Paladin of the Pegasos
Posts: 1424 from 2003/4/13
I'll try to tackle this from the perspective of someone who has the C128 (128Dcr to be specific) as my favorite computer of all time.
Quote:
Kronos wrote:
It's not the question wether the 128 sold, but wether it made sense as a project.
That's entirely subjective and you are entitled to that opinion. I'm just trying to make the objective point that unlike C='s true failures, which there were many, C128 was not one of them. They saw a market opportunity, a niche to fill, and it worked for this model.
Quote:
1st hint is the Z80 which made it complicated/expensive to build, all for running C/PM an OS already on it's dead bed by that time. The 128mode might have made sense if it had come in updated C64 chips (maybe it did no expert on the 128).
The first part about the Z80 and CP/M mode is hard to quantify. Granted, your average home user picking up a 128 as their first computer would be clueless about CP/M, and yes CP/M was on death row by this point. OTOH there were users back then who took advantage of the CP/M mode. Its hard to say if it helped sales in any measurable way.
I will say it was not a totally worthless addition. CP/M on the 128 did have some strong points compared to its competitors in the same market segment. Other 8bit systems capable of running CP/M had major drawbacks, such as the C64 with CP/M cart, Apple II with Z80 card and even the Coleco Adam. None of them could take a CP/M floppy from a traditional dedicated CP/M system and run it, or read the data. I've read that some businesses actually used Apple II with Z80 cards in a business setting, even though getting software to execute and data on to the Apple would be a major head ache, especially back then. The 128 with 1571 (and 1581 too) could read and write practically any native CP/M disk (minus 8" obviously). I've personally taken disks like WordStar for Kaypro, put it in the 1571 and ran directly. I've taken Dbase II for Televideo, put in 1571 and run it.
So yeah, CP/M mode is an arguable point. But even if it wasn't a major selling point by 1985, it didn't degrade the system just being there.
As for the 2nd part above, updated chips, it does in a way. 64 mode is basically the same chips. The only exceptions are the SID Chip in some models (8580 SID), which is just slightly different, and the 2 MHz-capable 8502 variant. The CPU could only run full 2Mhz in 64 mode by turning off the video output. However, it could run 2mhz "in the borders" with video still active which gave a performance boost of something like 15%. There were indeed some commercial games that took advantage of the extra speed. its minor you could argue, but there is a difference.
Outside of 64 mode and in 128 mode with 80 column video (separate RGBi output) is a different story. It had its own video chip, the VDC and obviously an extra 64K of base RAM. The 128 could DMA memory between banks. Commodore dropped the ball a little by advertising the 80 Column mode (VDC) was text only. However software developers and hobbyists quickly discovered that not to be the case. The VDC had enormous gfx capability. The most significant use of the 80 column mode was Geos 128 Operating System. Geos 128 was heads and shoulders over Geos 64 and was very widely used. In 80 column mode you also got the full 2Mhz CPU speed.
Quote:
What it should have been.
C64CR as super-cheap base and an 128 that just offered bit more while costing only extra pennies, just like A500 vs A500+.
So yes, add "HighRes" (aka 80 col), yes add a bit more RAM, yes add the floppy (that everyone had to have anyways) and maybe add some MHz.
If that didn't work, start developing the A1000CR 2 years earlier (aka A500).
When the A500 came out, the C128 was still selling strong. This is what I think you are missing here. The cost of a C128 with 1571 was still less than half of an A500. My first Amiga was an A500. Without getting deep in my personal story, I was underwhelmed by the A500 in many ways. Yes I grew to love the Amiga, but a reasonable 128 setup verses an Amiga 500 setup in ~87-89, the 128 easily won IMO. It was far cheaper too.
Also as mentioned above, the 128 did have expanded gfx capabilities. Those were vastly underused outside of Geos 128, Basic 8 and a few other programs. Here are a couple examples.
VDC Mode ManiaVDC Demo (On real hardware, uploaded by me almost a decade ago. The choppiness in the video was due to YT compression, it was not present on the real hardware or my recording).
Gunfright 128/VDC version (We are starting to get a number of new game ports that take advantage the 128/VDC mode. C= should have advertised this feature).
Hopefully not TLDR. I am a C128 fanboy
-Edit-
I spent a good part of my teen years online using BBSes. I was almost always in 128/80 column mode using BobsTerm 128, and later Desterm. There was no comparing with terminal programs in 64 mode. 40 column just didn't cut it for PC based BBSes, and "soft80" was hard on the eyes. You also get faster rs232 speeds in 128/80 column fast mode (2mhz).
[ Edited by redrumloa 22.03.2019 - 14:33 ] 
