
The C256 Phoenix Project aka What Commodore 256 could have been like - Jerry2
https://www.c256foenix.com/
======
mmjaa
Its been really interesting for me to observe this re-focus on older
technology, having been involved in the retro computing scene for the last few
decades .. it has grown and grown, to the point where there are now titles
being released for machines in the 80's that are nowhere like what our
expectations were, back in the day. We have titles on some systems that are
simply mind-blowing these days, in comparison.

My favourite 80's system, the Oric-1/Atmos range of computers, has even gotten
a few re-designs as well:

The Oric-1/Atmos machines:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oric](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oric)

The SuperOric:
[http://andre.cheramy.net/super/hardsuper.htm](http://andre.cheramy.net/super/hardsuper.htm)

The AtmoStrat: [http://forum.defence-
force.org/viewtopic.php?t=1692](http://forum.defence-
force.org/viewtopic.php?t=1692) -and-
[http://oric.club/atmostrat](http://oric.club/atmostrat)

The Twilighte expansion: [http://orix.oric.org](http://orix.oric.org) (^^
named in honour of one of the best programmers for the Oric systems that ever
lived...)

One wonders whether or not we won't see, in a few short years time, some sort
of return to the retro-computing ethos of simpler computers, more easily
maintained by their interested users, for more advanced tasks.

I could imagine, for example, building an Internet capable suite of software
for Atmos machines equipped with the Twilighte card, and do away with (for
example) using my MacBook Pro for email/casual news reading. The idea of
moving to a less powerful architecture for the most common daily tasks, as
perverse as it sounds, really appeals to me. There's no reason I couldn't use
the same machine as a Twitter client, also...

~~~
digi_owl
I wonder if there are two reasons:

1\. there is a generation coming to age now that never got to know these
computers first hand.

2\. More and more "computers" are getting locked down, supposedly for our own
good. Even FOSS is bitten by this bug.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
I’m old enough to have used everything from a ZX81 onwards. The appeal used to
be the sheer excirement of having a relatively simple machine do clever thinga
in a way that felt open and which promoted imagination - a bit like Lego, but
in code.

They encouraged you to get involved, learn, and have a go.

Modern systems can do a lot more, but the cost of entry in money and
especially time is so much higher. They’re more like closed appliances
optimised for consuming experiences created by others than playpens for
creating your own experiences.

The play and imagination element has largely disappeared from modern
computing. Most experiences are trying to sell you something, and if you make
something new you’re supposed to sell it - and sell it hard - too. Even FOSS
projects are measured mostly by stars and forks and not by fun and enjoyment.

IMO the nostalgia for old hardware can’t recreate the culture that surrounded
it. It might be more interesting to design new software that has more of that
just-for-fun feel to it - although it’s not obvious what that would look like
today.

~~~
mmjaa
>It might be more interesting to design new software that has more of that
just-for-fun feel to it - although it’s not obvious what that would look like
today.

PICO-8:
[https://www.lexaloffle.com/pico-8.php](https://www.lexaloffle.com/pico-8.php)

------
sehugg
An actual Commodore 256 was designed, but never built, thank goodness:
[https://dfarq.homeip.net/commodore-256-the-8-bit-that-
never-...](https://dfarq.homeip.net/commodore-256-the-8-bit-that-never-was/)

But they did release the CBM 256, with an optional 8088 or Z80 daughterboard:
[http://www.zimmers.net/cbmpics/cb3s.html](http://www.zimmers.net/cbmpics/cb3s.html)

Oh, to be a fly on the wall at all of those meetings of computer manufacturers
where they asked the engineers "why can't we run PC software too?"

~~~
colomon
The C128 came standard with a Z80 as a secondary processor. (Would have been
more useful for me if they'd also had an 8" floppy drive so I could have
easily gotten stuff to my parents' CP/M machine at work.)

~~~
vidarh
The C128 is a really bizarre beast - it actually "boots" with the Z-80 in
control initially, and uses that to check for a CP/M disk in the drive, a C-64
cartridge in the cartridge port, or if you hold down the Commodore key, and
uses that to determine whether to go into CP/M mode, C128 mode or C64 mode on
startup...

During CP/M operation, some BIOS functionality actually causes a context
switch from the Z-80 to the 8502 and back...

~~~
rusk
_The C128 is a really bizarre beast_

It really is. It's a fantastic looking machine but the internals are just
bonkers.

The reason for the internal Z80 was that Commodore had sold all these CP/M
plugin cartridges that actually had a Z80 in them, but they drew too much
power and the C128 engineers pretty much unilaterally decided it was cheaper
to just build in the second chip than sort out the power issue [0].

The story of how this machine was designed and built is quite hair-raising and
the likes of which I doubt we'll ever see again!

[0]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/c128/comments/682da4/c128_ama_from_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/c128/comments/682da4/c128_ama_from_bil_herd/dgvcla9/)

------
ageofwant
I appreciate the 80's hardware ethic, as well as the 'art by constraint'
philosophy. But I do see a place for devices where those constraints are just
programmed into into a modernish FPGA - no silly scouring old warehouses for
obsolete parts - way less routing, fraction of the size pcb etc, all the 80's
angst. The words of a Philistine perhaps, but I do think we can get the
constraint and creativity benefits without the hardware headache, and I'm
saying this a EE.

~~~
C256_Stef
I am glad you appreciate the discipline I am trying to put on the design.
However, I do have to take into account these facts. This is 2018 and there
just so much I can do to emulate this philosophy. So, I will do as much as I
can without destroying the practical aspect of things. Also, the idea is to
create it in a way, someone could actually build it (solder it) by hand... So
I need to take that into account as well...

------
walkingolof
This is a dupe (sort of) of
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17273954](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17273954)

------
Yuioup
Page is unreadable on a tablet.

~~~
jacquesm
Getting quite tired of comments like these. The web was made for computers,
not for tablets. If tablets are dumbed down and handicapped to the point that
they can no longer partake in the web your beef is with the tablet
manufacturer or the browser vendor. Either one or both has all the tools at
their disposal to fix these issues. All the webserver does is serve up a bunch
of data, the interpretation of that data is up to your client.

~~~
mikeash
“Unreadable on tablet/mobile” is almost always a misguided attempt to
accommodate those platforms, though. Sites made without even thinking about
them tend to work just fine.

~~~
lopmotr
Yes. I think this is what people are actually aggravated by. Somebody did
extra work, however well-intentioned, that resulted in a worse experience than
had they done nothing. On Chrome Android, you can "Request desktop site" which
changes the User-Agent to look like a desktop.

------
mlmartin
A very similar project is nearing completion for the arch rival (in the UK
anyway) ZX Spectrum.

[https://www.specnext.com/](https://www.specnext.com/)

Uses FPGA to ensure backwards hardware compatibility, while providing extra
clock speed and new video modes.

~~~
dirtbox
I grew up with the ZX Spectrum, initially starting out with the ZX80 and 81
which I soldered together myself with the help of my equally clueless father.

One of the most enduring and engaging aspects of the old micros is the
inherent limitation of the hardware. You're constantly battling with extreme
optimisation and utilising often quite hacky hardware tricks to do things that
would otherwise be impossible to achieve while mastering the arcane arts of
assembler. I think above all that's the beauty of them and why people are
still supporting these projects.

I'm very sad about missing out on the Spectrum Next which is nearly due to
ship their completed cased model after a successful release of only the board.
Complete with keyboard and design from the recently late original designer of
those same machines I had in the 80s, Rick Dickinson.

------
_pRwn_
is this guy aware of the Mega65 Project (
[http://mega65.org/](http://mega65.org/) ) which actually already has working
machines, a case and is on the brink to begin mass production?

~~~
C256_Stef
Yes, I am actually a girl! ;o)

Yes, I am aware of the Mega65.

Like I wrote before. 2 different computer with 2 different approaches...

I don't know why people come back with this comment... Like one 8bit music
creator will stop creating music because someone else is doing it too? What's
up with that?

~~~
ttldude
Great to see a follow-up to our Gigatron computer!

I wonder what you will use for video generation in the C256, because the
greatness in 8-bit gaming came from these chips. So you'ld have to
differentiate there or run the danger of becoming yet another retro knock-off
(well, the merits of compatibility should not be underestimated. Most of the
effort will be in software otherwise). For the Gigatron it was ok to have
limited video effects, because its insanely low chip count was its primary
objective: so we have no tiling, no hardware sprites and no color indirection.
But we do have indirection per scanline and you can do neat things with that,
such as the bending road in the Racer game.

One thought is to design your own video circuit and put it in an FPGA. ASIC is
also an option if you go with a 0.18um/0.25um foundry (X-FAB). You can also do
it with discrete logic, but it will become big. There is the Vulcan-74 guy
doing TTL (well, CMOS) video circuits:
[http://forum.6502.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3329](http://forum.6502.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3329)
and [http://sleepingelephant.com/ipw-
web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.ph...](http://sleepingelephant.com/ipw-
web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=8734) (video:
[https://youtu.be/EIghk1BUG98](https://youtu.be/EIghk1BUG98))

Another idea is to do a hardware version of the PICO-8 platform:
[https://www.lexaloffle.com/pico-8.php](https://www.lexaloffle.com/pico-8.php)

For sound you should really consider the awesome SAA1099 chip.

~~~
walkingolof
>For sound you should really consider the awesome SAA1099 chip.

Yea !! As far as I know only the SAM Coupé used it, and nobody really pushed
it on that platform.

------
LarryMade2
The site is kinda sparse on details so far - Wondering if the 256 is going to
be along the lines of the initial C-One concept where it would have something
like a Monster SID (multiples of 3 voices) and a Super VIC (massive
resolutions, copper list, etc.)

These were the Specs Jeri Ellsworth had hoped for initially:
[http://c64upgra.de/c-one/s_specs.htm](http://c64upgra.de/c-one/s_specs.htm)

Unfortunately costs/manufacturing decisions curtailed much of that.

~~~
C256_Stef
I don't believe the 256 will be like a C-one. Graphic Controller wise, it
ought to be closer to an A500 than anything else. For the sound, I too would
like to come up with something that would be more than just 3 voices. A 6
Voices SID Per Channel, like a 6586 or 8586 would be great!

As far as know, the C-one was abandoned or never completely finished... Was
it?

Otherwise, I am sorry if the information is sparse right now, the whole
SnapEDA interview caught me off guard. I wasn't quite ready to deal with that
kind of attention. Not now, anyway! Cheers, Stefany

------
hotsunnyvale
These are very exiting times! Old machines and old custom chips can be re-
imagined on FPGA (and then custom ASIC given enough demand) if NOS isn't
available. Seeing artists work within the constraints of these 8-bit games to
make new games that push the limits of the technology beyond what anyone
thought possible (like moving video).

------
narrator
How about building a machine to run TempleOS natively? The crazy guy who wrote
it says explicitly that the OS was meant to implement the commodore 64 ideal
of one big flat address space and no memory protection, everything is rung 0,
no protected io, etc.

~~~
ashleyn
I'm glad to know I'm not the only one with this engineer's nostalgia for the
kind of systems I first learned everything on. When Terry compares TempleOS's
design inspirations to the C64, I know exactly where he's coming from. I've
thought once or twice about writing a 64-bit DOS in Rust but just couldn't
justify the time and trouble.

~~~
0x445442
I thought about doing the same thing with AmigaDOS

------
Aardwolf
Is making a good sid chip clone something within reach of hobbyists today?

~~~
sehugg
With a FPGA: [http://www.fpgasid.de/](http://www.fpgasid.de/)

~~~
Aardwolf
How about with the actual analog circuits :)

Probably not I guess, if it even depended on the manufactoring process

------
mozumder
The Super Nintendo was probably the closest thing to a C256.

------
Annatar
No head, no tail... what are the specifications?

~~~
C256_Stef
[https://www.c256foenix.com/forum/the-specifications/early-
sp...](https://www.c256foenix.com/forum/the-specifications/early-
specifications)

You will find them there... Cheers Stef

------
adamnemecek
I was really tempted to buy that C64 (C64 mini?) remake the other day,
eventually decided not to buy it but this is very intriguing.

------
gbraad
After reading [http://blog.snapeda.com/2018/06/06/building-the-commodore-
co...](http://blog.snapeda.com/2018/06/06/building-the-commodore-computer-
that-should-have-existed-an-interview-with-stefany-allaire/) I doubt pretty
much about this. Besides, we had the C-one which IS a successor and more...

~~~
C256_Stef
I love your enthusiasm! C'mon! let's stay positive! The worst that can happen
is that I will fail miserably and I will be forgotten immediately and then
people will rejoice around their Mega65! cheers! Stefany

