|
| |
There are 142 guests and 1 MSX friend online
You are an anonymous user.
|
| | One Chip MSX is to get a second chance! |
| | Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 15:14 Submitted by: Latok Topic: MSX Revival | | Source: RetroPC
During PLD World 2005, an event dedicated to PLD (FPGA) technology, organized by Altera, Kazuhiko Nishi of MSX Association officially announced the One Chip MSX is to get a second chance, after ASCII decided not to produce the One Chip MSX in August, 2005.
This news does not exactly come as a surprise, as the One Chip MSX was already demonstrated during the Tokyo Gameshow, and Bazix had already announced several improvements to the One Chip MSX. With the lecture on PLD World, where this flyer was spread as well, the information does however become official.
The default specifications of the One Chip MSX will offer MSX2 compatibility (256kB RAM), Kanji ROM, 2 MSX cartridge slots, a hot swappable SD/MMC card slot, 10 and 40 pin FPGA i/o connectors and default I/O (PS/2, VGA, 2x cinch audio, composite video out). As it looks now, the One Chip MSX will be up for pre-order once again, with its boosted specifications, during the first three months of 2006. Once again, MSX Association aim at selling 5,000 computers. Last but not least, RetroPC reports that MSX Association plan to produce the One Chip MSX under their own name this time.
Relevant link: One Chip MSX at PLD World report by RetroPC |
| | |
|
| By spl on October 23 2005, 15:17 | Good news. Hope it will be sold 
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 23 2005, 15:22 | yay, g00d news!
But.., there's always room for pickers ^_^
Why not all the memory the device has? Why only 256k ? I see good use for such software like Meridian.. whicch *really* seems to need serious RAM if you want to do lengty songs..
| | |
| By Ivan on October 23 2005, 18:08 | Forget the extra RAM. According to the current poll we need a printer port. 
| | |
| By Ivan on October 23 2005, 18:10 | And I want the case in pink colour. Otherwise I won't buy it.
| | |
| By mars2000you on October 23 2005, 18:26 | Yes, in the last part, there's a price : 20.790 yens
I presume that there's a comparison with the price of the MSX1 One Chip : 19.800 yens
| | |
| By Ivan on October 23 2005, 18:54 | Still no case?
| | |
| By snout on October 23 2005, 18:55 | Actually it's the price inc. VAT (and 19.800 ex VAT), being the exact same price as when ASCII had it on offer. Damn, those Japanese only have 5% VAT...
| | |
| By Patsie on October 23 2005, 19:50 | Why does MSX asociation think they can sell 5000 this time, when not even 2 months ago they couldn't?
| | |
| By [D-Tail] on October 23 2005, 21:14 | Umm, first off: because of the WAY BETTER specs? Secondly, they have some fame of name right now, and more people will initially react, because they've heard of it before, I assume.
I WANT IT!!
Where's the order page? Not to rash anything, just out of curiosity... ;-)
| | |
| By konamiman on October 23 2005, 22:26 | 256K RAM? What the hell...? What would be the cost increase if selling it with 4M??? Or at the very least 1M! 
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 23 2005, 22:27 | nothing..
just some VHDL-coding..
| | |
| By djh1697 on October 23 2005, 22:58 | Can anyone here code in VHDL ? we could have an msx.org challange? the most useful add on for OCM!
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 23 2005, 23:22 | I propose: .. an ogg/mp3-decoder that doesn't take too many gates ^_^
| | |
| By Edwin on October 23 2005, 23:39 | Once I get my hands on an OCM, I'll be able to code vhdl. 
| | |
| By Samor on October 24 2005, 00:50 | 256 aint so bad....
my vg8235 is jealous of it (it only has 128 )
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 24 2005, 01:34 | yes, it isn't bad, but it isn't ideal either..
Just use the whole 32 Megabyte minus some
| | |
| By Sonic_aka_T on October 24 2005, 02:00 | I must say, 256kB doesn't make a whole lot of sense... I would expect the 4MB limit (slot), but not something below that. Having said that, it shouldn't be too hard to change, tho personally I don't see why you wouldn't wanna ship it with at least 4MB in the first place...
| | |
| By Gilneas2 on October 24 2005, 06:55 | Whatever happened to all the alternative names we came up with for the OCM?
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 24 2005, 13:14 | btw, the newspost says:
"MSX2 compatibility (256kB RAM)"
So did my 8245
Which ofcourse was: 128 RAM + 128 VRAM
So it might not even be 256k main RAM !
Ahwell it's all speculating.. bottomline is that the thing should at least come with 4MB right from the start
| | |
| By Sonic_aka_T on October 24 2005, 13:39 | no, it says 256kB main RAM... Heck, I just noticed it even says it in 'plain english' in the lower right corner of the leaflet. Still, if it's pretty much a variable in the VHDL code, why not set that variable to 4096 instead of 256? (Or more likely, $0100 instead of $0010)
| | |
| By sunrise on October 24 2005, 13:40 | Happy programming
| | |
| By BiFi on October 24 2005, 14:04 | Does this mean they're going to wait for 5000 orders again before the production even starts?
| | |
| By snout on October 24 2005, 18:36 | Hmm, BiFi, are you saying in a roundabout way that you'd want to finance the production in advance?
| | |
| By Sonic_aka_T on October 24 2005, 18:43 | judging from another thread I saw, Repair-Bas is the one with the real big money!!! (in cash too!) 
| | |
| By BiFi on October 24 2005, 18:46 | Thank you for this elaborating reaction... I would've expected a more serious answer from a Bazix official.
| | |
| By snout on October 24 2005, 19:11 | scary huh, even people from Bazix have a sense of humour these days
| | |
| By snout on October 24 2005, 19:20 | <serious mode> As it looks now, 5,000 One Chip MSX computers are to be produced and delivered to market in the first 3 quarters of 2006, meaning the production will continue no matter what, not depending on the success or failure of a pre-order period. More info on this to follow in the (near) future. </serious mode>
| | |
| By Sonic_aka_T on October 24 2005, 20:02 | I like you better when you're not serious...
| | |
| By Edwin on October 24 2005, 21:15 | The serious answer was more helpful though!
| | |
| By sunrise on October 24 2005, 21:19 | If it is serious, where do we need pre-ordering for ?
| | |
| By spl on October 24 2005, 21:44 | I want to order one!
Ok, being more serious, where we will be able to order the OCM?
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 24 2005, 22:13 | Snout, make sure you nag those guys in the far east enough to ship the 1cm with 4meg out of the box! 256k is a joke
| | |
| By Rikusu on October 25 2005, 02:42 | I'd really like to see Snout nagging in Japanese
And to answer Sunrise's question: a pre-order is quite a normal phenomenon; new gameconsoles and other products can usually be pre-ordered as well. People who are eager to get one as soon as possible, get it immediately after it has been produced. There will be little or no delay in shipping the product when it's finished.
| | |
| By Grauw on October 25 2005, 02:46 | Pfft.
If the device is anything like its predecessor, it’s got a lot of RAM onboard which can probably be mapped to the MSX main RAM relatively easily.
If not, ah well... The second slot’s good for my memory mapper then .
Anyways, 256k isn’t that bad... Few things need more than that, except cracked ROMs.
~Grauw
| | |
| By mars2000you on October 25 2005, 08:11 | Quote:
| Anyways, 256k isn’t that bad... Few things need more than that, except cracked ROMs.
|
..... and some demos, like thre great Sphere demo 
| | |
| By msd on October 25 2005, 08:12 | And width dos2 256KB is really not enough to still run all software
| | |
| By sunrise on October 25 2005, 08:29 | Rikusu, I didnot asked for the explanation of a custom do so, but simply the question what is the use of pre-ordering if you want to produce it.
I would say, if you are sure , why again this circus. So no hesitation produce !
| | |
| By AuroraMSX on October 25 2005, 09:56 | If we just keep nagging about the lameness of this OCM thingy, will MSXA push up the specs just in time before production and give us a turboR-OCM? (Coz only by then, I'll start thinking about getting one...)
| | |
| By konamiman on October 25 2005, 10:29 | Quote:
| Anyways, 256k isn’t that bad... Few things need more than that, except cracked ROMs.
|
What if I want to load Compass, install InterNestor, and create a RAMdisk all at once, as I usually do? Sorry but 256K is VERY bad. 
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 10:47 | aurora: the only lameness atm is those programmers typing "2 5 6" instead of "4 0 9 6"
| | |
| By spl on October 25 2005, 10:51 | As I have a external 512KB ram cart, actually I don't mind about the 256 limit.
Yours,
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 10:57 | oh, perhaps an old question.. but does it or does it not have an RJ45 connector?
| | |
| By msd on October 25 2005, 11:07 | Spl: I've an external mapper of 4096KB and I mind.. I rather keep those slots free for an opl4 and gfx9000
| | |
| By sunrise on October 25 2005, 11:20 | Well, if you can use your Moonsound ofcourse
| | |
| By msd on October 25 2005, 11:47 | If it has no 12Volt then I will put it on there myself
| | |
| By sunrise on October 25 2005, 12:08 | The real spirit for a DIYC
| | |
| By spl on October 25 2005, 12:25 | Actually, I know that Moonsound and GX9000 are good hardware, but with few owners. Also, are those piece of hardware part of MSX standards?
| | |
| By msd on October 25 2005, 12:28 | well there are more carts using 12Volt, but hey it's just strange to put the default settings on 256KB. There is 32MB onboard. Those board are maybe not standard but the cartridge slot pins are
| | |
| By sunrise on October 25 2005, 12:33 | spl , a gfx9000 works, that into the first place.
Furthermore it is not only a question of the Moonsound, but philips modul, thosiba modul ,rs232c, msx audio, thus talking about a fully support of the 50 pins a cartrdige has
Many people understand this, a msx-1 was built that way, msx-2, msx2+ and a Turbo-r also.
Have we suddenly lost the knowledge or what ?
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 12:35 | Besides, iirc the Moonsound is not obsolete, they can still be made (@ 25 orders), so there's nothing in the way to make the Moonsound a really generally accepted 'standard' ..
| | |
| By J-War on October 25 2005, 13:43 | I'd like to request the one chip msx to have WinXP + 256 Mb ram + x800 + 160 Gb Hard disk and a Wolf_ Sticker on it, please 
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 13:45 | I think the first options could be done.. the last one however... o_O
| | |
| By Grauw on October 25 2005, 17:37 | Memory-wise, this OCM configuration is better than my current MSX.
So I have no problem with it, although it would be nice if it had more memory, of course.
With regard to 4 MB, were there not some software products with faulty memory detection routines which had problems with that amount? 2 MB would be fine by me as well (that’s what I currently have, and it’s enough).
What strikes me is that no matter what they do, people always find new stuff to complain about. So now it’s got an MSX2 config, but ‘I still won’t buy it, because it has too little memory’. Whiners! ;p
| | |
| By msd on October 25 2005, 17:41 | We are no going to 'change' the hardware because some programs contain some bugs?
| | |
| By Samor on October 25 2005, 18:00 | >With regard to 4 MB, were there not some software products with faulty memory detection routines which had problems with that amount?
Yes. I have a 4MB memorymapper and some programs lock up when using it.
| | |
| By snout on October 25 2005, 18:02 | the OCM doesn't have too little memory, by default it's configged as a 256k MSX2. There's 32MB on board, you can do with it what you like. Now you can use a lot of memory for FPGA add-ons (if one is to implement wavetable/OPL4 audio, some memory for soundbanks would be nice, right?). If you want 4MB memory and loadsa VRAM, you got it. I think it's really strange that some people just simply can't (or won't) look any further than the default configurations of the OCM, because with FPGA the default config is only of minor significance. It's just a starting point... you get all the FPGA code you need with it to make all the adjustments you'd want to make.
| | |
| By Sonic_aka_T on October 25 2005, 18:08 | Something tells me VRAM won't be as easy as RAM tho. The expansion RAM could prolly be done, but that's of not much use anyhow... You'd pretty much have to re-rig the whole V9938 for more VRAM than that...
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 18:45 | Snout: I already estimated that MSX-RAM would cost FPGA-RAM .. I don't think anyone has an issue with that. The point is however whether all the RAM is already used out-of-the-box or not. If not, put it into MSX-RAM. Yes, we know we can change everything with the VHDL'ing (which is nice), but does that mean that the standard-config should be small?
I dunno, but if I was to sell an OCM to an audience, I'd feel a bit like "oops, hm.. done wrong!" when it turns out that ppl upgrade the MSX-RAM to 1..4MB the same day they got the machine (that is, when they know how to). The better way should be (my 2 cents however) : ship it with much MSX-RAM, and if ppl need more FPGA-RAM, they know where to take it from.
It's a bit like selling a can of yellow paint and a can of red paint to an audience who screams for orange paint.
| | |
| By snout on October 25 2005, 20:02 | Wolf_: I'm not sure what you mean by 'FPGA-RAM', but just in case: adding more memory to the MSX does -not- cost you any LE's/gates. You can use the 32MB SDRAM on-board for that. However, I do think 256kB of memory is sufficient as a default configuration and just because you don't like it doesn't mean everybody doesn't. If the One Chip MSX had been static hardware, I would have agreed with you, but the One Chip MSX isn't static. If you want 4MB RAM, make it so (or let someone else make it so). Actually, I would be quite happy if people started developing VHDL upgrades for the OCM the day they received the device.
| | |
| By mars2000you on October 25 2005, 20:24 | In blueMSX, all our generic MSX2/2+/Turbo-R machines have by default 512 Kb RAM. The main reason of that is to avoid complaints from newbies about so-called non-working of or game of a demo, like the great Sphere demo (and I speak here by experience).
So, the question is to know if the main goal of the One Chip MSX is to interest only the MSX 'experts' or to attract a new generation to MSX. If the second option is the good one, than the RAM size must be 512 Kb by default.
| | |
| By djh1697 on October 25 2005, 20:27 | Since ASCII are allowing you to update VDHL from MSX-DOS maybe we could have a memory driver? along with a USB mouse driver? a USB printer driver? since a MSX-DOS driver for OCM will not work on a real MSX does that mean it isnt a true MSX program ? or course it is! future generations offer compataility upwardly.
If USB drivers are produced for OCM, perhaps some hardware genius could bring out a compatable USB cartridge for previous MSX versions? That would be neat!
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 20:40 | Snout: what's wrong with 4MB being default?
And when I speak for developers, I also speak for users since they need to be able to run typical developers-configs. "because I want it" ? That would mean that only composers would buy soundchips, not normal end-users, they rather prefer PSG.
So again, there's not a real complaint orso.. in this case I agree with Mars however.. I'd go for a strong out-of-the-box system, to meet the more n00b'ish users. The only thing I don't understand is why there isn't 4MB out of the box. Even if it's enough for 90% of the users.. just let the creators type in the code to get 4MB.. and you please those 90% users AND the other 10% .. and while I don't know a bit about all that memory-stuff, nor do I know about VHDL.. I can't imagine that it's more than 30 seconds work. In the best case it's just a variable-assignment.
| | |
| By mars2000you on October 25 2005, 20:54 | I don't think that 4MB RAM by default should be a good choice. On the real machines, there are no problems with such RAM size if you use a MSX2 or MSX2+, but incompatibility problems happen on a Turbo-R because the Turbo-R memory mapper acts differently from the 'Philips" MSX2 memory mapper for example.
As the logic evolution in the future of the OCM is to support also Turbo-R, I don't advice to chhose 4MB as RAM size by default. Again , to avoid complaints ....
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 21:04 | well, 2MB then.. but at least more than 256k
Meridian needs to run orso, and have space left for the songdata..
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 21:18 | The question is btw whether future developments of the ocm should be compatible with the old msx'es. I dunno a bit about that tR RAM issue .. but should we always stick to <4MB just because of a tR ? Question is whether the ocm should go forward taking the style of the old msx with it, but not the flaws of it.
Once you start VHDL'ing the machine, and improve the sprites or palette or whatever, then it's already not compatible with old machines anymore..
| | |
| By mars2000you on October 25 2005, 21:30 | Wolf : see here for more explanations about problems with memory mapper :
http://www.msx.org/forumtopic4600.html (read mth answer, it's the last one).
About go beyond the Turbo-R limitations : it seems me a very good idea, especially if the final goal is to create a MSX3 (even if it will probably be named otherwise)
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 25 2005, 22:12 | About the idea of the MSX3 .. it does raise some MSX-ethical questions ^_^
* what to inherit?
* what to drop?
* do we care about backwards compatibility?
* should the ocm really take-over the current MSX'es as 'main computer', regarding software (as in: OCM-only software that really can't run on old MSX'es)
| | |
| By djh1697 on October 25 2005, 22:41 | MSX TurboR dropped the cassette port, I guess ASCII can choose to change it at any time. I like to idea of MSX-DOS loadable drivers, then the facitlity to reset to VDHL code via software! You could rewrite the VDHL for a particular purpose, then put it back to the default specification.
| | |
| By snout on October 26 2005, 00:47 | err.. there already is a tool to load and save the PLD code (from and to the FPGA chip)... so that's a couple of ppl happy I suppose
| | |
| By opcode on October 26 2005, 03:47 | Considering the current flyer, is it safe to say that MSXA dropped FM and SCC from the OCM?
| | |
| By BiFi on October 26 2005, 07:46 | SCC shouldn't have been in there in the first place... I can imagine FM to be added from MSX2+ since these machines (at least the japanese versions) tend to have it internally anyway.
| | |
| By spl on October 26 2005, 10:20 | Humm... it doesn't have FM PAC?
| | |
| By Samor on October 26 2005, 12:31 | I think it will when you insert one in a cartridge slot.
| | |
| By Samor on October 26 2005, 12:34 | >I don't think that 4MB RAM by default should be a good choice. On the real machines, there are no problems with such RAM size if you use a MSX2 or MSX2+, but incompatibility problems happen on a Turbo-R because the Turbo-R memory mapper acts differently from the 'Philips" MSX2 memory mapper for example.
I had problems on a vg8235 with an added 4mb memory mapper. I don't think it's limited to a Turbo-R.....
or I have a dodgy memory mapper. Still, I don't think so...
| | |
| By Rikusu on October 26 2005, 13:14 | Development and sales of the OCM is one thing, getting people to create VHDL for it to make it worth its status as non-static computer is something else. If the OCM comes standard with 256kB RAM and many people wish to have more, this may be a good incentive to start exploring the possibilities of VHDL. Imagine the satisfaction you get (especially when you're a n00b) if you succeed in giving the computer as much RAM as you wish it to have.
Little people will buy an MSX2 of approximately 200 euro; there will be more who are willing to buy a computer they can tweak themselves. Factors like these were taken in serious consideration when determining the out-of-the-box configuration. It was even an important reason for the original OCM to be no more than an MSX1 out-of-the-box.
| | |
| By spl on October 26 2005, 13:18 | Samor: I have a original FM PAC, so no problem... FOR ME or FM PAC OWNERS. The problem is that according Bazix, OCM had FM PAC - MSX MUSIC. So now, MSX MUSIC has been dropped from OCM
| | |
| By msd on October 26 2005, 15:48 | Stating the Turbo R as example or a machine with a not so good 4MB mapper has nothing to do with this. I have a 4MB mapper for years the only time I've found a program that didn't work was Uknown Reality, but nothing that a quick hack didn't fix and if there are any other programs out there with 4MB problems I will personaly change the ram check of those programs
| | |
| By AuroraMSX on October 26 2005, 18:04 | Quote:
| Development and sales of the OCM is one thing, getting people to create VHDL for it to make it worth its status as non-static computer is something else. If the OCM comes standard with 256kB RAM and many people wish to have more, this may be a good incentive to start exploring the possibilities of VHDL. Imagine the satisfaction you get (especially when you're a n00b) if you succeed in giving the computer as much RAM as you wish it to have.
|
Still, as wolf_ pointed out already: there's something wrong if 99% of the buyers upgrade their OCM memory config first thing after unpacking the thing. And really, in the time that we're discussing this whole memory story, MSXA's VHDL programmer could get himself a coffee, read the internet, have a vacation and replace the "256" by "4096"!
Anyhow, I'm really anxious to see how many people will start developing VHDL stuff for the OCM and very curious about the actual applications!
/me envisions www.1cmforge.net (like sourceforge.net )
| | |
| By Grauw on October 27 2005, 14:32 | Quote:
| Snout: what's wrong with 4MB being default?
|
Didn’t Samor just say what’s wrong with that? 2MB is a much better choice. Really, I have that and I never needed more, and at least you won’t get problems with software not running because their memory detection routines can’t cope with 4MB (which is 256 16k pages which has to be special-cased in the memory detection routines or it’ll overflow to 0).
Anyways, when can we start pre-ordering this thing?
~Grauw
| | |
| By snout on October 27 2005, 14:36 | To those worrying about MSX-MUSIC: have no fear, the OCM is still delivered with MSX-MUSIC on-board, as expected. As for pre-ordering: somewhere betewen now and the end of the first quarter of 2006 ^_^.
| | |
| By spl on October 27 2005, 14:42 | Thanks Snout
| | |
| By msd on October 27 2005, 14:58 | Grauw: Didn't I say I would fix any programs with 4MB problems
| | |
| By Rikusu on October 27 2005, 15:01 | Quote:
| Still, as wolf_ pointed out already: there's something wrong if 99% of the buyers upgrade their OCM memory config first thing after unpacking the thing. And really, in the time that we're discussing this whole memory story, MSXA's VHDL programmer could get himself a coffee, read the internet, have a vacation and replace the "256" by "4096"!
|
I disagree, as that means that 99% of the buyers have immediately taken their first steps in tweaking the One Chip MSX VHDL code .
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 27 2005, 17:55 | indeed.. those who don't know VHDL have just bad luck..and are stuck with 256k ... o_O
| | |
| By Tanni on October 27 2005, 18:26 | Quote:
| Still, as wolf_ pointed out already: there's something wrong if 99% of the buyers upgrade their OCM memory config first thing after unpacking the thing. And really, in the time that we're discussing this whole memory story, MSXA's VHDL programmer could get himself a coffee, read the internet, have a vacation and replace the "256" by "4096"!
|
I agree! MSX should be fun, not causing problems right after unpacking. By the way, I like VHDL. I would be glad if as many as possible MSX user would learn it and code for some MSX extensions. But being forced to code just to get more memory, even if you're not interested in coding, that's not the way to go. Coding in VHDL is not so easy as coding in BASIC. I also don't know if it is sufficient to just replace 256 by 4096. And you must resynthesize the VHDL sourcecode and therefore downloading and learning to use a VHDL compiler, too. Possible solution: Two FPGA configuration streams, one for 256 and one for 4094 KB memory. Not to restart a discussion we already have, but this ''MSX should be fun, not causing problems right after unpacking'' is one of the reasons I would like the OCM having CAS port, printer port and +12V/-12V support. If OCM has everything you usually find on a MSX, then there will be no problems for sure.
| | |
| By Grauw on October 28 2005, 17:18 | Quote:
| indeed.. those who don't know VHDL have just bad luck..and are stuck with 256k ... o_O
|
Nonsense.
Quote:
| Grauw: Didn't I say I would fix any programs with 4MB problems
|
Somehow it seems easier to me to just have 2MB. Really, would you miss the other two? If you do, you can always choose to have the VHDL map 4MB, but at least everything would work out-of-the-box for everyone else.
~Grauw
| | |
| By AuroraMSX on October 28 2005, 18:25 | Quote:
| I disagree, as that means that 99% of the buyers have immediately taken their first steps in tweaking the One Chip MSX VHDL code
|
Hm, somehow, I think that you've just lost about 99% of your potential buyers
| | |
| By snout on October 28 2005, 18:59 | Upgrading from a 256kB configuration to 4MB doesn't require every single One Chip MSX owner to tweak the VHDL code on his own, it requires one single person releasing the code needed to do so. Everybody else can use that code as an upgrade. Furthermore, as the vast majority of (legal ) MSX software easily runs on 256kB memory, I don't think of it as a bad out-of-the-box MSX2 config. Most MSX2 computers had 128kB or even 64kB memory. Once again, the whole point behind the OCM is that -for the first time- you can develop the computer far beyond its default configuration without making a single physical hardware adjustment. Just because a few of the elite members of the MSX community would appreciate 4MB by default, doesn't mean 99% of the potential customers are lost, it doesn't even mean that 99% of the customers would upgrade the OCM to 4MB first thing. It means that a couple of OCM owners would like to upgrade -and will- to 4MB, some of them making their first steps in VHDL design, others using the result of those first steps. Sounds like a good 'hey this FPGA stuff actually works, lets see what else I can do with it'-experience to me.
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 28 2005, 21:22 | If elitists are gonna use 4MB .. they're prolly use it to create a large-scale project .. a demo or game.. imagine a game with 4MB worth of msx-scale media.. oodles and oodles of graphics or layered maps, oodles and oodles worth of sprites, samples, you name it. And if you're out of inspiration.. "who needs 1000 sprites?" .. use smoothly animating sprites then.. there's always a creative reason to fully use the available RAM
So, only the elitists are the ones to play those games/demos? You'd need an audience, so more or less automatically everyone will eventually need all that lot.
So, stating that 256k is enough for everyone reminds me a bit of uncle Bill. ^_^
| | |
| By snout on October 28 2005, 21:27 | The beauty of the One Chip MSX is that you have to worry less about your audience. If you want your product to use 4MB, distribute the needed PLD code with it (or auto-update and restore-to-previous-state). Same goes for supporting 6 PSG channels, more sprites, more colors, other resolutions, ADVRAM, whatever...
| | |
| By wolf_ on October 28 2005, 21:33 | Distributing your own temp PLD code with a product is actually good food for another discussion.. does the audience allow overwriting their config?
| | |
| By snout on October 28 2005, 21:39 | If the OCM in the end gets restored in its original state I see no reason why not. Of course you'd want to run safe software only, so on the MRC we will make sure and double-check software that changes the PLD restores the PLD in the end before posting it online... but that's quite a lot of steps ahead already...
| | |
| By sunrise on October 28 2005, 23:18 | Arises the question also how many times can you reprogram the fpga itself and or the flashrom
| | |
| By Grauw on October 28 2005, 23:42 | Quote:
| Hm, somehow, I think that you've just lost about 99% of your potential buyers
|
As I said, some people can only see the bad things. MSX1 wasn’t good enough. Now it’s MSX2, it still isn’t good enough. They seem to just look for excuses not to buy it.
What’s with all this milling on and on about the same lame thing. It is new hardware, it is cool, it is going to be produced (yay!) and it will be easy to tweak for everyone who has got different demands.
On a side note, if this device is meant for the ‘general public’ and not just for the ‘MSX freaks’ (which I think is the case, because I don’t believe there are still 5.000 active MSX users around), then 99% of the users will use it for the 99% of the games that work just fine with 256kB of RAM.
Quote:
| So, stating that 256k is enough for everyone reminds me a bit of uncle Bill. ^_^
|
Actually, uncle Bill never really said that, it’s an urban legend.
~Grauw
| | |
| By boukichi on October 29 2005, 11:36 | does anyone know the OCM has no RTC(Real time clock)?
btw,from previous news
>An extra flashrom containing the default MSX2 configuration
does the OCM have this one?
and is it correct that the flash is for upgrade VHDL safety?
it's very nice if it's like this:
http://global.aopen.com.tw/tech/techinside/DieHard.htm
| | |
| By Guillian on October 29 2005, 12:32 | Yes, the RTC is not implemented yet but the code was written some years ago. RTC needs a battery (which is not present in ESE MSX System 3). Another problem is that the FPGA power cosumption is too high for a normal battery. They just need to decide if it is better to implement a RTC that works only when the EMS3 is ON, or increase the production costs adding an external RTC.
| | |
| By Tanni on October 31 2005, 16:42 | Quote:
| So, stating that 256k is enough for everyone reminds me a bit of uncle Bill. ^_^
|
Who is uncle Bill?
| | |
| By Tanni on October 31 2005, 16:59 | Quote:
| As I said, some people can only see the bad things. MSX1 wasn’t good enough. Now it’s MSX2, it still isn’t good enough. They seem to just look for excuses not to buy it.
|
MSX1 was good enough for me for many years and would still be good enough for me today for that what I have in mind to do with it. Yes, I would like to have an OCM for replacing my MSX1 computers which are defective. Yes, I would like to contribute to improve the OCM if I can do it. For me, it doesn't matter if the OCM will have 128KB, 256KB, 2MB or 4MB, I would be glad to have one with 64KB RAM and 16KB video RAM! Everything beyond that would be good, yes, and we should talk about what would be best approbriate to our needs. But, as the memory is available and -- obviously -- can be accessed via VHDL code modifications, everything concernig memory will get solved when the OCM will be available.
| | |
| By Tanni on October 31 2005, 17:05 | My previous post was the 100th reaction to this thread!
| | |
| By Sonic_aka_T on October 31 2005, 18:51 | I'm sure uncle bill would appreciate that!
| | |
| By spl on December 01 2005, 19:00 | Any news about OCM?
| | |
|
|
| | |
