What I think an MSX 3 Should be ?

Страница 20/24
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

Аватар пользователя anonymous

23-11-2015, 16:38

Daemos wrote:
Quote:

Your post was hilarious. I couldn't stop laughing. This is how we should handle all these clueless specification requests. :-)

Funny how someone gets completely flamed to destruction for just brainstorming. Even if the idea sounds hilarious it is still an idea. Nobody died you know. Brainstorming leads to many paths and offcourse many are not feasable...

Sorry, but no. This is not kindergarten, where everybody is praised for participating no matter whether what they say makes sense or not. We're on a public discussion forum where it is assumed that we're all grown-ups and able to take responsibility for what we say.

Megatron started his post saying that he has a "better" spec. tvalenca showed him how ridiculous those specs are and why. That's exactly what should happen when people give uninformed opinions about subjects they don't understand: the ones who do understand the subject correct them.

Daemos wrote:

... but think about it when someone likes input on the creation of a new product and everyone is affraid to give an idea. We will all be affraid to try or to even think along. Better let the specialists sort things out if you don't want to meddle with them or I will get burned at the stake for saying something stupid. We must remember how we all started, as beginners.

Then learn the subject. Become an specialist, learn what is feasible and what isn't and why, and THEN comment.

Daemos wrote:

Should I flame someone straight into the ground next time when someone comments on audio hardware design?

If they're wrong about what they say, and you know why, then yes. You should correct them.

Daemos wrote:

Remember that there is a actual person behind that post not some dog you can easily yell at.

Perfect! A person will understand why he's being told that the ideas he proposed are bad. A dog wouldn't. But in any case, a dog wouldn't be posting on an Internet forum regarding some ideas he has for developing some hardware devices.

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

Аватар пользователя anonymous

23-11-2015, 16:44

@JaviLM

clap clap clap clap !! (for you too).

By tvalenca

Paladin (747)

Аватар пользователя tvalenca

23-11-2015, 17:08

Daemos wrote:

Funny how someone gets completely flamed to destruction for just brainstorming. Even if the idea sounds hilarious it is still an idea. Nobody died you know. Brainstorming leads to many paths and offcourse many are not feasable but think about it when someone likes input on the creation of a new product and everyone is affraid to give an idea. We will all be affraid to try or to even think along. Better let the specialists sort things out if you don't want to meddle with them or I will get burned at the stake for saying something stupid. We must remember how we all started, as beginners. Should I flame someone straight into the ground next time when someone comments on audio hardware design? Remember that there is a actual person behind that post not some dog you can easily yell at.

First of all, sorry for snapping like that.

But my feelings was kinda JaviLM said... at some time people stopped trying to think what could be a cool improvement and simply started to throw random chips at whoever-wanted-to-do-something-about's face only because someone THINKS it's cool, I got really pissed off and I'm very sorry. If we were talking about IDEAS about what could be cool to do with a new MSX, I would reacted way different.

Maybe this is something we learned with PCs, but when we think about a better computer we automatically think about better parts, and don't care about it's usefullness or coherence. Of course faster is better (well, when we're talking about a slow computer like MSX, a lightning fast plus over a already lightning fast computer is BOOOOORING!) but the MSX we all know and love is about coherence, about things that work well together, about a cool BIOS and (why not?) a cool BASIC programming environment. So when someone tells that putting 50 random chips togheter inside the same computer because he THINK it would be cool, with no real reason why, like, "hell, I want to draw some cool graphics using trigonometric funcions in BASIC but this Z80 is slow as hell to do calculations!"... Or a "I want to draw some cool 2-layer scrolling background to move some sprites over them"... Or even "I want to play better quality music without having to have fixed 50/60hz refresh issues"... Sorry, I wasn't able to stand that.

By tvalenca

Paladin (747)

Аватар пользователя tvalenca

23-11-2015, 17:26

I also must apologize to @megatron, because those weren't his words, he simply copied @lezanderson's answer to another thread. I am very sorry for snapping like that.

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

Аватар пользователя anonymous

23-11-2015, 17:34

tvalenca wrote:

[...] but the MSX we all know and love is about coherence, about things that work well together, about a cool BIOS and (why not?) a cool BASIC programming environment.

CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP!!!!!
Bravo!!!!!!

At last!!! Dude, you've written the more brilliant and coherent comment I've read about MSX in years.
IMHO, THAT is exactly the MSX spirit. If we forget the magic, the essence of our beloved system... what do we have? Just another boring PC?

The MSX system was not intended to be just an "affordable home computer" (as someone stated before), but an elegant and smart system. It was about compatibility, about standards, about doing things as easily as using a microwave oven or a toaster. Any "new" advance in the MSX platform (if it still made any sense to do it) should be in that direction.

I can't understand those projects based on software emulators (OpenMSX, RPI2, etc.) or hardware emulators (FPGA) just to try to fake non-MSX machines with lots of scrambled chips and overclocked features...
Why do you need a 2.2GHz MSX? You already have a PC for that. Creating such a Frankestein is like creating a 2048 minutes long cassette tape.

MSX is just what it is and nothing else.

Do all of you still love your MSX?
.
.
Really?

By l_oliveira

Hero (534)

Аватар пользователя l_oliveira

23-11-2015, 19:07

warau wrote:

The MSX system was not intended to be just an "affordable home computer" (as someone stated before), but an elegant and smart system. It was about compatibility, about standards, about doing things as easily as using a microwave oven or a toaster. Any "new" advance in the MSX platform (if it still made any sense to do it) should be in that direction.

Sorry, but what I've seen around (MSX based TOSHIBA SoC chips everywhere, extremely gimped MSX computer designs and market strategies, plenty of dedicated computerized equipment using MSX systems as basis) point in the direction of "affordable home computer" more than anything else.

Anyway, anyhow, keeping true to that vision of "affordable home computer" is not a bad idea at all since that "affordable home computer" idea is where the MSX came from and where it went to. There's nothing wrong with that. It's surely more elegant than Sinclair's idea of "affordable home computer"... Smile

For the opposite there were the X68000, FM TOWNS and NEC PC98xx series in Japan. Those were very, very expensive computers at their time.

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

Аватар пользователя anonymous

23-11-2015, 19:37

l_oliveira wrote:

Anyway, anyhow, keeping true to that vision of "affordable home computer" is not a bad idea at all since that "affordable home computer" idea is where the MSX came from and where it went to.

Ok.

According to that definition, a ZX Spectrum is the perfect machine for you.

By l_oliveira

Hero (534)

Аватар пользователя l_oliveira

23-11-2015, 19:51

warau wrote:
l_oliveira wrote:

Anyway, anyhow, keeping true to that vision of "affordable home computer" is not a bad idea at all since that "affordable home computer" idea is where the MSX came from and where it went to.

Ok.

According to that definition, a ZX Spectrum is the perfect machine for you.

You think you're funny and the ZX Spectrum is a big pile of BOLLOCKS. I believe we both agree on the second part of my statement, no? Smile

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

Аватар пользователя anonymous

23-11-2015, 19:53

l_oliveira wrote:
warau wrote:
l_oliveira wrote:

Anyway, anyhow, keeping true to that vision of "affordable home computer" is not a bad idea at all since that "affordable home computer" idea is where the MSX came from and where it went to.

Ok.

According to that definition, a ZX Spectrum is the perfect machine for you.

You think you're funny and the ZX Spectrum is a big pile of BOLLOCKS.

Don't think so. It's just an affordable home computer. As a matter fact, it was cheaper than MSX.

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

Аватар пользователя anonymous

24-11-2015, 06:52

l_oliveira wrote:

You think you're funny and the ZX Spectrum is a big pile of BOLLOCKS.

Really? An Amiga or, X68000 or PC user could say exactly the same thing about the MSX.

Страница 20/24
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24