Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by IrishJourno on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @11:26AM
(#14646243)
Hi -- I'm one of the editor's at IEEE Spectrum. You're absolutely correct: as the article does make clear, it was the first 16-bit HOME computer. We should have been more specific in the headline, our bad.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by schlupa on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @04:16AM
(#14643349)
The Basic was slow for several reasons.
1. Double interpretation: As other already pointed out, the interpreter was written in an interpreted language, a kind of byte code if you prefer.
2. GROM routines: What added to the pain was that a lot of the routines necessary for the program were not in ROM but in TI specific GROM. All the "CALL something" (CALL CHAR, CALL HCHAR, CALL VCHAR, CALL SOUND, etc.) commands were GROM routines. GROM were a kind of serial ROMS that only TI manufactured (one of the reasons third parties had such a struggle with that machine).
3. VRAM: the worst offender why TI-BASIC (and TI-EXTENDED-BASIC) were so slow was that the basic console only had a wopping 256 bytes of memory. Yes, you read it right, the CPU only had 256 bytes of fast 16 bit memory. This memory was used by the system and were not accessible to the programmer. So where was the BASIC code then? It was stored in the video RAM and the CPU had no direct way to read and write to it. It always had to go through the TMS9918 video chip. This has 2 consequences, it was obviously slow and it clogged the video RAM. So unless one bought the 32K RAM expansion (which was outrageously expensive) or the mini-memory module (but then no Extended Basic was possible) it was impossible to use the graphic modes, making that incredibly advanced graphic chip a dud.
It's probably the strangest machine (aka f..d up) of the home computer era.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by stan_rogers on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @12:06AM
(#14642502)
I wasted an alarmingly large percentage of a year or thereabouts on that game. And that was depite having the expansion chassis, floppy drives, the assembler card and Advanced Basic (all of which also ate a huge chunk of time).
Also it turns out that the interpreter was slow because it was written in an interpreted language, but it was good enough for simple games because they had built-in sprites.
Interesting that they have emulators/simulators for it.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by SuperGent on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @07:14AM
(#14644259)
I too started on TI BASIC, which taught me a lot, including ASCII, hex, binary, function calls, debugging the lists from magazines and how to type. I think I could type 'Call CLear' faster than anyone I knew!
It's a pity I didn't get into ASM until years later when I got a spectrum.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by flomo on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @02:32AM
(#14642954)
No idea if this is true, but the meme was that you could only write BASIC for the TI99, assembly was forbidden somehow. For the most part, hackers avoided this system like the plague, despite all the advertisements starring Bill Cosby.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by smoyer on Monday June 26, 2017 @09:56PM
(#14642005)
I also had a TI99-4A ... It was a lot of fun to play with but I was also programming uProcessors in assembly language and that CPU's instruction set (and caveats) were so non-standard it was like learning it all over again.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by T-hawk on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @11:05AM
(#14646026)
I got good enough at Parsec to go infinite (earn lives faster than losing them) and roll over the score: http://dos486.com/misc/parsec.jpg
Fun fact: even though the manual says the sequence of level colors repeats after 16, it doesn't. It just stays yellow from level 16 onwards, through at least level 24 or so.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by gbin on Monday June 26, 2017 @10:01PM
(#14642030)
My first computer! I was 6.
Started with TI invaders and ended up playing with assembly with minimemory a couple years later.
Not unlike the Amiga, this machine was so in advance on its time for example with its hardware sprites.
This thing alone sparked my entire career.
If there are original TI engineers in the audience, it would be amazing to get a kind of AMA.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by IrishJourno on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @11:34AM
(#14646344)
Hi Folks -- Stephen Cass here, one of the editors at IEEE Spectrum. Rather than replying to a bunch of comments individually, let me say here that the folks pointing out it wasn't the first ever 16-bit computer are absolutely correct. As the article quickly makes clear, it was the first 16-bit HOME computer: we should have been more precise in the headline, and that's our bad.
Speaking personally, I really loved having this article in Spectrum and reading everyone's comments, as I too was a 99/4A O.G. from the 1980s, (the machine was my first computer before I moved onto the BBC Micro). And word, yes, the system was squirrely, but I did at least learn to count in hex in my head trying to turn user-defined characters into poor-man's sprites in TI-BASIC
The rest of that magazine issue is pretty interesting too, including the interview with Ann Winblad, fresh off her $15M exit. ("The male mystique was killed for me at age 2.")
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by protomyth on Monday June 26, 2017 @10:07PM
(#14642058)
Our school had one with pretty much everything in the way of expansions. It took up a lot of space on the table. I loved the voice synthesizer module which I fiddle around enough with to make it speak Dakota (Sioux) with a passable tone.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by 80211 on Monday June 26, 2017 @10:18PM
(#14642099)
It may have been the first 16-bit home computer, but it certainly wasn't the first 16-bit computer. Or even the first 16-bit computer with a CPU on one chip.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by IrishJourno on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @11:27AM
(#14646259)
Hi -- As I noted above, I'm one of the editor's at IEEE Spectrum. And you're absolutely correct: as the article does make clear, it was the first 16-bit HOME computer. We should have been more specific in the headline, our bad.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by empressplay on Monday June 26, 2017 @11:22PM
(#14642353)
I love the TI-99/4A but what about the SuperPet 9000? It had a second 16-bit CPU you could use (the 6809) in _the same address space_ as the 8-bit 6502 CPU!
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by nobleach on Monday June 26, 2017 @10:21PM
(#14642108)
This was my first computer. I remember the huge RF modulator that came with it to hook up to my TV. I didn't get any games until quite a bit later (TI Invaders) I spent many hours trying to program tic-tac-toe from a book I got from the library.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by nobleach on Thursday June 29, 2017 @09:32AM
(#14663119)
Oh wow, thanks for that! I've often thought of picking up one of these machines again... but I quickly realize that I'd really have little to do with it other than boot it up, and look at it. I think I'm probably more suited for an emulator.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by jasode on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @08:26AM
(#14644727)
The most enduring memory from TI-99 wasn't the games like MunchMan and Parsec. Instead, it was a specific oddity of the TI-BASIC language.
In the free TI-BASIC (built into ROM), the language had no boolean operators like "OR", "AND". Instead, what programmers did was use math tricks to simulate those booleans ... something like this:
Simulate "OR" boolean:
IF (X=3) + (Y=5) THEN
Simulate "AND" boolean:
IF (X=3) * (Y=5) THEN
As a child, it was extremely confusing to read those lines of code. Why in the world are we adding or multiplying nonsense like that?!? It turns out the programmers took advantage of any value greater than 0 as "TRUE", and 0 as false. Therefore, if either side evaluated to 0, multiplying the conditions would be FALSE.
However, you paid $100 extra for TI EXTENDED BASIC cartridge[1], that language had extra fancy features like the keywords "AND" and "OR". No more workarounds using "+" and "* " operators. That was progress in 1980s.
That early lesson in "inherent complexity" has affected how I view arguments today about "language simplicity". Not having things like "AND" "OR" makes the language syntax's formal specification simpler on a superficial level but it ends up making it more complex in user code.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by schlupa on Wednesday June 28, 2017 @02:49AM
(#14652159)
May be. TI BASIC was also limited in a lot of other ways. It didn't have ELSE and the THEN clause didn't allow for anything other than a line number as jump destination. Only one statement per line. So doing something as simple as
10 IF a=1 THEN v=10 ELSE v=50
would have to be written as
10 IF a=1 THEN 40
20 LET v=50
30 GOTO 50
40 LET v=10
50 ...
This was IMHO the worst restriction of that BASIC.
The only feature on the plus side of that BASIC was that it used the BCD floating format they also used in their calculator. So 13 digits precision with numeric range of 10^-99 to 10^99. When I switched later to the Apple II, I was shocked at the ridicule binary floating point format that couldn't even add 2 simple numbers correctly :-)
The TI-EXTENDED BASIC was an absolute must if you wanted to do serious programming. It enabled the sprites, had fancy stuff like named subroutines (that could even be called recursively) and a lot of restriction of the original BASIC were lifted.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by Xoros on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @12:05AM
(#14642499)
My school had a 4A (which was pretty unusual in France back then) and it was the first time I touched a computer for programming.
2 friends and I were the only ones in school interested in it so we basically were in the "computer room" every lunch break :) We didn't have any recording device so it was just programming little stuff that will disappear at the end of the session. Had really great times !
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by blackguardx on Monday June 26, 2017 @09:00PM
(#14641758)
I had one of these as a child in the '80s. My family had it hooked up to a black and white TV and I didn't know it could do color until seeing screenshots online in the early 2000s.
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by nsxwolf on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @11:28AM
(#14646271)
I wouldn't ordinarily pimp my own (poorly made) video, it's not even monetized, but I have the only TI-99/4 demonstration on YouTube if you're interested:
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by mikejmoffitt on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @07:48PM
(#14650623)
I'm sorry, but I genuinely don't understand what you mean. There are thousands of videos of people demonstrating use of this computer. Is there a specific property of a demonstration you are looking for?
Re:The Texas Instruments 99/4: World’s First 16-Bit Computer
by nsxwolf on Monday June 26, 2017 @07:37PM
(#14641340)
As an owner I can attest to the terribleness of the keyboard. I've used most of the bad chicklet keyboards out there - ZX, PCjr, Atari 400... this takes the cake.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16-bit
Maybe it was the first 16bit HOME computer... as mentioned in the text.
It's probably the strangest machine (aka f..d up) of the home computer era.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsec_(video_game)
http://ridingthecrest.com/edburns/classic-gaming/tunnels/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI_BASIC_(TI_99/4A)
Also it turns out that the interpreter was slow because it was written in an interpreted language, but it was good enough for simple games because they had built-in sprites.
Interesting that they have emulators/simulators for it.
http://www.99er.net/emul.shtml http://www.99er.net/win994a.shtml
It was an economical way to dabble in assembly without springing for the 32K RAM expansion and disk system.
Fun fact: even though the manual says the sequence of level colors repeats after 16, it doesn't. It just stays yellow from level 16 onwards, through at least level 24 or so.
This thing alone sparked my entire career.
If there are original TI engineers in the audience, it would be amazing to get a kind of AMA.
Speaking personally, I really loved having this article in Spectrum and reading everyone's comments, as I too was a 99/4A O.G. from the 1980s, (the machine was my first computer before I moved onto the BBC Micro). And word, yes, the system was squirrely, but I did at least learn to count in hex in my head trying to turn user-defined characters into poor-man's sprites in TI-BASIC
https://books.google.ca/books?id=wy4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA63&lpg=PA...
The rest of that magazine issue is pretty interesting too, including the interview with Ann Winblad, fresh off her $15M exit. ("The male mystique was killed for me at age 2.")
And there were many, many bit-sliced 16-bit computers that predated it by years. Like the AYK-14: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/AYK-14
Whirlwind, circa 1950, was probably the 1st 16-bit computer.
http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c=675
In the free TI-BASIC (built into ROM), the language had no boolean operators like "OR", "AND". Instead, what programmers did was use math tricks to simulate those booleans ... something like this:
Simulate "OR" boolean:
Simulate "AND" boolean: As a child, it was extremely confusing to read those lines of code. Why in the world are we adding or multiplying nonsense like that?!? It turns out the programmers took advantage of any value greater than 0 as "TRUE", and 0 as false. Therefore, if either side evaluated to 0, multiplying the conditions would be FALSE.However, you paid $100 extra for TI EXTENDED BASIC cartridge[1], that language had extra fancy features like the keywords "AND" and "OR". No more workarounds using "+" and "* " operators. That was progress in 1980s.
That early lesson in "inherent complexity" has affected how I view arguments today about "language simplicity". Not having things like "AND" "OR" makes the language syntax's formal specification simpler on a superficial level but it ends up making it more complex in user code.
[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=ti+extended+basic+cartridge&...
Maybe that's why?
This was IMHO the worst restriction of that BASIC.
The only feature on the plus side of that BASIC was that it used the BCD floating format they also used in their calculator. So 13 digits precision with numeric range of 10^-99 to 10^99. When I switched later to the Apple II, I was shocked at the ridicule binary floating point format that couldn't even add 2 simple numbers correctly :-)
The TI-EXTENDED BASIC was an absolute must if you wanted to do serious programming. It enabled the sprites, had fancy stuff like named subroutines (that could even be called recursively) and a lot of restriction of the original BASIC were lifted.
2 friends and I were the only ones in school interested in it so we basically were in the "computer room" every lunch break :) We didn't have any recording device so it was just programming little stuff that will disappear at the end of the session. Had really great times !
I was 12. It was 33 years ago. Still developing.
When I was 11 I used it to create fully-leveled NPC characters for dungeons and dragons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBgxOaUU7lQ
Can't imagine there are thousands of videos of the 4 since there were barely thousands of them sold.
ps: I always loved the 99 design, especially with the side modules. Reminds me of old analog Meridian hifi modules
The games (Alpine, ...) I've looked up on YT look like C64 basic games though. Why was that?