> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, Alex Wulms wrote:
>
> > It does not work like this. At least, not how I interprete it. I think
> > the situation is as follows:
> > 1) ESE *will* develop a V9938 or V9958 clone by reverse-engineering the
> > current MSX VDP and ofcourse they make a few enhancements to ma
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Sander van Nunen wrote:
> The only way to make the new MSX a success is to produce a machine that is
> cheap, uses advanced hardware, and is somehow compatible with -say- directX
> (dreamcast, PC, MS X-Box) so that games easely could be ported from other
> platforms, has a DV
Hehehe...
Just wanted to say it's pretty cool hehe.. Never new there was an
A1-Spirit... Though I still can't figure out y the heck those KoNami guys
made it, but ok... hehe...
well.. see ya'll
d-fader, TeddyWareZ
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and pu
: -Original Message-
: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
: Sent: 21 June 2000 13:56
: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Subject: Re: Info concerning 'new MSX'
:
:
:
: What you want isn't a new MSX, but a cheaper PC! This is not the 'MSX
: way'. MSX has been always an easy-t
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Marco Frissen wrote:
> : What you want isn't a new MSX, but a cheaper PC! This is not the 'MSX
> : way'. MSX has been always an easy-to-program, user-friendly system, where
> : users make hardware developments and upgrades themselves. This should
> : continue this way. Th
: -Original Message-
: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
: Sent: 21 June 2000 14:21
: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Subject: RE: Info concerning 'new MSX'
:
: You will agree that at least they're much closer to the MSX than the PC.
:
absolutely 100%.
that's the problem
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, David Heremans wrote:
> Is there some page which could tell me how all the MSX version react on
> an in a,(#FF). I know it shouldn't be done but I'm trying to change a
> program...
In MSX turbo R and some MSX2+ machines, the upper 3 bits will always be 1.
The value read wil
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Marco Frissen wrote:
> Funny how developers seem to 'go back to the future' .. first homecomputers
> were made, easy to set up, plug into TV set and run it. then came PCs,
> seperate machines, requiring a seperate space... and now everything is going
> back to the first again
Mass production makes computers cheap. The question is: will any company
make that much MSX computers?
Maybe there will a new -out of the box- MSX computer. But I don't think it
will be cheap. Because there is no market.
We have moonsound, Graphics 9000, padial's z380 etc. Are those hardware
ext
: -Original Message-
: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
: Sent: 21 June 2000 17:20
: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Subject: Re: Info concerning 'new MSX'
:
: Everybody knew Sony whould beat them with the Playstation2 before it was
: launched.
Not quite true.. Maybe mar
Hey,
Let's not forget the MSX had one major advantage:
All the information on how to program the computer
was available for the users themselves...
No expensive developer kits, qn easy to use basic for beginners
and easy to learn assembly for the advanced users.
This is a major advantage the MSX
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, ag0ny wrote:
> > >Maybe a greater advance in the new MSX graphics scheme would be
> > > RAM-mapped VRAM (it is VRAM being directly accesible by the CPU). In
> > > this way, all VRAM access by the CPU would be MUCH faster: just put
> > > the value you want where you want, inst
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
> - low level: the VRAM IC is accessed by CPU and VDP at the same time.
In the ADVRAM this never happens, because the dynamic rams
used in the msx are replaced by static ram, much faster. Since the
rate the VDP request data to vram is the sa
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Sander van Nunen wrote:
> The only way to make the new MSX a success is to produce a machine that
> is cheap, uses advanced hardware, and is somehow compatible with -say-
> directX (dreamcast, PC, MS X-Box) so that games easely could be ported
> from other platforms, has a DV
] On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Sander van Nunen wrote:
] The easiest way to get an extremely fast Z80 compatible CPU would be to ask
] Transmeta to develop a Crusoe with Z80 code morphing...
Or ask Zilog to start producing that eZ80 they promised a while ago...
Kind regards,
Alex Wulms
--
Visit The MS
] On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, David Heremans wrote:
]
] > Is there some page which could tell me how all the MSX version react on
] > an in a,(#FF). I know it shouldn't be done but I'm trying to change a
] > program...
]
] In MSX turbo R and some MSX2+ machines, the upper 3 bits will always be 1.
]
]
> Hehehe...
>
> Just wanted to say it's pretty cool hehe.. Never new there was an
> A1-Spirit... Though I still can't figure out y the heck those KoNami guys
> made it, but ok... hehe...
Isn't it very obvious that it's a promotional item made for
Panasonic? Pana simply paid Konami big bucks to
> Isn't it very obvious that it's a promotional item made for
> Panasonic? Pana simply paid Konami big bucks to put their hit game
> title with that steering wheel.
Yeah, guess indeed BIG bucks are paid for it! Big business for Konami...
hehe.. With that money the Snatcher and SD-Snatcher project
d-fader wrote:
> > The A1 logo is also in a similar font as the FS-A1ST and FS-A1GT
> > markings.
> Think it was a bit of a promotion for the Turbo-R?? Hmmm.. then it's even
> more odd!! hehe...
Yes, it is more old (1987). So de A1 logo is referring to Panasonic FS-A1,
FS-A1mkII and/or FS-A1F M
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Alex Wulms wrote:
> ] The easiest way to get an extremely fast Z80 compatible CPU would be to
> ] ask Transmeta to develop a Crusoe with Z80 code morphing...
>
> Or ask Zilog to start producing that eZ80 they promised a while ago...
As I understood it, Zilog made a design fo
At 09:09 AM 6/20/00 +0200, you wrote:
>RJP wrote
Hey, it´s me!
> [Eric was a naughty boy and wrote blahblah in *dutch*]
=)
>>Please, I want mustard too. And don´t forget my soft-drink...
>>
>>;-)
>
>Pepsi or Coke? ;-)
Pepsi (dislike monopolies...)
I think the easiest, fastest and cheapest way for a 'new MSX' is to build a
dedicated MSX emulator for DC and/or PS2. The machines are powerful enough
for it. The other advantage is that you can build a new MSX emulator: so,
what you want in a real machine: code it in the emulator, and you'll have
ag0ny wrote:
> > The only way to make the new MSX a success is to produce a machine that is
> > cheap, uses advanced hardware, and is somehow compatible with -say- directX
> > (dreamcast, PC, MS X-Box) so that games easely could be ported from other
> > platforms, has a DVD player, so that people
- Original Message -
From: Marco Frissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I think the easiest, fastest and cheapest way for a 'new MSX' is to build
a
> dedicated MSX emulator for DC and/or PS2. The machines are powerful enough
> for it. The other advantage is that you can build a new MSX emulator: s
24 matches
Mail list logo