[HN Gopher] My Mega65 has arrived ___________________________________________________________________ My Mega65 has arrived Author : ibobev Score : 168 points Date : 2022-06-01 08:57 UTC (2 days ago) (HTM) web link (www.epsilonsworld.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.epsilonsworld.com) | the_af wrote: | I'm really enjoying the current retrocomputer craze. I bought the | "TheC64" myself (full size with working keyboard, wouldn't have | it any other way), which is just a C64 lookalike case with a tiny | ARM computer running VICE inside. I know it's not a real C64, but | it sure looks like one! | | The Mega65 in particular is not for me though: it's way too | expensive and it's not an actual computer I owned as a kid, so | the nostalgia factor is lower. It does look extremely nice, | though. | sys_64738 wrote: | Agreed. TheC64 has hit the sweet spot for what this type of | gizmo should be and it really does deliver. They are great for | vendor support too. | FullyFunctional wrote: | My only interest in this is as an FPGA dev kit. It was | surprisingly hard to find details on the actual hardware but it | appears to be a Xilinx(tm) Artix A7 200T according to | https://shop.trenz-electronic.de/en/TE0765-03-S001-MEGA65-hi... | That page curiously doesn't specify the amount of external DRAM, | but various hints suggests it might be 8 MiB of HyperRAM (that's | DRAM with a simpler protocol). Cute. | bpye wrote: | Is a high performance HyperRAM controller really simpler than a | normal DRAM controller? It's serial rather than parallel so you | need higher frequency signals for the same bandwidth. | hedora wrote: | I was wondering the same thing. I wonder if they could produce | a "lite" version without some of the physical components (like | the floppy disk and "expansion port"), and maybe some of the | retro stuff swapped for cheap modern bits, like USB. | | Does anyone know if the FPGA code that makes this thing work is | open source? It might be a nice starting point for some other | hobby project / processor architecture experiments / etc. | Keyframe wrote: | Nexys 100T was recommended as a stand-in until you get the | real mega65, that it's pretty much the same thing once set | up. So, one could view it as a lite version: | https://shop.trenz- | electronic.de/en/29376-Nexys-A7-100T-FPGA... | everslick wrote: | It's on GitHub. | Linda703 wrote: | Arrath wrote: | I'd never heard of the Mega 65 before, I love the aesthetic of it | fully contained in the keyboard and for some reason the floppy | drive being molded right into it just tickles my fancy in all the | right ways. | mindcrime wrote: | The first question that comes to my mind is, "where did they get | the floppy drives?" Surely the original manufacturer of those | drives isn't still making them??? And having a batch manufactured | as a one-off seems like it would be prohibitively expensive. So | I'd be really curious to know how they managed that part of the | whole thing. | | Anyway, looks like a great project. I wasn't a C64 fanboy as a | kid or anything, but I'm still tempted to look into getting one | of these. OTOH, I still have an Atari 800 I bought last year that | I haven't touched yet, a half-started Z80 retrocomputer project | to finish, and a desire to get an Atari 1040 "one of these days". | So maybe I don't need yet another retrocomputer "thing" to play | with... :p | dfxm12 wrote: | _So I 'd be really curious to know how they managed that part | of the whole thing._ | | Searching the linked development blog yields this: | https://c65gs.blogspot.com/2019/03/floppys-floppys-everywher... | | _After some searching, we found what we were after: A local | supplier here in Germany who has some quantity of different | models, including a large number of ALPS 3.5 " 1.44MB drives._ | mindcrime wrote: | Wow, so it sounds like they actually had to go with used | drives. I was thinking maybe they got lucky and found some | unsold NOS ones in an old warehouse or something. No such | luck. But at least they found something to let them move | forward with the project. | | It does lead me to wonder though: How many floppy drives | would one have to commit to ordering, and how much would it | cost, to get a company to manufacture a run of such devices? | salgernon wrote: | There's some interesting reading from the creator of a Mac | Floppy emulator on sourcing the obscure (DB19) connector it | uses - and his setting out I do a new production run. This | [1] is kind of in the middle of the thread - but still | interesting reading: | | [1] https://www.bigmessowires.com/2015/03/20/finding-a- | db-19-ang... | | Better[2] link: | | [2] https://www.bigmessowires.com/2016/06/04/db-19-resurrec | ting-... | [deleted] | forinti wrote: | The last time I bought a real brand new floppy drive at a shop | was in 2010 and they were really cheap (about US$5). They must | have been trying to get rid of old inventory already. | mlindner wrote: | There's numerous types of floppy drive and disks and the | Commodore ones aren't compatible with modern drives or disks. | DeathArrow wrote: | Since the CPU is emulated by an FPGA, FDD is emulated, then why | not save all the money and just use a software emulator? | jason-phillips wrote: | Because the journey is more rewarding than the destination? | | Extending your thought, what if the journey of | building/acquiring/configuring the meatspace thing was also | emulated? | antiverse wrote: | Wouldn't use this analogy - it might be an emulation of some | sort. | tom_ wrote: | The I/O latency is typically much closer to the original | hardware. OSs have become a bit careless about latency, and LCD | screens add some more delay on top. It all adds up, and the | result is a slightly inauthentic-feeling experience. | bebop wrote: | Hardware emulation can make the timings between multiple chips | more accurate as processes actually can be done in parallel and | in sync with a shared clock. This is harder to get perfect with | software emulation. In theory. | klodolph wrote: | Hardware emulation cannot actually make the emulation more | accurate than software emulation. That doesn't make any | logical sense. If you know what the correct timing is, you | can emulate it in hardware or software. | | It's not harder to do in software. It's just hard to get the | timing correct, regardless of whether you are using software | or hardware. There are certain cases where it's hard to get | good performance out of a software emulator, that's really | the main difference. | bitwize wrote: | It should be easier to do in software. What's hard is, | modelling the hardware accurately, getting the timing | correct, AND getting everything performant enough to run at | the original hardware speeds. It takes a beefy system to | accurately emulate even SNES hardware at full speed. An | FPGA can be programmed with accurate hardware models and | run them all in parallel at the same speeds the original | hardware ran at (up to a limit, I believe today it's | somewhere in the low hundreds of MHz for a CPU). This | allows for a closer approximation of the original hardware | running at usable speeds. | klodolph wrote: | It used to take a beefy system to emulate the SNES at | full speed. Emulator performance has improved, CPU | performance has improved, and nowadays, an outdated and | low-spec x86 laptop will run BSNES. | | You will have problems running BSNES on a Raspberry Pi, | though, although I've heard the RPi 4 can do it. | [deleted] | markus_zhang wrote: | Maybe holding some real hardware gives much joy? I'm thinking | about maybe emulating it using a Pi and buy some peripherals | such as external floppy. Not sure if it's doable though. | Koshkin wrote: | The _real_ real hardware - sure, but emulated on a FPGA... | not so much. But that's just me. | | Emulation in software (and the virtual space in general), on | the other hand, is close to perfect these days. In fact, | material things get boring pretty fast (and tend to end up in | the attic) whereas virtual reality (like games) remain a | source of perpetual joy. | timbit42 wrote: | FPGA is a simulation, not an emulation. Emulation does | everything serially while simulation does everything in | parallel, just like the real hardware. | | Also, software emulation on a non-real-time OS such as Windows, | macOS or Linux can result in lag when the OS is busy with other | things. You never get that on FPGA simulation. | klodolph wrote: | I've never heard that distinction before. | | It's all emulation--either in hardware or software, in | parallel or in series. | | I used to work on simulation software professionally. The | idea that simulation is parallel while emulation is serial is | completely foreign to me, and I suspect foreign to others as | well. | FullyFunctional wrote: | I have worked on simulators for most of my life and the GPs | definition is not true. | | There's no formal distinction between the two, but | conventionally emulation is more faithful whereas | simulation is more high-level. Still, the two are used | fairly interchangeably. | icedchai wrote: | It is foreign to me, for sure. I have been experimenting | with FPGA-based retro systems for years (started with a | MIST.) I still consider them "emulators." | mlindner wrote: | I really don't understand the love people have for the commodore | 64. It wasn't especially advanced for it's time nor was it | especially good. Finally it basically required the use of a | horrible language like Basic to use. There's like zero reason to | re-create it as a retro computer. | | Then you compare it to things like the Amiga which was incredibly | advanced for it's time with amazing graphics and sound that even | today are very playable modern-feeling experiences. For an | example of what I'm talking about here's two clips (the whole | video is good): https://youtu.be/kjapiUQOi2s?t=834 | https://youtu.be/kjapiUQOi2s?t=1502 | pvg wrote: | It's heartwarming to see some people still enjoy the old | breadbox and others still enjoy telling everyone everything was | better on the Amiga. | ZetaZero wrote: | The Amiga launched at $1300, while the C64 was going for $200. | By the time I could afford an Amiga, I got a PC instead. | tenebrisalietum wrote: | The SID chip in the c64 is very unique, it's specifically | designed for music versus the PSG-like square wave generators | in other systems at the time. (I will say the Atari POKEY is | magical though.) | | Comparing c64 to Amiga isn't fair, the Amiga was a generation | later. What the c64 should be compared with is the Atari 8-bit | systems (400, 800, 65XE, 130XE), Apple II, Colecovision. | | Having the 64k RAM, plus sprites, plus a sound chip that | implemented ADSR and different waveforms other than square did | introduce a lot of possibilities and excitement in 1982 though, | even if you tried your best to use them from the absolutely | shitty BASIC and/or had to wait minutes for things to load from | disk or cassette. | mrandish wrote: | I'm not going to judge other people's retro-crushes but as an | old-timer who used several of these 80s computers in the 80s, | you're correct about the Amiga being especially notable from an | historical perspective. | | I would even say that the Amiga, at the time it shipped, was | the single largest step-up in capabilities of any widely | available computer that's ever occurred. Compared to all the | other computers available to consumers at the time, the Amiga's | graphics, sound, operating system and processing were best of | breed. From today's perspective it's hard to appreciate just | how stunning the Amiga was versus status quo. It literally drew | crowds of people at local computer stores just to watch someone | run through all the demos. | | While today's PCs are many orders of magnitude more powerful | and capable, I can't recall any single increment over the | decades being nearly as significant across so many different | dimensions (visuals, sound, speed, OS, UX, I/O, etc). | guyzero wrote: | I really don't understand the love people have for ${literally | anything}. | | Nostalgia is a hell of a drug. | egypturnash wrote: | The c64 was cheap, easily available, and dominated the market. | The Amiga was not cheap, was not made in anything like the | quantities of the c64, and was fighting with the ST for third | place behind the Mac and IBM PCs. | | The Amiga 1000 was a decade ahead of it's time, but Commodore | sat on its ass for longer than that, with very little | investment in upgrading the thing. | | I say this as someone who went from a c64 in her teens to the | Amiga in her twenties, and held on to the Amiga well past the | time when it was obviously dead in terms of technological | prowess and software availability. | | The c64 was also a lot of people's first taste of programming | in a time when C compilers cost hundreds of dollars. | | And if you don't understand c64 nostalgia, I bet you must be | even more befuddled by Spectrum nostalgia. Which was even | cheaper and shittier than the c64, but completely ruled the UK | for a while. | yakz wrote: | My family couldn't afford an Amiga when I was a kid, but we | could afford a C64 so that's what we had. | [deleted] | the_af wrote: | > _I really don 't understand the love people have for the | commodore 64. It wasn't especially advanced for it's time nor | was it especially good. Finally it basically required the use | of a horrible language like Basic to use. There's like zero | reason to re-create it as a retro computer._ | | Happy to help you understand: | | Like a lot of people, I owned a C64 and not an Amiga, which was | very expensive and uncommon in my country. | | Agreed the included Basic was horrible, but I also started my | programming journey with it. One upside, unlike with current | computers, is that the C64 had an "instant on" appliance feel | to it -- you plugged it in, and it booted up almost instantly, | greeting you with the READY prompt, ready to go at your | command. Turning it off was likewise instant. | | You could also write assembly with it. | | The C64 had a vast library of games, many very good, and the | SID music from those games was simply amazing. It still is. I | still listen to C64 music from time to time, and I love it. | | The demoscene around the C64 was amazing and -- get this -- it | still exists! | | Finally, though less importantly, the C64 was a massive success | and sold lots of units, and helped kickstart an era in | computing, so it has great historical importance. | | Hopefully this helped you understand the widespread love for | the C64. | dansanderson wrote: | I would add that the popularity of the original machine and | the vast library of games built off of each other, and the | result is a large community with love and nostalgia for the | C64. That in turn perpetuates modern projects, newcomers to | the scene, and new generations of community here for their | own reasons. | | "Retro" exists independently of "nostalgia:" it's a broad | cultural category that encompasses fashion, technology, and | new reasons to appreciate old things. I would recommend | Commodore-adjacent stuff--VICE, TheC64, Ultimate 64 in a new | case, MEGA65, refurbished machines with new accessories and | adapters--to people with a variety of interests that have | never seen an original Commodore. | jansan wrote: | Just the other day I ran into this video of a recent C64 | demo. It just blew my mind (5:02 is my favorite part). THere | were demos at the time I played on the C64, but this is just | pushing the limits so far, it is pure art. | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q56-23D7omY | SeanLuke wrote: | > Back in the 1980's, Commodore released the famous Commodore 64 | (8 bit computer), and then followed it up with the Commodore 128, | and Amiga (16 bit computers). | | ??? Pretty sure the 128 was an 8-bit computer. | jacquesm wrote: | Yes, the added memory was managed with an 8722 MMU. | [deleted] | bitwize wrote: | He Did The Math, Atari Jaguar style. (Two 8-bit CPUs = 16 bits) | wang_li wrote: | And the amiga was Motorola 68000 based which is a 32 bit | processor by any coherent definition. | [deleted] | glonq wrote: | Does the mega65 shipping put a nail in the coffin of the | commander x16, which seems to be stumbling? | the_af wrote: | How is it stumbling? Do you mean "slow going"? Because | according to Wikipedia, the MEGA65 project was started in 2015, | so Mega itself was slow. | | These are essentially hobbyist projects, I don't think there's | any nails to be placed on any coffins. They get done when they | get done, and are not expected to become huge commercial | successes. | glonq wrote: | By stumbling I mean 'founders and influencers abandoning the | project'. | | Well hopefully by scaling back ambitions they'll be able to | get something out. | 300bps wrote: | I have quite a number of Commodore 64s lying around by virtue of | developing a hobby of learning component level repair on them. | | I'm tempted to buy one of these Mega65s to play around with it | but at $832.50 including shipping to the US, it's a bit much. The | main reason I am interested in old computers is because I used | those old computers back in the day! | | Really have to hand it to them on the engineering of it though - | looks like an amazing machine. | technothrasher wrote: | > I have quite a number of Commodore 64s lying around | | I've got a bunch as well, some new in box, some completely | ratty and worn out, most somewhere in between. Have you | registered them with the C64 registry? | (https://c64preservation.com/dp.php?pg=registry) What's your | lowest serial number? I've got one with a pretty low serial, | which I was lucky enough to find and purchase at the Dayton | Hamvention back in the 1993 for $5. | | > The main reason I am interested in old computers is because I | used those old computers back in the day! | | Right there with you! | technofiend wrote: | Things I'm nostalgic for are slightly older like the VT100 and | PDP 11 series. There was something just amazing about the soft | blip when turning on the VT100, and something very powerful | about clacking away on that keyboard, writing code to do | whatever you could think of. But even if someone made a brand | new VT 100 with a proper CRT and embedded a PDP 11 equivalent, | would I pay $832.50 for it? Nah, probably not. | | Still, kudos to the team for successfully recreating the C64 in | FGPA. Preserving digital heritage is important even if it's | time consuming and expensive. | russellendicott wrote: | I've always wanted a PDP11 but having never used one I'm | overwhelmed when looking for them. I have no way of knowing | if I'm buying the right parts or how to tell if they | function. | | Are there any retro recreations of PDP machines? All I've | ever been able to find are emulators. | watmough wrote: | Enjoy ... | https://obsolescence.wixsite.com/obsolescence/pidp-11 | | The 8 and 11 have been made. There was a PiDP-10 in progress, | but not sure what the status is on it currently. | everslick wrote: | Actually it is a recreation of the C65. (Which happened to | have a C64 mode) Running 3rd party cores is possible though. | dfxm12 wrote: | Consider checking out the mister project. The Mister is one | FPGA board that lets you emulate many old computers, like the | C64, Atari ST, Amiga 500, Macintosh plus, 486 based systems, | even Japanese computers like the Sharp x68k, PC-88, MSX, etc. | It's a great piece of kit, with some level of floppy support | and more affordable (although you have to bring your own fancy | case!). | glonq wrote: | If they had a no-floppy option and an assemble-it-yourself | option, I wonder how much the cost might come down? Heck, some | people might even want to DIY the case and keyboard. | bluescrn wrote: | Most of the cost seems likely to come from the costs of | producing a very small run of a large presumably-injection- | molded case and a custom keyboard. | | Can't imagine the machine will ever have much of a community | with its combination of high price, relatively low nostalgia, | and a bulky/unsexy design, but it's cool that they actually | managed to finish and ship the product. | cmrdporcupine wrote: | You might be interested in my good friend Randy's labour of | love: | | https://accentual.com/vicii-kawari/ | | FPGA replacement for the VIC-II. | 300bps wrote: | Considering I just bought 10 NOS NTSC VIC-II chips, yes I'm | interested. | | I've been following that project for some time but it seems | to be On hold for months and counting due to chip shortage. | Is it being resumed at some point soon? | cmrdporcupine wrote: | He's constantly working on it. We both quit our Google jobs | back in January (on the same day) and frankly, the VIC is | how he seems to be spending most of his time since. | | The problem remains chip shortages. He had to rework the | board a couple times because of lack of FPGA supply. | | I've seen his latest boards and they are impressive. | com2kid wrote: | > In my view the ongoing race to the bottom of slave labour to | make cheaper systems is not sustainable. | | As someone who has worked in consumer electronics, and worked | closely with the people who were on the factory line, employees | on electronics manufacturing lines are not slave labor. They are | often times well paid, with pay that would make for a good living | in more rural parts of the US. After having worked on a | production line for a year, they are in a good bargaining | position to up their pay for the next year[1], sometime I got to | witness as my team had to basically pay a bonus to get people to | come back to work after the spring festival. | | Do some employers suck? Of course[2]. It is important for the | companies placing these orders to ensure workers are treated | well, I know when I was at MSFT we had guidelines in place for | worker treatment, including an increase minimum age for workers | vs what the local law allowed. | | I also don't think a lot of people realize that for any | production line in China making complicated American designed | electronics, that there are likely Americans also on the factory | floor helping things out! Especially at the beginning of the | production run. None of the people I know who were on the factory | floor would have been silent if they had seen abuses, abuses of | the people they worked day in and day out with for weeks and | sometimes months. | | I'm not saying horrible abuses don't happen, but I am saying that | it is possible, and not some insanely difficult task, to | responsibly manufacture goods in China, or any other country for | that matter. | | BTW, everything is made in China because China has a ton of local | expertise, engineering talent, and ease of sourcing parts. For | complicated to make products, the labor savings really isn't the | big driver. | | [1] Yield rates go up significantly with experienced employees. | [2] There is a lot of pressure to make release dates for consumer | electronics, missing certain holidays for release means an entire | product may not sell enough units to be profitable anymore. Does | this mean crap tons of stress for everyone involved? | Unfortunately yes, if you work in higher end consumer electronics | you will see people fall apart all around you, it is a very high | stress environment. It sucks that the stress is also put on the | lowest paid workers in the chain, and more needs to be done to | stop that from happening. | [deleted] | miguel_cordeiro wrote: | Maybe it's nostalgia but for me it makes computing look fun | again. Amazing attention to detail... kudos to the makers. | kloch wrote: | I love that the box and form factor are retro 80's but the | keyboard is fully modern. Very good design decisions. | layer8 wrote: | It's based on the C65 prototypes | (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_65) from 1990/1991. | Not sure about "modern", the modern keyboard layout was | arguably established by the IBM Enhanced Keyboard | (https://deskthority.net/wiki/IBM_Enhanced_Keyboard) introduced | in 1985/1986, so roughly at the same time the now-retro C128 | and the Amiga were introduced (who had vaguely similar | keyboards). ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-06-03 23:00 UTC)