I find it interesting they included the PET and VIC-20 but left out the Commodore 64. While it had the same number of sprites as the Atari 8-bit home computers, they were much larger and colorful at 24x21 in monochrome mode or 12x21 with 4 colors in multi-color mode.
It had separate RAMs chip for video memory, on a separate part of the bus. The original PET could only have either CPU or video access this RAM, however, with the "dynamic" PET they changed it to interleaved memory access, but still separate video memory (which helped with the 80 column machines, as they used 2 8bit memory chips in parallel to accomodate for the higher bandwidth needed. Only with the 8296 they integrated the video memory into the main 128k memory, that was then capable of being accessed with 4MHz, to easily allow for 80 column display _and_ CPU access.
The Lynx was such a capable machine, too bad it never took off and games support was limited. I always wondered what games on it would look like if software development went through some generations.
The Atari 800XL version of Defender was the best in the early years. It looked and sounded so much like the arcade. I'm still blown away how much they captured the essence of the original with that limited machine. Here's a decent play of the it to compare. th-cam.com/video/QU4KWAQznTI/w-d-xo.html
No, I CAN'T see the Atari 800XL's better graphics because the screen is still displaying the VIC-20 video. Also, the 256 colors are the palette but only 4, or 16 of them can be displayed at one time. The CPU is the 6502C, not 6502B. The 6502C was based off of the 6502B. The CPU runs at 1.79 MHz, which is faster than the Apple II and Commodore systems, but in the higher bitmap modes, most of those extra cycles were stolen by the graphics chips.
This video skimmed over the capability of the 800. First of all, it could display more than 16 colors at a time using display list interrupts to change the palette on the fly. It had hardware course and fine scrolling. It had multiple graphic modes that could be mixed, include a few multi-colored character sets. Again, using display lists it could put more than 8 sprites (actually 4 "players" + 4 "missiles") on the screen at a time. It was years ahead of all the other home computers at the time.
The Apple II had enormous sales? It sold around 5.5 million units. That's only half a million more than the 5 million both the MSX systems and Sinclair ZX Spectrum systems sold, and only 1 million more than the Commodore 128's 4.5 million sales, a system many people call a failure. The Commodore 64, based on serial number analysis, sold at least 13 million units. I would suggest it sold well, but of 8-bit computer systems, only the Commodore 64 had enormous sales.
The only one that applies the title in 80% is the ATARI 2600 of 1977, the rest of computer are the video from "character" generators, and the NES 1986 wtih PPU RICOCH
Chuck Peddle didn't start MOS. MOS Technology already existed when Peddle came along with his idea to build a CPU.
I find it interesting they included the PET and VIC-20 but left out the Commodore 64. While it had the same number of sprites as the Atari 8-bit home computers, they were much larger and colorful at 24x21 in monochrome mode or 12x21 with 4 colors in multi-color mode.
The c64 was a glaring omission.
The commodore 64 used the 6510 which is similar but still different from the 6502.
@@JaredConnell The Atari 2600 used a 6507 and the Atari 800XL use a 6502C (aka Sally).
Thank you
6:00 1977 for the VCS :) -- 1979 for the Atari 800
Wasn't the 2600 already released in 1977 instead of 1979?
Yes; the 400 and 800 came out in 1979
The PET does NOT have dedicated graphics memory. It's video memory is located at $8000 in the 6502's 64K memory map.
It had separate RAMs chip for video memory, on a separate part of the bus. The original PET could only have either CPU or video access this RAM, however, with the "dynamic" PET they changed it to interleaved memory access, but still separate video memory (which helped with the 80 column machines, as they used 2 8bit memory chips in parallel to accomodate for the higher bandwidth needed. Only with the 8296 they integrated the video memory into the main 128k memory, that was then capable of being accessed with 4MHz, to easily allow for 80 column display _and_ CPU access.
@@8bittimes Thanks.
The Lynx was such a capable machine, too bad it never took off and games support was limited. I always wondered what games on it would look like if software development went through some generations.
That was always the VIC-20 version of Defender playing on the monitor sitting on the Atari 800 XL...
Eek wish I had paid more attention. I would have happily lent my original Atari 800 (not XL) for this demo :)
The Atari 800XL version of Defender was the best in the early years. It looked and sounded so much like the arcade. I'm still blown away how much they captured the essence of the original with that limited machine. Here's a decent play of the it to compare. th-cam.com/video/QU4KWAQznTI/w-d-xo.html
No, I CAN'T see the Atari 800XL's better graphics because the screen is still displaying the VIC-20 video. Also, the 256 colors are the palette but only 4, or 16 of them can be displayed at one time. The CPU is the 6502C, not 6502B. The 6502C was based off of the 6502B. The CPU runs at 1.79 MHz, which is faster than the Apple II and Commodore systems, but in the higher bitmap modes, most of those extra cycles were stolen by the graphics chips.
This video skimmed over the capability of the 800. First of all, it could display more than 16 colors at a time using display list interrupts to change the palette on the fly. It had hardware course and fine scrolling. It had multiple graphic modes that could be mixed, include a few multi-colored character sets. Again, using display lists it could put more than 8 sprites (actually 4 "players" + 4 "missiles") on the screen at a time. It was years ahead of all the other home computers at the time.
@@bjbell52 Yes, I am aware of these features but they are limited to certain areas of the screen.
The Apple II had enormous sales? It sold around 5.5 million units. That's only half a million more than the 5 million both the MSX systems and Sinclair ZX Spectrum systems sold, and only 1 million more than the Commodore 128's 4.5 million sales, a system many people call a failure. The Commodore 64, based on serial number analysis, sold at least 13 million units. I would suggest it sold well, but of 8-bit computer systems, only the Commodore 64 had enormous sales.
The only one that applies the title in 80% is the ATARI 2600 of 1977, the rest of computer are the video from "character" generators, and the NES 1986 wtih PPU RICOCH