Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: mdv2000 on April 08, 2010, 04:23:49 PM
-
Saw this on ebay...
http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ160420469681QQ
Was this the rumored "after Amiga" C64 predecessor?
Just curious...
-
It's a Plus/4 without the 3+1 software.
-
Was this the rumored "after Amiga" C64 predecessor?
Just curious...
In one of my old Amiga magazines, I just read about a machine that was supposed to be kind of a hybrid between the C64 and Amiga, called the C65. The editor was funny about the machine. He pretty much said: "umm, yeah.... Commodore, you could just kind of leave the prototype and schematics on Atari's front door if you want". lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_65
-
Wow... Yeah, I hadn't seen a C=264 before, outside of old magazine ads mentioning it as upcoming. It does appear there are a few out there in the wild. A quick google confirmed someone has already captured a ROM image of one, so that is cool. I guess they're out there, I just hadn't seen one before.
(@save2600 - the C65 is fairly well known, and prototypes for it surface surface for sale once a year or so... It's got a somewhat legendary status around here, for some reason.)
-
It's always amazed me how much time, energy, R&D, etc. was wasted on things like the C128, C128D, 1581, 1571, C264, C65 and whatever else those dummies (C=) had on their plates when they should have been putting all that effort into the Amiga all along. IMO. Okay, *maybe* not the C128, but that machine was a little too late in its arrival. Guess that happens when you're used to competing with yourself. lol
-
indeed *not* the c128... it was a nice upgrade (expanded to 640k) and certainly more affordable then any Amiga at the time. I got one because my c64 blew up - would I have gotten one if not ?... prob not, but it served me well
Tom UK
-
Saw this on ebay...
http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ160420469681QQ
Was this the rumored "after Amiga" C64 predecessor?
Just curious...
The ill fated 264 range....
These competed with the C64 and really never caught on . The C264 was a prototype which became the Plus/4 Kinda like the C116... Never successful as they were incomatible with the 64 stuff... Big failure.
And so... A very collectable piece of kit. I have the C116 and Plus/4 but not one of these so very interesting.
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/amiga_scuzz23.htm
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/amiga_scuzz26.htm
You can read more here
http://www.commodore.ca/products/264/Commodore_264_family.htm
scuzz
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com
-
makes me laugh that people spend a crap load on this stuff and then complain about how expensive brand new hardware is to run OS4.1
-
It's always amazed me how much time, energy, R&D, etc. was wasted on things like the C128, C128D, 1581, 1571, C264, C65 and whatever else those dummies (C=) had on their plates when they should have been putting all that effort into the Amiga all along. IMO. Okay, *maybe* not the C128, but that machine was a little too late in its arrival. Guess that happens when you're used to competing with yourself. lol
The C128 was fully developed and released in January 1985 before the release of the Amiga. During the sales of the Amiga 1000 Commodore was still making more money out of the C64 and C128. Sadly by even 1985 Commodore were in financial trouble. There was no A500, A600, A1200, A3000, A2000, A4000 etc etc and Commodore had no idea of the strengths or failures of an emerging giant on the market. If you study the history of the Amiga you will realise that much of the development of the Amiga was done without Commodore really understanding what the guys were up to.
As to the Commodore range.. you need to look at this in context of the years up to 1985 and see that the C128 was a very good computer. There was nothing wrong really. The Amiga itself was a giant leap in its own right. The team worked independently of the Commodore team.
Here is an Amiga 1000 and a C128D... I am guessing the Amiga guys did trip over to the C128 development team and have a look at what they were doing with the casing.
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/a1000/a36_a100005.jpg
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/a1000/a37_a100006.jpg
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/a1000/a38_a100007.jpg
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/amiga_scuzz17.htm
scuzz
-
I've never heard of this machine 'til now. The trivia section of the Wikipedia page for the Plus/4 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_Plus/4) says: "The Plus/4 was originally named the Commodore 264 during prototype stage".
There was apparently some kind of unreleased C=V364 prototype to according to same...
-
makes me laugh that people spend a crap load on this stuff and then complain about how expensive brand new hardware is to run OS4.1
Older kit can be seen as an investement and subject of real joy for those that like computing. I would certainly pay far more for an older piece of kit than a piece of hardware that was capeable of running say OS4.1.
I only support machines with badges on anyway and the Amiga was hardware and software. OS4.1 is an operating system not a computer so you cannot compare this with a true Amiga or Commodore. When a true Amiga is again released I will pay whatever is asked. It is doubtful that will ever happen so I will continue to enjoy computing through the window of retro.
And there is a growing band of folk that are doing just the same.
scuzz
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com
-
@Scuzz: For the record, I am not ripping on the 128. While I totally skipped the concept back in the day (investing in a moderately priced 8-bit machine did not make any sense to me when I knew I could purchase a used A1000 for less than $400 by late '87 and hook it to my TV). Today, I have a boxed example with 1571 sitting here begging to be used in some capacity (thanks Damion).
The C128 seems to be a really cool machine, but lets face it. Commodore was hardly in a position to market one machine, let alone 2, 3 or 4. '85 was a really strange time for computing for sure. ST and Mac seemed to pretty much force C= to release the Amiga at a time where it might have been prudent to wait another year or two. Let the C128 mature (which it never got a chance to) and perfect what was all wrong with the A1000. Imagine if C= had actually skipped the A1000 (blasphemous I know) and went straight after the 500 and 2000 in '87? It's all conjecture and hindsight is always 20/20, but just seems to me Commodore made a lot of mistakes that could have easily been avoided. I bet their fate could have been postponed a little while longer had Tramiel stayed on board. I guess I just need to read that Rise and Fall book someday :)
-
The 128 was cool, but 85 was totally the wrong time for it. In 85 cp/m was dead, msdos killed it mac buried it and amiga and atari pissed on the grave. In 82 or maybe even 83 a dual boot capable c64 with cp/m would have definitely turned heads. It probably wouldnt have saved cp/m, not by itself but it would have sold.
I thought the plus4 was an interesting design but it was poorly implemented. Better, more up to date software like the plus4 had but on a cart would have been better. The video chip had some good features with lots of colors but it didnt have sprites or a sid chip.
-
I thought the plus4 was an interesting design but it was poorly implemented. Better, more up to date software like the plus4 had but on a cart would have been better. The video chip had some good features with lots of colors but it didnt have sprites or a sid chip.
I can totally remember the Plus4 mini-Infomercials back in the early 80's. Commodore was on the tele a lot and pushing that machine big time. Dirt cheap too. Still, even at 13-14, I thought there was something "up" with that machine. I knew it wasn't a Vic and knew it wasn't a C64. And yes, I worked back then (had two jobs) and saved my money. I was a potential customers for sure. I knew back then the Plus4 was a mistake and wouldn't last. Didn't help there was no support for it either in mags or otherwise. What a debacle.
-
It's always amazed me how much time, energy, R&D, etc. was wasted on things like the C128, C128D, 1581, 1571, C264, C65 and whatever else those dummies (C=) had on their plates when they should have been putting all that effort into the Amiga all along. IMO. Okay, *maybe* not the C128, but that machine was a little too late in its arrival. Guess that happens when you're used to competing with yourself. lol
The initial brief of what turned into the 264 series was for a $50-70 dollar 16kb full colour machine like a spiritual successor to the old VIC-20. What was released as the Commodore 16 is what this machine was supposed to be....I think we can all agree that had the C16 been $60/£50 combined with the C64 @ $199 and the Amiga 500 style machine launching BEFORE the high price niche A1000 machine then they would have had the strongest line-up of any computer company ever.
Of course Jack left and we ended up with the Plus4 at C64 prices, the A1000 at top end price for mass market (so effectively leaving the market free for Atari ST for nearly 2 years in total) and the Commodore 128D 8bit with no improved SID/VIC-II/1mz 6510 speed for the price of an Atari ST with 8mhz 68k and a superior Mac-a-like than the original $3K monochrome Mac! What a travesty.
-
The 128 was cool, but 85 was totally the wrong time for it. In 85 cp/m was dead, msdos killed it mac buried it and amiga and atari pissed on the grave. In 82 or maybe even 83 a dual boot capable c64 with cp/m would have definitely turned heads. It probably wouldnt have saved cp/m, not by itself but it would have sold.
I thought the plus4 was an interesting design but it was poorly implemented. Better, more up to date software like the plus4 had but on a cart would have been better. The video chip had some good features with lots of colors but it didnt have sprites or a sid chip.
Interesting... I was still using CP/M in 1992 and BASIC... but not on an Amiga. I knew quite a few folk using CP/M. Machines like the Amstrad PCW range which I used in my office had Malard BASIC and CP/M plus Locoscript. Wasn`t a problem... things were different then though.
You can`t blame Commodore for the 264 range the styling with the directional arrows was picking up some of the trends in MSX machines. The C64 was just too popular. Even the 64C was dumped in Germany cus they liked the old music keyboard that fit over the standard C64 keys. They then bought out the C64G which was the C in the old breadbin
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/a_scuzz_jul2005/a_scuzz_jul30_043.jpg
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/car_0706/car_0706_215.jpg
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/car_0706/car_0706_123.jpg
C64C and C64G
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/amiga_scuzz25.htm
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/amiga_scuzz183.htm
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com/amiga/addons/a155_addon01.jpg
scuzz
-
People talk about Steve Jobs and some of the crazy stuff he did at apple but the undeniable fact was that he had a vision: the mac. The mac was his future and nothing else could distract him from that. He even purposely killed the apple II because of it.
Atari and especially commodore didnt have that vision so they limped along with half supported systems and computer lines, no vision, no dedication.
IBM didnt need that kind of vision they had dozens of manufacturers building different versions of their system. They could afford to lead or follow or whatever.
-
People talk about Steve Jobs and some of the crazy stuff he did at apple but the undeniable fact was that he had a vision: the mac. The mac was his future and nothing else could distract him from that. He even purposely killed the apple II because of it.
Atari and especially commodore didnt have that vision so they limped along with half supported systems and computer lines, no vision, no dedication.
IBM didnt need that kind of vision they had dozens of manufacturers building different versions of their system. They could afford to lead or follow or whatever.
You don`t expect me to agree on that.... :-) On two counts.
Lets not go there......
Other than to say its one thing to have a vision, its another just to be bloody minded... Even if the idea was crap in the first place. If those guys working with Dave Haynie had been able to complete their work the world of computing would be way in advance of any gimmicky Micantoosh....
scuzz
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com
-
Other than to say its one thing to have a vision, its another just to be bloody minded... Even if the idea was crap in the first place. If those guys working with Dave Haynie had been able to complete their work the world of computing would be way in advance of any gimmicky Micantoosh. (http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com)
******
-
You don`t expect me to agree on that.... :-) On two counts.
Lets not go there......
Other than to say its one thing to have a vision, its another just to be bloody minded... Even if the idea was crap in the first place. If those guys working with Dave Haynie had been able to complete their work the world of computing would be way in advance of any gimmicky Micantoosh....
scuzz
http://www.commodore-amiga-retro.com
You might not agree with Job's vision but he had one thing he wanted the mac. he didnt want to develop for the apple II anymore in software or hardware. we wanted the mac. (stephen wozniak wanted the apple II still)
the other companies had no real vision. the vision for the amiga was quickly diluted with new c64 models and pc clones etc. same with atari. Apple had a cleaner break with the past and a more focused intent with the mac.
steve jobs was nutz though
@hell labs
who were you calling a douche? Dave Haynie, Steve Jobs or someone else
-
Just funnin' w/ you Hell Labs ;) Cheers!
-
muussssst stooooop waaaaanking !!! FRAP FRAP FRAP!
... content deleted by moderator ltstanfo at save2600 request... reason - offensive / TOS violation ...
-
muussssst stooooop waaaaanking !!! FAP FAP FAP!
fixed!
Man , if you sound like frap frap frap, you might wanna get that looked at :D
-
You might not agree with Job's vision but he had one thing he wanted the mac. he didnt want to develop for the apple II anymore in software or hardware. we wanted the mac. (stephen wozniak wanted the apple II still)
the other companies had no real vision. the vision for the amiga was quickly diluted with new c64 models and pc clones etc. same with atari. Apple had a cleaner break with the past and a more focused intent with the mac.
steve jobs was nutz though
@hell labs
who were you calling a douche? Dave Haynie, Steve Jobs or someone else
As I say not sure of that... The Amiga was, is, will always be a quite unique piece of equipment and if you look at the tech rooms featured on the deathbed vigil tapes you can see the extent of research being done. This was more about poor business management and selling the kit and sorting out supply chains. The actual technology was sound and was superior to anything Apple could produce [ novelty-wear is what I call Mac crap ]. Mr Haynie along with all the crew building the Amiga were 'gods' and it was a very sad day for computing the day that Commodore closed the facility. It breaks my heart just thinking about it, cus everything that has flowed from this point is utter junk. And I mean that.
I have no respect for anything codged together by tin box manufacturers and certainly have no time what what so ever for Crapintosh novelty-wear. Sadly the world thinks computing is about, Twitter, YouTube, FaceBook, film and music downloads and other such nonsense. It has become an entertainment facility in homes..... It can be that... but please give me back something I can really enjoy and get under the hood with... And that means hardwear and softwear. Not emulation or OSs running on archaic outdated 25 year old concepts like the tin box. We can do much better than this. The Amiga was about design, not only of OS but also the hardwear. And they were brilliant at it.
Anyway... I would never ever be critical of Commodore or Amiga or Dave Haynie. They gave me the best years of my life. And for that I am truly grateful.
scuzz
Still crazy after all these years. And still using his Amiga ' hardwear '.
-
From Old-computers.com
Among the Commodore news from the Summer CES 1984 was the renaming of the C=264 to Plus/4. This renaming came along with a slight change in the built-in software: you could not choose between many different programs anymore, but each Plus/4 was delivered with the 3-plus-1 software.
The built-in software is not worth the silicon it is etched in: a word processor (only with 40 columns and can manage documents with only 99 lines of 77 columns), a very small spreadsheet (only 17 columns and 50 lines), a poor graph generator program (which can graphically display data from the sheets, but only in text mode) and a small database (999 records with 17 fields each and only 38 characters by field).
Most of these programs can only be used with a floppy drive.
The Plus/4 can use some of the peripherals of the C=64 or the VIC-20, like the famous MPS-801 dot-matrix printer and the 1541 Disk Drive run well with it but it can't use C=64 programs (unfortunately, it cannot use the same joysticks & Datasette as the C=64/VIC-20).
This machine wasn't built to be a competitor of the C=64, but it wasn’t meant to replace it either. It has an improved BASIC compared to the C=64’s, this one features graphic and sound instructions and a built-in assembler, but has lost lots of interesting C-64 features like great sound chip (SID: Sound Interface Device) or hardware sprites.
The Commodore Plus/4 was an error in the Commodore marketing policy and had no success.
Very interesting extra information from Dave Haynie who designed the Commodore Plus-4:
I was one of priviledged few to actually help develop this little gem. I started work at Commodore in October of 1983, my second job out of college, after four months of boredom at General Electric. I was hired to help out on the "TED" project.
TED, you see, was an all-in-one cheap computer chip. It improved on a number of the things that were done in the C64, so you didn't need extra SRAMs, you got more color, etc. Ok, so the sound sucked. Anyway, this project was started by Jack Tramiel as an answer to the Timex Sinclair, as well as a replacement for the VIC-20 (eg, a real computer that sold for about $100). The basic idea was to sell a 64K computer, or close, to that market. The result was the membrane keyboard version called the C116.
By the time I was hired, big nonsense was in full swing. For unknown reasons, the TED project was split into several machines. There was the C264, which had the full complement of stuff, 64K of RAM, etc. The C232 was a scaled-down version, with 32K and no serial port (TED systems, unlike C64s, has a real 6551 hardware ACIA).
Eventually, there was the CV364, which I was in charge of for the two weeks between it becoming an official, for production unit, and it being cancelled forever. Take the C264, add a new version of the Magic Voice (we called it Tragic Voice) speech synthesizer module, add a numeric keypad, and you have your CV364. I think I still have one of the two units actually made with production plastic (it was shown at the '84 Winter CES, but with mock-up casework).
The TED systems had some advantages over the C64. BASIC 3.5 has real graphics commands in it. It used a dynamic ROM banking scheme, so you got nearly 64K in BASIC (this was later used on the C128). ROM cartridges, and an internal ROM slot, could also be banked. Orginally, the C264 was to be offered with Your Choice of ROM option; EasyCalc, LOGO, etc. Later, it got the horrible 3+1 package, and was redubbed the PLUS/4. Some time later, a scaled down 16K version was introduced as the C16.
All in all, the PLUS/4 wasn't a bad computer, when compared to others at the same price range. What was wrong with it? The C64. Why make an incremental, incompatible step above the C64. Everyone who tried to take on the C64 was laid to waste: Atari, Coleco Adam, Mattel Aquarius, etc. How could the PLUS/4 do any better.
The rational becomes clear when you look at the company politics. Summer of 1983, TED is the answer to Sinclair and replacing the VIC-20. Fall 1983, we have an explosion of TED models. Winter 1984, Jack Tramiel leaves Commodore. Summer 1984, his sons follow him, after pushing the PLUS/4 through. The result: Commodore is left confused about product.
-
Folks,
This is your first and only warning. Please stick to topic and drop the side comments. Joking or not, it's too easy for people to misunderstand what you think you are trying to convey. Any more reports to the admins and this thread will be closed. Enough said... I hope.
Thanks,
Ltstanfo
-
Folks,
This is your first and only warning. Please stick to topic and drop the side comments. Joking or not, it's too easy for people to misunderstand what you think you are trying to convey. Any more reports to the admins and this thread will be closed.
Thanks,
Ltstanfo
Ah you pay peanuts you get monk..... ;)
-
I have a Plus/4. Shortly after realizing how limited the 3 + 1 software was and buying the better word processing cart, I realized that both the 3 + 1 and the cart were ROM based and I swapped the ROMs. That made a big improvement. I had a small TV that I used with the Plus/4 (toted in a milk crate) to give me a portable computer. There was a great jet fighter game, which included a spoken female voice of the plane advising of the damage taken on, which was really very cool for the time. I got many hand cramps holding the base of the joystick while I pulled the plane in various directions.
The included BASIC was fun to use. I even wrote a program to help translate C64 BASIC to Plus/4 BASIC (the main difference being that Peeks and POKEs needed different addresses from one version to the other).
The power supply started dieing while I was finishing my final master's paper, to the point that I would print one single page, turn it off to cool, wait 5 minutes, repeat. It only took all night to print the 40 - 60 pages! I finally chiseled my way into the PS and replaced the 7805 5V. regulator.
Now it sits in the original box in the garage.
-
@JGB
That was a great first post.
I for one thought the Plus/4 and C16 were complete wastes of time and effort back in 1984. I recall the C16 being talked about as a cheap competitor for Apple in the classrooms. That sounded like a good idea, but fizzled. On the other hand I thought the C128 was a nice step up from the C64. Unfortunately for the 128, the Amiga was released within months.
Plaz
-
I,too, wish Commodore had focused the time money and energy of the TED project into getting the C128 out sooner-and including 64VDC as standard would have been good.
Commodore muddied its own waters;oh and also jumping into make Commodore IBM compatibles was kind of a strange way of committing corporate suicide.