3 ms·
To me the NES is the precursor of Apple and Google with closed systems that preys on the discovery of the home computer and creates waste (cartridges) when soft
by bullen 5y ago
To me the NES is the precursor of Apple and Google with closed systems that preys on the discovery of the home computer and creates waste (cartridges) when software can be written to re-writeable media (cassettes, floppies and network).
C64 and Amiga are the precursors of the Raspberry, that while not 100% good; they atleast leave you in charge of your machine to a larger extent:
http://move.rupy.se/file/commodore.png http://move.rupy.se/file/commodore.png
Another interesting tidbit is that Nintendo wanted Commodore to design the Famicom but Tramiel bailed in the last second when the Commodore guy was allready in Japan on his way to that first meeting.
Last but not least, the C64 had S-video before it even had that name, separating the chroma and luma. Not even the Amigas had that 10 years later.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y agoFloppies and cassettes had slow access times and lacked the ability to use mappers to extend functionality. Pluggable ROM cartridges had a lot of advantages and were used by computer systems of the era too. Besides, Nintendo did have the Famicom Disk System in Japan, which used rewritable floppies.
- bullen 5y agoEverything can do anything, you need to look at what the majority did. And not even 0.0000001% of NES/Famicom owners had a keyboard and a disk drive and out of those probably 0% did any coding since Nintendo to this day does not allow you to run what you want on your hardware unless you hack it.
- butlerm 5y agoThe Amiga had analog RGB output that was used by everyone because high resolution text (640x200) was unreadable with the composite output. Composite was okay for playing video games (inevitably 320x200), but few actually did that. One RGB monitor that worked (and much better than composite) was good enough. That was in August 1985, about three years after the C-64. The Atari ST came out a few months earlier, and had excellent monitors, the problem was you really wanted two of them, one for high resolution (640x400), non-interlaced black and white, and the other for RGB low resolution (320x200) color. They were not compatible with each other. In the PC world you started to see digital RGB EGA with 64 colors about this time, but until VGA monitors came out there wasn't really anything to compare to the Amiga / Atari ST in the color department. VGA was released in 1987, and of course took a few years to become common. An amazing number of PC video games were still CGA (four color low res digital RGB) at the time, but that of course all changed a few years later when VGA became standard.
- bullen 5y agoSure, but the RGB standard did not survive so the Amigas are for all intents and purposes limited by composite out of the box today. Again everything can do anything.
- butlerm 5y agoThe analog RGB signals from an Amiga are so standard that you can easily break them out and plug into almost any analog RGB monitor, including any decent VGA monitor with an off the shelf adapter. Composite support is an aberration and no one in their right mind would run an Amiga using composite only for any significant period of time, and it has always been that way. It was a waste of hardware, they should have left it out, almost no one ever used it. Of course these days HDMI conversion is better, but that is also the case for nearly any video signal you want to display from more than a couple of decades ago.
- bullen 5y agoI use composite on my A1200 because RGB -> anything means trouble with signals and latency. My GV-USB2 capture dongle has zero latency and I only play games.