@OneTimer1

in a row

@OneTimer1

is really

@OneTimer1

unusual

@OneTimer1

and I will never do it again

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @cdimauro Quote: No, they are not fully compatible with 8086/8088. Don't assume. I already know Z80 is not compatible with 8088/8086. Z80 CP/M standard was the business platform establishment before the x86 PC establishment. "Own goal" mistake is on Zilog. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDgFXMKA6QU

You've completely failed to understand the context of my reply.

READ IT AGAIN!

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: Trivial example: with a 640x200x16 colours screen So? That mode was utterly useless for games and with apps you would still have blocked chip RAM access even if the system had real FAST making it pretty much useless for anything but a static picture.

That was a TRIVIAL example: I've reported more, and more common/realistic ones, but "strangely" (!) you've completely removed them from the quote...
Quote:

Sure the could have done something slightly with just a little more time and budget,

As I've already reported, it was a TRIVAL change: only a few gates, and probably just a logical port.
Quote:

but with what they were given we got: - cheap 1MB on the budget system - 1MB base on the "pro" system with easy and affordable option to expand with up to 8MB of FAST

I've said nothing against the 1MB: they were very welcome.

But I've A LOT to say about the "solution" that was implemented, because it HEAVILY crippled the usage.
Quote:

So simply not a real problem.

Not for you because you've not developed games for the Amiga, and you don't get the BIG implications of both alternative solutions (e.g.: 1MB Chip Mem or an additional 512kB of Fast Mem).

Since you seem to don't trust me (albeit I've given technical considerations of both better solutions), ask skilled game developers their opinions.

@minator

Quote:

minator wrote: @cdimauro Quote: That wasn't the point. The point is that this PA-RISC with its very very limited amount of caches would have been a complete disaster, since it was supposed to be not only the graphic processors, but the central processor has well. The PA-RISC in Hombre was to be a custom 50MHz implementation with added custom SIMD graphics instructions. Hombre is listed as having 6K cache + texture memory.

No, it had 2kB instruction and 1kB data cache, with the HOPE to double them.
Quote:

That's more than the Playstation.

The Playstation had 5kB of caches, so not far way from the hoped 6kB, but with the notable difference that the 1kB data cache can be used as scratchpad area (e.g. coders are free to use it as super fast embedded memory).
Quote:

The CPU would have done general processing and also geometry calculations, but at 50MHz I don't think it would have been much of a problem.

IF there aren't many cache misses: that's the point.

You can have very high frequencies, but if your processor is spending too much time with cache misses, this advantage is lost.
Quote:

That said, it is a *very* clever design. The Blitter (which also does texture mapping) can read from the cache. This means it can get the geometry data directly without going to memory, saving a ton of bandwidth.

That's a very good thing. IF you've a lot of polygons to be rendered.
Quote:

Quote: I've already told you that the Atari Jaguar was a failure It was always going to be, it was complex to program, they shipped bad tools and they seemingly didn't care about 3rd party developers at all. You have to wonder if they had lessons from Commodore management. Quote: and it had a CUSTOM RISC (so, specialized on this specific task -> much more efficient and with better performance) which was ONLY DEVOTED to the graphics (because the system had a main, separated, processor. And other custom processors for other tasks), 2 custom RISCs in fact, it would have been a very nice system if they hadn't rushed it to market without allowing the development team to debug it ...there was a nasty bug in the memory controller that appears to have somewhat hurt performance.

I fully agree on that: it was released too early and too bugged.
Quote:

Quote: and with DOUBLE the caches. The Jag doesn't have any cache, it uses local memories, so more like DSPs. So they'll run incredibly fast and then just stop until more code is loaded.

The graphic processor has 4kB of caches.
Quote:

Quote: How do you think that Hombre could have performed? Depends on which version they made, there's a single 32 bit VRAM version or a better version with 64 bit VRAM + CPU RAM. I think the 64 bit version would have been similar performance to the Playstation if not better, the 32 bit version lower performance.

The PS specs look much better, even using a 32-bit processor (the PA-RISC was 64-bit).
Quote:

Both would have looked amazing though, they could use Ham8 as the background playfield.

That's a good point for Hombre (visually compelling, but using 1/3 of the space), but only if you've a static background.

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote: @MEGA_RJ_MICAL Quote: Five posts in a row. If this is not autism, my friends, then what? By now you should already know how forums are supposed to work.

He's only interested on trolling, and he takes any chance to do it: you can clearly see how he's like a Vulture, continuously waiting the forum for new "food", and then flying to the target.

But the ones with mental illness are the users which... use the forum. According to him, of course.

@cdimauro

silence, goblin.

/mega_rj_mical

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @cdimauro Quote: The same happened to Commodore as well in the last years, with the help of HP & VLSI. The difference: 1. AA Lisa was designed by CSG LSI personnel and fabricated by 3rd party. From Commodore - The Final Years book As work progressed on the graphics chip, Lisa, it became clear that the timeline was too ambitious. Jeff Porter set a more realistic expectation of late 1990. As Porter predicted, CSG produced the first prototype chips by late November 1990 and testing began. CSG produced the first prototype chips. HP aided with mass production. 2. PlayStation's custom CXD8514Q GPU was designed by Toshiba. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_technical_specifications 32-bit Sony GPU (designed by Toshiba)

If you talk of components entirely developed externally, then there's Hombre, which was designed around the same time of the PS1.
Quote:

Quote: Wasn't the ECS chipset... a new chipset? Wasn't it embedding support for high-resolution graphics? Wasn't it embedding support for the extra Ultra-highres bitplane & sprite (likely using VRAM)? Full ECS has been operational since the internal 1988 A2000-CR prototype. From Commodore - The Final Years book On February 4, 1987, LSI head Ted Lenthe produced a development schedule with prototype samples expected in May and the first 1000 production units in July. He assigned Hi-Res Denise the chip number 8369. Commodore engineer Bob Raible would perform the layout for Hi-Res Denise, with assistance from Amiga engineers Glenn Keller and Mark Shieu. Engineer Victor Andrade became lead designer on another chip, dubbed Hi-Res Fat Agnus, which received chip number 8372. A new chip designer named Bill Gardei would provide simulation and testing support. Andrade and Raible would need to make a few tweaks on the Los Gatos design in order to ensure plug-in compatibility. The West Chester engineers wanted the new chips to be pin compatible with the A500 and A2000-CR boards to make future improvements of the systems easy, although the AmigaOS software would need to be upgraded to work with the chips. From West Chester engineers, VRAM ECS was ditched and modified for the existing 16-bit DRAM-equipped A500 and A2000-CR. 1989 released A500 Rev6A PCB design is full ECS ready without any bodge wire hacks. A500 Rev6A PCB design fully supports 8372B/8372AB and 2MB Chip RAM configuration along with Kickstart 2.0 512KB ROM. https://www.amibay.com/threads/2megs-chipram-on-rev-6a-amiga-500-motherboard.89654/

According to the last link, it looks like that the A3000 had different ECS chips compared to the ones in this A500 Rev6A.

It only talks about the Agnus 2MB version (the Amiga 3000's one), and not about Denise, but it has to be seen if the Denise in this Rev6A is able to support the Super HiRes (and the Ultra bitplane + sprite), as the one in the A3000.

I've already and specifically asked it in the past, but you never gave an answer (which is THE relevant thing in THIS part of the discussion).
Quote:

Quote: The standard for game companies was set by the 512kB Chip + 512kB Slow Mem. Everything extra was... extra, and not changing (cannot change) the core of the games. That's policy. During 1989, A500 Rev6A (with ECS Agnus A)'s install base was ramping up, hence A500's older Rev 3 and Rev 5 were dominant. It would take 1989 and 1990 sales for the A500 Rev6A to be dominant over the older A500 Rev3/Rev5. A500 Rev 6A's 512KB Chip RAM + 512 Slow RAM configuration with alternate 1MB Chip RAM access is built in. Reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_share_of_personal_computer_vendors A500 Rev 6A is the de facto Amiga standard sometime in 1991. If a game targeted A500 Rev 6A (with 512KB Chip RAM + 512 Slow RAM and alternate 1MB Chip RAM access), it would break on older A500 Rev 3 and Rev 5.

Which shows you why it can't really be considered as the (new) standard: you'll miss a good part of the market, which software houses can NOT ignore.
Quote:

A500 platform wasn't designed to have a partitioned graphics card upgrade i.e. horizontal graphics card that can be upgraded.

You can't install a nVidia RTX 5090 on the first IBM PC...
Quote:

Quote: I've highlighted the relevant parts which show why it was good that this board/architecture was rejected. $300 retail increase is okay for countries with strong currencies. Retail US$499 baseline + US$300 = US $799, which is AU$1100 range. Retail US$599 baseline + US$300 = US $899, which is AU$1200 range. My family is okay with spending the AU$1500 range 386DX33/ET4000AX PC in Q4 1992. Roughly equivalent to US$1000 and UKP 750. $125 BOM vs $300 retail estimate is using a familiar 2.4 ratio. This ratio can change.

Your family was irrelevant for the Amiga market: the A500 clearly brought back Commodore to the "Computer for the masses, non for the classes".

Hence, the very big price increase of the Acutiator board was NOT in line with what the company needed.
Quote:

Quote: Just one thing to add here: Amiga did NOT need any (P)MMU to keep cache consistency. In fact, the OS had proper APIs for that: it was "enough" (!) to just use them. For 68040-class CPUs with Amigas, data cache consistency needs a working MMU. 68EC040 can't be used with the current Amiga!

Source for this?
Quote:

68020's instruction cache doesn't need an MMU. 68030's data cache has a cache suppression pin.

OK, and?
Quote:

I have TF1260, can you guarantee 68EC060 rev6's suitability with Amiga?

That's up to the TF1260 board. To be more precise, IF its architect has designed it taking into account the proper requirements for making it work with the Amiga.

And to be even more clear: it's not the Amiga which should adapt to the board, but viceversa.
Quote:

Quote: No. From what I've read and it was reported, engineers decides on their own, without consulting and management approval. You just ignored the Commodore story drama.

?!? I've just reported the FACTs. If you've other sources to show the contrary, then show them.
Quote:

Quote: The C65 was revealed TWO YEARS BEFORE that the ECS was put in production. Try it for Herni Rubin. From Commodore - The Final Year, The Amiga 500 would receive virtually no new improvements during 1988, although that was unlikely to hinder sales of the mass-market machine A sequel to the Amiga 500 would be developed by George Robbins and released in 1989. The foundation of the Amiga plans was an upgrade to the Amiga chipset. These plans had been mired for months by disagreements within the engineering team. As a result, Rubin did not believe Commodore would be able to keep up with the rapid PC release cycle and felt it would be at least 1989 before the engineers could release a completely new computer. But in order to keep the highend Amiga line current, Commodore would produce upgrade cards for the Amiga 2000’s video and processor slots, namely the A2620 accelerator card. The company would release a “new� machine in 1988 that was merely the old A2000 with different adapter cards and faceplates. Named the Amiga 2500AT, it would contain an A2286 bridgeboard, the A2620 accelerator card, and a 40 MB hard drive with the A2090 card. Rubin planned to release a brand new, high-end Amiga in 1989 with the moderately improved chipset and a Motorola 68030 CPU. He even dubbed this the Amiga 3000 very early. Finally, Rubin wanted a machine to continue the legacy of the Commodore 64. Something truly inexpensive that would compete with Nintendo and allow Commodore shelf space in mass-market retailers and even toy stores across the US and Europe. The present plans called for the C64D, but Jeff Porter also revealed the C65 to Rubin. From Commodore - The Final Year, Meanwhile, by October, Porter was zeroing in on a power supply for the A250. Robbins would continue designing the cartridge and Boyer the main game system, right up until the January 1989 CES. Remember Me? As Commodore’s system engineering group raced forward with the A250, under Irving Gould’s whip, there remained a curious omission. Commodore already had a game machine under development in the CSG group called the C65. On August 23, less than two weeks after the Bahamas Technology Meeting, CSG head Ted Lenthe asked Jeff Porter what this A250 thing was and why Commodore was developing it instead of the C65 (SKIP) In fact, Rubin had been told about the C65 in January but, considering Rubin’s age and forgetfulness, Porter suspected he hadn’t thought about it since then. Jeff Porter hides C65 during CIC's Bahamas Technology Meeting.

Don't you see the problem here? Specifically, WHO is the problem?
Quote:

Herni Rubin forgets about C65.

But it has the given the right signal to start the AGA project, after that. Which, taking account the dates, is roughly two years before that the ECS (the complete one) went in production.
Quote:

Irving Gould and the CIC executive board are not aware of the C65 project.

This is even more serious: people are working to new projects with the top most management which was completely unaware of it.

Who is the culprit here?

@cdimauro

Quote:

If you talk of components entirely developed externally, then there's Hombre, which was designed around the same time of the PS1.

Sony's PlayStation hardware adventure is mostly about semi-custom from 3rd-party ASIC IP. PlayStation's main strength is 1st party games and software dev kits.

Quote:

According to the last link, it looks like that the A3000 had different ECS chips compared to the ones in this A500 Rev6A. .

With the correct jumper settings (no bodge wires) and DRAM chips, A500 Rev 6A PCB fully supports A3000's ECS Agnus B/AB 2MB.

Quote:

It only talks about the Agnus 2MB version (the Amiga 3000's one), and not about Denise, but it has to be seen if the Denise in this Rev6A is able to support the Super HiRes (and the Ultra bitplane + sprite), as the one in the A3000. .

For ECS Denise's "productivity mode" enablement, the A500 Rev 6A PCB fully supports ECS Kickstart 2.0's 512 KB ROM without A500 Rev 5's bodge wire.

I have A500 Rev 6A PCB with ECS Denise (via drop-in upgrade) and ECS Agnus A 1MB Chip RAM.

For management issues, internal 1988 prototype ECS Amiga 2000-CR and prototype ECS A500 rev6A are in play, NOT retail.

I have both A500 rev5 and A500 rev6A. My current A500 rev6A is my second unit since my 1st 1989 A500 rev6A was sold to fund an ex-corporate A3000 in early 1992.

Quote:

Your family was irrelevant for the Amiga market: the A500 clearly brought back Commodore to the "Computer for the masses, non for the classes". .

A500's US$699 price in 1987 is US$872 in 1992. https://www.dollartimes.com/inflation/inflation.php?amount=699&year=1987

You have forgotten US inflation.

https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/usd/USD-to-AUD-1992
1992's US$872 is AU$1,273.

Quote:

This is even more serious: people are working to new projects with the top most management which was completely unaware of it. .

You flip-flop between independent engineering action and management's directive enforcement.

Last edited by Hammer on 14-Sep-2025 at 02:48 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 14-Sep-2025 at 02:47 AM.

_________________

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @cdimauro Quote: If you talk of components entirely developed externally, then there's Hombre, which was designed around the same time of the PS1. Sony's PlayStation hardware adventure is mostly about semi-custom from 3rd-party ASIC IP.

Whereas Commodore's Hombre is entirely semi-custom from 3rd-party...
Quote:

PlayStation's main strength is 1st party games and software dev kits.

Irrelevant / Hammer's PADDING...
Quote:

Quote: According to the last link, it looks like that the A3000 had different ECS chips compared to the ones in this A500 Rev6A. . With the correct jumper settings (no bodge wires) and DRAM chips, A500 Rev 6A PCB fully supports A3000's ECS Agnus B/AB 2MB.

Which I've already reported, but you like to repeat, and repeat, and repeat things, who knows why...
Quote:

Quote: It only talks about the Agnus 2MB version (the Amiga 3000's one), and not about Denise, but it has to be seen if the Denise in this Rev6A is able to support the Super HiRes (and the Ultra bitplane + sprite), as the one in the A3000. . For ECS Denise's "productivity mode" enablement, the A500 Rev 6A PCB fully supports ECS Kickstart 2.0's 512 KB ROM without A500 Rev 5's bodge wire.

I've talked and asked for something different.
Quote:

I have A500 Rev 6A PCB with ECS Denise (via drop-in upgrade) and ECS Agnus A 1MB Chip RAM. For management issues, internal 1988 prototype ECS Amiga 2000-CR and prototype ECS A500 rev6A are in play, NOT retail. I have both A500 rev5 and A500 rev6A. My current A500 rev6A is my second unit since my 1st 1989 A500 rev6A was sold to fund an ex-corporate A3000 in early 1992.

Usual PADDING.

Again, I've posed precise questions which are still waiting an answer. Questions which, of course, are important for this part of the discussion.
Quote:

Quote: Your family was irrelevant for the Amiga market: the A500 clearly brought back Commodore to the "Computer for the masses, non for the classes". . A500's US$699 price in 1987 is US$872 in 1992. https://www.dollartimes.com/inflation/inflation.php?amount=699&year=1987 You have forgotten US inflation. https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/bank-of-england-spot/historical-spot-exchange-rates/usd/USD-to-AUD-1992 1992's US$872 is AU$1,273.

Even if you take into account, it doesn't change the overall picture. Calculator in hand...
Quote:

Quote: This is even more serious: people are working to new projects with the top most management which was completely unaware of it. . You flip-flop between independent engineering action and management's directive enforcement.

Sure: because the top management should be left unaware of NEW PRODUCTS that their company is working on.

I don't know if you get what you're trying to defend (hint: the impossible).

Anyway, other questions are left unanswered. As usual. Why you write things and NOT answering when people are asking clarifications? Is it your way to "discuss" in a thread?

@thread

You know, when I think about it a bit more, I think it's safe to say that the janitors over at Westchester were to blame for the company's failures. They were skimping on the use of bicarbonate soda in their chlorine-based cleaning solution. With less bi-carb, there is an increase in chlorine off-gassing, which would have affected the the thinking clarity of both managers and engineers.

But they couldn't just open a few windows and solve the problem, the low pH in the surface residue of in the cafeteria kitchen also increased the acidity of all meals, aggravating the gastrointestinal tract of both management and engineers increasing the conditions for hypertension. Which negatively affected the work of individuals and team cohesion.

The mystery remains: What were the janitors doing with the bicarbonate soda stockpile?

_________________
All the way, with 68k

Quote:

agami wrote: But they couldn't just open a few windows and solve the problem

IF ONLY THEY USED GEOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TE-HEE












/mega

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

@MEGA_RJ_MICAL

Quote:

MEGA_RJ_MICAL wrote: Quote: agami wrote: But they couldn't just open a few windows and solve the problem IF ONLY THEY USED GEOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TE-HEE /mega

Against C128's 65xx GEOS.

Postscript in 1986 is missing.

Stable 512x342 resolution display is missing. C128 supports 640x200 monochrome display.

32-bit flat memory model is missing.

32-bit CPU roadmap = missing. 68020 was already released in 1984, and Macintosh II's system integration started in 1985, which includes a color 640x480p 256 color chipset, a 68020 CPU, and a 68851 MMU provision. For the A2620 project, Commodore wasted time on two custom MMUs before switching to 68851.

After Apple Lisa's custom MMU, Apple didn't waste time on a custom MMU for Macintosh II (1987).

_________________

@cdimauro

Quote:

Whereas Commodore's Hombre is entirely semi-custom from 3rd-party...

Wrong. Hombre's display IP is from AAA without full backward compatibility.

Hombre's texture mapper is in-house that is based on the Blitter with extra warp/scale functions. Hombre's texture mapper reached simulation stage.

3DO's CEL hardware texture mapper is based on sprite engines with warp/scale. This is similar to Saturn's. Both 3DO and Saturn game consoles have a flawed quadrilateral 3D texture mapper direction. 3DO M2 (completed in 1995) has the corrected triangle-based texture map 3D hardware direction.

Hombre is not like throwing a 586-class CPU with an ET6000 display together.

Quote:

Irrelevant / Hammer's PADDING

Relevant / Cesare Di Mauro's head in the sand.

Quote:

Which I've already reported, but you like to repeat, and repeat, and repeat things, who knows why...

You keep saying "read my lips, no new chips" as false.

You keep saying ECS is "new chips" for A2001 (aka A3000), which is wrong when Commodore's internal development had a fully operational ECS with A2000-CR in 1988. You form a view based on the retail side, not within Commodore's product development side. Commodore's management issues are within Commodore's internal development side.

Retail A500 Rev6A PCB's inherent full ECS support (without A500 Rev5 bodge wire hacks) shows internal A500 Rev6A development with full ECS.

Quote:

I've talked and asked for something different.

Fact: ECS is not new from the Commodore engineers' POV.

Quote:

Even if you take into account, it doesn't change the overall picture

Irrelevant / Cesare Di Mauro's head in the sand.

Quote:

Sure: because the top management should be left unaware of NEW PRODUCTS that their company is working on.

Around 1986-1987, CSG LSI head Ted Lenthe was aware, gave the go-ahead, and supported C65's R&D. C65 R&D was hidden from other directors and upper management.

Herni Rubin has monochrome high-resolution directive since 1986.

From 1987, Ted Lenthe argued for improved Paula i.e. FAT Paula. This R&D path was ignored. since Ted Lenthe doesn't govern Herni Rubin's system engineering group.

From Commodore - The Final Years

Early in 1987, 1.44 MB high density (HD) disks began appearing on
the market for the IBM PC. In order to take advantage of these new
developments, the engineers would need to improve the Paula chip,
which controlled IO functions. George Robbins began talking with
engineers to implement SCSI (which would allow faster 2MB/s
transfer speeds) into a “FAT Paula� chip.

These ideas did not go anywhere all year until September, when the
discussions around the chipset reopened. Ted Lenthe asked for an
improved Paula with 2 MB/s support, along with possible networking
and serial bus support. He also asked for a sound input channel in
Paula which would allow a microphone to record sound digitally to
the Amiga. And he wanted sound improvements to Paula, allowing
four additional audio channels with 44.1 Khz “CD grade� audio
quality.

In order to begin FAT Paula, the team would need to input the old
Paula schematics into the Mentor system before they could begin
making changes to the chip. However, clearly the Paula
Improvements were on the back burner and seen as less important
than the graphics chip changes.


Ted Lenthe and George Robbins argued for evolved FAT Paula.

George Robbins is consistent with his 32-bit evolved Amiga chipset argument to replace A500 business.

Arguments can't go anywhere without Herni Rubin's approval and directive.

Ted Lenthe allows C65 R&D since he has governance over CSG LSI.

Last edited by Hammer on 15-Sep-2025 at 05:32 AM.

_________________

@dipsomania

Quote:

dipsomania wrote: @OneTimer1 They (Bowen and another young engineer) started to develop the C65 in 1988-9 (after the A500...) mainly because NES was eating the C64 share market, although Commodore was still able to sell millions of them.

In this case it was useless, Just because another 8-bit console made an impression on the market, well some slightly improvements on the C64 and further cost reduction may have been helpful.

possible improvements: The C64 DTV has a simple blitter and an adjustable 256 bit palette, a simple software update can make the floppy faster.

---

Marketing a console and marketing a home computer are totally different things, consoles have a strongly restricted game market where companies can publish only via the console company, that is something C= never did or had the knowledge to do.

Quote:

agami wrote: But they couldn't just open a few windows and solve the problem

...

Quote:

MEGA_RJ_MICAL wrote: IF ONLY THEY USED GEOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TE-HEE /mega

you know, "open a few windows"... "GEOS" ...
...and hammer's follow-up is...

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @MEGA_RJ_MICAL Against C128's 65xx GEOS. Postscript in 1986 is missing. Stable 512x342 resolution display is missing. C128 supports 640x200 monochrome display. 32-bit flat memory model is missing. 32-bit CPU roadmap = missing. 68020 was already released in 1984, and Macintosh II's system integration started in 1985, which includes a color 640x480p 256 color chipset, a 68020 CPU, and a 68851 MMU provision. For the A2620 project, Commodore wasted time on two custom MMUs before switching to 68851.

... ok, now I am frankly beginning to suspect Hammer IS an LLM.
One with not that many parameters, too.



/m!

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: Against C128's 65xx GEOS. Postscript in 1986 is missing.

You realize you responded to a joke, right?

GeoPublish was released in 1986. It did PostScript.

Quote:

Stable 512x342 resolution display is missing. C128 supports 640x200 monochrome display.

It's worse than that. GEOS was designed for the C64 and so worked in 320x200 resolution. But this was good because most C64 owners used a TV or 15kHz composite monitor so higher resolutions would be useless to them.

Quote:

32-bit flat memory model is missing.

Missing from the Mac? You're right! The idiots decided that since those upper 8 bits weren't used by the 68000 they would be a good place to store system flags.

Quote:

32-bit CPU roadmap = missing. 68020 was already released in 1984, and Macintosh II's system integration started in 1985, which includes a color 640x480p 256 color chipset, a 68020 CPU, and a 68851 MMU provision.

The Macintosh II was released in March 1987. With the 256 color display card and 13" monitor it cost US$7,145 (equivalent to ~$20,000 today). You could buy a good new car for less! At that price it might as well have not existed. Comparing this to the C128 or Amiga is just silly.

BTW the Amiga's OS was always 32-bit, unlike the Mac. Amiga owners were putting 68020 CPUs in their machines as early as 1986. The Amiga could display 4096 colors in 1985.

Quote:

For the A2620 project, Commodore wasted time on two custom MMUs before switching to 68851.

It's called R&D. Apple did it too. The Apple II GS was their second attempt to develop a next-generation Apple II based on the 65816. They started working on a new OS for the Mac in 1988. By 1995 they were spending $1 billion a year on it. In 1996 they finally realized that it was a colossal waste of time and money. So much for that 'roadmap'.

Your barely relevant Mac advocacy is getting tiresome. Your silence on the mistakes and questionable decisions Apple made can only mean one thing - you're an Apple fanboy.

Quote:

The term “apple fanboy� has been around for years. It describes someone who has strong emotional loyalty to Apple — sometimes irrationally so. These users not only buy Apple products consistently but also advocate for the brand, dismiss criticism, and often refuse to consider alternatives, even when logic might say otherwise.

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @MEGA_RJ_MICAL Quote: MEGA_RJ_MICAL wrote: agami wrote: But they couldn't just open a few windows and solve the problem IF ONLY THEY USED GEOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TE-HEE /mega Against C128's 65xx GEOS. Postscript in 1986 is missing. Stable 512x342 resolution display is missing. C128 supports 640x200 monochrome display. 32-bit flat memory model is missing. 32-bit CPU roadmap = missing. 68020 was already released in 1984, and Macintosh II's system integration started in 1985, which includes a color 640x480p 256 color chipset, a 68020 CPU, and a 68851 MMU provision. For the A2620 project, Commodore wasted time on two custom MMUs before switching to 68851. After Apple Lisa's custom MMU, Apple didn't waste time on a custom MMU for Macintosh II (1987).

O-MY-GOSH: I can't believe to my eyes.

Oh, well, I can: it was already observed an incredible amount of times with you.

@Bruce, now do you understand why several people think that he's a BOT?