It’s hard to argue with nostalgia, but you can toss a bucket of cold facts over it. In the case of the recent rescuing of the Commodore brand from the clutches of relabeling of generic electronics by [Perifractic] of Retro Recipes, we got [The Retro Shack] doing the proverbial bucket dumping in a new video. Basically the question is whether the fresh Commodore 64 offerings by the new-and-improved Commodore are what you really want, or need.
The thing is that over the decades many people have created all the bits that you need to build your own classical C64, or even buy one off-the-shelf, with people like [bwack] having reverse-engineered the various C64 mainboards. These can be populated with drop-in replacements for chips like the SID, VIC-II, CIAs and others that are readily available, along with replica cases and keyboards. If you crave something less bulky and complex, you can run a bare metal C64 emulator like BMC64 on a Raspberry Pi, or just run the VICE emulator on your platform of choice. There’re also options like the full-sized TheC64 and Ultimate 64 Elite II systems that you can buy ready to go.
Basically, there is a whole gamut of ways to get some part of the C64 experience, ranging from emulator-only to a full hardware DIY or pre-assembled format. Each of which come with their own price tag, starting at $0 for running VICE on your existing system. With so much choice we can only hope that the renewed Commodore company will become something more than Yet Another C64 Experience.
that starlight edition looks excellent.
Its a beaut! The prices on these (especially the beige model) are quite reasonable if you price out the individual components involved. I do agree with the columnist that I want to see Commodore transcend just offering a new iteration of the C64. I believe that the C64 Ultimate is pretty much just that the perfected, ultimate C64 and it deserves this honor. Now, it’s up to the luminaries at Commodore to translate the spirit of the Commodore 64 community into a compelling vision for the future.
If this was using newly created chips then I would understand buying one, but it is just another FPGA emulator. If I want to play C64 games I’ll just get an emulator on my laptop.
Even if it was using newly created chips, it would still be a replica. It’d be like re-making the Ford Model T – a perfectly useless car by today’s standards, and of no historic value since it wouldn’t be original.
The only thing going for it would be the authentic experience, which a well made replica can provide, but for that you’d also need a replica CRT monitor, and the floppies, and the joysticks, etc.
You were posh if you had floppies on you’re 64! 😂
I first got mine with the cassette tape and then got a floppy drive for the next birthday. My best friend actually had the hard drive and set up a BBS
I put a 1541 on layaway and mowed grass to get the money to get my floppy drive!
I bought mine used and it came with a 1541. Oh the days!
The new owners under the Commodore. net banner added USB ports, HDMI monitor port and an SD card slot to what had been reinvention of the original hardware. You can now order the revived Commodore 64 in the original “bikini-suntan” light-gray brown case (the best known,) transparent case with glowing multicolor LEDs or gold.
Some of us real collectors still have all our working components. It’s not just about having a replica. It’s about supporting the rebirth of an icon company that will most likely grow into the specialty PC market as well.
Imagine having a PC that can play C64 games too without an emulator.
Back in the mid 80’s Franklin made a computer that could play Apple ][ and Commodore programs with a flip of a switch and a reboot.
Computing today isn’t even fun anymore! We just want to sit back and mess around without worries of someone watching our every move.
It’s not just “another” FPGA. It’s a previously released FPGA emulator, with a new logo on the case.
“Commodore Is Back Selling New C64s, But Should You Buy Them?”
No.
Betteridge’s law of headlines.
After the introduction, 20 second jingle and advertisement I got too bored and stopped the video. for anyone else, I recommend to at least skip the first three minutes.
Content starts at 1:35.
Using Youtube absolutely requires the following plugins (I’m using WaterFox but they’re on Edge, Chrome, … too):
1) SponsorBlock for YouTube
2) uBlock Origin
3) Unhook – Remove YouTube Recommended & Shorts
4) YouTube No Translation
Without those plugins I wouldn’t watch any videos on YT anymore…
Chrome has disallowed ublock origin plugin recently.
Not if you compile it from source.
Easy to do on Arch, windows users should gtfo of internet anyway.
Have fun in your “I can compile everything myself” bubble lol. I couldn’t earn my money on Linux because there’s no SolidWorks, no Inventor, no SolidEdge, no professional CAD package available.
Blame it on whoever you want, I’m even with you on “f MS in every possible way” but it’s just facts :)
Oh no no no. If there’s one insufferable bunch of twots that need to stay away from comments altogether, it’s Linux users.
For example, how much of a an arrogant sod do you have to be too claim that someone should stop using the internet solely because they use a different operating system then you do!?
Just use Ublock Origin Lite
@Grofney39 Hey don’t tarnish every Linux user with that brush – yes they exist, but there are also so many folks that will bend over backwards and take some serious time out of their lives to help you or document clearly and with detail how everything works – like the wonderful Arch Wiki.
Linux perhaps is more attractive to folks that will be somewhat inept when it comes to the social contract folks rather expect, but that doesn’t mean everyone using it is that way at all. Same as whichever video game attracts the most immature unpleasant community these days, or whichever of the luxury car brands in your region is renowned for drivers that are self entitled nightmares on the road.
It’s dickishness like this that stops people from switching to Linux.
Oh hey let’s be rude and superior to people and abuse newbies with innocent questions and then wonder why people give up or switch back.
Grow up dude.
As an alternative there’s always DOS. And it has binaries, too.
I disallowed chrome on my computer.
btw I meant LibreWolf, not WaterFox. But WaterFox does exist, too :)
I simply pay for YouTube,But on the family plan for 4 it makes a lot of sense. Shrug.
Revanced is your friend. ;-)
and
5) Return YouTube Dislike
Buy one if you want. I spend more money on coffee.
If the video is about shopping for a cheapest Commodore 64, it’s fine. But if it’s about the revival of Commodore, it misses the point. The Commodore 64 is the first product they had ready to sell, and it absolutely makes sense to start with it. But they have much of the original Commodore team back on board which should mean there will be other stuff… It’s all there in Perifractic’s last couple of videos and probably known to all people here if not to the author of he video at hand.
Also, it’s not about nostalgia either. A quote from Peri summarises it nicely for me:
“Do you remember how tech felt in the late ’90-ies and early 2000s? Sort of “techno optimism” they called it. It was retro futuristic, fresh, inviting. No popups and overflowing inboxes and boring black rectangles that all looked the same and took our attention away from our loved ones. All that transparent tech and metallic clothing symbolized and reflected clarity, hope and freedom. Social media stands for the opposite: toxicity, distraction, addiction and harm. It just all went wrong. Technology that was meant to help us, we became enslaved to it. It just went too far.”
Depends on what you mean by “they have much of the original team on board”
I wouldn’t expect any direct involvement from any ex commodore employees for developing new products. I know they want to do something under the Amiga name, but they don’t have the money to develop anything from scratch
Fwiw the ultimate 64 is great, I’ve had one for years and I was going to upgrade and this package is a much cheaper way of doing it
“I wouldn’t expect any direct involvement from any ex commodore employees for developing new products.”
Really? I’d assume at least one of the original designers that just sunk a bunch of money into this, might have some renewed interest beyond purely “investor”
Sure it won’t be like the 80s again, and sure I wouldn’t expect as a full blown project design lead, but no involvement at all?
Bil Hurd for instance, who I think still publishes here at hackaday, contributed to a ‘c64 in a joystick’ device from Jeri Ellsworth between working there and the reclaiming of the brand… thou far be it from me to put words and interests in anyones mouth.
I doubt they have much of the original team on board. Considering when the c64 was developed and released much of the original team probably isn’t with us anymore, or in declining heath due to age.
My hope is that this C64-focused launch is just for generating income and that in the future they’ll switch to actually making new products that extend the Commodore line of thinking. I’m not super optimistic in that though, like maybe they’ll bring back the Commodore PC series and it’ll be some generic Linux box with Commodore branding or something.
That was essentially the pitch, it depends if that is a good enough revenue stream to actually leverage though
Commodore never built its legacy on nostalgia—that came later, from us. Back then it wasn’t about clinging to the past, it was about breaking into the future. The C64 and Amiga were modern, daring, and—most importantly—affordable. They weren’t relics, they were the bleeding edge put into the hands of ordinary people. That’s the part everyone keeps missing today. Instead of pushing boundaries again, we just get endless C64 clones and rebranded hardware with a premium slapped on because of the name. But that magic wasn’t the logo—it was the bargain, the accessibility, the thrill of cutting-edge power that felt within reach. Commodore gave us the future in a cardboard box we could actually afford. And that’s the piece no one has managed to resurrect.
THIS!
Um, well.. Here in Germany, after re-union, to my knowledge, the former GDR citizens were crazy after C64 and the like.
The Commodores sold still very well when “normal” users had moved on to a 386/486 PC already.
And by that time, the technology of the home computers was years behind – nolonger bleeding edge.
The C64 PCB was further integrated to use less parts and safe costs.
The C64 and A500 were rather sold for cheap at an ALDI store, in various toystores, stores for office supplies,
and department stores such as Karstadt or via mail order (Quelle etc).
That being said, the GDR citizens were being used to wait for 10 years for a new Trabi (a car).
So waiting for a C64 not quite ten years long didn’t seem to be an issue.
The perception of time was different, maybe. They didn’t upgrade so often (until re-union).
A computer that relatives in W.-Germany (and some of their lucky friends in GDR) had in 1983 wasn’t really “old” to them by 1990.
They simply continued to use it as if it was entirely normal, it seems.
Speaking under correction. I just thought I should mention it, since Commodore wasn’t exactly a small company over here.
How far we’ve fallen is weirdly well summed up by Mr Rossman talking about Clippy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_Dtmpe9qaQ
Paraphrasing: He used to be a symbol of the worst annoyance, but he didn’t read our files, he didn’t sell our data, he didn’t show us adverts – and if you booted up a 20+ year old machine today he’d still work exactly the same.
The new C-64 is not made with 8-bit chips. Commodore engineers would have to be versed in FPGA or ARM chips or whatever the new C-64 uses.
It all feels like people with too much money cosplaying as Commodore.
Maybe. But on other hand, someone could say they’re more Commodore than the former Commodore in its final years.
The key difference is that they truly care about the company, its products, and its users.
And in gloomy, purely commercial times like these, such values might actually be rewarded.
Not just because it feels right, but also because it’s a new and fresh idea.
I mean, how long has it been since a company
last truly stood behind its products and ideas instead of just focusing on making money?
^ this, if they only cared about money they wouldn’t have bothered buying out the name.
Spot on.
If you were considering buying one of those new breadbin cases, plus a CBMstuff keyboard plus a 64 Ultimate to build the definitive modern parts C64, then definitely go and buy this one. It’s way cheaper and more convenient. The components are great, and you’ll have a robust machine that will last you many, many years.
Do you have something that already fits your needs (emulator, The C64 Maxi, RPi with BMC64, etc), or way too many working old C64s? Then maybe it’s not for you, unless you just want to buy it for nostalgia reasons or to support Peri and crew, which are still valid reasons.
In any case, it’s nice seeing the C64 brand being applied to retro C64 products and not generic cheap Chinese tech gadgets.
The 1541 ultimate and U64 are fantastic modern extensions of the C64 hardware, peak C64 experience. if this makes it more affordable, I’m all for it. I’m not pre-ordering anything though, see how the reviews go and buy after the dust settles. these hardware crowdfunding things always get delayed 6 months, a year, 2 years.
To me its not truly retro gaming if u are using any kind of eemulator must buy a real c64nm or a new c64 ultimate because it still has all the connections as a c64 does so it can run old 1541’s and u can connect a 1702 and has cartridge slot its retro
Emulators and real hardware are no contradiction.
Looking back in history, emulators are about as old as computing itself.
You had ROM emulators based on RAM, a ViC20 or KIM emulator that ran on C64, an ZX81 emulator for Atari ST.
The numerous CP/M-80 emulators for IBM PC..
Emulators are development tools, similiar to compilers, debuggers etc.
Hardware emulators as debug or development tools are a different thing to whole emulated machines as replacement for the original, they’re literally tools designed to supplement and aid development or debug and are not necessary for the operation of the original.
A replica built with new versions of original silicon is as close as we’d get these days and while I’m pretty sure it won’t happen, I’d love to see new drop in replacement silicon become available, imagine being able to buy a new PLA, SID or VIC, a new Agnes, Denise etc. but that’s going to be very expensive to do for a small, niche market.
I also doubt they’ll be building new 5.25″ drives, disks etc so, sadly and while their hearts may be in the right place, I think the ‘new’ Commodore will be releasing a lot of FPGA or CPU based emulation products and will be little more than just another badge company.
The PLA can be recreated in hardware using an EPROM, at the very least.
https://www.geocities.ws/sieg.peter/pla/pla.html
Speaking of emulation vs real hardware,
I hope that in eventually (once possible) more ASICs will be used instead of FPGAs.
Generally speaking, I mean. I’m not thinking about C64 only.
Because ASICs are a bit closer to the traditional technology.
Which is another point that matters to not a few people.
People who have an emotional bond to vintage hardware are attached to the inner workings of beloved things:
Someone who learned to program an 6502 (6510) in his/her youth wants to know that a real, native 6510 or 8502 is inside and working.
Knowing that an gigantic FPGA with its
huge number of function blocks does the work ruins the experience,
no matter if it’s functional 99,9% identical to an 6510.
It’s about principles, not about function. A lot of FPGA fans simply won’t get this.
From a psychological point of view, it might be also because people want to go back in time for a moment and re-live the old days.
And an FPGA simply reminds them that they’re nolonger young people working with cutting edge technology,
but older people who tinker with a modern simulation that simply exists to please them.
It’s a bit like using a Pentium 4 PC just to blink a LED, in short.
It might be nice for historical accuracy etc, but if you can’t tell without cracking open the case, and maybe even scraping the packaging epoxy off the DIP chip that it is not in fact a genuine ASIC but an FPGA playing pretend inside does it really matter?
If you are using an FPGA to simulate the entire C64 motherboard in the one chip with just a few connectors broken out you might have a point, as that is then changing the potential user experience of doing strange and stupid things to the more hackable hardware – but a drop in replacement, that functions the same and can be made vastly cheaper as the same silicon can pretend to be potentially hundreds of these old slow dedicated ASIC, in many cases even using the same packaging format so all it needs is programming and labelling changes to the production line to match whatever chip it is supposed to be…
It’s about same as with the moon landings or with native tribes, isn’t it?
Certain people do care about things being real or not.
In the latter example it’s about living in real freedom vs reservations.
It’s as if you’re living in a zoo under a dome that merely mimics a real, open land.
Again, it’s about principles here – not plain function.
On a real NES, for example, you also have an 6502 derivative.
And the real console, even if its a NES-on-a-chip (NOAC) is a ‘living” thing that sometimes small glitches, even.
It’s an device with a character, a personality.
I’m sorry if you or others don’t see the difference here.
I don’t know how to explain it to you any better.
Or let’s think about solid-state technology vs tube technology.
People who love tube technology don’t like using a pin-comaptible fake tube based on LEDs and transistors.
Sure, functionally it’s about same – but the underlying technology is a different one.
Which sounds more like a difference between largely software emulation and mostly hardware replication styles of experiencing the old content – the latter being rather like what you get with the more real FPGA clones – especially ones that did just create the Dip chip rather than large portions of the system. If there is no way to tell the difference as the hardware is replicated that well..
I’m afraid we’re just talking past each other here. 😟 Never mind.
I don’t think so, I’m just making the point it doesn’t really really matter. Or at least I don’t agree that it matters as much as you seem to think it does – your real tubes vs fake ones with LED is a good example – as it is a fake that actually can be seen to be a fake if you look at them. The function is comparable but it is not the same experience (though so minor in difference I think I’d be fine with it – especially as I’m not taking up tube blowing or robbing a bank to source more of the practically unobtainium tubes to keep enjoying my old tube device).
Or for another example it would be like an digital music player in the form of a vinyl record player, that the music is selected by putting the ‘record’ on the turn table and placing the head, but all that does is have an RFID tag inside to trigger the right music playback – not to my mind an acceptable substitute and you might as well not have bothered. Where a brand new vinyl record player, that plays actual needle in the groove stuff and follows the design language of whichever historical machine it is trying to be even if it substitutes in a few readily available or more reliable modern parts is an authentic recreation of the experience, and probably not as far from ‘genuine’ as the surviving old ones – after all its not like all the capacitors in that old original sound system are going to be the ones it came with (at least for it to still be working).
Or where do you stand on a 100% perfect replica of the broken or missing part being produced and fitted to your classic car/steam engine/boat/gun etc? It isn’t the old part, it will doubtless be somewhat different in metallurgical quality, and might well have been made by CNC, or lost wax casting from a 3d print as you are not restarting a 100+ year old production line, building the reusable master mould or stamping dies or somehow raising from the dead that guy with the funny quirk in how he used the tools that left a barely perceptible mark in the final product that nobody else can quite figure out how.
For some despite the fact you can’t actually tell, the surface finish is within the range that came out of the factory originally, the function is the same etc that is a big deal, which to my mind is stupid as it is functionally identical to the old stock part in new condition if one existed, even if it was made a somewhat different way. It does the job of keeping that history alive and accessible.
No no, I can. I did. It’s about working with a given technology.
Fans of, say, the C64, Apple II or 6502 itself do care about working with real silicon – instead of a facsimile.
They want to tinker with the capabilities of a real processor die from back in the day – rather than a replica coded in VHDL.
But anyway, the counter argument seem to be that it doesn’t matter,
because if accuracy is just high enough then users
can be fooled somehow into working with a replica without them finding out.
From an ethical or philosophical perspective, that’s like cloning a person or pet in android form and then pretending its same living thing.
Because it looks same, has same memory and so on.
There’s no consideration, though, if it’s really same person or pet anymore.
Maybe it doesn’t matter? Would people accept a functional double of a family member?
It’s an ethical or philosophical question, but isn’t it worth to think about it?
@Foldi-One Please don’t get me wrong, from a purely functional point of view I think all your points are valid.
But to some people it’s about learning about/working with the technology of a given era.
Modern FPGAs contain an ARM core that all alone can emulate a whole C64 in software.
To some who grew up with a real 6502 or Z80 it’s a waste of technology, an overkill.
Not from economic point of view, but by principle, by heart.
By contrast, such people are fine with an imperfect hardware replica of an Z80 ot 6502,
as long as it is the technology of the time.
And that’s why same group of vintage gaming fans that may also accept NOACs but no emulator boxes or FPGAs.
They are real, allbeit slightly buggy NES silicon dies combined in a blob on a PCB.
No FPGA, no ASIC, but real 1970/80s technology in a higher integration.
That being said, there are occasions where I do imagine real hardware enthusiasts do like or even welcome FPGAs.
For those C64 expansion modules, for examples.
Those that replicate functionality of an “The Final Cartridge III” module or a “Pagefox” module, for example.
That’s because here, the computer still remains “real”.
It’s merely the accessories that are being hardware-emulated,
in absence to alternatives.
On PC side, there are these Gotek floppy drive emulators, for example.
Users of real vintage hardware, say 1:1 IBM PC clones (8088 clone motherboard etc) even do use them.
Because they’re not the “heart” of the system, but an addon.
As such, it can be a hardware-emulation just fine.
(Please excuse my limited English skills)
If you can accept the accessories being fakes because they behave correctly why not the computing part of the system? I get liking to touch something with real history, especially if its your own personal real history as you went and got your old computer out of the parents garage or whatever. But how many working C64’s in remotely original condition are there still after all this time? How many repairable without going beyond whatever your limit of acceptability is?
Sure, but you can have 100% identical experience to working with that technology (at least in theory) – in the case of a C64, lets say you buy a replacement chip after yours let out some magic smoke – it is sold as new old stock or salvaged from the exact same model so it is ‘original’ though your C64 is no longer ‘parts matching’ to how it came out of the factory… Is that fine?
Now lets assume it works like the part you thought, you can’t tell at all, but actually inside its an FPGA, or heck even the same silicon design just made with much much much finer feature size as a new run of chips in a more modern process node is massively cheaper than finding a fab that can still make these fossils exactly as it should be for your machine. Does that matter to you? Here I’d argue it should, at least if you ever found out, as it was sold on a lie, and the fraud should matter.
However if it was sold openly as a brand new drop in replacement. In that case IMO your hardware is still “real” – your vintage electronics surely doesn’t cease to be real if you replace the original long expired CMOS battery or leaky capacitors, cracked resistor (etc) does it??!?!?!? So why should a functionally identical CPU make any difference – still a digital silicon chip doing its obsolete CPU things in the same package as the original…
@Foldi-One I get, you like FPGAs.
Personally, though, I wished there was “lithography at home”, so 1:1 copies of old, slow ICs can be rebuilt.
Maybe in a few years or decades we’re there.
Just like 3D printers took about 15 years from when I dreamt about laser-based 3D printers first time in the 90s.
Technically just about possible, as there is at least one nutter trying to do serious silicon fab in their garage – Look at Sam Zeloof’s work. But the complexity of even something as simple as C64 isn’t likely to be practically possible at home the way 3d printers are any time soon if ever – FDM is conceptually simple to engineer the tolerances for a working printer are huge (at least by silicon fabrication standards), it can be fire and forget printing with a decent machine and it is pretty safe to be around (long term health implications do need more study). Silicon fabrication at home really isn’t any of that, its a complex and pretty hands on process, with some rather short term dangerous chemicals and tools.
Given that if you wish to experience that nostalgic computing or have available for your students that more simple and comprehendable bare metal programing type chip for that 90’s electronics feel you really have two choices, accept its all fake, and looks it as it is nothing but a software simulation on your modern device, that probably can’t interface with the real word in cycle accurate fashion at all, or have an experience much closer to if not identical to the historic one, which almost certainly means FPGA in there.
I think this is undercut a bit by the fact that an FPGA is more hackable than the original but a significant margin. Want your random hardware add on? Just reprogram the thing to have the feature or break out the i/o to add it the old way.
A positive aspect of FPGAs is that they are very quick, have low latency.
Thus, they can interact with physical peripherals no problem unlike software-based emulation.
This makes them great as functional alternatives to vintage hardware.
But…..I wanted a Commadore branded toilet brush 😢
I think my Atari 8bit clone imwould be better
Also has Dma and 4gb of address (16bit of 6502+ 16bit ay8930 plus some glue logic,)
And 128k is more than a c64 with 128 color and native svideo and composite
And 320 x 228 resolution with the extra dma and graphics processor, like nes ppu runs @ 21.47727mhz, but just does the number crunch
CO10444D does the actual display and video and some sounds at 3.579545mhz
The 6502 can be with the 3.57 or 1.19 if you want compatibly with atleast 4k vcs stuff
It works if it can atleast run a combat cartridge
But over 4k, you need some routine or hypervisor to dump and remap the rom to ram
I already have a C64 case and keyboard, loaded up with Gideon’s Ultimate 64 motherboard. Love it, and don’t regret the money spent, or the time waiting for it. Two months after I received and installed the board, the “official” Commodore 64 Ultimate was announced for preorder… with new case, same Gideon motherboard, AND a mechanical keyboard! Damn it! I was miffed at first. But then I put on my order..😅
I don’t feel that the preorders will have the delays associated with other Kickstarter-type offerings, because it’s made up of mostly existing parts. The only issue may be keeping up with quantity, as I believe they’ve topped the 7,000 orders so far. Confident I’ll see mine by October.
I need:
1. more ram
2. thin and still mechanic keyboard
3. replacable or flashable rom (for other language and other gui)
4. power offgrid (of course with screen )
“other GUI”
Right…
These units ARE the C64 Ultimate Elite II put in nice cases with nice mechanical keyboards for quite a bit less than if you bought it all separately.
There is an Italian company challenging the YouTuber over the Commodore brand. The Italian company claim they registered the logo and brand name 8 years ago. Each has said the other are illegally using the brand. Trouble ahead methinks.
I probably shouldn’t comment so often, but there’s something that makes me wonder:
Why are nowadays all these vintage computers are being reduced to game machines?
The “mini” models of certain computers lack all the real i/o ports, for example, so they can’t interface with any accessories.
I’m wondering in general, it’s not about this HaD article in particular.
Someone should think that people have more previous memories about the 80s or 90s than playing games.
The C64, for example, was being used in schools or within other hobbies.
Some had their model train or robot arm being controlled by it.
Or used it in the ham shack, as many photos on the internet suggest.
So why is it that vintage computers are usually merely being celebrated as, um, toys? 🤔
Good question. Think about the use cases. When faced with a task, a person will use the most effort / cost / time effective tool available. 99% of the ‘work’ that was done in the 1980s on home computers can now be handled much more conveniently and cheaply using modern devices.
Writing a paper, tabulating data, sending a letter, developing software, and managing accounts is best handled using a modern laptop.
Controlling embedded systems is best handled by your favorite embedded controller (RaspberryPI, Arduino, etc), or perhaps one connected to a modern laptop.
What is left? Some educational software gems that never had a better modern replacement, and of course games.
Hi, this sure makes sense.
But from my cultural point of view (-I guess-),
I don’t see the importance of efficiency and cost/benefit ratio in life.
Or money, despite it being needed to pay certain bills.
To people like me it’s more of a decission of the heart, I suppose.
Using a vintage computer for a vintage hobby, doesn’t that also simply feel right?
An vintage computer, radio or [insert thing] adds to the whole experience.
Be it because you’re interacting with in a different way.
I mean, why are nix users still loving the terminal/console if there’s a GUI?
Or why do people hold on to BBSes, IRC and traditional websites?
It’s not so much about being old or new, but because of being *different, I suppose.
Just like vintage technology being different to what we’re using new.
My first apple II+ when I was 7 years old was the launchpad into both my electronics hobby and computing career, as well as why I can still fake being a programmer today.
That said I distinctly remember nearly all of my childhood friends only using theirs for games.
I played games too of course but at least at that age I do distinctly remember noticing that “spark” of fascination I had was very much missing in others.
It was quite a few years later entering the BBS scene before finding others with similar levels of interest as I had.
Nearly four decades later everyone wanting to tickle that nostalgia urge I just assumed would follow the same ratio. I’m also not surprised the nostalgia levels would work out the same way.
Myself and one of the two friends from childhood interested in more than games, well I still have my original IIe (had to sell that II+ at the time to afford the IIe), and similarly he still has his childhood IIgs.
Those not as interested and that only played games, I wouldn’t expect a single one to have kept their childhood computers on purpose, and are the ones I’d expect to go out now to buy whatever tickles their fancy.
In other words old systems geared towards games is going to be 99% of the market looking to buy, and far far less of us that would want more out of them would need to buy anything today.
When selling to a niche market, they are just making what that market wants.
I would suggest that is because toys is really what they are good for now – yes you could still use a modern replica of a C64 to control your train or robot arm, but you’d have to be really quite crazy to want to against the backdrop of modern options.
Don’t get me wrong it might be fun to be that ‘crazy’ for a while, but it isn’t at all practical – so you are doing it with the vintage limitations entirely for ‘fun’, which really makes it a toy. Also ‘fun’ is in quotations in the previous sentence as most folks that grew up with the C64 probably wouldn’t consider that to be fun – where the nostalgic game might still be frustrating, but is much more likely to still be considered fun.
Hi, I understand, but since when are hobbies, um, practical?
If you’re, say, a tube radio enthusiasts who repairs old radios in his free time
then wouldn’t it be a pleasure to use an old C64, Apple or DOS PC
to look the tube specs in a vintage database that runs on these systems?
The database is unlike to need an update, anyway and interacting with a vintage PC with a CRT monitor
is much more relaxing and fitting the atmosphere than using a random modern Windows 11 PC from super market.
I have a job, where I design “practical modern stuff” with ARM, FPGAs etc.
In my spare time, I like to play with old hardware. Mostly 8-bit with real HW but also emulators of older stuff. Compared to the current x86 or ARM systems it feels very refreshing to toy around with bare metal 64K systems, where you know exactly what everyone of those 64k addresses hold.
And it never fails to amaze me, how much of the core functionality of modern software were, or could have been done with just 8 bits in 64KB. It was mostly the “bells and whistles” that required larger address space.
Another, related thing that makes me think:
There is a market for vintage toys, comics and so on.
Why not for construction kits, too? Or is there?
Say, electronic construction sets from the 70s, 80s or 90s with the optional computer interfaces.
Stuff like Kosmos or Fischertechnik, for example.
So if there are so many replicas of 80s home computers,
then why no interest in the peripherals of the time?
Re-releasing old construction kits with their original manuals,
with their original experiments and 80s era computer interface/software doesn’t require new development.
It’s so simple to produce, yet so fun to tinker on a low-level approach:
Beginners of any age could directly interact with things via BASIC, for example, by toggling i/o pins via port addresses.
I simply don’t get it why there’s so little nostalgia left for this side of history.
Where is all the fascination gone? The spirit of discovery, of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) and being willing to learn and to understand your surroundings?
Well if your hobby is your model train layout do you really want to fight with vintage computing hardware now? Vintage computing isn’t your hobby, even if decades ago folks in your hobby would have used one of these computers, if they could afford one and understand how to use it – being the only option they had available.
If YOUR hobby happens to be tinkering with electronics like it is 1989 still that is great for you, and would inform which recreations and emulations (if any) of that old stuff you will accept. But most of the folks that used the C64 for that sort of hobby in the past didn’t consider the now retro computer as their hobby, or even really important to the hobby – it was simply the best tool they could get, and now better tools exist and are cheaper…
There is definitely a market for old construction toys, being a fan of the older style of Lego Technic and Mindstorms myself I’m quite aware of how that market has fluctuated in valuation over the years, but it is always still there. Just probably not strong enough to be worth recreating, and given Lego are still a going concern building new broadly similar stuff…
Got nothing against the newer Lego styles, even picked up some NXT thinking they would be fun to have in the collection as they bring some new tools like positionally aware motors without eating your limited sensor ports the RCX didn’t have (and at the time where cheap and convenient compared to rolling my own). Nor do I dislike the new technic sets/parts particularly – the look has changed somewhat, and I do like the older technic set style a little more – hinting at being a particular dump truck rather than full of fine detailing so it almost looks like the real thing in a slightly blurred photo. But really both are good. Though the studded beams and regular brick interactions are rather more flexible than the current almost all stud less beam stuff – if you need a 16 stud long gap between axles you can’t so easily build it from the parts you have with modern technic so will have to go buy another part or three that fills the gap. But the new parts do also come with benefits in the complexity and compactness of what you can build – I’d just have liked the sets to push a little more towards the old style where every set really is a kit of more generic useful parts.
Okay, so the glorious C64 is “just a tool” to them?
Then why they have nostalgic feelings for it same time?
I mean, if we read about posts/comments by Amiga fans then they often are stating how much they loved their Amiga and that they kept using it for everything until they absolutely couldn’t anymore.
Actually.. On a second thought, you’re spot on here. Thanks! :)
But I wouldn’t necessarily limit to 1989, albeit it’s really a nice year to choose.
Perhaps saying “late 20th century” electronics in general is good enough.
Because it really was same yet a different technology, more pure TTL circuits without any internal software.
But yes, electronics hobby was different back then.
Lots of soldering on vero boards, PCBs etched at home, more 555s..
We’re talking a bit past each others, I’m afraid.
I meant to ask/wonder if, say, C64 users of the 80s didn’t integrate their C64 hobby into their other hobby/hobbies.
– And if so, why there’s no nostalgia for the C64 in its role as part of the other hobby/hobbies.
Why just in its gaming role? Isn’t that boring on long run, I ask ?
– This is hackaday.com – a site about homebrew and electronics, that’s why I’m asking here.
The model train was an real world example, because model trains were still relevant in the 80s – Just like electronic construction sets.
These weren’t some random ideas, thus, but (a few) people back then simply had an interest in such things.
It were common hobbies, in short. I didn’t make them up.
So true. I never used a C64 to play games.
Excellent article. Everyone who thinks they want to relive their childhood needs to spin up VICE and play with it for an afternoon. If, at the end of that afternoon you are thinking, “OMG, I want a bulky one of these on my desk again!” then do it, but if you get bored or just suddenly remember that computers are still fun because things get faster and easier to do over time, then you spent $0 to save a lot of money.
the problem isn’t that we don’t have enough c64, but that we have too much of everything else.
i remember in 5th grade sometimes they let me play with an atari 800. and i was very aware that its BASIC was more limited than the QB i had at home on our 286. but i jumped at the chance nonetheless, because it was the only computer i could play with at school. a few years later, i was staying at my grandparents’ house on vacation, and i played with a C16 that my uncles left behind. it was very primitive but it was exciting to me because it was the only computer i could play with at the time. and i was a little excited, too, to prod at its unique sound hardware.
now, there’s nowhere i go where i don’t have more computer than i care to play with. and the oddball software and hardware limitations and unique hacks are all old news to me.
i would never play with this toy :(
Considering that Kevin O’Leary is involved, I’ll take a HARD PASS on any of this effort.
Your just racist and jelaous.
why? the brand died a long time ago. as commodore system owner, user, service repair and programmer. i hate to say this but its time is done and unless you can really compete with this pc industry and not charge the same price as equipment available today, it will die again. you will have to create an entire. They have to create an ecco system just like apple and i dont think this new team has the know-how. just like the other commodore owners wont listen to the user new and old. You have to create an ecco system you must go above and not worry about the financials which what the old owners did. When steve job come back to apple that was what he did and at that time apple was almost going to file for bankruptcy. You have to have that umf and if you dont you go broke. Ask intel, ibm, and hp that did not want to think outside the box. Its not just enough to love the system and want to see it go on. You have put money and time for new and improved products.
8 bit computer are the thing of the past and only us oldies will use it. in business that not enough you need to bring in the new users to turn a profit and the new user have iphones. Also, let not forget the emulation (which is what i do for cheap). Also, another thing what destroyed commodore software developers, piracy. I stop developing software because there was not money in it because of piracy. I left for pc, made private contracting software and made a ton. Why, do you think the precious commodore brand name holders sold current items.
As a business owner may self this what run though my mind everyday, competition competition. How to make my business better and don’t get left behind.
sorry i love commodore but their time is up……
But the points you mention are exactly what makes this little company stand out from “business as usual” world of making money these days.
This Commodore has dedication and a fan base.
Most of them being parents or grandparents of a new, future generation.
A replica of a C64 can’t compete with current technology, of course,
but it can provide an alternative to the bleak world of smartphones, social media consumption and so on.
The fact alone that it is different might appeal a number of potential new Commodore users or fans.
Personally, I have no idea if it will succeed. But I think they rightfully take their chance and try.
And this try a lobe was/is worth it, maybe.:
Doing something you love and something that makes others happy.
I still sometimes fire up my old Amiga, to do a bit of painting and programming:
1) The painting is relaxing and distraction free.
2) Programming on the old machine forces me to make my programs more efficient. Some of the ideas I can use on newer and completely different hardware.
Somethings makes no sense to do on the old Amiga (heavy simulations, AI, serious numbercrunching, etc), but then again: I also have other tools besides my hammer.
So for me it s both a bit of nostalgia, mental excercise and the relaxing effect of no distractions.
So i second your thought on this being an alternative to the current bleak world of computing.
I think the Peri Fractic said, they would license the name at low cost to people that had ideas for hardware/software that fits the brand. And hacks like Pistorm for the Amiga are really amazing ideas that came from a single developer. (pistorm is an Raspberry Pi accelleration board that is compatible with real amiga hardware). So i think they have a shot at making something different. I dont think they will be replacing your PC/Mac any time soon though.
in my kid’s 13 years, he’s played a good amount of combat for atari on stella, and some major stryker with dosbox. and an hour or two of qbasic under dosbox. but now he’s even too lazy to learn how to mod minecraft, and that’s something he actually wants to do.
The problem is the C64 is nostalgia and 50 years behind schedule and underdeveloped.
I would rather want to see an 80 or 120 column Commodore 64 with gigabytes of Ram. I would rather have a path forward because the magazines and millions of followers stopped following.
It is unclear there is a vision for new hardware that will pass off as Commodore’s vision for a computer.
Microsoft makes some of the most powerful software in the world so why would I want to play with Nostalgia that has little money in it for me?
The second problem is once there are computers shipped out, what guarantee is there that users will actually pay for updated products?
Nintendo Of America wanted to build a better Commodore 64 that delivered the same graphics and sound capabilities as the NES (with at least 32 colors instead of 16 and revised audio similar to having dual SID chips for up to 6 voice channels) so you could write your own games that would normally play on an NES cartridge. Its keyboard was based on the Commodore Plus 4 with the function keys F1-F8 now eight in a row above the main keyboard and the arrow-type cursor keys revised. It was to be marketed as the Nintendo Advanced Video System (NAVS.) It was rendered stillborn. If Commodore and Nintendo collaborated, the NAVS would also have sold as something in naming like “Commodore 128G” (G for gaming,) “Commodore 128N” (N for NES Compatible) or “Commodore Plus 8.” Your games that you would have written likely would be in BBC BASIC, the only BASIC interpreter known to run as fast as machine language because there was at one time a memory multiplexing system for computers such as the BBC Micro Atom and Acorn Archimedes that allowed the conversion of BASIC code to assembly without actually having to write in machine language yourself.
Well, there’s the C65 as a blue print for future development.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_65
The C128 had 80 char mode, too. 80×50, even.
The VDC was very capable, it was being accessible in C64 mode even.
Not ideal for action games and sprites, maybe, but fine for graphics and terminal software (PETSCII BBSes).
I think a lot of people are missing one of the points of this exercise, yes sure enthusiasts are quite capable of building a replica or boxing an emulator and so on, but regular non technical people might struggle somewhat , but this is a ready built option under the proper flag, which makes it more accessible and recognizable to regular folk.
I personally find Christian Simpson/Perifractic a little cringe, which is off-putting for me. Still, the premise of this is pretty cool otherwise, especially since they have some of the original Commodore crew (Bil!) on board.
I would love to buy case with keyboard to put MISTer FPGA or some miniPC or RasPi in it, i was looking for some broken The C64 to salvage case and keyb but no luck.
This article misses the point. The intent was to create momentum immediately. Too many times in the past the resurrection of Commodore was promised and nothing ever happened. In this case it was a simple as taking what was basically an existing project and giving it official status in order to immediately have a product to sell. Buy it or don’t buy for crying out loud wait until they come out with their next round of products that are part of their vision before judging the entire plan.
This was an opportunity to not just immediately have a product to offer, but to immediately start generating revenue.
The long term plan will take more time to get rolling. Be patient.
“We’re impressed!” –
Hackaday yall might want to talk to them lol this is at the bottom of the relaunch page.
What they need to do is make a C64 case that will house an mITX board. They should make a C128, C128D, A1000 and A500 versions as well. These would sell.