15 ms·

Building the Commodore computer that should have existed

124 points by natashabaker 8y ago

rbanffy 8y ago
Shouldn't it be beige?
- anyfoo 8y ago
  Why? Many of Commodore’s later models weren’t.
ajnin 8y ago
Any tips getting into mechanical design ? I love designing PCBs, creating a schematic, then laying out the component and traces in the most elegant way is very satisfying. However when it comes to 3D stuff I wouldn't know where to begin.
- janekm 8y ago
  Download Fusion 360 (probably the easiest of the serious programs and free for hobbyists), and start playing around, try making some enclosures for your PCBs copying features from existing objects around you.
hfdgiutdryg 8y ago
However, I believe that restriction is the mother of creativity, so I’m trying to restrict myself to keep it limited to what would have been available back then. I'm going to steal that phrasing.
- emptybits 8y ago
  "The more constraints one imposes, the more one frees one's self. And the arbitrariness of the constraint serves only to obtain precision of execution." - Igor Stravinsky
- bookofjoe 8y ago
  "Solve the problem with what's in the room."—Edwin Land
egypturnash 8y ago
I wonder if Ms. Allaire knows about the C65[1]. Her initial sketch of specs[2] is not too far off from that. IMHO Commodore was right to kill the C65 when they were already making the Amiga 1000. The end of all the 8-bit systems was pretty obvious by '89, when rumors of the c65 started going around - the Mac had been out for five years, the Amiga and Atari ST for four. It would have suffered a fate almost as ignominious as the Sega Saturn. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_65 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_65 2: https://www.c256foenix.com/forum/the-specifications/early-specifications https://www.c256foenix.com/forum/the-specifications/early-sp...
- cmrdporcupine 8y ago
  Yes, the death of 8-bit systems was obvious by 89, but so was the death of the 68000. Motorola was already pushing the failed 88000 by the late 80s. And the 68000 itself was killed off only a couple years later. So I don't really agree with you here. The 68000 was as big of a dead end, and IMHO was a terrible CPU for home computers and gaming machines. It was fast for 16 and 32 bit integer arithmetic, so basically good for its target market of minicomputer replacements and workstations -- but very slow at memory accesses and interrupt response, two things that slow down gaming/graphics type machines. The Amiga would have been more responsive and really just as powerful with the same custom chipset tied to something like a 65816 clocked at 8mhz. Would have been able to address just as much RAM but would have higher interrupt responsiveness, and Commodore could have made use of its existing 6502 expertise, thrown in a couple SID chips, and maybe even a VICII for C64 portability. What a machine that would have been! Likewise, I think Tramiel could have done something similar instead of diving down the 68000 path with the Atari ST. They could have improved on the excellent Jay Miner designed A8 chipset but tied it to something like the 816, which was just coming out in 84 when they started the ST project. Just some fantasy alternative history :-)
  - walkingolof 8y ago
    >Likewise, I think Tramiel could have done something similar instead of diving down the 68000 path with the Atari ST. The Atari ST was built from scratch in less than 8 months after the deal to license the Amiga chipset fell trouhg. The ST is an amazing engineering feat considering the insane schedule. I agree on you that the 68k is a terrible CPU for gaming, but it got better when there was some cache added to it, starting with the 68030. I had an Acorn Archimedes with an ARM 2 clocked 8 Mhz (the same speed as the Atari ST, and 1 Mhz faster than the Amiga 1000/500), it was so much faster than my ST.
teddyh 8y ago
I would hope it runs something other than BASIC. BASIC is a terrible language, and the only reason it became popular is that there was a book published with a lot of games written in that language. People buying a home computer wanted games, and the commercial game market was initially nonexistent, so people wanted a computer with BASIC, since then they assumed they could play those games. The designers of this new computer might want to restrict themselves to old hardware, but there is no reason for them to restrict themselves to that old accident of history. Naïvely, I would assume that something like Forth or Occam would be much better for this, and both are also age-appropriate.
- DanBC 8y ago
  What's the best introduction to Forth or Occam for complete beginners to programming. (I didn't downvote you, and I have upvoted your post.)
  - abecedarius 8y ago
    Starting FORTH was aimed at beginners. I wasn't one when I read it, so I couldn't really say. Certainly you wouldn't find a lot of games in Forth in the magazines.
- the-dude 8y ago
  BASIC is just a ROM. If I recall correctly, I had a LISP cartridge for my Acorn Electron. Except I didn't know LISP and there was no internet. We had a library though.
- jerrysievert 8y ago
  the c64 supported k&r c via the abacus c compiler. I learned c on my c64, in fact. a skill I still use 32 years later. you can download the manual courtesy of archive.org: https://archive.org/details/Super-C_1986_Abacus https://archive.org/details/Super-C_1986_Abacus
  - GlenTheMachine 8y ago
    I had that. I interned at NASA as a high schooler, got exposed to C, and suddenly found BASIC lacking. SO I tracked down Abacus C at, as I recall, a JC Penney electronics section. It didn't support then entire K&R standard though. No function pointers.
Fnoord 8y ago
Reminds me of Computer latency: 1977-2017 [1] as recently linked on HN. 1977 and 60 ms latency. The SGI Indy of 1993 also had 60 ms latency. [1] https://danluu.com/input-lag/ https://danluu.com/input-lag/
samatman 8y ago
That grey and fine font on a white background is pretty hostile to the older sets of eyes that might like this article. I know this comes up a bit too often on HN but it's pretty, um, glaring, in this case.

124 points by natashabaker 8y ago

rbanffy 8y ago

Shouldn't it be beige?

anyfoo 8y ago
Why? Many of Commodore’s later models weren’t.

ajnin 8y ago

Any tips getting into mechanical design ? I love designing PCBs, creating a schematic, then laying out the component and traces in the most elegant way is very satisfying. However when it comes to 3D stuff I wouldn't know where to begin.

janekm 8y ago
Download Fusion 360 (probably the easiest of the serious programs and free for hobbyists), and start playing around, try making some enclosures for your PCBs copying features from existing objects around you.

hfdgiutdryg 8y ago

However, I believe that restriction is the mother of creativity, so I’m trying to restrict myself to keep it limited to what would have been available back then. I'm going to steal that phrasing.

emptybits 8y ago
"The more constraints one imposes, the more one frees one's self. And the arbitrariness of the constraint serves only to obtain precision of execution." - Igor Stravinsky
bookofjoe 8y ago
"Solve the problem with what's in the room."—Edwin Land

egypturnash 8y ago

I wonder if Ms. Allaire knows about the C65[1]. Her initial sketch of specs[2] is not too far off from that. IMHO Commodore was right to kill the C65 when they were already making the Amiga 1000. The end of all the 8-bit systems was pretty obvious by '89, when rumors of the c65 started going around - the Mac had been out for five years, the Amiga and Atari ST for four. It would have suffered a fate almost as ignominious as the Sega Saturn. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_65 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_65 2: https://www.c256foenix.com/forum/the-specifications/early-specifications https://www.c256foenix.com/forum/the-specifications/early-sp...

cmrdporcupine 8y ago
Yes, the death of 8-bit systems was obvious by 89, but so was the death of the 68000. Motorola was already pushing the failed 88000 by the late 80s. And the 68000 itself was killed off only a couple years later. So I don't really agree with you here. The 68000 was as big of a dead end, and IMHO was a terrible CPU for home computers and gaming machines. It was fast for 16 and 32 bit integer arithmetic, so basically good for its target market of minicomputer replacements and workstations -- but very slow at memory accesses and interrupt response, two things that slow down gaming/graphics type machines. The Amiga would have been more responsive and really just as powerful with the same custom chipset tied to something like a 65816 clocked at 8mhz. Would have been able to address just as much RAM but would have higher interrupt responsiveness, and Commodore could have made use of its existing 6502 expertise, thrown in a couple SID chips, and maybe even a VICII for C64 portability. What a machine that would have been! Likewise, I think Tramiel could have done something similar instead of diving down the 68000 path with the Atari ST. They could have improved on the excellent Jay Miner designed A8 chipset but tied it to something like the 816, which was just coming out in 84 when they started the ST project. Just some fantasy alternative history :-)
- walkingolof 8y ago
  >Likewise, I think Tramiel could have done something similar instead of diving down the 68000 path with the Atari ST. The Atari ST was built from scratch in less than 8 months after the deal to license the Amiga chipset fell trouhg. The ST is an amazing engineering feat considering the insane schedule. I agree on you that the 68k is a terrible CPU for gaming, but it got better when there was some cache added to it, starting with the 68030. I had an Acorn Archimedes with an ARM 2 clocked 8 Mhz (the same speed as the Atari ST, and 1 Mhz faster than the Amiga 1000/500), it was so much faster than my ST.

teddyh 8y ago

I would hope it runs something other than BASIC. BASIC is a terrible language, and the only reason it became popular is that there was a book published with a lot of games written in that language. People buying a home computer wanted games, and the commercial game market was initially nonexistent, so people wanted a computer with BASIC, since then they assumed they could play those games. The designers of this new computer might want to restrict themselves to old hardware, but there is no reason for them to restrict themselves to that old accident of history. Naïvely, I would assume that something like Forth or Occam would be much better for this, and both are also age-appropriate.

DanBC 8y ago
What's the best introduction to Forth or Occam for complete beginners to programming. (I didn't downvote you, and I have upvoted your post.)
- abecedarius 8y ago
  Starting FORTH was aimed at beginners. I wasn't one when I read it, so I couldn't really say. Certainly you wouldn't find a lot of games in Forth in the magazines.
the-dude 8y ago
BASIC is just a ROM. If I recall correctly, I had a LISP cartridge for my Acorn Electron. Except I didn't know LISP and there was no internet. We had a library though.
jerrysievert 8y ago
the c64 supported k&r c via the abacus c compiler. I learned c on my c64, in fact. a skill I still use 32 years later. you can download the manual courtesy of archive.org: https://archive.org/details/Super-C_1986_Abacus https://archive.org/details/Super-C_1986_Abacus
- GlenTheMachine 8y ago
  I had that. I interned at NASA as a high schooler, got exposed to C, and suddenly found BASIC lacking. SO I tracked down Abacus C at, as I recall, a JC Penney electronics section. It didn't support then entire K&R standard though. No function pointers.

Fnoord 8y ago

Reminds me of Computer latency: 1977-2017 [1] as recently linked on HN. 1977 and 60 ms latency. The SGI Indy of 1993 also had 60 ms latency. [1] https://danluu.com/input-lag/ https://danluu.com/input-lag/

samatman 8y ago

That grey and fine font on a white background is pretty hostile to the older sets of eyes that might like this article. I know this comes up a bit too often on HN but it's pretty, um, glaring, in this case.