Maybe I can get the bare minimum driver working without sprites and then we can work from there?
At least we will be able to run the basic interpreter and load some spectrum converted games like "The trapdoor" without sprites.
That sounds perfect. Could you post your progress in the stages of development? I'd really like to learn where the starting points of an emulation project such as this are.
Part of me thinks that is the coolest thing ever... The other part is screaming that this is exploitation of what was once a great name!!! If they would have simply altered the BIOS to include a C64 emulator that one could access by holding down the C= key I'd be all over this thing. Instead it's a stupid PC.
Part of me thinks that is the coolest thing ever... The other part is screaming that this is exploitation of what was once a great name!!! If they would have simply altered the BIOS to include a C64 emulator that one could access by holding down the C= key I'd be all over this thing. Instead it's a stupid PC.
OBC
Jeff, they're going to sell just the barebone case and keyboard... unfortunately for $250 bucks which is a bit too much.
They claim they have to recover the cost for the plastic mold and the custom made keyboard.
If the price will ever go down to 100-and-something, then it would be perfect for this project. More than a gutted real C64 considering the four arrow keys.
I agree that it's partly an exploitation, but frankly they had to face too harsh, unjustified (since they paid for the brand) and even ad-hominem hostility down at amiga.org forums, so I'd give them a chance.
I agree that it's partly an exploitation, but frankly they had to face too harsh, unjustified (since they paid for the brand) and even ad-hominem hostility down at amiga.org forums, so I'd give them a chance.
It appears that they are advertising a PC/AT Compatible computer in a custom case, with a custom (not yet released) OS. If they were only advertising an empty case, that would be different. As it stands they are putting the Commodore name on a PC/AT, something that Commodore promised never to do again after the failure of the Commodore PC. This is in direct disrespect to Commodore as a company. Also they are advertising Amiga styled PCs, and after a quick search I was able to confirm that they do NOT currently own Amiga.
It appears that they are advertising a PC/AT Compatible computer in a custom case, with a custom (not yet released) OS. If they were only advertising an empty case, that would be different. As it stands they are putting the Commodore name on a PC/AT, something that Commodore promised never to do again after the failure of the Commodore PC. This is in direct disrespect to Commodore as a company. Also they are advertising Amiga styled PCs, and after a quick search I was able to confirm that they do NOT currently own Amiga.
David
I understand your point, and I would agree with you if all this was happening shortly after Commodore/Amiga bankruptcy. But today it's just a retro hobby, and "Commodore" it's now just a brand they paid to use. Much worst has been done to Amiga and Commodore memory by others in the past 15 years.
Even the C64 DTV could have been seen as an exploitation of the brand by a toy company, but in the end (thanks to the developers sneaking in all the necessary to hack it) it ended to be one of the cheapest and most hackable retro things... so bad its availability is limited today!
Don't get me wrong, I'm really looking forward for things like your 68K project... but when I fire up SIMH it's more fun to pretend it's really a PDP-11 (eventually with the help of a serially connected Wyse-50) instead of repeating to myself "it's just a stinking PC!" ;-D
AntoineDoinel:
I do agree that it is nice to use emulators to remind us of the great days of the development of computing. And I would have no problem with there project if it were advertised as such. As far as there Amiga styled products are concerned, Commodore has NOT owned Amiga since about 1994, and Amiga has licensed new development as recently as 2007, maybe even more recently. After the breakup of commodore and Amiga GateWay took hold of amiga for a short time, until it was realized by Amiga that they were not going to get anywhere under Gateway, and Gateway saw no profit in Amiga, then Amiga was independent for a time and after that sold and bought a few times. Amiga and Commodore were never one and the same, yes Commodore did hold them for a long time and provide the production resources, though when Commodore went under to Bankrupcy they just let Amiga go again. Remember that this is why Amiga disliked Atari, Atari wanted to buy them rights and all, Commodore offered a much better solution.
The E-Mail that I sent them was very polite, asking them who licensed Amiga to them, and what the nature of there OS is, as well as why they chose to use a PC.
What made Commodore magic was their innovation.. They did things that no one else was doing at the time. It's part of the same reason I'm so impressed with Parallax. Unfortunately. the current owners of Commodore have different ideas.
Sooner or later the CBM name will go up for sale again. Maybe we can get a large contingent of those of us who loved the original to buy it. Give every contributor "stock" rights to the Commodore name and logo with permission to re-print it on products and software which pay tribute to the original company and the ideal.
It looks like the two remaining big hurdles are, the VIC II and the 6510 emulation. There already exists a 6502 emulation, so not to much to do for the CPU. VIC is the big challenge.
Sooner or later the CBM name will go up for sale again. Maybe we can get a large contingent of those of us who loved the original to buy it. Give every contributor "stock" rights to the Commodore name and logo with permission to re-print it on products and software which pay tribute to the original company and the ideal.
Now that is a great idea.
I have always been a little bit confused, about the difference between the 6502 and 6510. What is the effective difference?
On the second link, if you go to the bottom of the page, lists the following:
Different versions of the 6502:
In the C64/C128 series of computers, slightly modified versions of the 6502 were used. The modifications did not affect the functional part of the processor itself. Only a so-called processor port was added. This port, in combination with an external PLA, was used to map ROM and I/O areas into the 64KB RAM of the C64. Also, some bits of the port were used for the legendary Datasette.
The port can be accessed through memory adresses $0000 and $0001, while $0001 is the port itself, and $0000 is the data direction register for it.
Explanation for the bits of $0001:
7 - unused (Flash 8: 0=8MHz/1=1MHz)
6 - unused (C128: ASCII/DIN sense/switch (1=ASCII/0=DIN))
5 - Cassette motor control (0 = motor on)
4 - Cassette switch sense (0 = PLAY pressed)
3 - Cassette write line
2 - CHAREN (0=Character ROM instead of I/O area)
1 - HIRAM ($E000-$FFFF)
0 - LORAM ($A000-$BFFF)
If HIRAM or LORAM is set, the I/O area is mapped to $D000-$DFFF.
$0000 should always be set to $2F (%00101111)
Note to bit 6: This bit is used to select either the ASCII or the DIN character ROM of a C128. When data direction is set to INPUT, the charset is selected externally with the ASCII/DIN key.
CPU versions:
6502: NMOS, used in Commodore disk drives, PET, various other 8 bit computers
6502C: 6502 with additional HALT pin, used in Atari 8 bit computer range
6510: 6502 with additional processor port, used in C64
8500: CMOS version of the 6510, used in C64C and C64G
8502: 2 MHz version of the 8500, used in C128
7501: HMOS-1 version of the 6502, used in C16/C116/Plus4
8501: HMOS-2 version of the 6502, used in C16/C116/Plus4
All of these processors are the same concerning the software-side.
Some processors of the family which are not 100% compatible:
65C02: Extension of the 6502.
65SC02: Small version of the 65C02 which lost a few opcodes again.
65CE02: Extension of the 65C02, used in the C65.
65816: Extended 6502 with new opcodes and 16 bit operation modes.
I have always been a little bit confused, about the difference between the 6502 and 6510. What is the effective difference?
To quote myself from an earlier post in this thread:
The 6502 and the 6510 are almost identical; The only difference is the 8bit I/O port which is controlled by two memory mapped registers at address $0 and 1$ (data, direction).
These registers were used to map the different rom-chips in and out of the address space and also to handle communication with the datasette drive.
There is one more difference which isn't of any concern when it comes to emulation. I/O pins can be tristated on the 6510.
/Ahle2
The machines they made at the time are to be treasured but make no mistake CBM was Jack Tramiel's money making machine.
If he had his way he would have been Bill Gates.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_International
This company loyalty makes no sense to me. However it does highlight the power of marketing and branding over peoples minds.
Heater:
Yes, this is true. I was referring to the style of systems being developed by CBM, not the marketing, nor Jacks greed. I do not so much like Jack. At one point he even oversaw an Atari project (the Atari ST), that is greedy.
I'm no big fan of Jack either, but he did set the guidelines for the machines, as well as obtaining the best people possible for the project. The folks who I'm the biggest fans of are Robert Yannes (SID), Chuck Peddle (6502), Bil Herd (C128), and MOS technologies.
Company loyalty was earned as far I'm concerned. Had Apple and MOS been intelligent enough to collaborate, the Apple ][ would have been the A64. Woz did some amazing engineering, but the difference was that Woz was a minimalist when it came to circuit design. The special VID and SID chips are what put the ball out of the park for the Commodore 64.
Wasn't some here already working on a VIC emulation for the Propeller?
It is easy to armchair quarterback different situations, but at the end of the day Apple still won that battle without making exclusive deals with MOS. Apple made Apple 2, Mac, Mac with OSX that people actually liked, ipod iphone and ipad. Commodore made the Vic-20, C64, Amiga, then died and traded hands several times.
While Commodore did hold Amiga for a time (and manufactured the HW), Commodore did NOT make Amiga. Amiga designed every Amiga, even when CBM held them, and Amiga survived after CBM fell. Just take the time to look at Amiga OS3.5, 3.9, 4.0, 4.1, showing that Amiga is still under active development to this day (even if most of it is licensed through third party companies).
Admittedly Amiga did go idle for a few years in the 1990s, during the time Gateway held them. They never went under.
Oh and to note it has been verified that Amiga did not license anything to the new Commodore USA. I know a few people who are in constant contact with Amiga (currently independent) as a result of there work, and Amiga has refused every offer provided by Commodore USA.
Is any one still working towards the C64 Emulation on the Prop??? This is a great idea, and it is doable. We need only a VIC 2 emulation to get a minimal emulation up and running.
I have currently 4 projects going at the same time; But VIC 2 emulation is on my TODO list!
If you want to begin coding on a VIC emulator, that's okay with me
Comments
That sounds perfect. Could you post your progress in the stages of development? I'd really like to learn where the starting points of an emulation project such as this are.
Thanks
OBC
http://www.commodoreusa.net/CUSA_C64.aspx
Part of me thinks that is the coolest thing ever... The other part is screaming that this is exploitation of what was once a great name!!! If they would have simply altered the BIOS to include a C64 emulator that one could access by holding down the C= key I'd be all over this thing. Instead it's a stupid PC.
OBC
Jeff, they're going to sell just the barebone case and keyboard... unfortunately for $250 bucks which is a bit too much.
They claim they have to recover the cost for the plastic mold and the custom made keyboard.
If the price will ever go down to 100-and-something, then it would be perfect for this project. More than a gutted real C64 considering the four arrow keys.
I agree that it's partly an exploitation, but frankly they had to face too harsh, unjustified (since they paid for the brand) and even ad-hominem hostility down at amiga.org forums, so I'd give them a chance.
Alessandro
David
I understand your point, and I would agree with you if all this was happening shortly after Commodore/Amiga bankruptcy. But today it's just a retro hobby, and "Commodore" it's now just a brand they paid to use. Much worst has been done to Amiga and Commodore memory by others in the past 15 years.
Even the C64 DTV could have been seen as an exploitation of the brand by a toy company, but in the end (thanks to the developers sneaking in all the necessary to hack it) it ended to be one of the cheapest and most hackable retro things... so bad its availability is limited today!
Don't get me wrong, I'm really looking forward for things like your 68K project... but when I fire up SIMH it's more fun to pretend it's really a PDP-11 (eventually with the help of a serially connected Wyse-50) instead of repeating to myself "it's just a stinking PC!" ;-D
Alessandro
I do agree that it is nice to use emulators to remind us of the great days of the development of computing. And I would have no problem with there project if it were advertised as such. As far as there Amiga styled products are concerned, Commodore has NOT owned Amiga since about 1994, and Amiga has licensed new development as recently as 2007, maybe even more recently. After the breakup of commodore and Amiga GateWay took hold of amiga for a short time, until it was realized by Amiga that they were not going to get anywhere under Gateway, and Gateway saw no profit in Amiga, then Amiga was independent for a time and after that sold and bought a few times. Amiga and Commodore were never one and the same, yes Commodore did hold them for a long time and provide the production resources, though when Commodore went under to Bankrupcy they just let Amiga go again. Remember that this is why Amiga disliked Atari, Atari wanted to buy them rights and all, Commodore offered a much better solution.
The E-Mail that I sent them was very polite, asking them who licensed Amiga to them, and what the nature of there OS is, as well as why they chose to use a PC.
I wish the original CBM were back.
What made Commodore magic was their innovation.. They did things that no one else was doing at the time. It's part of the same reason I'm so impressed with Parallax. Unfortunately. the current owners of Commodore have different ideas.
Sooner or later the CBM name will go up for sale again. Maybe we can get a large contingent of those of us who loved the original to buy it. Give every contributor "stock" rights to the Commodore name and logo with permission to re-print it on products and software which pay tribute to the original company and the ideal.
OBC
I had sent Commodore an email that contained the fallowing body: And they responded (edited to not set off any filter):
Subject="LEARN TO READ, MOR*N" I do not think that there response was called for. And I know that I had made a spelling error.
It looks like the two remaining big hurdles are, the VIC II and the 6510 emulation. There already exists a 6502 emulation, so not to much to do for the CPU. VIC is the big challenge.
I have always been a little bit confused, about the difference between the 6502 and 6510. What is the effective difference?
http://hitmen.c02.at/files/releases/gbc/mnemonics_8080_z80_6502.txt
http://www.oxyron.de/html/opcodes02.html
On the second link, if you go to the bottom of the page, lists the following:
I also found an archived datasheet on the 6510
http://archive.6502.org/datasheets/mos_6510_mpu.pdf
To quote myself from an earlier post in this thread:
There is one more difference which isn't of any concern when it comes to emulation. I/O pins can be tristated on the 6510.
/Ahle2
What!?
The machines they made at the time are to be treasured but make no mistake CBM was Jack Tramiel's money making machine.
If he had his way he would have been Bill Gates.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_International
This company loyalty makes no sense to me. However it does highlight the power of marketing and branding over peoples minds.
Yes, this is true. I was referring to the style of systems being developed by CBM, not the marketing, nor Jacks greed. I do not so much like Jack. At one point he even oversaw an Atari project (the Atari ST), that is greedy.
I'm no big fan of Jack either, but he did set the guidelines for the machines, as well as obtaining the best people possible for the project. The folks who I'm the biggest fans of are Robert Yannes (SID), Chuck Peddle (6502), Bil Herd (C128), and MOS technologies.
Company loyalty was earned as far I'm concerned. Had Apple and MOS been intelligent enough to collaborate, the Apple ][ would have been the A64. Woz did some amazing engineering, but the difference was that Woz was a minimalist when it came to circuit design. The special VID and SID chips are what put the ball out of the park for the Commodore 64.
Wasn't some here already working on a VIC emulation for the Propeller?
OBC
I could not have said it better my self.
JT Cook: While Commodore did hold Amiga for a time (and manufactured the HW), Commodore did NOT make Amiga. Amiga designed every Amiga, even when CBM held them, and Amiga survived after CBM fell. Just take the time to look at Amiga OS3.5, 3.9, 4.0, 4.1, showing that Amiga is still under active development to this day (even if most of it is licensed through third party companies).
Admittedly Amiga did go idle for a few years in the 1990s, during the time Gateway held them. They never went under.
Oh and to note it has been verified that Amiga did not license anything to the new Commodore USA. I know a few people who are in constant contact with Amiga (currently independent) as a result of there work, and Amiga has refused every offer provided by Commodore USA.
If you want to begin coding on a VIC emulator, that's okay with me
/Ahle2