Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.sys.sinclair > #847 > unrolled thread

ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64

Started by"Chris Young" <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com>
First post2012-04-22 17:08 +0100
Last post2012-05-18 05:21 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 89 — 23 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.sinclair


Contents

  ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Chris Young" <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com> - 2012-04-22 17:08 +0100
    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-04-22 20:49 +0200
      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 andy rea <ask_me@ask.me> - 2012-04-22 21:43 +0100
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Wasted" <removematd@deletematd.adsl24.co.uk> - 2012-04-22 23:12 +0100
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-04-23 00:37 +0200
            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 spike1@freenet.co.uk - 2012-04-23 11:27 +0100
              Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-23 19:17 +0800
      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 deKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid> - 2012-04-23 20:33 +0100
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-24 19:54 +0800
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 deKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid> - 2012-04-24 15:27 +0100
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-13 15:39 +0000
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-17 20:04 +0800
      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Jan van den Broek <fortytwo@xs4all.nl> - 2012-04-23 22:03 +0100
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 hp <ferd@farkel.net> - 2012-04-24 20:07 -0400
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-04-25 18:03 +0200
    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 lizardb0y <andrew.stephen@gmail.com> - 2012-04-22 15:08 -0700
    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-23 17:07 +0800
      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 spike1@freenet.co.uk - 2012-04-23 11:28 +0100
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-23 19:16 +0800
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-04-23 21:44 +0200
            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-24 19:55 +0800
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-04-23 21:08 +0200
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-04-23 21:39 +0200
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 andy rea <ask_me@ask.me> - 2012-04-23 20:45 +0100
            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-04-23 21:54 +0200
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-24 19:58 +0800
            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-04-24 17:21 +0200
              Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-25 06:41 +0800
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Martijn van Buul <pino@dohd.org> - 2012-04-24 12:07 +0000
            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-04-24 16:59 +0200
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-25 06:46 +0800
      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Calum <com.gmail@nospam.scottishwildcat> - 2012-04-23 12:50 +0100
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-04-24 20:00 +0800
      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-13 15:59 +0000
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-15 06:12 +0800
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-15 08:44 +0000
            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-20 08:18 +0800
              Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Guesser <alistair@alistairsserver.no-ip.org> - 2012-05-20 01:44 +0100
                Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-22 16:50 +0800
                  Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Guesser <alistair@alistairsserver.no-ip.org> - 2012-05-22 11:12 +0100
                    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-22 18:48 +0800
                      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Andrew Owen <aowen10@mail.bbk.ac.uk> - 2012-05-22 12:47 +0100
                        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 deKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid> - 2012-05-22 13:24 +0100
                          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-24 06:29 +0800
                            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-25 21:48 +0000
                              Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-26 18:17 +0800
                                Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-26 13:38 +0000
                                  Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-27 10:36 +0800
                              Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Matthew Westcott <gasman@raww.org> - 2012-05-26 20:56 +0100
                                Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-27 10:41 +0800
                                  Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-05-27 12:16 +0200
                                Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-28 12:56 +0000
                                Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Andreas Kohlbach <april12.8.ankman@spamgourmet.com> - 2012-05-28 17:35 -0400
                                  Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-30 17:56 +0800
                                    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Andreas Kohlbach <april12.8.ankman@spamgourmet.com> - 2012-05-30 16:01 -0400
                                      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Martijn van Buul <pino@dohd.org> - 2012-05-31 07:16 +0000
                                        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-31 18:21 +0800
                            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 deKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid> - 2012-05-28 15:07 +0100
                        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Chris Young" <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com> - 2012-05-22 18:19 +0100
                          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> - 2012-05-23 23:35 +0100
                            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-25 21:57 +0000
                        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-25 21:29 +0000
                      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-25 21:15 +0000
                        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-27 10:48 +0800
                          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me> - 2012-05-27 12:25 +0200
                            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Mic <mic_carusoQWERTY@libero.it> - 2012-06-17 01:37 +0200
                          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Guesser <alistair@alistairsserver.no-ip.org> - 2012-05-27 11:55 +0100
                            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-27 21:40 +0800
                              Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Guesser <alistair@alistairsserver.no-ip.org> - 2012-05-27 14:57 +0100
              Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-21 18:44 +0000
      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Andrew Owen <aowen10@mail.bbk.ac.uk> - 2012-05-21 01:03 +0100
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Chris Young" <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com> - 2012-05-21 18:13 +0100
        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-22 16:54 +0800
          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Andrew Owen <aowen10@mail.bbk.ac.uk> - 2012-05-22 12:48 +0100
            Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-24 06:32 +0800
              Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Andrew Owen <aowen10@mail.bbk.ac.uk> - 2012-05-24 07:01 +0100
                Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Chris Young" <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com> - 2012-05-24 18:15 +0100
                  Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-26 18:23 +0800
                  Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-05-26 18:29 +0200
                Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-26 18:21 +0800
                  Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> - 2012-05-26 19:53 +0100
                    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-05-26 21:19 +0200
                    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-27 10:50 +0800
                      Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> - 2012-05-28 16:32 +0100
                        Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> - 2012-05-29 12:11 +0800
                          Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> - 2012-05-31 17:34 +0100
    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 Groepaz <groepaz@gmx.net> - 2012-04-23 14:27 +0200
    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 "Pedro" <pcm2000@teleline.es> - 2012-04-26 01:03 +0200
    Re: ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64 rogerjowett <rogerjowett@gmail.com> - 2012-05-18 05:21 -0700

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →


#847 — ZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64

From"Chris Young" <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com>
Date2012-04-22 17:08 +0100
SubjectZX Spectrum vs Commodore 64
Message-ID<4F943B27.MD-1.4.17.chris.young@unsatisfactorysoftware.co.uk>
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html

Discuss.

Chris


-- 
+-------------------------------------------+
| Unsatisfactory Software - "because it is" |
|  http://www.unsatisfactorysoftware.co.uk  |
| Your Sinclair: A Celebration              |
+- http://www.yoursinclair.co.uk -----------+

DISCLAIMER: I may be making all this stuff up again.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#848

FromDombo <dombo@disposable.invalid>
Date2012-04-22 20:49 +0200
Message-ID<4f945262$0$14710$5fc3050@news.tiscali.nl>
In reply to#847
Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>
> Discuss.

It has been discussed a gazillion times.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#849

Fromandy rea <ask_me@ask.me>
Date2012-04-22 21:43 +0100
Message-ID<p3_kr.236988$sE1.86187@fx22.am4>
In reply to#848
On 22/04/2012 19:49, Dombo wrote:
> Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>
>>
>> Discuss.
>
> It has been discussed a gazillion times.

aye discussed.... But.... was there ever a difinative outcome that both 
sides would agree upon.....Therefor the discussion must continue....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#851

From"Wasted" <removematd@deletematd.adsl24.co.uk>
Date2012-04-22 23:12 +0100
Message-ID<coGdnR1XTKbAHwnSnZ2dnUVZ8nOdnZ2d@powerusenet.com>
In reply to#849
"andy rea" <ask_me@ask.me> wrote in message 
news:p3_kr.236988$sE1.86187@fx22.am4...
> On 22/04/2012 19:49, Dombo wrote:
>> Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Discuss.
>>
>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>
> aye discussed.... But.... was there ever a difinative outcome that both 
> sides would agree upon.....Therefor the discussion must continue....
>

Its like comparing apples and pears, some people like apples, some like
pears, they are not the same. But we must agree that the amstrad CPC464 was
like a rotten peach, it should have been good but stank and looked like
something we did not want. I'm a speccy fanboy but enjoyed my vic20 but cant
beat the spec for fun :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#853

From"dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me>
Date2012-04-23 00:37 +0200
Message-ID<jK%kr.161404$GZ3.130009@tornado.fastwebnet.it>
In reply to#851
Il 23/04/2012 00:12, Wasted ha scritto:

>>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html

>>>> Discuss.
>>>
>>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>>
>> aye discussed.... But.... was there ever a difinative outcome that
>> both sides would agree upon.....Therefor the discussion must continue....

> Its like comparing apples and pears, some people like apples, some like
> pears, they are not the same. But we must agree that the amstrad CPC464 was
> like a rotten peach, it should have been good but stank and looked like
> something we did not want. I'm a speccy fanboy but enjoyed my vic20 but
> cant
> beat the spec for fun :)

OK everyone has ready their soda, popcorn and flamethrower ? :D

seriously, it's the usual attempt to ignite the perpetual flamewar....

Best reards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#872

Fromspike1@freenet.co.uk
Date2012-04-23 11:27 +0100
Message-ID<8dnf69-psb.ln1@librarian.sky.com>
In reply to#853
And verily, didst dott.Piergiorgio <chiedetelo@ask.me> hastily babble thusly:
> Il 23/04/2012 00:12, Wasted ha scritto:
> 
>>>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
> 
>>>>> Discuss.
>>>>
>>>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>>>
>>> aye discussed.... But.... was there ever a difinative outcome that
>>> both sides would agree upon.....Therefor the discussion must continue....
> 
>> Its like comparing apples and pears, some people like apples, some like
>> pears, they are not the same. But we must agree that the amstrad CPC464 was
>> like a rotten peach, it should have been good but stank and looked like
>> something we did not want. I'm a speccy fanboy but enjoyed my vic20 but
>> cant
>> beat the spec for fun :)
> 
> OK everyone has ready their soda, popcorn and flamethrower ? :D
> 
> seriously, it's the usual attempt to ignite the perpetual flamewar....

Special occasion today though innit?
The spectrum's hit the big 3 0.

-- 
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   |                                                 |
|   Andrew Halliwell BSc   | "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!"          |
|            in            | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
|     Computer Science     | - Father Jack in "Father Ted"                   |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#874

From"Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com>
Date2012-04-23 19:17 +0800
Message-ID<4f953a47$0$11128$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#872
spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
> And verily, didst dott.Piergiorgio <chiedetelo@ask.me> hastily babble
> thusly:
>> Il 23/04/2012 00:12, Wasted ha scritto:
>>
>>>>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>
>>>>>> Discuss.
>>>>>
>>>>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>>>>
>>>> aye discussed.... But.... was there ever a difinative outcome that
>>>> both sides would agree upon.....Therefor the discussion must
>>>> continue....
>>
>>> Its like comparing apples and pears, some people like apples, some
>>> like pears, they are not the same. But we must agree that the
>>> amstrad CPC464 was like a rotten peach, it should have been good
>>> but stank and looked like something we did not want. I'm a speccy
>>> fanboy but enjoyed my vic20 but cant
>>> beat the spec for fun :)
>>
>> OK everyone has ready their soda, popcorn and flamethrower ? :D
>>
>> seriously, it's the usual attempt to ignite the perpetual
>> flamewar....
>
> Special occasion today though innit?
> The spectrum's hit the big 3 0.

Nobody at the party? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#881

FromdeKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid>
Date2012-04-23 20:33 +0100
Message-ID<alpine.OSX.2.00.1204232033400.2296@imac.dekay.sytes.net>
In reply to#848
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012, Dombo wrote:

> Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>> 
>> Discuss.
>
> It has been discussed a gazillion times.

Indeed. And the Spectrum was best every time.

deKay
-- 
  Lofi Gaming - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk
  Gaming Diary - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk/diary
  Blog - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk/blog
  My computer runs at 3.5MHz and I'm proud of that

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#900

From"Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com>
Date2012-04-24 19:54 +0800
Message-ID<4f96942e$0$11125$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#881
deKay wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012, Dombo wrote:
>
>> Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>>
>>> Discuss.
>>
>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>
> Indeed. And the C64 was best every time.
>

Typo corrected. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#908

FromdeKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid>
Date2012-04-24 15:27 +0100
Message-ID<alpine.OSX.2.00.1204241527350.2296@imac.dekay.sytes.net>
In reply to#900
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012, Clocky wrote:

>>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>>
>> Indeed. And the C64 was best every time.
>
> Typo incorrected.


deKay
-- 
  Lofi Gaming - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk
  Gaming Diary - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk/diary
  Blog - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk/blog
  My computer runs at 3.5MHz and I'm proud of that

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#985

From"Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@hotmail.com>
Date2012-05-13 15:39 +0000
Message-ID<4fafd5c4$0$18697$91cee783@newsreader03.highway.telekom.at>
In reply to#881
deKay wrote:

> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012, Dombo wrote:
> 
> > Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
> > >
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
> > > 
> > > Discuss.
> > 
> > It has been discussed a gazillion times.
> 
> Indeed. And the Spectrum was best every time.
> 
> deKay

if not even better....


-- 
Daniel Mandic

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#998

From"Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com>
Date2012-05-17 20:04 +0800
Message-ID<4fb4e90c$0$1760$c3e8da3$76491128@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#985
Daniel Mandic wrote:
> deKay wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012, Dombo wrote:
>>
>>> Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
>>>>
> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>>>
>>>> Discuss.
>>>
>>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>>
>> Indeed. And the Spectrum was best every time.
>>
>> deKay
>
> if not even better....

Only poor poverty stricken poms think that so they don't feel inadequate.


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#888

FromJan van den Broek <fortytwo@xs4all.nl>
Date2012-04-23 22:03 +0100
Message-ID<jfi.4F95C3A9.42.fortytwo@xs4all.nl>
In reply to#848
Sun, 22 Apr 2012 20:49:09 +0200
Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> schrieb:
>Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>
>> Discuss.
>
>It has been discussed a gazillion times.

And it will be discussed a gazillion times again. 
-- 
Jan van den Broek                                          balglaas@xs4all.nl

                        Entertaining Quakers since 2005

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#923

Fromhp <ferd@farkel.net>
Date2012-04-24 20:07 -0400
Message-ID<jn7f8p$9ek$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#888
On 4/23/2012 5:03 PM, Jan van den Broek wrote:
> Sun, 22 Apr 2012 20:49:09 +0200
> Dombo<dombo@disposable.invalid>  schrieb:
>> Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>>
>>> Discuss.
>>
>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>
> And it will be discussed a gazillion times again.

would it even be interesting to get the 'flame war hopeful' to explain 
the simple math error present in the C64 that was easily demonstrated?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#928

From"dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me>
Date2012-04-25 18:03 +0200
Message-ID<0fVlr.162453$GZ3.38128@tornado.fastwebnet.it>
In reply to#923
Il 25/04/2012 02:07, hp ha scritto:
> On 4/23/2012 5:03 PM, Jan van den Broek wrote:
>> Sun, 22 Apr 2012 20:49:09 +0200
>> Dombo<dombo@disposable.invalid> schrieb:
>>> Op 22-Apr-12 18:08, Chris Young schreef:
>>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Discuss.
>>>
>>> It has been discussed a gazillion times.
>>
>> And it will be discussed a gazillion times again.
>
> would it even be interesting to get the 'flame war hopeful' to explain
> the simple math error present in the C64 that was easily demonstrated?

oh, dear, I have given you earlier the perfect setting for this....

As I pointed earlier, these historical flamewars are like comparing 
apples with oranges, hence their longstandins

(side question, I'm wrong but there aren't historical flamewar "X vs. 
Apple II" ?)

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#850

Fromlizardb0y <andrew.stephen@gmail.com>
Date2012-04-22 15:08 -0700
Message-ID<18395052.796.1335132503245.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbcqs8>
In reply to#847
On Monday, 23 April 2012 04:08:55 UTC+12, Chris Young  wrote:
> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
> 
> Discuss.

Obviously the best computer was the one you could afford - and we could afford a second hand Speccy, so that settles it.

-- lizardb0y
Madman and Itinerant Bus Stop.
http://www.vintage8bit.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#866

From"Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com>
Date2012-04-23 17:07 +0800
Message-ID<4f951bbc$0$11110$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#847
Chris Young wrote:
> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>
> Discuss.
>
There is nothing to compare. The Spectrum was cheaper, but it wasn't a 
proper computer so it's not even comparable on that point to the vastly 
superior in every aspect C64.


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#871

Fromspike1@freenet.co.uk
Date2012-04-23 11:28 +0100
Message-ID<ofnf69-psb.ln1@librarian.sky.com>
In reply to#866
And verily, didst Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> hastily babble thusly:
> Chris Young wrote:
>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>
>> Discuss.
>>
> There is nothing to compare. The Spectrum was cheaper, but it wasn't a 
> proper computer so it's not even comparable on that point to the vastly 
> superior in every aspect C64.

Even the ZX80 was a PROPER computer, silly.
Bet alan turing would've been drooling over even that if you showed it him.

-- 
|                          |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
|  spike1@freenet.co.uk    |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
|                          |can't move, with no hope of rescue.             |
|  Andrew Halliwell BSc    |Consider how lucky you are that life has been   |
|           in             |good to you so far...                           |
|    Computer Science      |   -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#873

From"Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com>
Date2012-04-23 19:16 +0800
Message-ID<4f9539e0$0$11113$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#871
spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
> And verily, didst Clocky <notgonn@happen.com> hastily babble thusly:
>> Chris Young wrote:
>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>>
>>> Discuss.
>>>
>> There is nothing to compare. The Spectrum was cheaper, but it wasn't
>> a proper computer so it's not even comparable on that point to the
>> vastly superior in every aspect C64.
>
> Even the ZX80 was a PROPER computer, silly.

Cheap shoddy rubbish is all it was. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#883

From"dott.Piergiorgio" <chiedetelo@ask.me>
Date2012-04-23 21:44 +0200
Message-ID<hiilr.161766$GZ3.62158@tornado.fastwebnet.it>
In reply to#873
Il 23/04/2012 13:16, Clocky ha scritto:
> spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
>> And verily, didst Clocky<notgonn@happen.com>  hastily babble thusly:
>>> Chris Young wrote:
>>>> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/news/a377768/zx-spectrum-vs-commodore-64-gamings-greatest-rivalry.html
>>>>
>>>> Discuss.
>>>>
>>> There is nothing to compare. The Spectrum was cheaper, but it wasn't
>>> a proper computer so it's not even comparable on that point to the
>>> vastly superior in every aspect C64.
>>
>> Even the ZX80 was a PROPER computer, silly.
>
> Cheap shoddy rubbish is all it was.

try to cram a 64 +1541+ a 7"-8" portable TV screen in a trunk full of 
carefully packaged telescopes then set up and run this in the backseat 
of a car in the middle of nowhere having to use only a car battery as 
power source....

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.sinclair


csiph-web