[Coco] Re: 8-Bit Microcomputers

[Richard E. Crislip]

Hello Torsten

On 01/24/04, Torsten Dittel wrote:
>> Dragon 32/64 (somewhat compatible in BASIC, but incompatible using
>> machine code).
> 
> Err... the machine code was compatible (both using a 6809...), the
> biggest difference was the keyboard matrix layout. You could run Dragon
> ML-games on the CoCo and vice versa, but you had to learn the
> "keyboard-translation" to play them. If they used the POLCAT routine
> from ROM, it wasn't even a problem. The dragon had a true ACIA serial
> interface integrated (like a CoCo with RS-232 Deluxe Pak) and a parallel
> port for printing. It had composite video out (not shure about RGB on
> later models).
> 
> The C=64 was trash compared to the CoCo. Just the sound chip (SID) and
> the video chip (VID) were fine. However, I always preferred the CoCo's
> VDG with it's poor possibilities but true memory mapped graphics. Much
> work for the poor CPU, but good to learn how everything works. All my
> fellows here in Germany had the C-64 (just a few with a Sinclair
> Spectrum), but noone learned something about how a computer works nor
> BASIC which was a disease in the C=64. The only usable BASIC command was
> POKE to set the VID/SID registers.
> 
> Just my 0.02€.

That's how I felt about it too. I loved being able to poke or do it via
Assembler an area in memory and see ti on the screen. My opinion was
solidified when I move over to the Amiga. Programming this beast was more
than I wanted to take on. I'm retired now and I'd maybe like to try, but
why? 8-)

Regards
-- 
Cruisen                                                      _|_
              on AutoPilot with an Amiga   ---o-( )-o---   and a CoCo
 
                                             Richard