The C64 is crap
The Starglider
Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites to
make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky graphics. How
I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely fast
3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip grating
away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior??? What
are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the worst
basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's that
stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a program in
basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding mistakes.
Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold around the
world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only manage
about 22 million.
Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer to load
a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being superbly
designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge keys
(required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
small, light, powerful!
--
****************The Starglider***************** Remove "wibble" in
* Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com * E-Mail address
* * TO REPLY.
*E-Mail: the_starg...@yahoo-wibble.co.uk* _WW_
* * /_ _\
*********************************************** | O O |
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
Roland (.funxiun.)
.dark.elektronix.
The Starglider
<NOSPAMuse...@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)> wrote:
>here we go again...
>
That's the best counter-argument you could come up with. In that case, I am
right. The C64 was, is and always will be crap.
Ojala Pasi 'Albert'
>64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
66046 bytes of RAM when you include the 1024 nybbles of color RAM.
All accessible with a bit of 6510 assembly.
Maybe you should take part in the 1k game competition to prove your
points?:-)
-Pasi
--
"When I marry, I want it to be for love."
"Ah, a radical?"
-- Vir and Lyndisty in Babylon 5:"Sic Transit Vir"
Peter de Vroomen
PeterV
Peter de Vroomen
Well, let's say that I own 3 C64's and 2 speccies. Both speccies have all
sorts of technical problems and remind me of Lada's: you have to keep
working at them to keep them running, and the occasional bash will help. The
C64's remind me of Nissan's: nobody actually wants them because they are
ugly, but they offer the best value that money can buy.
PeterV
Peter de Vroomen
software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene), but they are
speaking of hardware too.
PeterV
Phil-on-a-hill
"Peter de Vroomen" <pet...@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> wrote in message
news:3f13e4f6$0$49111$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
> Oh, opposed to the Spectrum...
>
> Well, let's say that I own 3 C64's and 2 speccies. Both speccies have all
> sorts of technical problems and remind me of Lada's: you have to keep
> working at them to keep them running,
I never had any trouble with mine (apart from, of course, all the millions
of 'c90' games I used).
Phil-on-a-hill
> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene
That's alright, most people didn't know one existed!
;o)
paul s
> Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
> software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene),
Now that will take some doing, if it's going to be successful. Especially
when you got the excellent open-source VICE Commodore emulator, available
on most OSs.
Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
Linux, Fuse.
> but they are speaking of hardware too.
Depends on the market their aiming at I suppose. I believe the Peters-Plus
Sprinter Speccy compatible has been somewhat successful in Russia, etc.
--
Paul S
Sinclair QL
<pet...@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> έγραψε/wrote:
See.... you're running by yourselves and still managed to finish last ;-)
Although Amstrad hasn't (technically) got the Sinclair name anymore, ZX
Spectrum games and "compatible" hardware are still on sale via the em@iler.
I wonder how Tulip is going to realise that with a C64? Put it in a toilet
bowl cover that will play SID tunes to make you shit faster and decongest
traffic to the WC? :-P
Hehe C64 IS CRAP indeed
Phoebus
--
One Motorola a day, makes the doctor go away :-)
For mail remove the obvious crap from the email below:
mailto:ql@dokos-grCHOKEONTHIS=SPAMMER.net
Lister
<the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Let's look at the evidence:
<snip>
Who plays a computer like this?
David, it's over to you.
--
www.ferg.tk - Oh, look, I just can't be arsed.
James Sill
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com...
> Let's look at the evidence:
Aw, you're just jealous.
Ownership of one of those "Spackdrum" units breeds in the owner such a sense
of inferiority that they are compelled to chronic disbelief of the 64's
superiority.
Sill
Frodo Morris
> Την/On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:28:32 +0200,ο(η) Peter de Vroomen
> <pet...@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> έγραψε/wrote:
>
>> Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
>> software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
>> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene), but they are
>> speaking of hardware too.
>>
>> PeterV
>>
>>
>>
>
> See.... you're running by yourselves and still managed to finish last ;-)
> Although Amstrad hasn't (technically) got the Sinclair name anymore, ZX
Hmmm, seems like the internet has passed you by....
http://webdb4.patent.gov.uk/tm/number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=1191859
http://webdb4.patent.gov.uk/tm/number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=1196410
Amstrad *has* got the Sinclair name these days, and I claim my five (R)
symbols.
--
Frodo Morris http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wadh1342
All your bast are belong to us AKA Graham Lee, Wadham College
SpectrumSofts currently on show at URL/speccy/: Speccy@Home SETI Client
Also the home of iloveyou.bas, the first PC virus ported to the ZX82!!!
Sinclair QL
<graha...@wadham.ox.invalid.ac.uk> έγραψε/wrote:
> Sinclair QL wrote:
>> Την/On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:28:32 +0200,ο(η) Peter de Vroomen
>> <pet...@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> έγραψε/wrote:
>>
>>> Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
>>> software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator,
>>> which
>>> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene), but they are
>>> speaking of hardware too.
>>>
>>> PeterV
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> See.... you're running by yourselves and still managed to finish last ;-)
>> Although Amstrad hasn't (technically) got the Sinclair name anymore, ZX
>
> Hmmm, seems like the internet has passed you by....
>
> http://webdb4.patent.gov.uk/tm/number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=1191859
> http://webdb4.patent.gov.uk/tm/number?detailsrequested=C&trademark=1196410
>
> Amstrad *has* got the Sinclair name these days, and I claim my five (R)
> symbols.
>
Hehe, actually I was trying to find that info for some time but for some
reason I couldn't get the UK patent office to return anything on the
search.... it's besides the point anyway. (Just for the heck of it, I based
my belief on the fact that Sinclair started trading again under the
Sinclair Research name.... of course that demands a huge discussion in
legalese, but nonetheless I admit I was misguided in my assertion and
therefore here are your five (R)s :-).
That would also explain why Sir Clive never got back into computers anymore
after the Z88...
Oh well...
And of course none of this changes the fact that a C64 IS CRAP.
(That cannot be said for an Amiga of course as ... a: It's not technically
a Commodore creation and b: its OS was designed on a Sinclair QL :-) (Of
course)
The Starglider
Pasi 'Albert') wrote:
>In article <9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com>,
>The Starglider <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>Let's look at the evidence:
>
>>64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
>
>66046 bytes of RAM when you include the 1024 nybbles of color RAM.
>All accessible with a bit of 6510 assembly.
>
>Maybe you should take part in the 1k game competition to prove your
>points?:-)
>
But 64K is 65536 bytes, so it only proves again that you never had access to the
full memory!
The Starglider
<pet...@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> wrote:
>Crap as opposed to what? Or is this simply a sad attempt at trolling?
>
Not at all! The C64 is crap. It's the truth, can you not handle the truth?
The Starglider
Well, I've never had any problems with my speccy, but I have seen loads of
knackered commodes.
The Starglider
As opposed to the Speccy, which has been revived already in the Emailer, and at
the same time, our emulators are legal.
So the C64 is still crap!
The Starglider
>Peter de Vroomen wrote:
>
>> Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
>> software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
>> will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene),
>
>Now that will take some doing, if it's going to be successful. Especially
>when you got the excellent open-source VICE Commodore emulator, available
>on most OSs.
>
>Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
>emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
>and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
>Linux, Fuse.
>
Yes, there was, Z80 did very well.
The Starglider
So no evidence to prove otherwise, eh? Well, that was a terrible
counter-argument from you...
...mind you, that's normal for Commode Users.
Carl Woffenden
crowd simply 'because'... but then one day I actually used my mate's
64... and was amazed! Really! I'm a big fan of the Speccy and all things
Clive but I gotta say the 64 is a great machine.
Carl.
The Starglider
Pasi 'Albert') wrote:
>In article <9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com>,
>The Starglider <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>Let's look at the evidence:
>
>>64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
>
>66046 bytes of RAM when you include the 1024 nybbles of color RAM.
>All accessible with a bit of 6510 assembly.
>
As an additional, does the fact that you can't count and 65536 bytes plus 1024
nybbles equals 66048 bytes (and not 66046)?
Does that explain why the C64 was crap?
The Starglider
They're great for doorstops, draught excluders, or to keep a good fire going (as
we found out a while ago), but really, no use at all for anything else.
Floris van den Berg
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com...
> Let's look at the evidence:
Ok. Even though it's obvious this guy is trolling i'm going to defend my
beloved c64 step by step. I guess i'm just bored.
> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites
to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
Slow compared to... the spectrum? Compared to current PCs? Obviously a c64
is slower than a PC. The system is 15 years old for crying out loud.
Nevertheless, it runs 2 layers of parallax with a large number of sprites
without any problems (take the game No Mercy for example, or the excellent
game Hawkeye).
> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky
graphics. How
> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
Again, terrible compared to... what? The IFLI modes looks pretty good for
the limited pallette the c64 offers.
> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely
fast
Good games: Last Ninja, Batman The Caped Crusader, Spy vs Spy, Outrun
Europe, Ghostbusters, Batman the Movie, Spikey in Transylvania, No Mercy,
Operation Wolf, Giana Sisters... shall i continue?
> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
Commodore had at least 2 3D games. Elite and Castle Master.
> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior???
What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
The SID chip even played samples (with pretty decent quality i might add).
> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
Yes we had.
> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the
worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's
that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode.
Oh well. It worked for me.
> At least we could type a program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding
mistakes.
> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
around the
> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
manage
> about 22 million.
Last thing i heard 6 million people are still using the c64. And Tulip is
now resurrecting them. I don't see anyone resurrect the Spectrum.
> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer
to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
Have to agree there. The 1541 is horrid slow. A speed loader cartridge
helps.
> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
Maybe, but that's not a good point why the MACHINE ITSELF sucks. And
besides, it's now 15 years later; you can get one with a pack of milk now.
> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge
keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!
Personally i love the looks of the commodore. In the old days i especially
liked the Amiga-style box. Nowadays i prefer the older model because it
stores a better sid chip. I have both models by the way.
Floris
Fritz Reinders
>
Graphics: Hercules Monochrome
CGA 4 colors selectable from 16 available
Sound: built in speaker (This high tech sound device
is still installed in today's PC's just select
PC speaker :)
For another well thought out bash there was Jerry Pournelle's review
of the Amiga 1000 in Byte magazine years ago. He gave it 2 thumbs
down at the time since the review machine had no hard drive installed.
His opinion was: Full GUI ... who needs it?
512k memory...His PC had 640k! So memory was lousy
Multitasking...Who will ever need to run more than
one program at atime?
All of the above from 880k floppies...Requires 2
floppies one after the other to boot. MS-DOS does
it with one 360k disk & besides a real PC has a
hard disk
Summary: Pass on the MultiTasking, Windowed OS that runs from floppy
or hard disk, you will never need it.
He writes an MS Windows column nowadays.
Of course Windows is much better it REQUIRES a hard disk and 128M
memory. Not the puny floppy & 1/4M of memory the Amiga could use (His
review machine had extra memory)
Afterthought: MS Windows to this day has no task priority setting.
The Amiga 1000 allowed you to run background tasks at low priority to
so they didn't interfere with what ever else you were doing or run
critical task at high priority so the game you were playing wouldn't
interfere. This feature was prominently displayed in the review in
Transactor magazine :)
Fritz
Fritz Reinders
> Let's look at the evidence:
>
for many years after...it's competition is the Commodore Amiga series
Read a bit of the official Sinclair history at:
http://www.worldofspectrum.org/sinclairbasic/history.html
Remember that first home computer under 100 pounds sterling (ZX-80/81)
or $100 dollars (TS-1000)
They really beat Commodore in price...
Fritz
D.B.
"The Starglider" <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com...
> [snip crap]
>
mmmm
yawn
[shrugs]
Ø*PLONK*
Peter van Merkerk
I guess you haven't upgraded since Windows 3.1; you are wrong. You can
set a task priority using the task manager (on XP/2000 and NT which has
been around for ages). I use it dailly to run tasks in the background.
The Windows 9x versions of the OS support task priorities as well but
this feature is less accessible there.
--
Peter van Merkerk
peter.van.merkerk(at)dse.nl
The Starglider
So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
Poor show dear boy!
Dunny
"Floris van den Berg" <flvdber...@NOSPAMwxs.nl> wrote in message
news:3f140287$0$149$edd6...@news.versatel.net...
> Ok. Even though it's obvious this guy is trolling i'm going to defend my
> beloved c64 step by step. I guess i'm just bored.
You don't understand. This is "tradition" - only Starglider has gone and done it
a bit differently. The Annual flamewar should start with a crosspost "The C64
was crap - Discuss" to c.s.c. We then start with petty bickering, until the real
techy guys get involved, when we start having some well informed, interesting
arguments about he relative merits of each machine.
It's just fun, really. The last couple were excellent reading.
> Slow compared to... the spectrum?
Technically, yes, it was slower than a spectrum.
> Last thing i heard 6 million people are still using the c64. And Tulip is
> now resurrecting them. I don't see anyone resurrect the Spectrum.
I take it you have a large graveyard vote then? And Peters Plus are resurrecting
the spectrum with the Sprinter, Amstrad recently released the emailer, Dave (the
lurker) is doing the USB interface, Yarek (sp?) has done the YaBus and other
mods...
And there's a demo and coding scene for the spectrum just as large as the
commode's.
D.
Frodo Morris
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:48:16 +0200, "D.B." <so...@no.spam> wrote:
>
>
>>X-Archive-No:Yes
>>
>>"The Starglider" <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>[snip crap]
>>>
>>
>>mmmm
>>yawn
>>[shrugs]
>>
>
>
> So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
>
> Poor show dear boy!
Anders Carlsson
> And there's a demo and coding scene for the spectrum just as large
> as the commode's.
Currrent number of 2003 MiniGames: Commodore 5, Sinclair 2, Amstrad 1
with 2.5 months to go before the deadline. :-)
--
Anders Carlsson
Shaddy
> So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
Hi.
What is a speccy? Sorry for my ignorance, but I never even heard of it. I
do remember a time in the 80s where the C64 was intensely popular. When I
was at one point consumed in everything C64, I never bothered to notice any
other systems because I guess they really weren't contenders in terms of
popularity. I do remember the TI-99, the Tandy CRS-80, but they were all
garbage. I think you and your speccy are an analogy comparable to OS/2 vs
Windows. Let's say that thing you call speccy or spectrum or whatever the
heck it is, let's say it is better technically, who really cares? The
leader was always C64, like Windows was over OS/2.
Now go play with your speccy, you little child.
The Starglider
Ah! The typical American response. Not even bothering to look outside of their
own country to see what else happens in the world. I bet you think WW2 started
in 1942 as well, didn't you? The Commode 64 was not the leader, simple as that!
Roland (.funxiun.)
<the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:11:15 +0200, "Roland (.funxiun.)"
><NOSPAMuse...@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)> wrote:
>
>>here we go again...
>>
>That's the best counter-argument you could come up with. In that case, I am
>right. The C64 was, is and always will be crap.
Let Google decide:
http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Commodore+64&q2=Sinclair+Spectrum&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
R.
(*sigh*)
http://www.funxiun.com
.dark.elektronix.
Phil-on-a-hill
"Shaddy" <sha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2bVQa.24874$Nf.6...@sea-read.news.verio.net...
> "The Starglider" <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message...
>
> > So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
>
> Hi.
>
> What is a speccy? Sorry for my ignorance, but I never even heard of it.
That's alright, most people haven't heard of a C64 either!
;o)
Phil-on-a-hill
"Roland (.funxiun.)" <NOSPAMuse...@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)>
wrote in message news:vj88hvsiak1fu76cj...@4ax.com...
Decide what? I'm sure the word 'and' will get more hits than the word 'tits'
but is it really a better word?
Matthew Westcott
>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:57:13 GMT, paul s <nos...@nospam.forme> wrote:
>
>>Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
>>emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've
>>seen and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your
>>using Linux, Fuse.
>>
>Yes, there was, Z80 did very well.
Z80 was (is) shareware though. AFAIR, Amstrad only licenced the Speccy ROMs
for free or shareware emulators, which would hold back commercial efforts a
tad (other than Amstrad's own email phone thing, which could arguably be
described as a successful commercial Speccy emulator - sort of).
Hmm... isn't one of the Nokia-based emulators commercial? Wonder whether
they cleared that with Amstrad - if not, a few slapped wrists could be in
order...
--
http://www.zxdemo.org/ - the home of the Spectrum demo scene
"there's a breach in security, a disturbance in the chuntey"
Doctor J. Frink
<the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:57:13 GMT, paul s <nos...@nospam.forme> wrote:
>>
>>Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
>>emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
>>and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
>>Linux, Fuse.
>>
>Yes, there was, Z80 did very well.
!Z80 on RISC OS was very 'swish' indeed and seemed to be doing quite
well last time I was in those waters. Dunno how it stacked up in the
great scheme of emulation seeing as there aren't that many RISC OS users
to start with, let alone with Spectrum fever, and even fewer willing to
shell out 15 quid or so. But it must have been quite good cos it's one
of the very few applications I've ever paid money for (and, no, I don't
pirate) and I don't remember any PD or shareware emulators even working
post RISC OS 3.50.
Frink
--
Doctor J. Frink : 'Rampant Ribald Ringtail'
See his mind here : http://www.cmp.liv.ac.uk/frink/
Annoy his mind here : pjf at cmp dot liv dot ack dot ook
"Joy!" - Stimpy
Doctor J. Frink
>
>!Z80 on RISC OS
Oops, that should have been !Z80em.
Frink (doh)
Ted
Ooh Ooh, flamewar time! How fun, it's been a while :)
Let's pour some oil on the fire: Everyone knows MSX2 was the best 8bits comp.
Mwahahaaa !
Richard Wilson
>
> Let Google decide:
I think MicroMart already decided this one. If I remember correctly, the
Amstrad CPC also beat the C64 in their Best Computer of all time
competition!
Richard
Richard Wilson
>
> Oh, opposed to the Spectrum...
>
> Well, let's say that I own 3 C64's and 2 speccies. Both speccies have all
> sorts of technical problems and remind me of Lada's: you have to keep
> working at them to keep them running, and the occasional bash will help. The
> C64's remind me of Nissan's: nobody actually wants them because they are
> ugly, but they offer the best value that money can buy.
I used to sell C64's, or should I say I used to lend C64's to temporary
owners until they got returned for various faults, then we'd have to
lend them another.
Richard Wilson
>
> Currrent number of 2003 MiniGames: Commodore 5, Sinclair 2, Amstrad 1
> with 2.5 months to go before the deadline. :-)
At least 1 of those is for VIC-20, not C-64.
Lee Prince
[snip]
*yawn*
--
Hey, hey, 16K, what does that get you today?
A. J. Moss
Starglider hates tests.
--
"If you send a letter to 'Cunt, London' it'll get to the
Director-General of the BBC, you can be sure of that."
-- Peter Cook
Anders Carlsson
>> Currrent number of 2003 MiniGames: Commodore 5, Sinclair 2, Amstrad 1
>> with 2.5 months to go before the deadline. :-)
> At least 1 of those is for VIC-20, not C-64.
Two to be exact. On the other hand, there seems to be no entry for the
48K Spectrum, or are we comparing Commodore 64 with Spectrum 128K rather
than the classic 48K model?
--
Anders Carlsson
Steppe
> Ah! The typical American response. Not even bothering to look outside
> of their own country to see what else happens in the world. I bet you
> think WW2 started in 1942 as well, didn't you? The Commode 64 was not
> the leader, simple as that!
Although I'm German and don't really feel offended by that, I feel that if
arguments like that enter the discussion it deserves a short and painless
*PLONK*
A E
>
> Afterthought: MS Windows to this day has no task priority setting.
What? Are you kidding? Go to Task Manager, and right click on a process.
The Doctor
Carl Woffenden <ca...@bigredswitch.co.REMOVETHISBIT.uk> wrote:
> When I was a young lad being a Speccy owner meant bashing the Commodore
> crowd simply 'because'... but then one day I actually used my mate's
> 64... and was amazed! Really! I'm a big fan of the Speccy and all things
> Clive but I gotta say the 64 is a great machine.
>
Really??!?!?
I could believe what a lucky escape I'd had when I first used a C64
emulator (VICE) and played the C64 versions of the games I had for my
Speccy. They were such crap!
I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of C64 games that I
think are better than their Speccy counterparts.
When I was choosing my first computer I wanted a C64 (cos most people in
my school had them) but we couldn't afford one (£240) so had to 'make
do' with a speccy instead (£69). I'm so glad we were poor!
Cheers!
--
Graham
The RISC OS software site - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/software
The RISC OS hardware guide - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/hardware
Deathzone Emulation - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/emulation
The Main Control Room - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk
The Doctor
The Starglider <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:35:26 GMT, "Shaddy" <sha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"The Starglider" <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message...
> >
> >> So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
> >
> >Hi.
> >
> >What is a speccy? Sorry for my ignorance, but I never even heard of it. I
> >do remember a time in the 80s where the C64 was intensely popular. When I
> >was at one point consumed in everything C64, I never bothered to notice any
> >other systems because I guess they really weren't contenders in terms of
> >popularity. I do remember the TI-99, the Tandy CRS-80, but they were all
> >garbage. I think you and your speccy are an analogy comparable to OS/2 vs
> >Windows. Let's say that thing you call speccy or spectrum or whatever the
> >heck it is, let's say it is better technically, who really cares? The
> >leader was always C64, like Windows was over OS/2.
> >
> Ah! The typical American response. Not even bothering to look outside
> of their own country to see what else happens in the world. I bet you
> think WW2 started in 1942 as well, didn't you? The Commode 64 was not
> the leader, simple as that!
>
Not just American, but an Outlook Express user as well!
<fx:shakes head in despair>
The Doctor
fr...@homer.cmp.liv.ac.uk (Doctor J. Frink) wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:00:12 +0100, The Starglider
> <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:57:13 GMT, paul s <nos...@nospam.forme> wrote:
> >>
> >>Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
> >>emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
> >>and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
> >>Linux, Fuse.
> >>
> >Yes, there was, Z80 did very well.
>
> !Z80 on RISC OS was very 'swish' indeed and seemed to be doing quite
> well last time I was in those waters. Dunno how it stacked up in the
> great scheme of emulation seeing as there aren't that many RISC OS users
> to start with, let alone with Spectrum fever, and even fewer willing to
> shell out 15 quid or so. But it must have been quite good cos it's one
> of the very few applications I've ever paid money for (and, no, I don't
> pirate) and I don't remember any PD or shareware emulators even working
> post RISC OS 3.50.
>
It compared very well a few years ago but other emulators have since
appeared and become superior.
Spec128 has recently shown signs of life from its author on the
AcornArcade message boards though.
Cheers!
The Doctor
The Starglider <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:28:32 +0200, "Peter de Vroomen"
> <pet...@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> wrote:
>
> >Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
> >software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
> >will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene), but they are
> >speaking of hardware too.
> >
> As opposed to the Speccy, which has been revived already in the Emailer, and at
> the same time, our emulators are legal.
>
> So the C64 is still crap!
>
But they make such lovely door stops or replacement breeze blocks. Can't
use a speccy for that.
Niall Wallace
if you fight Commodore vs Sinclair
Sir Clive Wins
Niall
"Roland (.funxiun.)" <NOSPAMuse...@NOSPAMfunxiunNOSPAM.808 (808=com)>
wrote in message news:vj88hvsiak1fu76cj...@4ax.com...
Biggo
> "The Starglider" <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> schreef in bericht
> news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com...
> > Let's look at the evidence:
>
> Slow compared to... the spectrum? Compared to current PCs? Obviously a c64
> is slower than a PC.
*And* it's slower than a Spectrum too.
> > I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
>
> Again, terrible compared to... what?
To the Speccy. What were they thinking at CBM when they decided to give
the 64 16 shades of brown?
> > Lovely fast
<snip>
> > 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
>
> Commodore had at least 2 3D games. Elite and Castle Master.
As you can see, the original claim is "Lovely fast 3d shaded graphics",
as opposed to "horrendous blocky graphics whose meaning you have to
guess on-the-fly while playing".
> Last thing i heard 6 million people are still using the c64. And Tulip is
> now resurrecting them. I don't see anyone resurrect the Spectrum.
No need to resurrect something that's alive. New Spectrums are still
sold today. *New* Spectrums, not second-hand brown doorstops.
> Have to agree there. The 1541 is horrid slow. A speed loader cartridge
> helps.
Agreed. With a speed loader, the 1541 is almost as fast as a Wafadrive.
Now, a disk drive on the Speccy, that's another thing.
> Personally i love the looks of the commodore.
Ha! No wonder you manage to stand c64 graphics. You need glasses.
--
||_ (o) __ __ __ | Biggo. <mailto:big...@dplanet.ch>
|'o\| |/o \/o \/o \ | On The aaria: http://OnTheaaria.webhop.org
|._/|_|\__/\__/\__/ | * An out of control ego will sometimes get in the
/_/ /_/ | way of your success. (Todd H.)
Biggo
> review of the Amiga 1000
Yawn. Has anyone mentioned the Amiga? It wasn't even made by CBM.
So, the reply to "the c64 is crap" is "The Amiga was better than the
PC/XT"? Nice try, Commode User.
Biggo
> The Starglider <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> > Let's look at the evidence:
> >
> As for the Speccy I didn't note it in my first post as it didn't exist
> for many years after.
c64: 1981
Spectrum: 1982
I guess you still do your maths on a c64.
> ..it's competition is the Commodore Amiga series
As you wish. But the c64 is still crap.
> Read a bit of the official Sinclair history at:
> http://www.worldofspectrum.org/sinclairbasic/history.html
And the c64 is crappity crap even compared to the ZX81.
Sam Gillett
The Starglider wrote ...
[crap snipped]
That's strange. There is nothing left to reply to.
Flame war finished!
Best regards,
Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!
shephed
Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
Phil-on-a-hill
"shephed" <smo...@twist1up.com> wrote in message
news:oLZQa.796$ib2.1...@twister.neo.rr.com...
> Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
No, you would be physically disabled. Retarded is when you have something
wrong with your mind, a situation I'm sure you are quite used to.
Biggo
> Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
Ohhh. *This* is the real stuff. You showed him!
Derek Jolly
@twister.neo.rr.com:
> Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
My still retarded what?
--
Derek Jolly (derek at rivetsoft dot freeserve dot co dot uk)
Leaner, cleaner homepage: http://rivet.50megs.com/
comp.sys.sinclair folklore FAQ: http://rivet.50megs.com/cssfolk.html
YASPIC v1.5.1: http://rivet.50megs.com/speccy.html
Thomas Müller
don't use it rather than complaining about others who like their C64 (I do
and I don't really care about what you say). Every machine has it's own
spirit. Some like it and others do not. If you're in love with your speccy:
fine, that's your business - not ours.
Regards
gearc
A VIC-20, had one of those before i got my spectrum 128K. Spent zillions
of hours typing if i wanted to play a game :-) after the taperecorder
broke down : I couldn't afford another :-( .
shephed
"Phil-on-a-hill" <malcn...@gothcorp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7a_Qa.12187$nP....@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net...
Fritz Reinders
>
> So does that mean that he has no valid proof that the C64 wasn't crap???
>
Depends on the standard you're judging by. At the time it was
introduced and
for several years after it was a very advanced game & small business
system.
By the time the Spectrum 128 came out it was just about ready to
retire. To judge it by how well it handled the standards of 8 to 10
years after it's introduction it fares poorly on benchmarks.
Of course you need to judge it by how well it actually handles what it
is used for. On that standard it does quite well. Demo coders are
still getting the C64 to do new things, and within the limits of 3
channel sound (6 if the 2d SID modification is made) it has very good
music synthesis capabilities.
It's not able to handle VGA screens natively. So it might be said
that it's graphics are poor. That's a matter of the standard you're
judging by again. Commodore was pushing the limits of what could be
done with a home game console when they designed the Ultimax and
luckily for us the 'Max was expanded into a full blown small business
system that was also a state of the art game console
Of course there have been many hardware & software projects that added
to the many capabilities of the C-64. 80 column hi res screens,
multimeg memories, IBM compatibles harnessed as disk drives, internest
connectivity to name a few.
Of course the things that an 8bit 'can't' do such as a Windows OS
(GEOS is one), a Unix knockoff (LUnix). I'm sure that there are many
more 'impossibilities' running around out there and of course the
severak multitasking/multiuser OSes running on C-64
Personally I'd use longevity of the system on the open market as the
best judge of the quality machines. The 64 to this day has the best
claim to the best selling and longest market life of any computer
made.
The Apples went through many models offering partial compatibility
with their predecessors. The Sinclairs and Ataris also limited
compatibility between models as they changed regularly. The C64 made
a few cosmetic changes to lower chip count & a case redesign, but it
remained a C-64. Even it's successor the C-128 family offered a C-64
compatability that only a very few hardware intensive programs could
break.
All of this has been well covered here and elsewhere...didn't think a
rehash was needed :)
Fritz
Dunny
> Just a simple reply: If you don't like a certain (8-bit) machine,
> then just don't use it rather than complaining about others who like
> their C64 (I do and I don't really care about what you say).
Wooooossshhhh!!!
<ducks>
Jeez, that bugger was low! What was that? Eh? There was bags of height left?
Maybe over *your* head there was :-)
D.
Peter Thomas
wrote:
>> Let's look at the evidence:
>As for the Speccy I didn't note it in my first post as it didn't exist
>for many years after...it's competition is the Commodore Amiga series
Commodore 64: 1981
ZX Spectrum 16/48: 1982
Commodore Amiga: 1985
Hmm?
>Read a bit of the official Sinclair history at:
>http://www.worldofspectrum.org/sinclairbasic/history.html
You should have done!
--
pete [at] ¦ In development: Beer Chaos.
horseshoe ¦ You buy a shot of vodka or water.
[hyphen] ¦ Anyone choosing to disbelieve it has to
inn [dot] ¦ down it.
co [dot] uk¦
Peter Thomas
wrote:
>Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
At time of writing, this cliche has been used about 5,060 times on
Usenet[1]. Please find something original to say.
[1] According to google - http://tinyurl.com/h1pp
John Kavanagh
"Richard Wilson" <ri...@bitwise-systems.com> wrote in message
news:3F14353E...@bitwise-systems.com...
> "Roland (.funxiun.)" wrote:
> >
> > Let Google decide:
>
> I think MicroMart already decided this one. If I remember correctly, the
> Amstrad CPC also beat the C64 in their Best Computer of all time
> competition!
>
> Richard
So it should, the CPC is a good computer. The only reason the Spectrum came
second was due to its larger user base. C64 compared to Spectrum, well to me
its a hard one, depends on what you looking for in a computer I guess. But
CPC against the Spectrum, well the CPC win in every respect, well I can't
honestly think of one thing that the Spectrum was better at?
John
Phil-on-a-hill
came
> second was due to its larger user base. C64 compared to Spectrum, well to
me
> its a hard one, depends on what you looking for in a computer I guess. But
> CPC against the Spectrum, well the CPC win in every respect, well I can't
> honestly think of one thing that the Spectrum was better at?
Games?
Axell
The Starglider wrote:
> Let's look at the evidence:
>
> Remove "wibble" in
> E Mail address
> TO REPLY.
Why would I want to remove the wibble? It's is appropriate for you.
wibble, v. [...] 2. intr. Brit. slang. To speak or write, especially at great
length, without saying anything important; to
witter or waffle; to talk
drivel. Freq. with on. Also trans. with direct speech as object.
Jeff Ledger
> > Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
Typical flame war crap from the 80's... Same crap grammer and spelling
issues..
Pay attention class! If you fan the flame war, check your grammer.
Note: "You might win, but your still retarted."
Corrected: "You might win, but you're still retarded."
===============
From Dictionary.com
===============
your
\Your\ ([=u]r), pron. & a. [OE. your, [yogh]our, eowr, eower, AS. e['o]wer,
originally used as the gen. of ge, g[=e], ye; akin to OFries. iuwer your,
OS. iuwar, D. uw, OHG. iuw[=e]r, G. euer, Icel. y[eth]ar, Goth. izwara,
izwar, and E. you. [root]189. See You.] The form of the possessive case of
the personal pronoun you.
Note: The possessive takes the form yours when the noun to which it refers
is not expressed, but implied; as, this book is yours. ``An old fellow of
yours.'' --Chaucer.
you're (yr; yr when unstressed)
Contraction of you are.
Peter Thomas
wrote:
>> > Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>> > Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>Typical flame war crap from the 80's... Same crap grammer and spelling
>issues..
Typical ISP-rule breaching crap from Jeff Ledger... Binary attachments
posted even though these are text-only newsgroups!
Pay attention Jess! If you post attachments on text-only newsgroups,
your ISP account is at risk.
>Pay attention class! If you fan the flame war, check your grammer.
>Note: "You might win, but your still retarted."
>Corrected: "You might win, but you're still retarded."
Note: "check your grammer."
Corrected: "check your grammar."
russ juckes
Frink) wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:00:12 +0100, The Starglider
><the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:57:13 GMT, paul s <nos...@nospam.forme> wrote:
>>>
>>>Are there any really any successful commercial 'pay money for' Speccy
>>>emulators? I know there are a few *shareware* ones. But from what I've seen
>>>and read most people are using Spin or Spectaculator, or if your using
>>>Linux, Fuse.
>>>
>>Yes, there was, Z80 did very well.
>
>!Z80 on RISC OS was very 'swish' indeed and seemed to be doing quite
>well last time I was in those waters. Dunno how it stacked up in the
>great scheme of emulation seeing as there aren't that many RISC OS users
>to start with, let alone with Spectrum fever, and even fewer willing to
>shell out 15 quid or so. But it must have been quite good cos it's one
>of the very few applications I've ever paid money for (and, no, I don't
>pirate) and I don't remember any PD or shareware emulators even working
>post RISC OS 3.50.
Going back a few years, but !Speccy by Carsten Witt ran hapily under
RO3.5 - in fact one of the versions I tested had an amusing bug which
meant that it would *only* run under either RO2, or RO3.5 - nothing
inbetween.
I paid for both !Speccy *and* !Z80Em.
Outta here,
Russ Juckes - Atari Jaguar, Jamma Cabinet & Sinclair ZX Spectrum Owner
--
http://www.russandem.co.uk "Knowledge is power"
amigo
i wont bother reading all the followups.
[ //\ //\//\ | G O ]
http://mondodizzy.members.easyspace.com/
Pixeling ( Mostly 8-bit ) - ***Updated 14 July 2003***
http://dizzypetition.members.easyspace.com/
Bring Back that Loveable EGG!
"The Starglider" <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com...
> Let's look at the evidence:
>
> Slow. A poxy slow processor, hence the reliance on hardware based sprites
to
> make sure games don't turn out utterly crap.
> Terrible graphics - 15 shades of brown, and really *REALLY* blocky
graphics. How
> I laugh whenever I see digitised pictures on a commode 64!
> Crap games - Paradroid Vs. Quazatron. No contest. Carrier Command. Lovely
fast
> 3D shaded graphics on the Speccy. What the fuck went wrong on the Commode?
> Sound - My god. My ears bleed every time I hear that damned SID chip
grating
> away at some tune. It's not clean, and you people think that's superior???
What
> are you all on? Or are you all tine deaf?
> 64K Ram - Lies! You never had access to the full 64K of RAM.
> Crap Basic - Who's bright idea was it to incluse what I consider to be the
worst
> basic I have ever seen on any computer. Even typing nothing on it get's
that
> stupid Syntax Error message on the Commode. At least we could type a
program in
> basic 15 times faster on the Speccy, with a decent system for finding
mistakes.
> Sales - The commode is dead. At least Spectrums are still being sold
around the
> world. Speccy sales now up to about 25 million. The commode could only
manage
> about 22 million.
> Loading times - Oh how I laugh when your commode disk drive takes longer
to load
> a program than it does to load a program by cassette on the speccy.
> Cost - the commodes were sold at rip off prices. The speccy, being
superbly
> designed, meant that it was sold at a fraction of the price.
> Looks - let's face it, the commode was ugly. A huge beige thing with huge
keys
> (required for your neanderthal fingers so you wouldn't mistype). Spectrum,
> small, light, powerful!
>
> --
> ****************The Starglider***************** Remove "wibble"
in
> * Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com * E-Mail
address
> * * TO REPLY.
> *E-Mail: the_starg...@yahoo-wibble.co.uk* _WW_
> * * /_ _\
> *********************************************** | O O |
>
___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo_______
____
>
Dave Dahle
news:9gm7hv8oukb1dimd9...@4ax.com...
> Let's look at the evidence:
Shut up, you mindless, mouth-breathing, UTTER bastard.
*plonk*
Richard Wilson
>
> Games?
Some games are better on the Spectrum, some games are better on the CPC,
and some games are better on the C64. All depends who developed it in
the first place. IMO, all Hewson games are best on the CPC, most Ocean
games are better on the CPC. Very few games used the CPC to its full
potential, for example, only one game I know of uses a hardware
pixel-scroll and split screen (ZTB - Mission Genocide).
Richard
Richard Wilson
>
> From Dictionary.com
Is there a real English dictionary there? Or just a yankee one? Bet it
doesn't have "Grammer" in it, unless they've started listing actor
surnames.
Rick
"Fritz Reinders" <fri...@dc4pc.net> wrote in message
news:40433c66.03071...@posting.google.com...
Glenn P.,
> Let's look at the evidence:
[ Snip! ]
Rates an 8.7 out of 10 on the TrollScale[tm].
--_____ %%%%%%%%%%%%%%% "Glenn P.," <C128...@FVI.Net> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
{~._.~} ----------------------------------------------------------------
_( Y )_ "So, Zachary! You FINALLY got here!"
(:_~*~_:) "Who are you? And what is this ghastly place!?"
(_)-(_) "Come, Zachary! Who the Devil do you THINK I am? And where in
========= Hades do you think YOU are?!"
///////// "Oh, the pain... the pain of it all...!"
========= --Morbus & Dr. Smith, "Lost In Space" ("A Visit To Hades").
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
John Kavanagh
You never played an Amstrad did you? Both computers share the same processor
and sound chip so both versions of the same game would be more or less equal
sometimes the spectrum version is better, other times it the CPC version.
This got more to do with the programmers talents than the computers.
Now on to the graphics. If a game was designed on the Amstrad to use all it
graphical features it just blows the spectrum away, however a lot of the
games were designed for the weakest computer so that porting over to
different formats would be easier and cheaper, hence many Amstrad games look
like Spectums dull O' graphics amd don't take advantage of the full 16
colours on screen (more on the PLUS).
Correct me if I'm wrong?
Oh by the way I don't hate Spectrums or anything.
Anders Carlsson
> c64: 1981
> Spectrum: 1982
I thought both were released during 1982. Was the C64 available
anywhere in the world (US, Japan?) already in the end of 1981?
--
Anders Carlsson
Biggo
Keine Ahnung :-)
"C64 history" pages state 1981. Even if this was true, it's hardly "many
years" before the birth of the Speccy, right?
Biggo
> By the time the Spectrum 128 came out it was just about ready to
> retire.
Why do you insist in comparing the c64 with the Spectrum 128? The 64 is
crap even compared to the original 16K.
Biggo
> Pay attention class! If you fan the flame war, check your grammer.
What's wrong with my grand-mère?
Biggo
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:47:16 GMT, "shephed" <smo...@twist1up.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
> >Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>
> At time of writing, this cliche has been used about 5,060 times on
> Usenet[1].
And another 30 times in the last 7 hours. This is the most stupid, most
conceptually incorrect "tag line" I ever happened to read in my life.
How can it be so popular?
The Starglider
The Starglider
<nial...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Ah ha but
>
>if you fight Commodore vs Sinclair
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Commodore&q2=Sinclair&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
>Sir Clive Wins
>
I wouldn't expect any other result. It's obvious!
The Starglider
<thed...@thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <bku7hv8mlb860iu73...@4ax.com>
> The Starglider <the_starg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:28:32 +0200, "Peter de Vroomen"
>> <pet...@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Tulip is reviving Commodore and the C64, by the way. At first only in
>> >software (i.e., they are going to market an official C64 emulator, which
>> >will probably kill the C64 emulation/abandonware scene), but they are
>> >speaking of hardware too.
>> >
>> As opposed to the Speccy, which has been revived already in the Emailer, and at
>> the same time, our emulators are legal.
>>
>> So the C64 is still crap!
>>
>But they make such lovely door stops or replacement breeze blocks. Can't
>use a speccy for that.
>Cheers!
Yes, this is true. And they burn soo well too!
The Starglider
wrote:
>Richard Wilson <ri...@bitwise-systems.com> writes:
>
>>> Currrent number of 2003 MiniGames: Commodore 5, Sinclair 2, Amstrad 1
>>> with 2.5 months to go before the deadline. :-)
>> At least 1 of those is for VIC-20, not C-64.
>
>Two to be exact. On the other hand, there seems to be no entry for the
>48K Spectrum, or are we comparing Commodore 64 with Spectrum 128K rather
>than the classic 48K model?
Well, yes. I can't see the point of comparing with the Commode 128, because that
was even worse!
I have never seen anything that was specifically written for the commode 128.
Maybe there is now, but not when the machine was being sold!
The Starglider
<steppe_not_for@spam_demodungeon.com> wrote:
>The Starglider wrote:
>> Ah! The typical American response. Not even bothering to look outside
>> of their own country to see what else happens in the world. I bet you
>> think WW2 started in 1942 as well, didn't you? The Commode 64 was not
>> the leader, simple as that!
>
>Although I'm German and don't really feel offended by that, I feel that if
>arguments like that enter the discussion it deserves a short and painless
>*PLONK*
>
If he had bloody read the post, he would see that I was critisizing the
Americans, not the Germans!
The Starglider
>WOW!!! what a pointless argument we have here
>
As I side issue here, why the fuck did you:
a) Top post
b) Top post with one line of text, but leaving the rest of the post in???
The Starglider
<ajm...@macpaint.fsworld.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>This is a test.
>
BASTARD!
The Starglider
>
>The Starglider wrote ...
>
>[crap snipped]
>
>That's strange. There is nothing left to reply to.
>
>Flame war finished!
>
>Best regards,
>
>Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
> Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!
>
Ah! Te delayed wit of trying to end the flamewar quickly! You were too slow my
friend!
BTW... Commode lives? It's a machine! It has no soul! Get with it! It's crap!
The Starglider
>Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>
Again, this is the post that wins the "Crossed the line of taste" by offending
several people who are disabled who post here.
The Starglider
>Just a simple reply: If you don't like a certain (8-bit) machine, then just
>don't use it rather than complaining about others who like their C64 (I do
>and I don't really care about what you say). Every machine has it's own
>spirit. Some like it and others do not. If you're in love with your speccy:
>fine, that's your business - not ours.
>
But it is simply my job to ensure you all realise that the Commode 64 is utter
crap. It was a useless machine, ugly, expensive, and just plain crap.
Once you all realise this, you will lead happier lives.
The Starglider
>> > Arguing over what 8-bit computer is the best is like winning the Special
>> > Olympics. You might win, but your still retarded.
>
>Typical flame war crap from the 80's... Same crap grammer and spelling
>issues..
>
>Pay attention class! If you fan the flame war, check your grammer.
>
>Note: "You might win, but your still retarted."
>
>Corrected: "You might win, but you're still retarded."
>
And Jeff wins the award for "Trying to stop a flamewar, but making it worse by
posting binaries to non-binary groups, which is a worse offense".
The Starglider
>
>
>The Starglider wrote:
>
>> Let's look at the evidence:
>>
>> Remove "wibble" in
>> E Mail address
>> TO REPLY.
>
>Why would I want to remove the wibble? It's is appropriate for you.
>
>wibble, v. [...] 2. intr. Brit. slang. To speak or write, especially at great
>length, without saying anything important; to
> witter or waffle; to talk
>drivel. Freq. with on. Also trans. with direct speech as object.
>
I know, that's why I used it.
But my argument still stands. The Commode 64 is crap. Always will be. Now don't
try to change the subject.