
the Amiga coming back, I wasn't at all interested.
Besides, look at what the Amiga was competing against in 1994...IBM
released OS/2 v3 WARP and had some impressive PS/2's at the time. I
bought (and still have) an IBM PS/2 Model 90 with a Pentium 60, 64MB
RAM, XGA-2 video card with 3 MB of VRAM (I think), 200 MB SCSI HD w/ 1
MB caching controller, 2.88 MB disk drives, etc. This system
completely blew away my A4000. That same year, Apple launched their
PowerMac line featuring PowerPC processors. Even if Commodore survived
another year or so, Windows 95 would have crushed them and finished
them off, which by the way, ran perfectly on my PS/2. ;)
Amiga never had a chance back then and certainly not today. Anyone who
believes differently is just wasting their time.
> Combine that with the excessive price that they charged for the Amiga
> One mainboard and you do definitely have a recipe for failure.
That's also my fear with the C-One.
> Of course, they would want to learn from the mistakes made by Amiga
> Inc. and improve on the strategies.
I'm not sure I agree with this. After all, most of the computer
companies that existed in the 70's and 80's are all dead or bailed out
of the home computer market all together. It's just like in the 1900's
when we had dozens of car companies in North America. They all
eventually folded or merged into the "Big 3." Besides, Apple made it's
share of mistakes but they're still around. On the other hand, NeXT
didn't do very well. ;)
> One thing is for sure though, if they simply make another PC clone and
> put a Commodore label on it, they will fall short of success.
However, this is what people are buying so I think it is possible but
certainly not if they try and ride on the coat-tails of just the
Commodore name. That would have worked 10 years ago but not today.
I think the Commodore name would attract attention but they still have
to stand on their own technically and from a price perspective. I am
amazed that they haven't tried to do this already. What are (were)
they waiting for?
> believe it when I see it." But, I found the thread to be an
> interesting discussion of "what would you want if...."
Sure, I understand completely. I, also, like to play the "what if"
game and discuss things on the newsgroup. If his message was "My idea
for a fictitious Commodore PC," I'm sure it would spark a lot of
friendly conversation and debate.
The problem is that Rick actually believes that Commodore can rise
from the ashes and he's the one who can make it happen. He really
believes that his ideas and assumptions are credible. He really
believes that the gang at Tulip are sitting there reading his messages
and getting ready to call him and bring him on-board. He really
believes that his "NEW Commodore PC" could sell in the millions and
recapture the home market. Need I go on?
> I wasn't seeking validation. But I do believe that you may have
> mis-understood what I was actually thinking. Make no mistake, I am
My apologies for misunderstanding your position.
MikeC
Michael Hunter
I must apologize in advance for the length here. When I got to the
end of my response, I realized it was quite long.
> I was the biggest Commodore and Amiga fan. I've owned a Vic-20,
> C-64's, C-64c's, a C-128 and just about every single Amiga ever
> made, from the A1000 right on through to the A4000. Heck, I even
> signed on as a dealer and CATS developer in 1990.
I myself got started with the VIC-20 when it first came out. We used
to sit around as a family and play Hangman or Adventure Land &
Pirate's Cove (Scott Adams adventure games). Those were the good ol'
days ;-)
After the VIC-20, I got one of those shiny silver TI99/4a systems and
a kind of plain looking Apple IIe.
I quickly got frustrated with the TI system because I was unable to
locate a tape drive or floppy drive for it at the time. I quickly got
tired of having to re-enter any program that I wanted to use every
time the power was interrupted. Nothing like having to re-write all
those lines of code all the time.
Since the VIC-20 had a cassette drive already, and I just could not
seem to locate TI peripherals no matter how hard I tried, the trusty
VIC returned to it's prominent position and the TI system was sold.
I spent time bouncing back and forth between the Apple IIe and
Commodore VIC-20. I became quite proficient at programming on the
Apple, but when Apple pulled the plug on the Apple II line there was a
sense of "abandonment." This was more due to the way Apple went about
killing the Apple II line. Anyway, the Apple IIe started to collect
dust and I moved on to the PC and also got a Commodore 64 (a bit late
in the game, but still about midway through it's life).
After all these years, I have moved on and basically lost interest in
PC's and Apple II systems, but I have never been able to part with the
old Commodore for some reason.
I still have that old VIC-20 hooked up and it's list of peripherals
grow from time to time. I once put it up for sale, and received an
offer from a guy in Russia, but at the last minute couldn't bring
myself to sell it. Maybe it was all those faithful years it has put
in ;-)
Would you believe that to this day, I have still not removed a single
screw from the old VIC's case. It still looks great and works like
new. Now that's reliability :-)
Today, my flat 128 with tons of expansion options sits in the more
prominent position and admittedly my old VIC gets relatively little
use. I have many child oriented games for it, so I am considering
giving it to my young daughter to play with as she grows.
The other day, I actually finished putting together a "beater" c-64
bread-box for her to play with. Believe it or not, she has just
turned 6 months old, and already has her own Commodore 64.
Of course, I used a case that was pretty rough, and a main-board that
I had repaired after it's previous owner left it outside in the
weather (ever seen a rusty 64?). But hey, it gives her something to
beat on and have a good time with. You should have seen her pounding
on the keys and staring at the screen. I'm thinking I'm going to have
to throw together a custom program for her to play around with.
Of course, now that she's teething, I'm going to have to give her a
"teething-stick" to play those arcade games with ;-) Now that would
be a sight!!!
Anyway, after that detour, back to the topic at hand:
> When CBM filed for bankruptcy, I was already moving towards the
> "WinTel" platform. I saw the writing on the wall and I guess so did
> Commodore since they were aggressively pitching their PC clones.
Yes, I must admit that at that point in time, I probably would not
have given my Commodore much thought if it wasn't for the huge amount
of software that I had for it compared to my PC. There were a few
games that made it worth keeping the 64 around.
For the most part though, I also began to drift into PC land.
I'm sure if Commodore had survived it would've sadly ended up focusing
more on the PC market.
I never did actually buy a Commodore PC. I did have a few offered to
me for free that I did turn down. I guess it wasn't really Commodore
that I liked as much as it was the 8-BIT machines that they had
produced.
From what I remember of the 80's, that was pretty much the general
feeling. Very few people liked the Commodore company. Even people
who loved the machines disliked the company. It was kind of like the
company that no-one liked produced the product that they just had to
have. Hmm, that kinda sounds like Microsoft today ;-)
That's pretty much why I stated in my previous messages that if a new
Commodore machine was produced, it would have to display a clear
heritage to the old Commodore 8-BIT machines. To me, that is more
important than the name.
Now, if by some miracle such a machine was made, and "felt" like an
evolved "Commodore 128" machine; and even had the Commodore brand
stamped to it, that would be absolutely wonderful.
But as it was in the 80's I believe it is more about the "feel" of the
machine and it's features than it is about the name. I would love to
buy a new "Commodore-Like" machine with the Commodore name on it (more
for nastalgia I guess).
But if the machine didn't have the Commodore name and atleast offered
a legal implementation that "felt" like 2004 version of the old
Commodore 128, I would be interested (of course it would need the
"classic" mode that would run my favorite 64 and 128 software).
> Everyone knew that the Amiga was quickly losing its competitive
> advantage, both on the technical and price side of things. I had
One of the most impressive displays of Amiga power that I ever
witnessed was around 1993 when I was working with a crew putting
together an "American Bandstand" type show. I was impressed by this
small Amiga system that was editing recorded video on the fly in full
color and real-time. It was really quite something to watch.
> pretty much given up on the Amiga by 1994 so when I heard news about
> the Amiga coming back, I wasn't at all interested.
The price tag scared me off. I just can't justify that kind of money
on a bare mainboard and processor. Ultimately, I think this is what
killed the project off faster than it might have been otherwise.
> survived another year or so, Windows 95 would have crushed them and
> finished them off, which by the way, ran perfectly on my PS/2. ;)
Yes, Windows 95 really killed off pretty much anything that dared to
compete with it. Microsoft offered some pretty big incentives to get
developers busy writing Windows 95 software. Of course, what company
in their right mind would turn down an offer like: "Well give you the
money to pay your programmers if they write programs that require our
new operating system." You'd have to be crazy to turn down a deal
like that. Basically you'd be able to make money on a program that
someone else paid you to write.
> Amiga never had a chance back then and certainly not today. Anyone
Early on, Amiga intended to put the Amiga stamp on new game consoles.
This tactic might actually work if you're not counting on the Amiga
name to carry you. Of course, I personally was kind of offended at
the idea of the Amiga becoming a game console. It just didn't feel
right.
Of course, not like my desire to remember the Amiga as something great
would mean much to a marketing team looking to make money from the new
generation.
I think the problem comes in when the company thinks that brand
loyalty is going to be enough to get people to flock to the machine.
In reality, when we're talking about brands established on Commodore
and Amiga technology, there is going to have to be some sort of
"connection" between the old and the new if they want brand loyalty to
work for them.
Brand loyalty will not do a single thing if they simply produce a new
PC clone or Linux box.
>> Combine that with the excessive price that they charged for the
>> Amiga One mainboard and you do definitely have a recipe for
>> failure.
>
> That's also my fear with the C-One.
I must agree there. I think the C-One might suffer because of the
relatively high price of it's main board. Of course $250 is much more
affordable than the $800 Amiga Inc. wanted for the Amiga One board,
but still $250 is a lot of money when I still have to build the rest
of the machine.
Now, if for $250 I got a ready to run setup with a "legal"
implementation of the Commodore Kernal ROM and BASIC ROM preloaded
into the system, then I might be more interested. I guess what I'm
saying here is that it's a lot of money to spend when I already have
ready access to Commodore 64 computers that are ready to use.
> all eventually folded or merged into the "Big 3." Besides, Apple
> made it's share of mistakes but they're still around. On the other
Valid Point :-)
>> One thing is for sure though, if they simply make another PC clone
>> and put a Commodore label on it, they will fall short of success.
>
> However, this is what people are buying so I think it is possible
> but certainly not if they try and ride on the coat-tails of just the
> Commodore name. That would have worked 10 years ago but not today.
Exactly. They can easily sell PC clones with whatever name they want
on them. Brand Loyalty though will only occur if they can convince
all of us from the old days that there is some connection to these old
machines and that we just absolutely have to buy one.
If it's just another PC clone, I'm going to be more concerned with
what's inside it than who's name is on it.
> I think the Commodore name would attract attention but they still
I'm sure it would atleast make headlines for a few days. Just imagine
those PC Magazine stories ;-)
> have to stand on their own technically and from a price
> perspective. I am amazed that they haven't tried to do this
Of course, if they didn't make themselves stand out as you say, they'd
be forgotten by the next issue.
> already. What are (were) they waiting for?
I know, they've sure taken their time putting the name to use. Maybe
they'll finally do it :-)
> Sure, I understand completely. I, also, like to play the "what if"
> game and discuss things on the newsgroup. If his message was "My
Every once in a while I have this idea that pops up saying if they
still did things this way.....
Usually it's when I'm waiting 10 minutes for my PC to become "usable"
when I push that power button. When I'm waiting on my PC to do
something. When I say hang-up, and it takes 2 minutes to free my
phone line. And so on.....
Of course, the thing that really made me think was when Microsoft was
pushing that "Instant-On" thing a few years back. Who were they
kidding there? Now, the Commodore 64 and 128 (and other 8-BIT
systems) that was truely instant on. No waiting there (except for the
monitor to warm up).
> My apologies for misunderstanding your position.
No problem. Of course, now that I've finished this posting, I feel I
must apologize for it's length ;-)
Sorry about that, guess I got carried away :-)
Michael Hunter
mhu...@videocam.net.au
>
> MikeC
" >
> But if the machine didn't have the Commodore name and atleast offered
> a legal implementation that "felt" like 2004 version of the old
> Commodore 128, I would be interested (of course it would need the
> "classic" mode that would run my favorite 64 and 128 software).
I know this doesn't exactly help the cause but nowadays I get that feel
from running Linux. The reason for me though, is that what I like most
about the old 8-bits as well as what Linux gives modern multitasking
computers is that I have clearly documented information to get a program
I want to write to do whatever I want. In Linux this is achieved with
the open source model, in the Commodore 8-bits it was achieved with
documentation of the kernel jump points and the occasional rom dissassembly.
In fact, the only thing a Commodore 8-bit gives that a PC running Linux
does not is a schematic diagram of the mainboard. If the new Commodore
wants my business, include a schematic diagram and make sure the OS is
open. I'll get over just about anything else.
> Of course, the thing that really made me think was when Microsoft was
> pushing that "Instant-On" thing a few years back. Who were they
> kidding there? Now, the Commodore 64 and 128 (and other 8-BIT
> systems) that was truely instant on. No waiting there (except for the
> monitor to warm up).
>
Friend of a friend a long time ago told me about a lady that still used
a cartridge-based C64 for all her sec- I mean administrative assistant
work. If anyone dared to doubt her hardware choice, her fast reply was
"My word processor boots in three seconds."
Best wishes
-Christopher Hunter
PS- Uncertain why my name field isn't working. If it stays that way,
I'll write the Mozilla crew.
Laust Brock-Nannestad
> Besides, look at what the Amiga was competing against in 1994...IBM
> released OS/2 v3 WARP and had some impressive PS/2's at the time. I
> bought (and still have) an IBM PS/2 Model 90 with a Pentium 60, 64MB
> RAM, XGA-2 video card with 3 MB of VRAM (I think), 200 MB SCSI HD w/ 1
> MB caching controller, 2.88 MB disk drives, etc. This system
Just 1MB VRAM on the XGA-2 adapter. There were a few other cards with
more, though (from ATI and Matrox among others).
Regards,
Laust
Rick Balkins
all humans and go about it all over again.
It is the most intellegent thing to do. Heck he need not any humans - he is
omnipotent, right ?
"Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:HFgfc.75303$rM4.3...@news4.tin.it...
Michael Hunter
> I want to write to do whatever I want. In Linux this is achieved
> with
> the open source model, in the Commodore 8-bits it was achieved with
> documentation of the kernel jump points and the occasional rom
> dissassembly.
That's actually a pretty good point. I must confess that I just never
really got into Linux. I just like programming on my Commodore. In
recent years I have modified a few programs on the PC to fix things
that shouldn't have been broken, but my "pleasure programming" is done
on my Commodore system.
> In fact, the only thing a Commodore 8-bit gives that a PC running
> Linux does not is a schematic diagram of the mainboard. If the new
That schematic is pretty handy when it comes to making things happen
on the hardware level. You can easily see how the signal you're
manipulating "flows" through the hardware and to the destination your
aiming for. It's one thing to see the technical reference, but it's
another to compare that against the actual hardware.
Understanding the hardware makes programming alot easier than if you
are just going by what the manufacturer says about the OS. Of course,
I guess you could stay above the Kernal (BIOS) level and not really
need to know the hardware but where's the fun in that. Besides
manipulating the hardware directly is usually more efficient than
going through a "translation" layer.
Of course, that was one benefit of the Commodore 64, the hardware
pretty much stayed the same. With PC based systems, you never really
know what hardware your program is going to be using so the layer
provided by the OS is pretty much necessary. Either that or you'd
have to get really specific when it came to system requirements.
Could you imagine that, a two-page long list of required hardware for
a program?
With the Commodore 64, you could pretty much get away with saying "All
you need is a Commodore 64."
> Commodore wants my business, include a schematic diagram and make
> sure the OS is open. I'll get over just about anything else.
One of the things I really liked about the Commodore design was the
ability to completely (electronically) switch the kernal and basic ROM
out of the system. This feature makes it possible to essentially turn
the computer into a completely different system. Of course the
hardware is the same, but you can completely replace the Kernal and
Basic ROM chips with whatever you wanted when you loaded your program.
In essence, it was probably one of the first "reconfigurable"
computers. If someone was so inclined, you could for example replace
the BASIC language that was built-in with a PASCAL or C language
interpreter. Now that would be pretty cool.
> assistant work. If anyone dared to doubt her hardware choice, her
> fast reply was "My word processor boots in three seconds."
Yea, try and argue with that ;-) There's just really no way to combat
that kind of logic.
> -Christopher Hunter
I had to double check that for a minute. One of my younger brothers
has the same name. For a minute I thought he found me and was messing
with me ;-)
He's more into PC's though, and probably wouldn't have enough
experience with the Commodore systems to pull that kind of bluff. He
is quite talented with electronics though ;-)
Michael Hunter
mhu...@videocam.net.au
Rick Balkins
"Sam Gillett" <samgille...@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:QZhfc.8501$hg1...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> Is Atari really revived? Are there any current Atari computers that can
> trace their roots to either the 8-bit Atari or the ST series?
>
> [snip]
> There is mention of Commodore in the more or less official history of
> Microsoft found in Microsoft's Encarta Encyclopedia. The sentence
containing
> Commodore is quoted below.
Well, not for long - but notice the commercial politics like "fledgling".
Commodore is ALOT older than they are. They were already an establish
internation company while Bill Gates was being slapped in the face when
girls didn't want him as a boyfriend in high school - thinking he was too
geeky - um nerd. Bill Gates wasn't even in highschool when Commodore was in
the printing machines and calculator business. They call it "fledgling".
Yeah Microsoft was making maybe upto $5 million a year and Commodore was
making - um $50 Million. Let's see - who was the fledgling. A company
founded in 1955 and was in business for 25 years or so when Microsoft was
barely even a business. Hell, if it wasn't for Commodore - they would have
never made MS-DOS. Technically, they really didn't make the orignal code.
> [start quote]
> Microsoft's early customers included fledgling hardware firms such as
Apple
> Computer, maker of the Apple II computer; Commodore, maker of the PET
> computer; and Tandy Corporation, maker of the Radio Shack TRS-80 computer.
> [end quote]
>
> [snip]
> Jeri has already proven you wrong on this one. You _can not_ put even a
> stock C64 on a 30K FPGA. Doubt it? Go back and check the early
development
> of the C=One.
Really ???? Ok maybe just the 100K FPGA. If you can cram an Apple II in the
30K - yeah. Also Jeri didn't optimize it any and was doing all that SD-RAM
and SIMM memory. Certainly that wouldn't but for sake - it can on the 100K
FPGA and that is not that expensive. Not for Tulip. Then again, why can't
you use the 65c22 chips to alleviate the I/O issues ????
BTW: 65c22 are available from WDC. Now, who says that you couldn't put it on
there.
Note: Jeri did not have a large amount of professional training in
developing using VHDL. Over time - she did optimize some things. Big
question - how much over 30K would it take. There are 50K FPGAs. So
something inbetween can solve the issues and ever new product that Altera
introduces is going to reduce the price of the FPGA. You call that
progression.
So issue, in about a year or two - a 100K FPGA will cost about as much as
the 30K or just slightly more so what difference does it make ?
Rick Balkins
> ...And after LISTENING to your new "concept for a NEW Commodore PC" the
top
> management at Tulip got together, locked the doors, discussed, and finally
> and ultimately a decision was taken on the fate of the Commodore brand
> name...
<<< snip >>>
Has it been attempted by listening to Commodore users or are Commodore users
just trying to make the Commodore scene their little private club that they
can drink beer and spit over the keyboards. Give me a break. If this is
where Commodore gone then the CEO can use the worthless sheets of paper and
wipe his butt with it because we all have just heard that there are no true
Commodore users left in this world and everybody loves licking the shit off
Bill Gates ass. Why don't you go literally do that.
Guess what, I now have no choice of platform. Guess what - why don't you
take a sacrifice and use a Speccy because that will be the only choice that
you are allowed. If I can only have Windows then you can only use a Speccy
with 1 bit of RAM and that is it.
Since you want to control my choices then I'll control yours. How about
that.
Riccardo Rubini
> The world is filled with idiots - would He make his life easier by
> removing all humans and go about it all over again.
Your sentence above relies on the false assumption that every human is an
idiot, which is not the case. God hates idiots, but idiots are just a
portion of humanity. God has no need to remove the humanity as a whole, just
the bad apples.
Let's put it this way, Balkins: you gave your best shot. But you failed once
again. You never fail to fail.
> It is the most intellegent thing to do. Heck he need not any humans -
> he is omnipotent, right ?
This attempt in putting together a sort of syllogism is even more pathetic
and trivial than the first one. Your ipothesis and thesis are always like
your any couple of your neurons: disconnected.
Then you sound blatanly safe while tempting God to kill all us human beings.
Are you jealous because you do not qualify as one?
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> Since you want to control my choices then I'll control yours. How
> about that.
Have you taken your medication? Hurry up, before you start drooling.
Riccardo
Rick Balkins
> Your sentence above relies on the false assumption that every human is an
> idiot, which is not the case. God hates idiots, but idiots are just a
> portion of humanity. God has no need to remove the humanity as a whole,
just
> the bad apples.
To an omnipotent being with infinite knowledge - we are all meaningless
idiots but we can challenge if such an omnipotent being was an idiot to
create humans to begin with ?
Since none of us humans know everything - we all are idiots. You are talking
plain logic then if GOD hates idiots then what is the level of IQ to not be
an idiot. If you compare yourself to a omnipotent deity than you are an
idiot. Compare limited IQ to INFINITE IQ, where can we ever compare to such
a deity. Do some logic on that one.
> Let's put it this way, Balkins: you gave your best shot. But you failed
once
> again. You never fail to fail.
No I haven't as you also failed to catch the hidden clue. How can a being
with limited intellegence (aka humans) compare to an omnipotent GOD. Even
Einstein is an idiot compared to a GOD. Even God can be considered an idiot
for creating humans to begin with. He should have known how humans would be.
He knows all of what was, what is and what is to come at all times so what
is GOD's reason for making humans. Not because of hate - maybe for laughter
and for not destroying us all - love perhaps.
> Then you sound blatanly safe while tempting God to kill all us human
beings.
> Are you jealous because you do not qualify as one?
Nah, I am not tempting GOD, I am tempting your logic. Think carefully
yourself and think about the points that I am making a little more instead
of playing the Extreme opposite.
Since I would not ask God to actually kill all humans in any serious
fashion.
Sam Gillett
"Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...
> Hell, if it wasn't for Commodore - they would have never made MS-DOS.
> Technically, they really didn't make the orignal code.
I know the story behind Microsoft's purchase of QDOS (Quick and Dirty
Operating System) and its rework into MS-DOS. So, tell us Rick, how was
Commodore the driving force behind MS-DOS?
Sam Gillett
"Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote ...
> You don't deserve mine either. I'll send an email to Harro Tillema and will
> ask Tulip to simply forget the Commodore and that no one in the Commodore
> scene even WANTS Tulip to produce or even revive Commodore in anyway.
I'm sure your email will be printed out and passed around for all to read.
When everyone has finished laughing, it will be shredded.
--
Best regards,
Sam Gillett
Global warming is caused by the sun.
Duh!
mikec
> I must apologize in advance for the length here. When I got to the
No problem...
> Apple, but when Apple pulled the plug on the Apple II line there was a
> sense of "abandonment." This was more due to the way Apple went about
Yeah, I owned a pair of IIc's (in fact I still have them) so I can
relate. Apple seemed more interested in pushing Macintosh than
anything else so the II line was always neglected. Kind of like
Commodore when they acquired the Amiga. I guess you really can't blame
them.
> I never did actually buy a Commodore PC. I did have a few offered to
> me for free that I did turn down. I guess it wasn't really Commodore
They really weren't that competitive but I haven't figured out whether
this helped Commodore or hurt them. I know local Governments, for
example, were keen on Commodore PC's but they certainly showed no
interest in the Amiga. On the other hand, I think the PC line
marginalize the Amiga.
> evolved "Commodore 128" machine; and even had the Commodore brand
> stamped to it, that would be absolutely wonderful.
What about the C-65 (64DX)? Seemed like a pretty cool system since it
combined the technology from Commodore's 8-bit line and the Amiga. If
I was going to bring back some sort of modernized C-64, I'd probably
look seriously at the C-65.
> together an "American Bandstand" type show. I was impressed by this
> small Amiga system that was editing recorded video on the fly in full
They were probably using a Video Toaster / Flyer or something similar.
I see people doing similar stuff today with notebooks and those Avid
Mojo's. Very cool stuff.
Although the Amiga was great with video and multimedia apps, I know
the interlace flicker on my 1084 would drive me nuts. I eventually got
use to it but I know it turned a lot of people off the platform.
Thankfully, this was fixed in the A3000. ;)
MikeC
mikec
> Just 1MB VRAM on the XGA-2 adapter. There were a few other cards with
You're right...I was confusing it with my other IBM Image Adapter/A graphics card.
MikeC
" >
>
> I know the story behind Microsoft's purchase of QDOS (Quick and Dirty
> Operating System) and its rework into MS-DOS. So, tell us Rick, how was
> Commodore the driving force behind MS-DOS?
>
>
It wasn't, however all the home computers of the day came with a BASIC
that Microsoft wrote for them. The only exception I can think of at
this instant is the TI.
So, if all these home computers had gone with FORTH instead, where would
Microsoft be?
-Christopher Hunter
Rick Balkins
>
> "Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote
...
>
> > Hell, if it wasn't for Commodore - they would have never made MS-DOS.
> > Technically, they really didn't make the orignal code.
>
> I know the story behind Microsoft's purchase of QDOS (Quick and Dirty
> Operating System) and its rework into MS-DOS. So, tell us Rick, how was
> Commodore the driving force behind MS-DOS?
>
The money. An OS company is a nobody unless they have an OEM to have the OS
installed for example. Commodore paying them money and putting their company
initially in business to begin with. Microsoft would have been out of
business if Commodore and others didn't buy their BASIC to begin with. First
Microsoft produced BASIC and that put them in business and that is what
financed the purchase of QDOS. Otherwise, there would be no money which
equals no business. The first buck is the most significant event in a
company or a company's revival. Without it - it is a nobody. You can't go on
to do more if you never had gas to begin with. You car never leaves the
dealership unless it has gas to begin with otherwise - it won't leave the
dealership. Now think really hard what I mean by this parallel.
Riccardo Rubini
> such an omnipotent being was an idiot to create humans to begin with ?
Are you cursing, Rick? I find it disrespectful for those who believe in God,
here.
> Since none of us humans know everything - we all are idiots.
This is not the definition of "idiot". An idiot is a foolish or stupid
person - just like you. That definition fits so well on you Microsoft should
put your picture in the next Encarta release, near the term "idiot".
Reading all the extra rubbish you have written is surely a waste of time, as
generally reading you always is, so I spared myself from that.
Riccardo
Clockmeister
An foolish person is one who puts his faith in god.
Riccardo Rubini
> An foolish person is one who puts his faith in god.
...Rather than putting it in a shotgun? I don't remember in which movie I
heard that :-)
Religious beliefs are intimate and personal matters. I am no believer, but I
think believers deserve respect for their choices.
Riccardo
Clockmeister
Not when religion is used an an excuse to act like an arse or do things in
the name of it that causes others grief.
Riccardo Rubini
> Not when religion is used an an excuse to act like an arse or do
> things in the name of it that causes others grief.
Of course, this rests for granted.
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
"rests" out, "is" in. Sorry for the semantic mistake. 6 words, 1 mistake.
Well, I still can do worse :-))
Riccardo
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
character in the movie thought that, but it wasn't based on God's
scripture.
"Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in news:vEefc.74445
$rM4.2...@news4.tin.it:
> Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle wrote:
>
>> Well I'm a Christian and I intend on acting in a Christlike manner.
>
> Then let me remind you the immortal words of Clint Eastwood in "The
Good,
> the Bad and the Ugly":
>
> "God hates idiots too..."
>
> Riccardo
>
>
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:407e76c7$0$18980$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
Well then call me a fool if you like.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:407db64e$0$18995$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
>
> "Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle" <jose...@josephexperimental.com>
> wrote in message
> news:Xns94CB82FC1CC07jo...@216.77.188.18...
>> "Clockmeister" <no-...@nowhere.com> wrote in
>> news:407d2953$0$18997$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net:
>>
>> >
>> > "Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in message
>> > news:zf9fc.51805$hc5.2...@news3.tin.it...
>> >> bud wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > (I'm not as tolerant as Riccardo is.) :-))
>> >>
>> >> Well, calling me tolerant sounds like an oximoron, because in real
>> >> life I
>> > am
>> >> as tolerant as a Nazi is :-))
>> >>
>> >> No, seriously, I have been tolerant with Rick in the past because
>> >> I
>> > thought
>> >> he probably needed some time to find a place in this newsgroup. Of
>> >> course every community has a village idiot, but for some reason I
>> >> thought it was
>> > a
>> >> waste for him to take that place. I was wrong. I thought he needed
>> >> just
>> > some
>> >> time and things would have worked out for him.
>> >>
>> >> Some guys thought, and I did as well in certain circumstances,
>> >> that
>> > arguing
>> >> with him, paragraph by paragraph, sentence by sentence, and
>> >> proving him wrong many times, would have lead to some result, like
>> >> Rick understanding people are restless towards him because
>> >> something is wrong with his
>> > antics -
>> >> my very own aim -, or, what the majority desired, Rick's
>> >> definitive departure from this community. Wrong.
>> >>
>> >> It's important to understand that Rick isn't interested in winning
>> >> any argument, neither giving any contribution to this place.
>> >> Instead, the only thing he does is keeping himself busy posting
>> >> any kind of shite that
>> > crosses
>> >> his mind, because probably he got no better thing to do in that
>> >> very circumstance. That's it.
>> >>
>> >> I think Rick really needs a rude awakening to see how much people
>> >> are exausthed by his behaviour, that's why I suggest not to kill
>> >> filter him, but, rather, to be rude and intolerant and kicking his
>> >> ass on regular
>> > basis,
>> >> whenever he brings out useless shite like this thread out. As
>> >> Clockmeister said, anyone who believes there something solid in
>> >> his original post,
>> > needs
>> >> a reality check. What he wrote is solid actually, but in the way a
>> >> turd
>> > is.
>> >
>> > LOL You have a wonderful way with words...
>> >
>> >> Closing the argument : like when your dog takes a crap on your
>> >> precious carpet, and you have to stick its mouth in the shit and
>> >> spank its ass,
>> > same
>> >> shall be done with Rick, so he understands he shall not shit on
>> >> the carpet again. You don't argue with your pet, because "if you
>> >> prove him wrong he might eventually not shit on the carpet again"
>> >> ( an overrated school of thought, here ), don't you?
>> >>
>> >
>> > We operate on the same level I think :-)
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Well I'm a Christian and I intend on acting in a Christlike manner.
>
> You are going to be the exception?
>
> Besides christ is quite dead, are you going to act dead?
>
>
>
If doing what I believe Christ would do would make me an exception in
this group, then yeah.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
news:407db819$1...@e-post.inode.at:
>> I'd just say let he without sin cast the first stone.
>
> I'm without sin.
>
Don't know wether you believe the Bible or not. If you do, then check this
out.
"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
Oh, and I believe Christ was resurrected.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
God does not hate idiots. He sent Jesus to die for all of mankind,
including "idiots". I don't know wether you believe the Bible or not,
but if so, check out John 3:16 and also some other verses about the love
of God.
Rick Balkins
> Are you cursing, Rick? I find it disrespectful for those who believe in
God,
> here.
BTW: You snipped part of the sentence - you shall run for politics right
along with tricky dick Nixon when your done. First off - you don't catch the
sarcasm and mockery of your own logic being sent back to you.
> This is not the definition of "idiot". An idiot is a foolish or stupid
> person - just like you. That definition fits so well on you Microsoft
should
> put your picture in the next Encarta release, near the term "idiot".
>
> Reading all the extra rubbish you have written is surely a waste of time,
as
> generally reading you always is, so I spared myself from that.
You face can be placed next to dumb and dumber and dumbest as your logic was
found to be an insult to me to begin with in the beginning. God already
knows that my thing was a sarcasm to you not the GOD himself. If God hates
idiots than everyone below his IQ which everyone are would be an idiot since
no one can meet his caliber of IQ. You can't, I can't, no one can. So he if
he hates idiots and every human is foolish. Just like you get baited because
of your anger. Wow, does that make you a fool. Now this isn't a theology
newsgroup and it is off-topic at any level and clearly does not relate to
computing so are you done with your bickery cry.
Joseph Experimental AKA Joey Cagle
in news:107tbvm...@corp.supernews.com:
I'm sorry if I caused this to be off topic. I just wanted to state why I
wasn't going to treat you like crap and why I'm not going to treat anyone
else here like crap.
I don't come here to see other people being put down. I come here
because I've started a hobby with a Commodore 64 and I want to talk about
things involving Commdore and buy (when I have money) and maybe trade
items. In all things I do, I want Christ to be glorified and I'm not
about to treat others like crap here because I know Christ wouldn't do
that.
Anyway that's the last I'll say about that. Let's get this back on
topic. If any of you want to continue insulting Rick, then do it, but
I'm not going to take part in it, just like I'm not going to take part in
insulting anyone else here.
Joey
Michael Hunter
> relate. Apple seemed more interested in pushing Macintosh than
> anything else so the II line was always neglected. Kind of like
> Commodore when they acquired the Amiga. I guess you really can't
> blame them.
I guess not. It was the logical move. The only thing that bugged me
about the way Apple did it was that they had just released the IIe to
IIgs upgrade package, and s new Apple IIgs system. Then within a
month or so, they pulled the plug and said that they would no longer
support the II line.
It kinda felt like a betrayal to have company take $2000 for a
computer and then say sorry we don't support that machine anymore.
Nothing like having a brand-new machine that Apple says you can't get
any help with.
Of course, I didn't have one of those new machines at the time. I was
still working with the Apple IIe. It just bugged me that they would
pull such a tactic. Atleast wait till the warranty period is up
before you say that's it.
> certainly showed no interest in the Amiga. On the other hand, I
> think the PC line marginalize the Amiga.
It certainly didn't make people believe that the Amiga was the future.
If the Amiga was really better than the PC, why would the company that
produces the Amiga build a PC. Obviously, it was to make money on the
PC market. But when Commodore sold PC's, it was kind of like saying
we're moving on.
Now, if they had marketed the PC's as their low-end machines, and the
Amiga's as the high-end (and I mean REALLY marketed things that way),
they might have succeeded in establishing the Amiga. Of course, that
strategy may have turned-off PC buyers.
> What about the C-65 (64DX)? Seemed like a pretty cool system since
Yes, I have always been kind of intrigued by the C-65.
> it combined the technology from Commodore's 8-bit line and the
> Amiga. If I was going to bring back some sort of modernized C-64,
> I'd probably look seriously at the C-65.
It would be a logical place to look when considering the "new"
Commodore platform. The only thing that makes it difficult is that we
cannot clearly determine how the machine was intended to operate.
I know there are a few functional units out there, but it sounds like
they differ in some aspects from each other.
With the 128 we have a clearly defined machine. But I really did like
the concept of building the floppy drive into the C-65. I wonder how
64 compatible the final revision would have been.
I know that it was conceived to be a significantly enhanced 64. It
sure would be nice to hear from the developers as to what they were
attempting to do. That would surely go a long way towards dreaming
about a finished C-65 system (or even building a new enhanced system
that incorporated the spirit of it's design).
> They were probably using a Video Toaster / Flyer or something
I believe it was. To that point though, I had never seen anything
that handled video so easily. My top of the line PC still only
displayed fuzzy animated characters at the time.
Michael Hunter
mhu...@videocam.net.au
Riccardo Rubini
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rub...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:7Qsfc.55902$hc5.2...@news3.tin.it...
>
>> Are you cursing, Rick? I find it disrespectful for those who believe
>> in God, here.
>
> BTW: You snipped part of the sentence - you shall run for politics
You know the beauty about flaming you? I don't even have to prove you're
wrong, justify myself if I call you idiot, expose your weakness in logics.
When it comes about you, everybody already gives for granted all those
things above.
Actually, wrongfulness, idiocy and lack of consequential thinking are what
made yourself the Rick Balkins everybody knows and "loves" ;-)
Riccardo
White Flame (aka David Holz)
news:407e93dc$0$18994$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
> Not when religion is used an an excuse to act like an arse or do things in
> the name of it that causes others grief.
In such cases, the fault lies with the person, not with the religion.
--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)