Denial

Thank you for your deep and profound observation. I'm sure we all feel we greatly benefited from your insight. this btw are the type of comments that make ppl like mike no more want to communicate with you. try picking your own nose for once. I was just telling cbmeeks there are multiple good reaso...

I know. Did Jim Drew admit he dropped the ball because he ran into a dead end ? actually he keeps argueing about unrelated issues just the same whenever someone questions the emulation. hint: the cost of the hardware you were using is completely irrelevant at this point. its all about saying you ha...

"Why would I ever make a thorough testing and debugging on a product I have strictly no intention on ever offering ?" why would you tell people that you have developed a car when you didnt even check if the motor works and the windows dont fall off when you drive sharp corners? i know you...

The only thing I understand from this post is that you're a person with a hypersensitive ego. Therefore communicating with you is just like walking in a mine field coffee everywhere now. this is going into my quotes file. cheers. (i would have raised the same thoughts as Mike - however this GandALF...

was CIAnide tested the same? run a few games and programs and then conclude its ready for prime time?

i always come back to "bandits" as a quite impressing "sprites" game on vic20... it has some clashes though

Last year, Sylvain, Fredric and i did develop a replacement for the 6526/8520/8521 CIA used in the C64, C128, C128D, 1571, 1581 and Amiga line of computers.

sounds like something jimmy would write

you can only shift it by 1 cycle minimum

Then you replied to what I said to him by mentioning 8 MHz is also extremely slow by today's standards. Ergo, you disagree with me and you're saying it is feasible to run a software emulation of the VIC-II in the same manner. Are you? i said that it is slow by todays standards. no more no less. all...

yeah sure, you are right. as always (it wasnt me who started with the "offtopic". nor did cbmeeks specifically nail it on software emulation.)

do you realise that you are the only one trying to nail this on software emulation?

The VIC-I has a dot clock of about 4MHz, the VIC-II has a dot clock around 8 MHz. The SID can be emulated by software on a uC board because by today's standards 1 MHz is extremely slow. 8MHz are no less slow by todays standards really. The reason for why SID is relatively easy to do compared to a V...

one major problem is that in a C64 (unlike in many other systems) the VIC plays an integral role in the system, when it doesnt work (at least halfway) right, then *nothing* works. you must get all the external timing perfectly right before you can even try it out in a C64 - in practise that means fi...

The VIC-I and VIC-II are a really special case because they incorporate both digital and analog electronics technology. there is very little analog stuff in either. if you make the replacement generate for example HDMI instead of analog video, then you can eliminate all of that. (and even if you do...

drop-in replacement havent been done because a) they are even harder to do than a complete FPGA core (you must meet external timing at all times) and b) they would be quite expensive (likely more expensive than real chips)