10 ms·
Commander X16 8 bit computer now has its own website
- loraa 6y agoWhy?
- WesBrownSQL 6y agoI'm in
- maheart 6y agoI was originally interested in this, but I recently found a seemingly good alternative in the Color Maximite 2 (http://geoffg.net/maximite.html http://geoffg.net/maximite.html) which sits somewhere between 8bit (feel) and 16bit (graphics).
- jhallenworld 6y ago8-bit guy reviewed it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA7REQxohV4&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA7REQxohV4&feature=youtu.be
- bitwize 6y agoHe reviewed the other computers in the Maximite series in the past. He considered the Maximites as possible candidates for what he was looking for in a "modern" retro style computer, but decided to pass on them as they weren't quite what he wanted. Very interesting machines nevertheless, and fun to play with for retro fans.
- emmanueloga_ 6y agoThis review by C-trix is also very cool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzrX72aB7zg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzrX72aB7zg
- djaychela 6y agoI was going to post a similar thing. I know the 8 bit guy reviewed it positively, and for me the CM2 is a better bet as it can run BASIC code about as fast as a 6505 can run assembler. I know it's not as legitimately retro (in terms of chips), but that doesn't matter to me; what does matter is having an accessible system to play about with and hopefully show my son that programming can be fun and he can make games without an impossibly step learning curve (ie how I felt about my ZX spectrum back in the day).
- zozbot234 6y ago> I know it's not as legitimately retro (in terms of chips), but .. what does matter is having an accessible system to play about with ... (ie how I felt about my ZX spectrum back in the day). Hopefully we'll see more focus on RISC-V chips in the future. A RISC-V based, maximite-like system would bring assembly-level programming that's as simple and accessible as it could feasibly be, and quite comparable to the ease of writing assembly for the old 8-bit chips.
- cmrdporcupine 6y agoI had started on a project like this, which I was calling "Retro V" (retro 5... is alive! for the 80s movie reference...) It's a PicoRV32 core + a simple 'retro' style video display processor (sprites, character generator, and 640x480 8 bit palette indexed bitmap graphics) that outputs on HDMI/DVI, plus 512KB of SRAM that runs on the CMod A35t board (Artix 7 35t FPGA + SRAM on DIP friendly package), which I intended on making a simple daughterboard for (to hook up PS/2 keyboard & mouse, add some extra RAM etc.) The "OS" was to be mid-80s style -- boot to a REPL, either a BASIC or something like Lua, with simple DOS commands and an assembly language monitor. I got pretty far but stalled out around Christmas when things got a bit busy personally for me, and I ran into the complications of getting the QSPI flash chip interfaced for storing programs. I might pick this project back up again. I think it has potential. BTW I don't actually think RISC-V assembly is all that great for beginners. It's a bit awkward to write directly. For example, to set a 32-bit register with an immediate value requires setting the upper 20 bits followed by the lower 12. Similar with PC jumps, etc. In general RISC architecture assembly language is meant to be written by C compilers, not humans. I actually think beginners might be better off with a CISC instruction set (like the 68k or similar). EDIT: Thinking more about this, out of all the architectures that GCC currently supports, 68k seems to be the most "retro" and easiest/most enjoyable to write by hand.
- cturner 6y agoSomething I found frustrating - the Maximite repl goes out of its way to prevent the user from writing machine code. This is not in the spirit of classic systems. Maximite lacks memory protection, and does allow direct writes to memory. There will be a way to over-write a basic function in order to hijack initiative into machine code. More, http://songseed.org/dinghy/d.pic32.platform.html http://songseed.org/dinghy/d.pic32.platform.html
- nogabebop23 6y agoThe main pusher behind Commander X16 talked a bit about this alternative. It does feel like an 8-bit machine but IMO is closer to an emulator than 8-bit hardware. It's super overpowered compared to what it represents with the most intriguing aspect being it runs reegular old basic faster than a C64 runs machine code. Some of the creations are pretty amazing, but mostly because of today's hardware. It's also been pretty difficult to get a maximite (though this might clear up)
- tyingq 6y agoYou can get a similar feel, very inexpensively, with an ESP32. Tiny Basic[1] and the FabGL vga library[2] turn an ESP32 into a reasonable retro clone. You can even find an ESP32 that already has PS/2 and VGA connectors for $11[3]. [1] https://github.com/BleuLlama/TinyBasicPlus https://github.com/BleuLlama/TinyBasicPlus [2] https://github.com/fdivitto/fabgl https://github.com/fdivitto/fabgl [3] https://www.tindie.com/products/ttgo/lilygor-ttgo-vga32_v14-controller/ https://www.tindie.com/products/ttgo/lilygor-ttgo-vga32_v14-...
- ibobev 6y agoI think that for such modern retro style systems is very important to have a huge community and because of this a legacy compatible systems like ZX Spectrum Next[1] or MEGA65[2] or systems designed from persons with a huge audience like David Murray[3] are clear winners. ESP32, TinyBasic and FabGL look cool, but it seems that there is not enough people knowing about them and wanting to develop software for/with them. Unfortunately the same can also be said for the Maximite series of machines. I wasn't able to find any dedicated FabGL or Maximite community sites. The same cannot be said for the upper mentioned computers which apparently already have significant community and some people actively developing games and other software for them. ZX Spectrum Next even have a dedicated distribution site[4]. Commander X16's official site has community downloads section[5] which looks similar. If someone wants only to have some fun programming a retro like machine in Basic or in C++ with FabGL, ESP32 is really a cheep alternative, but most probably what he does with it, will stay only his own personal experience and he will not have a huge chance to find some audience or community. [1]https://www.specnext.com/ https://www.specnext.com/ [2]https://mega65.org/ https://mega65.org/ [3]http://www.the8bitguy.com/ http://www.the8bitguy.com/ [4]https://www.spectrumnextgames.uk/ https://www.spectrumnextgames.uk/ [5]https://www.commanderx16.com/forum/index.php?/files/category/11-community-downloads/ https://www.commanderx16.com/forum/index.php?/files/category...
- jhallenworld 6y agoPeople should really get retro crazy about the TI-99/4A, now hear me out.. It's generally the cheapest retro computer you can buy, and it's really weird, not some easy computer like the C64 or Atari 800: The TI-99/4A BASIC interpreter is written in another byte-code interpreted language. This is because the BASIC ROM is not directly accessible to the CPU, you have to read it indirectly through a port. Likewise, the 16K of dedicated video RAM is also only accessible through a port. Now keep in mind this is a 16 KB computer, so your BASIC program is stored in the video RAM. It only has 256 bytes of 16-bit native RAM (unless you have the PEB...) Now it uses a pretty good 16-bit CPU (but weird mind you- its registers are kept in external RAM), but massively crippled like this to keep the cost down, but also to prevent the home computer from competing with TI's minicomputer line. TI made millions of them.
- II2II 6y agoWhile there are many reasons why people should be retro crazy for the TI-99/4A, the Commander X16 is unique for a bunch of reasons that would make it difficult to recreate for other systems: - Some of the hardware reflects 1980's designs. For example, it uses a CPU that was used back then and is still available. (Edit: or rather a variation of the CPU.) - Some of the software is from the 1980's. That requires rights holders who are willing to license that software. Those two criteria alone would limit the systems this type of project could reimagine. Then you have to consider: - The people behind this project. Creating your dream computer in hardware takes skill and determination. The people following through decided to use the Commoder 64 as their model. - A large part of the rationale is that it is "easy" and lacks weirdness. Many of the people interested in retro computers are looking for something more engaging than games. They want hardware that is simple enough for them to understand and develop software for at a low level. Yet I suspect that the biggest reason why the C=64 was reimagined has to do with the community around it today. For whatever reason, Commodore computers have attracted a following of hardware and software tinkerers (this goes for the Amiga as well). I haven't seen quite the same thing to a similar degree of dedication on other platforms, aside from some particularly dedicated 68k Macintosh hardware presevationists and 8-bit Atari software developers.
- 6y ago
- banana_giraffe 6y agoThe emulator locks up if you type "DOS" and press enter. How odd.
- unixhero 6y agoHow did you manage to figure this out? Do you generally try that command out?
- banana_giraffe 6y agoNope, I just did a strings dump of the ROM file this page is running, and noticed it near some other commands.
- unixhero 6y agoCool thanks
- bdowling 6y agoWhy the 6502 instead of the 65816?
- LIV2 6y agoA '816 would indeed be much better suited to access 512K of banked memory rather than banking through an 8K window but perhaps they don't think 65816 counts as retro enough, or maybe they're just masochists
- rbanffy 6y agoThe 65816 had a segmented memory, like the 8086. That's still very masochistic.
- 0xTJ 6y agoIt's not segmented, it's banked. And due to instructions that can use far pointers, you can directly access the entire memory. The main annoying part for me is that the stack and zero page are stuck within the first bank, limiting usability for a multitasking system.
- moring 6y agoCan't you still have 128 tasks even without sharing pages between tasks? That is, one direct page and one stack page for each task, with 256 pages total in bank 0. With sharing I mean, when you have two or more tasks of which only one instance will run, they can use the same direct page. Similar if you can statically limit the stack size of the tasks to a fraction of 256 bytes, you can fit multiple stacks on the same page with some work.
- cmrdporcupine 6y agoSaid far pointers are only for certain instructions, and there's no register which can hold a full 24-bit address, so there's always a bunch of hassle when dealing with addresses. They should have added a "pointer" register, which could hold both a 16 bit value and a bank value. Program counter is 16 bit, with a separate bank byte; it'll wrap when it hits the bank boundary. Constantly having to flip between register modes is a hassle. And makes it very difficult to write compilers and high level languages. Many common patterns require flipping back and forth a few times. Either they needed to have a whole new set of addressing modes, or they should have just added 3 new registers -- 16 bit versions of X Y and A -- and let the two co-exist. Honestly, this is an era when a 68000 could be had with a full 16 register set of 32-bit registers. The 65816 doesn't look so hot in that light, though it certainly was faster at interrupt handling. I guess Nintendo made do with their modified 816, but it really is not a nice architecture.
- wbhart 6y agoWhat I'm really curious to know is at what effective screen resolution it will have sufficient power to update every pixel on the screen in a single frame (assuming you are using assembly language and true graphics, not a character mode), with enough CPU cycles left over to do some computation.
- jhallenworld 6y agoWith an 8 MHz 6502? It's around 15 cycles per byte for memcpy, so 500KB/s of data. At 60 Hz frame rate, that's 8KB- so 64x128 for byte per pixel, or 256x256 for a bit per pixel.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- wvenable 6y agoThe GPU supports multiple tile layers and has 128 individual sprites so updating every pixel on the screen in a single frame is unlikely to be how you use it. This is in style of 8-bit machines that had hardware sprite support and tiles graphics rather than treating the display as a flat framebuffer.
- wbhart 6y agoSure. It's just nice to know what the limitations are in that regard. Some demos for the Atari 8 bit machines for example did use them that way by lowering the resolution sufficiently far and then writing really tight assembly language. So I was just interested in comparing on that basis.
- KingOfCoders 6y agoMe too, I love plasmas.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- TeaDude 6y agoBeen eagerly anticipating this thing for a while now. Originally it looked like it was gonna come out before the MEGA65 (because they had been dragging their butts for like 6 years) but now it looks like THAT's gonna be coming out first! How times change! I hope they don't clash with each-other as they both look awesome!
- bencollier49 6y agoI received my ZX Spectrum Next recently and it's fantastic. Personally, I'd be put off the X16 by its weird form factor, which I guess is intended to avoid the need to commission of custom keyboard design.
- the_af 6y agoI really dig the looks of the ZX Spectrum Next. I never had a Speccie as a kid, so it lacks the nostalgia factor for me, but it looks like a great product. I ended up buying TheC64: a C64 lookalike that has the looks but none of the hassle of the real old hardware. I don't care for the games carousel (I know where to get games anyway) and I wish it booted up faster, like the BMC64 emulator does, but other than that I'm sure I'll love it. I can't wait to write petscii graphics with a C64-like keyboard ;)
- rbanffy 6y agoThings like this make me want to design an Apple IV... Sadly, the IIgs was not really an upgrade to the II line, but rather a 65816-based "MacAmiga ST" with an Apple IIe inside, screaming to come out. And we all know the III would have been a good computer, if it weren't designed by the marketing team.
- jecel 6y agoSomething like project 1 in the "Other projects:" part of this page? http://www.byrdsight.com/apple-macintosh/ http://www.byrdsight.com/apple-macintosh/
- rbanffy 6y agoI'd probably use a 65816 and a direct progression of the II and /// feature sets. Maybe place the frame buffer on dual-ported RAM so it wouldn't be locked to main system timings. Or add a palette that would merge 2 or 4 pixels into 4 or 16 color entries. Maybe linearize the HGR and DHGR modes too.
- blickentwapft 6y agoRetro machines always feel less authentic to me when they use an fpga for the CPU instead of an actual retro CPU or descendant of. Just opinion of course. Retro is whatever it means to you.
- markonen 6y agoCPU - WDC 65C02S @ 8 MHz - 40-pin DIP package
- blickentwapft 6y agoOh ok that’s encouraging. It does use an fpga for graphics. That’s kinda surprising I would have thought there’d be a suitable graphics chip off the shelf.
- gecko 6y agoHe’s looked at a few on his YouRube channel and discussed what his issues were with them. Basically, the existing ones made trade-offs he’s wasn’t super excited about, and he needs some modern chip due to HDMI and the like.
- 0xTJ 6y agoIf you can find a suitable graphics chip, please let me know, but I've been casually looking for the past few years for a chip that can connect to a parallel bus, and output VGA and/or composite. There http://www.vlsi.fi/en/products/vs23s040.html http://www.vlsi.fi/en/products/vs23s040.html, but it requires SPI to configure video, on the same pins used for the parallel bus.
- pantalaimon 6y agoI mean you can bit-bang SPI. But from the features it sounds like it’s really just a frame buffer/RAMDAC, no sprites or other fancy features.
- phire 6y ago
- blue1 6y agomeanwhile, Stefany Allaire put an end to the C256 Foenix project :( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gv9KELroAeo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gv9KELroAeo
- virtue3 6y agoI didn't know anything about this project. But it seemed like another creator got fed up with the online criticisms. She made mention of a youtube comment about "why not just make an emulator, it's so much easier". Really really sad that SO many people think that their comments just go into the void and don't affect people :(
- cmrdporcupine 6y agoI made an emulator for some aspects of her machine early on. Not to displace her project, which I thought was great (she's insanely talented), but to bootstrap development of software and demos for when the machine came out. I was on the list to get one of the boards. What she was working on was a far better machine than this 8-bit guy project. But I pulled myself off the list and stopped working on it when she started making ad hominem personal attacks on me. I don't think she ever liked the emulator project, which is fine, but she made some rather paranoid false accusations against me. So I walked. It's a shame her project is gone. But there's a similar machine, the Neon816, that is also really interesting. But after having working with the 65c816 for that period of time I've decided it's a processor I don't really want to play with. It's really unpleasant to code for.
- gecko 6y agoThanks for providing more information. It’s too bad, but I’m glad there’s a similar project. The true desire to follow the C128 made that a bit more interesting to me than the Neon816, but I’ll give that another look. One question: But after having working with the 65c816 for that period of time I've decided it's a processor I don't really want to play with. It's really unpleasant to code for. I’d love to hear a bit more. I hate coding for the SNES, but mostly because doing it properly feels like nothing but DMA. What about the 65816 makes it painful in general, if you don’t mind my asking? I find the 6502 very pleasant, if understandably limited.
- sepisoad 6y agoit reminds of another cool (maybe even cooler!) project named Uzebox: http://uzebox.org/wiki/Main_Page http://uzebox.org/wiki/Main_Page Although it is focused mainly on games
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- kgwxd 6y agoI hope this means the Facebook group is no longer the main community. That's the only reason I lost interest in the project.
- rst 6y agoOdd to see "a real CPU, not an ... FPGA". For perspective, the first "real" SPARC processor was implemented in a Fujitsu gate array (though not, I think, field programmed). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MB86900 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MB86900