1. Forum
  2. USENET
  3. comp.sys.cbm

  • Re: World-wide 8-bit computer sales (all-time)?

    From vairxpert@vairxpert@hotmail.com (vairxpert) to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Tuesday, July 01, 2003 00:23:21
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 21:35:58 +0000 (UTC), pausch@saaf.se (Paul
    Schlyter) wrote:

    In article <3f002b4d.813040@news.netnitco.net>,
    vairxpert <vairxpert@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 07:28:56 +0000 (UTC), pausch@saaf.se (Paul
    Schlyter) wrote:

    In article <3eff7fb0.35967984@news.netnitco.net>,
    vairxpert <vairxpert@hotmail.com> wrote:

    Have you ever owned a one piece computer system?

    Only some laptops with LED or LCD screens, where this problem with
    magnetic fields doesn't exist. I always thought 1-piece computers
    systems with CRT displays either were too bulky or had a screen
    too small.

    Full blown laptop computers with LCD screens didn't exist back in the
    late 70's/early 80's.

    I know..... there was only the Osbourne, with a small CRT display....

    And don't forget about the TRS-80 Model 4P. The P standing for
    "portable" since it only weighed about 25 lbs : )


    If you were around and able to use a computer back then you had
    no choice.

    Sure I had a choice! My choice was to use only desktop computes... :-)


    Those systems were
    designed to work that way so there is no reason people shouldn't have
    bought one. Just about every high end serious business computer was
    all one piece with either 5.25" or 8" floppy drives back in the early
    80's.

    ...I don't think so. CP/M machines were the most common micros used
    by businesses back, and they usually had a separate terminal. And
    minis and mainframes (which were the most serious computers back
    then) _definitely_ had separate terminals !!!!

    We're not talking about terminals, mini's and mainframes.

    You were talking about "systems" -- they include mini's and mainframes,
    which back then was dominant among serious computer users, who often
    regarded micros as just toys....

    I guess system can mean a bunch of different things...I consider my
    Emachine that I'm typing this message on to be a system. An no wise
    cracks about the E...out of the dozens of computers I've owned it's
    been the most reliable : )


    I can give you a mile long list of popular systems (most CPM
    compatible) that were all in one, including every TRS-80 (model II,
    III, 4, 4P, 12, 16), Kaypro's, Osbornes, macs, ect.

    What business systems from 1982

    Was Trash-80 really a _business_ system?

    All except the CoCo's. The model I was more of a ground breaking
    hobbiest system. The III's popped up everywhere from homes, schools
    and businesses (I still laugh everytime I watch Airport and see the
    III's at the terminal). The 2, 12, 16 were very expensive heavy duty
    office type systems not designed for home use. They used the big ol'
    8" floppies and were available early on with hard drives. I think a
    few of those depending on options hit well over $10 grand.

    I owned a very basic 16K cassette based model III. It was $1,000 plus
    the cost of the cassette recorder. Fully loaded with dual floppies,
    48K, RS232 board and Orchestra 90 sound board brought the price up
    towards $3,000.00. I eventually got there but only after all the
    parts were heavily discounted. I know the original price of the Drive
    0 kit was $1,000.00 alone.


    and earlier do you recall that used a separate CPU, keyboard and
    monitor? Something that you would walk into a persons office and
    see sitting on a desk?

    The Altair, IMSAI 8080 and most S-100 computers, including brands
    advertised specifically as business computers, such as the North Star >Horizon. And, of course, the Apple II which got used as a business
    system too........ and the Apple ///....

    I'll give ya that...I'll say there's a fair share of both.


    Later the VIC-20, Commodore-64, Sinclair ZX-80, ZX-81 and Spectru,
    the Jupiter Ace and many more appeared, which had separate displays.
    But they were not business systems.

    Considering when they were released I never understood why the C64 and
    Atari 800's never made it as real business machines? I would say
    either one was able to hold it own against the first 4.77 mhz XT's and
    they cost a fraction of the price.

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From pausch@pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter) to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Tuesday, July 01, 2003 06:36:57
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    In article <3f00cbfd.3788766@news.netnitco.net>,
    vairxpert <vairxpert@hotmail.com> wrote:

    Later the VIC-20, Commodore-64, Sinclair ZX-80, ZX-81 and Spectru,
    the Jupiter Ace and many more appeared, which had separate displays.
    But they were not business systems.

    Considering when they were released I never understood why the C64 and
    Atari 800's never made it as real business machines? I would say
    either one was able to hold it own against the first 4.77 mhz XT's and
    they cost a fraction of the price.

    At the very beginning, IBM considered the PC to be a game machine for
    home use.....

    BTW the XT had a hard disk (10 MBytes -- tiny by today's standards but
    enormous back then), which probably partly explains why the XT was so
    expensive (the other reason it was so expensive was of course the
    brand name "IBM". Otoh, when Apple released the Lisa, and later the
    first Macs, they did the same thing: these were _not_ cheap machines!).




    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN

    e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se

    WWW: http://www.stjarnhimlen.se/

    http://home.tiscali.se/pausch/

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From wildstar@wildstar128@hotmail.com to comp.sys.cbm on Tuesday, July 01, 2003 09:02:06
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote in news:As8Ma.5581$Fl5.190@nwrddc02.gnilink.net:


    Good thing you aren't an engineer with the computer makers. If you
    were, it would require a hoist to install a new computer system, just
    to get the shielding in place! :-)

    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
    Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!

    Use Aluminum, not a Iron Boilerplate. Ok, 1/8th inch plate should do but
    hey, you may need to build muscles like Arnold. Anyway. ever heard of
    wheels. :-)

    You can say, you'll never have to worry about it breaking. Not to mention,
    it is built like a tank. Anyway, if you want Iron Boilerplate then use it
    for the outside casing. Just to make it very hard to break.

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From email@email@luddite.ca (Simon Williams) to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Tuesday, July 01, 2003 21:07:58
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Paul Schlyter <pausch@saaf.se> wrote:

    In article <o9ctfvc6143n8sqi01f6lpode89p5stnki@4ax.com>,
    Peter Thomas <see-my-sig@hotmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 01:01:20 -0500, Exegete <millers@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:

    I loved it. It was slow - compared to an IBM disk drive. From what I've
    seen of Commodore disk drives, well.... I never had ANY problem with
    mine. But all the ADAM's I've ever seen had the warning not to leave the >> tapes on top of a color TV, or it would be erased. Perhaps, or perhaps
    that was a "cover" for tapes that did go bad.

    Leaving *any* kind of magnetic storage on top of a television is never
    a good thing. I'm not sure why Coleco specified a colour television
    either. All TVs, to my knowledge, play around with magnetic fields,
    and can damage magnetic media.

    Which is why you should never get some models of the Apple Macintosh:
    a CRT display as well as a floppy and a harddisk inside the same
    cover..... *shudder*.....


    Never thought of that... is it an actual issue, or just a percieved one?
    I can't see it being that much different than say a DuoDisk with a
    monitor stacked on top...


    --
    =LUDDITE ENTERPRISES=
    http://www.luddite.ca
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Bill Garber@willy46pa@comcast.net to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Tuesday, July 01, 2003 20:16:23
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


    Leaving *any* kind of magnetic storage on top of a television is never
    a good thing. I'm not sure why Coleco specified a colour television either. All TVs, to my knowledge, play around with magnetic fields,
    and can damage magnetic media.

    Which is why you should never get some models of the Apple Macintosh:
    a CRT display as well as a floppy and a harddisk inside the same
    cover..... *shudder*.....

    Never thought of that... is it an actual issue, or just a percieved one?
    I can't see it being that much different than say a DuoDisk with a
    monitor stacked on top...

    Actually it isn't. Most floppy drives are shielded anyway, plus they
    add shielding between the components that are susceptible to the
    magnetic fields inside the case. If you are concerned, simply remove
    the cover and if the drive is not encased in itself, then it probably has
    a piece of coated paper between it and the CRT.

    Bill @ GarberStreet Enterprises };-)
    Web Site - http://garberstreet.netfirms.com
    Email - willy46pa@comcast.net



    ---
    This email ain't infected, dude!

    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.495 / Virus Database: 294 - Release Date: 6/30/03


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Sam Gillett@samgillett@msn.com to comp.sys.cbm on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 01:25:32
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


    wildstar wrote ...

    "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote in >news:As8Ma.5581$Fl5.190@nwrddc02.gnilink.net:


    Good thing you aren't an engineer with the computer makers. If you
    were, it would require a hoist to install a new computer system, just
    to get the shielding in place! :-)

    Use Aluminum, not a Iron Boilerplate. Ok, 1/8th inch plate should do but
    hey, you may need to build muscles like Arnold. Anyway. ever heard of
    wheels. :-)

    You don't understand magnetic shielding. 22 gauge steel is reasonably lightweight, yet provides better shielding than aluminum over an inch thick. Aluminum provides good shielding against EMF (ElectroMotive Force) fields
    such as RF (Radio Frequency) energy. But, as it is a non-magnetic material, provides little or no shielding against magnetic energy, or fields.

    Steel is a magnetic material, and as such, provides good magnetic shielding.
    As it is also a good conductor it also provides good RF shielding.

    You can say, you'll never have to worry about it breaking. Not to mention,
    it is built like a tank. Anyway, if you want Iron Boilerplate then use it
    for the outside casing. Just to make it very hard to break.

    What about the material used in bullet-proof vests? Kelvar isn't it? That would have the advantage of making your computer both lightweight _and_ bulletproof! ;-)

    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
    Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!





    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Sam Gillett@samgillett@msn.com to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 01:25:30
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


    Paul Schlyter wrote ...

    BTW the XT had a hard disk (10 MBytes -- tiny by today's standards but >enormous back then), which probably partly explains why the XT was so >expensive (the other reason it was so expensive was of course the
    brand name "IBM". Otoh, when Apple released the Lisa, and later the
    first Macs, they did the same thing: these were _not_ cheap machines!).

    The hard drive was an option on most of the XT clones. Not sure if the IBM
    was available without it or not. Back in the mid 1980's a lot of home users bought a bare bones machine and added a hard drive later. By buying an RLL drive controller card instead of an MFM card, you could end up with 35 megabytes of drive space for the price of a 20 megabyte drive. :-)

    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
    Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!







    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From wildstar@wildstar128@hotmail.com to comp.sys.cbm on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 06:15:22
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    "Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote in news:gwqMa.198$aD6.128@nwrddc03.gnilink.net:


    You don't understand magnetic shielding. 22 gauge steel is reasonably lightweight, yet provides better shielding than aluminum over an inch
    thick. Aluminum provides good shielding against EMF (ElectroMotive
    Force) fields such as RF (Radio Frequency) energy. But, as it is a non-magnetic material, provides little or no shielding against
    magnetic energy, or fields.

    Hehehe, your right. What the heck was I thinking. I must have been up too late. Anyway, an 1/8 inch Steel Plate would do just fine. Anyway, if
    placed just below the CRT and on the sides. Then you would do just fine.
    Then you place the Aluminum shielding just underneath the Steel plate inbetween the Steel plate and the electronics/drives. This way, you block
    the magnetics and have very good RF Double Shielding.

    Steel is a magnetic material, and as such, provides good magnetic
    shielding. As it is also a good conductor it also provides good RF
    shielding.

    What about the material used in bullet-proof vests? Kelvar isn't it?
    That would have the advantage of making your computer both lightweight
    _and_ bulletproof! ;-)


    Only if Kevlar wasn't a flexible material. Spider-web anyone. Hehehe... Anyway, I wouldn't mind using heavy-duty material but hey, make sure the bottom has wheels. Not the cheap-ass plastic shit but the stong metal
    wheels. Anyway, whoever said weight matters. Maybe one can have strong muscles. Hey, if Arnold can throw a barbarian sword with one arm (as used
    in Conan) and lift 300 lbs then what stops you roll this around. ;-)

    Anyway, I thought we can have some good comedy around here.



    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From russotto@russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:46:59
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    In article <1fxbkku.ve14pc6tpffoN%email@luddite.ca>,
    Simon Williams <email@luddite.ca> wrote:
    Paul Schlyter <pausch@saaf.se> wrote:

    Which is why you should never get some models of the Apple Macintosh:
    a CRT display as well as a floppy and a harddisk inside the same
    cover..... *shudder*.....


    Never thought of that... is it an actual issue, or just a percieved one?
    I can't see it being that much different than say a DuoDisk with a
    monitor stacked on top...

    Percieved.
    --
    Matthew T. Russotto mrussotto@speakeasy.net "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
    of justice is no virtue." But extreme restriction of liberty in pursuit of
    a modicum of security is a very expensive vice.
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Sam Gillett@samgillett@msn.com to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 22:58:03
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


    vairxpert wrote ...

    I did the RLL thing...it worked great with certain drives. I was able
    to squeeze 32 megs out of an MFM drive that way. Sleazgates just
    wouldn't fly with that trick though.

    I used a 20 meg MFM Seagate with a Western Digital RLL card. I did have to
    do a low-level format to get it to work though. This was after Seagate
    started including install software on a 5 1/4" disk in the box with their drives. The software made low-level formatting easy.

    I loved the BBS's back then and how each would brag in the opening
    screen about the amount of online space they had. I remember being
    blown away when "Last Chance" upped his to 85 megs!

    I remember one BBS using five 286's networked together. With two 50 meg
    drives in each box. He had five phone lines and a modem in each computer
    for a 5 node system. One line was free (and _always_ busy). It was worth
    ten bucks a year to become a subscriber and be able to connect on the other four lines.

    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
    Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!







    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Roger Johnstone@rojaws@es.co.nz to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Thursday, July 03, 2003 07:40:51
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    In <8TydnVmUt7nuY5-iXTWc-w@speakeasy.net> Matthew Russotto wrote:
    In article <1fxbkku.ve14pc6tpffoN%email@luddite.ca>,
    Simon Williams <email@luddite.ca> wrote:
    Paul Schlyter <pausch@saaf.se> wrote:

    Which is why you should never get some models of the Apple Macintosh:
    a CRT display as well as a floppy and a harddisk inside the same
    cover..... *shudder*.....

    Never thought of that... is it an actual issue, or just a percieved
    one? I can't see it being that much different than say a DuoDisk with
    a monitor stacked on top...

    Percieved.

    Perceived.

    The old toaster Macs did have a warning about placing an external floppy
    drive on top of the computer, or on a stand beside it at the same level
    as the monitor. The internal drives were never a problem of course,
    since the designers _knew_ where they would be.

    --
    Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand

    Apple II - FutureCop:LAPD - iMac Game Wizard http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~rojaws/ ________________________________________________________________________
    "So we went to Atari and said, 'We've got this amazing thing, even built
    with some of your parts and what do you think about funding us? Or we'll
    give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll come work
    for you.' They said 'No'. Then we went to Hewlett-Packard; they said,
    'We don't need you. You haven't got through college yet'."

    Apple Computer founder Steve Jobs on attempts to get Atari and
    H-P interested in his and Steve Wozniak's personal computer
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Andreas Magenheimer@magea000@students.uni-mainz.de to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Thursday, July 03, 2003 20:43:01
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Well,
    the crash took place from 1983 to 1985. Read how many millions Atari
    lost in 1983 and 1984 (until the Tramiels took over; the losses were
    smaller then and somewhere in 1985 Atari was on the plus side again).
    Some companies already got busted in 1983, some survived until 1984.
    think, after 1985 the great homecomputer crash was over...
    -Andreas.



    Robert J Baker schrieb:

    Exegete <millers@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote in message news:<3EFC75C0.3030706@noneofyourbusiness.com>...

    That's because of the great computer/video market crash of 1983, when alot of companies went under!


    Actually, the crash was the following year, 1984.

    Actually, it was the year after that -- 1985. I remember because of
    Live Aid. :p

    (One computer magazine cartoon postulated the rescue of a certain
    company by way of a "Clive Aid" event...)
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Mark Rathwell@av999@freenet.carleton.ca to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Monday, July 07, 2003 03:54:42
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    If it has anything to
    do with display, the VIC (Video Interface Chip) in the C64 was the most advanced display processor available in a low cost home computer in 1983.

    Yeah - those 16 colours really were advanced in 1983. All the Atari
    computer owners are probably laughing their asses off at this statement.

    The C64 was one of my favorite systems. Best developers, best games,
    terrific sound. But your statement above is SILLY.











    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Sam Gillett@samgillett@msn.com to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Monday, July 07, 2003 04:20:16
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


    Mark Rathwell wrote ...

    If it has anything to
    do with display, the VIC (Video Interface Chip) in the C64 was the most
    advanced display processor available in a low cost home computer in 1983.

    Yeah - those 16 colours really were advanced in 1983. All the Atari
    computer owners are probably laughing their asses off at this statement.

    The C64 was one of my favorite systems. Best developers, best games,
    terrific sound. But your statement above is SILLY.

    You seem to be forgetting that sprites were implemented in hardware, as well
    as collision detection in hardware, and other nifty features. All of which explains your statement above about the C64 having good games. :-)

    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
    Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!







    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Exegete@millers@noneofyourbusiness.com to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Monday, July 07, 2003 08:30:06
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm



    Sam Gillett wrote:
    Mark Rathwell wrote ...


    If it has anything to

    do with display, the VIC (Video Interface Chip) in the C64 was the most >>>advanced display processor available in a low cost home computer in 1983.

    Yeah - those 16 colours really were advanced in 1983. All the Atari >>computer owners are probably laughing their asses off at this statement.

    The C64 was one of my favorite systems. Best developers, best games, >>terrific sound. But your statement above is SILLY.


    You seem to be forgetting that sprites were implemented in hardware, as well as collision detection in hardware, and other nifty features. All of which explains your statement above about the C64 having good games. :-)

    The 9918/28 had 32 hardware sprites and 16 colors. Long before 1983

    Roy


    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
    Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!










    -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From bill@bill@newbreedsoftware.com (William Kendrick) to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 22:44:56
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    In comp.sys.atari.8bit Sam Gillett <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:

    You seem to be forgetting that sprites were implemented in hardware, as well as collision detection in hardware, and other nifty features. All of which explains your statement above about the C64 having good games. :-)

    Sprites and collision detection were done in hardware on the Atari 8-bits, too!

    C=64 sprites seemed to be more versatile 'out-of-the-box', but there were some pretty damned
    cool tricks you could do with those screen-length (e.g., ~200 pixel tall) 'players' and 'missiles'
    on the Atari, too. ;)

    -bill!

    --
    bill@newbreedsoftware.com Got kids? Get Tux Paint! http://newbreedsoftware.com/bill/ http://newbreedsoftware.com/tuxpaint/ --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From rtdos \(status@rtdos.info\)@abuse@rtdos.info to comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.sinclair,rec.games.video.classic on Sunday, July 20, 2003 15:34:41
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    it'd be nice to "combine" the best features of both world's wouldn't it?


    "William Kendrick" <bill@newbreedsoftware.com> wrote in message news:IPHOa.64$dk4.3239@typhoon.sonic.net...
    In comp.sys.atari.8bit Sam Gillett <samgillett@msn.com> wrote:

    You seem to be forgetting that sprites were implemented in hardware, as
    well
    as collision detection in hardware, and other nifty features. All of
    which
    explains your statement above about the C64 having good games. :-)

    Sprites and collision detection were done in hardware on the Atari 8-bits,
    too!

    C=64 sprites seemed to be more versatile 'out-of-the-box', but there were
    some pretty damned
    cool tricks you could do with those screen-length (e.g., ~200 pixel tall)
    'players' and 'missiles'
    on the Atari, too. ;)

    -bill!

    --
    bill@newbreedsoftware.com Got kids? Get Tux
    Paint!
    http://newbreedsoftware.com/bill/
    http://newbreedsoftware.com/tuxpaint/


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113