ZX80 & the Dawn of 'Surreal' UK Game Industry
wired.com
wired.com
The ZX81 BASIC (and "OS", such as it was) was written by Steve Vickers, and everything fitted into an 8K ROM. I have always been impressed by this guy's work. The whole unit had only 4 chips (ROM, RAM, CPU and a custom chip). Scroll done for a photo: http://oldcomputers.net/zx81.html
Steve Vickers went on to create the Jupiter Ace (with the main ZX81 hardware guy), which had similar hardware, but instead of BASIC, it had Forth.
I've been fascinated by RPN languages ever since - even managing to have great fun doing interactive PostScript development on slightly more expensive kit.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Jupiter-Ace-Computer-/290440498106?cmd...
I have to say that it doesn't look quite as interesting as it did when I was 16.
Everyone went to assembly if they wanted speed. I think Forth requires more thinking than BASIC (at least, of a mathematically flexible kind).
I'd love to see ZXevious - any chance you've still got a copy somewhere? We Pandora fanboix have lots of emulators in our pockets these days ..
It always amazes me why would anyone need more than that. Well... Memory could be an exception - a single memory chip is limiting - but the rest is doable.
PCs are ugly overcomplicated things.
http://www.commodore.ca/products/c64/commodore_64_motherboar... and http://www.commodore.ca/gallery/hardware/c65.jpg
Even if you don't get to 4 chips, a simple and elegant design is very desirable. And, in the case of PCs, quite impossible.
It just has to be cheap and run the software they want to use.
I find it disturbing that my computer has, somewhere inside its sleek and modern body, a complete IBM 5150, with its ISA bus, serial ports, real-time clock, keyboard micro-controller (with that horrendous A20 hack so that the 286 it can emulate can switch between user and whatever mode OS/2 1.0 would need to run) and CGA display adapter ready to boot up PC-DOS from something it thinks is an MFM hard disk. The only thing missing is Microsoft's BASIC burned in ROM.
It's offensive. Really.
I have a collection of 80's and 90's computers. No computer in the collection is as inelegant as the IBM PC and its clones. Many of them (original Mac, Apple II - despite the chip count - Ataris) are absolute works of art. Sheer elegance in their simplicity.
It's on YouTube for those wanting to take a peek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y8IkcUGV9w
So you have Clive Sinclair to thank for both Lemmings and GTA!
The practical difficulties such as very restricted memory (the ZX-80 had < 1kB of usable RAM), unreliable cassette tape drives, long loading/saving times and non-ergonomic keyboards meant that even the most dedicated business user would struggle to use them for any serious purpose.
So is it that modern games suck, or that I'm too used to the game of the 80s? I don't know, but I know it'll be a while till I find another game as good as Knight 'n' Grail.
I would much rather play Half Life 2: Episode 3 or Starcraft 2 to Pacman or Joust (my first computer was a 1986 vintage PC XT clone, so it's not that I'm not aware of the old games).