I was thinking, go back in time to the late 80's BBC Micro computer from ACORN, ZX from Sinclair, Atari, Amiga, the list goes on in the UK alone let alone in America we have Apple, Altair, list goes on.
Well what if one of these companies, decided to invest money in a new venture, re-create an old model (but with new fittings) and have the hardware actually run the same applications and the eg.
An old micro, looks like a Micro, but suspiciously comes with a DVD/Blueray has 64bit CPU, gigs of memory quad core whatever and a flat LCD screen... but in the style of an old machine (imagine again, Ferrari, in the 80's it had a square body) we give it some curves, update the style but essentially bring it back to the extent if you install the Original operating system and your old games (some kind of Floppy to USB? for ease of use..)
With options to Develop a lot more powerful operating system to run whatever you want.....
Maybe this has been done, i was not about to google that question with a hundred false results)
There are emulators for a LOT of the old systems (games, personal computers, mainframes...) that will run the old software. Typically, they run much faster than they did in their own lifetime, even with graphics emulation of the systems. Sometimes you can even find emulators written in java or javascript that run in a web browser window.
lol is right. you have to excuse grumpy and fungus. theyre pretty much my favorite members but dont always get the point. in this case unable to determine the difference between imitating an insruction set (emulation) and running look-and-feel of programs and os for vintage computers.
john1993:
lol is right. you have to excuse grumpy and fungus. theyre pretty much my favorite members but dont always get the point. in this case unable to determine the difference between imitating an insruction set (emulation) and running look-and-feel of programs and os for vintage computers.
What's the difference between software on a Pentium/ARM CPU and 'hardware' implemented on a FPGA (or whatever)?
Writing programs for it not the same thing as using an API. You're 'seeing' the instruction set and hardware that you wanted.
How the circuit board inside the box works really doesn't matter.
cjdelphi:
Not emulated, somehow have the real hardware running the real thing only a lot lot more powerful...
Think windows 3.1 on a quad core machine. Not emulated. Only lets have hardware from the past updated
I have to agree -- this seems like a contradiction. Not emulated ... same hardware except more powerful. How can it be the same, but improved? If it's improved, it's not the same. Do you mean the same architecture at higher clock speeds? If so, that throws off the timing of all the legacy software. Back in the days when software ran on computers less powerful than an Uno, there was a lot of timing-dependency. Especially where computers were all the same CPU at the same clock speed. (I.e., not like PCs where yours could be 2.4GHz, and mine is 2.8GHz, but where we're both running 8MHz CPUs with the same part number.) When you know the clock speed, you can assume it takes XX clock cycles to do whatever task, and you can use this to run delay loops and things like that. Changing the clock speed breaks all those assumptions, and sometimes causes the code to stop working, if the delay was there to wait for some event to take place. Other times it just changes the apparent speed. To see this in action, try running Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 in a VirtualBox emulator, and win a game of Solitaire. That used to be an animation that took a minute or two to complete. Now, it's just a blur of cards.
I don't know how literally you meant the analogy of running Win3.1 on a quad-core, but it's kinda doable now, without emulating anything. It will only use one core, because Win3.1 does not support SMP. Also, you'll have to tweak one of the .ini files to change the memory divisor because it doesn't use large enough integers to track the amount of RAM computers have today. Other than that, it works. Again, I used VirtualBox to do so myself (a couple years ago) because... well.. there's not much to do in Win3.1 these days, and I'm not willing to dedicate hardware to it.
john1993:
lol is right. you have to excuse grumpy and fungus. theyre pretty much my favorite members but dont always get the point. in this case unable to determine the difference between imitating an insruction set (emulation) and running look-and-feel of programs and os for vintage computers.
It could be we're all misunderstanding the point. It's not very clear. What is it you or the OP is looking for? A way to run old software? (The actual binaries of old software...) Re-make something that looks like old software, but with modern hardware support? Just rebuilding an old computer in a new case?
Whatever the goal is here, someone's probably already done it. There's a lot of tech prowess behind nostalgia. But first, someone has to spell out what they're trying to do.. 'cause this Ferrari metaphor is totally lost on me.
SirNickity:
Back in the days when software ran on computers less powerful than an Uno, there was a lot of timing-dependency. Especially where computers were all the same CPU at the same clock speed. (I.e., not like PCs where yours could be 2.4GHz, and mine is 2.8GHz, but where we're both running 8MHz CPUs with the same part number.) When you know the clock speed, you can assume it takes XX clock cycles to do whatever task, and you can use this to run delay loops and things like that. Changing the clock speed breaks all those assumptions,
Yep, I've done a lot of that in the old days - from Spectrums to Atari ST and Amiga. Things like changing the color palette in sync with the video display was very common.
The C64 in particuar relied heavily on "raster chasing" for split-screen scrolling and sprite multiplexing. I'm always very impressed that software emulators can run those programs at all. It shows the dedication of their programmers.
There's also a lot of games that will simply run too fast. We've all seen what happens to "delay()" on an Arduino if you choose the wrong clock speed in the menu. Many old games would do the same thing.
Bottom line: There's a lot of 'nostalgia' code out there that will break if you change the clock speed.
It's a rather techincal hour-long talk, but (for those not interested in grimey details) the interesting part is the demo they put together. (It's near the beginning.) Just unreal what they've accomplished on such limited hardware. And a perfect case in point here. They're literally executing code in such a way that memory contents are both program and data, and timed to exact cycles of the hardware. It's just sick...
They're literally executing code in such a way that memory contents are both program and data,
Yep done that back in 75 about the third program I ever wrote on a micro.
It played a tune and the data it used to play the tune was the code that played the tune. You can't do that on an Arduino because it is Harvard architecture.
cjdelphi:
There's no limits to your closed off imagination.
More imagination in my little finger sunshine than you will ever have if you live to be 300. Seen my projects have you? Where are your projects?
Thing is when I say things, I tend to think about what I say first, you should try that sometime. But then there I am again taking you literally, thinking that your words actually have meaning.
So a mini with a Ferrari's engine would snap the chassis in two, just like your analogy.
You can run RISC OS on a Raspberry Pi, it makes Linxu look like the dog it is.
Thing is when I say things, I tend to think about what I say first, you should try that sometime.
Well Grumpy if you really did think about things first you probably would not say half the things you throw out there.
RISC OS is a cute 15 year old OS that has developed into, well, a cute 15 year old OS. Nice Toy !!! To compare it to Linxu might hold water - I'm guessing you mean the Linxu Mint - the pseudo random bit bucket :).
Or perhaps when you type things you don't tend to let your fingers think about it first. You should try that sometime
Now - RISC OS vs LINUX ? Thats a debate thats likely to last less than a minute. And if you really DO think about things first, you probably won't do much more than an agreeable grunt in response.
Which would I prefer - the old Ferrari or the new RISC OS ? I'll leave that up to your densely packed finger imagination.
Buy hey Grumpy don't get Grumpy - I'm just winding you up - which is what you have to do with RISC OS before using it
Grumpy_Mike:
It played a tune and the data it used to play the tune was the code that played the tune. You can't do that on an Arduino because it is Harvard architecture.
