Atari v Commodore

[Shannon]

Hardly... The Atari's not only looked better but had much better keyboards. Just a fact.

 

The Ataris (as in all of them) had much better keyboards... [cough]Atari 400[/cough]

Awww comeon! The Atari 400 gave a whole new meaning to the phrase "touch type".

[Alison DeMeyer]

It (400) was still a better keyboard than on ZX Spectrum, UKs best selling computer during the 80s (tape based too, wooohaaa). The world was playing games on disk, UK was playing games loading from tape, even on C64).

Edited November 27, 2008 by Alison DeMeyer

[Fröhn]

"was a flop in my country"... heard it a million times already. There must be some obscure unknown country where all those VIC20's and C64's shipped to, otherwise I fail to explain why it was by far the most sold computers of the time since for all countries there is some guy who claims that it "flopped".

That's explained easy, just look at the NES, 'flopped in Europe' according to Nintendo (Explained in the Game Over book), but a massive seller in Japan and USA (approx 62 million sold).

That has nothing to do what I actually said. What I said is: Some people overrate their own experience and extrapolate it to their entire country.

 

It (400) was still a better keyboard than on Spectrum, UKs best selling computer during the 80s (tape based too, wooohaaa, the world was playing games on disk, UK was playing games loading from tape, even on C64).

UK was always a different market. Anything build in UK had a huge advantage to get sold in the UK.

 

And when it comes to tapes vs disks: Tapes were kept popular by disk drive owning people too just because UK tape games were amazingly cheap (usually 2-3 times cheaper than the disk versions).

Edited November 27, 2008 by Fröhn

[Alison DeMeyer]

And there you have it, here in the UK we like the cheap stuff, C64 was way cheaper than Atari 8 bit computer (RG issue 47), that's why it sold more but was less stylish (style and UK are two seperate countries, despite what Trinny and Susannah might want you to think).

Edited November 27, 2008 by Alison DeMeyer

[Garak]

Hardly... The Atari's not only looked better but had much better keyboards. Just a fact.

 

Too bad your "facts" are nothing more then opinions.

 

 

Not in my area of the country And it's still doesn't change the fact that the c64 is uggg leeee! Your argument is without merit.

 

Nothing you post has any merit except to troll.

 

I hate to tell you this but Ohio isn't it's own country.

 

Oh well, contrary to your opinion, the C64 outsold every other computer everywhere. That includes North America and your "country" of Ohio. That is a proven fact and not an "opinion".

 

Still here I see...

 

You certainly are. Unfortunately.

 

Not in this country, it was a flop

 

I've told you already Ohio isn't it's own country. The school system in Ohio must be horrible.

 

Garak

[TMR]

superstars never stop.....

 

That must be very nice for them, do you know any superstars to be aware of this then? Perhaps if you didn't keep ignoring the actual points i was making for cheap shots like that we'd get somewhere but i doubt it.

 

Vic 20 wasn't a big seller in UK either, even ZX81 sold better and more (increased Sinclairs income eightfold, Retro Gamer issue 45)

 

And worldwide, the VIC got to the million mark before the ZX81, the Atari 8-bits and the Apple 2. But that wasn't the point of what i was saying in response to Bryan so we'll try again for the cheap seats; if a company put a product on sale that then rakes in lots of cash for them and sells more than their competition, do they A) carry it's physical design on to the next product and save themselves lots of cash or B) redesign anyway even though people were buying the previous one? If you answered B, welcome to Earth and that explains why you'd consider the Atari 400 to be stylish...

[Alison DeMeyer]

B: as with Kylie Minogue, worked for her, and yes I met her, so I can honestly say that I know superstars. Aren't I great?

[TMR]

B: as with Kylie Minogue, worked for her, and yes I met her, so I can honestly say that I know superstars. Aren't I great?

 

That doesn't actually make any sense, what has Kylie got to do with stupid business decisions that you'd make?

[Alison DeMeyer]

B: as with Kylie Minogue, worked for her, and yes I met her, so I can honestly say that I know superstars. Aren't I great?

 

That doesn't actually make any sense,

 

That is because you are 'dazed and confused'. Say no more.

 

Anyway, it's getting personal here, and therefore I leave TMR in his 'dazed and confused' state, I'm gonna play with my stylish Atari computer (BTW, I haven't got the faintest idea about the inner workings of a computer, but you played along nicely).

 

(Thanks to all guys for checking me out xxx)

Edited November 28, 2008 by Alison DeMeyer

[TMR]

That is because you are 'dazed and confused'. Say no more.

 

So if you can read that bit, why are the rest of the words i write giving you so much trouble? Do the words in Retro Gamer give you any problems?

[TMR]

Anyway, it's getting personal here, and therefore I leave TMR in his 'dazed and confused' state, I'm gonna play with my stylish Atari computer (BTW, I haven't got the faintest idea about the inner workings of a computer, but you played along nicely).

 

Ah, the old "i wasn't serious" line... do people still fall for that one, i haven't seen it for a couple of years and assumed it had died out? Hey atarian, she says she wasn't serious so all that "good one" stuff you posted makes you look a bit silly...

Edited November 28, 2008 by TMR

[Fröhn]

And there you have it, here in the UK we like the cheap stuff, C64 was way cheaper than Atari 8 bit computer (RG issue 47), that's why it sold more but was less stylish (style and UK are two seperate countries, despite what Trinny and Susannah might want you to think).

A8 and C64 was in the same price range. I can't talk for UK, but in this area the C64 sold more because it had more and better games. And for both there is one reason: It was way easier to code convincing 80's type of games for C64.

[Allas]

mmmm ....

 

1982 - 1986

C64 is cheaper -> people buy C64 -> companies make more games for C64 -> people buy C64 because have more games

 

1987 - 1994

C64 is absolutely cheaper -> people continue buy c64 because have tons of games -> companies produce garbage arcade ports at full speed

[atarian63]

Don't forget that the VIC shifted significant numbers (i believe it was the first machine to move a million units) so if you're deciding what a machine should look like that's one hell of a reason to recycle a design.

 

And there you are, back to my point, you prefer quantity over quality

 

If you ran a company that had shifted a lot of units based on a certain design (and more units than your competition despite having less time in the market) you'd have to be a complete idiot if you didn't at least consider continuing that design to new products; Commodore recycled the same shell over several machines (some of the 264 series use the same design) so they had some confidence in it, but the same doesn't seem to be true of Atari since they felt the need to redesign their range not once but twice.

If you ran a company the basically had a flop, the Vic20, why would you not fix some of the issues like appearance, that is most people would unless you are a cheapass like Tramiel was, not to mention a big ego in his commodore days.

Ataris were revolutionary in style and function, each time a more current design based on the age of the last one, kind of like automakers do it but less frequently.

 

(Don't thank me, it's just my 'talent', which comes naturally, of course).

 

Well, the "talent" i was referring to was that you seem to make a lot of rather ridiculous and baseless assumptions about other people and yes, you've just done it again (read back, i've never said that i personally like or dislike either machine's physical appearance - my only argument is that it was irrelevant to this thread and subjective opinion either way) so obviously it does come naturally... bit of a shame really, if it needed concentration you could at least stop once in a while.

If you ran a company that basically had a flop, the Vic20, why would you not fix some of the issues like appearance, that is most people would unless you are a cheapa-- like Tramiel was, not to mention a big ego in his commodore days.

Ataris were revolutionary in style and function, each time a more current design based on the age of the last one, kind of like automakers do it but less frequently.

Edited November 28, 2008 by atarian63

[atarian63]

And there you have it, here in the UK we like the cheap stuff, C64 was way cheaper than Atari 8 bit computer (RG issue 47), that's why it sold more but was less stylish (style and UK are two seperate countries, despite what Trinny and Susannah might want you to think).

A8 and C64 was in the same price range. I can't talk for UK, but in this area the C64 sold more because it had more and better games. And for both there is one reason: It was way easier to code convincing 80's type of games for C64.

That was so later in it's life , earlier like 82 83 84 85, there were many, many more and better games and productivity on the Atari, Prices on Atari didn't drop much until 84.After that the reason people bought the C64 was twofold, Atari was out of the market for a bit while Tramiel took over and they never did re-establish their distribution network. So it was more a matter of monkey see monkey buy. The second was after this phenominon happened the piracy was huge! I used to have people come into my store and say they wanted an Atari but needed a C64 because they could get all the games for free... pretty sad. We used to call it the bubba machine. "my brothers got one.duh duh duh" . "free games..Hic..." Software sold like crap due to this. We dropped the platform due to high defect,low margin, and bad software sales.

[atarian63]

Hardly... The Atari's not only looked better but had much better keyboards. Just a fact.

 

Too bad your "facts" are nothing more then opinions.

 

 

Not in my area of the country And it's still doesn't change the fact that the c64 is uggg leeee! Your argument is without merit.

 

Nothing you post has any merit except to troll.

 

I hate to tell you this but Ohio isn't it's own country.

 

Oh well, contrary to your opinion, the C64 outsold every other computer everywhere. That includes North America and your "country" of Ohio. That is a proven fact and not an "opinion".

 

Still here I see...

 

You certainly are. Unfortunately.

 

Not in this country, it was a flop

 

I've told you already Ohio isn't it's own country. The school system in Ohio must be horrible.

 

Garak

Wow , insults from a nobody.. lovely .. The trolling is all yours, guess I would expect that from PA and a C64 user.

Edited November 28, 2008 by atarian63

[atarian63]

Hardly... The Atari's not only looked better but had much better keyboards. Just a fact.

 

Too bad your "facts" are nothing more then opinions.

 

 

Not in my area of the country And it's still doesn't change the fact that the c64 is uggg leeee! Your argument is without merit.

 

Nothing you post has any merit except to troll.

 

I hate to tell you this but Ohio isn't it's own country.

 

Oh well, contrary to your opinion, the C64 outsold every other computer everywhere. That includes North America and your "country" of Ohio. That is a proven fact and not an "opinion".

 

Still here I see...

 

You certainly are. Unfortunately.

 

Not in this country, it was a flop

 

I've told you already Ohio isn't it's own country. The school system in Ohio must be horrible.

 

Garak

Wow , insults from a nobody.. lovely .. The trolling is all yours, guess I would expect that from PA and a C64 user.

 

Facts are facts, your not liking it is only your opinion.

 

On you C64 "fact" What can I say the public is pretty stupid, easy to see that in everyday like, retail never ceases to amaze me. It only has to be good enough, the best seldom sell the best.

C64 is just another example of that, though a really good one.

 

Oh and private schools for me not public. Maybe it would have helped you..does explain some choices though doesn't it?

 

Keep on trolling PA

Edited November 28, 2008 by atarian63

[atarian63]

Anyway, it's getting personal here, and therefore I leave TMR in his 'dazed and confused' state, I'm gonna play with my stylish Atari computer (BTW, I haven't got the faintest idea about the inner workings of a computer, but you played along nicely).

 

Ah, the old "i wasn't serious" line... do people still fall for that one, i haven't seen it for a couple of years and assumed it had died out? Hey atarian, she says she wasn't serious so all that "good one" stuff you posted makes you look a bit silly...

Only to a tool like yourself. You must be a legend in your own mind viewing what you have said here.

[+Sauron]

Alright guys, this thread has degenerated quite far enough. Please stop the personal insults or I'll have to lock it.

[atarian63]

Alright guys, this thread has degenerated quite far enough. Please stop the personal insults or I'll have to lock it.

Agreed, though what do you expect when C64 guys troll the Atariage site?

[Allas]

Alright guys, this thread has degenerated quite far enough. Please stop the personal insults or I'll have to lock it.

 

Don't close this post, is just the objective some people follow.

[atariksi]

>Because he explicitely doesn't want to use one of the MC-colors to avoid sharing of colors. Imagine you use sprites 1 to 4, and overlay sprite 1 with 2 and 3 with 4. As a result you get two combined sprites with following colors:

 

>Overlayed sprite A: SC1 + SC2 + MC1 (ignoring MC2)

>Overlayed sprite B: SC3 + SC4 + MC2 (ignoring MC1)

 

Original point: multicolor sprite on Atari is better implementation.

QED, you're using 4 sprites.

[atariksi]

>>I used it to compare Z-axis-- for depth. I think they used that in that Atari game Landscape.

 

>the screen rendered by a8/c64 is 2d. forget the z axis for god's sake.

 

It expands and shrinks on my version.

 

>kewl, then a8 has less error when dividing the timer freq when playing a 11025hz wav. a huge win

 

Original contention: show me an example of timer accuracy useage without external device control. I did. QED.

 

>why should you accept anything I say or link, or anything on the world, like facts that there were sprite capable video chips before the atari ?

 

You gave a link stating earlier existence of sprites. I gave a link to article stating Atari 800 was first to use them. It does not follow that your article is correct.

 

>0:55, there sprites zooming while plasma/zooming chessb in the background.. 50fps..

 

Can't tell. I'll need to write some code and try it out.

 

>>Why do you call look-up tables are WASTING RAM? It's a way of SPEEDING things up. I use the following code all the time:

 

>compared to VICII where they are not needed arent they ? either 11x slower or much more ram needed to reach the same speed...

 

Original point: POTENTIAL OF machine targetting 800XL vs. C64. Now you want to compare RAM useage 16K vs. 1K.

 

>>GTIA does 80*200*16 shades w/o cpu intervention. It does 160*200*30 shades w/ simple DLI.

 

>vs 320x200x16 colors. w/o cpu intervention.

 

Restricted modes, I can pump out 16 colors in 320*200 as well. I gave you mode where it's not restricted. I can do any of the 16 shades at any point. Original point: most imagery has shading. Your resolution cannot have as much shading as that's a hardware restriction.

 

You forgot to pick one of the two code samples; here I optimized it more:

 

XFORM: DB 16 dup(240), 16 dup(241), 16 dup(242), 16 dup(243), 16 dup(244), ... 16 dup(255)

LDX Sample

LDA XFORM,X

STA 53761

 

rather than the slower:

 

LDA Sample

ROR

ROR

ROR

ROR

ORA #$F0

STA 53761

[atariksi]

I think you missed the point. All hardware aspects of both machines require CPU access to enable/disable/initialize things. The algorithm I presented of Y-axis simulation only uses a few instructions just like setting sprite/SID/etc. registers on your machine. There's 16K RAM useage for all the sprites and we're targetting 800XL/C64 so it's no problem. I gave you two algorithms-- one is not restricted and the other one is. The players can move vertically using almost same amount of code as you use to set up your sprites.

 

Can you explain me please, how you want to verticaly move sprite by changing PMBASE without it to be almost totaly useless? Maybe I just don't get it, but isn't it like you need like 1kB (or 2kB if you use single line resolution) od RAM for one line Y-axis movement (ok, in double line resolution and fine Y movement you can save half memory used by using VDELAY register) and you will move all players together to that predefined position.... So I can't imagine any meaningful use of this method in your stated 16kB of RAM. Will be glad if you prove me wrong.

 

I can explain how it's doable as I already have it working. However, when you have some biased people already finding fault with it before I even show it, I'll wait for their attitude to change or for them to shut-up.

[Allas]

5 - BLUE PRINT

 

Atari screenshots

 

Another example how a classic can feel so responsive on the right machine. A lot of fun for hours, who needs the 1x1 pixel precision?

Again colors seems to be the same, but Atari has the right tone.

 

C64 screenshots

Edited November 28, 2008 by Allas