| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5086 |
History Fakers
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,126692-page,14-c,systems/arti..
c64 not even on the top 25 pcs of all time while trash like trs80 is on it.
appleII is the number one pc while pet was released earlier.
great.
thanks apple. I bloody hate you. |
|
... 16 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Tim
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 467 |
Quote: Then again - could computing get any more personal than with a 64? Sure, I like my Thinkpad x60s; it's a neat machine. But I wouldn't miss it if it broke. And I definitely don't dream in terms of demo ideas for anything else than the 64...
The 64 might possibly be not only the best PC, but the *only* real PC.
So true TAO, although that X60 is very nice, the only thing I can fault it on is the brand name Lenovo (IBM should never have sold off their thinkpads).. having said that you hit the nail on the head.. I would never shed a tear for replacing a notebook for a better, younger, thinner, quicker, etc. model..
Of all the series of other c64s that Ive collected over the years theres only one real c64 for me.. the one that I bought brand new and kickstarted my life of endless piracy ;) I will use this machine filled with god knows how many drink spills, stickers, breadcrumbs, cigarette ashes, etc. until it dies.
My own C64 is almost female.. hehe.. Sure I can flirt and admire C65s, SX64s, 128s or other cute c64s.. but Ill always come back home to my old true love.. besides.. she has the cutest little sid voice of all ;)
Shit.. someone call Dr.Phil for an episode "I Love my C64" :)
|
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
Christ, can you imagine a "pop psych" show like that (we have a couple over here, one is hosted by someone who actually knows what she's talking about so if everyone fancies piling over to the UK for it...? =-) about C64 love... some of us'd be getting arrested for lewd behaviour with an 8-bit micro!
Y'know... whilst i appreciate the contributions some machines like the Apple II and the MITS Altair made to home computing, i can't see the point of including the "pretty" PCs and the C64 should have been in there for multiple reasons; because it carried several hardware features, that it had a longer commercial lifespan than any machine in that list and still retains a small but insane... erm, active user base, that it did more to popularise home computing than most other machines (other machines made major headway, but not in as many different markets) and because there's just so damned many of 'em out there.
|
| |
Stryyker
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 468 |
A simpler test would have been to ask plenty of older generations how many had first used a C64. With its good sales for a long period it is a significant part of comuting history. Some people in various IT industries built a name for themselves with C64 from Xample, JT, Rob Hubbard, Charles Deenen, and there could be a massive list. It was the 8 bit computer used for games through to productivity. Even Linus Torvalds has mentioned it in interviews. |
| |
Tim
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 467 |
Tmr.. well obviously its the games history of the c64 that causes historians to neglect the c64 from p.c. status. Fair or not? Who knows.. I only knew very few companies actually using the c64 as a real computer so in that perspective there is a good point. (although I might not like to admit that)
In gaming history, the c64 is also often skipped. Have you ever heard people saying they are from the Nintendo or Atari generation? Sigh.. I hate those annoying game players, reminds me of fights with friends when I was young whether or not to view a crack intro or hit space immediately to start a game. (and since I provided most of them with games, if I was there they were forced to read the scroller.. hehe).
Tja.. and that list is actually quite arguable even if youd consider only real PCs.. a poor mans way of making a top 25 list at best.
|
| |
Style
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 498 |
Quote: A simpler test would have been to ask plenty of older generations how many had first used a C64. With its good sales for a long period it is a significant part of comuting history. Some people in various IT industries built a name for themselves with C64 from Xample, JT, Rob Hubbard, Charles Deenen, and there could be a massive list. It was the 8 bit computer used for games through to productivity. Even Linus Torvalds has mentioned it in interviews.
errr, that was a VIC-20 (his grandfather's), but point taken :D
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5086 |
Bordeaux, here in hungary c64's were used for everything back in the day :) fathers brought c64s from the company to home for weekends to have the kids a good play :)
btw some dumbass atari dude from the forum of pcworld:
"C64 has the same architecture as Atari computers, even like some enginners said, there is reverse engineering in some aspects. The list includes the first computer in the serie of innovation." |
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
The Atari fan is wrong of course, nobody at Commodore said they'd gone as far as actually reverse engineering the Atari although they happily admitted to looking at all of the would-be competition and nicking the bits they liked for the C64. A lot of what is seen as borrowed from the 800 actually wasn't, since a couple of the more obvious influences on the C64 are the Apple ][ (graphics modes) and Commodore's own PET (text based screen) and both of these predate the Atari 800. This kind of borrowing was commonplace and [i]everybody[/i] was doing the same at that time; Atari were no more innocent of it than the others and it can and has been argued that the 800's graphics modes are similar to those of the Apple ][ and PET as well.
At Bordeaux: The gaming history really shouldn't make a difference, the Atari 800 was pitched pretty much purely at the gaming market to the point of Atari discouraging business software development whilst the C64 was originally pushed as a business machine in the same way the Amiga 1000 would later be - C.B.M. was, after all, Commodore Business Machines. |
| |
Ed
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 173 |
Hmmm
http://www.4to40.com/recordbook/index.asp?category=&counter=190 |
| |
Tim
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 467 |
@oswald
here in holland, especially around Eindhoven where I grew up, things were quite Philips dominated. So a lot of P2000 machines or the G7000 as a games machine and later the msx. Both gaming consoles were a lot of fun for gaming but eventually I fell in love with the c64 due to these cool pirates messages game broken by
:)
@tmr
Hmm.. im actually always wondered what would have happened to the quality of Atari software if there had been a huge scene like the c64 had. Quite sure that the hardware/software was never fully optimized on most of their systems simply because of not enough people inventing new routines, modes, etc.
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5086 |
atari hardware was too weak for good games, atleast in the usual eighties 2d platform/walkaround department. sprites were unusable, and gfxmodes cant use more colors than 4 in reasonable resolutions. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 - Next |
