Commander X16

4 hours ago, paulscottrobson said:

.... you aren't getting a modern BASIC.

Why crush a dream like that... "I had a dream, once" : )

 

Hi!

I'm late to this thread, but below is my way of looking at it.



I am going to put it straight.  Probably many disagree with me, but I am ok with that.

To keep my enthusiasm for development for the platform, and to get me to spend money on the platform, below is more or less my list of thoughts / requirements to make that happen.

 

Let's start with my view, and then I go into the questions.

Quote

What I really want is this.

First: A breadbox like the C64, with PETSCII keyboard, but it says X16 on the top. What is in the breadbox is more or less irrelevant to me, as long as it boots up, and pretends it's the X16 that we now all know and love.  That would really make my day.  But since you can't have it all, below is some more nuance.



Secondly: A cool development community like the X16 community is just now, where you can discuss development, and display your programs.

 

Quote

X8

For me the X8, is a no go. 

Unless,

- You chuck away the X16 completely, and X8 takes over the show.

- Or the X16 is really an compatible upgrade of the X8. Think C64/C128.  The X16 should at least have a "goX8" command, if both have to live in the same universe. Or at least they both should have the same way accessing the Vera.

- Or there is at least 5 years time between the releases.

 

Quote

Keyboard

About the keyboard, as it stands.   I don't mind at all how good or bad quality, ps2 or usb it is.  The only thing I REALLY want is the cool PETSCII characters on the keyboard, connected to my X8/16. If I can't have the breadboard form-factor, then the PETSCII keyboard is the next big selling point for me. 

 

Quote

KIT

KIT or no KIT.  I am not buying a KIT, period.   I'd love to buy one and put it together, but I am way to clumsy, and I end up breaking the KIT.  If KIT is the only option, I'll be doing the rounds on eBay to see if someone wants to sell an assembled kit.

 

Quote

The insides and the outside

I'd prefer a through hole circuit board of course, with all parts being discrete.  But since $$$ and also we already have a FPGA onboard, I more or less don't care what's inside.  Put in a raspberry pi, pre-configured to be an X16, and I am still a happy camper.  The thing that matters to me how it boots up like a X16 and how it looks like a X16.  So, does it look like a X16, or does it look like a generic box.  For example I LOVE the Myster, but the form factor is the worst I've seen in a long time. 

I like my retro computers  not only to work great on the inside, but also look the part.  Since I rather have it in a display cabinet next to a C64, looking cool, during it's "off time" periods.

 

Quote

Approach

Myself, I would perhaps take a different route.

0. It sounds like the X8 has a better Vera architecture, change the X16 to copy that.

1. Dump the X8, cool idea, but, nah.

2. Phase 1, is the raspberry pi, bundled with a bare metal emulator of the X16 as it stands now, a generic box, but with PETSCII KB. (I would totally buy that)

3. Phase 2, is a full FPGA version of the X16.

4. Scrap the through hole. Great idea, but maybe only as a kit for the hardcore enthusiasts.  And my daughter can look at resisters, capacitors and transistors in my old C64, that's fine for me.

 

Quote

Conclusion

In short, I really like this project.  And respect the people working so hard to make it happen.  So even if you ignore all my points, I probably stick around, and buy "one of whatever comes out of the oven" ?

So please continue, and keep faith !!  

 

But that being said, I will focus on one single platform, and buy one hardware, and ignore the other one. 

Also, If prefer outside looks (with Keyboard) over inside looks, and a KIT won't do it for me.

 

On 8/19/2021 at 8:32 PM, The 8-Bit Guy said:

The Commander X8 - Believe it or not, this product already exists.  I've had one sitting on my desk the last 6 months.  This is entirely designed by Frank.  It's a 100% FPGA implementation.  It is sort of a subset of the Commander X16.  It has mostly the same architecture, but it has minor differences. There is also already an emulator for it.  It's about the size of a Raspberry Pi.

I can't tell if comments along the lines of "I don't want a Raspberry Pi" are facetious or exaggerations, or if there's a genuine mistaken perception among some that the X8 is nothing more than an emulator of the X16 on a Pi board, but above is how the man himself describes the 100% FPGA X8.

Sounds good to me. I'm probably not going to drop $400 on a hobby computer. I want the low cost Jack Tramiel "for the masses" machine. But I'd be much more likely to buy that $400 machine when it eventually becomes available if I was already invested time and knowledge-wise in the X-family ecosystem. The saying goes, Less is more. I say, More is more. The more X8's are sold, the more X16's will sell.

Also, with the Covid-throttled parts supply situation, it may actually be 5 years before the X16 can be realized. If selling the X8 brings in a big infusion of cash, that could only help to accelerate release of the X16.

15 hours ago, EMwhite said:

Why crush a dream like that... "I had a dream, once" : )



 

and you're malicious, mean and scary.

12 hours ago, VIC-2020 said:

I can't tell if comments along the lines of "I don't want a Raspberry Pi" are facetious or exaggerations, or if there's a genuine mistaken perception among some that the X8 is nothing more than an emulator of the X16 on a Pi board, but above is how the man himself describes the 100% FPGA X8.

It is inevitable that some people will make that mistake.

Some people just skim through things, so are basically "too long / didn't read" but reply anyway. If they were aware that a RPi0 can emulate a C64, they might be unaware of the difficult that a top end RPi can have in emulating the X16 at full speed when Vera is being pushed harder.

Indeed, some people, after all, are under the impression that an FPGA "emulates" hardware rather than being hardware with a an ability to reprogram the connections between the hardware elements at a very low level.

So, yes, while it follows directly from what David said that the X8 is not a Raspberry Pi emulating the Vera chip, but the Vera chip being rewired to have almost all of the the complete system inside of it, it does bear stressing that point for those who are confused.

23 minutes ago, BruceMcF said:

Indeed, some people, after all, are under the impression that an FPGA "emulates" hardware rather than being hardware with a an ability to reprogram the connections between the hardware elements at a very low level.

I think part of the problem is "dictionary definitions" vs "real world meaning of words". Yes, a strict reading of the dictionary states that FPGA emulates a CPU, but at the same time, one could say every automobile after the first automobile can be said to be emulating its predecessor. And those automobiles (aka horseless carriages) emulated a predecessor. And every hammer after the first emulated the first. Every building after the first. Etc Etc Etc.

Some people do use the term negatively as an insult because it isn't original equipment. But just as software emulation can be good or bad, an FPGA based solution can be good or bad. They are just tools and can be used well or poorly. This is part of the brilliance (or maybe insanity!) of creating Commander X16. It tries to be reminiscent of the past without claiming 100% fidelity to something else.

1 minute ago, Scott Robison said:

I think part of the problem is "dictionary definitions" vs "real world meaning of words". Yes, a strict reading of the dictionary states that FPGA emulates a CPU, but at the same time, one could say every automobile after the first automobile can be said to be emulating its predecessor. And those automobiles (aka horseless carriages) emulated a predecessor. And every hammer after the first emulated the first. Every building after the first. Etc Etc Etc.

Yes, using dictionary definitions rather than the technical definitions is part of it ... the technical usage of simulation for, eg, a soft 6502 core and emulation for, eg, VICE is not subject to the same confusion, while in casual English usage, "emulation" and "simulation" are not so sharply differentiated.

Oh man - how can I not take this as personal? Okay.

I know what a Raspberry Pi is. I know what a FPGA is. If I wanted a Raspberry PI C64, I'd already have it - because it's already a product. The C64 is already out for about 130 bucks.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08GMTJYXJ/

Again - I'd have fleeting interest in it because I'd likely make it into something else instead of use it as it came. If the X8 is a Crowdfunding bonus, I'd get it because it's something, but I'm here for the finished product.

And yeah, It's a dream to be able to program old stuff but remain in the 21st century. I don't expect enough work to be done between compatibility and reality to eliminate the absolutely absurd artifacts of 1970's programming in light of the 21st century development environments and requirements. If the goal is to make a usable computer, I will insist resolving the lower levels of problems with BASIC v2 and the C64's low level systems is a critical bit of work. I know some here don't seem to have any problem with this, but I am absolutely sure you'd reach a wider audience and ensure lasting use and value of the product if, like providing a HDMI or a USB or SD card i/o, you do the same engineering work in the software side of things. We do not use computers the same way as we did in the late 70's and early 80's. Proof enough is the rapid evolution of all those middle soft-parts before DOS computers came into the norm. Software is not developed to completion and subsequently supported by a single guru with unlimited time in a garage, anymore. It is the exception now, not the rule. Waiting for manna from heaven is not how you get a killer app. You need a development environment and ecosystem with high level ease-of-use. The cuttthroat University CS department "Make-everything-as-arcane-as-possible" way is not the way of real life.

I want the project to succeed at a wider level of appeal. I see the above as a critical part of it. There's already plenty of collector's items out there, as well as pretenders and emulators that are far cheaper and do the job - but they aren't real computers, anymore. I want the X16 to be more than a mantle-piece for the wide audience it's said to be intended for. The project being at a crossroads is perhaps the best thing that could happen to it.

I gave it a serious shot, and unfortunately I came up empty. I don't have it in me to try again without serious improvements in the middling levels and in the ecosystem. I would LIKE to try again, but without the cookbook or the environment - it's just me messing around in pico on a university unix system. I want to complete projects in a timely and reliable manner. Nothing wrong with that. I don't feel like I'm barking up the wrong tree, here.

6 minutes ago, BruceMcF said:

Yes, using dictionary definitions rather than the technical definitions is part of it ... the technical usage of simulation for, eg, a soft 6502 core and emulation for, eg, VICE is not subject to the same confusion, while in casual English usage, "emulation" and "simulation" are not so sharply differentiated.

The interesting thing is that I'm engaged with this exact topic in a FB group right now. I don't know what the credentials of the other person are, but my instinct is that it is someone who's never worked with FPGA.

13 minutes ago, Starsickle said:

Oh man - how can I not take this as personal? Okay.



I know what a Raspberry Pi is. I know what a FPGA is. If I wanted a Raspberry PI C64, I'd already have it - because it's already a product. The C64 is already out for about 130 bucks.



https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08GMTJYXJ/



Again - I'd have fleeting interest in it because I'd likely make it into something else instead of use it as it came. If the X8 is a Crowdfunding bonus, I'd get it because it's something, but I'm here for the finished product.



And yeah, It's a dream to be able to program old stuff but remain in the 21st century. I don't expect enough work to be done between compatibility and reality to eliminate the absolutely absurd artifacts of 1970's programming in light of the 21st century development environments and requirements. If the goal is to make a usable computer, I will insist resolving the lower levels of problems with BASIC v2 and the C64's low level systems is a critical bit of work. I know some here don't seem to have any problem with this, but I am absolutely sure you'd reach a wider audience and ensure lasting use and value of the product if, like providing a HDMI or a USB or SD card i/o, you do the same engineering work in the software side of things. We do not use computers the same way as we did in the late 70's and early 80's. Proof enough is the rapid evolution of all those middle soft-parts before DOS computers came into the norm. Software is not developed to completion and subsequently supported by a single guru with unlimited time in a garage, anymore. It is the exception now, not the rule. Waiting for manna from heaven is not how you get a killer app. You need a development environment and ecosystem with high level ease-of-use. The cuttthroat University CS department "Make-everything-as-arcane-as-possible" way is not the way of real life.



I want the project to succeed at a wider level of appeal. I see the above as a critical part of it. There's already plenty of collector's items out there, as well as pretenders and emulators that are far cheaper and do the job - but they aren't real computers, anymore. I want the X16 to be more than a mantle-piece for the wide audience it's said to be intended for. The project being at a crossroads is perhaps the best thing that could happen to it.



I gave it a serious shot, and unfortunately I came up empty. I don't have it in me to try again without serious improvements in the middling levels and in the ecosystem. I would LIKE to try again, but without the cookbook or the environment - it's just me messing around in pico on a university unix system. I want to complete projects in a timely and reliable manner. Nothing wrong with that. I don't feel like I'm barking up the wrong tree, here.

Yeah, I've suggested at least a couple of important (to me) things, but remember this is 8BG's vision.  If you go back and watch his original videos about this and your wants aren't expressed in those videos, then what?