Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!netcom!ergo From: ergo@netcom.UUCP (Isaac Rabinovitch) Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: HELP: programming Nintendo's Message-ID: <12577@netcom.UUCP> Date: 23 Jul 90 06:18:33 GMT References: <4035@celery20.UUCP> <538@telxon.UUCP> <13264@cbmvax.commodore.com> Distribution: na Organization: UESPA Lines: 30 In <13264@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >In article bianco@cs.odu.edu (David J. Bianco) writes: >Nintendos are apparently _almost_ 6502 powered, which would make sense, since >at the time (and still, thanks to Nintendo), 6502 assembler was pretty much >the universal language of video game writers. In any case, to avoid paying >any royalties to Commodore Semiconductor Group (formerly MOS Technology), >the CPU in these boxes is a 6502-ish critter with the appropriate patented >sections hacked out. Royalties? On a CPU? Well, I won't quibble with your buzzwords, but it's difficult to see how using a proprietary CPU could be less expensive than buying an existing chip, even if you have to buy it from your competitors. *Especially* the 6502, whose main appeal is its price. I seem to recall a story that the Apple I was 6502-based because they couldn't afford 8008s! On the other hand, Nintendo might've come up with a chip of their own just because they thought they could do a better job (I dunno about hardware, but it's often a motive in software -- too often the *main* motive) but stuck with the 6502 instruction set because that's what they knew. -- ergo@netcom.uucp Isaac Rabinovitch atina!pyramid!apple!netcom!ergo Silicon Valley, CA uunet!mimsy!ames!claris!netcom!ergo "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know!" -- Ralph Waldo Emerson