Re: Could you make a 'new', 'better' computer from the C64 just by reprogramming the PLA?

> On Nov 4, 2021, at 10:30, Jim Brain <brain_at_jbrain.com> wrote:
> 
> On 11/4/2021 3:57 AM, smf wrote:
>> 
>> You probably shouldn't question someones decisions if you don't
>> understand the reason why they made them.
> 
> That might be a bit harsh towards the OP, but I understand the sentiment.
> 
> In a way, the OP's point of "compromise" is relevant here.  They did compromise.  die sizes contributed directly to yield and cost, so the 1/8th of the die for extra RAM was a no go, expensive DRAM was a no go because, well, Commodore.  And, though I'm not sure they had SRAMs lying around (that was the story around why the VIC20 had it's SRAM), I do think you're directionally correct. I'm surprised they didn't use their internal 65XX RAM option (6550?)
> 
> On the larger point, it seems the farther away we get from the origin of these machines, the less well understood they are by most folks and the time period from which the design was taken. That's unfortunate, as I think it's fascinating to see how features and capabilities that we all treat with reverence on classic systems were often borne out of necessity or cost concerns.
> 
> Jim

Less well understood yes, but when people ask me why I still mess with this old stuff one of the reasons I give is that they are the last computers that you could really understand end to end if you wanted to. I do not of course, but I see it, and I agree that seeing it helps maintain context for how incredible modern equipment really is.

I also find both perspective and entertainment in that my toddler does not care that the load times for games are long on a 1541 as long as there is something happening on the display.  The crazy colors etc from some of the loaders are a bonus as far as he is concerned.

Justin