scott@max.acs.washington.edu (08/25/89)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: This post should be credited to BRUCE WADE of
"Library BBS", (206) 562-2447, Seattle, WA, USA
In article <5682@max.washington.EDU, scott@max writes:
-In article <4394@sdcc3.ucsd.EDU>, tc1ujk@sdcc3.ucsd.EDU ( Repo Man) writes:
-> I just started using my commodore 64 to connect to a Unix system.
-> But, I need a good terminal program that can enable me to use most
-> of the functions of a Vt terminal. Does anyone know of a terminal
-> program that can emulate a vt terminal for a c-64?
-> What are commodore users using now?
-
-There are several terminal programs available for the C=64 that can
-emulate VT terminals. I shall mention two that I know. They are
-both PD and/or shareware (as far as I know).
-
-The first one is called Kermit (latest version 2.2). Many people,
-initially at least, get confused about the name of this terminal program
-because Kermit is also the name of the protocol used for file
-transfer. However, rest assure, the Kermit that I am refering is a terminal
-program. According to the documentation, the name of the terminal program
-is derived from the protocol that it supports, which is Kermit.
-This terminal program can emulate the VT-52, the VT-100, and
-partially the VT-102. It has both 40 columns and 80 columns modes
-of display (more about this later). Unlike many others, this terminal
-program doesn't come with software support for any particular modem, for
-such things as auto-dial, hangup, baud-rate selection, etc. Instead all
-necessary modem commands to do the mentioned tasks must be send by the user
-directly.
-
-The second one is called CxCbterm (latest version 6.7, I think). I
-personally haven't used this terminal program myself. However,
-according to the messages that I read in regards to this terminal program,
-it can emulate the VT-52. I am mentioning about the CxCbterm
-because, if I am correct, I have used an earlier version of this
-terminal program, and my experiences with it have been very positive.
-The version that I have doesn't have support for any VT emulation;
-however, I still use it frequently because it has 80 columns mode of
-display. And I have found it to be more responsibe and faster in the
-scrolling of the display than Kermit. And chances are it will still
-be true with the latest version of CxCbterm.
-
-Both of these terminal programs have 80 columns mode of display, which is
-achieved via software only, without the need of any extra hardward. However,
-if you use a television or a 40 columns monitor, the character displayed
-on the screen may appear somewhat blurred and hard to read. This is so
-because the resolution on a television and a 40 columns monitor isn't
-high enough and sharp enough to display the characters clearly.
-In contrast, 80 columns mode display on a 80 columns monitor is very
-clear and the characters very legible. As matter of fact, I am typing
-this message on the C=64 with a 80 columns monitor (acting as a remote
-terminal to call my university's computer system, of course).
-
-If you want even higher clarity in the display on the C=64, then you
-need to get a 80 columns hardware card, which will give you a clarity
-of display that is equal to any 80 columns computer.
-
-I hope this answers some of your questions.
-
-
-Sincerely,
-Scott K. Stephen
Msg#:40599 *Commodore*
08/24/89 22:39:30
From: BRUCE WADE
Subj: REPLY TO MSG# 34049 (606: RE: VT EMULATOR..VERY INTERESTI)
To Usenet: You mention an 80 col. hardware card. Is that in the Commodore
catalog, or is it available from retailers? Never heard of that before, Verrry
Interesting, indeed!
scott@max.acs.washington.edu (08/25/89)
In article <6064@max.acs.washington.edu>, scott@max.acs.washington.edu writes: > - > -If you want even higher clarity in the display on the C=64, then you > -need to get a 80 columns hardware card, which will give you a clarity > -of display that is equal to any 80 columns computer. > - > -I hope this answers some of your questions. > - > - > -Sincerely, > -Scott K. Stephen > > > > Msg#:40599 *Commodore* > 08/24/89 22:39:30 > From: BRUCE WADE <from Library BBS, (206)562-2447> > Subj: REPLY TO MSG# 34049 (606: RE: VT EMULATOR..VERY INTERESTI) > To Usenet: You mention an 80 col. hardware card. Is that in the Commodore > catalog, or is it available from retailers? Never heard of that before, Verrry > Interesting, indeed! > There WERE a number of 80 columns cards available for the C64 which turned the screen output of the C64 into 80 columns Of couse, as you may perhaps know, you could obtain 80 columns on the C64 through software only. However software-achieved 80 columns cut the resolution of the characters by half (instead of being the usual 8 pixels by 8 pixels, now you have 4 pixels by 8 pixels). With an 80 columns card however you get 80 columns on screen without losing any resolution (still 8 by 8 pixels). Now some mathematics, and then a reason why the 80 columns cards didn't receive wide acceptance among the C64 users. A standard C64 can display 40 columns and 25 rows (or lines). If each character is 8 pixels wide and 8 pixels high (which it is) that means the C64 needs to be able to display at least 40 * 8 = 320 pixels horizontally in order to display 40 columns of 8x8 pixel characters. In the same manner, it need at least 25 * 8 = 200 pixels vertically in order to display 25 lines. And this is the maximum screen resolution of the C64, 320x200 pixels. In order to display 80 columns of 8x8 pixel character, the C64 must be able to display 80 * 8 = 640 pixels horizontally, which it can not (its maximum resolution is 320 pixels horizontally). But an 80 column card could do that. An 80 columns card actually gives the C64 a 640x200 pixel resolution (the screen resolution of a C128). BUT this only works for text!. The 80 columns card connects to the expansion port of the C64. The card also has cable that connects to the monitor (aaahh, the monitor..a major culprit in the demize of the 80 columns cards....but more about that later). Now with the 80 columns card installed, the monitor does not get its signal from the video/audio port of the C64. Instead it gets the signal from the 80 columns card, which gives the screen the required 640x200 resolution. Now the monitor.....much like a black and white TV can only display black and white picture eventhough the signal that it is getting contains colors, a monitor can display as clearer characters as its resolutions allows to. This means that in order to display 80 columns on screen, it is require a monitor with 640 horizonal pixel resolution (in other words, an "80 columns monitor"). If one uses an 80 columns card with an 40 columns monitor (only 320 pixels horizontally), the produced display will be much like that of softwarely achieved 80 columns display; each character having a 4x8 resolution. This happens because the monitor just didn't have enough pixels to display the characters in their true resolution. This also applies to TVs. A normal TV has a resolution equal to that of a 40 columns monitor. This is why alot of C64 users were dissapointed when they got the 80 columns card. The display was no better than the softwarely achieved 80 columns on their 40 columns monitors, which was the monitor that most people had in those days. The 1702 color monitor is/was only 40 columns). And those who knew that they needed to get 80 columns monitor in order to view the true resolution of an 80 columns card, they didn't even bother buying the 80 columns card itself, because in those days an 80 columns monitor was just too expensive. However now, prices has dropped down in all areas of electronic equipments, including 80 columns monitor. Today, you can buy a brand new 80 col monitor for under $100. But now, we can't find a manufacturer that is still making 80 columns cards for the C64 (at least, I don't know of any. Does anyone else knows of a company?). I know that Batteries Included use to make the BI-80 80 columns card, but was discontinued a year or two ago. The first version of PaperClip wordprocessor (from Batteries Included) was made so that it could be used along with the BI-80..... ..those good old days... SUGESTION::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: How about if we all mail a letter to Batteries Included, petitioning them to re-introduce the BI-80 card along with some of the softwares that use the BI-80? This can really work! When makers of the WordPerfect wordprocessor dropped their support for the Amiga line of computers, a lot of Amiga users mailed letters to them protesting about their drop, and now, work on the WordPerfect 5.0 for the Amiga continues. This could happen for the C64 too! How expensive could it be for them to re-introduce some softwares whose source code is lying on a desk gathering dust and a piece of hardware whose schematics has already been drawn and tested. I am sure that if there were enough interest they would surely jump to the opportunity. It just makes good business sense. And the need for a 80 columns card is greater than ever. Before, many people bought the C64 for entertainment. But more and more users are using the C64 for productive work. And we require clear 80 columns display for wordprocessors, spread sheets and databases. Also, as modem has become more affortable, more and more us are using our C64s for telecommunication. And we require 80 columns display to access main frames and unix system. Moreover excellent telecommunication softwares like Kermit has appear which takes advantage of the 80 columns card. So, lets start writing those letters and make a change. Their adress is: BATTERIES INCLUDED 3303 Harbor Blvd. Costa Mesa, CA. 92626 Tel: (714) 979-0920 If you like, I am allowing complete free usage of this message, as a whole or in part, to be added in your letter for this purpose. Finally, some software and hardware joggling.... If you have an 80 columns card and 80 columns monitor then you have everything you need to properly view 80 columns displays. However, what happens if you have 80 columns card with a 40 columns monitor? Is this no better then the softwarely-achieved 80 columns with a 40 columns monitor? The answer is no. You gain one important thing, speed. Softwarely-achieved 80 columns display must undergo through programming manipulation before the inputed characters (from what ever source) appear on the screen in 80 columns. This means there is a delay from the moment of input to the display of the input on the screen. Human typing is slow enough for us not to worry about his delay for worprocessing. However, modeming with a BBS or a MainFram could set a problem if the baud rate is high enough. If I am correct with software-achieved 80 columns one can communicate at 1200 baud rate fairly well, but at 2400 baud rate, it is just too fast. How about a softwarely-achieved 80 columns and a 80 columns monitor, what are the benefits and drawbacks of this setup? The drawback is as mention above speed in screen display. The benefit is that the 80 columns display on te 80 col monitor is much clear than that of a 40 col monitor. Technically it is still displaying 4x8 characters, however, on a 80 columns monitor, the individual dots are displayed more finely, so the fuzziness and blur of the characters seen on a 40 columns monitor is eliminated. 4x8 characters are still very legible if they are well defined. And this is the setup I used to access the mainframe computer of my university through the modem and type this message. Well, I hope are the information above has been informative. I never intended this message to come out to be this long, but words just kept coming out.....Next time I will shut-up more quicker :) tired but Sincerely, Scott K. Stephen
leblanc@eecg.toronto.edu (Marcel LeBlanc) (08/26/89)
In article <6072@max.acs.washington.edu> scott@max.acs.washington.edu writes: ... [long discussion about hardware requirements for good 80 columns] ... >And the need for a 80 columns card is greater than ever. Before, >many people bought the C64 for entertainment. But more and more users >are using the C64 for productive work. And we require clear 80 columns >display for wordprocessors, spread sheets and databases. Also, as I think software sales indicate that you have this backwards. The last article I read on this subject indicated that what market there may have been at one time for business software has all but vanished. Virtually all new titles being sold for the C64 are games. >modem has become more affortable, more and more us are using our >C64s for telecommunication. And we require 80 columns display to >access main frames and unix system. Moreover excellent telecommunication >softwares like Kermit has appear which takes advantage of the >80 columns card. This may be the only real potential market for 80 column cards today. But what software would support it? Marcel A. LeBlanc | University of Toronto -- Toronto, Canada leblanc@eecg.toronto.edu | also: LMS Technologies Ltd, Fredericton, NB, Canada ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UUCP: uunet!utai!eecg!leblanc BITNET: leblanc@eecg.utoronto (may work)
scott@max.acs.washington.edu (08/26/89)
In article <1989Aug25.154713.13860@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, leblanc@eecg.toronto.edu (Marcel LeBlanc) writes: > In article <6072@max.acs.washington.edu> scott@max.acs.washington.edu writes: > > .... [long discussion about hardware requirements for good 80 columns] ... > >>And the need for a 80 columns card is greater than ever. Before, >>many people bought the C64 for entertainment. But more and more users >>are using the C64 for productive work. And we require clear 80 columns >>display for wordprocessors, spread sheets and databases. Also, as > > I think software sales indicate that you have this backwards. The last > article I read on this subject indicated that what market there may have > been at one time for business software has all but vanished. Virtually all > new titles being sold for the C64 are games. Besides playing games on a C64, how many of the C64 users use their C64 for wordprocessing? A lot. Most C64 users, beside having a many games, they also have one or two word processors. And they don't want to buy another wordprocessor whose feature has no drastic improvement over the one they already got. But how many people would jump to the opportunity of upgrading their wordprocessor to a one that offers crip, clear 80 columns view of of the screen? Almost all. And this indeed will be a large market yet untapped. Moreover, with the re-introduction of an 80 columns card, now software manufacture would have the incentive to create such wordprocessor. This could not only happen for wordprocessor BUT FOR EVERY APPLICATION SOFTWARE AVAILABLE FOR THE C64, which presently are only 40 columns... Who will not take a chance is such winning-venture? Like I said in the previous message, before 80 columns card weren't feasible because of cost of 80 columns monitors and the cards itself. But now, we got the right cost, but not the right hardware. Looking at sale statistic could be misleading. The sale indicates what people are buying what is available in the market at present. It tells in no way what people need or want for the future. If games are the best software availbable for the C64 than games is surely what people will buy. Not because they like games over an application software-package, but because that is all there is. >>modem has become more affortable, more and more us are using our >>C64s for telecommunication. And we require 80 columns display to >>access main frames and unix system. Moreover excellent telecommunication >>softwares like Kermit has appear which takes advantage of the >>80 columns card. > > This may be the only real potential market for 80 column cards today. But > what software would support it? > Kermit 2.2 terminal programs support the BI-80 columns card. And I am sure that with the reintroduction of the BI-80 card or any other 80 columns card more software will be written in ways to support the card, it would be illogical not to. And I am sure I will be one of them :) Sincerely, Scott K. Stephen
kentsu@microsoft.UUCP (Kent Sullivan) (08/27/89)
In article <6072@max.acs.washington.edu>, scott@max.acs.washington.edu writes: [long discussion about resolution problems deleted] > How about if we all mail a letter to Batteries Included, petitioning > them to re-introduce the BI-80 card along with some of the softwares > that use the BI-80? This can really work! ... > And the need for a 80 columns card is greater than ever. Before, > many people bought the C64 for entertainment. But more and more users > are using the C64 for productive work. And we require clear 80 columns > display for wordprocessors, spread sheets and databases. Also, as > modem has become more affortable, more and more us are using our > C64s for telecommunication. And we require 80 columns display to > access main frames and unix system. Moreover excellent telecommunication > softwares like Kermit has appear which takes advantage of the > 80 columns card. I don't believe any letter-writing campaigns will help reinstate production of the BI-80, or any other Batteries Included product--they have long been out of business. Electronic Arts bought up all of their stock and has since closed out much of it (including Paperclip 64E). I'm not sure where the address in CA for BI came from, but I don't think it is reliable. As to the need for an 80-column display for the C-64: there really is none. I believe Ray Moody could confirm that maybe six of the hundreds of people that have asked for Kermit from Dr. Evil Labs were doing so for use with a BI-80. The card was almost prohibitively expensive when available new, and its cost would certainly be no lower these days. The board size was large enough that a custom case had to be manufactured--$$. For the value, it is much more effective to buy a C-128D (or used C-128!) to get 80 columns. Kent Sullivan Microsoft Corporation The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinions of my employer.
seven@nuchat.UUCP (David Paulsen) (08/27/89)
In article <6072@max.acs.washington.edu> scott@max.acs.washington.edu writes: >> - >> From: BRUCE WADE <from Library BBS, (206)562-2447> >> Subj: REPLY TO MSG# 34049 (606: RE: VT EMULATOR..VERY INTERESTI) >> To Usenet: You mention an 80 col. hardware card. Is that in the Commodore >> catalog, or is it available from retailers? Never heard of that before... > >There WERE a number of 80 columns cards available for the C64 >which turned the screen output of the C64 into 80 columns [description of software 80-column screen drivers deleted] >Now some mathematics, and then a reason why the 80 columns cards >didn't receive wide acceptance among the C64 users. [lots of stuff talking about the 64's 320x200 pixel resolution deleted] >The 80 columns card connects to the expansion port of the C64. The card >also has cable that connects to the monitor (aaahh, the monitor..a major >culprit in the demize of the 80 columns cards....but more about that >later). The biggest reason why 80-column cartridges never caught on was the fact that almost NOBODY WROTE ANY SOFTWARE FOR THEM. Aside from Batteries Included and Data-20, there were no vendors actually making an effort to adhere to the strict standards necessary to support 80-column text. Unless the programmer makes a concerted effort to do all his screen output through the kernal jump table, there's a zero chance the 80-column cartridge will work for that application. Furthermore, the simple existence of such a device plugged into the expansion port usually has an impact on whether or not a given software package will even boot properly... things like database managers, terminal emulators, word processors -- things you would expect to use with an 80-column setup -- flat refuse to work upon being loaded. It's very annoying having to unplug the 80-column cart everytime you want to run something that's fiercly copy-protected, for instance. >Now the monitor.....much like a black and white TV can only display >black and white picture eventhough the signal that it is getting >contains colors, a monitor can display as clearer characters as its >resolutions allows to. This means that in order to display 80 columns >on screen, it is require a monitor with 640 horizonal pixel resolution >(in other words, an "80 columns monitor"). If one uses an 80 columns >card with an 40 columns monitor (only 320 pixels horizontally), >the produced display will be much like that of softwarely achieved >80 columns display; each character having a 4x8 resolution. This happens >because the monitor just didn't have enough pixels to display the >characters in their true resolution. This also applies to TVs. True, but not entirely accurate. :-) As with most things, not all monitors are created equal. I achieved an excellent, highly readable 80-column output using my Commodore 1701 color monitor, driven by an old Batteries Included(tm) 80-column card. The 1701 is supposedly a 40-column only monitor. I also got decent results using a newer Commodore 1702 and (much later) an 1802.. surprisingly good video in fact. NOTHING like what you get from a software 80-column display. Trust me on this; I nearly went blind from watching kermit's VT-100 emulation on my 1701... The best display I ever saw came from a cheap ($79) Magnavox amber monitor... supposedly a "low resolution" monitor. In fact, I know one person who pumps the 80-columns from his C128 thru a black and white Panasonic TELEVISION. All depends on what you consider "acceptable". >This is why alot of C64 users were dissapointed when they got the >80 columns card. The display was no better than the softwarely >achieved 80 columns on their 40 columns monitors, which was the monitor >that most people had in those days. The 1702 color monitor is/was >only 40 columns). Sorry, I must disagree.. see above. >And those who knew that they needed to get 80 columns >monitor in order to view the true resolution of an 80 columns card, >they didn't even bother buying the 80 columns card itself, because in >those days an 80 columns monitor was just too expensive. I bought my fine amber Magnavox for $79, back in 1985.. exactly how far back in time are you thinking? >However now, prices has dropped down in all areas of electronic >equipments, including 80 columns monitor. Today, you can buy a >brand new 80 col monitor for under $100. But now, we can't find >a manufacturer that is still making 80 columns cards for the C64 >(at least, I don't know of any. Does anyone else knows of a >company?). Yep, B.I. was the only company with a serious commitment to 80-column hardware and software. There was a company called Data-20 that started out making 80-column adaptors for the VIC-20 (quite impressive really.. perhaps there's life in the old VIC after all, assuming you gots one o'these Data-20 carts..) and later came out with a version for the 64. They folded shortly thereafter.. and with good reason; their 80-column cartridge had major flaws. PaperClip, and B.I.'s Oracle database were the only software products I'm aware of that truly supported the 80-column hardware. Anyone else's software working would be the purest form of luck. >How about if we all mail a letter to Batteries Included, petitioning >them to re-introduce the BI-80 card along with some of the softwares >that use the BI-80? [...] A nice idea, but I don't see it happening. They dropped the cartridge for economic reasons: the dang thing cost almost as much to make as a 64 sells for at Toys'B'Us (I'm guessing). The retail on the BI-80 catridge was over $150, anyway.. in order to justify cranking out a few thousand cartridges they'd have to guarantee a market first. But my biggest reason for wanting to respond: Why would anyone pay ~$100 more when they can upgrade to a Commodore-128 with a REAL 80 column display that's supported by almost every software package out there? A COLOR 80-columns, that is built into your computer and doesn't hog your only expansion port? And unlike the primitive 80-column hardware in the BI-80, the VDC chip in the 128 has such things as hardware memory-fill and block-copy, a hardware cursor with multiple modes, various display modes including an 80-column/50-row interlaced mode, true bit-mapped high resolution, redefinable character sets, smooth scrolling, windowing.. AND its own onboard 16K or 64K memory stash that doesn't hog the system's resources. I got rid of my BI-80 and my Data-20 80-column cartdridges years ago, and now I have a Commodore-128. Which, by the way, can be coaxed into producing 80-columns even in 64 mode, if you don't mind writing the VDC-chip drivers yourself. [Batteries' Included address deleted. Lots of other stuff deleted.] >Well, I hope are the information above has been informative. >I never intended this message to come out to be this long, but >words just kept coming out.....Next time I will shut-up more quicker :) > >tired but Sincerely, >Scott K. Stephen David -- David Paulsen ..uunet!nuchat!seven ||| The Curiosity Shop BBS, 713/488-7836 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Crazy Dave's Computer Emporium: "If we don't have it, we'll get you!"
scott@max.acs.washington.edu (08/29/89)
In article <7522@microsoft.UUCP>, kentsu@microsoft.UUCP (Kent Sullivan) writes: > I don't believe any letter-writing campaigns will help reinstate production > of the BI-80, or any other Batteries Included product--they have long been > out of business. Electronic Arts bought up all of their stock and has since > closed out much of it (including Paperclip 64E). However, still someone if not BI itself must have the right to the schematic of the hardware. And he/she/they could always reintroduce that piece of the hardware if there is a market for it. And it would impact alot if we tell them personally, that there is such a market. And talking about letter-writing campaings, in the latest issue of Compute! Gazzette (Octorber issue!....yes, I know, now is only August), there is a letter-writing campaing started by a large user group, HUG, to the Commodore industry, to fight off possible rumor of the drop of the C64. And they are asking everyone to join in the campain. For more information look at the NEWS section of the October issue of Compute! Gazette. > I'm not sure where the > address in CA for BI came from, but I don't think it is reliable. The adress was gotten from September 1984 issue of Compute! Gazette from the very same ad advertizing the BI-80 card. However, Kent was somewhat correct. In looking at later issue of the magazine the US address changed, but the Canadian address remained constant. So, here is the Canadian address for those who would like to send them a mail in regards to the BI-80 card. Batteries Included 186 Queen St. West (* sorry if I have caused you *) Toronto, Ontario (* some inconvenience. *) M5V 1Z1 Canada (416) 596-1405 I truely believe that comments mailed by the public has a big impact on companies. It is a myth that businesses just simply throws away mails that they receive from the public. Their business is depended on the public likes and dislikes. And thus they can not affort to read all from people who at least know their product and has an opinion about it. > As to the need for an 80-column display for the C-64: there really is none. > I believe Ray Moody could confirm that maybe six of the hundreds of people > that have asked for Kermit from Dr. Evil Labs were doing so for use with a > BI-80. The Kermit terminal program was introduce well after the BI-80 card was discontinued. Moreover, in the documentation that accompanies the Kermit program, it states that finding a BI-80 card today is very difficult even used ones, which is true. With such drawback, it is obious to think that people didn't inquired about the BI-80 card not because they were disinterested, but because they lost all hope of finding one. Moreover, not everyone who has a BI-80 card knows that there are programs like Kermit. I found out about the Kermit terminal program only this year, almost a year after version 2.1 was released. And I am sure there are alot more people who hasn't hear of Kermit yet. > The card was almost prohibitively expensive when available new, and > its cost would certainly be no lower these days. The board size was large > enough that a custom case had to be manufactured--$$. For the value, it is > much more effective to buy a C-128D (or used C-128!) to get 80 columns. When the C64 was first introduced in costed around $250 (at least the price I remember), now it is around $130, almost a 50% reduction. And this reduction has not only happen to the C64 but to all it periperals too (as matter of fact, to entire electronic industry) some more than other of course. And I am sure that the 80 columns cards would have dropped in price to a more attractive and affortable level. And the board size would have shrinked too. :) > > Kent Sullivan > Microsoft Corporation > > The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinions > of my employer. Sincerely, Scott K. Stephen
phoenix@ms.uky.edu (R'ykandar Korra'ti) (08/30/89)
In article <6210@max.acs.washington.edu> scott@max.acs.washington.edu writes: >When the C64 was first introduced in costed around $250 (at least the >price I remember), now it is around $130, almost a 50% reduction. >And this reduction has not only happen to the C64 but to all it >periperals too (as matter of fact, to entire electronic industry) >some more than other of course. >Scott K. Stephen Actually, when the C64 was introduced, the retail price was US$595. The disk drive cost a bit less than that - around US$350 (although my memory on the cost of the drive is much shakier.) That's quite a bit of a reduction. Also, remember when CGA cards cost US$200? Now they're US$50, and only that much because nobody wants to charge less than that for ANYthing - the profit margins are too small below that, unless you mass-market. The 80 column chip in the C128 is a direct descendent of the CGA chip, isn't it? It might be possible to design a board around either that chip or the CGA chip - both would provide colour 80 columns (usable, of course, by monochrome monitors). Here's an idea: how much would it cost to make a CGA interface and driver software for the C64? -- R'ykandar. -- | "Signature V1.2.1.2..." | phoenix@ms.uky.edu | phoenix@ukma.bitnet | | "Got enough addresses, bub?" | CIS 72406,370 | PLink: Skywise | | "Alms! Alms! Laser printers for the poor!" | QLink: Bearclaw |
leblanc@eecg.toronto.edu (Marcel LeBlanc) (08/31/89)
In article <6210@max.acs.washington.edu> scott@max.acs.washington.edu writes: >In article <7522@microsoft.UUCP>, kentsu@microsoft.UUCP (Kent Sullivan) writes: ... >> As to the need for an 80-column display for the C-64: there really is none. >> I believe Ray Moody could confirm that maybe six of the hundreds of people >> that have asked for Kermit from Dr. Evil Labs were doing so for use with a >> BI-80. > >The Kermit terminal program was introduce well after the BI-80 >card was discontinued. Moreover, in the documentation that >accompanies the Kermit program, it states that finding a BI-80 >card today is very difficult even used ones, which is true. >With such drawback, it is obious to think that people didn't >inquired about the BI-80 card not because they were disinterested, >but because they lost all hope of finding one. >Moreover, not everyone who has a BI-80 card knows that there are >programs like Kermit. I found out about the Kermit terminal >program only this year, almost a year after version 2.1 was >released. And I am sure there are alot more people who hasn't >hear of Kermit yet. A better solution for crisp 80 columns may be to get Kermit to use the VDC that is normally only found in the C128 (since Kermit already has this capability). Naturally, C128 owners don't have to worry about the quality of 80 column in C64 mode because they can just switch to C128 mode. An interesting project for C64 owners would be to install an 8563 (C128 VDC) in the C64 at the same address as in a C128. This internal upgrade would leave the expansion port free for other important peripherals. Unfortunately the 8563 needs an RGBI monitor. Also, I don't know how much Commodore wants for 8563s these days. Marcel A. LeBlanc | University of Toronto -- Toronto, Canada leblanc@eecg.toronto.edu | also: LMS Technologies Ltd, Fredericton, NB, Canada ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UUCP: uunet!utai!eecg!leblanc BITNET: leblanc@eecg.utoronto (may work)
jgreco@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Joe Greco) (09/06/89)
In comp.sys.cbm article <1989Aug30.184224.12444@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, leblanc@eecg.toronto.edu (Marcel LeBlanc) wrote: >interesting project for C64 owners would be to install an 8563 (C128 VDC) in >the C64 at the same address as in a C128. This internal upgrade would leave That's something I've been considering for my BBS, which would be an ideal application for it (the program's I/O is almost entirely driver dependent, so a change like that would be easy). I've looked at the C128 schematics, and it looks like it would be childishly simple, requiring only a little work on the timing lines. -- jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu Joe Greco at FidoNet 1:154/200 USnail: 9905 W Montana Ave PunterNet Node 30 or 31 West Allis, WI 53227-3329 "These aren't anybody's opinions." Voice: 414/321-6184 Data: 414/321-9287 (Happy Hacker's BBS)