The problem when dealing with higher clock is that the old Video Processors are made to deal with the NTSC refresh rate (the 3.5 Mhz thing), even if some VDP could use a higher clock like 28+Mhz there would be some delays . Sure, in newer hardware it would be possible to include direct memory access (DMA).

I agreed that dual VDP would be nice, after all it should be one layer for the game and another scrolling layer for the background! It is even on the original MSX specification to deal with dual VDP cores ...

I understand that it's not as easy as it seems but as I said before, I'm sure we are capable.
Sometime, all of us have dreamed of a new MSX, maybe it's time to make our MSX once and for all.
To do this more bearable for designers we should distribute the work.

Besides we should start a specific thread collecting ideas, opinions, needs, features, etc in conclusion
the hardware requirements. Just to give an example, we already are using Mega-SD, FPGA
technology to replace VDP and soundchips, MP3... in short, a hypothetical MSX could include
hardware which is already tested and it's functional. I think we should comment the pros and cons.

Too optimist? IMHO at least we must to try it, we have nothing to lose.

You are talinkg about a msx one chip that have an up to date code , not just "an other msx2"

Quote:

Some years, ago there was a [official] request for original (short) games for the MSX line of microcomputers!/

I remember an advertisement by Sony in a spanish MSX magazine in the 80s. It was a BASIC programming contest. The specs where something like "the program must contain proper comment lines, and the maximum program size is 16K". The prize was about 150 euro.

Quote:

Sometime, all of us have dreamed of a new MSX, maybe it's time to make our MSX once and for all.

Yeah, I agree. But again: who puts the money? And the time?

what about a mother board tat replace original ?
We could have look & feol of a real msx ?
What model sacrifice ? an msx1 ?
Other wise we need to design new case from scratch ... even at that point the keybaord
should be from a PC , not really msx look& feel ...
...
I mean we could split the work & costs : design of pcb , desing of sw , degin of case.
pcb = costly & feature list ( V9990 ? OPL4? SDv2.2 ? FPGA ? R800 ?)
SW =time to code vhdl for fpga or ROMs
case = ideas , could be cheap or costly.

in the SW we dont have the vhdl code for opl4 & V9990 & V9958 to put them into FPGA, so real chip seems unievitable.

FPGA is a cost but can save lot of PCB area and components and also debug time of the pcb.

Quote:

Yeah, I agree. But again: who puts the money? And the time?

Project needs a project manager. And money can be solved with upfront pre-orders, after the scope is defined and costs estimated.

I also agree that we need to design something that can be "adapted" into some MSX models case.
AND, we could not forget the software. We'll need at least a new BIOS, and hopefully, a hacked MSX BASIC to support new stuff... That way, the feel would be complete.

Quote:

You are talinkg about a msx one chip that have an up to date code , not just "an other msx2"

I'm not talking about a other improved OCM or VHDL code, but a MSX3 with a new board. Yes this is not easy but at least we can discuss the pros and cons, if it's viable or not, at least we can start doing something huh?.

There are users with enough experience developing MSX hardware and it would be interesting to know their point of view, do a poll about how many people would be interested...

Quote:

We could have look & feol of a real msx ?

Similar to MSX appearance would be nice.

Quote:

What model sacrifice ? an msx1 ?

I think the compatibility is a hot point and it must be mandatory.

Quote:

Other wise we need to design new case from scratch ... even at that point the keybaord should be from a PC , not really msx look& feel

I agree with you but I think we have no option about that. In my opinion the OCM concept was so accurate using PC keyboards thus we could minimize the costs besides replacing it quickly. We should to assure what would be new (designed) and what wouldn't be (PC hardware) for example.

Quote:

in the SW we dont have the vhdl code for opl4 & V9990 & V9958 to put them into FPGA, so real chip seems unievitable.

Although I like "real IC's" I admit another point in favor of OCM using FPGA for some advantages, replacing IC's which aren't manufacture or are impossible to find. Maybe we could mix "real IC's" like CPU + FPGA for VDP, YM2413, PSG, SCC...

I hope this thread doesn't die in two days...MSX gurus we are waiting your opinions!!

Quote:

I understand that it's not as easy as it seems but as I said before, I'm sure we are capable. Sometime, all of us have dreamed of a new MSX, maybe it's time to make our MSX once and for all. To do this more bearable for designers we should distribute the work.

EVPON,

I agree that's not easy and I agree that we would be capable. And yes, i've already dreamed about a new MSX long time ago (BTW, if you attended Bussum 2003 up to the very end, you'll know.), but the ''distribute work'' thingy is not that easy at all. If someone comes up with an idea like you, he will be explained why it doesn't work, why it's totally impossible to realise that ideas, ... so that one don't need to put effort to reach that goal. This way, many really awesome ideas never get realised.

See this thread: www.msx.org/forumtopic9875.html

If it's hard -- almost impossible -- to convince people to have certain new features in an emulator, features which would not be so difficult to implement, but which also should be present in a new MSX, how will we ever be able to realize a new MSX by our own?

Adding new -- not yet MSX -- features to an (experimental) release of an emulator would be the first step to check how a new MSX could be. I don't care about what is there called ''creating virtual reality''; for me, an emulator is or could be also a means to investigate about the possible features of a new MSX.

Quote:

Besides we should start a specific thread collecting ideas, opinions, needs, features, etc in conclusion the hardware requirements.

There are several threads with ideas, opinions, features etc. for a new MSX design, it would be lot's of work to go through them and pick up and collect the proposals. What will turn out is that there will be several maybe contradicting ways for a new user-defined MSX to go.

See this thread: www.msx.org/forumtopic4762.html

And if Fixato's forum would still be online, there would be very interesting threads and discussions for you.

Quote:

Just to give an example, we already are using Mega-SD, FPGA technology to replace VDP and soundchips, MP3... in short, a hypothetical MSX could include hardware which is already tested and it's functional. I think we should comment the pros and cons.

If we want a new MSX made by ourselves, it will be a long term project, besides issues with the ones owning the standard. Yes, it should support new technology, i.e. the technology which came up after MSX was abandoned for 10 years. This could include the use of FUNCTIONALITY which is already tested and functional, but surely no HW form about the start of the MSX era. Of course, we should discuss the pros and cons.

Quote:

Too optimist? IMHO at least we must to try it, we have nothing to lose.

I totally agree!

Possible Feature list :

for hardware :

MSX Turbo R compatible
OPL 4
ADPCM from Msx audio
SCC ( just one ? )
PSG
PCM
RAM 4mb ( why bother )
SD or CF interface
ethernet
Really Fast Z80/R800 mode : coded in vhdl with little L2 ( i mean out of the Z80 core ) cache memory
V9990 video logically mixed with V9958 so this means V9990 in vhdl , glups...
PC mouse I/F
2 slots + I/O slot ( bored with just 2 slots msx's , except HB 500 )
ADVRAM ?
DMA support


For software
Internal flash HD with nice pre-installed softs ( installing & testing is so boring )
multi FDD Emu
MEGA ROM Emu
ethernet driver
e-mail client
ftp server/client
Symbos with MSX DOS 2 emulation.


Today you can have almost that feature list except :
- really fast Z80 mode
- symbos dos2 emu
- DMA
- ethernet works mostly with uzix
- you need like two slot expander on slot 1 & 2 ....

Quote:

Yeah, I agree. But again: who puts the money? And the time?

We first need to have very good ideas for a new MSX, and we need time to work them out.

Quote:

Project needs a project manager. And money can be solved with upfront pre-orders, after the scope is defined and costs estimated.

It would be a fan project, ...

Quote:

I also agree that we need to design something that can be "adapted" into some MSX models case.

We need something to replace defective HW for all MSX model's cases. Other HC comunities also will need such replacement, so maybe we can do that across the systems. That would be a nostalgia issue.

Quote:

AND, we could not forget the software. We'll need at least a new BIOS, and hopefully, a hacked MSX BASIC to support new stuff... That way, the feel would be complete.

Yes, we would need a new BIOS, ... but do we really need BASIC once again? OK, for compatibility, but I want to go on! I think, we should go beyond the standard, at least for copyright issues.

How do you think about MSX with e.g. Forth as mother tongue, like the Jupiter Ace? Or with the option to input keywords by [modifier key][character key] combinations like in ZX81, VZ200, etc.

Would this "MSX3" have connection to the Internet and a browser software?
Would it have a graphical interface?
It would need to have USB support, of course.

Quote:

Would this "MSX3" have connection to the Internet and a browser software?

I think we should be careful and not calling that MSX3. An MSX3 must be downwards compatible and can only be done with the consent of the brand's owner, whoever this is now. Also, to my mind, MSX 3 should be perfect in a certain sense. It should not be a wild conglomerate of yesterday's hardware put together in a quick and dirty designed case to be sold as cheep as possible. This surely wouldn't succeed. Of course, such an advanced MSX should be able to connect to the internet, if the user whises it.

Quote:

Would it have a graphical interface?

Maybe it should have a standard console interface for nostalgica's sake, but also a unique graphical interface. But then, it must have a more powerful processor.

Quote:

It would need to have USB support, of course.

Yes, it must have USB support!

OK, so let's call it "3XSM" or "IIIXSW"...

Would it still have support for cartridges, 5 1/4 disks and tape recorders?

What about CD/DVD support (for storage)?

Quote:

Quote: You are talinkg about a msx one chip that have an up to date code , not just "an other msx2" I'm not talking about a other improved OCM or VHDL code, but a MSX3 with a new board. Yes this is not easy but at least we can discuss the pros and cons, if it's viable or not, at least we can start doing something huh?.

Actually, we are talking about a new system in the generic sense of the word, so its not just hardware.

Why not first an (hypothetical/virtual) experimental version in the sense of a different branch of the ''MSX tree'', so you don't have to use the term MSX3. BTW, all of these letters are some kind of symmetric, that's something special. We should should reserve this for some really cool new MSX stuff ...

Quote:

There are users with enough experience developing MSX hardware and it would be interesting to know their point of view, do a poll about how many people would be interested...

I don't develop hardware, but I would be interested.

Quote:

Quote: We could have look & feol of a real msx ? Similar to MSX appearance would be nice.

Most important: it shouldn't resemble a PC at all!

It should be similar to a homecomputer, but unique.

Quote:

Quote: What model sacrifice ? an msx1 ? I think the compatibility is a hot point and it must be mandatory.

How about ''compatibility by demand''?

Quote:

Quote: Other wise we need to design new case from scratch ... even at that point the keybaord should be from a PC , not really msx look& feel I agree with you but I think we have no option about that. In my opinion the OCM concept was so accurate using PC keyboards thus we could minimize the costs besides replacing it quickly. We should to assure what would be new (designed) and what wouldn't be (PC hardware) for example.

Yes, the case must be designed from the scratch. The keyboard shouldn't resemble that of the PC, but should be MSX. It should have a new modifier key, the ''keyword'' or ''symbol'' key, at least.

Quote:

Quote: in the SW we dont have the vhdl code for opl4 & V9990 & V9958 to put them into FPGA, so real chip seems unievitable. Although I like "real IC's" I admit another point in favor of OCM using FPGA for some advantages, replacing IC's which aren't manufacture or are impossible to find. Maybe we could mix "real IC's" like CPU + FPGA for VDP, YM2413, PSG, SCC...

Isn't it possible to do a VDP by our own?

An FPGA is a real chip, but I know what you mean. I think an approach totally based on FPGA fits best for our purposes. The more chips, the more expensive.

Quote:

I hope this thread doesn't die in two days...MSX gurus we are waiting your opinions!!

I hope that, too!

Quote:

Would it still have support for cartridges, 5 1/4 disks and tape recorders?

To my mind, yes! There would be more cartridge slots, but these would be according to a new, smaller standard. To have the usual standard, you have to use an adapter. The system could support 5 1/4 disks, but only by external hardware, getting connected by cartridge of that new standard. For the tape recorder issue, there could be the same approach. (There is a thread concerning OCM discussing that issue.)

Quote:

What about CD/DVD support (for storage)?

With that new, smaller cartridge standard, it should also be possible to connect CD/DVD player/recorder.