If you could have changed one thing about the VIC...?

ral-clan · Post by **ral-clan** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:49 am

Boray wrote:Those who like more memory and a 40 column display? Why aren't you at a c64 forum???

While I suggested 40 columns for the VIC, that was merely on the suggestion that if the VIC had 40 columns from the start then our favourite computer have sold better - been more successful - been around longer. If the VIC had 40 columns then the C64 might not have been developed for several more years.

But personally, I like the 22 column mode of the VIC. It's rather cute and can prove to be a benefit rather than a detriment when making custom-character games.

PaulQ · Post by **PaulQ** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:13 am

I think we also need to bear in mind that a 40 column display would have required nearly twice the memory for mapping than the 22 column display did. We also need to bear in mind the competition of the day, such as the Timex Sinclair ZX-81, also only boasted a 22 column display, but without colour nor a real keyboard.

vic user · Post by **vic user** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:35 am

since this is just fantasy, and i don't have to worry about how much it would have cost or how much memory, etc..,

i would trade colour for a 40 column display, keeping the user port.

PaulQ · Post by **PaulQ** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:01 am

Some of these suggestions are sounding a lot like what the Commodore 16 was. Maybe if they had Bill Shatner selling it...

Boray · Post by **Boray** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:06 am

ral-clan wrote: But personally, I like the 22 column mode of the VIC. It's rather cute and can prove to be a benefit rather than a detriment when making custom-character games.

Exactly. The big characters is the main reason why it's possible to make fun playable basic games on the vic-20. On the c64 you need twice the processing power to move a graphics object of the same size (that not is a sprite) compared to the vic-20. The sprites of the c64 just makes it even more difficult in my opinion... And extending the basic with commands to move them (c128) makes the basic much slower. So the vic-20 is by far the best Commodore computer if you want to make a game in basic.

PaulQ · Post by **PaulQ** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:57 am

I would've thought the Commodore 16 was the best Commodore computer for making games in BASIC, what with its faster 1.76 Mhz processor and BASIC 3.5...though I've never actually tried it, so I could be mistaken.

Schlowski · Post by **Schlowski** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:43 am

The C-16 is remarkably slow compared to the VIC, I think it's because of the enhanced BASIC and because the 1.76MHz are only achieved if you do not access the screen or I/O. Then the frequency is only 50%, if memory serves correct...

So the bigger screen in conjunction with the speed decrease makes the C-16 more unusable for BASIC games than the C-64.

Code: Select all

10 T1=TI
20 FOR I=1 TO 1000:PRINT"{HOME}A":NEXT
30 T1=TI-T1
40 PRINT T1

results:
C-16: 384
VIC: 154

Boray · Post by **Boray** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:43 pm

http://user.tninet.se/~pug510w/datormuseum/qbench.html

carlsson · Post by **carlsson** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 3:50 pm

As far as I know, the ZX-81 uses a display file of 32 columns x 24 rows, of which the last two rows are reserved for system messages.

Didn't Brian Bagnall last year reveal that the 40 column version of the VIC-I chip (6562/63) was under development already before the launch of VIC-20, but wasn't finished and bug-free in time, so they decided to use the older ~22 column version?

How about the developers had fixed the bugs in the serial transfer protocol, so they could've delivered a significantly faster disk drive access to begin with? Ok, very little VIC software came on floppy disk anyway, so maybe it would not make any difference.

ral-clan · Post by **ral-clan** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 5:31 pm

Yeah. Fixing the serial port chip bug would have be a "wish list" fix that wouldn't change the original VIC design nor add to the expense.

Ok, very little VIC software came on floppy disk anyway, so maybe it would not make any difference.

Brian Bagnall makes the claim that NO software was released for the VIC-20 on disk. This is incorrect. I have photos of software released for the VIC on disk, some of it even by Commodore itself.

carlsson · Post by **carlsson** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:19 pm

Well, if you were in Jack Tramiel's clothes, time is money. Both in wages to the development team and in lost sales because the groundbreaking colour computer not yet is available for purchase.

Post by **Jeff-20** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:12 pm

I retract my suggestions. I guess I wouldn't really change anything. Even the built-in characters I suggested would take away from the programmer's fun in making custom characters. I always felt the lower case set was useless to me (but perhaps not so for other programmers).

carlsson · Post by **carlsson** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:22 am

For word processing (no, I'm not kidding) purposes, text adventures and similar applications, the lower case is very useful. It was also a strong marketing argument, or rather a company could not afford to skip it as competitors would quickly point out when e.g. Apple didn't include a lower case on their computers. It is a bit like having a keyboard with proper keys; something we take for granted today but 25 years ago every key was counted (computer A: 62 keys, computer B: 67 keys, computer C: 71 keys) in the comparative specs.

Stinky · Post by **Stinky** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:56 am

I love the bizarre, almost arbitrary graphical and memory quirks. The peculiar aspect ratio and freaky memory map are works of art in my eyes, not really of any use but aesthetically endearing.

Similarly, the Speccy's dot-crawl bugs and stupid buzzer, and the ZX81's wobbly RAM pack and barely acceptible display hearken back to a time of innocence and wonder. It didn't matter how shit it was, it was a computer.

But if I wish one thing was fixed, it would have to be the serial routines. I hate that stupid 1541!

PaulQ · Post by **PaulQ** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:23 am

According to Boray's link, it actually looks like a C128 running at 2Mhz is going to be the best BASIC machine.

I always remembered the ZX-81 being 22 columns, but I'm probably wrong. It probably was 32 columns.

Jeff-20 wrote:I retract my suggestions. I guess I wouldn't really change anything. Even the built-in characters I suggested would take away from the programmer's fun in making custom characters. I always felt the lower case set was useless to me (but perhaps not so for other programmers).

Carlsson's right; I do recall that people actually used the Vic 20 for word processing. Clearly not WYSIWYG word processing, but still doable even on a 22 column display. I recall "The Quick Brown Fox" being a big name Vic 20 word processor which was probably responsible for selling a lot of Vics to students tired of banging away on old typewriters. Considering that word processing was the "Killer App" of the day that sold most computers, I think that giving it the best computer keyboard in its class and then not offering lower case capability would have killed it.

Then there was the world of BBS's and message boards; a world which the Vic provided the cheapest point of entry. This is another aspect where having lower case letters is definitely an advantage.

Perhaps the Vic was as perfect as it could be in its day and age for its price range. Considering the limited size of programs that the Vic could load, even the serial routines would not have been noticable...at least on an unexpanded Vic.