Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!nuchat!seven From: seven@nuchat.UUCP (David Paulsen) Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm Subject: Re: 80 columns Card for the C64 Summary: Why not a C-128 instead? Message-ID: <13876@nuchat.UUCP> Date: 27 Aug 89 07:31:36 GMT References: <6064@max.acs.washington.edu> <6072@max.acs.washington.edu> Reply-To: seven@nuchat.UUCP (David Paulsen) Organization: Crazy Dave's Computer Emporium, Houston Lines: 146 In article <6072@max.acs.washington.edu> scott@max.acs.washington.edu writes: >> - >> 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... > >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!"