Re: MOS8520R4 - 1988 vs. 1991

From: Mia Magnusson <mia_at_plea.se>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:06:01 +0100
Message-ID: <20200130150601.000076a5_at_plea.se>
Den Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:30:59 +0100 skrev Gerrit Heitsch
<gerrit_at_laosinh.s.bawue.de>:
> On 1/29/20 6:50 PM, smf wrote:
> > On 29/01/2020 17:28, Gerrit Heitsch wrote:
> > 
> >> For the beginning of the 80s, it wasn't bad either.
> >>
> > Compared to what?
> > 
> > Up against the ZX80 it was able to maintain a video display while
> > running basic, but with only 22 columns compared to the ZX80's 32
> > columns.
> 
> But in color while the ZX81 was b/w. So you got colors AND an image 
> while running a program.

And three square wave channels and a noise channel.

>   Compared to the Atari 400/800 and arguably the Apple 2, the vic
> > 20 was terrible.
> 
> The Apple II had strange color limitations though.

Yeah, the Apple II could afaik do six colors that also did look a bit
odd, and only in hires, not in text mode, as it didn't have redefinable
characters. Also the hires mode can't had been that usable in the early
days as it would consume most of the RAM you had.

Compare that with VIC 20 that did 8/16 colors.

And afaik couldn't produce any decent sound while doing much else.

> > The only thing really going for it was that at least it wasn't the
> > TED series, which had 40 column text but no sprites and not enough
> > cpu power to do them in software.
> 
> The VIC had no sprites either, those came with VIC-II. You could say 
> that TED was an improved VIC, 40 x 25 text, full 64K access, more 
> colors, soft scrolling, hardware reverse and blink. Plus sound.

Minus overscan :)


-- 
(\_/) Copy the bunny to your mails to help
(O.o) him achieve world domination.
(> <) Come join the dark side.
/_|_\ We have cookies.
Received on 2020-05-30 00:34:58

Archive generated by hypermail 2.3.0.