Okay so the reason that I'm subscribing to your channel, is your title screen when it comes up. I swear the second that thing popped up, I felt like I was logging into a BBS. Well played!
these documents are gold and could be used as a base for creating an upgrade-path from an atari 2600. a new motherboard and a lot of pin headers for cpu, video, audio etc. modules, where you could start with the original chips from the atari 2600 and later upgrade with other daughter boards....
The documents discussing DMA audio at 6:32 remindes me of the STe DMA Audio subsystem.. Not to hard to guess where these designs ended up if they didnt end up in the console.
it is a very logical straight forward design. however, modern micro controllers have DMA channels that are a bit more flexible because the output register is not necessarily tied to a single register (like a DAC register), you could specify an automatic increment for the output destination as well, thus using it to copy data to memory. if you could specify an additional increment after X bytes, you could use it to copy graphical objects on a bitmap screen memory too where you have to add a certain value after every line of the object. with more of these DMA channels and different priorities you would be very flexible. interestingly, the audip spec mentions a 23 bit address which would suggest a memory architecture with two memory areas similar to the amiga, where you have a so called "chip mem" that is shared by the video chip, the dram refresh, some DMA channels and the cpu. and a "fast mem" which is exclusive to the cpu.
@@TheLairdsLair to I feel a challenge for Some super collector. There's got to be someone with more rare stuff than imagination brings under lock and key that their kids are just waiting to inherit
I don't have the specs, but it reminds me of the 7800 Maria chip. Is it based off of ideas in that? The pantha also seems to be similar. The group of frame buffers I just found mention of, sounds a bit like the scheme that I came up with in the retro graphics chip I wanted to do.
I think it's now pretty obvious the Mirai and Super XE are one in the same, glad that mystery is solved. I can't understand why Atari didn't go ahead with this though, sounds like the perfect upgrade!
@@ressljs Atari sold millions of their 8-bit computers in America - it was one of the three major 8-bit platforms here, along with the Apple // series and the C64. Computers for gaming were massive - that's how the C64 came to dominate the market: it was the cheapest of the 8-bit machines for several years once you threw in a disc drive. Every middle-class kid ended up getting one to function as a successor to the Atari VCS / Intellivision / Coelcovision, because you could copy games from your friends for free or download cracked games from BBSes. A C64 with a drive and a library of 20 or so cracked games was cheaper than a videogame console and a library of 20 or so purchased games, so the breakeven point for the investment was pretty low, and the games were better because the machine was far more-capable with its 64K of memory. Atari *could* have owned that market by the way, if they'd properly cost-reduced the Atari 800 in the first place around the time of the 1200XL, instead of bungling that project. The Atari 8-bits already had a large software library and a huge installed userbase, but the 1200XL was ridiculously expensive for a single-board computer, oversized, and had stupid compatibility issues. By the time the 800XL finally hit the market it was too late - the C64 had already exploded. (Releasing the crippled 600XL didn't help - they should have focused their efforts on a single machine offering the full capabilities of their 8-bit platform at the time.)
We had the Atari 400, 800, XEGS, TI99 4/A, C64, Amiga, Tandy TRS-80, Color Computer, Tandy 1000, IBM PCJR, Commodore 128, Apple II, IIC, IIGS so many computers that we played games on in the 80s.
I disagree. The Atari XE Game System was based on aging late 1970s technology that was the Atari 8-bit computer line. The archaic technology and older games could NOT compete with the power of the NES and its vastly superior games like Super Mario Bros, Super Mario Bros 2, the Legend of Zelda, Punch Out, Castlevania, Mega Man, Metroid, etc. Thinking the XE ever had a chance is a pipe dream.
Wrong. Even the original XE GS had arguably more-sophisticated graphics and sound capabilities than the NES, which was often a dumpster fire in comparison. The XE GS also had 64K of RAM, compared to the NES's pathetic 2K of program RAM and 2K of display RAM. The NES's display chip was a variant of the TI TMS9918, which dates back to 1979. It could only display 25 out of 54 colors. The Atari 8-bits had a palette of 256 colors and had modes where all 256 could be displayed at-once. You could also mix modes on screen. I've seen the NES ports of Atari / C64 games like MULE, and they're *pathetic* compared to the originals. The Super XE GS would have been running the same 16-bit 6502 variant as seen in the Apple //gs and far more sophisticated graphics chips. It would have arguably been superior to the SNES had Atari gone ahead with its release. As the video indicates, it was probably Atari dithering around with distributing the Sega Genesis that killed the Super XE GS, which in hindsight was a huge mistake.
Okay so the reason that I'm subscribing to your channel, is your title screen when it comes up. I swear the second that thing popped up, I felt like I was logging into a BBS. Well played!
You design that thing in WWIV? Lol
these documents are gold and could be used as a base for creating an upgrade-path from an atari 2600. a new motherboard and a lot of pin headers for cpu, video, audio etc. modules, where you could start with the original chips from the atari 2600 and later upgrade with other daughter boards....
The documents discussing DMA audio at 6:32 remindes me of the STe DMA Audio subsystem.. Not to hard to guess where these designs ended up if they didnt end up in the console.
Good point!
it is a very logical straight forward design. however, modern micro controllers have DMA channels that are a bit more flexible because the output register is not necessarily tied to a single register (like a DAC register), you could specify an automatic increment for the output destination as well, thus using it to copy data to memory. if you could specify an additional increment after X bytes, you could use it to copy graphical objects on a bitmap screen memory too where you have to add a certain value after every line of the object.
with more of these DMA channels and different priorities you would be very flexible.
interestingly, the audip spec mentions a 23 bit address which would suggest a memory architecture with two memory areas similar to the amiga, where you have a so called "chip mem" that is shared by the video chip, the dram refresh, some DMA channels and the cpu. and a "fast mem" which is exclusive to the cpu.
I always thought it was a shame Atari didn't make a 16-bit console, it seems they got them selfs in a rite mess.
They did, the Atari ST but it was a computer console instead of a home TV console.
Wasn't the Intellivision technically the first 16bit system?
Technically yes, but a lot of people argue that, because it was so limited.
@@TheLairdsLair ok got ya. I just wasn't sure if I remembered that correctly.
I think that's 2^12 colors, not 212 colors.
Panther looks like a purse....wheres rhe atari museum i feel a trip coming on
It was just online, but sadly its gone completely now it seems :-(
@@TheLairdsLair to I feel a challenge for Some super collector. There's got to be someone with more rare stuff than imagination brings under lock and key that their kids are just waiting to inherit
Still own my XEGS!
I don't have the specs, but it reminds me of the 7800 Maria chip. Is it based off of ideas in that? The pantha also seems to be similar. The group of frame buffers I just found mention of, sounds a bit like the scheme that I came up with in the retro graphics chip I wanted to do.
Thank you for uploading all of your old videos again. I really enjoy them.
Glad you like them!
I think it's now pretty obvious the Mirai and Super XE are one in the same, glad that mystery is solved. I can't understand why Atari didn't go ahead with this though, sounds like the perfect upgrade!
I'm not sure which side of the Atlantic you're on, but Atari computers, and computers sold mainly for gaming in general weren't big in America.
@@ressljs Atari sold millions of their 8-bit computers in America - it was one of the three major 8-bit platforms here, along with the Apple // series and the C64. Computers for gaming were massive - that's how the C64 came to dominate the market: it was the cheapest of the 8-bit machines for several years once you threw in a disc drive. Every middle-class kid ended up getting one to function as a successor to the Atari VCS / Intellivision / Coelcovision, because you could copy games from your friends for free or download cracked games from BBSes. A C64 with a drive and a library of 20 or so cracked games was cheaper than a videogame console and a library of 20 or so purchased games, so the breakeven point for the investment was pretty low, and the games were better because the machine was far more-capable with its 64K of memory.
Atari *could* have owned that market by the way, if they'd properly cost-reduced the Atari 800 in the first place around the time of the 1200XL, instead of bungling that project. The Atari 8-bits already had a large software library and a huge installed userbase, but the 1200XL was ridiculously expensive for a single-board computer, oversized, and had stupid compatibility issues. By the time the 800XL finally hit the market it was too late - the C64 had already exploded. (Releasing the crippled 600XL didn't help - they should have focused their efforts on a single machine offering the full capabilities of their 8-bit platform at the time.)
We had the Atari 400, 800, XEGS, TI99 4/A, C64, Amiga, Tandy TRS-80, Color Computer, Tandy 1000, IBM PCJR, Commodore 128, Apple II, IIC, IIGS so many computers that we played games on in the 80s.
how did you do it can you share with me , thank you
Do what?
the advertisement for the XE vs NES is very cringe, how they dare compare this shit with the NES saying the 2600 joystick is better for play 🤣🤣
They should have bundled a white version of the 7800 joypad with the XEGS.
The NES pad is a shit controller for those who use their Right hand for control.
NES relies on added chips in the cartridges to add effects and RAM
I disagree. The Atari XE Game System was based on aging late 1970s technology that was the Atari 8-bit computer line. The archaic technology and older games could NOT compete with the power of the NES and its vastly superior games like Super Mario Bros, Super Mario Bros 2, the Legend of Zelda, Punch Out, Castlevania, Mega Man, Metroid, etc. Thinking the XE ever had a chance is a pipe dream.
The Super XEGS wasn't 70s tech though, it was well in advance of any other console on the market at that time.
Wrong. Even the original XE GS had arguably more-sophisticated graphics and sound capabilities than the NES, which was often a dumpster fire in comparison. The XE GS also had 64K of RAM, compared to the NES's pathetic 2K of program RAM and 2K of display RAM. The NES's display chip was a variant of the TI TMS9918, which dates back to 1979. It could only display 25 out of 54 colors. The Atari 8-bits had a palette of 256 colors and had modes where all 256 could be displayed at-once. You could also mix modes on screen. I've seen the NES ports of Atari / C64 games like MULE, and they're *pathetic* compared to the originals.
The Super XE GS would have been running the same 16-bit 6502 variant as seen in the Apple //gs and far more sophisticated graphics chips. It would have arguably been superior to the SNES had Atari gone ahead with its release. As the video indicates, it was probably Atari dithering around with distributing the Sega Genesis that killed the Super XE GS, which in hindsight was a huge mistake.