Great video! This was my first computer. Just before Christmas 1985 my dad bought it so I could play C64 games and he could use CP/M. I don't think it took more than a few months and he bought a Commodore PC 20 for himself to use instead of the C128. Best time of my life when I could move the C128 into my room.
Yes, I was fond of my C128 back in the day. Yeah, still to this day, I wonder how this machine would fair, if it had utilized a version of the 65816 chip instead of the 8502. Yeah, I realized the need for additional hardware required to implement the infamous ports 0 & 1, and the fact it was Western Digital that created 65816 as to apposed MOS technology (owned by Commodore at time). Though, in hindsight, seemed like the AppleGS had a clear advantage when it came to handling memory beyond 64k.
The 128 is such a great system. The pinnacle of Commodore's computers. (Amiga not included). I remember using the CTRL G in the C64 days with terminals as they usually support that. Back then I learned that the CTRL G is the Bell code or character and it dates back to the teletype and into the late 1800's. When video terminals replaced teletypes they kept the sequence for compatibility and made it visual or electronic sound instead. Anyway, great video as usual.
I disagree, the C128 was a failure, like so many of Commodore's later offerings (C16, Plus 4, C65, Amiga CDTV, A600 and 4000, CD32 etc) It was a case of too little, too late. It was an expensive machine, sort of C64 compatible, but offering no more performance to the C64 side, whilst the Z80 side was poorly supported and relatively slow. It was the equivalent of Frankenstein's creature... a mixture of ill fitting parts cobbled together, neither one thing nor another.
@@another3997 The C128 was actually a considerable upgrade over the C64, or rather it *could* be. The real issue was the somewhat lazy decision to have the separate C64/C128 modes, making C64 compatibility come at the expense of every enhancement the C128 had when using it. It gave developers few reasons to dip their toe into native C128 development rather than just carrying on making C64 software that 128 users could run in compatibility mode. Most C128s must have spent more time in C64 mode than in any other. In which case the user might as well have just bought a C64. Thats why the C64 ultimately outlived it.
@@another3997 The C-128 was a commercial failure, but then so was the Amgiga. Good machines, though. I've wondered if they'd put more hardware power into the C-128 it would have done better, even if it suffered some C-64 incompatibility. Like using a 65816 CPU. But the Apple 2GS went that route, and the C-128 sold better than the 2GS.
I still have Commodore 128DCR as a kid and hope to play around with it some more when I have free time... Hope to get 80-column cable to work with regular composite monitor...
Cbmprg studio. It's an awesome cross development environment for all Commodore 8-Bit computers. Aside from a fully equipped editor and assembler, it also includes a sprite editor, a character editor, screen editor, and more. It also works with Basic, offering a more modern way to write and edit Basic code, but when it comes to basic I prefer doing it the old fashioned way. When it comes to assembly though, Cbmprg is my go to. www.ajordison.co.uk/
The C128 was a GREAT school computer (for 80 column word processing) and BBS terminal (since the most popular BBS's of that time were IBM). CCGMS/DesTerm128 ran awesome on the C128
A great school computer in some countries perhaps, but the C128 appeared too late to be a contender in many places. In fact the C128 was a dismal failure in terms of overall sales. The UK had chosen Acorn to design its "BBC Micro" range for the government's national computer literacy project in schools, and it was released in late 1981. And in terms of adaptability and expansion, the BBC Micro was a beast of a machine.
The Commodore 128 wasn't built well enough to withstand a school environment, the 128D was better, but never became the standard in the UK. Many schools in the UK used Research Machines 380Zs and 480Zs throughout the 1980s, often networked to a Winchester hard drive server, they were expensive CPM based machines, but were built like brick shit and then after it's initial release in 1985 many schools gradually started upgrading to the RM Nimbus range which were MSDOS based PCs. The BBC Model B was also popular in the 1980s, they were fairly well built to survive in a school environment and were specially subsidised for education.
@@pjcnet Oh, I meant for usage at home. I never saw a Commodore 128 used directly in any school in the 1980's. But I did use one at home for my projects, papers, and research online (Yes, the C128 had online research tools like QLink, BBS's, and early Internet). The C128 could also easily log into the library network of the 1980's to do online research there -- most people didn't know that was an option until the mid to late 1990's.
I got my hands on a 128 DCR 2 years ago and it's my baby. Always wanted one and finally have it! The 128D+DCR have 64KB video ram for the 80 column chip, where as the flats only came with 16KB and thus couldn't do as many colors in that mode.
Great video..I enjoyed it...the C128 was my first computer together with the 1571 drive & datasette....awesome times...I remember that loading Microprose Gunship from tape took 30...minutes ;-) happy days :-)
At least two of those facts I didn't know. Thank you! 👍 I have a genuine european 128-D stored in a drawer since the last century. (I bought it second hand in the early 90's). The last time it was tested (in 2005) it worked perfectly. Now, knowing that there are not many images of the interior of that model, I hope to get free time to unpack it, review it, and do and publish an extensive photo shoot (both outside and inside). 👋
Cool video. I've got to add one of these to my collection one day. I *think* that the control-g beep goes back to the bells on old Teletype machines from the 1960s. The control-g worked on all my old PCs. Just tried it on a Windows 10 machine, and it works there too though it just played a stock Windows .WAV sound instead of a beep LOL.
Bil Herd has a NTSC 'plastic' 128D, it was intended to be released in the USA also, but only a few NTSC ones exist. The DCR is a better machine in a few subtle ways. First of all, the timing of the address bus on the 'flat' 128 and 'plastic' D is 'wild' in 128 mode, especially when running at 2mhz. On the DCR it is much more 'in spec' and with a lot less variation depending on the exact mmu configuration. In the last month I've spent a pretty significant amount of time researching all the bus timings together with the guy who designs and produces the Ultimate II+ cartridge, to solve a number of timing issues when using that cartridge with a C128 in 128 mode. Also, the 8568 is a notable improvement over the 8563 VDC chip. First of all it does not suffer from some odd bugs (for example, it doesn't require shifting all text modes 7 pixels to the right on a 8563, obvious from the odd value needed for the horizontal scroll register for the 'default' position). It also runs cooler and is more reliable than the 8563, and in theory it did provide for an IRQ when done with a command. The lack of that is a much heard complaint of the C128 hardware designers about the 8563 VDC. Sadly this irq is not connected to the system, so not usable, but essentially the 8568 is what VDC should have been from the start. If you ever spoke to Bil, you may know he is no fan of the DCR for various reasons, including the more noisy VIC2e video output, but he'd have loved to have the 8568 instead of 8563. Btw, there also exists a cost reduced 'flat' 128CR. Like the 128DCR, it uses a 8580 SID chip, 8568 VDC chip, comes with 64k vram, but in the same case as the original 'flat' 128. This machine is somewhat rare, but made it beyond prototype, and a couple of them are known to still exist and being used.
At least twice the RAM - the C128 also had 16K or 64K VDC RAM as well as the base 128K RAM. This VDC RAM could be used for other uses other than the 80 columns display.
The 128 on paper was awesome, but like most things, market value is KING. With all the upgrades the 128 had, it was hardly every used by 3rd party programmers. Kind of sad... Just like the AMIGA, most software was designed for the AMIGA 500. When I say software I mean GAMES. because games really push the hardware.
It is one of the sleekest looking machines, but inside it is a mess. They should have merged both video outputs in a single RGB signal (and tweaked the VIC for RGB output as well). Also it is hard to open, no idea what to do after unscrewing the 6 screws, it still stays shut. The power brick is ginormous and should have been built in. But the weirdest is the 2 BASICS. They should have made 1 with backwards compatibility, and on the fly 40/80 column switching as with other machines from its time.
I soon had my heart and dreams on the Amiga which I saw demonstrated at the Commodore Show in London in 1985, it was absolutely jaw dropping to see in those days, well ahead of it's time, the Commodore 128 was too little too late and a strange combination with effectively 3 computers in 1 with only 1 good for gaming, the problem is most people who owned one only used it as a Commodore 64 which was a waste of all that extra hardware. I loved my Commodore 64 that I'd owned since 1983.
Hi. Amazing hobby, keeping the famous C128 alive. I did my thesis on the MOS 6502 CPU. I still have my 5.25” diskettes. Would you able to retrieve the info of those diskettes after 32 years?
I used monitor in c128 to mess with c64 games that have autostart at $8000 ( "cbm80" thing). Or rip sid music subroutines from demos and collect them just for listening. Good ol' times 😄
the peek from the 8bit was the C65 ..🙂..a question, what ist the best game/app only for the c128?...thanks for upload and sorry for my lousy english! ...The C128 ist for me a perfekt machine, but no software...ahhh, geos...ok, i forgot....!🙂 your robotronic64 from chemnitz
It's a bit weird to say "monochrome composite". Historically, composite video referred specifically to the combination of the luma and chroma components of a baseband *color* video signal onto one wire. That's in contrast to other baseband signal formats: 1) Monochrome video has no chroma component. 2) Y/C-separated video like S-Video puts luma and chroma on 2 separate wires. 3) Component video formats use 3 wires to carry the color channels separately. Then there's a question of where the sync signals go. They usually go with luma, but they can also go onto separate H-sync and V-sync wires, onto a single sync wire ("composite sync"), or on the green wire ("sync on green").
Usually composite includes chroma, but luma + sync is still considered 'composite', at least in the 'space' of computer monitors, going back well into the 1970s. That might be different in the world of broadcast video.
Before we called color video "Composite", there was "Composite Sync". Sync signals on old TV gear travelled on separate wires. Eventually it all got multiplexed into one cable.
Even if you could upgrade your C128 to exactly 512K RAM, it was pretty misleading to compare what could be possible with a completing platform. The Apple IIc came with 128K RAM as standard, just as the C128 did. I doubt many users of either platform ever upgraded their RAM and even if they did, the average user wouldn't have known what to do with the extra RAM.
By the time the C128 arrived, several competing computers were available with similar amounts of stock RAM, and there were a plethora of popular RAM expansions for many of them. People clamoured for extra memory to use RAM disks or paging in banks of RAM for better performance and animations etc. The limiting factor was usually cost, although memory prices were coming down slowly.
The RAM expanders (for the C64 too) were akin to EMS on the PC...they pretty much did nothing unless running software that had been specially coded to make use of it. In both cases they increased the RAM beyond the maximum the CPU could directly address (so did the stock 128K on a C128 actually since a 6502 can only directly address 64K). Making use of a RAM expander required either bank switching or using them as a RAM disk which supporting software could use as an ultra fast storage device to load and save files from as the program ran. Both cases required software developed to make use of it.
Actually, basic 7 and the C128 kernal support upto 256k out of the box, and can make use of that amount of ram in a usefull way. The hardware does not actually support 256k, let alone 512k, due to lacking address lines on the MMU. Interestingly, the MMU was originally going to support 1024k ram. This is obvious from the zeropage and stack relocation registers for example. For 'regular' ram access, the idea was to have 4 'superbanks' of 256k each, and have 4 ram blocks of 64k within each superbank. The bits to pick the 'superbank' are the unused bits in mmu register $d506 (information based on discussions with Bil Herd about the mmu design)
Commodore made the mistake of making a million computers which was a machine that was not compatible with the c64 library that faild in America but was successful in europe and then they made a machine that was compatible with c64 software but developers would not take on the machine because the 16 bit market seemed the way forward.....if only ....the 128 is a good computers capable of holding its own against a acorn bbc master 128
The display circuit on the C128 was really bad. They should have redesigned the VIC chip from the bottom. The machine has 2 video output ports, one is RGB-TTL the other Chroma/Luma. You cannot hook it up to a single screen and switch between modes without pressing switches on the screen as well. Also since it is RGB-i and "S-video-like", no TV from the era can show its output properly. Most small TV's had SCART RGB, but none had S-video yet, which came to 20 inch+ size TV's in the nineties. A redesigned VIC with the high res graphics should have led to a single RGB output port. The monitor itself does not mind having 640 or 320 pixels horizontal resolution. Also the VIC in the C128 has the same jailbars and chroma-bleed on Chroma/Luma output, despite the channel separation.
The Ctrl-G thing actually was not anything special to the C128. In the ASCII character standard, the Ctrl-G character is the "bell" character, and was intended for exactly this purpose. For this reason, almost all early computers and terminals which were ASCII-compatible would make a beep when told to print a Ctrl-G character. The only reason earlier Commodores wouldn't do this was because they weren't actually ASCII-compatible (they still used Commodore's old proprietary "PETSCII" character set instead).
@@HelloKittyFanMan The title of this video is "9 Random _Commodore 128_ Facts". That title by itself implies that these 'facts' are special or unique in some way to the C128, as opposed to _general_ facts that would apply to literally almost every computer/terminal in existence at the time. So yes, he pretty much _did_ say that, simply by including it in this video in the first place.
@@foogod4237: Nope. Just because something's random doesn't mean it's unique. Actually, if you can hit them randomly then that means they're probably _not_ very unique. Also, what is it that makes you think the fact is only figurative or even fake, so you distance yourself from it by putting quotation marks around it, instead of just taking it directly?
@@HelloKittyFanMan Wow, you have _completely_ misunderstood the point. The word "random" has nothing to do with anything. The point is that the video calls these things out as *"Commodore 128* facts". That means _facts which are specific to the Commodore 128,_ which implies they are _not_ facts which also apply to most other things which are not Commodore 128s. (And in fact, most of the other facts presented in the video are fairly unique to the C128 (or at least the Commodore line of computers), so this is really the only one which is not, which also reinforces my point.) This is basic English comprehension. It really shouldn't be that hard. (And the use of quote marks around the word "facts" was to emphasize that I was referencing the same word as was used in the (also quoted) title. It doesn't imply anything at all about being figurative or fake. Quotation marks can be used for multiple different reasons. Again, basic English comprehension stuff, here.)
Wow, wrong, @@foogod4237. I couldn't have "completely misunderstood the point" where there was no point to begin with. _You're_ the one who said the _whole_ title when you tried making it sound like things from it were significant as if they were special. If the word "random" had nothing to do with it then you shouldn't have brought up the whole title, but only the parts that made you believe what you believe, DUH. No, just because someone says "Commodore 128 facts" doesn't mean they're saying that those facts are _only_ about the 128; probably that just for him as a potential or actual Commodore computer fan, these were interesting to him to find on a Commodore 128. It doesn't mean he's implying something like, "Oh, uhhh... and by the way, I think these aren't found on other machines, uhhhh...." So no, your point was _not_ reinforced. Yes, of course I know about basic English comprehension because I have it, which is obviously something you lack. And yes, I know that quotation marks have a few uses, duh. But those are only for quoting either a thing that was actually said, citing the name of an article or short story, or other small work of art (books, movies, plays, TV shows, etc. are titled without them), referring to a character, word, or phrase as that by itself rather than using it for its meaning, nicknaming something, or framing an idea as if someone else had said it but you don't necessarily agree with it, like it's either just figurative or you think it's fake. (But they are all limited as quotation-based uses.) So when someone uses them to repeat someone else's saying verbatim but it doesn't seem necessary to, that's when that quote seems to have been used as the idea disclaimer type, which is why I thought you were using the marks around "fact" that way. Like: What sort of benefit did you believe actually quoting that single word from the title was supposed to help with even though you had already quoted the whole title?
Computer dealer and me often discussed this machine when I dropped by and he still hadn't sold one of them. We were both convinced it would have been more successful with small business and power hobbyists, if it hadn't the "I'm also a C64"- sticker on it. The shitty implementation of CP/M that Commodore only informed the users about in the fine print was another nail in the coffin. The devs must have been on drugs when they thought: 'Hey, here is this sleek universal OS (CP/M) that runs on many different machines! Let's include it in our new system, but you know what? We'll just stick to our own diskette file system, so data exchange between different systems is impossible, whoah lol. The dumb faces of the consumers will be hilarious!" The C128 was a developement test brought to market. It was a disaster. F*+~ it and everyone who contributed to it.
As a matter of fact, a C128 with 1571 drive can read and write double density 5.25" CP/M disks from almost every other CP/M system ever made, and with a 1581 drive, 3.5" disks from the majority of systems which supported those. There is more wrong with your comment, but this one is so easy to find out, it nicely shows how uninformed your rant is.
If you watch some videos on this platform from Bil Herd, he will tell you why the Z80 processor was put on the board. It wasn't for CP/M. That was only a side benefit for marketing. The chip had a purpose.
I honestly tried using CP/M back then, and it was just a horrible experience. The only benefit I got from CP/M was basically as a crash course into how MS-DOS worked which would prove useful only a few years later.
@@telengardforever7783 It was a bit late for CP/M which was already pretty much dead by 1985, and the C128 also wasn't really powerful enough to run it properly and so software ran pretty slow compared to a dedicated CP/M machine. Also it really required a 1571 disk drive to be useful when many users ran a 1541 with a C128. Although the supplied boot disk is in GCR format and so you can boot CP/M from a 1541, it both takes an age with no burst mode support and also once it is finally up pretty much no other CP/M disks can be read in a 1541 drive.
@@chriswathen9612 Hmm, the C128 was a bit slow for a mid 1980s CP/M machine, but had more memory than most CP/M machines. Also, 4mhz was common in the later years of CP/M, but 2mhz was a very common CPU speed during the heydays of CP/M, only more high-end machines did have 4mhz CPUs. So.. it was totally powerfull enough to run most CP/M software which already existed when CP/M was at its peak, but somewhat slow for the more demanding applications for sure. And all that is pretty relative really. In 1985, being able to run Wordstar on a sub $500 computer with high quality 80 column output and a good keyboard, and being able to use that same machine for games way beyond what any CP/M machine could was a pretty good deal for many students overhere at least. For serious business use CP/M was already kindof dead, so with regards to that it was mostly useless to have.
@@barryon8706 I have never really seen data on that, but it would make sense, and aligns with annecdotal evidence. First thing is that having an IBM PC (clone) at home was way more common in the USA in the mid 1980s, whereas CP/M was still in common use until the early 90s in especially eastern Europe, where people at that time also had relatively little money. Commodore sold lots of 128DCRs in Hungary, Romania, but also in Germany, which is a significant part of why the 128DCR specifically was kept in production till late 1989 (the 'flat' one had been out of production for about 3 years by the time production fo the DCR ended). One of the 128DCRs I own was originally sold in Romania. It is from the very tail end of production of the model, and when I got it, the original CP/M disks were included and unsealed, and in addition to that copies of a variety of CP/M productivity software was included, including a copy of Wordstar on 'C128 native' CP/M disks. That rather points at it having been used for that. I hear similar things from people I know in Croatia, Serbia etc. Now this will be rather biassed because many of the people I know there I only know because they were, and often still are slightly more serious C128 users (I still develop C128 code, specifically rom code to deal with some modern expansion hardware)
A lot of people (especially the C64 Gamers) view the C128 as sort of a failed continuation of the C64, or “just a C64 with double the RAM and some extra chips”, which are 2 misconceptions that couldn't be more utterly wrong. Commodore was one of those companies that were completely economically dependent on the Christmas season sales. The rest of the year was all about getting the next product lined up and ready before Christmas. And the primary objective for the C128, was to fill that position for '85, so that the Amiga 1000 had and extra year to become ready for Christmas '86. That was the C128 sole purpose from the perspective of the management. So, it was never meant to pick up and continue the C64’s legacy or even sell as abundantly. And from that perspective it not only served its purpose, but rather it exceeded all expectations by far. From an origin point of view the C128 was meant to be the next model of the TED 264/364 line (the C116, C16, and +4 business models). Bil Herd had an experience with a customer, a teacher who had spent a lot of time developing some teaching software for the C64, which she was now “a bit” upset about being completely incompatible with these new TED machines. This left a rather big impression on him, so when this "D128 project" (that turned into the C128) was more-or-less dropped into his lap, he amongst other things decided to make it backwards compatible with the C64. So, the C128 didn't spring from the C64, but rather from the TEDs, and sort of ended up as a culmination of everything learned during Commodore's entire 8-Bit era. Let’s face it, it is a Chimera, a Frankenstein’s monster, or in other words, a freak. And seriously, who in their right mind doesn’t love a good and proper freak? You know how the C64 is often called "the Breadbox" or "the Breadbin", and the Spectrum is often called "the Speccy" or Sinclair’s original 128K model is called "the Toast-rack". I am attempting to get the nickname of "the Commodore Chimera" or just "the Chimera" attached to the C128. Simply because I think it’s an extremely well-fitting nickname, considering its history and heritage. I am also attempting to nickname the Amstrad CPCs as "PowerPuff-PCs" (as in "Sir Alan Sugar, spice and everything nice"). But it doesn't seem like the Amstrad enthusiasts possess a sense of humour on that point. Check out "VCFMW 11 - Bil Herd: Tales From Inside Commodore" here on YT. It is not only a really great source of direct-from-the-horse’s-mouth knowledge, but some of his Commodore stories are also hilariously funny. Bil also talks about that customer experience at about 19 minutes 40 seconds in. The C128 is actually at least a 144KB RAM system, because the VDC (80-Column) chip has its own dedicated memory. The standard wedge shaped C128 came with 16KB of Video-RAM. Whereas some of the C128D's came with 16KB, some with a full 64KB, and all the C128DCR's had 64KB. Turning those into 192KB systems. You can get a small daughter-board upgrade for those with only 16KB, which plugs into the VDC’s socket, and you then simply put the VDC chip into a socket on top, bringing them up to the full 64KB of Video-RAM as well. Thereby giving them access to the VDC’s full HiRes multi-coloured graphics mode. However, you will also need the graphics commands of the Basic v8.0 extension (EPROM in the U36 socket) to utilize it in Basic. Which brings me to the fact that, it's not really that hard to bring colours onto your 80-Column display. The VDC-Chip outputs a RGBiHV signal out of its DB9 port marked RGBi. So, the first hurdle to overcome is that this is a purely digital signal operating at 15.1KHz. "RGBiHV" stands for "Red, Green, Blue, Intensity, Horizontal sync, and Vertical sync". One could speculate that this would mean 1 bit for red, 1 for green, 1 for blue, and 1 for doubling the brightness (intensity). Or in other words: 2^4 = 2*2*2*2 = 16 colours, however this is not entirely true. Because most digital RGBiHV/CGA compatible CRT monitors would interpret these binary values as an index and lookup the correct colour from an internally based palette. Which would mean that a direct convertion would cause some of the colours to be displayed incorrectly. Like for instance brown would just look far more like a dark orange and so on. Luckily there are already several options available and able to remedy this today. One option could be to get an "RGBiHV to RGBs" adaptor. "RGBs" is analogue and stands for "Red, Green, Blue, and combined Sync". And "combined sync" means that the horizontal and vertical sync gets combined into one signal. RGBs at 15.1KHz is actually what the Amigas output, also known as "Component-RGB" or the kind of signal which a European Scart cable is able to carry. These "DAC" adaptors are rather easily available in pre-assembled form and not really that expensive either. Sometimes they are called "RGBiHV to RGBa", sometimes "RGBi to RGBs", and sometimes "CGA to RGB" which can be a bit confusing. Although I have already hinted that RGBiHV is slightly related to CGA. There is an adaptor called "CGA2RGBv2" available from GGLabs's WebShop (US) and one named "C128 RGBi to RGBa" from Protovision's (Europe). That's all good and fine if we want to use it with a Component-RGB or SCART compatible TV/monitor. But most modern VGA capable monitors don’t understand anything less than 30KHz. So, although we've now managed to 'Convert' the signal from 'Digital' to 'Analog' (DAC = Digital to Analog Convertor), it is still only pumping out of our adaptor at 15.1KHz. What we now need is something to 'Double' the 'Scanlines' and 'Up-Scale' it to 30KHz, like the "GBS-8200/8220 (to 30KHz VGA)" or “HD-V9900 (to HDMI)” scan-doubler/up-scaler boards. You may argue that since the C128’s 80-column RGBi-signal is digital, then wouldn’t it be better to go directly from RGBiHV to HDMI, and you’d be completely right. “hoglet67” on GitHub has made an “RGBtoHDMI” adaptor based on a Raspberry Pi Zero. But it covers not only the C128, but a slew of other machines, is rather complicated, and this rant of mine is already getting way too long. 😅 Luckily there are already plenty of videos and information to be found out there on the interweb, on both the "RGBiHV to RGBs" DAC adaptors, the GBS-8200/8220 and HD-V9900 scan-doubles/up-scalers, and the RGBtoHDMI. The REU “RAM Expansion Unit” cartridges are not exactly adding to the C64/C128’s internal RAM. But rather providing an additional external source and some extra DMA (Direct Memory Access) circuitry to assist the 6510/8502 CPUs in very rapidly copying data-blocks back and forth between the internal and external RAM. This DMA circuitry is for example what the recent C64-port of “Sonic the Hedgehog” utilizes to generate the intensely fast scrolling needed for a Sonic game. It is also why a GEOS-RAM cartridge, or any other kind of RAM expansion cartridges won’t work with Sonic, because it is not about the extra RAM, but about the DMA-fast copying circuit. Another fact which people who look down upon the recently released “TheC64 Mini/Maxi” reproductions overlook, is that since they are software emulation based, such things as the rare, sought after, and really expensive additional hardware, or in this case the REU cartridges, are also fairly easy to emulate. Or in other words, where an original stock C64 would completely fail to run the new Sonic the Hedgehog port, one of the stock TheC64s absolutely and completely would run it, no problem… and TheC64 Mini is far cheaper than acquiring an original REU, or even one of the cartridges capable of simulating an REU would be. It should be possible to expand the C128’s RAM to 256KB internally, by doing some modding. However, expanding it to 512KB, as was heavily advertised, would require drilling into Bil’s custom MMU chip, in order to access and additional address-line pin, which was otherwise sacrificed for some other functionality back then, and therefore not drawn out into an actual physical pin on the chip… or that’s at least according to Bil Herd himself in a sort of “yeah, good luck with that” kind of attitude. The “DING” or otherwise known as the “Bell” by modem/BBS users, was not something confined to the C128s. But actually available on any computer while running any terminal-software. It was meant as a way to attract the SysOp (or administrator) on the other end of the line for some help or a chat. I know this because I was one of the SysOps running a BBS back in the days. The “Bell” is also assigned to ASCII/ANSI value 7 or in C128 PETSCII terms it would be CHR$(7). So, this would also make your C128 go “DING!”: PRINT CHR$(7); And you can actually access the entire lower region of the PETSCII table like this: CTRL+@ = CHR$(0) CTRL+A = CHR$(1) CTRL+B = CHR$(2) CTRL+C = CHR$(3)… and so on, you get the idea (Look in the C128’s manual - Appendix: I-1). But a funny thing happens once you reach CTRL+M, because that is CHR$(13) aka CR or “Carriage Return”. So, if you should ever break your [RETURN] and [ENTER] keys from smashing them too hard, you’ve got an extra hidden spare in CTRL+M. Phew, that was a bit of a bible… yeah, my head does hold a lot of now useless and outdated information and I certainly felt very "free to leave a comment below". So, this is the risk you're taking by encouraging people like me to do that. 😆
Interesting comments, however the C128 definitely derives from the 64 and has almost nothing in common with 264 (TED) machines, apart from the same 6502 instruction set. The C128 was basically a C64 with 128 KB to match the competition (e.g. Atari 130XE). Same video chip (with a few more pins to handle non-video stuff), identical SID audio chip, almost same CPU but able to run twice as fast when VIC was off (i.e. never in games, except the border area). The extra memory required a MMU and the incompatibility with C64 CP/M cartridge required a Z80 (which runs half-assed in the C128), and just because Commodore clueless marketing wanted the CP/M tick in the specs. The only real innovation in the C128 was the much more useful BASIC v7, and the VDC 8563 display controller which was ill-fated since the beginning due to poor design and implementation; required a special expensive display for colors; lacked sprites; and used a horribly bottlenecked system interface… Long story short: Useless for games. So games developers continued developing for the C64, as the hardware was identical, and there was no reason to increase development time to use the extra memory just to sell a couple more copies to C128 users. Also note that the Amiga 1000 was never an alternative to any 8 bit machine, because only a few rich people could afford to spend more than 4 times what a C128 cost back then (let alone a C64) for a Christmas gift. The C128 was discontinued two years after the relatively affordable Amiga 500 was on the market, and it was still twice the price of the C128. Hence a different market segment for a long while.
@@dans.8198 Sadly, I cannot say the same about your comment. There was nothing of what you wrote that I haven't heard before. If you want to add more to your knowledge, you need to go watch some of Bil Herd's talks here on YT and get into the history behind it, instead of only focusing on the similarities in hardware of the end products. Because from an origin point of view, the C128 started out as the D128, which was based on a 6509 CPU with a Motorola 6845 display controller. When Bil Herd took over the project, the first thing he did was to get rid of the 6845. Because why on earth pay more for a Motorola chip, when you've got an in-house chip-fab. So, it didn't have a VIC-II or a SID originally, actually rather far from. One of the next things he did was to swap the 1MB bank switching 6509 out with an expanded version of the 6510 (namely the 8502) and his own developed MMU. So, the C64 mode was "just" a backwards compatibility feature added by Bil, after a conversation with an upset school teacher about her self-written C64 educational software not being compatible with the C116, C16, and the Plus 4. If not for that initial conversation there probably wouldn't have been a "GO64" mode at all. There is much more behind the scenes information, and not to mention ridiculous and juicy commodore stories, to be found in those talks. Well, to be honest it is basically the same talk over and over again just with variating content, depending on how much time he was granted to speak,. So, don't take my word for it, just go watch them yourself. Personally, I have just gotten extremely tired of listening to this false myth, that C128 owners only ever used it as a C64. It is the same misplaced ignorant arrogance which makes some Commodore-only users look down upon and be completely blind towards the strong points of other systems. Many of my friends (and myself) specifically went for the C128 over the C64 back then, because of it's higher developed Basic interpreter. Granted, I never really used CP/M for anything. But I did manage to make it switch back and forth between the 8502 and the Z80 on the fly mid program (50% 8502 and 50% Z80 machine-code, of course), mainly just for shits and giggles. And then some ignorant people would probably claim "Who needs Basic anyway, just learn assembler/machine-code". Well, I obviously did. But if "you" are writing programs involving more complex floating-point mathematical calculations visualized onto the graphics-screen, machine code isn't really the greatest starting point, now is it. You may end up there eventually after generating some simplifying lookup tables. My point is, as much as I do like the C64, my true love and enthusiasm lies with the C128... and after a while it gets really frustrating to have this lame C64 vs. C128 conversation over and over again, especially with someone (not saying you), who only ever used them for gaming... My second point is, regardless of the topic and however much knowledge we think we have gained, there is always more to be learned, and always most likely from some different angle we have previously been unaware of (and I DO mean we, myself included). - Here are my 3 top favourite Bil Herd talks here on YT in order of preference, which I may just have watched a few too many times. Since there always seems to be some small golden nugget I didn't catch previously: 1) "VCFMW 11 - Bil Herd: Tales From Inside Commodore VCF Midwest" 2) "World of Commodore 2016 - Bil Herd Keynote - Life at Commodore" 3) "VCF East 2019 -- Bil Herd -- Component Aging and Heat"
@@Zhixalom I have watched a lot of Bil’s videos, and I know the machines down to IC level. We are talking about the actual C128 here, not the original project that was scrapped, also quite different from TED machines. You and I and are rare examples of people who got a C128 to actually program it. I also love my C128, but we must recognize that the majority of its 2.5 million users got it as a videogame machine, waiting for much better games to come up… which never happened. The dark power of marketing. The C128 offered nothing better to game developers who at the end of the month need to pay bills with their work. It even made their lives more difficult because it was not identical to a C64 in “C64 mode”. The really revolutionary machine was the Amiga. And indeed the C128 was discontinued 5 years before the C64, which remained on the market to cover the low end. This is just computer history, and it does not make our C128’s any less fun than they are. Take care of your C128. As Bil would say, it was not expected to still be functional after 40 years.
@dans.8198 NO! You are the one here rudely imposing constraints on my 7 month old topic. The "actual C128" cannot be separated from its history, nothing in this world can. - It is now obvious to me that we are not going to agree on any of this... and I am not going to waste more time on someone, trying to force his points of view down my throat.
I didn't think I'll enjoy this video as much as I did. Well done.
The plastic case 128D was also sold here in Australia
Great video! This was my first computer. Just before Christmas 1985 my dad bought it so I could play C64 games and he could use CP/M. I don't think it took more than a few months and he bought a Commodore PC 20 for himself to use instead of the C128. Best time of my life when I could move the C128 into my room.
Yes, I was fond of my C128 back in the day. Yeah, still to this day, I wonder how this machine would fair, if it had utilized a version of the 65816 chip instead of the 8502. Yeah, I realized the need for additional hardware required to implement the infamous ports 0 & 1, and the fact it was Western Digital that created 65816 as to apposed MOS technology (owned by Commodore at time). Though, in hindsight, seemed like the AppleGS had a clear advantage when it came to handling memory beyond 64k.
The 128 is such a great system. The pinnacle of Commodore's computers. (Amiga not included). I remember using the CTRL G in the C64 days with terminals as they usually support that. Back then I learned that the CTRL G is the Bell code or character and it dates back to the teletype and into the late 1800's. When video terminals replaced teletypes they kept the sequence for compatibility and made it visual or electronic sound instead. Anyway, great video as usual.
Thanks.
@@BTM86 Ctrl-G even still works in Windows 11. If you open a command prompt and echo Ctrl-G the default windows system alert plays.
I disagree, the C128 was a failure, like so many of Commodore's later offerings (C16, Plus 4, C65, Amiga CDTV, A600 and 4000, CD32 etc) It was a case of too little, too late. It was an expensive machine, sort of C64 compatible, but offering no more performance to the C64 side, whilst the Z80 side was poorly supported and relatively slow. It was the equivalent of Frankenstein's creature... a mixture of ill fitting parts cobbled together, neither one thing nor another.
@@another3997 The C128 was actually a considerable upgrade over the C64, or rather it *could* be. The real issue was the somewhat lazy decision to have the separate C64/C128 modes, making C64 compatibility come at the expense of every enhancement the C128 had when using it. It gave developers few reasons to dip their toe into native C128 development rather than just carrying on making C64 software that 128 users could run in compatibility mode. Most C128s must have spent more time in C64 mode than in any other. In which case the user might as well have just bought a C64. Thats why the C64 ultimately outlived it.
@@another3997 The C-128 was a commercial failure, but then so was the Amgiga. Good machines, though. I've wondered if they'd put more hardware power into the C-128 it would have done better, even if it suffered some C-64 incompatibility. Like using a 65816 CPU. But the Apple 2GS went that route, and the C-128 sold better than the 2GS.
I still have Commodore 128DCR as a kid and hope to play around with it some more when I have free time... Hope to get 80-column cable to work with regular composite monitor...
Love your videos mate. I especially like the C128 ones! Please give us some more C128 vids... the nerdier the better.
I forgot to ask... what is your 6502 programming application that you show? Is it 65xx IDE? I'm a Linux user as I guess you are too?
Cbmprg studio. It's an awesome cross development environment for all Commodore 8-Bit computers. Aside from a fully equipped editor and assembler, it also includes a sprite editor, a character editor, screen editor, and more. It also works with Basic, offering a more modern way to write and edit Basic code, but when it comes to basic I prefer doing it the old fashioned way. When it comes to assembly though, Cbmprg is my go to.
www.ajordison.co.uk/
I was doing 80 column on a TV through RGB with the C128 and a cable hack as early as 1987, LOL
Nice video :) I didn't know about the caps lock bug. Cheers!
The C128 was a GREAT school computer (for 80 column word processing) and BBS terminal (since the most popular BBS's of that time were IBM). CCGMS/DesTerm128 ran awesome on the C128
A great school computer in some countries perhaps, but the C128 appeared too late to be a contender in many places. In fact the C128 was a dismal failure in terms of overall sales. The UK had chosen Acorn to design its "BBC Micro" range for the government's national computer literacy project in schools, and it was released in late 1981. And in terms of adaptability and expansion, the BBC Micro was a beast of a machine.
The Commodore 128 wasn't built well enough to withstand a school environment, the 128D was better, but never became the standard in the UK. Many schools in the UK used Research Machines 380Zs and 480Zs throughout the 1980s, often networked to a Winchester hard drive server, they were expensive CPM based machines, but were built like brick shit and then after it's initial release in 1985 many schools gradually started upgrading to the RM Nimbus range which were MSDOS based PCs. The BBC Model B was also popular in the 1980s, they were fairly well built to survive in a school environment and were specially subsidised for education.
@@pjcnet Oh, I meant for usage at home. I never saw a Commodore 128 used directly in any school in the 1980's. But I did use one at home for my projects, papers, and research online (Yes, the C128 had online research tools like QLink, BBS's, and early Internet). The C128 could also easily log into the library network of the 1980's to do online research there -- most people didn't know that was an option until the mid to late 1990's.
This! The BBS software on the C128 was _so_ much better than the BBS software on the C64.
I really admire the C128. I wish I had it back in the day! It's a lovely and capable machine. Actually 3 in 1! ;-)
Ya, it's my personal favorite. I especially love the BASIC.
I got my hands on a 128 DCR 2 years ago and it's my baby. Always wanted one and finally have it!
The 128D+DCR have 64KB video ram for the 80 column chip, where as the flats only came with 16KB and thus couldn't do as many colors in that mode.
You can upgrade the VDC RAM to 64 KB in the flats using a special daughterboard or better, replacing the two 8 KB chips with two 32 KB ones.
I wanted a C128 back in the day so badly, but never managed to snag one. I've always admired it from afar.
Great video..I enjoyed it...the C128 was my first computer together with the 1571 drive & datasette....awesome times...I remember that loading Microprose Gunship from tape took 30...minutes ;-) happy days :-)
It was my dream machine when i was a teen. Never could buy one where I was living at the time.
At least two of those facts I didn't know. Thank you! 👍
I have a genuine european 128-D stored in a drawer since the last century. (I bought it second hand in the early 90's).
The last time it was tested (in 2005) it worked perfectly.
Now, knowing that there are not many images of the interior of that model, I hope to get free time to unpack it, review it, and do and publish an extensive photo shoot (both outside and inside). 👋
Cool video. I've got to add one of these to my collection one day. I *think* that the control-g beep goes back to the bells on old Teletype machines from the 1960s. The control-g worked on all my old PCs. Just tried it on a Windows 10 machine, and it works there too though it just played a stock Windows .WAV sound instead of a beep LOL.
Bil Herd has a NTSC 'plastic' 128D, it was intended to be released in the USA also, but only a few NTSC ones exist.
The DCR is a better machine in a few subtle ways. First of all, the timing of the address bus on the 'flat' 128 and 'plastic' D is 'wild' in 128 mode, especially when running at 2mhz. On the DCR it is much more 'in spec' and with a lot less variation depending on the exact mmu configuration. In the last month I've spent a pretty significant amount of time researching all the bus timings together with the guy who designs and produces the Ultimate II+ cartridge, to solve a number of timing issues when using that cartridge with a C128 in 128 mode.
Also, the 8568 is a notable improvement over the 8563 VDC chip. First of all it does not suffer from some odd bugs (for example, it doesn't require shifting all text modes 7 pixels to the right on a 8563, obvious from the odd value needed for the horizontal scroll register for the 'default' position). It also runs cooler and is more reliable than the 8563, and in theory it did provide for an IRQ when done with a command. The lack of that is a much heard complaint of the C128 hardware designers about the 8563 VDC. Sadly this irq is not connected to the system, so not usable, but essentially the 8568 is what VDC should have been from the start.
If you ever spoke to Bil, you may know he is no fan of the DCR for various reasons, including the more noisy VIC2e video output, but he'd have loved to have the 8568 instead of 8563.
Btw, there also exists a cost reduced 'flat' 128CR. Like the 128DCR, it uses a 8580 SID chip, 8568 VDC chip, comes with 64k vram, but in the same case as the original 'flat' 128. This machine is somewhat rare, but made it beyond prototype, and a couple of them are known to still exist and being used.
At least twice the RAM - the C128 also had 16K or 64K VDC RAM as well as the base 128K RAM. This VDC RAM could be used for other uses other than the 80 columns display.
The 128 on paper was awesome, but like most things, market value is KING. With all the upgrades the 128 had, it was hardly every used by 3rd party programmers. Kind of sad... Just like the AMIGA, most software was designed for the AMIGA 500. When I say software I mean GAMES. because games really push the hardware.
I have a SX-64 with twice the CPUs as a Commodore 64. Of course that means the Commodore 128D has three CPUs.
It is one of the sleekest looking machines, but inside it is a mess. They should have merged both video outputs in a single RGB signal (and tweaked the VIC for RGB output as well). Also it is hard to open, no idea what to do after unscrewing the 6 screws, it still stays shut. The power brick is ginormous and should have been built in. But the weirdest is the 2 BASICS. They should have made 1 with backwards compatibility, and on the fly 40/80 column switching as with other machines from its time.
8bit Sam Coupe max 4,5 MB RAM (ZX Spectrum 48K ... Sam Coupe 512 K + 4x module 1 MB RAM)
I soon had my heart and dreams on the Amiga which I saw demonstrated at the Commodore Show in London in 1985, it was absolutely jaw dropping to see in those days, well ahead of it's time, the Commodore 128 was too little too late and a strange combination with effectively 3 computers in 1 with only 1 good for gaming, the problem is most people who owned one only used it as a Commodore 64 which was a waste of all that extra hardware. I loved my Commodore 64 that I'd owned since 1983.
Hi. Amazing hobby, keeping the famous C128 alive. I did my thesis on the MOS 6502 CPU. I still have my 5.25” diskettes. Would you able to retrieve the info of those diskettes after 32 years?
I used monitor in c128 to mess with c64 games that have autostart at $8000 ( "cbm80" thing). Or rip sid music subroutines from demos and collect them just for listening. Good ol' times 😄
I have 128 + with a 1571. Great machine.
the peek from the 8bit was the C65 ..🙂..a question, what ist the best game/app only for the c128?...thanks for upload and sorry for my lousy english! ...The C128 ist for me a perfekt machine, but no software...ahhh, geos...ok, i forgot....!🙂 your robotronic64 from chemnitz
Interesting video, it reminds me of an Amiga.
It's a bit weird to say "monochrome composite". Historically, composite video referred specifically to the combination of the luma and chroma components of a baseband *color* video signal onto one wire.
That's in contrast to other baseband signal formats:
1) Monochrome video has no chroma component.
2) Y/C-separated video like S-Video puts luma and chroma on 2 separate wires.
3) Component video formats use 3 wires to carry the color channels separately.
Then there's a question of where the sync signals go. They usually go with luma, but they can also go onto separate H-sync and V-sync wires, onto a single sync wire ("composite sync"), or on the green wire ("sync on green").
Usually composite includes chroma, but luma + sync is still considered 'composite', at least in the 'space' of computer monitors, going back well into the 1970s. That might be different in the world of broadcast video.
Before we called color video "Composite", there was "Composite Sync". Sync signals on old TV gear travelled on separate wires. Eventually it all got multiplexed into one cable.
Even if you could upgrade your C128 to exactly 512K RAM, it was pretty misleading to compare what could be possible with a completing platform. The Apple IIc came with 128K RAM as standard, just as the C128 did. I doubt many users of either platform ever upgraded their RAM and even if they did, the average user wouldn't have known what to do with the extra RAM.
By the time the C128 arrived, several competing computers were available with similar amounts of stock RAM, and there were a plethora of popular RAM expansions for many of them. People clamoured for extra memory to use RAM disks or paging in banks of RAM for better performance and animations etc. The limiting factor was usually cost, although memory prices were coming down slowly.
The RAM expanders (for the C64 too) were akin to EMS on the PC...they pretty much did nothing unless running software that had been specially coded to make use of it. In both cases they increased the RAM beyond the maximum the CPU could directly address (so did the stock 128K on a C128 actually since a 6502 can only directly address 64K). Making use of a RAM expander required either bank switching or using them as a RAM disk which supporting software could use as an ultra fast storage device to load and save files from as the program ran. Both cases required software developed to make use of it.
Actually, basic 7 and the C128 kernal support upto 256k out of the box, and can make use of that amount of ram in a usefull way. The hardware does not actually support 256k, let alone 512k, due to lacking address lines on the MMU.
Interestingly, the MMU was originally going to support 1024k ram. This is obvious from the zeropage and stack relocation registers for example.
For 'regular' ram access, the idea was to have 4 'superbanks' of 256k each, and have 4 ram blocks of 64k within each superbank.
The bits to pick the 'superbank' are the unused bits in mmu register $d506
(information based on discussions with Bil Herd about the mmu design)
IBM FTW!
At the beginning you said 10 facts…
Commodore made the mistake of making a million computers which was a machine that was not compatible with the c64 library that faild in America but was successful in europe and then they made a machine that was compatible with c64 software but developers would not take on the machine because the 16 bit market seemed the way forward.....if only ....the 128 is a good computers capable of holding its own against a acorn bbc master 128
The display circuit on the C128 was really bad. They should have redesigned the VIC chip from the bottom.
The machine has 2 video output ports, one is RGB-TTL the other Chroma/Luma. You cannot hook it up to a single screen and switch between modes without pressing switches on the screen as well.
Also since it is RGB-i and "S-video-like", no TV from the era can show its output properly. Most small TV's had SCART RGB, but none had S-video yet, which came to 20 inch+ size TV's in the nineties.
A redesigned VIC with the high res graphics should have led to a single RGB output port. The monitor itself does not mind having 640 or 320 pixels horizontal resolution. Also the VIC in the C128 has the same jailbars and chroma-bleed on Chroma/Luma output, despite the channel separation.
The Ctrl-G thing actually was not anything special to the C128. In the ASCII character standard, the Ctrl-G character is the "bell" character, and was intended for exactly this purpose. For this reason, almost all early computers and terminals which were ASCII-compatible would make a beep when told to print a Ctrl-G character. The only reason earlier Commodores wouldn't do this was because they weren't actually ASCII-compatible (they still used Commodore's old proprietary "PETSCII" character set instead).
Did he say it _was_ "special to the 128"?
@@HelloKittyFanMan The title of this video is "9 Random _Commodore 128_ Facts". That title by itself implies that these 'facts' are special or unique in some way to the C128, as opposed to _general_ facts that would apply to literally almost every computer/terminal in existence at the time.
So yes, he pretty much _did_ say that, simply by including it in this video in the first place.
@@foogod4237: Nope. Just because something's random doesn't mean it's unique. Actually, if you can hit them randomly then that means they're probably _not_ very unique.
Also, what is it that makes you think the fact is only figurative or even fake, so you distance yourself from it by putting quotation marks around it, instead of just taking it directly?
@@HelloKittyFanMan Wow, you have _completely_ misunderstood the point. The word "random" has nothing to do with anything. The point is that the video calls these things out as *"Commodore 128* facts". That means _facts which are specific to the Commodore 128,_ which implies they are _not_ facts which also apply to most other things which are not Commodore 128s.
(And in fact, most of the other facts presented in the video are fairly unique to the C128 (or at least the Commodore line of computers), so this is really the only one which is not, which also reinforces my point.)
This is basic English comprehension. It really shouldn't be that hard.
(And the use of quote marks around the word "facts" was to emphasize that I was referencing the same word as was used in the (also quoted) title. It doesn't imply anything at all about being figurative or fake. Quotation marks can be used for multiple different reasons. Again, basic English comprehension stuff, here.)
Wow, wrong, @@foogod4237. I couldn't have "completely misunderstood the point" where there was no point to begin with. _You're_ the one who said the _whole_ title when you tried making it sound like things from it were significant as if they were special. If the word "random" had nothing to do with it then you shouldn't have brought up the whole title, but only the parts that made you believe what you believe, DUH. No, just because someone says "Commodore 128 facts" doesn't mean they're saying that those facts are _only_ about the 128; probably that just for him as a potential or actual Commodore computer fan, these were interesting to him to find on a Commodore 128. It doesn't mean he's implying something like, "Oh, uhhh... and by the way, I think these aren't found on other machines, uhhhh...." So no, your point was _not_ reinforced.
Yes, of course I know about basic English comprehension because I have it, which is obviously something you lack. And yes, I know that quotation marks have a few uses, duh. But those are only for quoting either a thing that was actually said, citing the name of an article or short story, or other small work of art (books, movies, plays, TV shows, etc. are titled without them), referring to a character, word, or phrase as that by itself rather than using it for its meaning, nicknaming something, or framing an idea as if someone else had said it but you don't necessarily agree with it, like it's either just figurative or you think it's fake. (But they are all limited as quotation-based uses.) So when someone uses them to repeat someone else's saying verbatim but it doesn't seem necessary to, that's when that quote seems to have been used as the idea disclaimer type, which is why I thought you were using the marks around "fact" that way. Like: What sort of benefit did you believe actually quoting that single word from the title was supposed to help with even though you had already quoted the whole title?
Computer dealer and me often discussed this machine when I dropped by and he still hadn't sold one of them.
We were both convinced it would have been more successful with small business and power hobbyists, if it hadn't the "I'm also a C64"- sticker on it.
The shitty implementation of CP/M that Commodore only informed the users about in the fine print was another nail in the coffin.
The devs must have been on drugs when they thought:
'Hey, here is this sleek universal OS (CP/M) that runs on many different machines! Let's include it in our new system, but you know what? We'll just stick to our own diskette file system, so data exchange between different systems is impossible, whoah lol. The dumb faces of the consumers will be hilarious!"
The C128 was a developement test brought to market. It was a disaster. F*+~ it and everyone who contributed to it.
As a matter of fact, a C128 with 1571 drive can read and write double density 5.25" CP/M disks from almost every other CP/M system ever made, and with a 1581 drive, 3.5" disks from the majority of systems which supported those.
There is more wrong with your comment, but this one is so easy to find out, it nicely shows how uninformed your rant is.
If you watch some videos on this platform from Bil Herd, he will tell you why the Z80 processor was put on the board. It wasn't for CP/M. That was only a side benefit for marketing. The chip had a purpose.
It can run CPM
I honestly tried using CP/M back then, and it was just a horrible experience. The only benefit I got from CP/M was basically as a crash course into how MS-DOS worked which would prove useful only a few years later.
@@telengardforever7783 It was a bit late for CP/M which was already pretty much dead by 1985, and the C128 also wasn't really powerful enough to run it properly and so software ran pretty slow compared to a dedicated CP/M machine. Also it really required a 1571 disk drive to be useful when many users ran a 1541 with a C128. Although the supplied boot disk is in GCR format and so you can boot CP/M from a 1541, it both takes an age with no burst mode support and also once it is finally up pretty much no other CP/M disks can be read in a 1541 drive.
@@chriswathen9612 Hmm, the C128 was a bit slow for a mid 1980s CP/M machine, but had more memory than most CP/M machines. Also, 4mhz was common in the later years of CP/M, but 2mhz was a very common CPU speed during the heydays of CP/M, only more high-end machines did have 4mhz CPUs.
So.. it was totally powerfull enough to run most CP/M software which already existed when CP/M was at its peak, but somewhat slow for the more demanding applications for sure.
And all that is pretty relative really. In 1985, being able to run Wordstar on a sub $500 computer with high quality 80 column output and a good keyboard, and being able to use that same machine for games way beyond what any CP/M machine could was a pretty good deal for many students overhere at least.
For serious business use CP/M was already kindof dead, so with regards to that it was mostly useless to have.
I heard somewhere that CP/M mode was more popular in Europe than it was in America.
@@barryon8706 I have never really seen data on that, but it would make sense, and aligns with annecdotal evidence.
First thing is that having an IBM PC (clone) at home was way more common in the USA in the mid 1980s, whereas CP/M was still in common use until the early 90s in especially eastern Europe, where people at that time also had relatively little money.
Commodore sold lots of 128DCRs in Hungary, Romania, but also in Germany, which is a significant part of why the 128DCR specifically was kept in production till late 1989 (the 'flat' one had been out of production for about 3 years by the time production fo the DCR ended).
One of the 128DCRs I own was originally sold in Romania. It is from the very tail end of production of the model, and when I got it, the original CP/M disks were included and unsealed, and in addition to that copies of a variety of CP/M productivity software was included, including a copy of Wordstar on 'C128 native' CP/M disks. That rather points at it having been used for that.
I hear similar things from people I know in Croatia, Serbia etc. Now this will be rather biassed because many of the people I know there I only know because they were, and often still are slightly more serious C128 users (I still develop C128 code, specifically rom code to deal with some modern expansion hardware)
NICE! TY!
A lot of people (especially the C64 Gamers) view the C128 as sort of a failed continuation of the C64, or “just a C64 with double the RAM and some extra chips”, which are 2 misconceptions that couldn't be more utterly wrong.
Commodore was one of those companies that were completely economically dependent on the Christmas season sales. The rest of the year was all about getting the next product lined up and ready before Christmas. And the primary objective for the C128, was to fill that position for '85, so that the Amiga 1000 had and extra year to become ready for Christmas '86. That was the C128 sole purpose from the perspective of the management. So, it was never meant to pick up and continue the C64’s legacy or even sell as abundantly. And from that perspective it not only served its purpose, but rather it exceeded all expectations by far.
From an origin point of view the C128 was meant to be the next model of the TED 264/364 line (the C116, C16, and +4 business models). Bil Herd had an experience with a customer, a teacher who had spent a lot of time developing some teaching software for the C64, which she was now “a bit” upset about being completely incompatible with these new TED machines. This left a rather big impression on him, so when this "D128 project" (that turned into the C128) was more-or-less dropped into his lap, he amongst other things decided to make it backwards compatible with the C64.
So, the C128 didn't spring from the C64, but rather from the TEDs, and sort of ended up as a culmination of everything learned during Commodore's entire 8-Bit era. Let’s face it, it is a Chimera, a Frankenstein’s monster, or in other words, a freak. And seriously, who in their right mind doesn’t love a good and proper freak?
You know how the C64 is often called "the Breadbox" or "the Breadbin", and the Spectrum is often called "the Speccy" or Sinclair’s original 128K model is called "the Toast-rack". I am attempting to get the nickname of "the Commodore Chimera" or just "the Chimera" attached to the C128. Simply because I think it’s an extremely well-fitting nickname, considering its history and heritage. I am also attempting to nickname the Amstrad CPCs as "PowerPuff-PCs" (as in "Sir Alan Sugar, spice and everything nice"). But it doesn't seem like the Amstrad enthusiasts possess a sense of humour on that point.
Check out "VCFMW 11 - Bil Herd: Tales From Inside Commodore" here on YT. It is not only a really great source of direct-from-the-horse’s-mouth knowledge, but some of his Commodore stories are also hilariously funny. Bil also talks about that customer experience at about 19 minutes 40 seconds in.
The C128 is actually at least a 144KB RAM system, because the VDC (80-Column) chip has its own dedicated memory. The standard wedge shaped C128 came with 16KB of Video-RAM. Whereas some of the C128D's came with 16KB, some with a full 64KB, and all the C128DCR's had 64KB. Turning those into 192KB systems. You can get a small daughter-board upgrade for those with only 16KB, which plugs into the VDC’s socket, and you then simply put the VDC chip into a socket on top, bringing them up to the full 64KB of Video-RAM as well. Thereby giving them access to the VDC’s full HiRes multi-coloured graphics mode. However, you will also need the graphics commands of the Basic v8.0 extension (EPROM in the U36 socket) to utilize it in Basic.
Which brings me to the fact that, it's not really that hard to bring colours onto your 80-Column display.
The VDC-Chip outputs a RGBiHV signal out of its DB9 port marked RGBi. So, the first hurdle to overcome is that this is a purely digital signal operating at 15.1KHz. "RGBiHV" stands for "Red, Green, Blue, Intensity, Horizontal sync, and Vertical sync". One could speculate that this would mean 1 bit for red, 1 for green, 1 for blue, and 1 for doubling the brightness (intensity). Or in other words: 2^4 = 2*2*2*2 = 16 colours, however this is not entirely true. Because most digital RGBiHV/CGA compatible CRT monitors would interpret these binary values as an index and lookup the correct colour from an internally based palette. Which would mean that a direct convertion would cause some of the colours to be displayed incorrectly. Like for instance brown would just look far more like a dark orange and so on. Luckily there are already several options available and able to remedy this today.
One option could be to get an "RGBiHV to RGBs" adaptor. "RGBs" is analogue and stands for "Red, Green, Blue, and combined Sync". And "combined sync" means that the horizontal and vertical sync gets combined into one signal. RGBs at 15.1KHz is actually what the Amigas output, also known as "Component-RGB" or the kind of signal which a European Scart cable is able to carry.
These "DAC" adaptors are rather easily available in pre-assembled form and not really that expensive either. Sometimes they are called "RGBiHV to RGBa", sometimes "RGBi to RGBs", and sometimes "CGA to RGB" which can be a bit confusing. Although I have already hinted that RGBiHV is slightly related to CGA.
There is an adaptor called "CGA2RGBv2" available from GGLabs's WebShop (US) and one named "C128 RGBi to RGBa" from Protovision's (Europe).
That's all good and fine if we want to use it with a Component-RGB or SCART compatible TV/monitor. But most modern VGA capable monitors don’t understand anything less than 30KHz. So, although we've now managed to 'Convert' the signal from 'Digital' to 'Analog' (DAC = Digital to Analog Convertor), it is still only pumping out of our adaptor at 15.1KHz. What we now need is something to 'Double' the 'Scanlines' and 'Up-Scale' it to 30KHz, like the "GBS-8200/8220 (to 30KHz VGA)" or “HD-V9900 (to HDMI)” scan-doubler/up-scaler boards.
You may argue that since the C128’s 80-column RGBi-signal is digital, then wouldn’t it be better to go directly from RGBiHV to HDMI, and you’d be completely right. “hoglet67” on GitHub has made an “RGBtoHDMI” adaptor based on a Raspberry Pi Zero. But it covers not only the C128, but a slew of other machines, is rather complicated, and this rant of mine is already getting way too long. 😅
Luckily there are already plenty of videos and information to be found out there on the interweb, on both the "RGBiHV to RGBs" DAC adaptors, the GBS-8200/8220 and HD-V9900 scan-doubles/up-scalers, and the RGBtoHDMI.
The REU “RAM Expansion Unit” cartridges are not exactly adding to the C64/C128’s internal RAM. But rather providing an additional external source and some extra DMA (Direct Memory Access) circuitry to assist the 6510/8502 CPUs in very rapidly copying data-blocks back and forth between the internal and external RAM. This DMA circuitry is for example what the recent C64-port of “Sonic the Hedgehog” utilizes to generate the intensely fast scrolling needed for a Sonic game. It is also why a GEOS-RAM cartridge, or any other kind of RAM expansion cartridges won’t work with Sonic, because it is not about the extra RAM, but about the DMA-fast copying circuit.
Another fact which people who look down upon the recently released “TheC64 Mini/Maxi” reproductions overlook, is that since they are software emulation based, such things as the rare, sought after, and really expensive additional hardware, or in this case the REU cartridges, are also fairly easy to emulate. Or in other words, where an original stock C64 would completely fail to run the new Sonic the Hedgehog port, one of the stock TheC64s absolutely and completely would run it, no problem… and TheC64 Mini is far cheaper than acquiring an original REU, or even one of the cartridges capable of simulating an REU would be.
It should be possible to expand the C128’s RAM to 256KB internally, by doing some modding. However, expanding it to 512KB, as was heavily advertised, would require drilling into Bil’s custom MMU chip, in order to access and additional address-line pin, which was otherwise sacrificed for some other functionality back then, and therefore not drawn out into an actual physical pin on the chip… or that’s at least according to Bil Herd himself in a sort of “yeah, good luck with that” kind of attitude.
The “DING” or otherwise known as the “Bell” by modem/BBS users, was not something confined to the C128s. But actually available on any computer while running any terminal-software. It was meant as a way to attract the SysOp (or administrator) on the other end of the line for some help or a chat. I know this because I was one of the SysOps running a BBS back in the days. The “Bell” is also assigned to ASCII/ANSI value 7 or in C128 PETSCII terms it would be CHR$(7).
So, this would also make your C128 go “DING!”:
PRINT CHR$(7);
And you can actually access the entire lower region of the PETSCII table like this:
CTRL+@ = CHR$(0)
CTRL+A = CHR$(1)
CTRL+B = CHR$(2)
CTRL+C = CHR$(3)… and so on, you get the idea (Look in the C128’s manual - Appendix: I-1).
But a funny thing happens once you reach CTRL+M, because that is CHR$(13) aka CR or “Carriage Return”. So, if you should ever break your [RETURN] and [ENTER] keys from smashing them too hard, you’ve got an extra hidden spare in CTRL+M.
Phew, that was a bit of a bible… yeah, my head does hold a lot of now useless and outdated information and I certainly felt very "free to leave a comment below". So, this is the risk you're taking by encouraging people like me to do that. 😆
Interesting comments, however the C128 definitely derives from the 64 and has almost nothing in common with 264 (TED) machines, apart from the same 6502 instruction set.
The C128 was basically a C64 with 128 KB to match the competition (e.g. Atari 130XE). Same video chip (with a few more pins to handle non-video stuff), identical SID audio chip, almost same CPU but able to run twice as fast when VIC was off (i.e. never in games, except the border area).
The extra memory required a MMU and the incompatibility with C64 CP/M cartridge required a Z80 (which runs half-assed in the C128), and just because Commodore clueless marketing wanted the CP/M tick in the specs.
The only real innovation in the C128 was the much more useful BASIC v7, and the VDC 8563 display controller which was ill-fated since the beginning due to poor design and implementation; required a special expensive display for colors; lacked sprites; and used a horribly bottlenecked system interface… Long story short: Useless for games.
So games developers continued developing for the C64, as the hardware was identical, and there was no reason to increase development time to use the extra memory just to sell a couple more copies to C128 users.
Also note that the Amiga 1000 was never an alternative to any 8 bit machine, because only a few rich people could afford to spend more than 4 times what a C128 cost back then (let alone a C64) for a Christmas gift. The C128 was discontinued two years after the relatively affordable Amiga 500 was on the market, and it was still twice the price of the C128. Hence a different market segment for a long while.
@@dans.8198 Sadly, I cannot say the same about your comment. There was nothing of what you wrote that I haven't heard before. If you want to add more to your knowledge, you need to go watch some of Bil Herd's talks here on YT and get into the history behind it, instead of only focusing on the similarities in hardware of the end products.
Because from an origin point of view, the C128 started out as the D128, which was based on a 6509 CPU with a Motorola 6845 display controller. When Bil Herd took over the project, the first thing he did was to get rid of the 6845. Because why on earth pay more for a Motorola chip, when you've got an in-house chip-fab. So, it didn't have a VIC-II or a SID originally, actually rather far from. One of the next things he did was to swap the 1MB bank switching 6509 out with an expanded version of the 6510 (namely the 8502) and his own developed MMU. So, the C64 mode was "just" a backwards compatibility feature added by Bil, after a conversation with an upset school teacher about her self-written C64 educational software not being compatible with the C116, C16, and the Plus 4. If not for that initial conversation there probably wouldn't have been a "GO64" mode at all.
There is much more behind the scenes information, and not to mention ridiculous and juicy commodore stories, to be found in those talks. Well, to be honest it is basically the same talk over and over again just with variating content, depending on how much time he was granted to speak,. So, don't take my word for it, just go watch them yourself.
Personally, I have just gotten extremely tired of listening to this false myth, that C128 owners only ever used it as a C64. It is the same misplaced ignorant arrogance which makes some Commodore-only users look down upon and be completely blind towards the strong points of other systems. Many of my friends (and myself) specifically went for the C128 over the C64 back then, because of it's higher developed Basic interpreter. Granted, I never really used CP/M for anything. But I did manage to make it switch back and forth between the 8502 and the Z80 on the fly mid program (50% 8502 and 50% Z80 machine-code, of course), mainly just for shits and giggles. And then some ignorant people would probably claim "Who needs Basic anyway, just learn assembler/machine-code". Well, I obviously did. But if "you" are writing programs involving more complex floating-point mathematical calculations visualized onto the graphics-screen, machine code isn't really the greatest starting point, now is it. You may end up there eventually after generating some simplifying lookup tables.
My point is, as much as I do like the C64, my true love and enthusiasm lies with the C128... and after a while it gets really frustrating to have this lame C64 vs. C128 conversation over and over again, especially with someone (not saying you), who only ever used them for gaming... My second point is, regardless of the topic and however much knowledge we think we have gained, there is always more to be learned, and always most likely from some different angle we have previously been unaware of (and I DO mean we, myself included).
- Here are my 3 top favourite Bil Herd talks here on YT in order of preference, which I may just have watched a few too many times. Since there always seems to be some small golden nugget I didn't catch previously:
1) "VCFMW 11 - Bil Herd: Tales From Inside Commodore VCF Midwest"
2) "World of Commodore 2016 - Bil Herd Keynote - Life at Commodore"
3) "VCF East 2019 -- Bil Herd -- Component Aging and Heat"
@@Zhixalom I have watched a lot of Bil’s videos, and I know the machines down to IC level. We are talking about the actual C128 here, not the original project that was scrapped, also quite different from TED machines.
You and I and are rare examples of people who got a C128 to actually program it. I also love my C128, but we must recognize that the majority of its 2.5 million users got it as a videogame machine, waiting for much better games to come up… which never happened. The dark power of marketing. The C128 offered nothing better to game developers who at the end of the month need to pay bills with their work. It even made their lives more difficult because it was not identical to a C64 in “C64 mode”.
The really revolutionary machine was the Amiga. And indeed the C128 was discontinued 5 years before the C64, which remained on the market to cover the low end.
This is just computer history, and it does not make our C128’s any less fun than they are. Take care of your C128. As Bil would say, it was not expected to still be functional after 40 years.
@dans.8198 NO! You are the one here rudely imposing constraints on my 7 month old topic. The "actual C128" cannot be separated from its history, nothing in this world can.
- It is now obvious to me that we are not going to agree on any of this... and I am not going to waste more time on someone, trying to force his points of view down my throat.
@@Zhixalom Noted. Keep enjoying your C128 as much as I do.