×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

238 comments

Oh well... (5, Funny)

Luc1fel (1469805) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439417)

Then it's settled. I'm getting a Commodore instead.

Re:Oh well... (1)

iCodemonkey (1480555) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439891)

Then it's settled. I'm getting a Commodore instead.

ill go you one better ill get a Commodore 64.

Re:Oh well... (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440285)

Then it's settled. I'm getting a Commodore instead.

ill go you one better ill get a Commodore 64.

If you want to go one better ill, then you'd better get not only the Commodore 64 but also the ill peripheral.

Re:Oh well... (2, Interesting)

jekewa (751500) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440617)

I've got one in my garage. Still works. 170K floppy AND tape drive. I've got an Amiga 500, too. Even have an old Apple III (or was it IIi?). Sometimes called "the museum" by the wife. AFAIK they all work still.

The developers are spreading FUD (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439445)

It's quite clear what Apple approved was selling individual C64 games or apps individually that used an emulator underneath. Not a full fledged emulator that would let you program your own games, or play whatever C64 software you have.

Apple probably read their website and realized their goal was quite different then what they were told earlier.

It's quite clear that an emulator is OK as long as it can only run the app sold with it, and not arbitrary code.

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (4, Insightful)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439649)

I do wonder about Apple's policy there. Ostensibly, it's to stop you running an unapproved app by running it in an emulator, but they're perfectly happy to approve apps which pull down arbitrary and equally unapproved content from the web.

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (2, Funny)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440035)

I do wonder about Apple's policy there. Ostensibly, it's to stop you running an unapproved app by running it in an emulator, but they're perfectly happy to approve apps which pull down arbitrary and equally unapproved content from the web.

Is it really any different than the Hot Coffee fiasco? For every person of age X who downloaded the mod, a dozen of the same age were probably downloading hardcore zebu porn MPGs but that isn't directly tied to a game, so is business as usual.

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (4, Funny)

jandrese (485) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440073)

Should I be relieved that I have no idea what the heck "zebu porn" is?

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (1)

KibibyteBrain (1455987) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440613)

That's true to an extent, but I think the real fear is non-Apple, and more importantly iPhone specific runtimes being able to exist for iPhone apps. Apple wants to make iPhone apps iPhone exclusive, as their app library is one of the strengths of their platform. I assure you anything resembling a general purpose way to get non-specifically coded apps to run on the iPhone will be shot down ASAP.

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439659)

It's not FUD if it's true. Are you even reading what you're writing?

It's quite clear that an emulator is OK as long as it can only run the app sold with it, and not arbitrary code.

It's okay to use this device that you've bought for running Apple-approved software, but not for running arbitrary code. That's not FUD, it's Apple's policy. If you're happy with a device that has this kind of restriction, then that's great, enjoy yourself.

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (1)

fbjon (692006) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439999)

But what code does the policy prohibit? Obviously, arbitrary native code is right out, but isn't the C64 emulator a sandbox?

Flash and Java (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440259)

isn't the C64 emulator a sandbox?

ActionScript and Java run in a sandbox, but they're rejected too.

Re:Flash and Java (3, Insightful)

Serious Callers Only (1022605) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440553)

isn't the C64 emulator a sandbox?

ActionScript and Java run in a sandbox, but they're rejected too.

Javascript or Brainfuck also run arbitrary code in a sandbox, but they're not rejected.

Welcome to the topsy-turvy world of the Apple app store, where any app could be removed at any time, because they could all be interpretted as infringing some part of the SDK rules.

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (1)

Em Ellel (523581) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440477)

But what code does the policy prohibit? Obviously, arbitrary native code is right out, but isn't the C64 emulator a sandbox?

Its not about sandbox or any performance issues or any other excuse they throw out. Its simple - any code that did not get bit for bit approved by Big Brother Steve is out. So any sort of interpreter or emulator is out. Flash is out. Palm emulator (there was one written a year or so back, would be nice to have it) is out. Anything that may run anything that is not completely controlled by Apple is out.

What is interesting is that web based apps are still allowed, but I would not be surprised that slowly they will get phased out in the next few releases.

-Em

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (2)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440011)

I would agree with you if it wasn't for the SID player that does the same thing but for C64 music.

Apple are shooting themselves in the foot with their rules. I know what they're trying to do, prevent unlocking of the phone.

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (4, Informative)

mini me (132455) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440113)

It's quite clear that an emulator is OK as long as it can only run the app sold with it, and not arbitrary code.

Except it's not clear. There's a Brainfuck interpreter [apple.com], as well as a Z-machine interpreter [apple.com]. Both execute arbitrary code which can be downloaded from a remote source, or entered right on the device itself.

Re:The developers are spreading FUD (1)

Mike Buddha (10734) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440219)

I'm sure if they restricted their Emulator to packs that can be downloaded using iTunes DLC system, there wouldn't be an issue. I think Apple wants a piece of everything that runs on your iPhone.

The Chip-8 emulator allows users to type in arbitrary code, so that's clearly not a hard and fast rule.

Nice Shapshot! (4, Informative)

jchawk (127686) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439493)

Good overview of the two technologies.

One point of correction the iPhone has successful run Apache so it can be used as a web server (for what it's worth). Here's a related article -

http://www.modmyi.com/forums/native-iphone-ipod-touch-app-launches/2665-apache-iphone-how-cool.html [modmyi.com]

Re:Nice Shapshot! (2, Informative)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439581)

According to the comments on TFA:

Kevin Harter Says:
June 21st, 2009 at 10:10 pm

Well, actually.... There are at least TWO web servers for the iPhone IF it has been jailbroken. Apache and Lighttpd are both available in Cydia and, probably, Icy.

(Yes, I know that the 3G S has yet to be jailbroken, but all other iPhone OS devices have, so I think it deserves a mention.)

Harry McCracken Says:
June 21st, 2009 at 10:20 pm

@Kevin: Also a good point–when the 3G S is jailbroken, I'll try to update.

–Harry

So yes, "the iPhone" has successfully run Apache, but no, the 3G S has not, so for the time being, TFA is correct.

Re:Nice Shapshot! (1)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440527)

If we want to be technical, there are some apps that implement their own web server so users can navigate to some address to configure some features or whatever. Obviously you can't use such implementations for anything besides that which they are designed to do, but a web server it still is.

Re:Nice Shapshot! (1)

downix (84795) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439705)

So has the Commodore 64:

http://www.c64web.com/ [c64web.com]

Re:Nice Shapshot! (3, Interesting)

jandrese (485) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440119)

Last time someone posted it the thing held up remarkably well because the author cheated a bit and made his webserver completely stateless, making the only limitation the speed of the network interface and processor. The site would take a long time to respond, but it never crashed the way most webservers (or, more often, their attached databases) do when slammed with requests.

Re:Nice Shapshot! (1)

spydabyte (1032538) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440151)

How is it a good review? Many of the fields he entered "you know.. I'm really not sure". A quick google or hacking the device itself will tell you more answers than this "review".

Re:Nice Shapshot! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440415)

Good overview of the two technologies.

One point of correction the iPhone has successful run Apache so it can be used as a web server (for what it's worth). Here's a related article -

http://www.modmyi.com/forums/native-iphone-ipod-touch-app-launches/2665-apache-iphone-how-cool.html [modmyi.com]

Oh well, Nokia offers a full feature mobile web server for free, without hacks, weird urls... Full working with a dynamic host name.

http://mymobilesite.net/

That is why Nokia and other Symbian vendors are still being chosen by people like me. Freedom... Evil Apple shows Nokia as some freedom fighter.

C64 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439501)

I just got all warm and fuzzy remembering Lode Runner. Oh those were the days. We used to install CTR+ALT+Delete hardwired switches into friends C64 for $50. I still have two working and a whole bunch of games. My kids love them, almost as much as playing on my iPhone.

Re:C64 (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440103)

You mean a reset switch?

It wasn't hard, there's a reset pin on many of the C64 ports, just connect that to GND and the C64 resets.

Of course there were many games that managed to prevent this somehow. They also managed to prevent copy cartridges like Datel's Action Replay and Trilogic's Freeze Frame from taking control.

Re:C64 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440601)

I call bull shit. Software alone cannot avoid a hardware reset between the two pins (on multiple locations) that you're suggesting (which I am assuming are the joystick ports and/or the cartidge ports).

Sad news (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439511)

I just heard some sad news on talk radio... Ed McMahon dead at 86. There weren't any more details. Even if you didn't enjoy Star Search or the Tonight Show, there's no denying his contribution to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Missing categories... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439543)

Number of owners who arent fanbois (C64 has more)
Number of games (C64 has more)
Number of useful apps (C64 has more)
Multitasking (No for both?)

Re:Missing categories... (3, Insightful)

blinking_at (126502) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439679)

Attached Physical Keyboard

Re:Missing categories... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440063)

The keyboard is the biggest difference.

I could still use a C64 for my work, which involves mostly correspondence.

It would be painful and slow to do the same with an iPhone.

3D acceleration is just the new 2D acceleration (4, Informative)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439545)

MOS Technology VIC-II; no 3D capability

True, but at the time, 2D hardware features were as much a bullet-point as 3D acceleration today, and the C64 had some quite impressive 2D tricks up its sleeve.

Re:3D acceleration is just the new 2D acceleration (0, Troll)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439927)

One should compare it to Flash. But both using the same (low-res and low-color) screen and the same CPU. :P

Seriously. Flash has way too many inner platforms in-between it and the hardware. The only thing missing in there, is a virtual CPU, emulated in Emacs. ^^

Re:3D acceleration is just the new 2D acceleration (1)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440247)

The only thing missing in there, is a virtual CPU, emulated in Emacs.

Try CTRL+[+P+X+1.

        -dZ.

Re:3D acceleration is just the new 2D acceleration (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440017)

True, but at the time, 2D hardware features were as much a bullet-point as 3D acceleration today, and the C64 had some quite impressive 2D tricks up its sleeve.

Indeed - the C64 had some impressive graphics and truly amazing sound capabilities for it's time. One has to keep in mind that the C=64 appears just a little after dinosaurs first roamed the earth [lcurtisboyle.com].

Re:3D acceleration is just the new 2D acceleration (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440321)

Well, wasn't there a version of Space Harrier for the C-64? Plus some flight simulators I'm sure...

C64 didn't use a 6502 (4, Informative)

Mprx (82435) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439555)

It used a 6510, which is a modified version of the 6502 with an extra IO port.

Re:C64 didn't use a 6502 (3, Informative)

bobintetley (643462) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439981)

It also ran at half the clock speed of the 6502 (6502 = 2Mhz, 6510 = 1Mhz). I used to code stuff on the C64 demo scene. What I really miss nowadays is the fact that it was the last time I fully knew all of the internals of a machine I was coding for.

Re:C64 didn't use a 6502 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440249)

That's why I miss my Trash-80 CoCo.

Nice comparison (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439571)

Of course, the AT&T contract was only required in the USA; in parts of the rest of the world dial-up access was available without a contract from a phone company in the '80s. The price comparison doesn't include the contract for the iPhone. Comparing it to one on a pre-pay contract would be more fair, which brings the C-64 a lot closer (until you account for inflation).

The iPhone wins on portability, although the C-64 could drive an external display including a large TV (no HD support though).

Re:Nice comparison (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439931)

The iPhone wins on portability, although the C-64 could drive an external display including a large TV (no HD support though).

It did have s-video though. While the plug was nothing like the current standard, a Commodore 64 monitor used the same luminance and chrominance setup. To make the slashdotting of a frontpage-linked site a tiny bit worse:

http://www.allpinouts.org/index.php/Commodore_C128/C64C_Video [allpinouts.org]

Price comparison (4, Insightful)

furby076 (1461805) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439599)

The iPhone 3G S has 4,000 times the RAM (256MB) for one-third the price (with an AT&T contract)

Your price comparison is not really good. You should compare an uncontracted iphone price (500 or 600) to that of a c64. The contract lock is worth money - especially considering how much you buy to maintain your service. THen again you get more from the contract (phone service, access to the internet, etc). So a better comparison is the straight phone price to the c64 price.

Re:Price comparison (5, Funny)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439915)

The iPhone 3G S has 4,000 times the RAM (256MB) for one-third the price (with an AT&T contract)

Your price comparison is not really good. You should compare an uncontracted iphone price (500 or 600) to that of a c64. The contract lock is worth money - especially considering how much you buy to maintain your service. THen again you get more from the contract (phone service, access to the internet, etc). So a better comparison is the straight phone price to the c64 price.

Don't forget to correct for 27 years of inflation! Incidentally, this brings the C64 price to $1,318.59. Beat that, Apple Elitists.

Re:Price comparison (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440107)

Well, those of us who enjoy trolling would point out that the C64:
  1. Came with developer tools, and didn't charge extra for them.
  2. Allowed you to run apps from any third party without Commodore needing to approve them.

We'd probably also point out that the price of the C64 went down a lot. I remember them being around £50 in Argos and shops carrying a lot of games for under £5.

Re:Price comparison (1)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440677)

  1. Came with developer tools, and didn't charge extra for them.

It looks like you're trying to draw a contrast here. However, the developer tools for the iPhone are also free [apple.com].

Re:Price comparison (1)

SailorSpork (1080153) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440437)

Well... some items in his list he uses 1982 analogies (Toys R Us, Phone Monopoly, etc), and some he lists things available for C64 now (Twitter client). He could list either the equivalent price today ($1,318.59 2009 dollars), or the ebay price today (~$20 shipped).

Re:Price comparison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440651)

Is that including the 1571 FDD? All SS/DD 170 KB GCR, 664 Blocks of it?

Remember it was the same price as the actual C-64 itself when they first came out.

Re:Price comparison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439959)

Oh yeah, and because this is such a serious comparison, he should also take inflation since release into account. We should also consider that the C64 was price reduced many times in its life, so maybe they should be considered as well (inflation adjusted).

Re:Price comparison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440433)

Maybe he should just do the decent thing and see which blends the quickest?

Progress (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439623)

At least this time Apple rejected something that was actually forbidden by the app store's rules.

Flash emulator (1)

CopaceticOpus (965603) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439645)

The iPhone might have hardware 3D graphics, but only the C64 had hardware sprites.

This Flash C64 emulator [codeazur.com.br] is pretty nifty. It still needs some work though. I guess the iPhone doesn't support flash, but other phones might be able to run it.

If you want to run a little C64 basic on that emulator, be aware that the key for the double quote character is SHIFT-2. (I can't believe I remembered that!)

10 PRINT "HELLO WORLD"
20 GOTO 10
RUN

Re:Flash emulator (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439771)

* Looks down at keyboard *

Yep, SHIFT-2 here as well. You must be using one of those odd foreign ones (US layout or some such rubbish).

Re:Flash emulator (1)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439917)

Well, the Atari 8-bit machines had sprites in hardware too, and had it before the C-64 came out.

But that's not why I'm following up. When I read your shift-2 comment, my first thought was "well, of COURSE! Where else would it be? That's not changed in the last 20 years or...

(looking down at my keyboard)

Huh. I guess I've retrained my fingers."

I don't have any problems typing them, but if you asked me, I'd probably say "shift-2" is the location of double quotes.

Re:Flash emulator (1)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439955)

What's so odd about pressing " oh, I mean shift+2 to get a "?

It's a pretty standard way to type that character on a lot of non-US keyboard layouts.

/Mikael

Re:Flash emulator (1)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440479)

In US keyboards, there's an @ there now.

The funny thing is, just like the other commenters, it seems like second nature to me too. I mean, I type normally on an modern US keyboard, but when I fired up a C=64 emulator for the very first time a few years ago, one of the first things I typed was:
        LOAD"$",8
without missing a beat.

It was only a few minutes later that I noticed that there was no quotation-mark over the "2" key and that due to some freakish mental glitch, my fingers knew precisely where to go.

        -dZ.

Couldn't find the size? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439657)

Lazy bastard!

Commodore C64 Physical Specifications.
Weight of machine:1820g.
Physical dimensions:404 mm * 216mm * 75mm

http://www.retrocomputermuseum.co.uk/display_system.php?display=25

[Cause if it's on the net, it has to be true]

Joystick + RS232 Bluetooth (1)

GameGod0 (680382) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439687)

I don't know about you guys, but I'd take joysticks ports and RS232 over Bluetooth any day. :)

Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439697)

They forgot to include FREEDOM. You were free on the C64, no one could stop you from making applications, running them and distributing them freely to friends, who in turn, without big brother watching, could distribute your creations as well. You're not even allowed ot run a python interpreter on the iphone.

And don't tell me about jailbreaking, jailbreaking is a DMCA violation and if AT&T catches you, you will be kicked off their network. You don't have control of your device, with the C64 you did.

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (1)

fpophoto (1382097) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439825)

You were free on the C64, no one could stop you from making applications

I wish that were true. The teachers were always kicking us out of the lab at the end of the school day!

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (0, Offtopic)

msbmsb (871828) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439857)

I know I was always free to get a sandwich waiting for a program to load I had foolishly saved at the end of the cassette tape.

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (1)

msbmsb (871828) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439983)

modded Troll?? I love my C64! That was a comment of endearment!

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (4, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439925)

Calm down.
I agree not only could you write any code you wanted for free but Commodore included the scematics of the C-64! At least they did with mine but I had an early one.
Not only that people disassembled the kernel and wrote books that included the listing and nobody sent them a take down notice!
That was simpler time full of Compute and Byte magazine and taking your best girl to see ET and WarGames.

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (2)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440575)

That is true. The indispensable "C=64 Advanced Programmer's Guide" included not only a complete Assembly Language reference and detailed memory and bus maps, but a fold-in schematic diagram of the entire machine.

        -dZ.

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (0, Troll)

Snocone (158524) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439929)

They forgot to include FREEDOM. You were free on the C64, no one could stop you from making applications, running them and distributing them freely to friends,

And for $0.99 apiece 100 of you and your friends can chip in for a developer account which gives you all that F-F-FREEEEEDDDOOOMMMM.

If passing the minimal sanity and seriousness validation of acquiring a developer account is too much of a hurdle for you, well then no you actually should not be playing with the grownup toys, kid. Back to F-F-FRREEEDDOOOMMMM whiny git land with you!

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440053)

Dear sir, We are sorry but we have to reject your definition of freedom because it is in fact a plagiarized definition of slavery.

James P Finklebottom on behalf of the OED

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (1)

ckaminski (82854) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440407)

Sorry, in the Palm world, or the Windows Mobile world, the cost of entry, aside from the phone itself, is exactly $0. There are no gatekeepers. I'm holding out hope the Pre will turn out the same fashion, but I doubt it. Looks like I'm switching to AT&T so I can import some of the better European phones.

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (1)

Anonymous Monkey (795756) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439977)

I think I would add FUN to that list. The C64 was fun to play with (programing or games). I remember one time my dad, big brother, and me hooked up our Commodore up to our Betamax VCR and recorded about eight hours of dig-dug. We took turns playing a marathon game and by the end of it we had about 20 roses and the fruit you got after dropping two rocks was any number of weird things, from the dig dug guy to a rock. I can't imagine iPhone ever being so much fun.

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (2, Funny)

Vintermann (400722) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440133)

That's ridiculous, you can do all that today as well, except you don't want to because you have an iphone. And anyway, the iphone is probably powerful enough to run an ...

Oh. Never mind.

Re:Unfair comparison -- didn't include FREEDOM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440225)

Wank wank wank...

The only comparison that matters (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439709)

The only comparison that matters is you could write and run your own code on the C64 and you cannot on the iPhone.

Re:The only comparison that matters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439903)

Actually, you can write and run your own code on your iPhone. Just download the SDK [apple.com].

You *can* write & run your own code on the iPh (3, Informative)

wurp (51446) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440025)

I think you have to buy the development key ($99) to deploy to a physical phone, but you can write whatever you like and deploy it to your phone. You can deploy to as many as 50 different phones without going through the app store or buying a site license.

I don't remember for sure - you might even be able to deploy to a phone that's physically connected to your Mac without paying anything.

I agree that you're nowhere near as free on the iPhone as we were on the C64, but it's just wrong to say that we can't run any code we like on our phone.

I think it's also worth pointing out that there are huge potential exploits on a phone that weren't there on a C64. E.g. I could distribute a free app that eventually calls a 1-900 number I own, with no modem sticking out the back for you to disconnect.

I have written and distributed an iPhone app [pharceapp.com] (and written C64 apps), so I'm not just spouting BS.

Re:You *can* write & run your own code on the (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440663)

You can deploy to as many as 50 different phones without going through the app store or buying a site license.

I'm trying to image a C64 developer proudly crowing, "We're allowed to sell 50 copies!"

Re:The only comparison that matters (-1, Troll)

Snocone (158524) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440033)

As I pointed out above, if passing the minimal sanity and seriousness validation of acquiring a developer account is too much of a hurdle for you, well then no you actually should not be playing with the grownup toys, kid. The C64 is, indeed, right up your alley in that case, and I eagerly encourage you to use one instead of an iPhone for either forever or until you can come up with $99, whichever comes first. ... and actually, you wouldn't have to come up with the $99 yourself for that matter, if you could convince even one of the 60,000 or so registered developers to date to sign you up for one of the 100 spots on their developer device list.

So if you can't make any friends, and you can't come up with $99 ... nope, I'm just not finding any sympathy left over, loser-boy. Go play with Android or something.

Re:The only comparison that matters (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440195)

Heck, if you jailbreak it you can develop on the phone itself. I can't recommend that to all but the most hardened touchscreen enthusiast, but it is possible. There are packages that have gcc and development headers available on Cydia, and they do work.

Re:The only comparison that matters (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440429)

Well, unless you download the free iPhone SDK and develop applications using that, which you can then distribute to up to 100 people without involving iTunes. That's a lot of tape copying on the C64! Hardly ideal though, it's rather limiting in this day and age.

Of course you can't code ON the iPhone itself, unless there's a website out there with a Javascript editor and execution environment. Then again, a bluetooth keyboard would be handy first. Not that I think a simple BASIC environment should be blocked, it's quite ridiculous.

Yes, but... (1, Funny)

TrekkieTechie (1265532) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439719)

...can they run Linux?

Re:Yes, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439795)

http://sourceforge.net/projects/lng

Re:Yes, but... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439831)

who gives a fuck. go read that article about condoms. linux fags are too dumb to use a condom and are all dying of aids. i hate linux and the faggot fucks who use it. fucking homosexual ass lickers.

DIE DIE DIE!!!!! BURN IN HELL FAGGOTS!!!!!!

Re:Yes, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439863)

kinda: http://hld.c64.org/poldi/lunix/lunix.html :)

notably missing... (1)

motherpusbucket (1487695) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439829)

Instead of Ms. Pac Man, I would suggest Lode Runner or Jumpman.
Some other items to compare:
DRM-Free SID file compatibility?
Soothing knocking sounds from removable media (i.e. 1541 floppy drive)
Game DRM ease of circumvention (i.e. resistor on parallel port for Links)

Surprised to see that C64 won all benchmark tests (1)

julie-h (530222) | more than 3 years ago | (#28439849)

I must say I was surprised to see that the C64 won all the benchmark tests.

Units... sigh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28439851)

> 300-bps, initially

> 7.2mbps, if AT&T ever supports it nationwide

Well... 300 bits per second is indeed more than 7.2 millibits per second. I guess the Commodore wins.

Why am I nitting on this? Because typical unit failure tends to make software people look bad when interfacing with engineers/physicists, etc. Please, "nerds", make an attempt to understand units.

Darned work computer... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440293)

I just realized yesterday that my phone (Motorola i776) has as much memory as the computer at work which they refuse to upgrade. The first computer I had that would run DOS was a used IBM-XT, with 1/5 the drive space my phone has memory (unless I'm screwing up the math, I think I'm getting heat stroke from foolishly going outside). The XT had 175k IIRC.

I just read TFA, what are the respective clock speeds? The XP was 4 mz, I have no idea how fast my phone's (or the iPhone's) processor is.

Price is wrong (3, Interesting)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#28440331)

The article compares the current price of the iPhone with the introductory price of the C=64. A few years in (circa 1984), you could buy a C=64 from K-mart at $90.00 USD. This was convenience, since the cheap power supply tended to burn up and die, and it was sometimes easier and cheaper to just buy a replacement machine. I went through three of the things back then!

      -dZ.

The emulator thing has an easy acid test (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#28440559)

Can you create your own app store, and cut Apple's 30% (what is their cut of every app sold?) out of the equation? Don't assume because an app is free, download and popularity data isn't worthless.

If yes, reject app. If no, move to some other random criteria.

The emulator clause is clearly spelled out in the developer agreement.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...