[PLUG] Dungeons of Daggorath

wes plug at the-wes.com
Mon Nov 24 16:51:51 UTC 2008


That's interesting. The version of the rumor that I heard was a little
different. What I heard was that IBM went to Motorola and asked for a good
deal on their processors. Motorola responded, "Why should we give you a
deal?"

Then they went to Intel, which responded, "Sure, how many do you want?"

This leaves plenty of room for people to do things like lie about how many
they can supply. I'm sure the actual correspondence would be very
interesting to see today.

And the rest is history.

-wes

On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 7:15 AM, William A Morita <wamorita at hevanet.com>wrote:

> Michael
>
> I did some assembly level development on the 6809.
> Rumor is that we ended up with 8086's in the PC because Intel lied to IBM
> about their then capacity to supply chips.
> The assembly language was very nicely formed as are most Motorola
> instruction sets.
> What is SDL??
>
> - Bill Morita
>
> wamorita at hevanet.com
> Home: (503) 697-6994
> Cell: (503) 260-3876
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: plug-bounces at lists.pdxlinux.org
> [mailto:plug-bounces at lists.pdxlinux.org] On Behalf Of Michael Robinson
> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:30 AM
> To: plug at lists.pdxlinux.org
> Subject: [PLUG] Dungeons of Daggorath
>
> Remember this coco 2 game?  Well, I found a Linux port and tried it out.
>  It
> uses SDL.  It seems a bit harder than I remember it being on the coco, I'm
> wondering if the port has some changes from the original.
>
> Finally survived the first level only to be wiped out by a knight on the
> second.  Typing seems a bit slow, that's my only real complaint.
>
> It would be nice if I could get the original coco version in a dsk image
> that I can load into drivewire to play on my actual color computer.  The
> whole game is only 8k.
>
> There is a windows port as well, apparently that came first.
>
> The other classic I miss is Downland, a coco 2 game that had problems
> running on the coco 3.  I don't know if anyone has ported it to the PC let
> alone Linux.
>
> Out of curiosity, what would a 6809 redesigned to run at say 2.4 Ghz with
> additional 16 bit sound hardware built in be like to work with?
> I've heard a lot of talk that PC machine language is just plain gross where
> the 6809 is much simpler than say a quad core processor used in a modern
> PC.
> There is talk from some coco enthusiasts of a COCO 4, but I doubt that will
> ever happen.  At least it won't happen until the hardware gets old enough.
> The coco3 had disk basic, what would a modern coco look like?  I suppose
> memory protection would have to be considered and the ability to access
> data
> using more than 8 bits, although a compatability mode would make sense.  I
> think the Coco 3 was the first coco in the coco line to have compatability
> issues.  For one thing, every pmode 4 game you play on an RGB monitor on a
> COCO 3 is in black and white.  I guess what would be most interesting is
> taking the best of all the computers that were popular in 1980 and making a
> modern variant.  Imagine a COCO 4 having the sprite technology of the
> Commodore 64.
>
>
> These days it seems like your choices are Mac or PC, not as diverse as say
> 1980 when you could go with a Commodore, a TRS-80, an Apple IIe, an Atari,
> etcetera.  In 1980 Microsoft wasn't dominant yet.
> Tandy corporation licensed software from Microsoft for the color computer,
> but Microsoft wasn't the sole provider of that software.  Isn't 1980 about
> the time that Windows
> 3.1 was getting popular?
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG mailing list
> PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG mailing list
> PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
>



More information about the PLUG mailing list