What if... C=64 Plus

[Charlie]

I know what if threads are pretty pointless, but sometimes bring up interesting discussion non-the-less. So here's a thought to throw out there:

Rather than a C=128 or a C=65, both of which could be arguably regarded as less than successful than hoped, what if C= followed up the release of the C=64 fairly quickly with a C=64+..? By that I mean a C=64 in a larger case with expansion slots, something like an Apple II.

My thinking goes something like this:
The Apple II was a success initially because it was one of the first 'decent' home computers to make it to market. But it lasted years beyond what it's headline specs would seem to justify, why? My feeling is that while it remained barely good enough as arguably better machines came out those expansion slots allowed for easy upgrades and expansions, along with diversification in to markets the Apple II was never intended to enter.
On the other hand, of course, the C=64 was a huge success but C= rather struggled to follow it up with a popular product. What if C= had brought out a 'big brother' within a year or two of the launch of the C=64? Basically the same hardware but with those extra expansion slots?

I wonder what the ongoing implications may have been for both C= and the personal computer industry at large? Thoughts?

 

[comraider]

C= would have had to release the 'big brother' shortly after the C64 to avoid the problem they had with the C128 (which you could call a 'big brother' of the C64): a plethora of C64 consumers, and little incentive for third parties to make something to utilize the extra capability of the C128.

The problem with that is, I don't think the C64 would have become the hit that it did if C= had pursued the 'plus' product strategy. The plus strategy depends on enough demand for third parties to make software and hardware that utilizes the addons. But if this had happened, the non-plus consumers would have been directly hurt by missing out on all of the new stuff. Planned obsolescence worked for Apple with the iPhone line, but it probably wouldn't have worked for C= in the 80s with a nascent personal computer industry.

IMHO the Amiga was the 'big brother' that should have taken over for folks ready to move into the next level of computing. C= marketing just dropped the ball on that one.

 

[SaviorX]

given how many expansions the C64 received in it's lifetime utilizing the Cartridge port, as well as the user port and IEC serial port, it probably would have made good use of a TI99 style PEB type of device that could have connected via all 3, and allowed it this level of expansion without 're-imagining' the C64 itself.

also bear in mind that the Apple IIGS was a 'souped up' Apple II or even a Mac 'jr' with full expansion capabilities (as well a a 2.8mhz CPU and 4x the RAM stock at release) and the C64 outlasted it in the marketplace by 2 years...expandability was certainly secondary to price. (not to mention the C64 was still a very good game system up to the end, almost on a par IMO to the NES, and had many superior RPGs)

 

[protek]

The Vic-20 actually had an expansion chassis, the Vic 1020: http://sleepingelephant.com/denial/wiki/index.php?title=VIC-1020_expansion_chassis

- - - Updated - - -

The biggest issue in the C64 scene, imo, is the die-hard sticking to the base setup, basically the C64/1541 combo, and hence the unwillingness to accept any innovations that would take the C64 beyond its boundaries.

In the Spectrum scene people embrace expansions that remove color clash or expand the color palette, but C64 people don’t even want the enhanced VIC that is in the Hummer which is a derivative of C64 DTV.

I’d love to see something that would push the 64’s boundaries while still maintaining the backwards compatibility.

 

[SaviorX]

but it was little more than a cartridge port expander really (just a really good one), the C64 also had cartridge port expanders, not quite the same thing. (in the day they usually still only allowed you to utilize one device on the cartridge port at the same time...I think CMD did a few things that allowed pass-though)

like I say, a PEB type device would be cool, but then someone would also have to make compatible devices (that could address themselves separately on the bus and work concurrently, RAM expansion, modems/network, additional SID, drives (especially hard drives), CF/SD reader, CPU upgrade AND still take carts )

 

[Charlie]

Hmm. Interesting thoughts chaps, do keep them coming. In the meantime barace yourselves for a lengthy post.

I have a reason to bring this subject up, apart from idle interst, which I admit my be grounded in a warped perspective. BIYD: My first proper home computer was a BBC B (on loan from my father's work on the understanding that it would remain on perment loan if I could write some software to run on it that the useless IT department claimed was impossible to do on the work mainframe - challence accepted and won!)

It was a great computer, very expandable, with a lot of external ports and internal sockets that one would think would be more than enough - far more than just about any other computer of the time, just no expansion slots. I have to say I was fully satisfied with it, and admit to a certain sense of 'superiority' over my Speccy and even C=64 owning friends as a result...

...move on (far too many) years and I have a strong interest in retro computing, to the point where I own & use a good number of systems that I never got to play with back in the day along with old favourites. Two of those systems being a C=64 and more recently an Apple II. My belated comparison of the two systems got me to thinking on this subject, and I wan't aware this 'what if' had come up before.

C=64 - A great system that I'd have been entirely happy with had circumstances dropped one on my lap instead of a Beeb. Having said that it's appallingly slow and cumbersome I/O which today is a non-issue courtesy of modern upgrades would have driven me nuts back in the day and would have very much restricted the machine to a 'games system' for me.
BBC B - Also a great system, and with hindsight I'm glad that's the computer that came home as while I was obviously jealous of the larger library of often better games to be had on the C=64 the Beeb had enough and I really appreciated all the extra things it could do without much hassle.

-This is in no way meant to be a pointless retrospective 'my computer is better than your computer' argument. Stick with me I'm coming to the point.

Apple II - So may years later I've purchased one of these, and after a good year of playing with it I'm almost ashamed for my Beeb memories to report it's currently my favourite 8 bit system. Why? Well certainly not for it's graphical and sound capabilities, the C=64 has it beaten hands down there in most areas. It's not for the machine's speed, system software, or elegance of it's archetecture, the Beeb has it thoroughly beaten there too.
No, it's those darn expansion slots, which are for me such a game-changer because of the virtually unlimited possibilities they present. I can honestly say I haven't enjoyed myself with an old computer so much in a long time, and had I known I'd have probably sold my soul for an Apple II back in the day - and that's a hard thing to say for a person who has always had a hard time with so many aspects of Apple and their rabid fan-boys for very many years.

I'm well aware that my view of the past is warped by the lens of time and nostalgia, but this revelation got me thinking. While I was at the time very happy with 'my' Beeb, the addition of proper expansion slots would have actually made one hell of a difference and I suspect the reason Apple got to both neglect and milk the Apple II for so many years - you just don't know what proper expansion slots can do for you if you don't have them...
...which then brought me back to the C=64 and what I know of C= history. They had a huge hit on their hands that they couldn't successfully follow up, or ultimately sustain. There are, of course, lots of good and bad reasons for that but I think a real biggie was this:
C=64, great. Get a FDD, some kind of fast load cartridge, than what? A user is bound to move on the something else once they have either outgrown it, or technology has moved on. C= saw this, hence the 128 and later dabbling with the 65, but the 128 was never the hit the company hoped they would be, why? It was perceived as not enough of a step-up for too much money by many of the public, and what software company in it's right mind would code exclusively for a 'niche' system? Catch 22, I believe.
By contrast (luck or judgement) Apple included slots in their 'inferior' machine and not only did this open up an array of possibilities (foreseen and unforeseen) for the machine that extended it's life for the company, for the user there was less need to overcome the inertia of ditching a familiar system for something better because you just upgraded it, and so Apple and their third parties kept you as a customer.

And this gets me, finally, to my point. C=64 - the most successful home computer ever. With the above in mind what might have happened if there was an official variant that was properly expandable? To put it another way Steve Jobs nearly killed Apple by perusing the Mac instead of running with the IIgs... Also, as far as I'm aware, Chuck Peddle left C= because he and JT couldn't see eye-to-eye over the direction of the company. An expandable C=64 may have kept him happy, and I suspect JT would have changed his mind if an expandable C=64 had become the further success I'm wondering about...
...um, IBM came along with a less than brilliant machine, put expansion slots in it and the rest is history - overly simplistic, but I hope I've gotten my point across.

If I'd have sold my soul for an Apple II back in the day, had I known about them, what would I have done for a machine like a C=64 with the same feature?

Further thoughts?

 

[TheCorfiot]

Good Post Charles but in fairness to the Beeb, It's 1MHz Bus, which could be daisy chained did exactly the job as the Apples Expansion slots and with better firmware support.
Add to the fact that to add on or utilise the Bus you didn't need to Manufacture a slot style PCB, Just a length of IDC Cable and a Home made breadboard.

But yes to me the Apple II has a Charm all of its own, primarily due to its designs reliance on Software control and use rather than hardware features being implemented. The Disc Drive system in itself is so innovative and Hardware sparse yet outruns a 1541 lol.

 

[SaviorX]

the only shame about the Apple II was that it was so damned expensive back in the day, the average person simply wasn't able to have one (they were, however..what we got to use in schools back then) - the C64 was literally 1/4 the price of an Apple II when it hit the shelves... (not to mention 64K vs 48K, SID vs....beep...well, beep and crunch)

most people who think Apple think Jobs..but for me it was all Woz...Woz i tell ya..

anyhow, as far as 'expansion' goes, the C64 itself had plenty of expandability for the average owner, what with having a Cart port (which allowed for more than just 'software') a User port (which, seems to me wound up sporting either a modem or a non-Commodore printer about 99% of the time) an IEC port (which did see it's share of drive upgrades over the years, in particular) a tape drive port, and joystick ports (which, in addition to joysticks saw many devices such as paddles, mouse, trackball...even voice-activation, like the 'Lipstick')

Apple II and C64 are probably tied for me as favorite 8-bit comp, I still have a soft spot for VIC20 as it was probably the first comp I ever saw in the stores and really wanted (Blue Meanies from Outer Space iirc) (though I wanted an Atari2600 more at that time), I have both an Atari 600XL and 800XL, but I'd really rather have the original 'space invader' looking 800... the TI99/4A was the first one any of my circle of friends ever had, this really was the best of times for computing imo...every single system seemed to have it's own 'character'

plus when you are 10-13 years old....ALL of this stuff is cool...well....5 or 6 these days :/

 

[freehand]

The C128 came out the same time as the ST so was dead in the water to start with.

I still have mine but need's a power supply.

 

[SaviorX]

5 months before the ST and 6 before the Amiga...it was never going to last (or even pick up much ground to begin with)

it was largely a bone thrown to 64 users who *did* want an 'upgraded' machine...

 

[freehand]

Shame really is a nice system was the first I learned assembler on still have many printed listing

 

[SaviorX]

It qualifies as my favorite version of the 64 (I have 1 flat + a D(CR) + 1 flat spare)

with a 512KB expansion (or more for that matter) plus 1571/1581 drives, it really was a very good 'windows' (GEOS) machine

I haven't got into the demos which utilize the VRAM upgrade, but i hear they are fantastic as well...

plus .SID and .MOD were well cool before MP3 and even MIDI

 

[RuneRider]

Had Commodore been able to focus on a very few key product lines such as the 64 & Amiga and stick to research on both incremental as well as major improvements for these rather than spreading out over the perhaps dozen or more different systems and PC clones they had teams working on at any given time, we'd likely have watched the 64 and it's never seen successors live even longer.

One thing I've learned over the years is just how much energy and time Commodore wasted trying to make the next big thing in every different niche of computing.

 

[SaviorX]

Had Commodore been able to focus on a very few key product lines such as the 64 & Amiga and stick to research on both incremental as well as major improvements for these rather than spreading out over the perhaps dozen or more different systems and PC clones they had teams working on at any given time, we'd likely have watched the 64 and it's never seen successors live even longer.

One thing I've learned over the years is just how much energy and time Commodore wasted trying to make the next big thing in every different niche of computing.

case in point?

View attachment 132863

 

[protek]

For me, one intriguing machine back in the day was the Memotech MTX series. I never owned one but I did see adverts and tests of it. It’s a shame it didn’t succeed as its feature set was pretty good both hardware and software side. It was my holy grail until I finally scored one locally.

The Commodore 8-bit series of course has a soft spot in my heart. Having grown up with a Vic-20 and a C64 they will be always special to me.

If I could find an Oric Atmos from somewhere, I’d consider my collection complete.

 

[Retrograde]

Had Commodore been able to focus on a very few key product lines such as the 64 & Amiga and stick to research on both incremental as well as major improvements for these rather than spreading out over the perhaps dozen or more different systems and PC clones they had teams working on at any given time, we'd likely have watched the 64 and it's never seen successors live even longer.

One thing I've learned over the years is just how much energy and time Commodore wasted trying to make the next big thing in every different niche of computing.

This!

Imagine a world where we have C64, SX64, GS64, C128, C128D, C128DCR, A500, A1000, A1500, A2000, Plus4, C16, PC1, PC10, PC20, PC30 etc.
And then you tack on the C64+, with more bus slots.
Which would fit in where between a C64, a C128, and an A500 in price point and capability?

By that time if you want a substantially better machine, you go for an entry level Amiga which runs circles around the C64 in every possible way.

I mean GEOS is cute and all but pair an A500 or Atari ST with a monitor, possibly some RAM and you have a competent system for word processsing, spreadsheets, music composition, image editing, light video editing, programming, etc.

 

[Gunstarrhero]

ive been saying this.

commodore cut back so much it wasnt even funny. if the c64 would have included 1 isa slot it would have been the most phenomenal computer next to its "dumbed down" success. i say dumbed down because even at that time, the "inside" of the industry were already working on 256 colour machines, 16.8 million colour machines, and memmory regardless of cost didnt have to be burned clocked down, just like the processors were. look at the amiga, the 68k was put into many machines and was used in arcade machines all over the world, this to my belief was done to ruin its true value in success, take a look at the arcade aspect most of the 68k's were running at 50mhz, either as a 30 or as it self. then look at the clock value of the same processor in the 2000, its 14 mhz...... the point is, they clocked everything down and underrun it so much they wanted us to believe that what we were getting was a HUGE DEAL. it wasnt. im sure the 68k can clockup, not overvoltage(overclock) to a range of 100mhz easy without beginning to overheat. then take a look at memory capacity, it could have been burned(written) with instructions that allow it a greater capacity than they were allowing, thats what a C-MAT system does, it clocks chips and sets voltage ratings per clock percentage. the point is, the c64 was severely underrun for its time and was a huge success because of the SID chip. i believe.

the 128D was the computer that was supposed to be on the same level as the A500 and from what i understand was also to have included 4 isa slots, why didnt this computer see the light of day? it wasnt just poor planning, it was the fact that the processor level was severly under clocked from the 13-25mhz range. regardless of its type, take a look at the most peculiar aspect, commodore claims the 6502/6510 was only capable of handling 64k of memory, why is that the 128 handles 128k of memory? now, i believe it was handling all 128k, i also came to the conclusions they paged the kernal rom to allow it to handle 64k twice, and just accumulated. and further more, the 128d was also supposed to be a 286 of its type in range on that level with the ibm pc xt/at clones. also, one more thing i believe: the z80 is a 5mhz chip, there was a z80 on board the 128... it was clocked down to 1mhz. if they can clock them down and regulale voltage on an instruction set, they can be upclocked the same, contention kept in had the whole way through until overheating starts. the difference is set between needing a heat sink and requiring water cooling or a fan and heatsink combo. dont forge geos in vga mode now (resolution). same chip as the c64, more memory, same vic II chip. high resolution do to a simple instruction set on the board. all of which could have been granted to the c64 even through an rs-232 card. the point is, if the c128 can sit that high for a second, can you imagine what it would have been like to see an isa specific card mounting a 68k and more memory, the computer practically sits amiga. now what about a vampire card? the 6510/6502 sits in the same step next to the 68k. cant be that difficult to built an accelerator for the type. would be nice to see a new cell based gui for the type as well and a shell operated prompt bash or hash type as a main run operating system through kernal rather than basic. picture it. internal harddrive/internal 3.5/internal cd-rom/high resolution display(hopefully up to 1280x1400)/16.8 million colours and full stereo 16 bit sid (id love to see wavetable synthesis instead of patch/sample modding only) and i would love to see no disconnects from the main types, and i dont mean the chipset, i mean the vic and the sid, why not use the vic as a display type and instruct it to run at resoution chose and colour type, and the vampire run the 3d instructions. and as of the sid, why not just triple mount the sid or allow a boat mount from the card to the sid socket and just put the sid on board with option for a second sid, giving you 4 sid in amount once the sockets are filled. hey why not? no emulation on board for the sid. i just dont want to hear how a fpga is emulating the classic sounds of the commodore 64. just dump it like they do with everything else.

as you can see the major problem i have with commodore even though ive been a long time user of the c64 is the fact that its completely upgradeable with all of this potential and no one was done anything to even begin to think of moving it up to modern standards. and that new type is not a commodore 64. so none of that. and regardless if i have to expend externally or not, at least i can still do it the way it was to be done, bridge and mount bridge and mount each and every card from the main slot and make sure to rate for voltage along the way, every so many cards, time for a 5v include.or just get a case, mount it and run a patch cable from the rs232 to a board with slots, power the board from an atx power supply and be happy your c64 is now modernized.

 

[salaxi54]

..bridge and mount bridge and mount each and every card from the main slot and make sure to rate for voltage along the way, every so many cards, time for a 5v include.or just get a case, mount it and run a patch cable from the rs232 to a board with slots, power the board from an atx power supply and be happy your c64 is now modernized.

You make it all sound so simple! The c64 cannot and will not ever become modernized -in every 'needed' aspect- ever. Heck, even the Amiga cannot be called modernized compared to an octa-core 2Ghz 16GB RAM 80$ HDMI Android TV stick..

 

[Gunstarrhero]

you are a neigh saying s.o.b. yes they can, it all depends on the right team and the right programming. im not looking at this drom a dump to dump process, im looking at t his from board build to HARDWARE ROUTINE programming, HARDWARE INSTRUCTIONING, and HARDWARE HANDLING; then all the sof. sof is instructions and control params not on the machine level. the point is yes it can be done, and eventually it is going to be done. im not the only person on the plaent that wants this being done, and im sure the other summer dreamers are all saying the same thing. memory is cheap, inexpensive, cpu's are inexpensive; it isnt out of the mount of any one dev to crack open the c64 and 128 and write for it.

as for the amiga and those octa cores, yes the amiga can be considered modernized, reinterface the ppc boards for the amiga with new ppcs, drop 2 of them on there, heres one: x86-level instructions on an fpga, with the 68k? no need for a bridgeboard. now i can run all of the new games. whooo

 

[protek]

The C128, as pretty much all 8-bit computers of the time handled memory capacities larger than 64 kB via bank switching. Even the C64 could do that with it’s REU.

There is a difference between pushing the original machine’s boundaries compared to taking quantum leaps. What purpose would an octa core CPU crammed into a C64 serve? Hardly the original. If I want to run new games, I’ll do it on my PC.