Jump to content

Carl Gundel

Members
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carl Gundel

  1. I agree. As much as the X16 can be a compatible upgrade for X8 users, the more compelling it is, I think.
  2. 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?
  3. Yeah, my idea was for it to be built in. After all, if you're going to reinvent the 8-bit computer in the Internet age, it makes sense for it to have some sort of network facility, however simple. The computer itself will have its OS in ROM so (as long as it isn't re-reflashable in situ) security isn't much of an issue. On the other hand, as much as I like the idea because I think it makes for instant X16 community, it is feature creep to say the least.
  4. I can see this as a super cheap way to add Internet connectivity, to support software for simple BBS style communities, or even simple FTP and HTTP type features. I made a suggestion some time back for this kind of thing, but people seemed mostly uninterested.
  5. I would be happy enough if I could buy just the keycaps. I have a keyboard I can use them with. Decent MX switch type ten keyless keyboards can be had for cheap.
  6. It's a serial port, right? Could be used for lots of things.
  7. Agreed. It really depends on individual learning style, but generally speaking young people need things to be more concrete before they learn to see things in the abstract.
  8. That's true, sorry. I think I was simply further making my case against the RPi vs the X16, which isn't clearly relevant to what you wrote.
  9. Off the shelf parts (not programmable chips) have clearly defined functional boundaries and electrical interfaces. This means each part is responsible for something. The interaction between the chips is meaningful, and the circuit can be modified, customized, repaired, etc. This is mostly sacrificed when all the functionality is simulated in a programmable chip. The organization of the hardware can and does inform understanding of how the computer works, and simpler and more transparent design makes it easier to understand. If none of this matters, then yes by all means let's just forget about phase 1 and 2 and go straight to FPGAs. I'm not going to suggest that this makes the product pointless, but it's not at all what 8BG presented. The Raspberry Pi is as you say highly integrated, and its operating system is Linux which is not ideal for personal mastery because of its size and complexity. This can often be too much for the beginner or casual hobbyist. The Raspberry Pi is a great product, don't get me wrong, but conceptually totally different from an X16.
  10. 8BG's original vision resonates with me strongly. A computer made with off the shelf parts as much as possible so that the end user can completely understand the machine and also master it to bend it to the will. It gives the user a tool for thinking, and learning and playing. In this way it is in my mind superior to the Raspberry Pi, and for that reason the phase 3 X16 and the X8 don't hold so strong an appeal for me. On the other hand, to each his own.
  11. It does seem like a funny idea to decrease the frequency, or to decrease anything else, but I think it makes sense. On the other hand, it's okay if the video or audio hardware is slightly different I think. Look at the PC games market as an example. Most games in the 80s and 90s supported multiple audio and video standards. Some of 8BG's games also do this, so why can't developers be encouraged to write games that work on both machines? After all we do have access to an X16 emulator, so even if the X16 isn't available when the X8 is, there's no reason why software can't theoretically be developed for both, and published for both?
  12. Of course if your software fits in RAM and doesn't access a disk, the CPU speed matters more, unless the speed of RAM isn't increased along with the CPU clock, generally speaking.
  13. You know, when you put it that way, I'm more interested in the X8, as a way to fund further work, no crowdfunding needed.
  14. Crowdfunding would pose certain challenges? Okay. But if the project is impeded from lack of money (is it?) and if crowdfunding can provide that money...? As for the case, aren't phase 1 and 2 both designed to fit in a standard case? Problem solved? The X8 to me just isn't the same thing that David described from the get go. It doesn't even have the same vibe to me at all. My three cents.
  15. Yeah, I think that those interested in the success of the Commander X16 can go onto social media and also to our different communities and promote the virtues of the CX16 and encourage interest! I'm very happy to do so myself.
  16. I would also be willing to participate in some sort of crowdfunding effort.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please review our Terms of Use