Commander X16

I'm not so much concerned about the sales, I concur they can both sell. My thoughts were on maximizing the developer focus by sticking to a single platform and thus maximizing the content and energy around said platform.

On 9/28/2021 at 1:10 PM, Janne Sirén said:

I'm not so much concerned about the sales, I concur they can both sell. My thoughts were on maximizing the developer focus by sticking to a single platform and thus maximizing the content and energy around said platform.

Yes, there is that.

I suspect it won't be that bad.  I just re-read the KERNAL documentation https://github.com/commanderx16/x16-docs/blob/master/Commander X16 Programmer's Reference Guide.md#sprites), and had forgotten that there are already sprite calls in the KERNAL that serve as a translation layer between a program and VERA.  And it had this for awhile.

It stands to reason that there are also PSG KERNAL calls planned.  If they also create a memory-move from system RAM to VERA, then the KERNAL effectively insulates the coder to a large degree from VERA access.

It doesn't grant 100% compatibility, but it does let an (even larger) amount of code written on one platform work on the other.

Niche cases will emigrate to one or the other platform.  It's a strength that they have different emphases and price points.

 

To sum up, the MAIN hoo-hah about the X8 is that VERA is interfaced differently.  This is an old problem that the KERNAL would solve, so presumably we should be able to call things like:

JSR $FFE0   ; psg_play_sound()

JSR $FFE3   ; memcpy_to_vram()

 

(The addresses are bogus; I just made a couple up)

Personally I'm "pro" all the projects, but I must admit those projects that have focused singularly speak to me more than those that have been a bit more all over the place. I think the X16 roadmap and the original plan made sense from the focus sense, and now the X8 is sort of out of nowhere kind of a diversion from that. I got the sense from the initial direction of this project that avoiding diversions was a part of the plan and it made sense to me. I still think it makes sense. Maintaining two incompatible platforms seems like a diversion.

But just my opinion of course, nothing more.

X8 is of course controversial in general, and so it was reasonable to keep the lid on it.

IT is interesting to think about their incompatibilities, and what effort that might create.  I'm not sure if it would...

...and actually not aiming for 100% compatibility helps in that regard.  Aiming for a level of general compatibility, via a minimal set of KERNAL calls, gives them design flexibility.

* * *

 

In fact, think about a KERNAL where the video and sound calls are generalized, and aimed at a specific base capability.

What prevents you from replacing VERA with something else, assuming you meet the KERNAL's capability assumptions?

Just thinking out loud.

 

To be clear, it "appearing from nowhere" is not really an issue. A project is allowed to have secrets and surprises. ? But roadmap-wise it does not seem to fit IMO.

The X8 at 12MHz would be significantly better for BASIC programming than the X16 at 8MHz, which is great, because programming in BASIC is probably why most people would buy the X8, given that it can only play games made for or ported to the X8, due to its memory limitations.

I don't think they need to be identical in assembly language programming, largely because anyone who can program in assembly can handle the minor modifications required to port a small X16 program down to the X8 or an X8 up to the X16.



X8: An inexpensive 8 bit computer for the nostalgic average person and otherwise curious people.

X16: A money sink for really big nerds.

The ecosystem for the X8 will be highly performant games and smaller demos.

This includes BASIC programs like Lunar Lander and Rogue-like games.  But I'll tell you, once I got CC65 working, I never looked back.  BASIC is not friendly for longer and more complex games.

Also, BASIC 2.0+ is no country for programs over 8K by people older than 12 years old.  Your brain has to be super spongy.

It also includes more cutting-edge assembly-coded games.  Maybe even some shooters resembling Wolf 3D.  

* * *

The ecosystem for the X16 will be larger, more capable games, and (potentially) richer small games.  They're more likely to be fuller featured, with a standard ADSR envelope library, fewer SD accesses (maybe?), blah blah.

Some fake examples:

• 
  Ultima X16 will have banked music and the "current local map".
  


• 
  The 7 Pirate Kingdoms of Gold  will have its entire map (1024 x 1024) banked, running in a vast simulation.
  


• 
  Traveller Trader  implements a generous swath of interstellar space with a high level of RPG detail.
  

* * *

Wild guessing.  Also assuming that all programmers cross over between two languages.

100% BASIC 2.0+

25% Structured BASIC ("ALGOL X16")

25% Forth

25% C

25% Assembly

 

So one in four developers for these platforms are working primarily in one of these, and secondarily everybody uses BASIC 2.0+ as the "batch mode" of the system.

 

One application that would probably work on the X16 better than the X8 is GeckOS for the 6502.

 

The main reason I think it would work (much) better on the X16 is the benefits of all that nice banked RAM.

But, I could be wrong.

 

  

On 9/28/2021 at 2:49 PM, rje said:

It's hard to predict the breakdown of use with both machines.



That said, after I got CC65 working, I never looked back.  BASIC 2.0+ is no country for people older than 12 years old.  Your brain has to be super spongy.



100% BASIC 2.0+

25% Structured BASIC ("ALGOL")

25% Forth

25% C

25% Assembly



So one in four developers for these platforms are working primarily in one of these, and secondarily everybody uses BASIC 2.0+ as the "batch mode" of the system.

I totally agree regarding MS BASIC 2.0. It sucks lol... Even just the labels, functions, and subroutines of QBasic make programming so much easier to manage, let alone the nifty keywords that replace poke statements for various common tasks. Structured BASIC would be welcome. I've never used FORTH, but it sounds nifty. C would be great as long as the compiler is extremely efficient, given the memory limitations, and it's not bunged up with wacky object oriented syntax.

The main thrust though is that there are a huge amount of potentially interested normal people and a small amount of really big nerds. The nerds will totally buy an X16, regardless of cost and maybe even regardless of how much they would actually truly use it. The normal and even heavily nerd-leaning normal folks though, they're just not emotionally invested enough to care about something like the full sized X16 and when you add the high price tag on top of that general apathy towards the product, you've basically just created the perfect storm of disinterest... for the majority of people on Earth. And that's where the X8 would shine, it's cheap enough to interesting to average people, even if they're not entirely sure why they want it.

What would be an amazing product would be an X8 built into one those cheap portable game machine chassis. I bought one of those POWKIDDY Q90 devices for a whole $48 CAD and it plays NES to GBA games great. If the X8 came in that form factor and could be plugged into a USB keyboard and HDMI screen, people could program for and ON a neat portable gaming machine. That's cool!

Yes, I agree with you.  The reason I left the MEGA65 discussion lists is because I knew I wouldn't be able to justify buying one.

The X16 is more affordable, but it's the same issue: I pay a significant amount of money for something that's going to take up desk space that I don't have, and I'm not sure what I'd do with it really.

The X8, on the other hand:  I already want one.  It hits my price point so easily.  Worth it.  Regardless of whether or not I get the X16.