Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!archimedes.math.uwm.edu!jgreco From: jgreco@archimedes.math.uwm.edu (Joe Greco) Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm Subject: Re: Piracy and Software Keywords: give me a break Message-ID: <5415@uwm.edu> Date: 28 Jul 90 22:28:08 GMT References: <631@beguine.UUCP> Sender: news@uwm.edu Organization: University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee - Department of Mathematics Lines: 90 In comp.sys.cbm article <631@beguine.UUCP>, Perry.Stokes@samba.acs.unc.edu (BBS Account) wrote: :Oh Really? I guess you've not heard of CMD making SCSI drives for the C=64 :that can handle upto 700MB of storage. Not to mention the fact that a c64 :with 20MB harddrive has more space than a 20MB IBM harddrive. What miracle of compression technology allows this? As far as I've seen, 20*1024*1024 bytes always is 20*1024*1024, allowing for differences in bad sector allocations and all... :Your average c64 game can fit on one double sided 1541 disk. <340K total> : :The average IBM game takes up much :more than that. : :So If I can fit 20 IBM games on a 20 MB PC harddrive Its a safe bet that you :can fit get 3 times that on your 20MB c64 drive. After all there is a large :difference between 64K and 640K. And I can actually fit one or two 10-megabyte Xwindow based games on a 20-megabyte harddrive. The size of a program tends to be based on the complexity of the computer and the intelligence of the compiler. Most IBM programs are compiled. Most 64 programs are written in assembly (at least games and the like). This is due to limited speed and limited memory: any assembly guru will happily spend a few hours why assembly code is so much more efficient than compiled code. :Another thing to consider is the fact that a 20MB harddrive for the c64 :costs the same as an IBM XT with a 20MB drive. Last I looked, a 20Mb for the 64 was ~$600. A ballpark figure for an ST225 might be about $200. Kindly let me in on the secret. My figures are a little old, but I have a hard time believing it. :Could you elaborate on this statement? Which graphics configuration are :you speaking of? Sure the cheapest color setup does not look :a whole hell of a lot better than a c64 but it can at least do decent 80 :columns. You're right, it looks worse. :Paint Show Plus looks much better on my CGA monitor than doodle looks on a c64. Use the same monitor. :Gif files look much nicer on the same monitor for my IBM and they don't take :20 minutes to print on the screen. Don't use a GIF reader in BASIC. If you used a BASIC GIF reader on an IBM, it'd take 30 minutes. ;-) :ANSI graphics look MUCH nicer than Commodore Color Graphics. I don't believe the ANSI graphics standard was around in 1977 when Commodore introduced the PET. Commodore engineered a most efficient line-graphics system on a machine that had no hires capability. By the way, my opinion of ANSI is quite low. :Don't get me wrong; I like my c64 a whole lot and use it daily even though :I have an XT and am about to close a deal on a 25 MHz 386 w/ vga. Don't make so many opinionated statements. I work on machines ranging from a VIC-20 which has a grand resolution of something like 192*172 and 8/16 colors and perhaps .01 MFLOPS (grin) to IBM RS/6000's with a resolution of over 1024*1024 and many colors and something more than 20 MFLOPS. The 64 is neither of these extremes. It is a very successful, popular machine. It is a reasonable machine. It's growing older. It will die, eventually. But it's still kicking. :Its the best 8bit I've seen and is much cheaper than an Apple II. : :I just wish people would quit acting as if it is the best computer in the world. I don't think anybody is. It's one of the better 8 bit machines and a lot of people out there would like to see it stay around. And it will; there's a very large investment in it. There's always something that's better or worse, and for many people the 64 is a good compromise. Now, I'm just wondering what all this has to do with the original question? :Perry Stokes ... Joe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Greco - University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee - Department of Mathematics jgreco@archimedes.math.uwm.edu USnail: Joe Greco Voice: 414/321-6184 9905 W. Montana Ave. Data: 414/321-9287 (Happy Hacker's BBS) West Allis, WI 53227-3329 #include Disclaimer: I don't speak for the Math Department, the University, or myself.