J-CIA64 – Modern spare part for Commodore 64, Commodore 128, SX-64

by dusted • 3 years ago

225 133 3 years ago

dusted12• 3 years ago

I think I've plugged this before, but I have bought the part and it's working in my "MaxFake64" project, only thing left from Commodore is the keyboard http://dusted.dk/pages/c64/MaxFake64/

wkjagt6• 3 years ago

Very cool project! I hope you do the keyboard too, because (in my opinion) that's the worst part of the C64. I see you're building the C64C form factor. I don't know if that has a different keyboard than the bread bin I have, so maybe yours already has a better typing experience than mine. And even if it's the same keyboard, the lower profile of the case must already make a huge difference. But building a nice keyboard for it with good switches will still make a big difference.

dusted12• 3 years ago

I'll definitely do the keyboard, actually I'm using the breadbin keyboard here because I think it looks neat. Commodore were pretty good at keeping things compatible. The motherboard was intended for breadbin as well, but fits fine in the C case.

SomeoneFromCA21• 3 years ago

No, it is not Commodore 64 anymore. It won't feel like one, you can as well run an emulator. I get it, FPGA is more faithful reproduction, than pure software, but it is not a real thing, and will never be.

nemo8551• 3 years ago

Well that’s just like your opinion man.

But I get it, it’s really hard to accurately replace legacy components as time moves on, it probably will feel like one but as it’s not all original it will never meet an unattainable expectation.

vidarh12• 3 years ago

For e.g. the SID, where a bad implementation might work but affect the sound, you might have a point, but for the CIA's this a meaningless purity test and sophistry.

Put another way: You can pull an 8520 from an Amiga and put it in a C64 and most users will never know the difference (been there, done that, horrified my parents who saw me involved in surgery on our two computers) because most C64 software never uses the clock function of the 6526. As long as it provides the IO functions you mostly rely on, most users will never know nor care about the difference.

SomeoneFromCA21• 3 years ago

No, it is not "sophistry". There is a reason why Apple-I commands these high prices- because it is a piece of history, a slice of technology of the era. If I buy Commodore 64, I won't be buying it for replaying old games, it is completely pointless excercise, I can just buy RPi for that, I will be buying it to have a historical artifact. Now what kind of historical artifact would it be, if the only thing left is the PCB, and everything else are Xilinx IC's designed in 2020s, 40 years later?

bullen• 3 years ago

100% agree

rcarmo• 3 years ago

Last time I wanted to fiddle with a C64, I just went and flashed bmc64 (https://github.com/randyrossi/bmc64) to an SD card. Even an original Raspberry Pi 1 does a decent job of emulating it.

SomeoneFromCA21• 3 years ago

Exactly mt point, no point in buying a bunch of Xilinx FPGA's and calling it Commodore 64.

wkjagt6• 3 years ago

I think the point of the J-CIA is to replace a failing CIA in an actual C64. However, that's not what the title of this HN post is about, so I'm not sure what is going on. Regardless, I think making a replacement CIA is very cool, noble even, and I would be happy to buy one if a CIA in my Commodore failed, if it meant having a useable C64 instead of an unrepairable one. But I do agree with you, that building a completely new C64 out of FPGA replacement parts would feel very weird to me. I wouldn't feel like it's the real thing, even if it behaves exactly like one. The big advantage though, if it's a 100% faithful reproduction, would be that it physically behaves like the real deal, meaning you can plug in actual cartridges, build things that connect to the user port, etc, which are things you can't do on an emulator. For now though, I'm just happy mine still works (even though I kinda want to get a C64C instead of my bread bin).

SomeoneFromCA21• 3 years ago

Oh, yes I agree. It is a necessary compromise, much like removing Rifa and electrolyte caps. I would still preserve the original broken IC in the C64's empty internal space, secured somehow, to keep the history intact.

varispeed• 3 years ago

It is the real thing. It does the same thing, just using different technology. It's a fully digital chip, so it doesn't matter if logic is fixed on the die or "fused" on FPGA. It does the same function.

The logic could as well be implemented in software - the reason it isn't and it wasn't in the original C64 is because it was not possible then. Programming this logic on a CPU would have required a very fast microcontroller, that would probably be more expensive than the whole computer. Even today, not many MCUs would be capable of emulating the CIA and keep up with all the timings. Mind you there is a difference in creating a software emulator that runs within the host computer versus emulating a chip that responds in real time to the electric signals.

SomeoneFromCA21• 3 years ago

I do not need this condescending lecture about the merits of programmable logic over CPUs and emulation. The difference is not technical or even technological; the actual difference is social. Anything that it is not period-accurate is going to erode the historical value of the artifact, until the point when everything inside is a bunch of fpga's on sockets.

TonyTrapp• 3 years ago

I wouldn't equal the possibility of taking a C64 with one or two broken chips and replacing them with a cheaper, more reliable modern equivalent to tossing the whole machine away and going 100% emulation.

SomeoneFromCA21• 3 years ago

Neither would I, but this is not what the title says.

crote• 3 years ago

That completely depends on your use case.

Want to have it collecting dust in a museum? Sure, you're going to want the original. Nobody is interested in an FPGA for that.

Want to actually use it? If an FPGA is close enough that it is literally impossible to tell the difference in a black box comparison, for all intents and purposes it is the original. Emulation simply isn't accurate enough for that, but FPGAs can be 100% cycle-accurate. And this means you don't need to risk wear or damage on your genuine C64 just to experience what it is like to use a C64.

SomeoneFromCA21• 3 years ago

Emulation is very close to 100% cycle accurate for many, many machines. You would practically not deal with this problem anyway. Now, I may want to tinker with my computer on a board level, making a period-accurate hardware-tweaks for the machine, how exactly I'd accomplish that, if everything is just a big FPGA? Now, having IC'level FPGA substitute for big chips on the original board is a bit better than one big flat fat IC, but it still a different machine and cannot be called C64, as much as a Ford-T is not a Ford-T if you put a modern electric motor to it, even if you tweak it to sound and handle exactly like T does.

tyingq2• 3 years ago

I don't know that for a parallel/serial/rtc chip you would really see any difference. I can see your point for some of the harder to emulate parts like the SID.

snvzz2• 3 years ago

Once configured, a FPGA is the hardware that's configured into it. It's cheaper than an ASIC, unless you make a shitton of them.

The newly-made design, be it in FPGA or ASIC form, is not the original MOS chip. But it could indeed behave identically.

ASIC advantages such as lower power consumption and higher achievable clock speeds at a given node, are advantages relative to the FPGA. Not advantages relative to the original MOS chip, which dirt cheap FPGAs can vastly outdo, and only need to match for the purpose.

dusted12• 3 years ago

FPGA is in absolutely no way more faithful, which FPGA implementation has 100% compatibility with all internal and external interfaces ?

tenebrisalietum• 3 years ago

The 6526 is infrastructure--it's a timer, clock, and I/O chip and doesn't really have anything to do with the interactive look and feel of the system. So an FPGA here doesn't harm the C64's soul one bit, if it works exactly like the original.

Honestly it would have been cool if they added a battery and maybe an extra register to indicate its presence; having the TOD clocks keep their time between power cycles would be cool.

Edit: If replacing a dead 6526 I would keep the dead one too. :)

rasz4• 3 years ago

the Audiophile argument

nullsmack2• 3 years ago

This is a silly argument.

FPGAs are not emulation. They implement logic at just as low a level as an ASIC. One day even working original C64s will stop working. You can't get original parts anymore. This is as good as it gets for fixing those.

twarge• 3 years ago

Which FPGA is it?

tyingq2• 3 years ago

The image is too low-res to see the model, but you can see the Lattice logo. This picture[1] is a little better, but still pretty grainy. Best guess is "Lattice ICE5LPxx", where I can't quite make out what the "xx" is. Maybe ICE5LP1K ?

https://retro8bitshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/F2eV4mB...

codeflo• 3 years ago

What do they do about the SID?

For younger folks, the SID is the sound chip of the C64. It's infamous for being partly an analog circuit. That is, it uses transistors in states between 0 and 1, as you would in a transistor-based amplifier, or an analog radio. This gave the sound of the C64 its unique texture.

My understanding is that this behavior is impossible to reproduce with modern chip fabrication techniques, so what's the solution? Digital emulation?

vidarh12• 3 years ago

Digital emulation, yes, like the ArmSID[1] which lets you tune the output to what you expect a SID to sound like, because they didn't all sound the same either, which is part of the problem of "accurately" replacing it - they were never accurate to begin with.

[1] https://retrocomp.cz/produkt?id=2

fluoridation• 3 years ago

They were accurate, just not precise. ;)

wkat4242• 3 years ago

It's not impossible. We still make many analog chips. Opamps, power amps, signal processing.

What's difficult is replicating it with generic programmable platforms like FPGAs because those are mostly digital gates.

But if we'd just want to cook a bunch of SID chips that's no problem. It'll just be hard to get enough interest to warrant all the design and setup work. You'd need to do a large batch to make it worth the investment.

dusted12• 3 years ago

I'm personally pretty happy with the ArmSID, thing is, it does not sound like my 6581R3.. BUT! My 6581R3 also does not sound like my other 6581R3, there's not really any "one true" sound for the SID, for better or worse.

That said, if I were to do music production, I'd use my real chip, because I prefer the sound of it.. But, on a PC, I'd use one of the libraries, like libsidplay which emulates the sound better than the ArmSID.

The same could be said for the VIC2 chip, I've yet to encounter two that give the same image, they look slightly different. There, I do prefer the look of the kawari on s-video, it's just.. easier to see ^_^

RetroTechie3• 3 years ago

BUT! My 6581R3 also does not sound like my other 6581R3, there's not really any "one true" sound for the SID, for better or worse.

Might just be old age? At some point, IC's may be degraded to a point where few (if any) work exactly like original part when it was new. And thus also differ between specimens.

At some point, original parts may become unreliable / quirky / glitchy enough that picking some kind of re-implementation (rather than original) as the "gold standard" is the only way forward.

Not a big issue for 'pure' digital parts like CPUs, glue logic etc. But (partly) analog IC's like sound or video chips... different story.

bartread• 3 years ago

That's not true: you make the SID sound weird and exotic when it's really not (although it is incredibly cool).

Seen from the perspective of microcomputers, which mostly either used simple square waves, or FM synthesis to generate sounds, the SID is unusual. But seen from the perspective of sound synthesis the SID is an analogue subtractive synthesizer[0] which, at the time of its design, were commonplace. As I say, that was pretty unique amongst microcomputers, and is why the SID was and is revered by fans of the 8-bit era: it has a really fantastic, crunchy analogue sound, that other computers of the era just don't and, indeed, can't reproduce.

I'd go as far as to say that Commodore missed a massive opportunity with the Amiga in terms of use for music: if it had the PCM based Paula chip, plus a SID chip (or even two - a man can dream), it would have been absolutely incredible.

In recent years analogue synthesizers have experienced something of a resurgence although, in truth, they never completely went away. As such ICs with analogue circuitry are actually relatively commonplace. Now that doesn't mean you can just remanufacture the SID chip really easily, but it is absolutely possible to build ICs with analogue circuitry today: as a trivial example, analogue to digital converters are commonplace.

[0] I think strictly speaking it's also a paraphonic synth, since all the voices share a single filter, but I can't remember off the top of my head whether they also all share a single amp (again, a hallmark of a paraphonic, rather than a true polyphonic, synthesizer).

diydsp• 3 years ago

It actually is weird and exotic. The analog SVF filter is made with digital components and is highly nonlinear. No one fabricates these any more though it would be technically possible.

Emulating the distortion is done with varying levels of accuracy.

Additionally the fabrication varied from part to part and from rev to rev. So the sound of any SID is a combo of its batch of substrates limiting bandwidth and the intermodulation distortion (IMD) of its FETs' imperfect emulation linear adding and multiplication functions increasing the bandwidth. Note that these non-linearities are in a feedback loop.

Furthermore the external caps ("matched") used for the filter varied considerably, but this is more easily reproduceable.

The envelopes are unconventional too, but more easily emulated than the filter. They are a mix of linear and exponential and use the non-linear FET multiplier.

Also the oscillators are not simple analog oscillators. They're high frequency lookup tables with digital aliasing related to the key the music is written in. The noise waveform is not analog, either, but a variable frequency LFSR, although this is easy to reproduce in FPGA and somewhat in software, although the max frequency can be challenging.

Finally the entire signal chain is replete with IMD so any melody/rhythm played on one voice is affected and influenced by what is played on the other voices.

In summary the SID was designed by electronic musician Bob Yannes who modeled it after typical analog synths but was technically limited by the fabrication of the age to make it less clean than even the grungiest cold war soviet synth. Still it was better than everything else at the time and it got a lot of loving attention from devs and musicians who squeezed every ounce of juice from it.

taylodl2• 3 years ago

I'd go as far as to say that Commodore missed a massive opportunity with the Amiga in terms of use for music

IDK - the first DAWs were made for the Amiga. If the Amiga hadn't already died-out by the early-ish 90's then I'd imagine Pro Tools would have been created on that and there would be a very real possibility we'd still be using Amigas today.

CalRobert• 3 years ago

If you enjoy this stuff, https://c64audio.com/ is well worth a look. Some good stuff from only 25 years ago at https://archive.org/details/back-in-time-1/Back+in+Time+1/Ex... .

I was really into Koyaanisqatsi at the time and you'll definitely hear the influence there.

FlyingAvatar• 3 years ago

A bunch of folks mentioning ARMsid, but there are a number of FPGA-based implementations as well:

FPGASID - https://webstore.kryoflux.com/catalog/product_info.php?produ... reDIP SID - https://github.com/daglem/reDIP-SID

nxobject• 3 years ago

Anyone up for a Heathkit-style "learn as you build your own C64" kit?

lmpdev2• 3 years ago

I have a boxed C64 that hasn't been turned on for over 20 years

I thought I'd try to turn it on but got spooked by the requirements for the PSU

I understand it needs ripple free 5VDC 2-4A+ through a 7 pin din

Am I really going to blow the unit up with a switch mode, does it really need linear regulation?

What's stopping me using 2-3 LM7805s in parallel?

[Background] former burnout frontend dev working at an electronics shop

unwind• 3 years ago

You are probably aware, but replacement PSUs are fairly widely available [1].

I am no EE but I would be very surprised if they are linear.

[1] https://www.c64psu.com/

dusted12• 3 years ago

You can do it with a linear supply, a common mod that people do is actually to replace the lm7805 regulator with a pin compatible switching replacement for less power draw and heat generation.

I think ripple-free is by 1982 standards ;)

HPsquared• 3 years ago

Can't you just use some filtering caps? (spoken as a non-EE)

lmpdev2• 3 years ago

Edit: Do NOT use LM7805s in parallel, they don't load balance evenly

jwr4• 3 years ago

The PSU also supplies 9V AC (this is not a mistake). The C64 is quite sensitive to over-voltage, so your switching supply might work, or it might kill it because there are voltage spikes which modern equipment doesn't care about, but the C64 will.

The PSU situation isn't great: building your own is difficult (see https://www.c64-wiki.com/wiki/Power_Supply), and using an old "real" PSU is risky, because they tend to produce >5V as they die, taking the C64 with them. That's why I ended up using the Ultimate 64 rather than a real C64: just supply it with 12V DC from basically anything, and it will be fine.

biggieshellz• 3 years ago

Why would you blow it up with a SMPS? I built a PSU for mine with a 5V switch-mode wall wart that originally powered a USB hub and it works fine. There's a 100uf filter cap on the 5V rail inside the machine already that will smooth things out. The real danger is letting the 5V rail get too much over voltage; that's what happens with the original power supplies, and it will cook the RAM chips in a hurry.

snvzz2• 3 years ago

A replacement, yes. But is it open hardware? It doesn't seem to be the case.

This is unlike the recently released VIC-II Kawari[0]. That one is OSH proper.

0. http://accentual.com/vicii-kawari/

dusted12• 3 years ago

The guy has worked on a complete chipset replacement for a very long time, I could understand if he would want to earn some money for his efforts before open sourcing it, he's under absolutely no moral obligation to opensource this, but I figure he might some time in the future, if people are nice to him. You know what's also not OSHW ? The FPGAs running it

nullsmack2• 3 years ago

Who cares if the FPGA is opensource? If the verilog, or vhdl, or whatever was used to program it was available someone could adapt it to other chips.

LordLotherak• 3 years ago

To me at least, it makes much better sense to go all-in on a MiSTer, rather than gradually frankenstein-ing the build with ARM or FPGA-based chips. There's money to be made trying to maintain these 40+ year old units though. (if the cottage industry surrounding it isn't a clue)

dusted12• 3 years ago

I have an Ultimate64 too, I did this project for philosophical reasons, since everything is new, even the motherboard, it's definitely a new machine, but at the same time, if you look at the electrical activity on the traces, you would conclude it's a c64, and yet, there's no commodore chips on there.. The most commodore thing is the firmware which is on the UV EEPROMs, and even that is slightly different since the original machine used mask roms rather than writable roms. So, it's very much not about "sense" on a practical level (then VICE with a couple of Quickshot competition pro USB sticks makes the most sense)

jwr4• 3 years ago

there's no commodore chips on there

My Ultimate 64 has a real SID in a socket :-)

jchw2• 3 years ago

Wow, I thought this already existed in some form, but it turns out it was actually the PLA that I was thinking of.

Installing the J-CIA64 requires delicate handling and taking the proper precautions to prevent antistatic discharges.

Also, at least in my non-expert opinion, in most cases you should consider installing a socket whenever replacing chips. You have to solder something new on anyways, may as well make it something that you won't have to redo any time soon. I wound up doing this for every chip I replaced in my own C64, which made debugging it a lot easier. (It was borked when I got it. I'm too young to have owned one new.)

dusted12• 3 years ago

Yes, I put mine in low-profile zif sockets, additionally, I put ESD protection diodes on the joystick ports because that's where you're most likely to touch and fry (including the orignal sid and cias)

jchw2• 3 years ago

What's the advantage of low profile sockets? Sounds convenient, but I just used pretty ordinary DIP sockets. (At least I have a puller to get chips out now though; jimmying with a flathead screwdriver never felt great.)

In terms of space, it feels like there's plenty of room in mine. I have the Perifrantic VIC-II switcher setup as well, which sockets a daughterboard with 2 VIC-IIs into the socket, and that fits surprisingly well. Though, I'd not be surprised if some models had less room to work with.

the_af6• 3 years ago

Tangentially related, and given some of the debates in the comments below, I'm sure I'll be burned at the stake for this, but here I go anyway:

I've given up on owning a real C64, just to remind me of my childhood. It's too convoluted, requires buying replacement parts, and I don't own any TV to plug it into. VICE emulation is good enough for me. But I really wanted the keyboard, which was a major part of the experience for me.

Out of the box -- no soldering, not buying extra cables or expansions or add-ons -- the most feasible option for me was buying the retroremake TheC64 ("max", the full version with the working keyboard).

Is it perfect? No.

Is it a C64? No. It looks like one, but inside there's an ARM chip running VICE.

Does it look like a convincing C64 "breadbin", and can I play every game, type BASIC programs, play with PETSCII art, even type assembly code, and generally relive my childhood?

YES!

dusted12• 3 years ago

A Pi400 is also an excellent option in my opinon. I love doing both real hardware and emulation for different purposes, I don't see anything wrong with picking either, neither or both (neither of course is the worst option ;) )

icedchai2• 3 years ago

I like both. The software is so much more convenient with emulation, but seeing the real hardware feels like it takes you back in time...

the_af6• 3 years ago

I considered the Pi400 but, like I said, the C64 keyboard was a big deal to me. Otherwise I would just use VICE on my laptop :)

Yes, I know: you can get custom keyboards, or print labels and stick them on a PC keyboard, or 3D print a case with a working keyboard: all of that is either more involved, more expensive, or fiddlier than what I wanted.

I wanted an out of the box experience with a working replica of the keyboard, complete with PETSCII symbols on the key caps, and TheC64 delivers just that :)

gmerc2• 3 years ago

MiSTER is pretty much a perfect replacement.

the_af6• 3 years ago

Curious: does MiSTER have a fully working C64 keyboard lookalike with no extra work that I must do, out of the box? If not, it's not what I was looking for :)

II2II• 3 years ago

I don't think anyone will burn you at the stake! Real hardware is great for diehard enthusiasts, for those wanting to use old peripherals, and for people wanting to play with electronics. Emulation is great for nearly everyone else.

jwr4• 3 years ago

I'll plug the Ultimate 64 (https://ultimate64.com/Ultimate-64-Elite) — it's a hardware-emulated C64 that you place inside your breadbin case. It works unbelievably well and is a great modern replacement with a lot of convenience added. For example, you don't have to deal with weird PSUs (12V runs it just fine), you get a HDMI output with sound (can be from a real SID!), and the HDMI out has no delay. That's a big deal: all the emulators normally use framebuffers, so you get a delay, none of the games were built for it.

What I find great is that you can plug in a USB stick with all the C64 games ever made and just load them quickly up using the Ultimate 64 built-in software.

I have both "real" C64s and the Ultimate 64, but I only use the Ultimate these days. It's just easier.

the_af6• 3 years ago

Thanks! It looks awesome and better but also more expensive (and slightly less "out of the box") than TheC64, at least when I got mine.

reaperducer2• 3 years ago

The problem is that the Ultimate 64 has been out of stock for a very long time. I check every few months, and have never seen it available.

And even when it might be available, you can get two or three real C-64s from eBay for the same price.

300bps• 3 years ago

It's really awesome how different people are able to engage in this hobby with different requirements.

For me, working on a real 64 is essential but I don't care about disk drives at all. So a Commodore 64 + Ultimate II+ (or pi1541) is a great combination. I love being able to use real 64 joysticks with no lag.

Keeping the hardware going is half the fun - I have replacement chips for everything on the board, diagnostic carts and have enjoyed picking up soldering again.

For Assembly language programming though, Visual Studio Code + Kick Assembler + Vice + C64 Debugger all the way!! Makes the development and debugging process completely seamless.

macjohnmcc• 3 years ago

You can also use TheC64 (Max) as a USB keyboard to the PC to use in Vice if you decide you want the keyboard and want to take advantage of some of the functionality of the emulators. I found a page that shows how to add a USB connector to the Max to allow this.

the_af6• 3 years ago

Never thought of this. Looks useful! I will look it up.

flyinghamster• 3 years ago

Much like how I've gotten onto a PDP-11 kick - yeah, it would be neat to have my own 11/70, but the power and space requirements would be insane, I'd have to track down rare and expensive pieces, and I don't have quite the skill set to debug/repair old hardware to the component level. SIMH it is (and it has a zillion other emulators as well).

Modern hardware can emulate an 11 much faster than any real one ever built. RSTS/E installs in seconds when your "disk" is NVMe and you don't have to wait for a DECwriter II console at 30 cps.

bitwize3• 3 years ago

You may wish to consider the PiDP-11, a frame that replicates the PDP-11's blinkenlight panel, into which a Raspberry Pi running SIMH or similar can be installed. Attach a terminal with a USB-to-serial adapter, and the experience is complete, without the drain on power, space, time/effort, or money. It's like THEC64 for the DEC mini world.

bitwize3• 3 years ago

I'm also a THEC64 owner, and I call it "retrocomputing on easy mode". That's a good thing! It offers a good-enough simulacrum of what the C64 experience was like. The breadbin case with original-layout keyboard, which feels plausibly like one of the keyboards that shipped on actual C64s (there were a few different ones), really put THEC64 over for me. And it just works with modern equipment like HDMI displays and USB controllers. It's a great way to introduce kids to the way we computed back in the before times.

TacticalCoder• 3 years ago

I've given up on owning a real C64

I can understand that... I'm lucky in that my very own C128, after nearly 40 years, still works. I think the C128 is a bit easier to get going because the PSU are of much better quality than the C64's PSUs and IIUC the C128's PSU is less likely to destroy the computer should it malfunction.

I wrote it recently in another thread here on HN: I've got both original PCBs from the eighties and a Raspberry Pi in a vintage arcade cab and it's pretty much giving identical results (except for the boot procedure).

Emulation may not be the real thing but it really became close enough.

We have options and we should be happy about it.

And as my electronic and soldering skills are really mediocre, I fear the day where my C128 shall eventually give up.

technothrasher• 3 years ago

I enjoy owning the fourth earliest serial number C64 registered on the C64 registry, and last I tried it still worked. But honestly I wouldn't ever really think of actually using it or any of the handful of others I have. Whenever I'm in the mood to play, I use an emulator.

And this basically goes for all the old nostalgic hardware I've got. For kicks I booted up an old Sun 3/80 I picked up a bit ago. After replacing the failed hard drive with an SSD on an adapter board, figuring out how to regenerate the boot info on a replacement of the dead battery backed RAM chip, and getting it to actually net boot off a Linux host, I realized SunOS 4.1.1 is a lot more of a pain in the ass than I remembered from back in the day. It was an amusing adventure, but it did make me think twice about trying to boot up my old SGI Indigo.

Damogran6• 3 years ago

We're going to have ironically hip webapps in the future, aren't we?

"100% Amiga generated web content"

stuff4ben• 3 years ago

I question why people go through the trouble of doing this. Then I remember back to when I was a pimply teenager, lugging my C64, 1541, and 13" TV to a user group meeting on a crisp Saturday morning. We would share warez and see awesome demos and oogle the C128's and inevitably someone would bring an Amiga. We'd gather around while they played the latest games and show off the full capabilities of that machine. We had some Apple users there too with their IIe's and IIc's. I never saw a Mac in real life until much later in college. And that's a part of my life I'll likely never live again, but now I get why people want to build these machines today, for nostalgia.

fallat• 3 years ago

Not just nostalgia. I want to experience what the first personal computers were like. I think there's a lot of value there!

bobboies• 3 years ago

I also believe there’s some value in reassessing how systems like that function. There’s some value in a challenge like: what can you do on older hardware with todays knowledge? Maybe there’s something to be learned and applied to modern problems.

Also, it’s a good introduction to understanding full systems, from the electronics—soldering, voltage, current, etc to assembly programming. The system is simple enough for them to ship circuit diagrams in the developer manual—along with all the opcodes and kernel routines.

There’s a resurgence across all fields in artisanal craftsmanship. Carpenters, blacksmiths, printmakers, cobblers.

Retro-Computing is exactly that—artisanal electronics and programming. There’s something meditative and enjoyable about it.

progman32• 3 years ago

Agree. I was born way after the C64 came on scene and never touched one until I bought one ten years ago. I'm in it for the perspective it brings (and I like fixing things).

icedchai2• 3 years ago

I still remember the first time I played a couple of Psygnosis games on an Amiga 500: Blood Money, and Shadow of the Beast. Those two blew me away. The sound and the graphics were absolutely stunning for late 80's.

I have a MIST, Vampire board, and still play around with UAE from time-to-time... but there's nothing like seeing the "real" hardware for the first time when you were a teenager. Even with all the hardware I've had over the past 30 years, everything else has felt so incremental.

dylan604• 3 years ago

And that's a part of my life I'll likely never live again

Back then, very few people had these. Now, nearly everyone has something much much more powerful in their pocket/purse or on their wrist.

I do pity younger kids today not having that feeling. The was a mystique around them. Now, it's just part and parcel of everyday life. Everything new now is just an upgraded version of something prior. Back then, it was all so new. I can't think of anything that would have the same feeling for kids today.

dan_quixote• 3 years ago

Assuming continued forward progress, this feeling is true of each generation. But when I get nostalgia about all the progress the world made since my early childhood in the 80s...I think about my great grandfather who was 8-ish when the Wright Brothers made their first flight, 40s when the atomic bomb was developed, 73 when the first man walked on the moon, and then lived another 20 years!

bitwize3• 3 years ago

Retrocomputing isn't just about nostalgia, a midlife-crisis rewind back to your pimply-faced youth. People are still getting more out of those old systems than was ever thought possible back in the day, using powerful modern systems to solve for packing ever more complex code or data structures into 64k or less. Kids are being introduced to old platforms. They can't deliver the graphical fidelity of the Xbox Series S, but if Minecraft and Roblox are any indication, post-zoomer youth do just fine with simple, abstract, representational graphics.

johnklos• 3 years ago

Retro Recipes did a whole video about this very thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qhdc-jgwqVQ

Studying how the old chips work and recreating them is an excellent way to document and preserve. I'm always happy for projects like these. The eventual availability of Amiga CIAs will save some old hardware, too :)

jwr4• 3 years ago

Good news! The 6526 was always easy to damage through static discharge, by touching or plugging something into the user port.

semireg• 3 years ago

Am I the only one with a twang of dread and anxiety... being transported back to a summer weekday in the 1990s. I was maybe 8 years old, learning how to use a screwdriver to take things apart. I opened my C64, wiggled one of these ICs out, breaking the pins in the process. Oh... having to explain this to my parents. They were not happy. I'm pretty sure that was the end of my GEOS days.

rasz4• 3 years ago

wonder if relate to bwacks https://github.com/bwack/VHDL6526 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLxncR7Ru4Y

J-CIA64 – Modern spare part for Commodore 64, Commodore 128, SX-64

Related Stories