Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!eecg.toronto.edu!leblanc
From: leblanc@eecg.toronto.edu (Marcel LeBlanc)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: Eulogy to the C128 (*Long*) (was Re: Homecum 640k acts like 64)
Summary: Why push 8-bit archoitectures when it isn't necessary?
Keywords: C64, C128, Amiga, C1024
Message-ID: <1989Oct2.140220.4532@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Date: 2 Oct 89 18:02:20 GMT
References: <89092920434743@masnet.uucp> <10657@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Organization: EECG, University of Toronto
Lines: 98

In article <10657@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> bskendig@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Brian Kendig) writes:
>In article <89092920434743@masnet.uucp> doug.purdy@canremote.uucp (DOUG PURDY) writes:
>>But I feel let down with this happening on our C128 with 1750 REU, 1571
>>and 1581 disk drives. How did it come to pass that this fast, powerful
>>machine can't run software any better than a 64k, 1541 combo?
>
>It can.  The problem is that software doesn't exist for it to show its
>stuff.

Make that: "NOT MUCH software exists for it to show its stuff"

>Hardware: The 128 is built to almost accommodate 1,024k of memory.  By
>'almost', I mean that there are places on the circuit board to plug in
>more chips, but the chips just ain't available!  So it's stuck with 1/4 of
>a meg.  The 80-column display, too, could handle 64k (for some pretty nifty
>displays) - but was given 16k until too late.

Why should Commodore, or anybody for that matter, want to build such a
machine?  A banked-memory architecture machine like the C128, or a
hypothetical C1024, is a pain to program!  This *IS* important to the end
user, because it means that the software available for his machine will tend
to be less capable.  The C128 is already in the same price neighborhood as
an Amiga 500 which has a FAR SUPERIOR operating system and much more
powerful graphics and sound hardware (I don't want to start a debate about
CPU speeds, but why NOT :-) My guess is that the 7.xx MHz 68000 is
20-30% faster than the C128's 2MHz 8502, on a reasonably large sample of
software)

>>Where are the real professional Commodore programmers? Why do many
>>programs feel like they were created by some first time amateur with
>>professional graphics tacked on as an afterthought?
>
>Consider this: Anyone good enough to really make the Commodore sit up,
>roll over, and do tricks, is probably also intelligent enough to realize
>that he could be working elsewhere, developing software for the machines
>that are on everyone's minds these days: Macintosh, IBM.  No offense
>intended towards those engineers who loyally support the Commodore
>8-bits, but the market has really moved away from 8-bit machines.

What "market" are you talking about?  The C64/C128 were never really of much
significance in the business market, but they continue to be THE major
player in the game (recreational) market!  The C64 is selling VERY well.  It
has matured into a game machine, with a very broad appeal (resulting in a
HUGE "market")!  It sounds like your needs have grown beyond the C64/C128,
and this is coloring your judgement, but the C64 goes on...

(Yes, I am a professional "Commodore" engineer/programmer)

>>With the 1581 available at such low prices, why is anything written
>>exclusively for the notoriously slow and expensive 1541? Why is Willow
>>too slow and awkward for a 640k machine with an 800k 1581 when the whole 
>>thing is less than 500k? I can't see why it shouldn't be a dream on a
>>256k REU equipped C64!
>
>Because EVERYBODY has a 1541, or can emulate a 1541.  Too many people

And a large majority of those people have some sort of fast loading utility.

>>A C64 programmer friend who's hot on the anti piracy  issue feels fast
>>loader cartridges should be banned.

Huh?  Sorry, I don't understand what fast loader cartridges have to do with
piracy.

>In my opinion, Commodore's mistake has been to do everything almost
>halfheartedly.  The C64 took the market by storm, much to everyone's
>surprise.

Speak for yourself :-)

>Nobody seems to know what Commodore is up to these days.
>
>Look guys!  Get your act together!  The Amiga is an *incredible* computer -
>it is capable of much more than the Macintosh, at a comparable price!
>Start organizing your market!

Yes, it is a great machine.  I'd say its market is organized, since the
Amiga has established several cosy niches. :-)

>...  Get some standards for your machine!  

Huh?  The Amiga is very standardized.  Programs written according to simple
rules will work on any version of AmigaDOS (1.0 to 1.3).

>..Start
>aggressively advertising it, making it compatible with Macs and IBMs (they're
>apparently here to stay)

Actually, I think CBM is starting a major advertising campaign in
mid-October for Christmas sales.  The Amiga already has software emulators
for both the MAC and the PC, and a hardware card for real PC compatibility.

>| Brian S. Kendig

Marcel A. LeBlanc	   | University of Toronto -- Toronto, Canada
"leblanc@eecg.toronto.edu" | and: LMS Technologies Ltd, Fredericton, NB, Canada
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UUCP:	uunet!utai!eecg!leblanc    BITNET: leblanc@eecg.utoronto[.ca]