3 ms·
So refreshing to see a MSX machine being featured here. Way before PCs got decent graphics and audio, everyone I did show my MSX (1.0) got impressed by it. Even
by outworlder 5y ago
So refreshing to see a MSX machine being featured here. Way before PCs got decent graphics and audio, everyone I did show my MSX (1.0) got impressed by it. Even more so with the "plug and play" capabilities - cartridges could contain software, hardware or a combination of both.
You could have a cartridge that allowed you to play a game - just like a console - while another allowed you to have a (say) disk drive. While 40 columns per line was the standard (this was upgraded with the 2.0 spec), there were cartridges that allowed you to have 80 columns - and would contain all necessary hardware.
Today this is not impressive and "firmware" is commonplace. But at the time the state of the art on the PC involved jumper flipping and installing software from disks...
Then the Amiga came in a similar (although more expensive) niche and there was no contest.
I never really understood why MSX didn't succeed in the US, considering that MSX means "Microsoft Extended". My first contact with DOS was MSX-DOS.
- arp242 5y agoThe US had the Commodore64 and the UK had the BBC micro, which are both more or less similar in capabilities (or so it seems; I only ever used the MSX myself) and released at about the same time (or actually, a bit earlier it seems). I bet this is an important part why it was never popular there.