Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.cbm |
| Subject | Re: The C64 is crap! |
| Date | 2016-01-24 10:08 +1300 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <240120161008159860%YourName@YourISP.com> (permalink) |
| References | <8760ymwn1k.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> <711111296@f1701.n2215.z1.fidonet.org> <87mvrwm4i0.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> |
In article <87mvrwm4i0.fsf@usenet.ankman.de>, Andreas Kohlbach <janrat.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> wrote: > Drew Klenotic wrote on 22. January 2016: > > On 21 Jan 16 18:05:59 Andreas Kohlbach wrote... > > > > > > then I try to emulate computers I never had, never even heard of > > > after power-on. Is that true that the Atari did this or just a > > > convenient feature of the emulator? For the C64 you had to load any > > > program manually. -- Andreas > > > > Well, if what you're asking is if the Atari could autoboot programs, the > > answer is yes. Most games and professional productivity packages did auto > > load on booting. It was easy enough for you to make your own programs auto > > boot as well as Atari DOS 2 would automatically search for "AUTORUN.SYS" and > > other DOSes had similar capabilities. > > Yes, thanks. > > Learning about "new" (old in fact) home computers from the 70s and 80s > many could in fact "auto boot". Too bad the Commodore 64 was not among them. Of course it probably depends on what "Atari" you're talking about too. The C64 did have the ability to "auto-run" from a cartridge plugged in.
Back to comp.sys.cbm | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
The C64 is crap! "Harald Habenichts" <po@p.o> - 2016-01-12 22:28 +0100
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-13 13:17 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! removemefirst.Robert.Wolfe@f18.n116.z1.fidonet.org (Robert Wolfe) - 2016-01-12 20:33 +1200
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-13 18:17 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! Andreas Kohlbach <janrat.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> - 2016-01-13 18:10 -0500
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-14 13:39 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! Andreas Kohlbach <janrat.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> - 2016-01-14 17:24 -0500
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-15 13:11 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! aowen10@mail.bbk.ac.uk - 2016-01-15 08:58 -0800
Re: The C64 is crap! Andreas Kohlbach <janrat.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> - 2016-01-15 16:05 -0500
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-16 12:35 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! AndyW <Andy@nojunqmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:32 +0000
Re: The C64 is crap! "Brian-Gaff" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-01-14 08:36 +0000
Re: The C64 is crap! Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-01-13 10:09 +0100
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-14 13:42 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! "Brian-Gaff" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-01-14 08:37 +0000
Re: The C64 is crap! Harry Potter <rose.joseph12@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-13 03:44 -0800
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-14 10:33 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! Clocky <notgonna@happen.com> - 2016-01-14 06:10 +0800
Re: The C64 is crap! "Brian-Gaff" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-01-14 08:35 +0000
Re: The C64 is crap! Guesser <alistair@zxnet.co.uk> - 2016-01-14 15:24 +0000
Re: The C64 is crap! Jan van den Broek <fortytwo@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-21 22:31 +0100
Re: The C64 is crap! Andreas Kohlbach <janrat.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> - 2016-01-21 18:05 -0500
Re: The C64 is crap! removemefirst.Drew.Klenotic@f1701.n2215.z1.fidonet.org (Drew Klenotic) - 2016-01-22 20:42 +1200
Re: The C64 is crap! Andreas Kohlbach <janrat.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> - 2016-01-23 15:21 -0500
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-24 10:06 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-24 10:08 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! Andreas Kohlbach <janrat.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> - 2016-01-24 18:10 -0500
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-25 14:09 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2016-01-30 02:33 +0100
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-30 18:16 +1300
Re: The C64 is crap! Andreas Kohlbach <janrat.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> - 2016-01-30 14:54 -0500
Re: The C64 is crap! Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2016-02-01 10:36 +0200
Re: The C64 is crap! removemefirst.Drew.Klenotic@f1701.n2215.z1.fidonet.org (Drew Klenotic) - 2016-01-26 19:45 +1200
Re: The C64 is crap! removemefirst.Drew.Klenotic@f1701.n2215.z1.fidonet.org (Drew Klenotic) - 2016-01-26 19:38 +1200
Re: The C64 is crap! Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2016-01-29 23:12 +0100
Re: The C64 is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-30 12:39 +1300
Re: The C64 is junk! nospam.Ed.Vance@f1.n770.z1437.fidonet.org (Ed Vance) - 2016-02-18 10:23 +1200
Re: The C64 is junk! Andreas Kohlbach <febr.9.ankman@spamgourmet.net> - 2016-02-19 15:57 -0500
The C64 is crap! Terry Raymond <traymond20@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 14:19 -0800
csiph-web