10 Dec
1998
10 Dec
'98
12:45 p.m.
I learned many things about the C64 recently.
First, that it was a underpowered, low quality computer that was more
expensive than an Apple ][ and had less features. I disagree because I
have never liked the Apple ][ more than the C64.
More expensive?!?! The C-64 with a C-1541 would have been about $600 when
introduced IIRC, at the same time a Apple ][ was about $1200-1500 I believe.
Second, I learn that the VIC-20, a predecessor to the
C-64, was better
than it. How is this? Last I heard, it is the VIC that was underpowered
because it only had 8k ram or something like. Please explain; how was it
better?
The VIC had about 3.5k base, with 8k and 16k (I've heard of a 32k)
expansions. Might have been faster, but even I'll admit the C-64 was
better since it came with 64k, better graphics and sprites. A VIC-20 with
Datacasette was my only computer from 1981 or 1982-1986. In mid-87 I got a
Kaypro 2000 laptop, what a change!
Zane
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | Linux Enthusiast |
| healyzh(a)holonet.net (alternate) | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/ |