Digest Number 262
3 messages · 2005-04-27 → 2005-05-03 · Yahoo Group era · View archive on archive.org
Participants: Scott A. Rossell, James Diffendaffer, Jeff Burrell
Preserved from the Timex/Sinclair 2068 Yahoo Group (2001–2019), which is no longer online. Text reproduced from the archive.org archive; email addresses masked.
Messages
1. RE: [ts2068] Digest Number 262
Scott A. Rossell · Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:28
It's amazing to hear that Hong Kong is so far behind the times in technology
that something as simple as a broadband connection is impossible to find.
As far as education goes, I have yet to see ANY school that wasn't privately
funded at extreme expense that offered truly useful and productive computing
or electronics education. I've often found it much easier to learn on my
own, which lead me to the 2068 in the first place.
My first interaction with a computer was in high school when I gained access
to a teletype terminal connected to a mini computer that I never saw. I
learned BASIC and was hooked at that point. I started reading what few
computer magazines existed at the time which were actually electronics
magazines that had articles and advertisements for computers. I saw the ad
for the ZX81 kit and had tunnel vision ever since.
In my time in high school in the early 80's, computer users were in tribes.
They didn't know it at the time. And they certainly didn't use the word
"tribe", but the behavior was unmistakable. If you owned a computer, any
computer, you were in the tribe of that user base. You had to be, because
back then, no two computers were compatible with each other. When two
members of two different tribes met to talk about computers, it was about
comparisons of differences. And some battles waged hard. There were the
Commodore's, The Atari's, the TI's (Texas Instruments), the Apple's, the
IBMer's, and the Sinclair's just to name a few. Each machine had it's pro's
and con's. And each machine was in a different price bracket.
The Commodore's flagship was the Commodore 64. Good keyboard, color and
sound with game cartridge support. Slowest disk drive in the world and
about as big as a boat anchor. And a proprietary port that prevented easy
connection of standardized peripherals. But oh so affordable.
The Atari's had the 800XL. Killer graphics and sound, better disk drive,
and game cartridge support, but yet another proprietary peripheral
connection (and not compatible with any other tribe's equipment). And the
price was a bit heftier.
The TI99/4a from Texas Instruments. Okay sound and graphics, game cartridge
port, proprietary peripheral connection. But the price was way too high for
what it was.
The Apple II+. I only saw one hooked up to a monochrome green phosphor
monitor because Apple charged entirely too much for their stuff! No game
cartridges for these guys. They were in the serious computing business.
And the IBM? Boring. It's still boring. It cost too much, but it got the
job done in the sense that a hammer can slam a screw through a brick if you
really want to.
And then there's the Sinclair's. At the time, the Sinclair pioneer was the
ZX81. Okay, crappy keyboard, really slow, no game cartridges, very quirky
black and white video, no sound, and a proprietary peripheral connection.
But the price! You could save up your lunch money to buy one of these
doorstops! Which is exactly what I did.
Later in '82 the 2068 would emerge for a very brief few months. I sold
everything I could to get enough money to buy it. I even skipped school one
day to win a radio contest for $130. That helped a lot.
The 2068 had a better keyboard, but let's face it, it's still kind of
crappy. The graphics and sound are up to par with the Commodore's but let
not fool ourselves into thinking it was anywhere near the Atari's. The
proprietary peripheral connection not only held it back from standardized
peripherals but it wasn't even fully compatible with it's own kin the ZX81.
And it had game cartridges - not many. But again, the price! $200 and you
had an entire endless world to discover and program!
All but the Apple and IBM had instant-on functionality. As soon as you hit
the switch, the ROM took over and you were ready to go. That was a great
idea. Where has it gone today? In pocket PC's, Palm Pilots and cell
phones.
All of these machines had a BASIC language that you could program them with.
But strangely, none of them were completely compatible with each other!
When I was in high school over twenty years ago, I owned an instant-on
personal computer with a BASIC language built-in that cost only $200. I
could learn the BASIC language and even explore electronics while trying to
figure out that strange edge connection on the back. It was a mysterious,
uncharted world of discovery. I dare you to find the equivalent today.
Education is much more fun when it's hands-on with something you can call
your own. If you wanted to approximate what we had twenty years ago today,
you would have to find the cheapest PC you could find like one of those
Linspire Linux boxes at Wal Mart for $300. Of course you'll need a monitor,
that's another $80 at least. Then you'll have to find a BASIC language -
preferably a free version - and it will have to run on Linux (there are
plenty to choose from). You wouldn't be completely compatible with the
mainstream IBM folks, but maybe that's as it should be...like the old days.
Oh, and forget that instant-on novelty. :-(
0 OK, O:1
2. Re: Digest Number 262
James Diffendaffer · Tue, 03 May 2005 15:15
--- In [email], "Scott A. Rossell" <scott@r...> wrote:
> The 2068 had a better keyboard, but let's face it, it's still kind of
> crappy. The graphics and sound are up to par with the Commodore's
but let
Actually, the Commodore SID has no equal as far as a synthesizer chips
from that era go.
> not fool ourselves into thinking it was anywhere near the Atari's.
You obviously aren't totally familiar with how the Atari does
graphics. The C64 was better for sprites and you'll find most C64
versions of games have more colors than the Atari versions... the
Antic did have some advantages though.
> Education is much more fun when it's hands-on with something you can
call
> your own. If you wanted to approximate what we had twenty years ago
today,
> you would have to find the cheapest PC you could find like one of those
> Linspire Linux boxes at Wal Mart for $300. Of course you'll need a
monitor,
> that's another $80 at least. Then you'll have to find a BASIC
language -
> preferably a free version - and it will have to run on Linux (there are
> plenty to choose from). You wouldn't be completely compatible with the
> mainstream IBM folks, but maybe that's as it should be...like the
old days.
To program in Basic these days is so much more complex than it was
with the instant on machines of yesterday and Basic is never included.
The free Basics I've messed with are terrible but look at what
VisualBasic or DarkBasic costs!
The biggest problem with the old machines is that the small memory
address buss just doesn't support high level languages well an page
flipping is difficult to support for running large code. Anything
less than a 6809 does a poor jub of supporting C. (the Z80 is
terrible for using stack passed parameters and a 6502 variants...
HAH!) If the eZ80 had been introduced by 1986 we would have seen
another generation of super 8 bit machines.
3. Re: [ts2068] Re: Digest Number 262
Jeff Burrell · Tue, 3 May 2005 17:29:
James;
Your points about the shortcomings of the old 8 bit processors are well taken. These things were originally meant to replace discrete logic in industrial controllers and were applied to general purpose computing by some daring visionaries.
My Windows language of choice is Power Basic, but it is still about $200 for the compiler. Not bad, but still a bit steep for most casual programmers. You can find some good, free 32 bit Forths for both Linux and Windows, but Forth can have a steep learning curve since it is a rather non-intuitive language. I can program in C when backed into a corner like a trapped rat, but I contend the language to have all of the disadvantages of assembly with few to none of the advantages. C++ is pretty interesting because of its OOP basis, but other OOP languages do a better job.
Eight bit processors have had their day, especially since we all expect lots of bells and whistles in our computers now. I am embarassed to say that I rely on GUIs now when not too many years ago I used to shell out of Windows to DOS regularly. Unfortunately the old grey matter finds it easier to mouse my way down the directory structure rather than remember all of the directory structure.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com