Re: 256 Colors

[anoneds@netscape.net (Ben Yates)]

Chris <hgrt225@inbox.net> wrote in message news:<cgsksvsdv1ci6clpb96oehej6o207vbrm1@4ax.com>...
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:57:25 GMT, Steve Nickolas
> <usotsuki@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
> >At Sun, 30 Nov 2003 7:45am -0000, Bryan Parkoff wrote:
> >
> >>     Why Apple Corp, Inc decide to limit 16 out of 256 colors each line?
> >> Super NES can handle 256 colors each line.  Both of them use 65816 CPU.  Is
> >> it because Apple Team are afraid that 256 colors might interfere I/O
> >> softswitches in E1/C000?
> >
> >Super NES is also (a) a dedicated gaming system and (b) five years newer 
> >than the Apple IIgs.
> >
> 
> On the issue of comparing apples and oranges, similar points could be
> made about the old C64 vs Apple2 marketing wars.
>  C64 had a built in tone generator and sprite graphics - 2 features
> more common for video game systems.
>  C64 was five years newer than the Apple2 architecture.
> 
> Chris

We had a similar discussion on comp.sys.ti where a poster was
comparing the C64 to the 99/4A. The 99/4 came out in 1979/80, the C64
came out in 1982/83.
That was a lifetime for a computer back then (actually, 1979-1983
_was_ the lifetime of the 99/4x line...)
However, it was more relevant than the current comparison. They were
closer in age, and both machines sport sound processors and sprites...
but a better comparison would have been with the Vic-20, which came
out soon after the 99/4A. Or the Atari 400/800 line.

Ben