Administered by:
@mos_8502 @NoelsRetroLab also TIL that Amstrad CPC was a truly hack design, which is totally in keeping with the Amstrad Way to be honest
@NoelsRetroLab @msh @mos_8502 I think the IO decoding is one of the Amstrads biggest flaws (along with the RAM banking schema).
But they were far from the only company at the time to hack things to keep the cost down.
@bread80 oh absolutely, though I would say Amstrad's cost-driven hardware hackery skills are right up there with Commodore, the latter of whom had the advantage of owning MOS/CSG so could extend the hackery fully into the ICs themselves. Amstrad of course flexed these skills in HiFi.
The whole industry was notorious for corner cutting, but at great detriment to usability (horrible keyboards, lack of power, poor graphics and sound etc). Commodore and Amstrad seemed to be leaders in finding ways to cut cost that preserved desirable features...and sometimes caused frustration for programmers!
@mos_8502 @NoelsRetroLab @msh I’m probably spoilt because I’ve been looking at the Enterprise design. It can put any 16k memory block into any bank. And video gets a dedicated 64k block.
In contrast the Amstrads available options are very limited. Also, the restriction to having video in the base 64k. And the system (effectively) also has to go in the base 64k.
Enterprise designed this in from the start. The Amstrad came later but didn’t even consider it.
@NoelsRetroLab yeah the Enterprise micros were pretty amazing...they were 8-bit systems that were legit competitive with contemporary 16-bit machines in capability IIRC...flexible memory management and impressive graphics and sound
@NoelsRetroLab @mos_8502 @msh The more I learn about the Enterprise the more disappointed I become that it is so poorly understood.
Bitmap, character and attribute graphics. Multiple video modes on screen *at the same time*, (basic) video pass through capabilities. Just incredible.