Slashdot Mirror
Sinclair ZX Spectrum 30th Anniversary
It's not just the TRS-80; new submitter sebt writes "ZX Spectrum, the microcomputer launched in 1982 by Sinclair Research (Cambridge, UK) turns 30 today. The launch of the machine is seen by many today as the inspiration for a generation of eager young programmers, software and game designers in the UK. The events surrounding its launch, notably Sinclair's well-known rivalry with Acorn, later helped to inspire the design of the ARM architecture and most recently the Raspberry PI (based on ARM), in an effort to reboot the idea of enthusiastic kid programmers first captured by the Spectrum and Acorn's BBC micro. Happy birthday Spec!"
... was a Timex Sinclair 1000. It had 16k of RAM and loaded programs on audio cassettes! You had to be pretty consistent with the volume or you'd "lose" programs. I programmed Monopoly into it, complete with color-pixel graphics, all in BASIC!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
I wonder if the "old" generation of microcomputers - the TRS80, the Sinclair, Commodore 64, Apple II - were more inspirational to young programmers and coders than what we have today. The old computers were all command line. You *had* to know what you were doing to make the thing do anything! You couldn't break it because you had to know how the thing worked to make it do anything! And there was a joy or satisfaction of "Hey, I made this machine do 'this', exactly how I wanted it to do it!" Today's PCs/Macs/pads? Anyone can pick one up, use it, maybe even cause a lot of damage with it but never understand the inner workings of it because all you had to do to make it go is click on some icon somewhere. There is no command line to use (at least that most users would choose to work with). You can become a proficient user of it but without some real digging you will have a hard time writing any kind of usable software for yourself, even as rudimentary as a "Hello, world".
I liken it to giving a car to a starting driver. The Sinclair and other older microcomputers were like giving a kid a 20-yr old Honda Civic with a manual transmission. Slow, dependable, bland, hard to get in trouble with it, you have to know how to drive it to make it go, you can really get a feel for how the thing wants to drive. The newer, much more powerful computers of today could be like giving that same kid a Porsche - powerful, fast, stylish, easy to get in trouble with, easy to wreck at high speeds, you may never understand its inner-workings because they are too much to learn.
Sinclair ZX Spectrum 48K....
I was good at school, so my dad bought me 48K version, instead of 16K one - oh, happy memories...
in the UK probably used the Spectrums rival, the BBC Micro, as it had expansion ports, extension ROMs etc, it was used as the standard computing workhorse for both hobbyists and electronics labs around the country.
Apple ][ was for people who wanted to become accountants.... :-)
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Please STOP IT!.
Boxed, with the leads, manuals, tapes. Also still have my Vic-20, boxed, and C64 & 1541 - also all boxed, but they aren't particularly uncommon.
The good thing about those computers was that
- they left something for the owners to do, today you can get ready made software for almost every need
- when you turned those computers you were in the programming interface, so that was in the focus and people would give a try to use it
- Personal computers were the magic new things of that decade, people were still appreciating it. Nowadays a PC with 16G of RAM and a quad core CPU is "just another" computer and more of a commodity than magic
- We loved to build things (like small electronic circuits, small programs) ourselves. Nowadays consumerism has taken everywhere. We just need to pay and buy.
Different time, different limitations.
I still say, give me a room full of Apple II's (preferable //e or IIgs) and eager students, and I'll give you room full of great developers. There is value in understanding how software interacts with hardware, something which has been missing in most programmers for a long time. That's not a new complaint, it existed in the mainframe and mini computer world before the microcomputer revolution. The pioneers of the micro revolution, the early adopters, etc broke that mold. But as operating systems and development environments have become more "friendly", much of that has fallen away.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
The bad thing about those computers was that
- they left something for the owners to do, today you can get ready made software for almost every need, where as then if you needed a simple fucking 4 function calculator you needed to learn programming
- when you turned those computers you were in the programming interface, and with no software you had no other choice
- Personal computers were the magic new things of that decade, people were still cursing it. Nowadays a PC with 16G of RAM and a quad core CPU is "just another" computer and more of a commodity than some bullshit you needed a PHD to operate
- Only a certain segment of nerds loved to build things (like small electronic circuits, small programs) ourselves. Nowadays consumerism has taken everywhere. We just need to pay and buy for them to encroach on our elitism
Listen, I grew up with this batch of 30 year old computers, I love them, and I was inspired by them, but they were not magical boxes of imignation, they were devel boxes of fustration that took damn near 30 years for average people to be fully functional with. And frankly all the knowledge I gained as a child gave me fuck all nothing with modern computers, so what I can pull the zeropage address of a Apple II out of the top of my head, doesn't do me any good past 1990, neither does the programming techniques or basic operations, these computers may have inspired a generation of hard core nerds, but outside of that they had little or nothing in common with modern machines. ASM wont do a kid much good if they cant even make a spreadsheet now.
Sinclair Computing - corporate motto: A computer in every closet!
I disagree. Fundamentals are ALWAYS important even if they aren't practical. While 6502 assembly isn't practical anymore, the experience you gained programming with it provided you a foundation for future skills that many of your peers might not have. That not only gives you a competitive advantage, it makes you into a better, smarter professional. You can play the piano without learning music theory, but you will be a much better pianist if you do take the time to learn the fundamentals of music. It's the same for computer science or information technology.
+1 ... (cassette player as in "bulky, heavy, need a bag to carry it around"). ... so we got that instead ... ... heck, once you get around with 3 not-so-all-purpose registers and the limited ASM commands, you ought to be able to program in just about any language with a couple pages of syntax/command reference ... seeing how "well" kids nowadays are tought in business school as far as programming goes, I always wonder if we should put an emulator (or maybe even the "real thing"?) on their desk and let them learn coding in assembler for a while ... sure programming is easy with all the fancy tools and libraries, but if you never really learned the basics, how should they know that requiring a bigger, faster computer isn't the way you fix limitations and performance problems?
I started out on a Spektrum, going to the department store almost every day, programming on the one they had on display for advertisement (they also had the ZX81, but with it being monochrome, awful keyboard and only 1K of RAM, who wanted that?). My friend would even bring his cassette player so we could save programs we wrote
After a while, my parents got fed up with my hanging around in the store constantly, so they decided to buy me one - while we were waiting for the clerk to get one from storage, we talked to some boy who convinced us to get a C64, as it had more RAM, more power, better keyboard,
Of course I was disappointed with the missing gfx commands on the 64, but quickly got around that (in part because of "Simon's Basic" IIRC), and ended up with the good ol' 6502/6510 Assembler programming
This song sums up the nostalgia so well
The Spectrum was a big part of my youth and early career (I was writing for it into the early 90s).
How do you sell five million "copies" of a computer?
No sig today...
Oh, and I still remember my first hack - dissassembling JetPac and finding the POKE that gave me infinite lives. Now *that* was fun :-)
The BBC was better, but it cost, IIRC, twice as much. It was out of my budget, I remember that.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Nearly three times as much...
But there was really no comparison. The BBC had a proper keyboard and tons of connectors on the back/underneath. Not just connections for printers, serial ports and floppy disks either, it was the Arduino of its day.
The only real problem was the graphics eating up two thirds of the RAM.
No sig today...
The good thing about those computers was that
- they left something for the owners to do, today you can get ready made software for almost every need
Most Spectrum owners never programmed them, they just put cassette tapes in the player and typed LOAD"".
No sig today...
On the google.co.uk domain today there's a special doodle devoted to the ZX and St. George's Day; all in one ;-)
Actually, I heard he wanted to do participate via online conferencing, but his computer suffered from RAMpack wobble...
It's a different style of graphics.
C64 hardware was good at character-map based, scrolling graphics but if you needed more than eight sprites on horizontal line you had problems.
The Spectrum was bitmapped graphics, it was bad at scrolling but you could have more sprites and do more 3D stuff, eg. there were quite a few fully-interactive isometric-view games and even some filled-3D-polygon games (Starstrike) which the C64 was really bad at.
Sound was pretty bad, yes, but it was a lot cheaper than a C64.
No sig today...
The BBC model B cost a lot of money, far more than the C64 or ZX Spectrum. If people used the BBC it was most likely in schools where it enjoyed far more popularity than it did in the home. When Acorn finally released an affordable home computer called the Electron it was so gimped that it didn't really hold much attraction for anybody.
Sorry to predate all of you, but I started with an RCA VIP - no BASIC, 2K of RAM, hex keypad and 64x32 (pixel, not character) video. Later I did get a T/S 2068 (the US version of the Spectrum, with some additional sound hardware).
Sound was produced by the Z80 CPU on the Spectrum. That meant that you could not have a soundtrack in games because the processor would have to dedicate 100% of a given cycle to playing a sound. You could have a beep or two as soundeffects, but no soundtrack to speak of, unless the game was either very basic, or the programmer was very, very talented. For the life of me, I cannot think of another soundtrack except Manic Miner. Also, I had a ZX. Games on the C64 were much, much better looking than on the Spectrum. there was no comparison. The Spectrum had a near-fatal flow: you could not have a 8x8 square with more than two colours. So that meant that most games were two-coloured affairs - one colour for the background, another for the sprite, and even then you could have the colour clashing that made Spectrum gaming unique. Whatever the Spectrum's faults, this in my opinion was the biggest by far and since it was a hardware limitation, it meant that games simply could never be as nice looking as the competition.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
The BBC micro was the 'standard' educational model, not least because of the BBC brand and the association with the Beeb's educational TV programs. The home market was dominated by Spectrums and C64s.
After spending the summer playing with my friends' ZX81, I got a Spectrum for christmas at the age of 8, and every week I would pester my dad to buy me "Your Spectrum" and "Your Sinclair" magazines, with their pages upon pages of type-em-in program listings. I'd then piss off my sister by monopolising the TV for 3hrs while I typed in the latest greatest amazing game .... and spend 5 minutes playing the inevitable top-down scrolling dodge-em-up before thinking "surely I could do better than that!". So I set out to try.
30 years later, I'm making a good living as a senior programmer, and I put it all down to those early days of truly accessible computing. The Spectrum was the ideal balance between entertainment machine and experimentation platform, amazing a geeky 8yr old with its possibilities while its limitations positively encouraged anyone with the right mindset to try and work around them. Hacking infinite lives with PEEK and POKE... designing game graphics pixel by pixel and then converting them to integer data... figuring out how to give the illusion of full-colour graphics when you only had one foreground and one background colour per 8x8 character square... i learned so much about computing from those days. Thanks Sinclair, you were awesome.
http://instantbadger.blogspot.com
A few of us make hardware for the humble Speccy still, you can now go on the Internet with the Spectranet http://spectrum.alioth.net/doc - at the VCF in 2010, much fun was had sending tweets from a Sinclair Spectrum, you can connect hard drives/CF cards with the DivIDE http://baze.au.com/divide/, there's a USB interface (although the developer seems to have disappeared, hmm...) and various other fun bits of hardware to play with. Retro enthusasts are still writing some really nice games for the Spectrum and there's a strong demoscene, too.
The ULA (the custom logic IC) has also been reverse engineered by actually de-encapsulating the chip and photographing it with a microscope http://www.zxdesign.info/ - you can buy the book there, by the way... There were some interesting anecdotes from that. Today we have FPGAs and CPLDs and you can essentially make custom logic at home, but back in the early 1980s, companies like Ferranti made generic dies, and stored them, and you made your actual custom logic by specifying the interconnection layer. Richard Altwasser had only 6 weeks to design the circuit for the Spectrum's ULA (which handles video and all other I/O for the basic machine). When Ferranti completed the first wafer of Spectrum ULAs, they ran tests and found that they didn't work. It turns out that a Ferranti engineer had made a mistake when making the phototools to make the metallization layer, and basically half the chip lacked its clock signal. However, one single die on the whole wafer DID work. It turns out that despite all this being done in a clean room, a spec of dust had landed in precisely the right place on the phototools to connect the clock circuit, so they had one working ULA die on the wafer, and Sinclair could test and validate their ULA.
Incidentally if you're in London on the 5th/6th May, there's a 30th anniversary of the Spectrum celebration at the British Film Institute. It's free to enter. Details are here:
http://www.imperica.com/horizons
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
80s computing will be missed by anyone who was lucky enough to be in it. back when users had control of there pcs. not what apple and microsoft and media company's think you should be allowed to do.
Yes I think they were inspirational. I remember wanting to write a screen scrolling type Defender game on my Spectrum and learning Z80 machine code in order to do it. I couldn't afford an assembler though so I had to write out the programs in pseudo-code and manually look up their codes. It didn't seem a big deal at the time but it was immensely satisfying to actually produce a working program from a series of 8-bit numbers. I'm hoping the Raspberry Pi will do a similar job of stimulating young programming talent today.
There is a big shortage of people who know what a zeropage is now. I happen to work in Embedded software development and that sort of knowledge is vital (not the exact address, but the concept). It is hard to recruit people like me because we are few and far between.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Nice article on The Register:
http://www.reghardware.com/2012/04/23/retro_week_sinclair_zx_spectrum_at_30/
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
You haven't really lived until you have experienced flight simulator on the Timex Sinclair. I had the full meal deal. Extra ram kit as well as the thermal printer. I was in hog heaven when I upgraded to the Timex Sinclair 2000 (color and sound!!). Enjoy.
This ain't no upwardly mobile freeway This is the road to hell
Most Spectrum owners never programmed them, they just put cassette tapes in the player and typed LOAD"".
That's 7 characters (including the space) more code than kids type these days.
I agree the computers were very inspirational - my first computer was a ZX-81.
But kids today are NOT suffering because the computers we have now are "too powerful"!!!?
Instead it is an AMAZING time to be growing up. I know a few ten year olds selling apps on the App Store!!! How is that not even more awesome and impressive than my writing a crossword puzzle generator at the same age?
The car analogy really falls down because there is no danger for younger kids with greater computing power and reach, just a much greater opportunity to share with others more complex development more early than has ever been possible before.
The only problem I can see is that despite this awesome opportunity you have a great deal of distractions through video games, movies and so on. Yet those with a real interest in programming will still I think find their way through the hedge of entertainment to the real world underneath it all.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
where did you get your statistics of 'Most Spectrum owners' from?
Out of my backside of course.
OTOH I was a salaried Spectrum games programmer back in the 1980s working for one of the major companies.
No sig today...
Ah, I remember. Atic Atac. Moon Buggy. The Hobbit. All great games. But of course the coolest thing was to program that sucker. I always liked the Basic dialect better than Commodore's (which was far more popular in my school), and even liked the weird tokenized entry method. But the real game changer for me was when I bought (yes, bought!) a Pascal and a Forth compiler. Man, Forth rocked. It still is one of my favorite programming languages.
Funny enough, my father was really opposed to me getting one, so an (older) friend of mine had to buy one for me and "lend" it to me until my father finally gave up and let me outright own it. A Ph.D. in EE later I'd say it was a good investment...
Too bad at some point my brother ended up with it and rather than giving it back for proper conservation he discarded it. I miss it dearly.
Of course there was early attempts at DRM back then too.
The BBC Micro for example introduced a file lock in ROM v1.2 (I think) that meant you could only execute a program from tape, not load it for copying.
And commercial games had things like the LENSLOK protection.
That only accounts for a couple of hundred of them
No sig today...
Better graphics modes too. Colour addressable per pixel in various resolutions, plus a teletext mode that only used 1KB. And commands in the BASIC interpreter to draw on that screen too.
Unfortunately, the awesome graphics modes used so much memory that you had no space left for your program. Picking the graphics mode was a matter of trading off between having memory for code and memory for output. I remember all this from when I wrote (what I now know to be) my first IDE. For the BBC. The trick was I loaded pieces of the program off floppy disk when needed. (I still hate those DFS floppies; only having a maximum of 31 files per disk was very limiting. Didn't have the ADFS available.)
And sound. BBC Micro had 3 channels of tones, plus a white noise channel, all ADSR programmable. Speccy had a single bit attached to a speaker.
But the Z80 was (with a bit of careful coding) fast enough to use PCM to drive that speaker. If your assembly chops were up to it, you could do truly impressive things. The BBC had some very interesting hardware, but really wasn't all that fast and the (lovely for the time) BASIC implementation greatly restricted what you could do in mixed BASIC/ASM code (unless you didn't mind being stuck in ASM).
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
Planetoid and Elite proved that you could do plenty. Planetoid used the full colour 20kB mode and hardware scrolling. Elite used a mixed medium res monochrome mode and low res 4 colour mode. Presumably using 10kB.
For an IDE where you had floppy available, presumably you used teletext graphics (1kB) for the coding, and saved the source code to disk before running so the object code could use any graphics mode it needed.
This was the power of the BBC Micro graphics. A choice of low memory teletext mode and several different pixel-addressable graphics modes.
Sure there were possibilities for trickery with the Spectrum speaker, but any time spent on IRQs serving speaker sound was lost from time spent doing the graphics. In practice it was an either/or. You didn't have games doing anything impressive with sound during gameplay on the Speccy. But on the BBC, it was no problem.
Interestingly, a ZX Spectrum emulator was recently discovered buried in the ROM of Goldeneye 64. http://www.romhacking.net/hacks/911/ Supposedly a programmer at Rare wanted to see if their old "Ultimate Play the Game" games could be emulated on the N64 while they were working on Goldeneye.