Really, sjoerd, I hope all those thousands of 7MHz users now realize how useless their upgrade really is.
You really opened our eyes!

My 2+ GHz PC is really waaay to fast for me also, because I can only type 200 keys per minute!

WHAT A REVELATION!

Hmm, I don't seem to get my message across here... (don't worry, happens all the time)... However, 7MHz just isn't much faster, the way I use it. Don't expect to much from it. And I am not interested in a faster MSX if this means a fast z80-like cpu surrounded with old hardware. It all depends on how you use your MSX, it may be useful to others.

Quote:

Really, sjoerd, I hope all those thousands of 7MHz users now realize how useless their upgrade really is.

Yeah! Me too! Yeah! Yeah! Me too!

Quote:

You really opened our eyes!

No thanks. I like to help!

Quote:

My 2+ GHz PC is really waaay to fast for me also, because I can only type 200 keys per minute!

I didn't state 7MHz was to fast. Or did I mention somewhere I think my PC is to fast? Don't think so, but if it was I managed to slow it down by installing Windows XP.

Quote:

WHAT A REVELATION!

Do you own a 7MHz Z80 based MSX next to your TurboR? Use it every day? Oh, Never mind... Thought you weren't takling to me anymore because of the 16 bit risc r800 debate...

I hate it when there's nothing useful to say. There are places that should be filled with void. But still, all that noise...

Quote:

Do you own a 7MHz Z80 based MSX next to your TurboR? Use it every day?

Yes, and yes.

Isn't part of the MSX fun, trying to do "things" at 3.5Mhz ? My 650Mhz Duron running windows 2000, at times seems slower then my 16Mhz 286 running windows 3.1 with WordPerfect and Lotus 123.

Try better coding to increase speed and keep programs less complicated. Fast speed makes lazy programming.


Good job my heart operation was not done on a computer running Windows, the Blue screen of death would have probably come up and I'd would have been dead, small and good programming is the best

David h

Quote:

Isn't part of the MSX fun, trying to do "things" at 3.5Mhz ? My 650Mhz Duron running windows 2000, at times seems slower then my 16Mhz 286 running windows 3.1 with WordPerfect and Lotus 123. Try better coding to increase speed and keep programs less complicated. Fast speed makes lazy programming. Good job my heart operation was not done on a computer running Windows, the Blue screen of death would have probably come up and I'd would have been dead, small and good programming is the best David h

Well David,

Of course it is part of the MSX fun to make everything as fast as possible, but I think a computersystem should evolve or else the system is dead (or will be in time)
MSX could evolve in the period (89-95) through efficient coding but I think coding has evolved so much that there isn't much room for improvement.

Nothing wrong with those retro people but I see the MSX system as a computer system that is still alive and therefore it needs new software but also hardware.

If there will be an new, fast (and cheap) MSX system it will be a lot easier to make software for it because it is not nessecary to program everything in Mcode.

After some time the development skills will rise again if the new MSX system will be easy and transparence enough.

Just imagine what those developers could make if they had a MSX system that is 30,40 or 50 times as fast as a MSX2+ (with a VDP that can handle that kind of speed).

People that cannot progam in assembley can create the most beautiful games in nestor basic for example. People that can program in an assembler can do really stunning things on that kind of machine and I think that they started also in basic before they start programm in assembly.

Conclusion:

I WANT A NEW MSX!!

Quote:

>> Try better coding to increase speed and keep programs less complicated. Fast speed makes lazy programming.

RIGHT!!!

Quote:

MSX could evolve in the period (89-95) through efficient coding but I think coding has evolved so much that there isn't much room for improvement.

HELLO ??!?! improved and evolved?? whoohoaaaahahaooh. sorry. ahum
No it has not. The HARDWARE has though. check first quote ....

Sure things have evolved.. but not really coding. It's even worse.. but hell what do we care.

Quote:

HELLO ??!?! improved and evolved?? whoohoaaaahahaooh. sorry. ahum No it has not. The HARDWARE has though. check first quote ....

I beg to differ!

UZIX, GEM, both software that were perfectly possible on a 1985 MSX2. But the programming skills were not evolved enough in those days.
Games, they've become prettier and faster and more impressive in the period Ivke describes.

For instance, look at the Matra games. The games themselves are really simple (could've been made in BASIC), but the implementation they did with all the tricks and special effects, that's just WOW. Ultimate polish, ultimate coding.

Quote:

Sure things have evolved.. but not really coding. It's even worse.. but hell what do we care.

Maybe you should get off your "I'm the bestest coder"-throne and see reality. Coding HAS improved tremendously over the last 15 years.

I seem to agree with GuyveR800 here. Somehow very very disturbing

WoRoWoooooorooooooo.......Ro is kinda right, don't ya think?! Or erhm...What about the next nuance? Good coders quited the MSX scene, but the ones who DID stay, improved. Ro, for real! GuyveR800 his codingqualities are quite mega. But I do think you have a point, Ro. There are (were? Hell, you are all coming back ) not many good active coders left for MSX.

look it's not to boost my ego, not at all.
I make crappy shit too, just check the javascript on thefuzz.nl which is not 100% crossbrowser compatible (only IE and NS) hehe.

in general I've never liked the average 'coding' ppl seem to NOT think about how to setup a source for example. Trust me, seen plenty shit coding. Met plenty ppl who coded some things etc. That's me: very critical on everything. There are only 2 ways: the wrong and right way. (nope, there ain't no left) If you do something, do it GOOD or else don't bother. This also implies I have to stick to these rules aswell....

The coding skills have not evolved really, the hardware has. More speed is lazy coding. Difficulty level is dropping. Ofcourse some dinosaurs have survived this trial. But to say code has improved.. no way.
To be honest, MANY MSX software is pure shit. Same for PC, many shitty crappy softs. It's like everything: some ppl have it, some not.

Although I started this message with 'not to boost my ego' I come to think I AM. Or how else would I know the difference.. oh, well.

Hehehehe.....I have NEVER programmed the VDP I/O wise and I'm going to code a 'logo&scroll' demo. Ro, you are going to kill me....Or just laugh @ me Because I'm going to put it all online in a seperate thread

can't wait to hunt you down latok..haha.
I'm very curious what you'll come up with, really. (no grin this time, I'll keep that for guyver next time haha )

Ro:

No offence but why don't you clock your MSX to 1 Mhz or maybe 0,5 Mhz?

You can try to code even more efficient than you already did.

I agree on one point:

The hardware (partly) evolved to (moonsound, IDE-interfaces, Turbo R, etc).

Sorry but you must be blind not to see the difference between software from the late '80s and the '90s.

It looks like no one on this forum wants a faster MSX with more capabilities. I find this disturbing. I thought the people here wanted MSX to evolve. Hmm..maybe MSX is dead afterall(ok...maybe a little dramatic )

Quote:

It looks like no one on this forum wants a faster MSX with more capabilities. I find this disturbing. I thought the people here wanted MSX to evolve. Hmm..maybe MSX is dead afterall(ok...maybe a little dramatic )

On the contrary, a lot of people (several on this forum included) have either (or all ) of the following: MoonSound (evolution of MSX-AUDIO), Gfx9000 (evolution of MSX2+ videochip), LPE-Z380 (32 bit evolution of Z80 processor) and ofcourse devices like SCSI, IDE and CompactFlash interfaces.