..so, what you're telling us is that they're blow hards?

Scali wrote on 2023-10-04, 11:16:

No, what mattered was that you said that if you had the "raw power", you wouldn't bother to put blitters in the machine.
Guess what, they did. Even when games didn't use them.

…and now you're just twisting my words. But if it makes you happy — feeling „victorious” or something — so be it. 😀

These were your exact words:
"Why not, if that works, and one can achieve interesting effects using that? The creators of Amiga designed copper, blitter etc. not because they had too much free time — but exactly because they didn't have at that time that mentioned „raw power”! If they had that at their disposal — would they really create all that blitters, increasing Amiga's final price?"
I didn't twist anything.
You just can't own up to what you claimed.

Scali wrote on 2023-10-04, 11:45:

I didn't twist anything.

We'll let the readers judge that.

What you should be doing is one of the following:
1) Admit that you indeed said this, and in retrospect you were wrong.
2) Clarify what you actually meant, if it wasn't this.

Instead you keep drawing up smoke screens. You first tried to shift the blame on me, twisting your words, and now you defer responsibility to "the readers".

The C64 was very easy to program. You wanted to put a sprite on the screen, all you did was set a pointer and put data into the appropriate memory locations.
And it was always the SAME memory locations on every commodore computer - not a different one depending on what video card might be installed 😉
I learned a LOT playing around on commodore 64. You could get close to the hardware, which you could do on a PC ONLY if you were running DOS, and even then it was a lot more complicated.

Everyone knows ti-99/4a is where it's at.

awgamer wrote on 2023-10-04, 12:43:

Everyone knows ti-99/4a is where it's at.

Don't mess with Texas!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U7j5o0bVPA

ncmark wrote on 2023-10-04, 12:30:

I learned a LOT playing around on commodore 64. You could get close to the hardware, which you could do on a PC ONLY if you were running DOS, and even then it was a lot more complicated.

I agree, a home computer such as ZX81 or C64 teaches a lot about the basics, the low-level side of computing.
It's very much like working with microcontrollers and single board computers running Basic (8052 AH BASIC etc).
In essence, the C64 is a great microcontroller with a keyboard and a screen.

However, it doesn't teach someone anything about operating a real PC running CP/M or MP/M, DOS or any flavor of Unix.
There's no knowledge being gained for further life, for using PCs at work place or in higher education (writing a doctoral thesis, working in groups on a document).

There's no teaching about using files or how a hard disk works, what multi-tasking and time sharing are. Or how networks are being designed (topology, protocols etc). Or how to use a mouse, type in 10 finger system..

It doesn't help here, sadly. 😔 Even as a moderator on the local FM radio station, basic PC skills are needed.
I'd dare to think that someone who had underwent a electric typewriter course
had a real benefit over a C64 user, even.
A typewriter had a standard keyboard, at least.

That's were all 16-Bit systems had more to offer. Amiga, Atari, Macintosh..
They all had been run operating systems and could use device drivers.
And their keyboards were more PC like.

Edit: Speaking about the C64 keyboard, the arrow/cursoe keys are a bit weird.
Someone had to press a key to make them work in the other direction.
My MZ-700 had four big arrow keys simply.
And even the C128D had a more professional keyboard, another reason why it was closer zo being a PC.

Anyway, this isn't exactly something were the C64 architecture is at fault.
GEOS had what it takes to make the C64 a real work computer.
It even had operated on files, not much different to an Atari ST running GEM.
But GEOS wasn't as popular as it could have been. If it was more on the cutting edge, had supported a simple networking connection like an Macintosh did way back in 1984..

Edit: What I mean to say, networking was a very fascinating thing back in the day.
I remember how much fun it was making 3-wire Null-Modem cables back in the 90s.
Or building a Covox plug. That was real fun.

On C64, all that was theoretically needed to implement a basic network was a module with a simple serial interface (short-ciruit protected) and a 3-pin connector (TXD, RXD, GND).
By doing so, files between two C64 could be exchanged. Or a dual player game could be played.
If GEOS had supported a standard network interface, regular C64 applications might have adopted it, too.

In the UK, Micros had used networking at school since the early 80s, too.
They even had real servers running on 8-Bit machines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Econet

Scali wrote on 2023-10-04, 06:51:

It's just software. Simons' BASIC offers you this, for example. Gives you the PLOT command to draw pixels in cartesian coordinat […]
Show full quote

kant explain wrote on 2023-10-03, 23:17:

The point IS the C64 DOESN'T have such facities.

It's just software. Simons' BASIC offers you this, for example. Gives you the PLOT command to draw pixels in cartesian coordinates, among many other things.
And this BASIC extension was written by a 16-year old.
You're simply wrong.

No C64, not 1 of the 17,000,000 ever shipped with Simon's Basic. You can always wtite or buy software. That's a given and besides the fact. Every IBM PC, clone, near compatible shipped with BASICA or GW-BASIC. I am not wrong. You're wrong in calling me wrong because you're just wrong
Wrong wrong and wrong again. The C64 a had crazed
funkadelic bitmap shenanigans. And you're still wrong. Simon's Basic never baled anyone out of anything. Why? Because you had to wait 6 hours for it to load from floppy disk. And watch it chew up ram. Why didn't Commodore buy Simon out. And burn that schnitzel to rom.

Yes the price of a C64 certainly came down by 1985. But it still must have been 600 us. Mayne less. Still a lot.

Simons' BASIC was a cartridge (you know, with a ROM inside).
And Commodore distributed it.

Did it ship with it? Noooooooooooo

Why didn't those cheapos burn it into rom? Wr all know the answer.

My mistake by the way. I never owned that, went from basic to machine/assembly language. I actually should have remembered it came as a cart.

A cartridge is a ROM.
GW-BASIC wasn't burnt to ROM, what's your point?
And GW-BASIC certainly didn't ship with all PCs.

kant explain wrote on 2023-10-04, 17:56:

Did it ship with it? Noooooooooooo

Why didn't those cheapos burn it into rom? Wr all know the answer.

My mistake by the way. I never owned that, went from basic to machine/assembly language. I actually should have remembered it came as a cart.

Well, Commodore 1541 Floppy Disk Drive also wasn't shipped with it. 🙂

BASIC was in rom on IBM computers. Graphic extensions were loaded from disk with BASICA (Advanced BASIC). Name 2 8088/8086/80186 based desktops that didn't come with GW-BASIC.

A cartridge is an extension of what the computer comes with. No C64 came with graphics primitives, nor Simon's Basic. PCs did all of them. BASIC/BASICA or GW-BASIC.

Still not sure what your point is. I am sure that I no longer care to listen.

kant explain wrote on 2023-10-04, 18:12:

BASIC was in rom on IBM computers. Graphic extensions were loaded from disk with BASICA (Advanced BASIC). Name 2 8088/8086/80186 based desktops that didn't come with GW-BASIC.

A cartridge is an extension of what the computer comes with. No C64 came with graphics primitives, nor Simon's Basic. PCs did all of them. BASIC/BASICA or GW-BASIC.

If you're talking about IBM PC computers, then what about monitors? They also didn't come with the computer. 🙂

My underlying point is some people can't accept criticism of their favorite childhood puter. The C64 had certain shortcomings. All computera do. Commodore should have, could have done much (actually little) to improve the original design. Or package rather. I never programmed a breadbin. I bought a 64c in 1989. Same old crappola firmware etc. That is all.

It would have been better if every manufacturer ever bundled every peripheral and every software package ever. Then nobody could complain about something random not coming with the computer.

kant explain wrote on 2023-10-04, 17:56:

Did it ship with it? Noooooooooooo

Why didn't those cheapos burn it into rom? Wr all know the answer.

My mistake by the way. I never owned that, went from basic to machine/assembly language. I actually should have remembered it came as a cart.

Scali wrote on 2023-10-04, 17:59:

A cartridge is a ROM.
GW-BASIC wasn't burnt to ROM, what's your point?
And GW-BASIC certainly didn't ship with all PCs.

The addess space of the C64 was very small, 64 KB maximum.
And C64 BASIC V2/KERNAL already occupied about half of it.

That's why SIMON basic didn't fit in anymore. To make that work, parts of the KERNAL or BASIC had to be removed. Or switched out via bank-switching.

But since the datasette routines couldn't be omitted so easily, an external module was the most non-destructive way, maybe. 🤷‍♂️

GW-BASIC. It was very popular, even existed on C64 (there were MS-DOS simulators).
Original IBM PCs original had ROM-BASIC or (IBM Cassette Basic?) on the motherboard, but it wasn't exactly great.

As a substitute, BASICA was later used from within DOS.
It loaded the ROM-BASIC on motherboard and patched it, adding functionality.

GW-BASIC then superseded BASICA, adding more functionality.
Sometimes, the GW-BASIC executable was renamed to BASICA for compatibility.
GW-BASIC was often (but not always) bundled with MS-DOS and other OEM DOSes, but not PC-DOS. DOS Plus also didn't ship with it.

In East Germany, GW-BASIC was renamed and being included with DCP, the Disc Control Program (an, um, MS-DOS "replica").

Anyway, ambitious BASIC programmers quickly had switched to Borland Turbo Basic/MS QuickBasic by the mid-late 80s.
The good source code compatibility to GW-BASIC made a switch easy.

The compiler equivalent to GW-BASIC was M-BASIC, afaik.

ThinkpadIL wrote on 2023-10-04, 18:01:

kant explain wrote on 2023-10-04, 17:56:

Did it ship with it? Noooooooooooo

Why didn't those cheapos burn it into rom? Wr all know the answer.

My mistake by the way. I never owned that, went from basic to machine/assembly language. I actually should have remembered it came as a cart.

Well, Commodore 1541 Floppy Disk Drive also wasn't shipped with it. 🙂

Of course not. The 1541 was a whole 6502 computer on its own, more powerful than the C64 itself.
Some C64 applications even used the 1541 as a co-processor.
That's why it was so expensive, maybe.

On Z80/x86 PCs, the PC itself did all the work. That's why PC floppy drives were more common, maybe. All that was needed was an interface card and the physical floppy drive