individual Computers supports Commodore One project

[System]

It's not supposed to "beat" anything. It's not a /serious/ platform, it's a platform for serious hobbyists

I agree, and I'd say that's what the classic Amiga is nowadays too. It does have a practical use in that it inspires people to see exactly what they can squeeze out of limited hardware. "Modern" programmers (I'm sounding like a right oldie here - I'm only 23!) can get away nowadays with writing stupidly inefficient code... it doesn't really matter when you've got 4GHz to play around with.  8-)

[whabang]

This...   Is WAY cool!

[whabang]

I think I read somewhere that there is an Atari clone based on coldfire on it's way aswell... :-)

[Kronos]

@whabang

http://acp.atari.org/


Not in $200-category (my guess)

The old Hades-Sytems were

>$1000 for a 040
>$1500 for the 060 version

[ido]

tell us more Kronos!

[Kronos]

Hi ido
Can't tell you very much about the current Ataris.

The only one i knew was the 520ST my brother bought shortly
after i got my A500 (Both with 1mb Kick1.3/TOS1.4).

The Atari was a bit faster on number-crunching apps due to its
full 8mhz and all its mem being "fastmem".
Playing cames it was a bit different  :-D  :-D

TOS was basiclly a MacOS-clone with standard file-requesters
and so on, while Kick1.3 was a bit "rough" on these issuses.
Omikron-Basic kicked ass when compared to Amiga-Basic.

TOS didn't have any kind of multitasking and was in some
ways just a sack full of (working) hacks.
When Atari launched the Falcon (think of a A3000+ in a
A1200-case) they couldn't deliever a working OS with it.

Thats was the end of Atari as a computer-manufactor.

Back to the Coldfire:
The cpus run at up to ~350mhz and are somewhat 68k-
compatible. So you won't need a full cpu-emu but only something
like the 68040.library. 68k-SW should run at about the same
speed as on a A1/Pegasos.

The bad side of this is that the coldfire-cpus are not intended
for desktop-computers, and will never be able to compete
against PPC/x86, just like the arm-cpus used in RiscOS-maschines.

BtW: The first name of the project was Pegasus, this was
later dropped to avoid confusion with bPlans Pegasos.

[System]

I can still remember being shocked by the sound and COLOR graphics of my C-64,  I still  have some of my "artwork" printed out on a dot matrix printer.   Black and white of course - only corporations could afford the many thousands of dollars for a color printer.

It was this machine that led me to my A500 then A2000 etc.

Glad to see this fun news item.

Bob C.

[redrumloa]

I can still remember being shocked by the sound and COLOR graphics of my C-64

Absolutely!! When the C64 came out nothing could touch it! The sound of the SID chip was remarkable. Even now the things demo coders are doing with the SID and VIC chips are amazing.

[Peggus]

I find this to be way cool.

However, I find it hard to understand why they chose to make it an atx mobo. I mean any old pc running a c64 emulator will outperform it. Imho a small portable (handheld)  c64 would have made more sence, but that's just my oppinion.

[System]

Absolutely!! When the C64 came out nothing could touch it! The sound of the SID chip was remarkable. Even now the things demo coders are doing with the SID and VIC chips are amazing.

And you still get C64 competitions at demo parties too! :-P

[Argo]

A Pocket 64 running GEOS would kick ass... Who need palm...

[redrumloa]

However, I find it hard to understand why they chose to make it an atx mobo. I mean any old pc running a c64 emulator will outperform it. Imho a small portable (handheld) c64 would have made more sence, but that's just my oppinion.

You miss the point! This isn't simply a stock C64 reworked into a ATX board. This is a NEW computer with tons of new functionality. It just happens to also be backwards compatible.

A C64 emulator on a 2Ghz PC may be faster than the C=One, but it can only run C64 software. The emulator will not have all the new features the C=One has.

Try getting Frodo or any other C64 emulator to give you a 1280x1028 screen resolution:-D

Read up on it with the link I provided above.

[Peggus]

I do ofcourse see the novelty value of getting new c64 hardware, still I'd prefer it to be smaller than a desktop pc wich despite crappy operating systems have a lot more functionality than C=one ever will.

Unfortunatly the C=one webpage is down so I don't know more about it than I've been able to extract from this forum.

A C64 emulator on a 2Ghz PC may be faster than the C=One, but it can only run C64 software

Uhm, what about all the pc software the pc runs?

[redrumloa]

@Peggus

Follow this link:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=commodoreone&hl=en&selm=la0f8.518%24d%254.1563561%40bcandid.telisphere.com&rnum=1

>wich despite crappy operating systems have a lot more functionality than C=one ever will.

Well the C=One is not trying to compete with Windows/Mac/etc. It is meant for coders and hobbiest. Kind of like classic car enthusiast. You buy an old car, pump a little bit of money into it and drive it on the weekends for fun. It won't have all the ammenities of a new car obvilously.

BTW also there *IS* alot of new software for C=ommies like OS'es, IRC clients, TCP/IP, graphical webbrowsers etc. The C=One will make it possible to modernize those programs alot more.

[Housey]

Hi,

I owned a C64 back in its hay day and WOW what a puter ;-)

However other than emulating it (which I haven't yet done) running an ATX tower one would not appeal to me (unless someone gave me one!).

Power to the enthusiasts but I feel the Amiga is the farthest viable solution to upgrade.

Hey, if your made of money who wouldn't want an ATX C64 sat there with their others??

[Chathurawind]

In a grander view:

Micro controlers are very popular in the hobiest market these days. Usually after a while the hobiest finds some reason to need bigger, better, faster. Moving up means something between a single processor with limited I/O functionality, and a full desktop, laptop, or hacking their palm pilot.

There is a nich market that is rapidly filling this hole. Full computers on a small board. What you got is a desktop computer with no slots, on a board smaller than a book. Video, serial, paralell, and usualy some spare IO.. maby instructions on point to point wiring an isa slot.

The problem here is that the more you get in a smaller package the more the cost. Prices start at about 200 or so and go up quickly the more functionality you add. Last time I checked IDE drives were not avail on a board for less then 200 in single quantities. Keep in mind, this is dos/linux only. 286-486 range with about 256k and maby 2 megs of flash.

With all the functionality added, options, and ease of use (A LOT of people remember programing on the C64/128) these boards might be a great alternative for small Kiosks, custom industrial automation where a bit of fancy graphics are nice, but a laptop is way too expensive and over powered. If marketed well (I.e not JUST to C64 hobiests, but to embeded systems designers as well) It could REALLY take off..

A micro ATX isnt all that large by the way. its about 10-12 inches square. Not to mention, if it sells well, smaller scale integration wouldnt be to difficult.

I work in a casino, and for anyone who has been to one, All those fancy video machines are "middle ground" systems. They even have sound chips that sound very much similar to SID.  All but the very newest are 68xx based cpus, running about the same speeds.

This really isnt as far fetched as it sounds from a purely technical standpoint. Very usefull in the Embeded market. And 200 dollars is cheap for the power you get.

--------
two cents from a guy with no name