Slashdot Mirror


Jack Tramiel, Founder of Commodore Business Machines, Dies At Age 83

LoTonah writes "Jack Tramiel, founder of Commodore Business Machines and later, the owner of Atari, died Easter Sunday. He was 83. He undoubtedly changed the computing landscape by bringing low cost computers to millions of people, and he started a price war that saw dozens of large companies leave the market. He also took a bankrupt Atari and managed to wring almost another decade out of it. The 6502 microprocessor would have withered on the vine if it weren't for Tramiel's support. Could anyone else have done all of that?"

301 comments

  1. Everyone ignores Commodore by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Looking at every article and documentary on the late 70's and 80's computing scene these days, you would think that the only computers that existed were Apples and PC's out of Silicon Valley, and that everyone out there had $2,000 to spend on a new computer back when that was the price of a decent used car. But the most popular computer in the 80's wasn't a Mac, or a PC. Commodore was by far the most popular computer line of that era. And they made computers than didn't require a second mortgage for working-class people to buy. And they were EVERYWHERE (not just in the yuppie homes).

    Not that you'll even find Commodore mentioned in The Pirates of Silicon Valley, or any other popular computing accounts about that time. You'd think everyone was going around back then just talking about IBM, Steve Jobs, and Bill Gates--when most people hadn't even *seen* a PC or Apple outside of a school or business.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Apple is the only company that matters. they invented the PC, they invented the smart phone and they invented the tablet. Literally no other company in the history of computing is anywhere near as important as Apple. Apple is all things to all people. Apple is Alpha and the Omega.

      Think different, think BETTER, think Apple.

    2. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >> Looking at every article and documentary on the late 70's and 80's computing scene these days, you would think that the only computers that existed were Apples and PC's

      The winners write the history. (More specifically, the marketing departments of the winners write the scripts, provide the footage and locate the retired experts to feed the articles and documentaries about how awesome they were decades ago.)

    3. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is the only company that matters. they invented the PC, they invented the smart phone and they invented the tablet. Literally no other company in the history of computing is anywhere near as important as Apple. Apple is all things to all people. Apple is Alpha and the Omega.

      Think different, think BETTER, think Apple.

      The sad part is, I can't really tell if the parent is being sarcastic or not, given there really are hordes of fanboys that believe those statements...

    4. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think he was sarcastic; but I totally see your point. Besides everybody knows Apple just copied off some ancient Chinese guy who invented the abacus. They did however, dutifully bring the improved technology back to where it came from.

    5. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by dryriver · · Score: 0

      You missed a few inventions. Apple also invented the Wheel, the Spear, Bow&Arrow, Gunpowder, Basket Weaving, Marbles, Feng Shui, the Gramophone, the Radio, the Radar, the Telegraph and a few thousand other important things, including Nikola Tesla (they wanted to call that last invention iNikola iTesla, but his mother didn't like that name...).

      --
      Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    6. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by kulnor · · Score: 1

      Actually, NeXT should have won,.Problem is that the cube was just 15 years ahead of its time. It eventually did win as a chunk of MacOS X.

    7. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by hackus · · Score: 0, Troll

      I hope you are wrong.

      Apple is the definitive company on using slave labor. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to manufacture a product overseas with people huddled in factories, in labor conditions we haven't seen in this country since the 1900's rolled around, and proclaim themselves "brilliant" managers.

      Give me a bunch of slaves and I bet I could have profit margins as high as Apple's.

      Oh, and I would like to point out, Apple is a American company in name only. If you look at who they make products for, where they design and make those products, it is increasingly just a small branch office in the USA.

      This is all going to come crashing down, when Apple can no longer find any slaves to make the products they sell at the margins they need.

      When it crashes, it is going to be a mighty crash too, at what $600 bucks a share?

      More like a small nuke is going to go off when it does in the exchange.

      -Hack

      PS: Oh and as a parting shot. This is one of the reasons why I like GNU Version 3 license. It would prevent companies like Apple hawking the public's hard work, and turning it into a slave based business model. Almost the entire Apple business is based off of public works including its ideas, none of which are original.
      (Specifically touch based phone devices or computing devices of any kind as well as the iPad....especially the ipad.)

      --
      Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    8. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that you'll even find Commodore mentioned in The Pirates of Silicon Valley, or any other popular computing accounts about that time.

      It is kind of odd. I think part of the problem is that history is being written by the victors, and as successful as Commodore were, they were driven into the ground by the post-Tramiel management team. Another issue that most of the accounts are written by Americans, and the Apple ][ ruled in the USA.

    9. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did you ever use a Commodore PET computer? It certainly wasn't anywhere near as sexy as an Apple or an Atari.

      The C-64 came far later. It's only interesting aspect was the low cost - the technology inside was 5 years out of date. Steve Jobs is off 'inventing' the Macintosh, while Tramiel is pushing a $200 computer in K-Mart. Which story makes the better movie?

      And if it's any condolence, the Radio Shack TRASH-80 also always gets the short shrift in these stories. They were at least as big as Apple for a while.

    10. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by fizzer06 · · Score: 1
      "Not that you'll even find Commodore mentioned in The Pirates of Silicon Valley . . ."

      Well, they WERE talking about pirates after all.

    11. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just Americans, but specifically journalists in the Silicon Valley. Non valley companies like Novell, IBM, and DEC always received worse press coverage than locals like Apple, Sun, and HP. (The one exception in Microsoft, but more often than not they've been framed as the enemy to the Valley.)

      This holds true even today with startups locating in the Bay Area partially just because the 'buzz' is so much better and you meet the right people at parties.

    12. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I bet Jack Tramel's death won't get the kind of coverage that Steve Jobs got. His 6502 CPU (plus variants) were used in Atari 2600/5200/7800 consoles, Atari computers, Apple I/II/IIgs computers, Nintendo ES and Super Nintendo consoles. His Commodore and Atari companies popularized music, video, and preemptive tasking when the Macs/PCs were going "beep" and had about 4 colors.

      And yet after today we'll probably never hear about him again. And yes the Commodore 64 was and still is the record-holder for most machines sold (peak years: 1983-86). The runner-ups:

      2. Amiga 500 (millions of C64 owners upgraded)
      3. Atari 800 (peak year: 1980-82)
      4. Tandy/Radio Shack TRS-80 (1977-1979)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    13. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by nurb432 · · Score: 0

      And you sir, are ignoring the Atari's, which were also selling like hotcakes and were just as good ( if not better ) than the 'equivalent market' commodore. There were also tons and tons of TRS-80s out there too.

      Old 8-bit rivalries aside ( which got us all nowhere in the end ), a lot of what you used would depend on where you lived, and what your friends used.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    14. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by KlomDark · · Score: 4, Informative

      The C-64 was better than anything available at the time. Most amount of RAM (More than the Apple ][), color graphics (Mac was Black & White), the super-advanced SID synthesizer (Still used by a lot of musicians today) which gave it true sound back when the Apple and IBM offerings only offered pathetic beep noises.

      Sure, the 6502 (Really the 6510 in a C64) was a few years old then, but there was nothing else out there in the affordable range. The megahertz wars hadn't started. the IBM PC was faster with a 4 Mhz processor, but the PC was such a barebones POS at the time that nobody wanted it.

      It's what they did with the 5 year old 65xx line that was the groundbreaking part.

    15. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Hovsep · · Score: 1

      You left out the discovery of fire.

    16. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except history blurs after that point. Jack decimated Atari. And then he jumped from Commodore and took over the smoking ruin of Atari. And the courtship of Amiga bounced between both Commodore and Jack's Atari.

    17. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      All the American tech companies are guilty. Commodore made computers in West Chester, Pennsylvania and the Philippines and Ireland. Since those days almost all of the computers are made in The Peoples Republic of China. It's not Apple alone. The Apple haters are about as bad as the Apple fanboys about twisting facts.

    18. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This price-point is a big deal. A friend in high school worked his first summer job for the $500 to get a PET. He wanted to "work for NASA". That was about the only visible high-tech thing in the 70 burbs; no Internet, no Discovery channel.

      The fact that some kid in the neighborhood got a computer, helped a lot to encourage interested adults who could spend the $2000. It made computers visible. That got people to seek out and visit the local computer dealer, and read a few magazines. That sold a lot of Apples and PCs.

      (In high school I did a multimedia presentation (three slide projectors, audio tape, and narration) about the coming ubiquity of small computers. I even declared some people would have them in their cars. I got laughed out of class.)

    19. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      > And yes the Commodore 64 was and still is the record-holder for most machines sold

      Just due market expansion, it wouldn't surprise me if that record was silently broken by some unremarkable Dell Dimension.

      C-64 sold between 13 and 30 million (depending who you ask). Apple has sold 300M+ iPads, so if one counts tablets, it's not even close.

    20. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      Well the IBM PC was *slightly* later than the C64.
      Yes I'm too lazy to look it up.

    21. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by lord_mike · · Score: 2

      It's important to note that the Commodore 64 incorporated graphics support hardware (aka the first "graphics card") which helped make the computer much faster than it's CPU speed would indicate, especially for gaming.

    22. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Most amount of RAM (More than the Apple ][)...

      More than an Apple ][ yes, but the ][e and //c had 128K, and that's what Apple was shipping when Commodore was selling the C64.

      But thanks for playing.

    23. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The 6502 was not just old, it was also the most cheap 8 bit part of its time. And the most inferior. Motorola and Intel both made better parts in the 6800 and the 8080. And by the time of the C64 boom period Zilog's Z80 ruled over everything else. The 6502 was the lesser choice for it's entire history. But MOS would sample to anybody and Motorola wouldn't. So it got put into the hobbyist's designs, most significantly the Apple II. And the C64 was the poor man's Apple II clone. The kids all had their plastic cased commies. The serious folks ran CP/M on a Z80.

    24. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      Did you ever use a Commodore PET computer? It certainly wasn't anywhere near as sexy as an Apple or an Atari.

      Ummm, the first PET came out when all Atari offered was the 2600 video game console; their computers, the Atari 400 and 800 came out a few years later. And both the Atari and Apple computers (and the Atari 2600 console) used the 6502 chip, which was codesigned by Chuck Peddle, who designed the first PET computer. And soon after MOS Technologies developed the 6502 they were bought by Commodore.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    25. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His 6502 CPU

      Except it was Chuck Peddle and Bill Mensch who created the 6502.

    26. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Funny

      And the turtleneck sweater.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    27. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      If you remember the SID don't forget the mockingboard
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mockingboard
      and AD/DA converter boards were on sale too.

      And the b/w mac with its teeny screen was more usable than a first gen amiga OS (which ran gorgeous graphic demos but crashed by looking at it the wrong way)

      Having said that, the c64 and amiga were the undisputed kings of home computing.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    28. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      which gave it true sound back when the Apple and IBM offerings only offered pathetic beep noises

      Except that you mentioned the Macintosh, which had a full 8-bit audio DAC and could generate any sound you might care to (although limited to around 11 kHz and at a relatively low S/N ratio), and the 68000 was fast enough to generate polyphonic composite waveforms in memory.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    29. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One whole year later. Apple ][ in 1977, C64 in '82, IBM PC in '83, Mac in '84.

    30. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Mongo+T.+Oaf · · Score: 0

      I bought a Commodore 64 in '83. I totally loved it. Programming in Basic was easy but dumb. It had excellent graphics, but the synthesizer portion was even better. Later in that decade I bought a hdd, $600.00 for a 600 KB drive the size of a large toaster. The best game was 117A stealth fighter. I still wish I had that game today. I got very tired of the tape cassette thingy; it was so slow. Jumpman was good too. God bless Jack, he made my life a lot of fun.

    31. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      The C-64 came far later. It's only interesting aspect was the low cost - the technology inside was 5 years out of date. Steve Jobs is off 'inventing' the Macintosh, while Tramiel is pushing a $200 computer in K-Mart.

      far later? far later than what? The C-64 came out in August of 82 with a price tag of $600 (The Vic 20 was the $200 computer at that point) The Apple IIe with similar specs (64K RAM, 6502 CPU) came out in Jan 1983. AFTER the C64 came out.
      The Mac came out in 84 while CBM released the Amiga in 1985 (both with the 68K CPU). I don't see how the tech was 5 years out of date. Apple and Mac and Atari were neck in neck (with IBM PC languishing in the business world)
      Things went downhill after Tramiel left for Atari. And things were never the same.
      As far as TRS-80 being short "shrifted" it was never recognized as the most popular computer by Guinness.

    32. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CaptainLugnuts · · Score: 3, Informative
      You Sir, must stop talking out of your ass.

      Most of the PCs back then had 'graphical support' hardware. Obviously I'm not talking about the D/A converter for analog video out. What do you think VIC in VIC-20 stood for? Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards. The Atari 8-bit PCs had the ANTIC with the CTIA & GTIA chips. Hell, even the 2600 had the Stella chip for dealing with player/missile graphics.

      Back in the day when I started out programming you had to rely on the hardware for functionality because there was no way the CPU could manage it.

      I hate the smell of noobs in the morning, It smells like ignorance.

    33. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Nyder · · Score: 2

      I think he was sarcastic; but I totally see your point. Besides everybody knows Apple just copied off some ancient Chinese guy who invented the abacus. They did however, dutifully bring the improved technology back to where it came from.

      Yep, them abacus had rounded corners and didn't work right if you held it wrong.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    34. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CaptainLugnuts · · Score: 1
      After growing up programming in the early 80's on the VIC-20, Atari 800 & C64, imagine my surprise when I started hacking the ECU in my car (240SX) to find out that it's a 6502 derivative! The Mitsubishi M7750 series is a 6502 based 8/16 bit swappable CPU with all kinds of extra goodies like hardware multipliers thrown in.

      It made me smile, and grab my Programming the 6502 published by Sybex off the shelf.

    35. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Dogtanian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Another issue that most of the accounts are written by Americans, and the Apple ][ ruled in the USA.

      Actually from what I understand, the Commodore 64 was- if anything- most successful in the USA, in part because it was sold so cheaply there (for what was actually a very good computer at the time) due to Tramiel wanting to win the home computer market. AFAIK the Apple II did well in educational and early business markets, but the C64 was *the* home computer in the US.

      But you're absolutely right- there's a problem with history being written by the victors, because it gives a misleading picture of the time. Sure, the IBM PC (and MS-DOS), predecessor to today's Wintel PCs, was big in the business market, but in its early days it wasn't a home machine. Who'd want to pay thousands of pounds for a machine with (at best) CGA graphics and *very* primitive sound when you could get a C64 for a fraction of the cost? Kids at home probably didn't give a **** about some horribly expensive green-screen machine that wasn't even that hot at games.

      I've heard that part of the problem with the C64- and the reason Tramiel was forced to leave C= - was that Tramiel was *so* aggressive with the price and driving competitors out of the market- that C= weren't actually making that much money on them (even though apparently they'd been exceptionally good at driving down the production cost, in part by becoming vertically integrated).

      I have to admit to having mixed feelings about Tramiel, as from what I've heard some of his business practices were very questionable, with- for example- some blaming him for contributing to the downfall of Synapse Software (well-known for developing many well-regarded early Atari 800 games) when he reneged on a supposedly binding agreement after taking over Atari's computer division. YMMV, there appears to be an interesting (archived) discussion here. (One comment; "Not paying suppliers, forcing them into bankruptcy, and them making them an offer to settle lawsuits for pennies on the dollar was a standard practice for him").

      At any rate, I think he at least deserves some credit for his successes- mainly with Commodore (and some level of respect for surviving Auschwitz) even if there were some aspects to him that were questionable.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    36. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by LoTonah · · Score: 1

      Really? I must have been a time traveller then, because I recall using an IBM PC in 1982 (came out in '81). :)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Personal_Computer

    37. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the IBM PC was faster with a 4 Mhz processor, but the PC was such a barebones POS at the time that nobody wanted it

      Not exactly. By 84-85 the company I was working for had more than a few. And we were not unique.

      My department wangled even more when I convinced my boss to buy Taiwan motherboards to upgrade a couple machines and then a while later we used petty cash to buy cases, floppy drives, VGA cards, and monitors to reassemble the original motherboards into more machines.

      And the PC actually had a 4.77Mhz CPU, and it wasn't too long before the Taiwan clones had 6, 8, and 10Mhz 8088s. And then there was the NEC v20 CPUs that ran 25-50% faster by virtue of fewer clock cycles per instruction.

      Perhaps most annoying was when I went to see a demo by the marketing department, where it was obvious that they had just bought a pair of ATs purely for the sake of putting together the demo and the things were sitting idle 90% of the time while we begged for XTs and couldn't get them.

    38. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by LoTonah · · Score: 1

      This is my favorite comment of the day. Thanks!

      I love how people who weren't there try to pass themselves off as experts ;)

    39. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      The megahertz wars hadn't started. the IBM PC was faster with a 4 Mhz processor

      I'm not so sure about that. Although the 6510 ran at 1.03 MHz, it could access the memory bus on every clock cycle (well, when not pre-empted by the video chip). The IBM-PC 8088 ran at 4.77 MHz, but could only access the memory bus every four clock cycles. I'd say the 64 was competitive with the 8088 and probably faster at some activities.

    40. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by LoTonah · · Score: 1

      Well, I dunno if the 6800 was more powerful than the 6502 (wasn't the 6502 more or less a clone of the 6800?), but the 6809 sure was.

      And the Z80 was driving off the cliff by 1982 (IBM PC's were starting to eat CP/M machines for lunch). I don't think I'd say the Z80 at 4MHz was more powerful than the 6502 at 1MHz. The 6502 could do more per cycle.

      As far as business machines go, it was more about an operating system than about any one computer. I saw CP/M run on some pretty crappy hardware, and I would rather have had an Apple, PET or TRS-80 than some of those so-called business machines. Once VisiCalc came out, and then Lotus 1-2-3, it was game over for CP/M.

    41. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Actually, NeXT boxes were made in the good ol' U.S. of A--I believe Steve Jobs built a factory up in Fremont, California. Of course, it was mostly automated...

    42. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by keeboo · · Score: 1

      IMO the NeXT workstations, though clearly based on the Xerox office computer from the 1970s, was far more deserving awe than anything Apple released during the 1980s, including both the Macintosh and the Lisa.

      But that wasn't for the masses (actually, given the price tag for awfully underpowered bare models during the 1980s, I don't think that even Macs were as realistic as people like to remember).

      For the rest of us, there were 8-bit computers such as C64, Spectrum, MSX etc; and great 16/32-bit machines one could actually afford, such as Amiga and Atari ST.

    43. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, that's only because I was trying to be quick and just believed him that the PC came later than the C64 after I looked up when the C64 came out.

      Not that it really changes anything.

    44. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by glassware · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also worth mentioning: Jack Tramiel was the only person who ever won a business deal over Bill Gates. When Jack Tramiel was looking for a BASIC for his computers - the Commodore PET specifically - he called in Bill Gates and wrung the worst deal out of him that anyone has ever produced. It's documented in the fantastic "Commodore" book by Brian Bagnall (http://www.amazon.com/Commodore-Company-Edge-Brian-Bagnall/dp/0973864966/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1334012789&sr=8-3).

      Every Commodore computer used Bill Gates' BASIC code and Bill got a pittance.

      Bill Gates has never since let anyone get the best of him. I suspect the experience of getting Tramieled directly led to his success in negotiating the rights to PC-DOS and winning the IBM PC contract.

      Here's to you, Jack. You gave Chuck Peddle the chance to be great, and you scared Bill Gates into building modern computers. That's a pretty damn good run.

    45. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by toejam13 · · Score: 2

      There are a number of reasons why Commodore is now a side note in history.

      First, Commodore really only had two major hits: the Commodore 64 and the Commodore Amiga 500. The Commodore VIC20 and Commodore Amiga 1200 sold well, but not to the degree needed to be remembered by the mainstream media. The rest of their product line-up, while sometimes revolutionary for the time, often had even less commercial success. In short, Commodore was either hot or not with their end-user products.

      The second issue was fragmentation. While Apple had a somewhat smooth transition from the Apple II through the II+, IIc, IIe and IIgs, Commodore's 8-bit era was a frenzied smorgasbord of products: the PET series, SuperPET, VIC20, MAX Machine, C64, CBM-II, C16/Plus4 and C128. Little to no unifying naming scheme, cross-platform binary compatibility, or cross-platform source code compatibility. Commodore got better with the Amiga and Tramiel got better with the Atari ST, but in the history books, the damage to Commodore's early days was done.

      The third issue is that discrete component supplies often get little notoriety. Commodore's MOS Technologies subsidiary may have been revolutionary at the time, but was too early in the game to get the sort of notoriety that Intel, AMD, 3Dfx, IBM, SiS, Nvidia and ATI received in the modern desktop world. Branding played a part, too. It was a number of years before they renamed the subsidiary to Commodore Semiconductor Group and even longer until they stopped stamping MOS on their chips. It may have been necessary to keep companies such as Apple, Atari, Sinclair Research and the like happy since it was a more neutral name, but it fragmented the Commodore brand.

      The fourth issue is that the Commodore name essentially died when they went bankrupt. Atari is still an active game publisher, even after purchase from Infogrames. So is Sega Corporation. Apple, IBM and Nintendo are still active hardware manufacturers. The Compaq name has only recently been phased out by HP. History is written by the winners and people tend to have short memories.

      The last issue is very open to debate, but part of it may be because of embarrassment. Amiga users were zealots. People joked about the fanboi culture that existed within the Amiga community. "I can format a floppy disk while playing Marble Madness!". Even today, when I point out that I used to own Amigas in my younger days, it will occasionally be met with a chuckle by whoever I'm talking to. In short, nobody wants to talk about you when they think you're a joke.

    46. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      My first computer was a CoCo2 (basically, a souped-up TRS-80). I won it when I was eight and taught myself how to program with the manual using BASIC and the limitations of the internal hardware. I think I've still got it kicking around somewhere, and I really should see if it still boots.

      I wonder which direction my life would have taken if someone else's name was drawn. But then, nobody gets to find out what would have happened.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    47. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards.

      I don't remember that. I remember you could put a card in your Apple ][ that would let it do text in 80-columns (usually with the added advantage of including a mixed-case font), but you didn't get any graphics advantage with that. It was only for text.

      In fact, I don't remember any significant upgrade to Apple ][ series graphics until the Apple //c and the late-model Apple //es arrived with the 128K RAM board, which had some kind of hidden feature that allowed you to do Double Hi-Res. Hardly any software supported that mode, though, because the audience was so small.

      I did, on the other hand, have a Mockingboard, which was a pluggable sound card that gave you even nicer sounding audio than the C64. Many popular games supported it (some even surprised you by not advertising support).

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    48. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the hordes of Space Nutters who believe NASA invented the transistor, the IC, the computer, Teflon and Velcro?

    49. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by sunspot42 · · Score: 1

      >The C-64 was better than anything available at the time

      Sorry, the Atari 800 easily bested it in most regards, and it had been designed in 1978. Faster CPU, vastly superior drives, better graphics, 4-channel sound, just to name a few points in its favor.

      The C64 was clearly built to rival the 800, which it did thanks not to any technical superiority, but due to the incompetence of Atari management.

    50. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The 6502 was fully as fast as the 8080; the Z80 was a little faster due to an expanded instruction set and more registers. The 6800 had little, if any, advantage over the 6502. In the early years, the Z80 was much more expensive than the 6502. It wasn't until 1982 that the extra cost of a Z80 could be justified for home use.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    51. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the winners may write history, however, the wise know that history can be neither truth nor fact.

      My first computer was a C64, and is still in a closet with 500 or so games still on 5.25 floppy. Thank $deity for all the grad students back in the day that traded Commodore games like candy and gave my Dad copies for us to play at home!

      You will never be forgotten, despite what the history writers twist into the bits of history.

    52. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The C-64 was better than anything available at the time. Most amount of RAM (More than the Apple ][), color graphics (Mac was Black & White)

      The Apple IIe came out hot on the heels of the C=64, with the same standard RAM and an easy bump to 128K (and 80 columns), was also color, had a higher res monochrome mode (560x192 IIRC), and 4-voice sound (in software; soundcards were optional). The II-series had a ~5 year head start on the C=64 (the first II shipped in '77), was more expandable (6 slots), had a larger software base when the C=64 launched, etc.

      Of course, all of it was academic when the IBM 5150 came onto the market...

    53. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Commodore didn't start making computers in the Philippines until the 1200/4000 line. My Amiga 3000 was made in West Chester PA.

    54. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by LoTonah · · Score: 1

      I think that he was referring to cards like those put out by Applied Engineering, that would give you higher resolutions, RGB output, etc. Apple didn't do much more than 80-column/memory cards for the //e.

    55. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were much bigger in Europe, where even more people were priced out of IBMs, Macs and even the Apple II line. Around the turn of the 90s, the Atari ST and the Commodore Amiga were a duopoly on home computers over most of Europe.

    56. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by LoTonah · · Score: 1

      Jack *had* to decimate Atari. Atari was losing so much money that nothing short of gutting it could save it.

    57. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by xero314 · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that MOS was able to under cut the price of every other vendor at the time because, MOS and only MOS had a process to correct flaws in their masks after producing them and before replication. This process allowed MOS to achieve a 70% production rate compared to the 30% that was industry standard. Thus allowing MOS to sell the 6502 was soat $25 each compared to the competitors of Zilog and Motorola that where selling at nearly $200 each for comparable products. This and this alone was the key factor in success of the MOS IC lines.

      That's not to say that the 65xx line isn't better than it's competitors, as in many ways it is, but that was not the key to success.

    58. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by suso · · Score: 1

      And the turtleneck sweater.

      Ok, that was pretty funny.

    59. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by eulernet · · Score: 2

      No, the GP is right.

      I programmed a few games on the C64 and on the PC before 1987 (in assembler).
      The C64 hardware was a lot better than the IBM PC's one.
      For example, there were hardware scrolling and sprites, and you could even trump the video card in removing the borders and surpassing the limits of the hardware (check a few demos without border).
      It was very dedicated towards console games.

      In comparison, the IBM's video card was the same as the Amstrad CPC's one. It barely allowed scrolling (I'm not even sure it was able to scroll pixel by pixel), and when you wanted to display something, you had to draw the objects pixel by pixel, and video memory was slower to access too !
      I remember I wrote a medical curve displayer in assembler on the very first PCs and CGA was terrible.
      When VGA appeared, it was a lot easier to write games, but the video memory was still slower than the rest of the memory, and scrolling was impossible.
      Then VESA cards appeared, but it was in the 90s.

      Of course, a few years after, the first 3D cards appeared, but the C64 was already dead at that time.

    60. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The 8088 in the IBM PC had the advantage of multiply, divide, and string compare instructions, the Z80 had the advantage of more registers. Which was faster for a given clock rate depended upon the particular software. The factors that led to the relative dominance of the IBM PC were (unearned) reputation, a standardized way to access memory beyond 64k, and a standardized architecture.

      The Z80 used an internal 2:1 clock divider, so that a 2X MHz Z80 was roughly equivalent to a 1X MHz 6502.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    61. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While Apple had a somewhat smooth transition from the Apple II through the II+, IIc, IIe and IIgs

      That's ignoring the Apple /// and Lisa.

    62. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate when someone makes a decent argument and then some greasy sperg replies with a mostly irrelevant nitpick.

    63. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIe had 64k of RAM. IIc had 128k but cost (at least) twice as much as a C64. The IIe came out several months after the C64 and the IIc nearly 2 years later.

      And if you want to really split hairs, the C64 had 40k of RAM available unless you mapped over ROM.

      So no, thank YOU for playing.

    64. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by suso · · Score: 1

      If you really want to extend the ignoring of Commodore to its fullest, you could also acknowledge that even Slashdot made this a minor "hidden" article instead of a full size one. Shame!

    65. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just compare Commodore 64 software with IBM-PC's at that time and you'll see you are way wrong.

    66. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Anyone else remember the ads with The Shat? My first real PC (I had an Altair for a little while but with nothing but switches there wasn't much a kid could do with one of those) was a VIC and it gave birth to a lifetime love of computing which has been passed down to my boys, both of whom had PCs before they were in grade school. With the VIC there was just soo much to do! there were programs in every mag you could type in and run, tons of docs and specs that would let you PEEK and POKE and get really deep into the guts...as much as i love my AMD Hexacore there is simply no way i could ever learn the deep levels like i did with the VIC, there are just too many layers of abstraction between you and the bare metal now.

      So goodbye Jack, you gave this guy a hell of a lot of fond memories from Commodore and Atari (he later bought Atari after Commodore and put out the Atari computers of the late 80s) and for many of us a lifetime of tech love was born from those fugly beige keyboards.I agree that old Jack should ALWAYS be mentioned right there besides Gates and Jobs as he was THE guy that made computers truly affordable to the masses. look up what the prices of the first gen Macs and the IBM 5150 were in the 80s in today's dollars and you'll see there was no way in hell the Average Joe was owning one. Hell I didn't even see my first Apple up close until going over to a rich guy's house in 89 and most of the SMBs were running Trash 80s and C64s until the clones made small business computing really affordable on x86 which i would argue is again because of Jack Tramiel starting the price wars. RIP computer man, the world wouldn't be what it is today without your contributions.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    67. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A less than sign was stripped from before the 40k.

    68. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VIC stood for Versatile Interface Chip

    69. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      I can confirm pretty much all of that (except the Synapse stuff), having done research on Commodore for a project a few months ago. The C64 had by far the most productive assembly lines of its day (hundreds of thousands of units every month!), Tramiel was ousted in January 1984 for decimating the company's financial resources during the 1983 "Home Computer Wars", in which the prices went down to a third of what they'd been in 1982, and he told the Amiga team outright during their tech demo to him (before he bought Atari, after he was booted from Commodore) that if he got hold of their hardware, he intended to sack all of them.

      As far as anyone can tell, I don't think it's right to say Tramiel really ever had any failures during the mid-eighties, at least not until '87 when the ST platform fell behind; he applied his ruthless methodology to everything in business, and it achieved the intended results. Stuff only fell apart when others were unwilling to go along with his approach. (Which, admittedly, was ludicrous and pretty unethical most of the time.)

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    70. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Bertie · · Score: 1

      Man, I remember when you could buy a Mac emulator on a cartridge for the Atari ST and it would run faster than a Mac Plus, and all for a lot less dough. The Mac was so far out of reach for most of us mere mortals it might as well not have existed. In the UK at least, they barely existed outside publishing houses and university campuses until, ooh, the iMac, probably.

    71. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry Charlie. The //e had an available memory card bumping it to 128K, later //es came with 128K standard, and 3rd party cards could bump this to 1024K; the //c+ could be had with as much as 1024K of RAM. And it's not splitting hairs, the C64 did have 64K of RAM, and I don't know how the C64 worked (you say you had to map it over the ROM), but with the Apple you had to swap pages of memory to access RAM above 48K.

      The C64 sold from 81 through 90 or 91 and the //e sold from 82-94 and the //c and //c+ sold from 83-90. A fair amount of time when they were on sale together.

      So really, it's thank YOU. Dancing with the Stars is on soon, hurry or you'll miss it.

    72. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1
      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    73. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by BeaverCleaver · · Score: 1

      My Amiga 1200 was made in the UK.

    74. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by bipbop · · Score: 0

      Scrolling wasn't impossible on EGA or VGA, FYI.

    75. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My high school mathematics teacher brought his Commodore PET computer to class and allowed we mere mortal students to write programs on it. I blame that teacher for handing out the free hit that got me addicted to computers and software engineering all those years ago. [ shakes hand in air] I wanted to buy a Commodore PET but the price was out of my budget as a high school student so I bought a Commodore VIC-20 instead. I still have that computer in its original packaging. Back in the early 1980s computers had unique personalities and the sense of adventure was exhilarating.

    76. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by damnbunni · · Score: 1

      /*nitpick*/ F-19 Stealth Fighter, also called Project: Stealth. F117A was the PC and Amiga version. When F-19 Stealth Fighter was released, the government had not yet admitted the existence of the F117. /*nitpick*/

    77. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by JASegler · · Score: 1

      On the C64 you had to move the ROM out of the way to get to the RAM underneath. I don't remember the exact details but you could either see the RAM or the ROM and it was controllable.

      If you want to get into memory expanders the C64 had at least a 512K ram expander available. I remember having one and it worked with GEOS at least.. might have been used as a form of ram drive to speed up games as well.

      The drive drive was a computer in itself that you could buy ram expanders for and run programs on. Typically used for increasing load speed or duplicating copy protected disks.

    78. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The C64 was faster at some activities. But completely and pitifully slow at important stuff like disk i/o. To add a floppy drive to a commie, you had to buy a separate unit that had it's own 6502 processor in it, that communicated with the main CPU over a pokey serial interface. It was multiprocessing, but amounted to having two pokey machines tied together on a 1200 baud link than anything real. The IBM-PC had a floppy disk controller on the I/O channel, right on the CPU's data buss, and could also use DMA to quickly grab data off disk storage and throw it into memory.

      And, uh, the IBM-PC had an open architecture for I/O expansion. Very quickly a large number of third party vendors came online to sell cards to plug into your box. The commie was still the same sealed unit. The schematic diagram for the C64 was published in the manual that shipped with every unit, but you could buy the Technical Reference Manual for the IBM-PC (granted, said manual cost about the same amount as a whole C64.)

      The IBM TechRefs which gave you not only the complete schematics, but the commented Assembly language source code for the BIOS, and for the BIOS extensions in most of the IBM-produced expansion cards (for example, the BIOS extension on the EGA card.) The IBM TechRefs were fabulous. I have almost all of them. One set even has the schematics for the hard drives. Where else do you get a schematic diagram for a hard drive without signing away your life and five or six figures to a HDD vendor?

    79. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by vistic · · Score: 1

      It's funny, my first computer was a 64K CoCo2 also. I don't think I still have it, but I do still have a 512K CoCo3 I bought in the mid 90's when I got into retro video games. Not many people have them, but I remember being on a CoCo listserv for a long time and wishing I could go to these CoCoFests that I'd hear about. Some people had crazy projects they were working on that were very impressive. I always had a cassette drive, but never had the disk drives. Though I did acquire a disk interface pak in the 90s.

      I didn't see a Commodore 64 until the 90's. Back then I just remember IBM, Macs, and Apple II. IBMs were at my dad's office, and the Macs and Apple II's were at school. (I miss the Apple II lab... nothing better than the sound of everyone printing their art out on those ImageWriters at the same time.)

    80. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by toejam13 · · Score: 1

      First, that's why I used the qualifier "somewhat" in my sentence.

      The Apple III was actually a fairly good attempt by Apple in releasing a successor to the Apple II series. It included a number of software and hardware advancements and included backwards compatibility with Apple II software. But the bean counters intentionally crippled some aspects of the backwards compatibility (no support for bank switching in A// emulation mode). Meanwhile, Steve Jobs and his Asperger-like weirdness botched the hardware design, making it expensive and prone to heat failure. While it may have been a commercial failure, many design innovations from the Apple III made their way into later Apple models (such as the IIe and IIgs) and Apple operating systems (such as ProDOS and GS/OS). So the Apple III really lived on as later Apple II enhancements.

      The Apple Lisa was simply too much hardware for a desktop machine for its time. A 68000 processor and 1MB of memory in early 1983 were incredibly expensive. At the same time, it was too slow and too unrefined to compete with workstations such as the Sun 100 desktop. I dunno what Apple gained from it, other than to ensure that the Macintosh was priced correctly for its target market. So yes, it was an utter failure. But Apple had the Macintosh in their back pocket.

      Since you bring up the Lisa, it is only fair to bring up the Commodore CBM 900. It was a workstation powered by a Zilog Z8000 and ran a UNIX V7 clone. It was a very odd beast. Had Commodore not canceled it in favor of the newly acquired Amiga, it could have made huge waves in the low-end workstation segment. Or it could have been a disastrous, expensive mess. It just happens that Commodore was more prone to cancel projects than Apple, so we'll never know.

    81. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      This is the first time I've ever seen anyone make this claim.

      It's not the first time I've seen anybody rant about Space Nutters, although I've never seen or heard any evidence of the existence of said Space Nutters, aside from occasional rants like this one.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    82. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by mfnickster · · Score: 1

      IMO the NeXT workstations, though clearly based on the Xerox office computer from the 1970s, was far more deserving awe than anything Apple released during the 1980s, including both the Macintosh and the Lisa.

      The NeXT Cube was almost an Apple product. Steve was involved in the "BigMac" project to create a "3M" workstation with a megabyte of memory, a million-pixel display, and 1 MFLOP of processing power.

      See Apple's Failed BigMac Project

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
    83. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Whiteox · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the TI 16. Also all those Z80 processor based machines. Remember CP/M?

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    84. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      Apple also invented gravity. They just chose to let Isaac Newton observe them for publicity.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    85. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think outside the advertisements, think about something that isn't just white-plastic and shiny. Think penguin. Think linux.

    86. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by toejam13 · · Score: 1

      I've heard that part of the problem with the C64- and the reason Tramiel was forced to leave C= - was that Tramiel was *so* aggressive with the price and driving competitors out of the market

      "Computers for the masses, not the classes" -- Jack Tramiel

      There is a fine line between being thrifty and penny-wise and being cheap. Tramiel was cheap. He had this paranoia that the Japanese and Texas Instruments were going to swoop in and crush him as they had done in the calculator market. The result was a series of short-sighted business decisions.

      Take the VIC-20 as an example. It was profitable, but the decision to use the 22-column MOS 6560/6561 video chip and 5KB of SRAM made it quickly obsolete. But Tramiel had a warehouse filled with spare SRAM chips. And there are various stories about how he had the core for the 6560/6561 kicking around since '77 and didn't want it to go to waste.

      Imagine instead if they had used a modified 40-column MOS 6562/6563 (but with DRAM refresh) and 16KB of DRAM. That would have been a very nice entry machine. And rather than the Commodore 16/116/232/264/Plus4 soup, releasing something like the 232 but with backwards compatibility with the old VIC. Chances are, sales of the "VIC-16" wouldn't have dropped as sharply in sales when the C64 was released and the "VIC-32" would have been much more successful than the Commodore 16/116/232/264/Plus4 series.

    87. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by qubezz · · Score: 4, Informative

      The yield of a process, which seems to be the percentages you are quoting, isn't directly related to the ability to rework hand-drawn rubylith masks. In fact, the 6502 worked with the very first tape-out (virtually unheard of).

      Jack Tramiel was a typical narcissistic domineering businessman, who had a typewriter and then calculator business that bought it's way into computers with the acquisition of MOS, mainly to ensure their calculator chip supply. The amazing success of the 6502 and the Commodore computers can be attributed to the brilliance of a very small group of genius engineers at MOS, led by Chuck Peddle. There will not likely be a time again where we will know the developers of a CPU by name, a CPU that sold hundreds of millions and who's architecture is still in use.

      If the bottom line of the 6502 was affected by mask design, it is that they had the finest designers at MOS. The quote below is from the book ("On the Edge: the Spectacular Rise and Fall of Commodore"

      Pavinen and Holt handed off the completed mask to the MOS technicians, who began fabricating the first run of chips. Bil Herd summarizes the situation. “No chip worked the first time,” he states emphatically. “No chip. It took seven or nine revs [revisions], or if someone was real good they would get it in five or six.” ...

      Implausibly, the engineers detected no errors in Mensch’s layout. “He built seven different chips without ever having an error,” says Peddle with disbelief in his voice. “Almost all done by hand. When I tell people that, they don’t believe me, but it’s true. This guy is a unique person. He is the best layout guy in world.”

      If you have hours to watch it, here's an informal interview with Chuck Peddle from a year and a half ago, where he goes into depth about the design of the 6502 and the Commodore computers, working Jack and Microsoft, and all sorts of topics, in the kind of interview you never thought you would see from the central figure in all of CBM:

      Part 1: http://blip.tv/file/4055830
      Part 2: http://blip.tv/file/4084084
      Part 3: http://blip.tv/file/4084124

    88. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'available memory card'

      'later IIe'

      '3rd party'

      'could be had with'

      Hmmm. NOTHING you said counters what I said and adds a bunch of bullshit. And you admit you don't know how the C64 worked.

      Caillou will be on soon, you better hurry too sonny.

    89. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about Space Nutters, there does seem to be this one Space Nutter Nutter who keeps ranting about Space Nutters on slashdot.

    90. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by hawk · · Score: 2

      the coco was *not* "basically" a soured up trash80.

      he two had nothing in common other than slapping the name on them,being sold by RS, and using MicrosoftBASIC 2.0 (and even then,the were significant differences between the 6800 versions and the 8080 versions [err' I think the coco used version 2])

      The trs80 was a z80 8 bit system with 16 bit addrssing; the coco used a 6809, a bizzare partial 16 bit extension of the 6800 with 19.5 bit addressing (seriously, it addressed 768k of 8 bit words).

      The trs80 and the coco had about as much in common as the Apple ][ and the Mac . . .

      hawk

    91. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by mvdwege · · Score: 2

      It is generally considered a good idea to not talk about things you don't know anything about.

      For your information, the problem with the 1541's speed was not the fact that it used a serial interface. The problem was that on both sides of the link the processor was doing the bit-banging, instead of the dedicated hardware interfaces that were available on both the drive and the computer.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    92. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      Well except for the Atari 800 which predated the C64 by 3 years of course, which had the same amount of RAM, better graphics, and similar sound capabilities.

    93. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by KingMotley · · Score: 2

      The Apple 2 was released in 78, Atari 800 in 79, C64 in 82.

      The Apple 2 could have been upgraded to be everything the C64 had, but it wasn't standard.

      The Atari 800 could do everything (graphics, sound, drives, connectivity, processor) the C-64 could, but better and 3 years earlier.

    94. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by wk633 · · Score: 1

      "Tramiel was *so* aggressive with the price and driving competitors out of the market- that C= weren't actually making that much money on them"

      In the late 80s I read that Atari never made a cent on their home computer division. It was subsidized by the 2600.

    95. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and cost a ram and leg.

    96. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people don't know that you can plug a 1541 into a VIC-20, but you had to put the drive into 'Slow' mode. 300 baud! Woo! With the propensity of the 1541 to go out of alignment I'm not sure it was more reliable then the cassete drive.

    97. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the disk drive usually isn't brought up as a point in the C-64's favor. I'll take the Woz's :)

      The big difference is the Apple had an easily accessible slots, so third party memory upgrades were cheap and plentiful. Many older ][s and ][+s were upgraded to 64KB - this was required to use CP/M or Pascal.

      And yep, both used essentially the same CPU with the same bank-switching techniques. That meant most software didn't use more than 48KB on either system.

    98. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by QQBoss · · Score: 2

      When I worked with Motorola, I worked to try to get more of our products into Commodore. Specifically trying to get them interested in using the 56000 DSP in place of something they wound up using an AT&T DSP for. I kept being told that it wasn't worth the time, that Commodore management was infamous for stabbing you in the back if it meant they could save a penny even on low volume products. The regional sales manager listed 3 different products off the top of his head from the last time he dealt with them years before that made him never willing to deal with Commodore again. I wasn't successful, but Haynie gave me the Fat Agnus I needed to upgrade my A2000 (engineering version, with tape holding the lid on), so it was all good ;-).

    99. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Hamsterdan · · Score: 2

      "Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards"

      No. I owned one of those machines.

      The Video was on the motherboard itself. Some applications could use an add-on 80-column card, but the *main* card was on the board itself. I still have the 80-column card, and its cable that hooked up on the motherboard.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_80-Column_Text_Card

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    100. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      My experience was exactly the same when I visited the Boston Computer Museum. Many of the displays were run by Amigas, but they were covered with boxes that were either painted or trimmed with colored paper. The Macs had their own room with huge band-awareness banners hung all over the ceiling, and practically everything related to life before PCs revolved around IBM mainframes (though ENIAC and the PDP-11 got a mention).

      To the victors go the spoils. Not like anyone is interested in computer history, of course.

    101. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by bipbop · · Score: 2

      Heh. Ignorant mods, today.

    102. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      Faster CPU? The Atari 800 was also based on an MOS 6502, so not sure what you are talking about there.

    103. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 6502 is not Jack Tramiel's invention, please check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Peddle.

    104. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The true fact was that very early on, there *WAS NO* PC, apples were expensive and harder to get ahold of. I had a commodore calculator in 1975. That was *PRE-APPLE-COMPUTER*. It took the PC world about 15 years to catch up to what I had in 1985. Because of this guy, there are a lot of software engineers around. What apple puts out doesn't foster software engineering. What apple puts out is the adult version of a speak and spell. What this guy put out was an introduction to a much more powerful way of looking at computers. They were great! The locked down crap you get now, with the user interface that practically excludes in every possible way the ability to see what is going on "oh my god, no, not that!!!" makes it look like unassailable magic that no one dares touch. He gave us the controls to Oz. They are still playing the wizard behind the curtain. Steve Jobs wasn't like Jack Tramiel, not even close.

    105. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by mwvdlee · · Score: 2

      Before Apple, the guy was named Saac Newton.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    106. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And NeXT boxes sold so poorly that they were forced to exit the hardware business, which sort of proves the original point.

    107. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by clickclickdrone · · Score: 2

      As others have noted, modern history seems to completely bypass several machines which were immensely popular and influential. When I first got into computers, it was TRS80/Atari 800/Apple II/Pet etc yet only Apple gets remmebered.

      Those who get dewy eyed about their B&W soundless ZX80/81s would be surprised to find say the Atari 800 came out in 78/79 and offered colour, high res (at the time), sprites, hardware scrolling, display interrupts and most of the hardware features the Amiga built on later). The C64 was approx the equivelent of the Atari 800 but came out nearly 4 years later and only improved upon it in a few areas and in many ways was inferior.

      I used to like text adventures and back then, the TRS80 got pretty much all the new ones first, witness Scott Adams et al.

      For me, by the time the 64, Amiga, Atari ST etc came along, all th exciting and interesting stuff had happened. The only thing the ST did for me was offer a proper C compiler so I could write Unix/C code for work at home and at least check it compiled OK before bringing it in and properly building it.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    108. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      >It's important to note that the Commodore 64 incorporated graphics support hardware (aka the first "graphics card")
      Hardly the first. The Atari 800 had hardware support for:
      Horizontal/Vertical scrolling
      Sprites
      Display List Interrupts (extra colours)
      Redfinable character sets, both mono and colour
      Yes, the C64 had better sprites and slightly better audio BUT was several years (800 previewed 1978, released 1979) after so ought to have been.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    109. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by __aancvu2993 · · Score: 1

      >His Commodore and Atari companies popularized music, video, and preemptive tasking when the Macs/PCs were going "beep" and had about 4 colors.

      Well, Commodores and Ataris were good hardware with incredibly weak, stupid and crappy 'OSes' and application software. I had an Atari 1040ST and everything including so-called professional software (Calamus, Cubase, etc) was a rotting piece of shit, crashing multiple times everyday. At Uni Macs were wonderful and smooth. I loaded Spectre in my 1040, attached a 80 MB disk, put System 6.0.8 on it and never looked back. It gave the machine a new ten year lease on life. The hardware was the same but the software was good, for a change. Suddenly I had a Mac with 1 MB of RAM, the gorgeous 640x400 b/w screen of the SM124 monitor and lots of disk space for nothing like the price of a Mac 128. Of course, no self-unloading diskette but life was good.

      If anything, CBM & Atari popularized good games but 'music, video and preemptive tasking'? What are you talking about?

      > And yet after today we'll probably never hear about him again. And yes the Commodore 64 was and still is the record-holder for most machines sold (peak years: 1983-86).

      If you put shit in a box and sell it cheap enough everyone will get two. Financial success has never had anything to do with quality. There is much more money to make selling coca-cola than Jaguars.

    110. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      Making computers in the USA is a property of the time period, not the particular company. In those days IBM also built its computers in the USA or in other developed countries such as the United Kingdom or Japan. I believe the factories were also more highly automated than is usual today: many of the IBM PS/2 series could be assembled entirely by robots.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    111. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      Are you sure the IBM PC was faster than the C64? I believe it did not benchmark that well against the 6502-based machines of the same era. Though for sure there would be workloads where a 16-bit processor is greatly superior, even if it is crippled with an 8-bit data bus as the 8088 was.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    112. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Bear in mind that the C16 and Plus/4 were released after Tramiel left. I heard that the chipset was apparently designed for what was meant to be a very low-cost machine that would combat the perceived Japanese threat (apparently the rubber-keyed Europe-only C116 was the first-designed model and the closest to the original intended vision).

      Tramiel was ousted, the threat didn't materialise, and the management apparently didn't know what to do with the chipset, hence the rather nonsensical release of mid-range machines that were competing too closely with their own C64.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    113. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dave Haynie still posts on Slashdot occasionally, although I imagine he'll avoid posting in this particular article.

    114. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the C64 was the poor man's Apple II clone.

      What a load of crap. The hardware in the C64 was far more sophisticated than anything Apple ever put inside a plastic case. Although Woz could build a better disc drive than Commodore would allow their engineers to build, I'll give Apple that.

    115. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Thanks! that brings back memories. Funny thing is i have an ex NASA engineer as a friend and customer and he said while the guys had all these supercomputers at NASA, know what they had at home? C64s and C128s. he even still has the code he wrote showing sat tracking that he wrote on a C128 as well as video of him with a really sharp robotic arm which again used the C128 as a controller.

      One thing you really have to give Commodore credit for, thanks to their really great docs the Commodore machines were great for DIYers. he said when he got his he wrote some questions about the internal layout to commodore and one of the actual engineers that built the chips sent him a large diagram with personal notes on several points. man you just don't get stuff like that anymore, damned shame he lost it with his 128 when his storage building was robbed.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    116. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      >Faster CPU? The Atari 800 was also based on an MOS 6502, so not sure what you are talking about there.
      The 6502 was available in different speeds. The Atari's one was clocked significantly higher than the C64. The 800 ran at 1.8Mhz, not sure about the 64.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    117. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Y2KDragon · · Score: 1

      Some days I miss my old Atari 800 computer, with the 32MB ram, 2 5 1/4" disk drives, and blasting Star Raiders out my stereo speakers in the college dorms. Aah, good times.

    118. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      I bet Jack Tramel's death won't get the kind of coverage that Steve Jobs got.

      Funny. I opened up a prominent Finnish technology news site that seems to worship the ground upon which modern-time gadget makers walk on - sure enough, no mention of Tramiel yet.

      Open up the news from the national broadcasting company? Boom. That's in the foreign news section, so that's fairly prominent. Dennis M. Ritchie's death was relegated to the "science and technology" section. Oh boo hoo.

      (Yes, they covered Steve Jobs too. Who didn't?)

      I was only half-heartedly hoping Tramiel's death would be reported in national news, but I was not surprised that they actually did that. Commodore computers were pretty damn popular here back in the day.

    119. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's interesting that you compare your ST to the Mac but ignore the Amiga. Which is probably because you already knew that the Amiga had a better OS than the Mac (Workbench 2.0 was far superior to MacOS prior to version 8).

      'music, video and preemptive tasking'? What are you talking about?

      That would be stuff like the pre-emptive multitasking that AmigaOS supported and the Mac didn't, stuff like the VideoToaster and Lightwave that the Amiga had and the Mac didn't, and stuff like Cubase that started life on the Atari (which had native MIDI support).

    120. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by pugugly · · Score: 1

      Bull - Sid Meier invented those!

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
    121. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by pegr · · Score: 2

      Yup, that was David Small's "Magic Sac". You had to find your own Mac ROMs, though.

      How about PC-Ditto, a daughter card with a NEC V20 processor on it so your ST could be a PC as well.

      Yes, my Atari 1040ST was a Mac and a PC. And the Atarti ST wasn't too shabby either.

    122. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't own a Commode Door 64, but I did buy some 6532 (SID) chips to try and interface to my Atari 800. They were pretty amazing chips for the time. A precursor to the custom chips in the Amiga, of which I owned a few.

      And who can forget when TOS didn't mean Terms Of Service.

    123. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      I had a 286 in my ST. Can't recall what the thing was called but it ran DOS nicely. I used it for running Dbase III+ for a collage project. Worked well. Most of my Atari's from the ST onwards were fairly tricked out, extra RAM, extra CPUs, FPUs and on the Falcon, a doohicky that let you boost the screen res to something rather more impressive. I think I ran it at 1280x1024 in the end after finding the monitor struggled beyond that. It amazes me that almost 20 years on most people run their PCs at less than that.
      I think my favourite was the Mega STe though. Silly money for what it was but I loved the seperate keyboard and TT style case and the 1.44 floppy/built in HD. Luxury!

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    124. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Dogtanian · · Score: 2

      It wasn't until 1982 that the extra cost of a Z80 could be justified for home use.

      The 1980 Sinclair ZX80 used a Z80 (though apparently most ones produced used an equivalent part manufactured by NEC).

      That was the first machine under £100 in the UK, and one whose design used every cost-saving, corner-cutting trick in the book to keep its cost down (e.g. the display generation was primarily done in software, which meant that the screen went blank when the CPU was busy with other things).

      Certainly not a place for expensive frivolities. :-)

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    125. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by pugugly · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but no . . . as a sad retrogamer, the PC 'Graphics' hardly qualified. There is nothing quite as painful as looking at the PC version of a game that looked great on the ST or C64 on the PC. Starflight, Dungeon Master, Neuromancer, et al. Starflight and Stellar Crusade are particularly egregious - {G}.

      Pug

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
    126. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by qwertyatwork · · Score: 1

      The 6502 wasn't his CPU, it was made by MOS Technology. Commadore, Atari, Apple, and a lot of others also used the 6502.

    127. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      IMO the NeXT workstations, though clearly based on the Xerox office computer from the 1970s, was far more deserving awe than anything Apple released during the 1980s, including both the Macintosh and the Lisa.

      But that wasn't for the masses (actually, given the price tag for awfully underpowered bare models during the 1980s, I don't think that even Macs were as realistic as people like to remember).

      According to the recent Jobs bio NeXT was actually prohibited by Apple from building a consumer grade machine as part of a settlement between Apple and NeXT after Jobs pilfered a lot of people.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    128. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Jobs built factories for both the original mac and NeXT in the US. Both were expensive and considered failures by many at the time. He learned his lesson after that.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    129. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Hey man, don't copy that floppy.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    130. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Those who get dewy eyed about their B&W soundless ZX80/81s would be surprised to find say the Atari 800 came out in 78/79 and offered colour, high res (at the time), sprites, hardware scrolling, display interrupts and most of the hardware features the Amiga built on later

      The Atari 400 and 800 were absolutely fantastic, state-of-the-art machines by 1979 standards, but they were also very expensive back then- many times more expensive than the ZX80 and ZX81.

      Few people will truly deny that the latter machines were basic- even by the standards of the time- but their great significance was producing something that was still a workable home computer, albeit one that was pared to the bare miniumum, for such a low price.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    131. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by crazyjj · · Score: 1

      Shop smart. Shop S-mart.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    132. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      And the NeXT was *such* a resounding success.

      What Jobs learned was to never do *that* again...

    133. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by pugugly · · Score: 1

      My Atari ST would dispute that - at least at the Amiga level.

      But yeah, I grew up on the C64.

      Pug

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
    134. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The fastest instructions on the Z80 took 4 clock cycles and many took 7 or 8, or even 12 cycles. You'd need a 4 MHz Z80 to beat a 1 MHz 6502 or 6510, and even then the difference wasn't that large.

    135. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      There was such a thing as a Commodore 128 compable with the C64 and with, you guessed it, 128Kb of RAM released around the time of the Apple IIc.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    136. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      The kids all had their plastic cased commies. The serious folks ran CP/M on a Z80.

      The C64's big brother, the C128, could run CP/M while still being backwards compatible with the C64.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    137. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Millions of people have Apple products *now* and lots of them knew who Steve Jobs was, a lot of people owned Commodore machines back in the day but it's been 20 years since they went belly up and even then most of those people probably didn't know who Tramiel was, even you spell his name wrong ;-) You just can't expect this news to generate the same kind of interest.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    138. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Crass+Spektakel · · Score: 2

      The C-64 was NOT better than anything. It was more economic than its competitors but not exactly bleeding edge.

      Only two months after the C64 the Sinclair QL was released: For the same price you got 128k, an 68008/7Mhz, 512x200 graphics and two tape drives.

      About power, the old Ataris and Apples were all a bit better, faster, more nifty. But they did cost a fortune in comparison to the C-64.

      Honestly I didn't see much improvements in the first C-64 against my first PET2001/CBM3032. The C-64 had a slower CPU, a slower floppy, was less expandable and not much cheaper. Hell, the C-64 CPU was only half as fast as an Atari-800 and 50% slower than an VIC-20.

      But you could get a complete System with floppy and printer for 1000 Euros in 1984. Noone could beat THAT.

      --
      "Life is short and in most cases it ends with death." Sir Sinclair
    139. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      And the GP post's moderation history reflects this as it is clear that Poe's law applies.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    140. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Because they exclusively produced bitty-boxes, Commodore really isn't as well-recognized for the hackish culture of its staff as it should be. But in fact, the people who worked there really had a lot of great ideas and a great mindset. This video from 1994 was shot by Dave Haynie on the day Commodore's headquarters in West Chester, PA finally shuttered. Toward the end there's a really neat segment where he goes into the lab where new Amigas were developed. At long last, a chance to see who was on the other side of those diagrams. :)

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    141. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Crud... my mistake. That video segment doesn't include the lab. It's out there on the internet somewhere!

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    142. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Virginia. Apple was not the be-all end-all of personal computers. If they had, there would have been a lot more of them. Instead, Apple was the highest priced computer that we couldn't afford. For just an Apple CPU the cost was in the thousands. If you wanted disk drives, you needed a lot more. Software? Tons more.

      The point of all this is that Jack Tramiel brought low cost computers to the masses. Not your "pwecious" Apple. Today, Apple continues to sell yesterday's technology at tomorrow's prices (way into tomorrow!).

    143. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Woz could build a faster drive than the 1541, yes, but not a better drive than the 1571. And still the 1541 had a slightly higher capacity than the Disk II.

    144. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>Well, Commodores and Ataris were good hardware with incredibly weak, stupid and crappy 'OSes' and application software.

      First we're talking 1979 to 89 here -- primitive times. The DOS and Windows 2/3 on the IBM PCs were also crap. The Macs had good OSes, but cost a small fortune and no color.

      As for professional software, both the Atari ST and Commodore Amiga had PhotoShop, DeluxePaint, Genlock, and other features that were used on TV shows like Babylon 5, seaQuest, and Voyager (first year). PCs/Macs couldn't even touch them.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    145. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, there were some cards for the Apple II that added sprite functionality. I had one, called the Arcade Board, and it included a TI 9981A display processor and a programmable sound generator as well. They were not common and there was very little software that supported them.

      A friend's dad also had a different card for his Apple II that gave him something like 132x48 text mode, and this made Visicalc much more usable. Again, it was not a common thing.

    146. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by keeboo · · Score: 1

      Yep, I remember that my (then new) A500 looked somewhat clunky even in 1990 (such great computer with such a depressing appearance.. oh well) , but it felt well built.

      I got bought a A1200 in in 1993 (or early 1994).. yeah, made in Philippines.
      It cost a _lot_ to me back since it wasn't produced in Brazil (imported computers were unpayable, really).
      AFAIR I paid something like ~950 USD back then for a A1200 with user-installed HD, and that from a (ahem) friendly person often crossed the border, so it was cheaper. -- It's a relief that epoch is long gone.

      So, back to the topic...
      That A1200 I got _felt_ different from my previous A500, like it was made my a company trying to save every single nickel (yes, I know.. Commodore).
      Heck, the A1200s were supposed to come with a non-1970s-looking-A500-like mouse but mine came with that ancient model, except it was not beige but white like the new machine.

      That not being enough, my Philippines-made A1200 started to fail after ~1 month or less, in 2 months it was dead (1993's 950 USD was a _lot_ of money in Brazil, so I was rather distressed). Weeks later I managed to find a technician from Rio de Janeiro who bothered to _try_ to salvage that computer, and he managed to fix that after a massive resoldering job on the A1200 board. Back then he told me that "those new Amigas are all having problems" (due to low-quality production).

      And about 1-2 years later the keyboard started to fail. My luck is that I managed to get another one from a dead A1200.


      I loved the architecture, the software and stuff... But Commodore treated its costumers like trash.

    147. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      From Wikipedia's entry on the 1541:

      Initially, Commodore intended to use a hardware shift register (one component of the 6522 VIA) to maintain relatively brisk drive speeds with the new serial interface. However, a hardware bug with this chip prevented the initial design from working as anticipated, and the ROM code was hastily rewritten to handle the entire operation in software. According to Jim Butterfield, this caused a speed reduction by a factor of five

      And from the 1571's entry:

      The 1571 featured a "burst mode" when used in conjunction with the C128 (although not when used with the Commodore 64 or VIC-20). This mode replaced the slow bit-banging serial routines of the 1541 with a true serial shift register implemented in hardware, thus dramatically increasing the drive speed. Although this originally had been planned when Commodore first switched from the parallel IEEE-488 interface to a custom serial interface, hardware bugs in the VIC-20's 6522 VIA shift register prevented it from working properly

    148. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Norwell+Bob · · Score: 1

      I may be mistaken, but I thought that the reason the Apple used a 6502 is that both Steves were working for Atari at the time, and Atari used 6502s extensively (really, exclusively until they started licensing Namco games) in their arcade games and computers. So, they had the chip at their disposal and they knew how to program them. There's a great story about how Jobs lied to and porked his buddy Woz out of a bonus for designing Breakout for Atari (which did not use a processor, it was entirely TTL).

    149. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Norwell+Bob · · Score: 1

      6502 = MOS
      6809 = Motorola

    150. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>MOS Technology

      MOS became Commodore Semiconductor in 1976. When Atari, Apple, et cetera were buying 6502s, they were buying direct from Commodore and making Jack Tramiel rich. (Also I suspect he was giving the 6502s internally free-of-charge, to enable C64s be sold at half the price of Ataris and Apples.)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    151. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I think there's quite a degree of overlap with the 3D printer nutters, who think they'll be able to make all those things in their kitchen for nothing.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    152. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by John+Bayko · · Score: 1

      The CoCo was an attempt to salvage a product to provide a low cost "videotex" terminal for farmers called AgVision (this is why the background was green, to seem "farm"-y). The product failed (farmers didn't think this "electrical net working" thing had anything to add to farming, or maybe the services like prices or weather reports just weren't worth the subscription price), but the cost reduction work by Motorola (which is why the 6809 was used) inspired also developing a home computer.

    153. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You couldn't get anything for any amount of Euro's in 1984, dickwad.

    154. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      That's true! Sprite boards... I remember seeing ads for those. They sounded like a great idea, but nothing really supported them.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    155. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Atari 800 was a great machine for its time, but all those machines were horribly expensive - I remember paying £645 for a 48K Atari 800 in about 1981, at a time when I guess I was earning about £1000 a month. And I paid, I think, around £130 for a floppy disk drive some months later when I got fed up with feeding cassette tapes to the Atari.

    156. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by mzs · · Score: 1

      To be fair by his only drawing one pixel at a time reference eulernet might be referring to using only int 10h. There was no way to scroll with only that. It was pretty limited, but the only really documented way from IBM for a long time.

    157. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      AFAIK the Apple II did well in educational and early business markets, but the C64 was *the* home computer in the US.

      My elementary schools both had C64s, with which we learned LOGO (2nd-4th grade) and, later, some BASIC (5th grade). The library of my high school had Apple ][s and IBM PCs that were intended and used mostly for writing papers, and the drafting and science classrooms had Macs that we never really used, but the teachers loved to fawn over them.

      Fast forward 20 years, my kids' elementary school has iMacs which they've used to make funhouse mirror-style pictures in Photobooth, take online reading assessment tests, and finally, in the 5th grade, design some WYSIWYG HTML in Dreamweaver. With any luck, in another 20 years my grandkids' will be using their Mac-Zed's to draw 3D rainbows and unicorns that look like dogs. Sigh.

    158. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      The 6502 wasn't his CPU, it was made by MOS Technology. Commadore, Atari, Apple, and a lot of others also used the 6502.

      because of his death I did some reading and I hadn't previously known(on conscious level anyways) that a very cool thing about commodore is that they owned their own chip fab ever since they bought MOS.. yep, others used it but they owned the guys who designed and fabbed it.(they had designed initial versions already when they bought it).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    159. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Atari was part Commodore, I just died a little on the inside.

    160. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      The 64 defaulted to 1 Mhz, but there was a trick by disabling the video handling you could kick the 6502 up to 2 MHz. You'd see this on some games where the screen border would get filled with quickly changing horizontal colored lines - that's what happens when the retrace handler (I think that was what it was called) was disabled to get the speed boost.

    161. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by EricTheO · · Score: 0

      I bet Jack Tramel's death won't get the kind of coverage that Steve Jobs got. His 6502 CPU (plus variants) were used in Atari 2600/5200/7800 consoles, Atari computers, Apple I/II/IIgs computers, Nintendo ES and Super Nintendo consoles. His Commodore and Atari companies popularized music, video, and preemptive tasking when the Macs/PCs were going "beep" and had about 4 colors.

      And yet after today we'll probably never hear about him again. And yes the Commodore 64 was and still is the record-holder for most machines sold (peak years: 1983-86). The runner-ups:

      2. Amiga 500 (millions of C64 owners upgraded)
      3. Atari 800 (peak year: 1980-82)
      4. Tandy/Radio Shack TRS-80 (1977-1979)

      TI-994/A.... FTW!

      --
      -Eric
    162. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the Turtleneck

    163. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dave Haynie gave you an engineering version of the Fat Agnus?
      Coool!
      The best i did was exchange emails with him once, about the possibility of using an A1000 keyboard
      on an A1200, never did try his suggestion, it was slightly non-trivial

    164. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by __aancvu2993 · · Score: 1

      > First we're talking 1979 to 89 here -- primitive times. The DOS and Windows 2/3 on the IBM PCs were also crap. The Macs had good OSes, but cost a small fortune and no color.

      I know, I didn't imply that DOS/Win were better. The Macs had a wonderful OS programmed in Assembly that went to great lengths to accomodate users but didn't treat them like retards. It was a balance that I miss on 99% or today's applications. Everything was cancellable, there was progress indications on anything long, it always told you why something could not be done and how to fix it, the help bubbles were a thing of beauty. Most programs were very friendly and very easy to install (drag folder to disk; uninstall? delete folder). Most applications had regular menus for everyday use but press Command or Shift+Option opening some menus and magic! the fun options appeared. This happened in ResEdit and many more. I had crazy fun with my brother recording our voices in the explosion resources inside games. When the bike in Dirt Bike crashed it was me saying Ka-Boom! engine idling sound? boooring, it's my brother saying 'pop-pop-pop'. We never broke any program fiddling with ResEdit, everything was so easy, well thought, accesible and fun. The Mac was light years ahead of DOS, Ataris, Amigas and anything.

      > As for professional software, both the Atari ST and Commodore Amiga had PhotoShop, DeluxePaint, Genlock, and other features that were used on TV shows like Babylon 5, seaQuest, and Voyager (first year). PCs/Macs couldn't even touch them.

      I'll give you that, but they were flimsy and crashed right and left; an operator was always there to re-record the weather map genlocked onto the green screen, etc, yes, but come on. I had an ST, friends had Amigas. Both crashed more often than not.

      And after the 90s the PCs caught up and went into warp drive and neither ST nor Amiga could ever compete again and we are all storing our old computers in a closet and use emulators and MAME in 'those days'.

    165. Re:Everyone ignores Commodore by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Knowing too much about shit designs like the Commie doesn't qualify anybody as an expert on Disk I/O.

      Putting a dedicated Floppy Disc Controller chip, generally an upgrade on Western Digital's 1771 chip, directly onto the Data/Address bus of the main processor will always be superior to using a 'second-CPU in a separate box' kludge to read the data off disk and then hustle it over a serial interface to the main box.

      If you don't know what is meant by things like DMA transfer, just keep plugging boxes you bought at K-Mart together. Maybe with enough of them hooked up you'll achieve a super-computer.

      Seriously, I thought the stunted subculture of Commie-enthusiasts clamoring 'our stuff is better' died out when the last 2400 baud BBS was taken down. It's okay to be nostalgic, but admit your favored hardware was dated from the start and a dead end.

  2. interview from 1989 by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:interview from 1989 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The guy survived fucking Auschwitz... the hell with Steve Jobs!

  3. a way more important person... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...than whoever the fuck that Mitch Wallance guy was from 60-minutes.

  4. Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back... by dryriver · · Score: 1

    http://www.commodoreusa.net/CUSA_AMIGAmini.aspx .... The new AMIGA MINI comes with a 3.5 Ghz i-7 CPU, up to 16 GB RAM, GTX 430 GFX, 600 GB SSD, HDMI/DVI out and 8 USB ports. Sure, it isn't a real "AMIGA", but its cool that there is at least an "attempt" to put AMIGA branded computers back on the desktop. Long live Commodore! And long live the C64 and Amiga 500! Good times...

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
  5. My First Computer by preaction · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The computer that started my love, and now my career, was an Atari ST. I would spend hours watching demos, playing (probably pirated) video games, and experimenting with voice synthesizers, drawing, and music programs.

    TOS ERROR #35 in heaven, Jack.

    1. Re:My First Computer by mccalli · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They were great. With an SM124 mono monitor in hand, he ST was my first serious computer (coming off the back of a Spectrum and another Tramiel machine, the C64).

      I learned C with the cheap GST C compiler. I did serious text crunching with Signum (superb output). I learned to do MIDI sequencing with Steinberg Pro 12. I used Spectre for Mac emulation and had a hardware 286 emulator fitte on which I ran Turbo Pascal. And then, of course, were the games.

      Excellent machine. Tramiel's great hit, the C64, was also responsible for getting me into music in the first place. People like Rob Hubbard and Martin Galway got me hooked, and I still use C64 sounds today via plugins like QuadraSID.

      Jack Tramiel's influence is severely understated by many (he schooled both Gates with the Commodore BASIC contract for instace) and I am sad to hear of him going.

      Ian

    2. Re:My First Computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would spend hours watching demos, playing (probably pirated) video games

      Who are you trying to kid? Damn near every last one of them were pirated.
      I know, you know it, and every geek here who used a computer back in those days knows it.

    3. Re:My First Computer by marsu_k · · Score: 2

      Tramiel's great hit, the C64, was also responsible for getting me into music in the first place. People like Rob Hubbard and Martin Galway got me hooked, and I still use C64 sounds today via plugins like QuadraSID.

      ++ for this. There were two factors that got me interested in electronic music, Rob Hubbard and Depeche Mode. Of the two, I'd have to say Hubbard was a greater influence (and I'm a huge DM fan).

    4. Re:My First Computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amiga > Atari ST

      My first comp was a TI-99/4A. Learned BASIC and assembly language there. Then on to the C64 for more of the same plus LISP. Then on the the Amiga where I learned the holy language: C

    5. Re:My First Computer by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I bought a lot of games for the 64 and a few for the Amiga. I did pirate EA games but that was after one of their shitty copy protected disks hammered my 1541 drive into oblivion. 5 minutes to load a game that after stripping the protection off only took about 15 seconds. Nobody else did that shit like that, it was unnecessary.

    6. Re:My First Computer by Koen+Lefever · · Score: 1

      Amiga > Atari ST

      My first comp was a TI-99/4A. Learned BASIC and assembly language there. Then on to the C64 for more of the same plus LISP. Then on the the Amiga where I learned the holy language: C

      Archimedes > Amiga, Atari ST

      I did not buy a TI-99 because it couldn't be programmed in assembly when I was shopping (1981). It had TI Basic and TI cartidges, no third party software. It is only now that I learn that Texas Instruments later (1983) softened their stance on this.

      --
      /. refugees on Usenet: news:comp.misc
    7. Re:My First Computer by slapout · · Score: 1

      "The computer that started my love, and now my career, was an Atari ST" Me too!

      I spent hours playing games on my ST, and I got started programming because of an article in Atari Explorer magazine. I can remember waking up face down on the keyboard of my ST.

      --
      Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  6. I did both by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    I owned both Atari and Amiga pcs, without them I'd have been trying to figure out a way to lug a crt and an acoustic coupler home. Thank you Jack.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  7. We have our three by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thomas Kinkade, Mike Wallace, and Jack Tramiel.

    RIP.

    1. Re:We have our three by narcc · · Score: 1

      Kinkade? That worthless hack in no way compares to Wallace or Tramiel.

      Kinkade's mass-produced crap isn't good enough to hang in a gas station restroom. The world's a better place without that self-aggrandizing publicity whore.

      The media has been felating his corpse, calling him the "painter of light" -- a title that he gave himself -- so I can see why you'd get confused.

      The world is better off without him.

  8. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those are primarily PCs in generic cases with the Commodore and Amiga logos slapped on them. The only exception is the "Commodore 64" which has a custom molded case. Aside from that, they're all just generic PCs with a half baked Linux distro thrown in. And oh my god are they expensive.

    Anyone would be much better off building themselves a computer or buying a Dell and loading Ubuntu if a Linux PC is what they're after.

  9. just has to be posted by nimbius · · Score: 1

    http://xkcd.com/218/

    for my childhood, thank you Jack.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  10. Wring another decade? by mat+catastrophe · · Score: 0

    That's an incredibly accurate way to describe the nonsensical way he ran that brand into the ground.

    --
    sig not found
    1. Re:Wring another decade? by LoTonah · · Score: 2

      Thank you. :)

      I never know what to think or say when I think about the last decade of Atari. Warner had no idea how to run a tech company, and there were too many projects going nowhere. They took a look at a few months-worth of profits and decided that they could spend money like that forever. Suddenly the videogame market, then the home computer market tanked.

      So Jack comes in, and has a lot of hard decisions to make. Cut here, slash there. Discontinue products. Write off factories and warehouses full of product that isn't moving. Kind of like how Steve Jobs came back to Apple and had to gut things fast.

      He knew that selling the Atari 8 bits wasn't going to work for long--PC compatibles and Macintoshes were starting to make inroads into homes and smaller businesses. Game machines were dead. He knew what Amiga had cooking, and when Commodore got ahold of that he knew he needed a counter-product. So, like the IBM PC, Atari used off-the-shelf components and built something quick and dirty.

      A lot of people took him to task for not advertising. There was advertising, just not in expensive publications. Very little in Byte, for instance. There was a big campaign at first, but then it seemed like nothing. Atari turned inward, producing magazines like Atari Explorer instead. Besides, who is to say that spending $5 million dollars a month on advertising actually is effective? BTW, I heard that it cost $1 million to do a full page colour ad in Byte. So how much for Newsweek, Time, etc., and how effective is it?

      I think Atari did a lot with the little money they had. I doubt Tramiel got any richer from his time there. He came into Atari with $40 million personal worth--how much did he leave with?

    2. Re:Wring another decade? by Gizzmonic · · Score: 1

      What he's trying to say is that you're completely wrong. Tramiel killed Atari. Remember his terrible decisions that destroyed the most pioneering company in video gaming history?

      "Game machines were dead"?!?! No, Tramiel decided that game machines were dead, and he was absolutely wrong. He froze the 7800 right when it was ready for market in 1984. He gutted Atari's arcade and home console divisions to focus on computers.

      Then, after the success of the NES, he decided Atari needed to make a console again. But did he commission a new design? Nope, he brought back the 7800, slashing the specs from its 1983 design so that it was even further behind the NES and Master System. Another puzzling decision in the name of saving money.

      In 1984, the 7800 had the best ports of the most popular arcade games ever made. In 1987, it was light years behind the NES and Super Mario Bros. Atari would never recover from Jack's decisions.

      --
      (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
  11. He gave me Coconotes by Cazekiel · · Score: 1

    Best game ever. RIP.

    --
    You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
  12. Speedscript was incredible! by ugglybabee · · Score: 1

    I used my C64 almost exclusively for word processing It got me through college, plus I wrote a novel that was (justly) never published. The program was called SPEEDSCRIPT, and it took a little time to learn, but I've never seen a word processor for PC that was more powerful or more agile. The closest thing I know of today is probably emacs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpeedScript

    1. Re:Speedscript was incredible! by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      I still miss the C= X key combination in SpeedScript (Swapped the two characters) and wonder why it never has appeared in any of the "big boy" word processors.

    2. Re:Speedscript was incredible! by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I spent many hours typing in SpeedScript out of Compute!'s Gazette Magazine. That's when I learned to backup my work to save lots of cussing.

    3. Re:Speedscript was incredible! by bigmo · · Score: 1

      Nice. I did the same thing but I had blocked it out of my memory. I had really forgotten about Gazette and the long listings of code you could type in from the magazine. I'll have to check the basement to see if I have any of them left. I found it really hard to throw that stuff away. I know I still have a 64 down there with an old vic20 keyboard I had mounted and wired in through a multipin connector hot glued into the side of the c64's case. I thought I was one cool cat with a keyboard I could sit back in my chair with. I wasn't afraid to take it apart and just try things with it. I guess it really did change my life.

    4. Re:Speedscript was incredible! by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 2

      It's in the only "big boy" word processor that matters: emacs.

      transpose-chars is an interactive compiled Lisp function in
      `simple.el'.

      It is bound to C-t.

      (transpose-chars ARG)

      Interchange characters around point, moving forward one character.
      With prefix arg ARG, effect is to take character before point
      and drag it forward past ARG other characters (backward if ARG negative).
      If no argument and at end of line, the previous two chars are exchanged.

  13. impressive adaptation by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One thing that's particularly interesting about Jack Tramiel is that, unlike some of the other 70s tech entrepreneurs (Woz, say), he was really from a previous generation, not natively a computer guy. But, he managed to anticipate and succeed over several technological transitions. He immigrated to the U.S. after surviving a concentration camp during WW2, and started a reasonably successful typewriter company in the 50s. That successfully transitioned to mechanical calculators in the early 60s after the typewriter market started getting too competitive and low-margin, and then once transistors started becoming affordable, he digified that line and put out a line of digital calculators in the late 60s. In fact Commodore in effect put out the first Texas Instruments calculator, using commodity circuits sourced from TI, which TI only later realized they could assemble under their own label, resulting in the now-famous TI calculator line.

    Then, finally, he anticipated the home-computing trend, with Commodore releasing its first design in 1977, the same year as the Apple II.

    It's not very difficult to imagine an alternate history where Commodore was a typewriter company that had a brief adding-machine phase before completely missing the digital-computing wave and going bankrupt by 1980.

    1. Re:impressive adaptation by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Too bad he didn't anticipate Mehdi Ali and Irving Gould coming in to destroy the company.

      I still remember one magazine talking about those two fools on the golf course. "What is it we sell again?" "Computers." "Oh, yes, how are those selling anyway?"

    2. Re:impressive adaptation by Ambient+Sheep · · Score: 1

      Very true. Commodore had some awesome (for the time) calculators in the mid-to-late 70s. I still remember one my maths teacher owned that had more buttons on it than the mind could comfortably conceive (this was a cool thing when I was 12).

      For some reason though, when the market moved from LED/VFD calculators to LCD ones, Commodore just seemed to vanish, presumably preferring to concentrate on the PET/VIC/C64.

    3. Re:impressive adaptation by edjs · · Score: 1

      TI using their own chips to produce their own calculators cheaper than Commodore could sourcing their chips from TI, plus the cheaper LCD calculators starting to come out of Japan, drove Commodore out of the calculator market. Which drove Tramiel to acquire his own chip fab (MOS) so that he'd never be dependent on outside suppliers for core components of his products, and an almost pathological need to undercut the competition.

    4. Re:impressive adaptation by Ambient+Sheep · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info.

      And yet, apart from the TI-57/58/59, TI calculators were generally seen amongst my peer group as "clunky" (the cheap 'n' nasty TI-30 really didn't help this when put up against the likes of the Casio FX-120), whereas the Commodore scientifics were seen as cool. Amazing what badge engineering can do...

    5. Re:impressive adaptation by aflyingcat · · Score: 1

      One of Jack's strengths was that he would listen to the engineers; not just the division heads, but actual line engineers who designed the products.

    6. Re:impressive adaptation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still remember one magazine talking about those two fools on the golf course.

      That sounds like the sort of thing Amiga Power would have written. But then Amiga Power was THE GREATEST MAGAZINE EVER.

  14. Guru Meditation by ClubPetey · · Score: 1

    Guru Meditaiton # 81070000.00524950

    --
    Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes
    1. Re:Guru Meditation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guru Meditaiton # 81070000.00524950

      You mean a dead-end alert (AT_DeadEnd = 0x8000000) in Exec library (AN_ExecLib = 0x01000000) caused by a failed AllocSignal() (AG_NoSignal = 0x00070000) at address 0x00524950 (which is in the Zorro-II memory space from 0x00200000 to 0x009FFFFF)?

      What an odd thing to say!

    2. Re:Guru Meditation by Osgeld · · Score: 2

      Jack was at Atari by the time that happened

  15. Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Could anyone else have done all of that?

    Kevin Flynn.

  16. Where are the Apple fanbois now? by michaelmalak · · Score: 0

    6502 microprocessor would have withered on the vine ...

    If the Commodore 64 and the Atari 800 never existed, the Apple ][ would have simply been even more prevalent than it was, until the IBM PC would come on the market.

    1. Re:Where are the Apple fanbois now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Apple II and Mac's were so expensive compared to the C64/TI/Atari, it's doubtful that the non-existence of the lower-end market would have made any difference. It's not like the absence of $200-$800 computers would have made $2000 computers any more affordable to the masses.

    2. Re:Where are the Apple fanbois now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the Apple //c and the Taiwan XT clones weren't $2000 computers, so I'm not really buying your logic that the absence of a $600 computer would have them any more or less affordable.

      No doubt it was hard for a lot of people to save $600, but if you really wanted a //c or an XT clone, those were only about 2x the price of a C64, not 3x or 4x like the Mac was. And I know people who really wanted a Mac, and they saved for it too; they just saved a lot longer for it.

    3. Re:Where are the Apple fanbois now? by LoTonah · · Score: 1

      If Commodore hadn't bought MOStek, the Apple // would have probably had to use the 6800. Commodore bought them in 1976, just before the Apple came out. Of course, if Commodore hadn't strangled MOStek into being so broke, it likely wouldn't have had to sell itself to Tramiel.

      So...if Apple had to use the 6800, the price of their computers would likely be around $200 higher.

  17. Being a supplier to Atari or Commodore sucked.... by rimcrazy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can tell you unequivocally that being a supplier to both companies sucked big time. They never paid you. It got so bad that we (when I was a supplier to them) basically made any business with them COD because if you didn't you would never get your money. You may all love Jack but I couldn't stand doing business with them. Major PITA.

    --
    "TV, a medium as it is neither rare nor well done." Ernie Kovacs
  18. Tramiel's Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Each succeeding generation of a consumer electronics product is sold at a lower price than its predecessor (this is in addition to having better performance and more features).

    What can be sacrificed? Backward compatibility. Customers don't care (or at least they didn't, back in his day)

  19. Hamster Reset! by KatchooNJ · · Score: 1

    Just don't blow your fuse.

    (Nobody will get this.)

    --
    "Never give up, for that is just the time and place when the tide will change." -Harriet Beecher Stowe ^_^
    1. Re:Hamster Reset! by mccalli · · Score: 1

      Looked it up: Interesting. I've performed that reset before, but never heard that name for it.

      Cheers,
      Ian

    2. Re:Hamster Reset! by KatchooNJ · · Score: 1

      At least someone learned something from it. lol Even if my joke wasn't that funny. :-)

      --
      "Never give up, for that is just the time and place when the tide will change." -Harriet Beecher Stowe ^_^
  20. Gotta Love 'TOS'. by lbalbalba · · Score: 1

    For it's name, at least, the name for the operating system on the Atari ST: T.ramiel O.perating S.ystem

    1. Re:Gotta Love 'TOS'. by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Better than Jack DOS

  21. BS by nurb432 · · Score: 0

    Its an abomination if you ask me. And i was an Atari guy and didn't like Amiga.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  22. Why is he associated with the 6502? by billcarson · · Score: 1

    As far as I recall, that thing was designed and produced by MOS technology (which was sadly a one-hit wonder).

    1. Re:Why is he associated with the 6502? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      Yes, it was a bunch of ex-Motorola folks who designed the 6502 under Chuck Peddle as a 6800 competitor. Tramiel bought MOS Technology though.

    2. Re:Why is he associated with the 6502? by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      As far as I recall, that thing was designed and produced by MOS technology (which was sadly a one-hit wonder).

      Commodore, under Tramiel, bought MOS technology in 1976 when they were in danger of going titsup.com.

      Plus, the PET, VIC20 and C64 from Commodore all used the 6502.

      Of course, Trameil wasn't the only 6502 user, there was some outfit called Apple using it, plus OSI (my first computer was an OSI 'Superboard') and, in the UK the Acorn System 1, Atom and (later) the BBC Micro. I'm sure there were others. However, I think these postdated the Commodore takeover.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    3. Re:Why is he associated with the 6502? by default+luser · · Score: 2

      He's not. That's Chuck Peddle's baby.

      He did allow Chuck to design the Commodore PET, but this was only after Chuck witnessed the Apple prototype and finally convinced Jack that the calculator market was dead.

      Jack was a smart businessman who could run a tight ship, but he was a poor prognosticator of the tech industry. Most of his products he pushed were derivatives made more efficiently, and he (and Commodore management once the company grew) had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the next big new thing.

      Hell, the legendary Commodore 64 chipset was only as amazing as it was because Jack wanted a game console. Never mind the fact that the console market was saturated, at the VIC-20 was the same price - Jack wanted to be the best console maker, and that was that. And when the console market caved he was left with a game chipset, and he still had to be convinced by an internal team of the best engineers at Commodore to turn it into a product.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    4. Re:Why is he associated with the 6502? by sunspot42 · · Score: 1

      You forgot Atari. They were probably the biggest single user of MOS 8-bit CPUs, since they were at the center of their 2600 and 5200 game consoles, as well as Atari's 8-bit computers (and I believe several of their arcade machines as well).

    5. Re:Why is he associated with the 6502? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      And Nintendo, that's a Ricoh made 6502 variant in every NES, and a 65816 in every SNES.

  23. Thank you, Jack by chiefnerd · · Score: 1

    Thank you, Jack, for your significant and underappreciated contribution to the computing field. I and many others like me cut our teeth coding for the Commodore 64 and have since made our own valuable contributions. You will be missed.

    --
    SYS64738
  24. The first computer I ever programmed. by BitterOak · · Score: 1

    The first computer I ever programmed or had in my home was a Commodore PET model 2001 computer. My father was a teacher taking an 8 week course in microcomputers and he was able to bring a PET home with him for the duration of the course. That was in 1978. A few years later, the first computer I ever owned was a Commodore 64. In high school computer science class we used Commodore PET model 4032 computers with Waterloo Structured BASIC, until I introduced the teacher to COMAL, which ran on the new Commodore 64s the school had just acquired.

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
  25. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by chrismcb · · Score: 1

    No please. let it die. I love the C64, still got two on my desk, and I write software for the C64 and for emulator tools for it in my spare time. But it is over and done with. Either bring out a new computer with a new chip and new OS or bring out a linux box, but don't brand the linux box "commodore" or "amiga" because it is neither.

  26. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by bmo · · Score: 1

    Did you price that so-called "Amiga"?

    It's twice the price of a top end Mac Mini, a SFF computer that has similar enough specs that if you bump the Apple to the same specs, it's /still/ 500 bucks cheaper.

    Just... no.

    And it's not like you're getting an Amiga OS. You're getting Fuduntu with an emulator and a really gawd-awful skin.

    --
    BMO

  27. Jack... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jack was a WWII Nazi concentration camp survivor who bore the scars of the numbers on his arms.
    He was brutal in business. Jack was also very short (I'm not tall, but towered over him).

    I've grown to consider all of those things about him before judgement of him. Basically, if it didn't
    make money, forget about it (think Oracle).

    I met him once (for about 12 seconds). He was very personable to me.

    He's a part of computer history, now.

    1. Re:Jack... by suso · · Score: 1

      I think the real question is now. Who will get the sword from Swordquest. Maybe there

    2. Re:Jack... by narcc · · Score: 1

      It's only a rumor that Jack had it hanging in his living room. My guess is that it was scrapped along with whatever the other prize was (the jade thing or the crown, maybe?).

      A shame, really, they were the only thing good about the Sword Quest games. I had two of them as a kid. They didn't stand on their own. Without the comics and the contest, I doubt we'd remember them.

  28. The Volkswagen of computing by hessian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Rest in peace, Jack Tramiel, famed for "The Jack Attack."

    The Commodore 64 truly was The People's Computer, like the Volkswagen "bug" was The People's Car.

    At a time when an Apple //e cost $2500 for monitor, CPU, extra RAM (necessary), and two disk drives, you could walk out of the store with a full Commodore system for $350 and hook it up to an old TV.

    This is why C64 culture was so vital: people took risks with their computers instead of treating them like business machines or expensive curiosities. Back in the BBS days, the Commodore boards were where it was at. Total anarchy zones. If the feds or feebs swooped in to confiscate them, one paycheck later they were up and operating again.

    I hope Jack gets the recognition he deserves in the great beyond. With any luck, he's just finished sliding a whoopee cushion onto Steve Jobs' easy chair and is watching from behind a corner with a devilish grin.

    1. Re:The Volkswagen of computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At a time when an Apple //e cost $2500 for monitor ...

      Apple ][, including the //e, could use a TV, just like a C64, so subtract that for a real, ahem, apples-to-apples comparison.

      ... CPU, extra RAM (necessary) ...

      Necessary for apples-to-apples comparisons, but the //e with 64K was certainly very usable. I knew people who got started with an original Apple ][ with just 16K.

      ... and two disk drives ...

      Why two? Lots of people got by with just one.

      ... you could walk out of the store with a full Commodore system for $350 and hook it up to an old TV.

      So, subtract the Apple branded monitor from the Apple price, and add the Commodore 8050 or 8250 dual floppy drive to the Commodore price and it's more like $600 vs $1200 than the $350 vs $2500 you claim.

    2. Re:The Volkswagen of computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An amusing anecdote.

      I was attending high school and I went to a computer programming competition, held at Washington University, on a Saturday. I was allowed to take one of the school's Apple //e computers with me.

      I'd write a program and get it running. And I'd wait while it did the number crunching. Other people at my tables had Apples and TRS-80's. Only one school (Ladue; the wealthy part of town) had an IBM PC (they were brand new and hideously expensive). Anyway, the guys on the next table were all using C64's and VIC-20's. They'd get their programs running, then hit the switch on the RF modulator on their screen and sit there and watch Saturday morning cartoons. At commercial breaks, they'd switch back over and see if their program was done. If it was done, well, back to work. If it wasn't, back to watching cartoons.

  29. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by echusarcana · · Score: 1

    I have to agree. Having learned my craft during those early years, I recall the times well. Jack was hated by Commodore dealers, hated by users... and I don't doubt hated by his own employees. The way I see it, he basically sucked all the money he could out of a successful company and reinvested very little to keep the success rolling. They were never able to move past their 6502-based designs (the Amiga design was purchased).

    I have to recommend this is an outstanding read: http://www.amazon.com/On-Edge-Spectacular-Rise-Commodore/dp/0973864907

  30. Re:Being a supplier to Atari or Commodore sucked.. by default+luser · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, this book details Jack purposefully not paying suppliers, nice to hear it repeated from someone first-hand. According to the book they made a point of not paying suppliers, especially if they were interested in acquiring the company. When the company was cash-strapped and desperate, Commodore would buy them out.

    It made more money on the short-term, but was bad for the long-run because it burned bridges in the industry. This made it hard for Jack to get now-wary suppliers and dealers to help him grow his business when he saw an opportunity for a new market/device.

    --

    Man is the animal that laughs.
    And occasionally whores for Karma.

  31. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    The ST series could have been nice, but they made it and... did nothing. They never evolved it anywhere. Say what you will about the current OS players, but at least things are always evolving and growing as they duke it out.

    I had an ST with the little box by David Small that turned it into a Mac. I used that for a year and then said WhyTF am I bothering with this hybrid monster and just got a Mac IIsi. I was pursuing my Master's degree at the time at USC, and they had amazing discounts for students an Apple stuff. Actually, on all stuff. I got Photoshop at 80% off.

  32. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

    Rather than spend $350 on a case containing a PC motherboard with no memory, no CPU, and no disk, I feel I'd get a much better "Amiga experience" by buying an Amiga Forever CD for $30 or so and running it on my existing machine.

    --
    Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  33. 6502 by mattack2 · · Score: 0

    > The 6502 microprocessor would have withered on the vine if it weren't for Tramiel's support

    Uhh, what?

    The Apple II came out before Atari's personal computers, and even before the Atari VCS (2600), which uses a 6507... As well as tons of other computers and other devices that use 6502 variants.

    1. Re:6502 by KPexEA · · Score: 2

      Commodore bought MOS technology in 1976 when they were on the verge of bankruptcy, Apple would not have had a source for chips if they had gone under.

    2. Re:6502 by toejam13 · · Score: 1

      Umm, the 6502 *did* wither because of Tamiel.

      If you ever look at a MOS 65xx op-code map, you'll see that a good deal of codes are unused. Supposedly the original MOS 65xx team wanted to come back at a later time and develop a revised core that would be more friendly for non-embedded solutions. Commodore management balked at the idea and several members of the core 65xx eventually left. They saw in Commodore management the same short-sighted thinking that drove them from Motorola. The result was that the processor core used in the original 6501 remained relatively unchanged throughout all of Commodore's NMOS and CMOS variants, bugs and all.

      Development of the 65xx series came from sources outside of Commodore. Bill Mensch, a former member of the MOS 65xx team, founded his own semiconductor company (Western Design Center), releasing upgraded cores such as the 65C02 and 65816. Undocumented ops went from weird behavior to NOPs, more ops were added for transferring values between registers, registers and memory locales could be zeroed out, the zero page and stack page could be relocated to offsets other than $0000 and $0100, the zero page index roll bug was fixed, flags had a predictable state after a RTI, etc...

      It wasn't until the CSG 65CE02 and derived CSG 4510 processors that Commodore finally gained modern 65xx processors.

      I sometimes wonder how nice the C64 would have been to program with a 65C02 or 65CE02.

    3. Re:6502 by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the makers of the 6502 were suffering massive problems early on in the history of the CPU, in part because of the lawsuits over the 6501 (essentially a 6800 clone.) Tramiel swooped in and bought the company.

      The only other cheap CPU at around that period in history was the Z80, and that took a few years to appear. I'd suggest that the Atari 2600 would have taken a little while to appear without Tramiel's involvement; the Apple series would have continued, albeit at an even more expensive price, and on that note it's interesting to speculate what the computer world would have looked like with a 6502-sized hole in it.

      Personally I couldn't stand that chip, but it was cheap, and its cheapness meant it kick started the home computer revolution.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  34. Wow, dude - this is the man that got me started by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and had such an impact on lives of many a geek,

  35. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by White+Flame · · Score: 1

    AMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! </scene reference>

    But seriously, not it is not "cool that there is at least an "attempt"" to bring back the brand, with zero innovation besides a breadbox casemod. Note that all their other systems (including their "Amiga"s) are just cheap Chinese off-the-line volume machines available to anybody to throw their badge on it.

  36. ..But it ended up at WDC with Bill Mensch by rimcrazy · · Score: 2

    The 6502 has had a very sorted past and changed hands many time. It ended up with Bill Mensch and the Western Design Center (http://www.westerndesigncenter.com/wdc/WDC_Founder.cfm) I worked with Bill when I was at VLSI Technology as we were fabricating the 65C816 for the Apple IICS. Let's just say it was "interesting" and leave it at that. Bill had his own idea what fabrication design rules "should be". Actually checking the design rules of the foundry you wanted to fabricate your parts at was a detail that was beneath him. Made for lots of "fun"........

    --
    "TV, a medium as it is neither rare nor well done." Ernie Kovacs
    1. Re:..But it ended up at WDC with Bill Mensch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 6502 has had a very sorted past

      I think you meant "sordid" past. Look it up.

      Not that big a deal and the rest of your post is interesting.

    2. Re:..But it ended up at WDC with Bill Mensch by default+luser · · Score: 1

      I always wondered why it took WDC over two years to design the thing. Guess I know now!

      I found it strange because Intel managed to produce the 8086 (similar in complexity) in less time, and this was while Intel was distracted with the already-delayed iAPX 432, which was their feature product. The late release of the 65C816 meant it was all but forgotten as the market moved on to the 286 and 68000 series.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    3. Re:..But it ended up at WDC with Bill Mensch by toejam13 · · Score: 1

      I always considered the 65816 to be a weird beast. It was a hybrid between a 16-bit and 24-bit memory architecture. It used bank paging to move a 64KB window around for most ops and a few 24-bit long operations tossed in for fun.

      I never understood why Mensch or some other second source just didn't go with a flat 24-bit memory architecture. For a college project, I developed a 65C02 derived processor that was just that. All 16-bit address modes were converted to 24-bit, branches could use either 8-bit or 16-bit displacements, stack and direct page could be relocated to any bank aligned (256 byte) offsets and a few extra JMP and JSR modes were added to support jump tables. The emulator wasn't too hard, but the dual pass assembler (for assessing branch displacements) was a PITA.

      The downside was that extra byte needed for memory addresses added some bloat, but the ability to relocate zero page helped offset it somewhat since you could now use ZP (now called direct page) everywhere.

      Just imagine a C64, C128 or CBM-II with a flat 16MB memory bus and no more congestion in ZP.

    4. Re:..But it ended up at WDC with Bill Mensch by glassware · · Score: 1

      I heard a fantastic quote once from actor Rutger Hauer. He was being interviewed on his tiny role in some big blockbuster movie and the interviewer asked him if he thought his role was great. He replied "Great... I got a chance to be great once. I took it, and I was great. I won't ever have that chance again, but I was, once." A wonderful bittersweet vision.

      I suppose when you've created arguably the most significant microprocessor that ever existed, you get to feel that rules don't apply to you. Although the Pentium Pro team could give him a run for his money.

      Anyways, I certainly don't begrudge these important old-timers the credit for their work well done.

  37. Re:Being a supplier to Atari or Commodore sucked.. by QuincyDurant · · Score: 1

    The word on Jack was, "He's a great guy, and he'll pay you if he has to."

    He bought Atari for a dollar down and a dollar when you catch me, 'cause Warner was a serious don't-wanter.

    I don't think anyone with a softer nose could have kept Atari going, but let's remember him as he was, one tough sonovabitch.

  38. Typical Slashdot by NiceGeek · · Score: 1

    It's funny how 50% of the posts in a thread about the founder of Commodore are nothing but bitching about Apple.

  39. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    I never played with Commodore 64 or knew anyone who owned one. But I do remember Tramiel's holy war against the Amiga. After leaving Commodore he just went on the attack against his former company.

  40. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's give him some credit. Atari was totally fucked already when Tramiel bought it from Warners. He basically kept the company alive by selling old crap he found in the warehouse (7800, XE, 2600jr, etc). That the Atari ST was even released was a minor miracle, even though the system was a bit underwhelming.

    Commodore Amiga had its own set of business issues way beyond what Atari was doing. (If anything he forced their hand to release the A500, which was the only Amiga which ever sold a damn.)

  41. As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by perpenso · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's important to note that the Commodore 64 incorporated graphics support hardware (aka the first "graphics card") which helped make the computer much faster than it's CPU speed would indicate, especially for gaming.

    You Sir, must stop talking out of your ass.

    Actually, he is correct. The C-64 did have "graphics support hardware" beyond offering a bitmap that programmer could directly manipulate. The GP is only mistaken in that he characterized the hardware as being like a "graphics card". The specialized C64 graphics hardware supported 8 sprites. It was a very handy thing.

    You could also consider the reprogrammable character set as such graphics hardware that sped up games. Various VIC-20 and C-64 games used this technique to good effect.

    Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards.

    Huh? *If* such cards existed they were certainly so rare that hardly anyone had them, a real niche thing. Are you thinking of the 80 column card? It added 64K RAM too but I don't recall this card enhancing graphics. My recollection as a former Apple II, //e, and C-64 programmer is that on the Apple II you had bitmapped graphics and that on the C-64 you also had bitmapped graphics, but it was better, plus specialized hardware support for sprites. The Apple was primitive in comparison.

    I hate the smell of noobs in the morning, It smells like ignorance.

    You might want to check that attitude if you yourself aren't remembering things quite correctly either.

    1. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by LoTonah · · Score: 1

      He is right, but he is wrong.

      GP basically said that the C64 had the first graphics chips. Weeelll... yes, before IBM had them. But Atari was doing graphic chips before Commodore, so that's why he is wrong.

    2. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL go back more to the vic 20 days

    3. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      Actually, he is correct. The C-64 did have "graphics support hardware" beyond offering a bitmap that programmer could directly manipulate. The GP is only mistaken in that he characterized the hardware as being like a "graphics card". The specialized C64 graphics hardware supported 8 sprites. It was a very handy thing.

      You could also consider the reprogrammable character set as such graphics hardware that sped up games. Various VIC-20 and C-64 games used this technique to good effect.

      Well again, other computers had the same or better years before the C-64 was released. The Atari 800 had ANTIC and GTIA which supported hardware sprites and had a reprogrammable character set, again, 3 years before the C-64 was released.

    4. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had an Apple ][e with a graphics card, and it wasn't an 80 column card. It enabled the Apple to put out a PAL signal, to work with the TVs in this country. It was a POS and leaked RF like you wouldn't believe - it was possible to tune a TV into the correct frequency at the other end of the house and see a blurry picture of what the Apple was putting to screen.

    5. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      >Actually, he is correct. The C-64 did have "graphics support hardware" beyond offering a bitmap that programmer could directly manipulate. The GP is only mistaken in that he characterized the hardware as being like a "graphics card". The specialized C64 graphics hardware supported 8 sprites. It was a very handy thing.

      Atari 800 had sprites in 78/79 although not as flexible.
      >You could also consider the reprogrammable character set as such graphics hardware that sped up games.
      Various VIC-20 and C-64 games used this technique to good effect.

      Atari 800 also had that.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    6. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's important to note that the Commodore 64 incorporated graphics support hardware (aka the first "graphics card") which helped make the computer much faster than it's CPU speed would indicate, especially for gaming.

      You Sir, must stop talking out of your ass.

      Actually, he is correct. The C-64 did have "graphics support hardware" beyond offering a bitmap that programmer could directly manipulate. The GP is only mistaken in that he characterized the hardware as being like a "graphics card". The specialized C64 graphics hardware supported 8 sprites. It was a very handy thing.

      You could also consider the reprogrammable character set as such graphics hardware that sped up games. Various VIC-20 and C-64 games used this technique to good effect.

      Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards.

      Huh? *If* such cards existed they were certainly so rare that hardly anyone had them, a real niche thing. Are you thinking of the 80 column card? It added 64K RAM too but I don't recall this card enhancing graphics. My recollection as a former Apple II, //e, and C-64 programmer is that on the Apple II you had bitmapped graphics and that on the C-64 you also had bitmapped graphics, but it was better, plus specialized hardware support for sprites. The Apple was primitive in comparison.

      I hate the smell of noobs in the morning, It smells like ignorance.

      You might want to check that attitude if you yourself aren't remembering things quite correctly either.

      How about Burrell Smith quitting Apple (after refuting his promising to whiz on Steve's desk), walking across the street & founding Radius? HE's actually the father of anything deeper than 8-bit color on the Macs with NUBUS slots (although Dave Smith will claim RasterOps is the daddy). Or was it SuperMac? The point is a LOT of companies jumped on the video card train, albeit not the Apple II monorail. . .

    7. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by bjb · · Score: 1

      Back then the Apple II had swappable video cards. Huh? *If* such cards existed they were certainly so rare that hardly anyone had them, a real niche thing. Are you thinking of the 80 column card? It added 64K RAM too but I don't recall this card enhancing graphics. My recollection as a former Apple II, //e, and C-64 programmer is that on the Apple II you had bitmapped graphics and that on the C-64 you also had bitmapped graphics, but it was better, plus specialized hardware support for sprites. The Apple was primitive in comparison.

      Actually, the 80 column card on the Apple //e did enhance the graphics capabilities. It added what was referred to as Double-LoRes and Double-HiRes modes.

      On the Apple ][ series, there was always Lo-Res graphics that were 40x40 with 16 fixed colors. Good for things like Breakout and used the memory space of the text mode display. Hi-Res originally was 280x192 with 4 colors on revision 0 boards, but updated to 6 unique colors shortly thereafter (we're talking 1977). There were 80 column boards made by various companies back in the day for the Apple ][ series, but they tended to be separate output connectors and non-standard. As well, there was at least one graphics board that used some TMS chips (I think), but I don't recall ever seeing software utilizing it. As well, there were later RGB boards but similar fate, if I remember correctly.

      When the Apple //e came out, most people installed 80 column boards in the AUX slot to enable a standard 80 column mode and add an additional 64KB with the "extended" version. The "double modes" were basically taking advantage of bank switching and doubled the horizontal resolution of text (80 cols!), lo-res (now 80x40) and hi-res (now 560x192). Lo-res didn't gain color capability, only resolution. Hi-res, on the other hand, since the original mode was basically an NTSC hack, it allowed the Apple to tweak the colorburst and phasing more to produce 16 colors instead of just the original 6.

      So in short, the 80 column card in an Apple //e (and subsequent models) did enhance the graphics, but only for applications which used it. However, unlike other graphics boards that did exist, the double hi-res mode was far more commonly taken advantage of.

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
    8. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      It seems to be a little more complicated. Not all //e motherboards supported double hi-res, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_IIe. I have no idea how many incompatible ones there were. My //e was a fairly early model, it might have been one such model. However my friends and I were targeting the II+ and //e so we probably would have passed on the mode even without such revision issues.

    9. Re:As a former Apple II and C-64 programmer ... by bjb · · Score: 1
      True, the revision A board wouldn't work. There was actually a jumper on the Apple Extended 80-column Card that existed because of this (I'm figuring it simply enabled/disabled the feature). However, since this only affected the initial run of motherboards and Apple did offer free upgrades, I left that detail out.

      I got my //e in May 1984 and it wasn't a revision A.

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
  42. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

    I was pursuing my Master's degree at the time at USC, and they had amazing discounts for students an Apple stuff. Actually, on all stuff. I got Photoshop at 80% off.

    I believe that's called "the drug dealer model."

    --
    I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  43. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by LoTonah · · Score: 1

    Geez, Tramiel didn't come to your house and force you to buy it at gunpoint. The world couldn't help you from being a dumbass Atari fanboi, so why blame him for smacking you back to reality?

    Atari couldn't afford to take three years to design the next Amiga. They did great considering the time/money constraints.

  44. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by LoTonah · · Score: 1

    I think I would blame Irving Goulde rather than Tramiel for sucking the money out. Tramiel wanted new designs, he wasn't afraid of trashing an architecture in order to move on.

    Commodore had all sorts of 68000, 8080 and Z8000 designs (although most were co-processors to the 650x) that never saw the light of day. But because they saved so much money on using MOStek processors, they kept going back to that well. I think their biggest failures were not forcing MOStek to come up with the 65816 themselves.

  45. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by LoTonah · · Score: 1

    Okay, I'm forced to agree with this. Atari did very little to upgrade the ST, and it pissed me off too.

    Its a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. It was always said that Atari didn't want to confuse users by having to pay attention to hardware specs when buying software, but the rest of the industry was doing just fine with that dilemma.

    I would have killed for an expansion slot on the ST. A cheaper Mega ST. Anything. I did some crazy upgrades to my ST (Stereo sound, 4096 colour video expansion, 4Mb memory). I got a 20Mb hard drive (bought it from Bill Wilkinson himself). You shouldn't have to jump through the hoops that I did to expand a machine. I had the Magic Sac, then the Spectre 128, then the Spectre GCR.

    But then Windows 3.0 came out, and I got a 286 with a mono VGA card, 2Mb RAM, and a 20Mb internal hard drive. That's when Atari stopped being my main computer.

  46. Re:Being a supplier to Atari or Commodore sucked.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's one of his worst offenses IMO:

    Synapse software was the company behind such classics as Shamus and Blue Max. It's founder and president, Ihor Wolosenko, entered into an agreement with Atari (then Warner Communications) to develop a new suite of applications (SynCalc, SynTrend, SynStock, etc...) to replace Atari's aging line of productivity apps. Atari received palettes of finished product about the time Jack took over and he refused to pay Synapse or locate the merchandise. Ihor was now overextended and attempted to produce a 2nd run in Synapse packaging when Jack dumped the contents of Atari's warehouses on the market including Synapse's unpaid inventory. This put one of the most innovative game companies out of business and caused Ihor to leave the technology sector. But hey, at least we got a few more years of cheaply made computers with no support.

    Jack's no hero to me.

  47. Oh please by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

    Apple would simply have found another source.

    1. Re:Oh please by narcc · · Score: 1

      I don't think you realize how incredibly small Apple was at the time.

      It consisted of Jobs and Woz and wasn't really a company -- Hell, Woz was still *very happy* at HP. Jobs was at Atari at the time, iirc. (He'd have Woz come over at night to do work for him in exchange for getting to play on the arcade machines for free!)

      I doubt they'd have found another source that they could afford. The $25 6502 was about the best they could hope for. It's not like Woz had anything left to sell to fund the company after he hocked his two prized calculators!

      If not for the 6502, there would be no Apple.

    2. Re:Oh please by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      Apple would simply have found another source.

      sure, but for a different chip, probably one from the big boys of the time(moto, intel)..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  48. Rest in peace, Mr. Tramiel by ChipMonk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have a story to tell about Mr. Tramiel. He touched my life in such an obvious way, with such a hackable C64, and I got the chance to thank him in person for his vision.

    I used to work in Silicon Valley. When I first went there, I had visions of rubbing elbows with personal computing luminaries like Jobs, Wozniak, Tramiel, and Bushnell. Let me tell you, working in a startup is not the way to make this happen. Of course, Nolan Bushnell doesn't live in Silicon Valley, and Steve Jobs was busy running Apple, so they got scratched off my list. I did get to meet Steve Wozniak, simply because I was in the right place at the right time. But Jack Tramiel was... well, someone I wanted to meet badly enough to track down myself.

    I had heard he still lived near Silicon Valley, but it was only by sheer luck that I came across a way to contact him (which I won't share here). It was my last week to work before moving back east, and I worked up the courage to initiate contact with him. Immediately, I found out he was someone who valued what privacy he could get, so I had to explain why I wanted to meet him in person. He graciously agreed to meet me for Thursday lunch. That gave me two days to think about what I wanted to say to him, and to ask him.

    Not that it mattered. I got there a little bit before he did, got shown to his customary booth, and started tripping over my own tongue as soon as he showed up. Any photos you've seen of him reflect exactly how he looked: somewhat rotund, mostly bald, clearly Jewish, and very contented with life. The ease with which he greeted me showed I wasn't the first 37-year-old Commodore fanboi he'd ever met.

    We ordered our meals, and began to chat. I tried to present myself as respectfully as I could, but... really, this was Jack Tramiel, and I was having lunch with him! He explained right away that he had just come from the gym, he always ate there after his workout, and that's how the restaurant host knew where to seat me. He worked out three times a week, as a way to stay somewhat active, but he had a good life, he knew it, and it showed.

    We talked about how he had learned what American business was about, and how he had learned about America. When I told him I was from Ohio, he piped up immediately with, "Ah, my favorite city is Toledo, Ohio. Even though I've never been there." I knew he was a Holocaust survivor, but I didn't know that an American from Toledo, Ohio was the first Allied soldier to greet him when the Ahlem labor camp was liberated. This soldier taught him to speak basic English, talking about Toledo, Ohio enough that it essentially became young Jacek's understanding of what city life in the USA was like.

    We talked about Commodore Business Machines, and how the design evolved from the early PET, through the VIC-20, C-64, and C-128. He had wanted economical designs from the beginning of his involvement with computers, and his products reflected that. He bore no ill will towards IBM, Apple, or any of the other competitors. It was all business; life is too short for animosity on any level. As the fortunes of CBM varied through time, that philosophy made it easier for him to stand aside and let history take its course. (I've heard that from a few other Holocaust survivors as well.)

    We also talked a little politics. I asked him what he thought about the conservative/liberal polemic, and his response was simple: The government governs a nation, but it's a nation of people. When a government prefers the nation over her citizens, they suffer as he suffered. He asserted that no form of government was completely immune to this hazard, but some are less suceptible to it.

    I had a website that the time, and said something about what an incredible brag I would have for it. He demurred a little, and asked that I refrain from speaking publicly about having lunch with him, at least while he was alive. So I did.

    The hour and a half I spent

    1. Re:Rest in peace, Mr. Tramiel by Cinnaman · · Score: 1

      Hi, thanks for the recount, may I ask when this meeting took place?

    2. Re:Rest in peace, Mr. Tramiel by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

      I'll say it was within the past 10 years. Yes, I'm being vague, for personal reasons.

    3. Re:Rest in peace, Mr. Tramiel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for sharing.

    4. Re:Rest in peace, Mr. Tramiel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where's the bit about putting a turd in the freezer?

      0/10

  49. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by damnbunni · · Score: 1

    That is not an Amiga. It's a badge-engineered PC running an OS that has nothing to do with the Amiga OS.

    THIS is an Amiga. It's expensive as hell, not very fast, and severely niche. But at least it runs AmigaOS and can run old Amiga code directly. http://acube-systems.biz/index.php?page=hardware&pid=7

    There are other models in the works - the AmigaOne X1000, for instance - but they're even more hideously expensive, and they're still in beta.

  50. A shame... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew Jack. I was on the short end of a couple of business deals with him and his companies. He could be a real b*****d in business.

    He tried to push his sons into Commodore. The board pushed them, and him, out. His sons just didn't have the same business sense that he did. That led to his buying Atari from Warner Brothers. Atari was losing big money at the time; too many things in the pan and no focus on any of them. Jack discarded all of the current projects to build the ST. And stopped paying all the creditors he could in order to fund it. (Which is why I got the short end the first time. He didn't pay for the Syn-series software from Synapse. I moved back in with Mom and Dad since I didn't get paid for that work for about 3 years.) But he ended up with a very slick computer. With some flaws; just like every other system then and now.

    He survived Auschwitz. I don't know if any of his family survived or if he was the only one. He was a very tough man after that. And did a lot for the computer industry. The C64 wasn't the greatest 8 bit system. It didn't have the best graphics or the fastest CPU (even among the 6502 systems). But it was good enough. And, most importantly, it was affordable. And he had the sales channels to put it everywhere; something Atari under Warner Brothers never did.

    I remember using a Commodore Pet while in college. (It's now a university, things have changed in 35 years.) It was slow and limited. But you could have the whole thing to yourself. The DECsystem 10 was always busy; you could never get a terminal to log in. I learned a lot on that Pet.

    RIP.

                        DLM (Author of Synfile+ and PaperClip/Atari)
     

    1. Re:A shame... by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Thank you. Classy post. (I remember PaperClip. And Dave Small, Dave Allen, the Codeheads, a whole bunch of fine people.)

      Read the thread, I appreciate all who had actual, factual, memories of Mr. Tramiel, the tech and the times. Never met him, but exchanged a few emails after a RTC on GEnie. Found him to be no-nonsense and gracious.

      A 520STfm was my first very own machine; had been involved with friends' stuff going back to Altair, Compucolor, Atari 800. Later bought a 1040, Atari gave me one (1040STe) and a friend years later gave me his old Mega. Wonderful learning, doing, playing - great memories.

      RIP, Sam. Thanks, again.

    2. Re:A shame... by LoTonah · · Score: 1

      Hi Dan.

      Did you eventually get paid for Synfile+? The wording of your sentence could lead someone to believe that either it took you three years to get paid, or that you did three years of work that you didn't get paid for. I sure hope you were paid.

  51. Sad loss -- not a good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Magic SAC was pretty slick. Dave came up with a very clever idea. I wish I had joined him earlier instead of continuing my company. Instead I tried to keep it going and then shut it down and went to Bell Labs. So all the work I did on Magic SAC and Spectre was as a contractor. It was a lot of fun. (I'm typing this on my iMac. Though I've owned a lot of Windows systems too. Didn't go back to Macs till we started selling them CPUs.)

    The STs issues weren't all due to Atari and Jack Tramiel. The OS was essentially a 68K port of DRDOS with GEM on top. Both had issues. They went out with some very noticeable bugs. Unfortunately, being in ROM meant they were very hard to fix. Every program disk would have to carry the patches. This was long before Flash became the OS memory of choice.

    DR was too busy fighting MS to put the resources needed into Atari's OS. And, knowing Jack, I'm sure he wasn't handing them piles of cash for the work.

    The world of the ST could have been very different. But the same can be said of many systems that are now gone. The Amiga was great. I still have 3 or 4. Along with a couple of STs. (Not sure if any of them will turn on. Haven't tried in a long time.)

    Jack wasn't a perfect man. But he did achieve a lot. My obituary won't be on Slashdot. I'm sure most of the other posters won't either. Jack is. And that shows something about him.

          DLM

  52. Jack Tramiel was one hell of a businessman by Lisandro · · Score: 1

    Everyone seem to praise Jobs, which was arguably the best CEO in the IT business in the last decade, but Tramiels' legacy is impressive. He basically beat all offerings from Atari and Apple and managed to sell 17 *million* C-64s back in the eighties, which is mind boggling. His company paved the market for a real, usable and affordable home computer.

    That little brown box opened a whole new world for me. Thank you Jack. You'll be missed.

  53. 64K RAM SYSTEM 38911 BASIC BYTES FREE by Errtu76 · · Score: 1

    READY. ...

    Yeah, good memories. Thanks, Jack.

  54. He's the Henry Ford of microcomputers by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    because he brought new technology to the populace by aiming to keep the price low by streamlining manufacturing; and selling gajillions of them.

  55. Re:Being a supplier to Atari or Commodore sucked.. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    According to the book, some speculate that the payment reputation is part of what doomed Atari when Jack took over because suppliers remembered being "hi-Jacked"*, and changed their contract/billing terms immediately.

    Almost all legendary businessmen seem to have about 30% asshole in them. His penny-pinching spilled over the edges, just like Jobs' perfectionism and idealism created annoying side-effects, including possibly his death.

    * Not sure of the exact phrase

  56. I heart my Jackintosh! by beaverdownunder · · Score: 2

    My family couldn't afford a Mac, but could manage a 'Jackintosh' -- a 520ST with a single-sided floppy drive and a monochrome monitor. Sure, it wasn't as fancy as a Mac, but neither is a Toyota Corolla as fancy as a Ferrari. It had a mouse-driven GUI, didn't need a bunch of disks just to get to the desktop, could play some pretty cool games -- even in monochrome mode (Bolo anyone?) -- could use a standard printer, and the floppies were PC-compatible!

    In terms of business, gaming and design and music, the ST was a really cheap way to touch on all of these when no other contemporary computer could, at an even-remotely similar price-point. Amiga for business? Yeah, right. Macintosh for home gaming? Not that inspiring, Dark Castle notwithstanding. PC for design? Bleah. Never mind MIDI. You can't really argue with the ST's flexibility -- and it was remarkably easy to sell the idea of buying one to parents who already felt burned when they discovered too late that using that 8-bit computer you talked them into had an extremely steep learning curve when it came to business and productivity applications.

    The ST's only real failing was it wasn't marketed particularly well. Had Jack been willing to lift prices to cover advertising costs I expect that it would have done much better, but he seems to have always had a bit of a personal philosophy on that matter that in retrospect was perhaps a little naive.

    Regardless, were it not for the ST I probably wouldn't have had a 16-bit computer until several years later. Thanks Jack.

    1. Re:I heart my Jackintosh! by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      You can't really argue with the ST's flexibility

      I can, and I will.

      I'm personally an ex-C64 and Amiga owner, so undeniable biased, but history has demonstrated what all these were good for.

      ST's were good for MIDI (thanks to inclusion of the port)
      Amiga for video (thanks to relatively cheap genlock)

      These are the only things these machines were still being used for professionally after their companies died.

      I know Amiga's being used for architecture CAD and wordprocessing profesionally for a long time afterwards, but not in any significant numbers. Likewise at the end ST's were only being used in recording studios.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:I heart my Jackintosh! by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Likewise at the end ST's were only being used in recording studios.

      They were used quite a lot in DTP too at places that couldn't afford Macs. You could buy a bundle of Mega ST/Laser printer and DTP software for GBP2,500 which a fair few firms went for.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    3. Re:I heart my Jackintosh! by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Indeed. And there were quite a few Amiga's and Archimedes used in similar roles, and all of them doing quite well. It's not a qualitative comparison but rather one where the ST didn't make any more dent in Apple's DTP monopoly than the other computers at the time.
      The only area where ST was the clear winner was in MIDI, where it ruled up until other computers had both a MIDI port and the software infrastructure to use it (notably the latter part took quite a while to catch up).
      Likewise the Amiga ruled video editing for a long time because for a very short time it was the only affordable solution, and in the short time a solid software library and user base was build around that other computers took quite a while to catch up to.
      Apple already had a big library and user-base in DTP and business applications before either the ST or Amiga existed, which neither was able to catch up with in time. Only the IBM PC really caught up with with Apple in the DTP field, and even that was only well after both the ST and Amiga were effectively dead.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    4. Re:I heart my Jackintosh! by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Fair points I can't really argue with :-)

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    5. Re:I heart my Jackintosh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Had one as well - upgrade from the 800XL.

      Problem wasn't so much the marketing but the fact it was a rush job thrown together in a hurry when Atari dipped out on the Amiga, and as such it lacked some of the features that a bit more time designing the silicon would have given - features that became the norm care of the Amiga.

      Ironic considering the Amiga was designed by former Atari engineers but that's karma for pissing off your staff I guess.

  57. Commodore started me in computing by maroberts · · Score: 1

    My first experience of a proper Microcomputer was a Commodore PET at a wargaming convention. After that I got interested in what computers could do and have had a career of over 25 years in Computing as a result. I also bought an Atari ST which I used for several years.

    Thank you, Jack, for your contribution to my life. You are one of the few people who I can genuinely say will be missed with thanks and gratitude.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  58. Rest in peace by dido · · Score: 1

    My wife dug up my old C-64 from that storage room in my mom's old house just a couple of weeks ago, and now the first real computer I ever owned now sits in my garage, along with the 1541 disk drive. I don't know if she also managed to dig up all the old cables that came with it so I can turn it on again for old times' sake. I have to wonder if it still works: that thing has been in storage for more than 20 years, and not in the best of conditions. That machine gave me my start in life in the world of computing, and I remember fondly the days of PEEKing and POKEing machine language opcodes from a photocopied 6502/6510 reference manual I managed to dig up from a shop somewhere (after having convinced my parents to pay a not insignificant sum for it). It's part of what made me what I am today, and I'm not like to forget it.

    Well Jack, I'd like to thank you for that bit of hardware that gave me and a million other geeks the start of their lives today.

    --
    Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
  59. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    Yup. It's about as cool as those C= branded MP3 players some years ago.
    The C= brand is dead and buried. Some lowlife scum just keeps digging it up and raping it in the arse.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  60. Fade to black... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    10 POKE 53280,0: POKE 53281,0
    RUN

    Without this man, I probably wouldn't have been able to have a computer at such an early age. Also, for anyone who doubts the mighty C=64, please take a look at some of the demos that are STILL being made for it. There's some amazing stuff out there. Thanks to my little C=1600 VICMODEM and a rotary phone, I was exposed to remote computer networking at an early age. 300 Baud with manual dialing was rough, but I would dial a BBS's number for an hour straight (manually on a rotary phone) to get through. When I finally got a 1670, things got crazy. If you were there for it, you know what I mean.

    Rest in peace...

    £8r,
            ((THE MANIAC))

  61. If he hadn't pushed the "compatible" Plus/4 by smchris · · Score: 2

    I'd have known a lot less about computers -- since the built-in decompiler came in handy when "compatibility" with C64 programs meant you had to recode because they moved the video addresses, among other things. I guess sometimes the best master is the one who throws you down a well and makes you find your own way out.

  62. Yeah, I *know* you meant KB really :-) by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    Some days I miss my old Atari 800 computer, with the 32MB ram

    32MB? Yeah, *you* wish! Would've made one *heck* of a RAM disk, but you'd still have had to bank-switch it in 16KB chunks into the 6502's 64KB address space ;-)

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  63. Re:Too bad.. RIP... But at least the Amiga is back by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    Note that all their other systems (including their "Amiga"s) are just cheap Chinese off-the-line volume machines available to anybody to throw their badge on it.

    Oh yes- I remember those same guys selling what appeared to be generic HTPC cases with absolutely *no* Amiga connection using the "classic" Amiga model numbers (e.g. A1000, A500, etc.)

    And the clusterf*** that is the Amiga rights is shown up by the fact that they're selling a computer with the "Commodore" and "Amiga" badges on it, that has nothing to do with that line otherwise, yet different companies are selling the "real" successor to the Amiga, running Amiga OS4.0.

    Except that even those Amigas aren't (AFAIK) directly compatible with the old Amigas, and they're basically just overpriced hardware that's been made to a proprietary design solely so they can monetise the latest Amiga OS (which is what people are really paying for), and possibly so the rabid hardcore buyers that it's meant to exploit can feel good that they haven't wasted all that money on a generic PC. Even though it would probably have been better to have the new Amiga OS run on masses-of-bang-per-buck commodity Wintel-compatible hardware instead.

    But back to the point- the latter machines are sold under the "AmigaOne" name, apparently they don't have the rights to call it plain "Amiga", yet some generic name-exploiting toss gets to use it(!)

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  64. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Well, I'm in the libertarian camp on drugs. ;-)

  65. Article's a shocker by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    Read the racist article in question. It starts out only very mildly racist (this is the "I'm totally not racist, but" section) and then once he gets to the numbered points, turns into a rocket-propelled rush to the top of Racist Mountain. Worth a read for entertainment value, your jaw will hit the floor at some of these points.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  66. Re:Good Riddance you fuck! by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

    We're in agreement there. The issue I was referring to is the market saturation by dumping. Which we accuse China of, and levy huge tariffs. Why we don't on e.g. Microsoft/Adobe when they dump their products on our children, I'm not so sure.

    --
    I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.