Denial

pitcalco wrote:What was worse was the Commodore vs. Apple II rivalry going on in school which even broke down into fisticuffs in the lunch hall.

You actually knew people who had Apple IIs? They were never very common in Sweden, probably due to being so expensive; I've still never seen one in real life. When I had my VIC and later my C64 (VIC: 1982-84, C64: 1984-87, when I was 12-17 years old) I knew lots of people with C= computers (mostly C64s), one with a Sinclair ZX81, one with a Sinclair Spectrum, and one with a TI99.

I seem to remember that we sometimes poked fun at the ZX81 owner in a friendly way, but there were never any real fights over the systems.

I did start out at the receiving end of these system rivalry fights, too. When I had my Vic 20, I was mocked and laughed at by peers fortunate enough to have a Commodore 64. Eventually, when I did get my Commodore 64, a friend of mine said he had an Apple II, and stated that it was very much superior to the Commodore. When I came over to check out this amazing computer, I was really disappointed. I pointed out the clearly inferior sound, very poor and choppy animation within the games, lousy color saturation, and the odd joystick controllers. I offered to show him the exact same games he was playing on my C64, but he wanted to do nothing of the sort. He got quite upset with me, and didn't want to be my friend anymore.

i got the c64 and here is what i said about these other computers back in the days....

1. vic20(unexpanded): pong machines are so dated now...

2. zx spectrum: no joystick ports?, no monitor connection?, where is the sound it only gives out a peep, is it a calculator with rubber keys?...

3. amstrad cpc: no hardware sprites and gaming area is to small, what a irritating sound it got... but it got great colors...


there was a few quarrels but never fights, after they visit me and played with the c64 most of them agreed that the c64 was better... a few never did accept that their computer was not better than the c64. specially one of my best friends that owned the amstrad cpc, but today he agree that the c64 was the better choice because of the hardware sprite and sid chip.....

Bacon wrote:

pitcalco wrote:What was worse was the Commodore vs. Apple II rivalry going on in school which even broke down into fisticuffs in the lunch hall.

You actually knew people who had Apple IIs? They were never very common in Sweden, probably due to being so expensive; I've still never seen one in real life. When I had my VIC and later my C64 (VIC: 1982-84, C64: 1984-87, when I was 12-17 years old) I knew lots of people with C= computers (mostly C64s), one with a Sinclair ZX81, one with a Sinclair Spectrum, and one with a TI99.

I seem to remember that we sometimes poked fun at the ZX81 owner in a friendly way, but there were never any real fights over the systems.

I knew lots of people with Apple IIs. ( I lived abroad in the 80s) On the otherhand, I never saw any Timex Sinclairs. They were not marketed in any of the countries I was in during that decade.

I have to admit that, yes, I looked down at my friend's computer compared to mine...He had a ZX81, and I had an Atari 400. But believe me, I was jealous of what he could make that computer do. He knew his ZX81 so much better than I knew my Atari 400.

But since then, he probably hasn't given his ZX81 a second thought, whereas I have continued to learn and develop for my Atari.

--Hawk

pitcalco wrote:Say, does anyone remember from his or her youth ( that is those who were teenagers or younger in the 80's) any rivalries at school depending on what computer you had?

Being born in 1959 the answer is obvious: there weren't any real home computers yet. The first computer I saw was IIRC a Digital and we had to operate it with telewriters.

My first home computer was a C64 and I choose it because it was technically much more advanced then many other computers:
- RAM under ROM
- Sourcelistings available
- Schematics available
- 512 bytes free space for own use
To be honest at that time I only knew the VIC-20, C64 and Sinclair Spectrum. The VIC-20 was too small, seen from a technical point of view. And I disliked the keys of the Speccy and the fact they used the address lines for decoding the keyboard. On it self a quit ingenious idea but for someone wanting to tinker with the hardware a disaster.

RobertBe wrote:

Jeff-20 wrote:I haven't really heard much about the new Commodore C=XX.

Well, I posted news about it on the Homestead, commodor, acug0447, and auscbm mailing lists. Also posted it to http://cbm.videocam.net.au . Also posted it at the newsgroups, comp.sys.cbm, alt.c64, rec.games.video.classic, comp.sys.amiga.misc, and alt.folklore.computers

Truly,
Robert Bernardo
Fresno Commodore User Group
http://videocam.net.au/fcug

WHAT?! WHERE?! HOW?! WHEN?! Is this some sort of revival Commodore 8-bit? I really missed this one. Can't find the article at the above link....

However, if this is just those new Commodore badged Windows gaming boxes with the fancy paint jobs, then I already knew about those.

ral-clan wrote:However, if this is just those new Commodore badged Windows gaming boxes with the fancy paint jobs, then I already knew about those.

It's one of those Commodore-badged Windows gaming boxes.

Truly,
Robert Bernardo
Fresno Commodore User Group
http://videocam.net.au/fcug

...with a fancy paint job. You already know about those.

Ruud: 512 bytes free on a C64? That surely must be one with defective RAM chips, or maybe you talked about the VIC-10, a.k.a. UltiMAX?

In middle school, only a few of us owned a computer. I had inherited my brother's VIC-20, there was another guy who's dad had a VIC-20 and one family with a TI-99. It took until a few years later before more classmates owned a computer at all, at that time C64. The guy with the TI-99 was the first to buy an Amiga 500 by the way, going from 16 bits to 16 bits.

Technically, the Amiga had a 32 bit processor.

DigitalQuirk wrote:Technically, the Amiga had a 32 bit processor.

I always wondered about this.....the 68000 is 16-bit, right?

I thought the Amiga (i.e. the 500) had a 16-bit processor but 32 bit architecture (i.e a 32 bit bus). Not that I more than vaguely understand what any of this means...

ral-clan wrote:

DigitalQuirk wrote:Technically, the Amiga had a 32 bit processor.

I always wondered about this.....the 68000 is 16-bit, right?

I thought the Amiga (i.e. the 500) had a 16-bit processor but 32 bit architecture (i.e a 32 bit bus). Not that I more than vaguely understand what any of this means...

Actually, its 68000 processor was a 32 bit processor internally, with a 16 bit data bus and a 24 bit address bus. So really, it was a hybrid 16/32 bit system with 8 bit sound.

And the funny thing is, a lot of people like to compose music MODs on the Amiga just because of its 8-bit Paula sound chip! They like the grittier sound. So something that was its weak point (well, actually it was good in 1985 when the Amiga was released) is now an attraction.

I was an arcade junkie, so of course, I wanted a Colecovision for my 15th birthday. imo, they had the best selection of home-based arcade titles. Never did get one though until several years later!

My parents finally bought a Vic, because it was deemed by them to be "more educational". It was supposed to be my Dad's machine, because he was an instructor...but I monopolized it!