VOGONS


Why is Amiga so popular with retro community ?

Topic actions

Reply 400 of 426, by HanSolo

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Jo22 wrote:
[...] the C64 was the #1 computer used by the working class in Germany, incl. those with a lower educational level and a simpler […]
Show full quote

[...] the C64 was the #1 computer used by the working class in Germany, incl. those with a lower educational level and a simpler mind.
[...] Which kind of was a demonstration of poverty for such a country at the time, if you ask me.
[...] Hm. I suppose, the cheap price simply attracted the same type of people (sly misers, penny pinchers, jerks) over and over again?
[...] I already had the, err, pleasure to meet such ex-C64 owners in person.
[...] Considering our German mentality (alles Fachidi*ten/all one trick ponies), I'm not surprised the software support was lacking. face with rolling eyes *sigh*

I really wonder where you draw all this wiseness from, but as you said this is not the right place to discuss it.

However, apparently you haven't experienced the times back then yourself.
(And obviously you have never been confronted with the elitism of many Amiga users 😀 )

Reply 401 of 426, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

To me, these comparisons between C64 and Amiga are somewhat strange and anachronistic. The C64 is an older machine, and was in a completely different pricerange by the time the Amiga came around.
A lot of people who owned an Amiga, had had a C64 before. It's like the Amiga was the 16-bit upgrade to the C64. Perhaps the fact that they both were Commodores played a role as well (in my case my dad even bought a Commodore PC clone, probably because we had a C64 before... I continued to use the C64 even when we had a PC and an Amiga).

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 402 of 426, by Grzyb

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Jo22 wrote on 2023-04-30, 05:50:

How comes that the Amiga sidecar and bridgeboard have no support for those Super CGA modes?
Or the real industry standard, Hercules?

As usual, you're ignoring the price factor.
It was necassary to cut costs wherever possible, the Amiga-and-PC-in-one-box combo was (too) expensive anyway.

640x400 b/w wasn't difficult to implement, either, even if Commodore had no engineers left.

But how?
That would require either a circa 30 kHz HSYNC monitor, or interlace...

With merely MDA or CGA emulation available within the Janus software, it's no problem to access 704 to 736KB of conventional memory.
In fact, this would have been an excellent opportunity for the CBM Amiga to be supperior to a real IBM PC/XT.

"640 KB ought to be enough for anybody" 🤣
But in the 80s that was pretty much true!
Software elephantiasis wasn't a thing yet... with the exception of OS/2 😜

Nie tylko, jak widzicie, w tym trudność, że nie zdołacie wejść na moją górę, lecz i w tym, że ja do was cały zejść nie mogę, gdyż schodząc, gubię po drodze to, co miałem donieść.

Reply 403 of 426, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Jo22 wrote on 2023-04-30, 05:50:

There's something about Commodore I didn't understand, though.

Their PC range of computers of the 1980s had an "AGA" graphics card installed (not to be confused by the Amiga's AGA chipset).
And this card/chip was clearly supperior to CGA.

The "AGA" is just a Paradise PVC2 or PVC4, depending on the exact model. Which is a Plantronics-compatible super-CGA chipset.
It was quite a popular clone of CGA, found in many XT machines from the 80s, along with the very similar ATi Graphics Solution/Small Wonder.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-04-30, 05:50:

How comes that the Amiga sidecar and bridgeboard have no support for those Super CGA modes?

Firstly, these modes were and are mostly irrelevant.
Secondly, the Amiga PC solutions didn't have a dedicated video chip. They used software emulation on the Amiga hardware.
So that would limit you to whatever modes the Amiga hardware could output. Hercules resolutions wouldn't be feasible (MDA was not emulated at the real resolution either, but since it's textmode-only, it's not that relevant).
If you wanted though, you could install a real PC videocard into one of the ISA slots, and then use that video output. In that case you weren't limited at all, and even SVGA-options will work.

Nevertheless, these bridge boards were niche products.
Most people bought an Amiga because it was an Amiga.
If they wanted a PC, they'd just get a PC.
If they needed both, most of then would buy both, especially in the late 80s or early 90s, when PC clones became much cheaper, because anyone could build them from generic parts.
Also, if you just wanted an Amiga, you wouldn't have to go for the much more expensive Amiga 2000, and just stick with the Amiga 500.
There was only a very small market for people who needed both an Amiga and a PC in a single box, and the various limitations that this would bring.
The market for the Amiga 2000 was much smaller than the market for the Amiga 500 anyway. For most people, an Amiga 500 had enough expansion capabilities.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 404 of 426, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Scali wrote on 2023-04-30, 12:54:
Jo22 wrote on 2023-04-30, 05:50:

How comes that the Amiga sidecar and bridgeboard have no support for those Super CGA modes?

Firstly, these modes were and are mostly irrelevant.

I don't think so. They were useful for productive software, the often mentioned purpose of the sidecar/bridgeboard.
Other PC emulators supported at least one of them.
It's MDA and CGA that were unsuited for any meaningful work, by the mid-late 80s.
Even the East German x86 PCs behind the iron curtain had better graphics.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 405 of 426, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Jo22 wrote on 2023-04-30, 13:53:

I don't think so. They were useful for productive software, the often mentioned purpose of the sidecar/bridgeboard.

Except most software didn't support them out-of-the-box, and patches/drivers to use these special modes were rare.
I had a Commodore PC10-III with Plantronics support, and I rarely used it.
Not even Windows had a driver for the extra modes.

The productivity software was mainly WordPerfect (only print preview was in graphics mode, and that was b/w anyway, no Plantronics), dBase (textmode only) and Lotus 1-2-3 (there was a special driver for that).

There's a difference between what specs you have on paper, and what was actually used in practice.

Last edited by Scali on 2023-04-30, 14:13. Edited 2 times in total.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 406 of 426, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
HanSolo wrote on 2023-04-30, 10:53:
I really wonder where you draw all this wiseness from, but as you said this is not the right place to discuss it. […]
Show full quote
Jo22 wrote:
[...] the C64 was the #1 computer used by the working class in Germany, incl. those with a lower educational level and a simpler […]
Show full quote

[...] the C64 was the #1 computer used by the working class in Germany, incl. those with a lower educational level and a simpler mind.
[...] Which kind of was a demonstration of poverty for such a country at the time, if you ask me.
[...] Hm. I suppose, the cheap price simply attracted the same type of people (sly misers, penny pinchers, jerks) over and over again?
[...] I already had the, err, pleasure to meet such ex-C64 owners in person.
[...] Considering our German mentality (alles Fachidi*ten/all one trick ponies), I'm not surprised the software support was lacking. face with rolling eyes *sigh*

I really wonder where you draw all this wiseness from, but as you said this is not the right place to discuss it.

However, apparently you haven't experienced the times back then yourself.
(And obviously you have never been confronted with the elitism of many Amiga users 😀 )

Hi there. 🙂 Please go a few pages back, I already mentioned the rivalry between PC/Amiga.
And also about the nasty comments they posted in magazines (PC Joker or Amiga Joker, I vaguely remember).

The C64 user base was much bigger at the times, though.
It seems about every German with a home computer had contact to a C64, which, err, had a lasting effect. Mildly said.

Edit: Besides, the C64 was being famously sold by ALDI.. ALDI.
That's the place were people go which primarily read Bildzeitung. 🙄
There even was an ALDI-C64.. I think that speaks for itself. 🤦‍♂️

In public places, especially museums, visitors drew the most ridiculous C64 comparisons.
"See my son this old computer was used in the past. I also had a C64 when I was young, which was similar".
- While standing in front of a historic tube computer. *sigh* 🙄

But you're right, it's not the right place.
It merely came to mind because of that Scanntronik article.
It wasn't my intention in first place to talk about that.
My apologies for being too chatty. After posting, I had the bad feeling in my guts that this would backfire.

That being said, I didn't say that the C64 community is like that.
I was talking about the C64 user base, which is a little but fine detail.
The C64 was the Volkscomputer, sadly. It took place of the VC-20 quickly.
And those "bad" people weren't part of any social group.

The C64, past its height, was also used by people who were penny wise. People who didn't want to upgrade not because of technology or emotional bonds, but because C64 was cheap and the library of pirated software was huge.
C64 floppies and datasettes were openly traded at the school yards, for example.
Modules on the other hand, were more difficult to replicate.

That's another reference/response to the article/interview. The scanner/paint program required a cartridge which contained both an EPROM and a bank-switching/mapping circuit for the SRAM chip.
But even that cartridge was copied a few times, says the article/interview.

Last edited by Jo22 on 2023-04-30, 17:23. Edited 1 time in total.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 407 of 426, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Scali wrote on 2023-04-30, 14:12:

There's a difference between what specs you have on paper, and what was actually used in practice.

I agree that Plantronics was rarely used.

However, the 640x400 AT&T mode and Mono EGA 640x350 were supported by applications.
Windows, GEM, QB4.x, AutoCad and MS Flight Simulator come to mind that did at least support one of them.

The support for CGA.. What was its point on an Amiga sidecar? Who's the target audience?
CGAs text font was poor (80x25 was business/terminal standard), the resolution was unusable for graphical charts/diagrams.
It would have made people laugh if used in a actual presentation.

Except the 640x200 mono mode, maybe, which was close to being usable (details already visible, but distorted, lines jaggy).
Hence my complaint about the missing 640x400 support. It would have made sense.
Other PC emulators supported it, rightfully.

"PC-SPEED emulates the Olivetti 640*400 pixel graphic card.
Many PC-programs (GEM,MS-WINDOWS etc.) support this."

Source: http://www.atarimania.com/utility-atari-st-pc … peed_23201.html

The third-party PC emulators for Amiga, made by other companies, were mich better here.
Some emulated VGA, even, in a window.

Edit: Since you mentioned dBase, there also was "dBase Übersetzer" (aka DBÜ) a popular translator utility.
It converted to XBase, for Clipper compiler.

Edit: I must correct myself, CGA would have made sense, because only CGA allowed the maximum conventional memory (736KB).
But not even that got these German folks at Commodore right. Dutifully and blind, they kept the 640KB barrier. Missing another opportunity. 😔 *sigh*
Again, other PC emulators did notice that chance. PC-Speed had 704KB of conventional memory, which even didn't interfere with MDA's 4KB text buffer yet.

Edit: Please don't get me wrong, I'm not hating or something. I'm just sad and tired, because of missed opportunities.
Like many things in this country, things start out promising, just to be driven into ground near their completion.
The bridgeboards weren't bad, at all. But when it mattered, the devs screwed up.

The daughterboard of the A2286 for example, leaves no headrom for installing an upgrade processor.
This was totally unnecessary. If the layout was made *just a bit* different, the 286 socket would have been accessible.
To install a heatsink, for example.

Or, let talk about the position of the A2286 daughter card itself..
It is blocking access to the pass-through pins of the ISA pins (above edge connector).
If the daughter card was on the other end, expansion hardware could have been installed on the bridgeboard card itself, saving an ISA slot.

Edit: And then there's the A2000 itself, which was a good workhorse.
It did most things right, I think, can't think of anything bad.
A second 5,25"drive may would have had been nice, though. 🙂

Last edited by Jo22 on 2023-04-30, 14:57. Edited 1 time in total.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 408 of 426, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I guess you had to be there.
I've never even seen an AT&T 6300 machine. Yes it was supported on paper, but who was actually using one? Most people used a PC clone with either CGA or Hercules.
EGA was only used on expensive high-end PCs. EGA never was very successful. I've only ever seen a single real EGA configuration. Everything was MDA/Hercules/CGA until VGA clones became affordable.

Likewise, your obsession with conventional RAM makes no sense. No regular PC clone supported more than 640k. As such it wasn't relevant.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 409 of 426, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Scali wrote on 2023-04-30, 14:55:

Likewise, your obsession with conventional RAM makes no sense. No regular PC clone supported more than 640k. As such it wasn't relevant.

Nah, It's no obsession, I think. Rather the contrary, since I don't wear rose coloured glasses (I'm not saying you do).
Personally, I do rather think practical here, I believe.
That's why my point of views are often so unpopular/different, I guess? 🤷‍♂️

MS-DOS platform has a long history of memory-related issues, I think.
Expanded Memory was being invented out of pure desperation (XT platform).

Some of the early MS-DOS compatibles before ~1986 had theoretical memory expansion beyond 640KB.
The BBC Master 512 had 704KB, for example.
Or the ancient Victor 9000/Sirius 1, which supported up to 896 KB and featured an 800x400 mono mode (good choice).

Hardware-based PC Emulators like KCS Power Board or AT-Once provided 704KB, too.
They were more recent, though, I admit.

The real IBM PC/XT supported memory past 640KB, too.
See attachments. Some file dates are '85/'86.

The readme in moreram.zip is dated 1985 and says:

";I use this program on my PC that has 576K (64K + 512K) worth of memory.
; Also, I have successfully tested it with 704K (64K + 512K + 128K) of memory,
; but this requires placing memory into the semi-forbidden zone (segment A000)
; designated by IBM as "reserved". But that's ok, as long as you don't install
; memory beyond this into the B000 segment where monochrome and graphics display
; memory live!"

Attachments

  • cga_os2_736k.png
    Filename
    cga_os2_736k.png
    File size
    32.17 KiB
    Views
    873 views
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception
  • Filename
    MORERAM.ZIP
    File size
    2.8 KiB
    Downloads
    29 downloads
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception
  • Filename
    896K.ZIP
    File size
    4.38 KiB
    Downloads
    29 downloads
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception
  • Filename
    megabyte.zip
    File size
    19.51 KiB
    Downloads
    29 downloads
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 410 of 426, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

The PC standard reserves all memory from segment A000 and beyond for BIOS and memory-mapped hardware.
So the limit for conventional memory has always been 640k, officially. EGA was the first device popular device that used A000, so this also made 640k the practical limit for conventional memory.
As such, using conventional memory beyond 640k is non-standard, and likely to cause issues with software and hardware.

The real problem here is that the PC BIOS and DOS both assume that conventional memory is a single continuous area, starting from address 0, up to a limit that is set by the BIOS at 0040h:0013h, and can also be retrieved by int 12h.
This is a very limited way of memory management, which doesn't allow for any 'gaps' in the memory map, unlike with many other platforms.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 411 of 426, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Maybe that's all correct, yes.

However, it doesn't change the way how things were being used in practice.

For example, a Hercules graphics card and a hi-rea TTL monitor (real or clone) were the defacto standard for an office PC.
Not an authentic IBM MDA™ board or the humble CGA card that can run Frogger.

So what was the purpose of the sidecar or the A2286?
For playing games, they make no sense, considering the Amiga's capabilities.
The CGA emulation doesn't even simulate Composite CGA.

And for business work?
They're worse than a PC clone from Taiwan..
They have Hercules, at least. And a Turbo mode.

But since emulating Hercules graphics mode on Amiga is tricky due to the higher vertical resolution (720 pixels width),
the Olivetti mode would have been a fitting alternative.

It was supported by many CGA based laptops, too, which had a 640x400 screen built-in.
If you don't believe me, please check yourself.
The AT&T/Olivetti mode wasn't made for games, it was intended for productivity software.

Edit: To be fair, though, the A2286 can be used with expansion hardware.
An ATI Small Wonder or EGA/VGA card can be installed and used.
But even that drews the question: Why do the PC emulators have no pin header for an "external" graphics board ?
I've seen single board computers from the latw 1980s/early 90s who had a PVGA1A graphics chip on a daughter card.
Why didn't Commodore think about this option?
By using a pass-through feature, it would have been possible to interface the bridgeboard with direct video slot of the A2000 (where the VGA scan doubler/flicketfixer sit)..

Edit: What I mean is the following, even if the emulated video couldn't be improved due to laziness or incompetence,
it surely was possible to switch video between Amiga video/PC emulator video (on a single monitor).
Especially, since the flicker fixer boards had a DE15 connector, anyway..

For example (simplified): Adding a software-controlled switching mechanism on the bridgeboard (a 2pin header for a relay) would have made that possible.
The Janus software then could enable it, if it is running.

On the flicker fixer board itself, a couple of relays or transistors would then connect/disconnect the RGBHV lines that come from the VGA board (and disconnect on-board video).

That way, a single monitor could be used without a hassle (no KVM needed).

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 412 of 426, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

As already said: the point was that you could run PC software, using the Amiga display.
If you also had to buy a separate monitor it would mostly defeat the point, as it would make the solution even more costly, and it would also require more desk space.
The MS-DOS sessions can even run in a window on the Amiga desktop:
https://youtu.be/PPfArIhoy0s?t=617

Also, 350-line or 400-line modes for productivity aren't really an option on Amiga.
It uses broadcast-standard NTSC or PAL, so you have either 200-line or 256-line progressive modes. You wouldn't want to use an interlaced display for productivity.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 413 of 426, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Scali wrote on 2023-04-30, 17:36:
As already said: the point was that you could run PC software, using the Amiga display. If you also had to buy a separate monito […]
Show full quote

As already said: the point was that you could run PC software, using the Amiga display.
If you also had to buy a separate monitor it would mostly defeat the point, as it would make the solution even more costly, and it would also require more desk space.
The MS-DOS sessions can even run in a window on the Amiga desktop:
https://youtu.be/PPfArIhoy0s?t=617

I get it that productivity software was the goal.
But that's exactly my point of critique.
MDA and CGA were sub standard. Not useful.
Hercules was the defacto standard in real life, not plain MDA. Period.
(EGA was an alternative, I admit, albeit with worse text quality.)
That's why *all* the third-party companies did support at least something in addition.

Installing extra graphics hardware is possible, but defeated the whole purpose of the concept.
By that point, buying a real PC was the better alternative at the point in time (~1988).

Edit: And that's my complaint about the German engineers, exactly :
They dutifully copied the original IBM PC configuration from ca. 1981,
without thinking, without considering real world use or the needs of the users.
By 1986/87, offering such a configuration is just crazy! Only the modest users can find this useful.
But even those are better of with a pure, dog-slow software emulation like the Amiga Transformer or PC-Ditto.

Edit: Of course, in retrospect, the boards can be most useful when paired with a external graphics hardware.
Like andSVGA card or a TIGA or 8514/A accelerator.
But it was still a shame that the original design wasn't being thought through properly.
All the competitors did it properly, after all.

Scali wrote on 2023-04-30, 17:36:

Also, 350-line or 400-line modes for productivity aren't really an option on Amiga.
It uses broadcast-standard NTSC or PAL, so you have either 200-line or 256-line progressive modes. You wouldn't want to use an interlaced display for productivity.

*Sigh* Oh, please. You're technically right, I agree, but you're thinking in real hardware specs, which is unnecessary complicated here.
The bridgeboard uses some sort of dual-ported RAM as a buffer, or the equivalent of it.
The Amiga side is free to read the video buffer at any times it wishes.
There's no need to worry about the 15KHz/18KHz or 50Hz/60Hz difference of Amiga's TV video and a PC's Hercules.

The MDA emulation is already implement, all it needs is a larger video buffer for the "all-pixel-addressable" mode of Hercules.
The actual timings of Hercules don't need to be faithful here, productivity software uses static images, anyway.

A simple Hercules support would already be a great upgrade over plain MDA.
That way, you can run astronomy programs, can use programs to control storage oscilloscopes, run AutoSketch for floor planning, run most Quick Basic/Turbo Pascal programs, or any of the GUIs.

Doing the same with plain CGA isn't fun, neither the 8x8 text font nor the graphics resolution can be taken serious.
That's why the Olivetti M24's hi-res CGA mode was so useful. It was still CGA, but *fixed *.

If it was about games, these technical things (accurate timings and resolutions) surely do matter.
But a high-level, pure software emulation of the Hercules frame buffer can be much simpler.

The Hercules emulation doesn't even need to fit inside the video window, scroll bars are fine.

Heck, my demands are very modest in comparison to what the people in that ~1987 interview wanted (including the Amiga dev).
They talked about full-fledged EGA support, not primitive Hercules.

Edit: The flicker fixers/scan doublers were available to solve the flicker issue of the Amigas.
They converted from 15KHz to 31KHz, without affecting the on-board video.
The on-board video ports on the back still ran at 15KHz without breaking genlock compatibility.
The 31KHz output was separate and allowed using a *real* monitor. A VGA monitor.
Or a hi-def professional RGB video monitor with a 15/31 KHz switch.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 414 of 426, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Jo22 wrote on 2023-05-01, 10:49:

But that's exactly my point of critique.
MDA and CGA were sub standard. Not useful.

Blame IBM, it's their standard.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-05-01, 10:49:

Hercules was the defacto standard in real life, not plain MDA. Period.

Not really.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-05-01, 10:49:

That's why *all* the third-party companies did support at least something in addition.

They did it because it was low-hanging fruit. A single card could output both CGA and MDA/Hercules, so most clone cards did this. It was especially interesting for OEMs because they could use a single card (or integrate it on the motherboard), and sell the same system with either an MDA or a CGA monitor.
Mind you, these clone cards arrived relatively late in the market. Eg, the popular OEM options ATi Graphics Solution and Paradise PVC2 both came out in 1986, two years after EGA, and 4 years after Hercules, and only shortly before VGA would enter the market.
By that time, Hercules was the low-budget option.

Note also that an original MDA or Hercules card is a full-size card, fully populated. These 'popular' Hercules/CGA clones are small cards, with larger integration, made possible only with technical advances in the later years, such as being able to include 64k on a card with just one or two chips, and being able to fit all the logic in just one or two ASICs.
So there's a difference between "Hercules" and "Hercules".
You can't just generalize over all these different variations from different time periods, price ranges etc.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-05-01, 10:49:

*Sigh* Oh, please. You're technically right, I agree, but you're thinking in real hardware specs, which is unnecessary complicated here.

No, you're making things unnecessarily complicated. As I said: it's designed to work with the Amiga display. As such, the display signal needs to be within the hardware specs of the Amiga display. And that is NTSC/PAL broadcast specs.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-05-01, 10:49:

The bridgeboard uses some sort of dual-ported RAM as a buffer, or the equivalent of it.
The Amiga side is free to read the video buffer at any times it wishes.
There's no need to worry about the 15KHz/18KHz or 50Hz/60Hz difference of Amiga's TV video and a PC's Hercules.

And what exactly would the point be of supporting resolutions that are higher than what you can display anyway? It only makes things slower and require more memory.
You appear to have absolutely no sense of how slow these solutions were, and how much memory they took.
Or how irrelevant most people considered resolution to be. 640x200 was fine in the 80s. 720x350 wasn't such a big deal. If it was, then standards like EGA and VGA would have adopted it.

I think you need to set up a Hercules fanclub.
You seem to WAY overestimate the relevance of Hercules.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 415 of 426, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Scali wrote on 2023-05-01, 11:12:
Blame IBM, it's their standard. […]
Show full quote
Jo22 wrote on 2023-05-01, 10:49:

But that's exactly my point of critique.
MDA and CGA were sub standard. Not useful.

Blame IBM, it's their standard.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-05-01, 10:49:

Hercules was the defacto standard in real life, not plain MDA. Period.

Not really.

[..]

Okay, perhaps I shouldn't reply to this old thread anymore, but there's one thing that just catched my eyes last night.
There's an article at Wikipedia about the mystical Mac286 "bridgeboard" for the Macintosh II.

It's from circa 1987 (A2286: 1989 ?) and seems to do certain things right, I think.
- Judging solely be the specs, I mean. Without actual testing, it's hard to judge. 🤷

Like the A2286 board, it does support/emulate standard PC peripherals, with the notable addition of Hercules graphics (full screen or window/scroll bars?).
As a PC user, I think that CGA and Hercules were the baseline graphics standards. One meant for video games/home use, one for business use.
They even worked nicely together, in a multi-monitor setup. Even with both being in graphics mode (VGA tolerates plain MDA as secondary video).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac286

If I had been picky, I'd argue that the circuit of the IBM Game Control Adapter is missing (a cheap piece of standard hardware often used by electronic hobbyists as an A/D converter).
That's something that later Macs had featured (Power Macintosh 6100/66 DOS Compatible, has SB16 sound card integrated on the 486 card).

Anyway, it just came to mind and I felt the need to share this discovery.
I hope you don't mind.

Both the Amiga 2000 and Macintosh II were IBM AT look-alikes and shared the same level of sophistication and expandibility (CPU slots, too).
The third one would be the Acorn Archimedes and its descendants, maybe, though it maybe rather resembles an Atari ST Mega.

Edit: To give give an idea how fascinating a simple analogue game port can be, please everyone have a look at this:
http://oldvcr.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-spawn- … -universal.html

This article that I've found just a few days ago (-I'm not related in any way, btw-) does illustrate quite nicely for what simple X/Y inputs can be good for.
It's even mentioning the Commodore version and the paddle inputs of the SID chips, which often is used as a mouse interface.

Imagine, if IBM ever had sold a mouse for the IBM Game Control Adapter! 😁
Ok, maybe not best idea, since timing of each PC was different as opposed to home computers of same series.

And that's essentially why I was criticizing the Commodore bridgeboard here.
It's good at the core, but wasn't finished yet. Some things were missing. Things that would appeal developers or hardware hackers.

So what exactly was the A2286 aimed at, I wonder ?
- An 68030 CPU accelerator for the A2000 and a pure software emulator (like PC-Ditto on ST) would have been a greater experience, maybe.
I mean, the A2286 was quite expensive and graphics performance was slow, even for CGA.
(Dedicated graphics hardware excepted, of course! I mean the graphics handled by Janus software.)

So it was rather good for slow paced chess games or simulations, though it lacked the graphics resolution for that.
If I was a chess player at the time, I would have been interested in a professional chess game, with hi-res Hercules or EGA/VGA graphics.
Maybe 8514/A, too, like with that Mahjong game.

But on the other hand, that's were Amiga shined, too. It already had nice chess games.
Not sure about the AI strenght, though. Chess players were a bit snobby here, I suppose.
Dedicated hardware was being considered more serious, or something. 🤷

There's the TASC card which fits in a PC slot and the GUI software supports VGA.
https://www.schach-computer.info/wiki/index.p … sc_ChessMachine
https://www.schach-computer.info/wiki/index.p … Final_ChessCard

Edit: Another use case I could have seen was astronomy or orbit prediction software, which existed plentiful on PC platform.
But again, CGA was quite limiting here, due to low resolution. Hercules and VGA had better support, I suppose.

Even VGA monochrome (mode 11h) would have been nice already, I think,
which can be provided with a 64KB Video RAM (fits in a single x86 segment) and MCGA hardware.

Edited. Pictures added.

Edit: Last but not least, there's another real-world use case that comes to mind - online services of late 80s/early 90s and their custom GUI software.
The special communication software usually wasn't being available on all platforms, but both the PC/Mac usually were being supported.

Like Amaris BTX/2, which was a highly professional software from 1988 and had supported SVGA, even, because our BTX service had high demands (known as VTX service in Swiss, I think).
So having a Hercules emulation, better yet VGA emulation, would have been useful for business use for sure.

Of course, in case of Amiga/ST or C64, some BTX software was being available and sufficient for home use.
But it lacked the scripting language that Amaris BTX had, for example. And a business user had certain standards..

Edit: MS Windows 2.x could run DOS programs (text, CGA) in a window - but it required EGA/VGA for that, too.

Edit: Anyway, I don't mean to discredit the A2000 or its official Commodore bridgeboard here.
I can indeed imagine useful applications that could have been possible despite the CGA or MDA machine type.
For example, to run a network server/client on the PC side or run some CAD program/control software via serial connection (external terminal device).
Thanks to the Zorro II/ISA slots, a lot of interesting stuff could have been done for sure.

Attachments

  • sts_vga.png
    Filename
    sts_vga.png
    File size
    53.59 KiB
    Views
    239 views
    File comment
    STS Orbit Plus (VGA), an once popular orbit preditiction tool
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception
  • STS_Amiga.png
    Filename
    STS_Amiga.png
    File size
    54.3 KiB
    Views
    239 views
    File comment
    STS Orbit Plus (CGA hi-res)
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception
  • nc_amiga.png
    Filename
    nc_amiga.png
    File size
    39.24 KiB
    Views
    239 views
    File comment
    Norton Commander. Does just fine on CGA.
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception
  • larry2_amiga.png
    Filename
    larry2_amiga.png
    File size
    31.09 KiB
    Views
    239 views
    File comment
    Leisure Suit Larry, original 1987 PC release. Fun, but Amiga has native port.
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 416 of 426, by bobsmith

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I've noticed the Amiga fascination is most common in Western Europeans. Why was the Amiga not popular in the US or other countries? Some parts of the Amiga culture that started there and evolved beyond it like trackers got pretty popular here at least in terms of nerd crowds, but I've never heard or read of the Amiga being popular in the US.

Modern : MSI PRO B650M-P Ryzen 5 7600, 32GB DDR5-5600, RX 7600
PIII : ASUS CUSL2-C, Pentium III @ 733MHz (Coppermine), Voodoo3 3000 AGP, 384 MB SDR, Audigy 2 ZS,
C2D : ASUS P5Q, Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3GHz (Wolfdale), Radeon HD 5750, 4GB DDR2-1066, 256GB SSD

Reply 417 of 426, by BitWrangler

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Amiga peaked earlier in the US, prior to mass web use and AGA, so it looks like there was no Amiga scene because it was all on BBS and usergroup disk zines. It was still third behind PC and Mac, but both of those being some third cheaper than they were elsewhere in the world tilted market in their favor. The 1992-1993 486 price war probably had a lot to do with it also... bringing down US 486 entry level pricing, because it really took a 486 with SVGA and win 3.1 to start to feel as nice and responsive to use as an Amiga.

Unicorn herding operations are proceeding, but all the totes of hens teeth and barrels of rocking horse poop give them plenty of hiding spots.

Reply 418 of 426, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
bobsmith wrote on 2024-03-21, 13:06:

I've noticed the Amiga fascination is most common in Western Europeans.

I suppose it was related to Commodore Germany somehow?
Nintendo was also being popular here, with its then-new Europe headquarters in Großostheim.

The Commodore 64 became something like the computer equivalent to the VW Beetle, for example.
It reached a cult status within just a few years, even when it was still being sold as new.

In East Germany, it was the wet dream of teens and adults, too. They were being desperate for it. An Amiga was unimaginable to them.
("Which kind soul from West Germany can give me a C64 for free ?" were printed in Funkamateur magazine and other magazines)

For the Amiga 1000, there was a big show or presentation going on in Frankfurt in 1986.
It tried to demonstrate how awesome the Amiga is and what it can do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_m-9PLanp0

And it really was fascinating for 1985 hardware, I admit. The A1000 was awesome.
In an era when kids didn't have ever played an original NES yet (Europe release 1986), it was mindbogglingly.

A far cry to a ZX81 or ZX Spectrum.
Or an IBM PC clone with 256KB RAM, 5,25" 360KB drive, CGA and MS-DOS 2.11.

Insofar I can understand that the Amiga community fights for acknowledge and the Amiga's place in history.
In a time when people still had funny hair cuts and were wearing cotton sweatshirts in all sorts of colour, this was just awesome.

Considering that some citizens (esp. teens and students) still had b/w portable TVs in their bed rooms at the time.

But by 1990, VGA resolution and 256 colours were becoming something of a norm.
The then-new Macintosh models had begun to adopt 640x480 pels as a new standard resolution, too.
Previously, they were using 512x384, albeit mostly in monochrome for the longest time.

bobsmith wrote on 2024-03-21, 13:06:

Why was the Amiga not popular in the US or other countries?
Some parts of the Amiga culture that started there and evolved beyond it like trackers got pretty popular here at least in terms of nerd crowds, but I've never heard or read of the Amiga being popular in the US.

I don't know, I can only guess. For one, I think that PCs in the US were more modern at an earlier moment in time.
- I'm thinking of those later Tandy PCs with their cheap VGA monitors right now, but maybe that's rather sort of a stereotype, not sure.
The citizen over there did have access to CD-ROMs and modern shareware much earlier or so it seems.

A lot of English language software had used EGA and VGA modes, at least.
Internet archive has quite some collection of vintage shareware CDs from the US, at least.

Here in Germany by the turn 1989/1900, we had a lot of old clunkers still sold newly when they were basically being obsolete for half a decade.
Not that modern hardware wasn't being sold, the contrary, it was. Businesses and universities usually had modern tech.

But the average Joe was apparently very conservative here and didn't see the point in a contemporary PC model.
When MS-DOS 5 was around, quite a few PC users seem to have stuck with MS-DOS 3.20 still, for example.
And had XTs, of course. Turbo XTs, in best case. I'm not sure if they were ignorant of just didn't care about progress. 🤷
Edit: Or they all secretly played their favorite games on their Atari STs instead ? 😁

Users of telecommunications software, MS Windows, office games (playing golf, strip poker or MS Flight Sim) and weird hobbies excepted here, of course.
They apparently saw the use of VGA early on and had bought cheaper VGA hardware from 1990 onwards (VGA clones, blurry no-name 14" VGA monitors).
That's what my prior experience says, at least. I'm speaking under correction, of course. Not all users were same, after all.

But to give an idea, one of my favorite electronic books was from 1990 and uses an 4,77 MHz XT w/ v20 and Hercules as a reference.
It's what the author had used at home, apparently. For years, maybe. Assuming work on the book had started in the late 80s.
Still, it at least acknowledges the existence of ATs and "hi-end" 386 PCs. And EGA/VGA.

AdLib and Sound Blaster apparently were never being heard of yet,
otherwise they would surely have been being mentioned as a fancy programmable tone generator (OPL2)
or D/A and A/D converter (SB DAC/ADC), respectively.

The author also mentioned the term "Gurken-Standard" in one occasion, which I had never heard before.
Calling something a "Gurke" (engl. cucumber) was synonymous to referring to something being a lame duck or slow dog, I suppose.

The term apparently was being used by some IBM PC users of the day (not the author) to describe a slow standard PC in a derogatory way (the original IBM PC and clones).
So there must have been users who had realized that the IBM PC wasn't being a high technology anymore. Math teachers excepted, of course. 😁

Which is quite reassuring, I think. Because when I was young(er), I always wondered about the outdated specs mentioned in the book.
Because, I started with a 12 Mhz 286 PC with VGA. Something to be considered sort of a DOS baseline configuration throughout the 90s.
An 4,77 MHz model already was considering being a museums piece before I was being born (almost, a bit exaggerating here).

That being said, Hercules and 5,25" floppy format were still being around in early-mid 90s.
The Hercules card, too, as an MDA card alongside developer PCs w/ VGA, to run their debuggers.

_

Here's a recent discovery of use case for an Amiga 2000 that I've found out about.
It's a promo video for a Disney production, so I assume it's from the US.
https://youtu.be/-_j48O50crQ?t=131

That Amiga apparently was being used occasional to assist artists at drawing certain scenes.
As an aid to the animators, I suppose. So they could visualize things.
(Boy, I really loved that cartoon when I was little/young. ^^)

Edit:

BitWrangler wrote on 2024-03-21, 14:45:

Amiga peaked earlier in the US, prior to mass web use and AGA, so it looks like there was no Amiga scene because it was all on BBS and usergroup disk zines. It was still third behind PC and Mac, but both of those being some third cheaper than they were elsewhere in the world tilted market in their favor. The 1992-1993 486 price war probably had a lot to do with it also... bringing down US 486 entry level pricing, because it really took a 486 with SVGA and win 3.1 to start to feel as nice and responsive to use as an Amiga.

Ah, I see, makes sense. The US apparently had more modem users early on, too.
Here in Germany, a "BBS" was usually being called a computer "mailbox".

We had quite some mailboxes here*, too, but it was very niche in direct comparison to the US, maybe.
My dad for example had rather used Datex-P, a public data network operated by our national telco.

It provided X.25 PADs to the end users with a terminal and acoustic coupler or modem.
Online services like BTX (Datex-J) or CompuServes or Genie could use it, too.

That way, our users could make contact with foreign online services way back in 80s and early 90s,
before the internet/www had been available. That was necessary, because their mainframes were located in the US.

The X.25 link was being available in the B and D links of the ISDN system, too, I vaguely remember.
Alas, ISDN and plain landlines (!) weren't being taken for granted here during early 90s.

X.25 also was being used by banks and point-of-sales systems. Such as ATMs or credit card readers. If there were any, I mean.
Credit cards were like an alien technology here in Germany, too.

(Paying via bank cards or EC cards was technically possible since 70s/80s, but still not all shops/stores accepted them.
Some didn't like the idea to pay for the transactional fee and insisted on customers paying in cash or buying something for 10€ or more.
It needed the pandemic to change this, believe it or not.)

For some weird reason, the telephone network wasn't as good as it should have been.
In retrospect I can now understand why some of the stationed US army people were being angry/dissatisfied for not getting an ordinary phone line (soon).
Their families surely had a need for a landline, to stay in touch with relatives and so on.

All in all I can now better understand why our national BTX service was so darn slow for most of its time.
Even a cozy phone connection via V.23 at 1200 Baud/75 Baud was not being trivial, considering the poor parts in our infrastructure.

*The mailbox scene consisted of a few hundred mailboxes, I assume.
There was a list with phone numbers being mentioned in "BTX Magazin" (later renamed Com Online AFAIK).

Edit: My apologies if I was talking too much again. Please feel free to just ignore what I wrote, I was mainly thinking out loud again. 😅

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 419 of 426, by appiah4

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
bobsmith wrote on 2024-03-21, 13:06:

I've noticed the Amiga fascination is most common in Western Europeans. Why was the Amiga not popular in the US or other countries? Some parts of the Amiga culture that started there and evolved beyond it like trackers got pretty popular here at least in terms of nerd crowds, but I've never heard or read of the Amiga being popular in the US.

Because Amiga US were a bunch of morons.

Retronautics: A digital gallery of my retro computers, hardware and projects.