|
Socoder -> On Topic -> The new C=64 ! |
|
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 06:23 | |
steve_ancell
|
Here is a rather feeble attempt at recreating the Commodore 64 (Linkage) I would only be interested in a true remake of a retro computer, one that is the same as the original but with bags more power and more modern. The one above, in my honest opinion, is just a gimmick. It's nothing more than a PC in a retro casing with an emulator. Blasphemy! |
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 06:28 | |
JL235
|
The C64x is still really cool though. If it was more powerful then I'd love to buy one myself and use it as my main machine. But you couldn't do a retro computer with all the power of modern PCs. This is because it's the complexity of modern x86 PC's which makes them so powerful (and useful too). |
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 08:10 | |
spinal
|
Welcome to 2003 commodore!
-=-=- Check out my excellent homepage! 
|
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 12:42 | |
|
dna |
That's Interesting. Everything fits inside the case of the keyboard. -=-=- DNA |
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 15:29 | |
|
steve_ancell
|
JL235  The C64x is still really cool though. If it was more powerful then I'd love to buy one myself and use it as my main machine.But you couldn't do a retro computer with all the power of modern PCs. This is because it's the complexity of modern x86 PC's which makes them so powerful (and useful too).  What I meant is a C=64, Amstrad CPC, ZX or Amiga that is the same as the original but faster and with better graphics, not actually as powerful, or complicated, as a PC. I think all four of those machines were and still are great and should be shown-off to all current and future computer geeks, it's part of their heritage. |
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 15:41 | |
|
JL235
|
There was an article on Reddit a couple of months ago that pointed out that about 80% of all speed gains over the last 40 years have been down to better (and more complex) algorithms. Only the remaining 20% has been down to things actually getting faster. So if you built an Amiga, C64 or any other old machine but much faster then the difference wouldn't be that great. But you can pick up some FPGAs or other embedded systems which would be much faster then those old machines. You'll also be programming entirely against the bare metal. Although there is nothing to stop you doing this on an x86 PC either! |
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 15:46 | |
|
steve_ancell
|
It would be interesting to see this project completed, it's apparently been designed from the ground-up, not just another PC. (Linkage)
|
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 15:56 | |
|
JL235
|
It's a nice idea, but they say they are basing it on the 'innovative system architecture' of the Amiga. The problem is that it was only innovative at the time. That's because the Amiga had excellent sound and graphics support, whilst other machines still had 8 colours and system beeps. Today that design has been easily superseded. Ultimately I understand your idea; how nice it would be if machines were still as simple and accessible (in terms of programming) as they were in the past. I just don't think I'd ever want to go back to that age! |
| Sat, 09 Apr 2011, 15:58 | |
steve_ancell
|
I would be fun though 
|
| Sun, 10 Apr 2011, 03:46 | |
|
spinal
|
JL235 There was an article on Reddit a couple of months ago that pointed out that about 80% of all speed gains over the last 40 years have been down to better (and more complex) algorithms. Only the remaining 20% has been down to things actually getting faster. I always thought that the vast majority of speed gains was because of miniaturization. The smaller a part is, the less distance the electricity has to travel, the quicker it happens. -=-=- Check out my excellent homepage!
|
| Sun, 10 Apr 2011, 03:54 | |
Jayenkai
|
I always assumed that the reason computers don't run anywhere near the speeds they should is because of the mountains of bullshit that runs in the background, and underneath/behind the scenes of the majority of code. Sluggishly attempting to use my moderately shitty Android phone (HTC Wildfire) is a pain in the ass, until you go "Meh, I bought the shit one, what can you do?" .. Then one day, you're using your Amiga, and going.. --- FFS, the Amiga is more fucking responsive.. ... Why the hell is this 7MHz Amiga more fucking responsive than a fucking 500MHz phone?!?! -=-=- ''Load, Next List!''
|
| Sun, 10 Apr 2011, 05:54 | |
|
steve_ancell
|
Well that's Amiga for you. It still is far more superior to most of the other crap out there, it just needs more consumers to realise it!
|
| Sun, 10 Apr 2011, 07:58 | |
|
JL235
|
Spinal I always thought that the vast majority of speed gains was because of miniaturization. The smaller a part is, the less distance the electricity has to travel, the quicker it happens. That might be true in terms of making an indevidual chip faster, but it is through more complex systems and better algorithms that most of the speed gains are made. For example CPUs don't transfer to and from the hard disk, instead they set up DMA to do it on their behalf (because it's faster and frees up the CPU for other tasks). One of the reasons PCI express is much faster then it's predecessors is because it allows multiple one-to-one connections, where as older architectures had a shared bus which only allowed 1 one-to-one connection. CPUs also now perform tasks whilst performing memory reads and writes. Then there are higher level optimizations such as better algorithms for working with floating point numbers; and just better implemented libraries that you now take advantage of. Even then the above are just the simple examples that I know of. The reality is that they take advantage of much more sophisiticad ideas. |
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||