You're very kind. My biggest problem is just the audio. I should have used a mic on myself rather than just the one built into the camera, but I was in a hurry. :)
So they basically took a design they do not own, from a company that is dead and pay no license fee to anyone, but they sell this FPGA based device for 700 dollars? That's what I call finding a pool full of whales and go to town. And I thought that the Spectrum Next was expensive; then I saw the price tag of this device. By any means, you collect computers, I collect cars, so that is totally fine; the difference is that I would never go out and buy a modern replica of a car that was never released for an outlandish price; so I guess that is the difference between collectors of other "objects" and collectors of computers. If this was priced as the C64 maxi, or even 2-3 times that price it would be a realistic price, but at the current price I think that most people will pass, leaving just the hard core 8 bit lovers fighting for them. Thanks for making this video so I learned about the existence of this device and forgot about it basically as soon as I saw the price and what it can do
I think you're making some assumptions here. One, they licensed technology from Cloanto, the rights holders for the C65 ROM and pay a license fee for every unit sold. Two, they're using better parts for this than other similar machines. Three, this will support many more cores than just the MEGA65 / C65. Four, a C64 at launch cost $595. That's over $1780 today for a fraction of the functionality we get in the "$700 expensive computer" you're being critical of. As for cars, a quick search revealed a prototype/ concept car collector: www.autoweek.com/car-life/a1699221/joe-bortz-collection-inside-cache-irreplaceable-concept-cars/ In the end, each person has to decide for themselves what has value and what doesn't. I won't denigrate your hobby, please don't denigrate mine, especially when you don't understand the value proposition.
@@qommodoretechnologies5644 Yes, I was assuming because there is nothing of this on their website... One would assume that being a no profit organization they should show max transparency, due to the monetary benefits that such entities receive; but I guess info are buried into some post for backers or in the updates for their product. Also I am not sure about where anyone is denigrating your hobby. This is a free country and anyone can express their opinion upon a piece of hardware sold and its features and functionalities. If that rub you the wrong way I am sorry but the point is about the device, not about you or anyone else buying this device or similar devices. I find silly when people take personally a critique to something they like, because that does not change the objective facts of what that "something" is, nor the amount of fun a person may get out of it. As far as better parts, I can't say. I can make myself a FPGA computer with a devboard and open source designs with minimal modifications; so it is not like it is rocket science if you know how to make PCB and some Verilog. Different situation if they would have to design a board using actual components, since that would require expertise in how to make a machine similar to the original but with modern parts (FPGA is just approximation at logic level of a chip, but most people that have no clue about how you program FPGA think that it is a 1:1 replica of every transistor in a chip...Which is wrong) As far as support; you can get cores from the community if you make your hardware open; so "getting money to support the development" statements are not always applicable. The MiSTer community work for free to make cores available to anyone... They must be some sort of mad people for giving away their time and expertise instead of asking for money I guess. Last but not least: the cost, which I agree is subjective; but I can do in emulation what this machine does with a 40 dollars RPI or if you want also to use a floppy, internet and so on, a cheap 200 dollars laptop. The injection molded case is what takes most of the money pool, that is for sure; but they could just sell the board at a reasonable price and share the CAD files so people can print their case (it is not like they designed it so they spent money, like the team that did the Spectrum Next did with their 100% original case). Not sure what hardware you consider "good", but even a cheap C64 maxi is good enough for what it has to do to be honest; but that is personal preferences so I totally get it. Car collectors collecting prototypes is different from car collectors buying a replica that has basically nothing of the original beside the shape and basic functionalities. They sell Porsche 356 replica, same for Shelby Cobra from the 60s; go ask a car collector what they think about that, versus spending money for the real thing (as long as you can afford it of course). The only ones buying replicas are not collectors but people that think to be collectors and compromise just to have that car in their garage. Nothing wrong with that, by any means; but that is not a collector.
I'm sorry you weren't able to easily find the information you wanted. Are you as openly critical of other FPGA recreations / reimaginings? The info isn't a secret and a simple question to the community would have given you the answer, vs the assumptions made. Perhaps there is a language issue. I don't know if we both natively speak the same language. Regardless, there is a "tone of type" and your tone came across to me as being negatively judgmental of those who want and enjoy this computer, not to mention a little "gatekeeping" where you attempt to define what does and does not constitute a collector. "Better parts" refers to "more capable parts". Sure, people can build a computer with smaller and less capable parts. To create this particular retro-inspired computer required a more capable FPGA than you find on your typical dev board. However, I would welcome the opportunity to review a comparable FPGA machine made with less expensive parts. To be fair to the project, they've been using "less expensive" parts during the development, such as the Nexys A7 / Nexys 4 DDR dev boards. And they help people who want to run a MEGA65 at a lower cost. Again, all you have to do is go to the community and ask. As for the cost of the MEGA65, I did a breakdown comparing the cost between a Nexys A7 & the released MEGA65. When you consider what went into it, the price is competitive for what is a niche small run system that will probably never reach 10,000 units sold. The comparison can be found at www.commanderx16.com/forum/index.php?/topic/742-commander-x16-vs-mega-65/page/5/#comment-14833 The hardware is open. Not sure why you think otherwise. As for emulation for much less cost, you're absolutely right. it can be done less expensively in other ways. If you're happy with that, have at it. You buy what you want and call it collecting or whatever. Yes, you are entitled to an opinion. I think the points could have been made with a lot more finesse. But you do you.
@@qommodoretechnologies5644 I personally have nothing against FPGA; it is a way to replicate hardware that would be impossible to be made due to manufacturer EOL that hardware, so per se it is a positive thing. I am less of a fan of products that use FPGA and that are sold for high prices, pointing at the high price due to costs and expenses. The whole point of FPGA is to be cheaper to be used because you do not need to manufacture a chip, but you can program it. Also while writing code for FPGA is not as easy as making a game in Unity or Unreal engine, it is still something that many people do for free on github; so the costs are really only related to very specific factors. I am sorry if the tone you perceived was judgmental because it was not my intention. I simply criticized the item for what it is and for the price it has, compared to what it offer. My reply about FPGA is just due to the fact that I encounter a lot of "experts" that think they know a technology just because they read wikipedia (I work in the field as main job, got a degree to do my job, didn't study on youtube or wiki); and that give false information to less technically inclined people and generate a chain of incorrect info that end up pushing someone to spend 700 dollars for something without understanding what are they actually buying. This is extrapolated from the context of what someone like, how much value is in an item for them and if they are emotionally invested in buying/owning something. That is personal and I have no place in saying what others should do or think, as I expect others won't tell me what should I do or think. I understand the basics of the process they used to price the product; it is a niche product so when you sell less units you increase its price to generate both a sense of value and FOMO, and at the same time to compensate for the low volume for sales. That does not translate in being acceptable though. Example : C64 maxi, sold at 129; which is just a plastic case with an OK keyboard and a small SOC board emulating a C64. I perceive that price as being appropriate for what is in the box, which is not affected by my love for the C64 or the thoughts about who make them, if they are making something at loss or not. I buy something looking at the sticker price, not at the story behind the product or who make it. But that's me, and I understand that. Another similar case could be the Spectrum Next; which is a similar idea (take an old computer, make it FPGA and faster and sell it for a large sum of money); and their asked price is in the same ballpark of the C65; but they have made a board only product that you can buy for a fraction of the asked price for the next (it is called N-Go). That board is the main board and software of the Next without the case. So in poor man's terms, you get the same product without the case at a fraction of the cost. And yes, the original team spent time in R&D; but this is what it is... You make a product, you spend time, your time and your money on it, before you sell it adding your profit. But these days it seems that nobody follow that workflow and everyone ask for money to make a product before it is even made; so there is no financial risk, except the time spent in the project. The development for that platform (intended as making changes to the hardware drivers and firmware, not intended as making games and software in basic or assembly language) is available to anyone, since the source code is on Github; and that is without revealing the code used for the original spectrum roms (which are copyrighted). It is not a matter of "have at it"; it is a matter to explain things clearly; because people need to understand the difference in something emulated via software, via FPGA or made with actual silicon chip; and all the implications behind it, before spend their hard earned cash. This is something that many youtubers promoting products on their channel seems to forget at times (not saying that it is done on purpose, let's be clear). It is a choice when you know what are the differences and can make an educated choice about X vs Y; otherwise it is just a matter of whoever has better arguments to promote X or Y, for the casual audience. Once again, it is not about you or me or the folks that made this device or folks that like this device; it is a plain and simple personal analysis of a good that is sold for money. Independently if you want to buy or not buy something, you are free to give your thoughts and opinions about it.
Sorry then that I read more into your comment. The team that designed the system is completely volunteer and non profit. The company that manufactures the system is not doing it for free. I think that if you look at the price breakdown I linked to you'll see this is a fair price for what was sold. And the project supports people building their own less expensive compatible systems. I also work for a company that sells this kind of stuff, so I also have a clue. Not all FPGA chips are created equal. Some can do more and cost more as a result. Anyway, to each their own.
![Commodore 65 - MEGA65 Unboxing - [Folge 36]](/img/1.gif)
Looking forward to mine showing up.(someday) Thanks for showing us yours.
Are you in the first 400 or in the next batch?
@@qommodoretechnologies5644 I just missed being in the first 400 from my understanding. Looking forward to your review when you have time.
I got really lucky with the timing of preorders and my inability to sleep that night.
Congratulation on receiving your Mega65! Thank you for the video. Looking forward to your next video.
Thanks for dropping by, and thanks for supporting MEGA65!
@@qommodoretechnologies5644 I am in the 2nd batch. It is really hard to wait seeing all you guys getting your machines :)
I understand the sentiment!
Cheers!.. Got mine over the weekend.. ❤
Your production quality is fine! Don't you worry!
You got it earlier than me and I live next to Germany. hot demy!
You're very kind. My biggest problem is just the audio. I should have used a mic on myself rather than just the one built into the camera, but I was in a hurry. :)
hey it even has a place to put your cup of coffee
Wow, 12 mins of talking an 2 mins of unboxing. 🤦
So they basically took a design they do not own, from a company that is dead and pay no license fee to anyone, but they sell this FPGA based device for 700 dollars? That's what I call finding a pool full of whales and go to town.
And I thought that the Spectrum Next was expensive; then I saw the price tag of this device. By any means, you collect computers, I collect cars, so that is totally fine; the difference is that I would never go out and buy a modern replica of a car that was never released for an outlandish price; so I guess that is the difference between collectors of other "objects" and collectors of computers.
If this was priced as the C64 maxi, or even 2-3 times that price it would be a realistic price, but at the current price I think that most people will pass, leaving just the hard core 8 bit lovers fighting for them. Thanks for making this video so I learned about the existence of this device and forgot about it basically as soon as I saw the price and what it can do
I think you're making some assumptions here. One, they licensed technology from Cloanto, the rights holders for the C65 ROM and pay a license fee for every unit sold. Two, they're using better parts for this than other similar machines. Three, this will support many more cores than just the MEGA65 / C65. Four, a C64 at launch cost $595. That's over $1780 today for a fraction of the functionality we get in the "$700 expensive computer" you're being critical of.
As for cars, a quick search revealed a prototype/ concept car collector: www.autoweek.com/car-life/a1699221/joe-bortz-collection-inside-cache-irreplaceable-concept-cars/
In the end, each person has to decide for themselves what has value and what doesn't. I won't denigrate your hobby, please don't denigrate mine, especially when you don't understand the value proposition.
@@qommodoretechnologies5644 Yes, I was assuming because there is nothing of this on their website... One would assume that being a no profit organization they should show max transparency, due to the monetary benefits that such entities receive; but I guess info are buried into some post for backers or in the updates for their product.
Also I am not sure about where anyone is denigrating your hobby. This is a free country and anyone can express their opinion upon a piece of hardware sold and its features and functionalities. If that rub you the wrong way I am sorry but the point is about the device, not about you or anyone else buying this device or similar devices. I find silly when people take personally a critique to something they like, because that does not change the objective facts of what that "something" is, nor the amount of fun a person may get out of it.
As far as better parts, I can't say. I can make myself a FPGA computer with a devboard and open source designs with minimal modifications; so it is not like it is rocket science if you know how to make PCB and some Verilog.
Different situation if they would have to design a board using actual components, since that would require expertise in how to make a machine similar to the original but with modern parts (FPGA is just approximation at logic level of a chip, but most people that have no clue about how you program FPGA think that it is a 1:1 replica of every transistor in a chip...Which is wrong)
As far as support; you can get cores from the community if you make your hardware open; so "getting money to support the development" statements are not always applicable. The MiSTer community work for free to make cores available to anyone... They must be some sort of mad people for giving away their time and expertise instead of asking for money I guess.
Last but not least: the cost, which I agree is subjective; but I can do in emulation what this machine does with a 40 dollars RPI or if you want also to use a floppy, internet and so on, a cheap 200 dollars laptop.
The injection molded case is what takes most of the money pool, that is for sure; but they could just sell the board at a reasonable price and share the CAD files so people can print their case (it is not like they designed it so they spent money, like the team that did the Spectrum Next did with their 100% original case).
Not sure what hardware you consider "good", but even a cheap C64 maxi is good enough for what it has to do to be honest; but that is personal preferences so I totally get it.
Car collectors collecting prototypes is different from car collectors buying a replica that has basically nothing of the original beside the shape and basic functionalities.
They sell Porsche 356 replica, same for Shelby Cobra from the 60s; go ask a car collector what they think about that, versus spending money for the real thing (as long as you can afford it of course).
The only ones buying replicas are not collectors but people that think to be collectors and compromise just to have that car in their garage. Nothing wrong with that, by any means; but that is not a collector.
I'm sorry you weren't able to easily find the information you wanted. Are you as openly critical of other FPGA recreations / reimaginings? The info isn't a secret and a simple question to the community would have given you the answer, vs the assumptions made.
Perhaps there is a language issue. I don't know if we both natively speak the same language. Regardless, there is a "tone of type" and your tone came across to me as being negatively judgmental of those who want and enjoy this computer, not to mention a little "gatekeeping" where you attempt to define what does and does not constitute a collector.
"Better parts" refers to "more capable parts". Sure, people can build a computer with smaller and less capable parts. To create this particular retro-inspired computer required a more capable FPGA than you find on your typical dev board. However, I would welcome the opportunity to review a comparable FPGA machine made with less expensive parts. To be fair to the project, they've been using "less expensive" parts during the development, such as the Nexys A7 / Nexys 4 DDR dev boards. And they help people who want to run a MEGA65 at a lower cost. Again, all you have to do is go to the community and ask.
As for the cost of the MEGA65, I did a breakdown comparing the cost between a Nexys A7 & the released MEGA65. When you consider what went into it, the price is competitive for what is a niche small run system that will probably never reach 10,000 units sold. The comparison can be found at www.commanderx16.com/forum/index.php?/topic/742-commander-x16-vs-mega-65/page/5/#comment-14833
The hardware is open. Not sure why you think otherwise.
As for emulation for much less cost, you're absolutely right. it can be done less expensively in other ways. If you're happy with that, have at it.
You buy what you want and call it collecting or whatever.
Yes, you are entitled to an opinion. I think the points could have been made with a lot more finesse. But you do you.
@@qommodoretechnologies5644 I personally have nothing against FPGA; it is a way to replicate hardware that would be impossible to be made due to manufacturer EOL that hardware, so per se it is a positive thing.
I am less of a fan of products that use FPGA and that are sold for high prices, pointing at the high price due to costs and expenses. The whole point of FPGA is to be cheaper to be used because you do not need to manufacture a chip, but you can program it. Also while writing code for FPGA is not as easy as making a game in Unity or Unreal engine, it is still something that many people do for free on github; so the costs are really only related to very specific factors.
I am sorry if the tone you perceived was judgmental because it was not my intention. I simply criticized the item for what it is and for the price it has, compared to what it offer.
My reply about FPGA is just due to the fact that I encounter a lot of "experts" that think they know a technology just because they read wikipedia (I work in the field as main job, got a degree to do my job, didn't study on youtube or wiki); and that give false information to less technically inclined people and generate a chain of incorrect info that end up pushing someone to spend 700 dollars for something without understanding what are they actually buying.
This is extrapolated from the context of what someone like, how much value is in an item for them and if they are emotionally invested in buying/owning something. That is personal and I have no place in saying what others should do or think, as I expect others won't tell me what should I do or think.
I understand the basics of the process they used to price the product; it is a niche product so when you sell less units you increase its price to generate both a sense of value and FOMO, and at the same time to compensate for the low volume for sales. That does not translate in being acceptable though.
Example : C64 maxi, sold at 129; which is just a plastic case with an OK keyboard and a small SOC board emulating a C64. I perceive that price as being appropriate for what is in the box, which is not affected by my love for the C64 or the thoughts about who make them, if they are making something at loss or not. I buy something looking at the sticker price, not at the story behind the product or who make it. But that's me, and I understand that.
Another similar case could be the Spectrum Next; which is a similar idea (take an old computer, make it FPGA and faster and sell it for a large sum of money); and their asked price is in the same ballpark of the C65; but they have made a board only product that you can buy for a fraction of the asked price for the next (it is called N-Go).
That board is the main board and software of the Next without the case. So in poor man's terms, you get the same product without the case at a fraction of the cost.
And yes, the original team spent time in R&D; but this is what it is... You make a product, you spend time, your time and your money on it, before you sell it adding your profit. But these days it seems that nobody follow that workflow and everyone ask for money to make a product before it is even made; so there is no financial risk, except the time spent in the project.
The development for that platform (intended as making changes to the hardware drivers and firmware, not intended as making games and software in basic or assembly language) is available to anyone, since the source code is on Github; and that is without revealing the code used for the original spectrum roms (which are copyrighted).
It is not a matter of "have at it"; it is a matter to explain things clearly; because people need to understand the difference in something emulated via software, via FPGA or made with actual silicon chip; and all the implications behind it, before spend their hard earned cash. This is something that many youtubers promoting products on their channel seems to forget at times (not saying that it is done on purpose, let's be clear).
It is a choice when you know what are the differences and can make an educated choice about X vs Y; otherwise it is just a matter of whoever has better arguments to promote X or Y, for the casual audience.
Once again, it is not about you or me or the folks that made this device or folks that like this device; it is a plain and simple personal analysis of a good that is sold for money. Independently if you want to buy or not buy something, you are free to give your thoughts and opinions about it.
Sorry then that I read more into your comment. The team that designed the system is completely volunteer and non profit. The company that manufactures the system is not doing it for free. I think that if you look at the price breakdown I linked to you'll see this is a fair price for what was sold.
And the project supports people building their own less expensive compatible systems.
I also work for a company that sells this kind of stuff, so I also have a clue. Not all FPGA chips are created equal. Some can do more and cost more as a result.
Anyway, to each their own.