Change of product direction, good and bad news!

[daschewie]

I would rather see the Vera Cartridge for the C64 instead of the X8.  There is a large market for existing C64 users that don't want to buy a new machine, but would spend money to upgrade their existing hardware. 

[Gold]

I've always been worried about the idea about using only through hole components as it was going to cost too much to assemble, and trying to shoulder the burden of building 1000+ units seems unsustainable to me. Everyone has already put in a lot of effort into the project already and you have almost reached an important milestone, so I also feel that not doing anything with the phase 1 design will be a waste. It think its best if you just offer it as a kit without warranty to let the people who are interested buy it and build it themselves, or they can just wait for the next phase. With a kit you also wouldn't have to worry about any EMC testing required by the FCC which is even that much harder to pass with a large motherboard design with through hole components.

I feel like bringing out the x8 would create a divide for a product that isn't even released yet. Its good to be able to focus your efforts onto the one product instead. I think you should also refocus your efforts onto your end goal too. There's a lot of development work that will have to be spent on phase 2 which can be used to work on phase 3 instead that can be mass produced the easiest. My suggestion is to finish phase 1 of the project, sell it as a kit to those that want expansion, an authentic retro feel et c. and start work on phase 3 to sell to everyone else. I think its also sad to see the FM chip go.

I've never been that interested in the case, so I don't mind it going. If you decide to sell it as a kit, I'm sure people won't mind that they have to source their own case to go along with it. The PS/2 keyboard seems like a nice addition but you also don't want to waste your down payment for no reason. Given that the x8 doesn't support PS/2, that's a significant amount of money spent on something that isn't even usable in its current state.

[TinyElvis]

I'd be very weary of releasing the X8 version first. It will definitely cannibalize sales of the X16 in two respects - 1) it will satisfy 90% of the demand since it can do about 90% of the work that the full X16 can do and 2) if there are any issues it will taint the expectations of the full X16 model before it sees the light of day. Your comparison to the C128 is also pretty apt - if I were you I'd hold it in reserve and treat it more like an Atari 2600jr, a later model to sell to those who couldn't afford or justify the full price.

On the assembled/non-assembled board - a choice is fine with a markup, but the maybe that too can be a release in waves - first available loose, then over time you offer it fully assembled. This from a guy who had very little skill in soldering.

[TechCowboy]

I think the cases would be the biggest issue.  I think we can source our own cases, or buy them direct from the manufacturer. 

[ppescher]

None of the available answers reflects my opinions on this, so I'll just leave a comment here.

1. 
   Should we release the Commander X8?
   
   Yes, but only if it's made compatible with the X16 from a programmer's perspective. I don't think, as others already said, that two different hardware platforms are a good idea. We can live with less RAM (no banking), as long as the memory map stasy the same for both X8 and X16, and also VERA addressing mode should be the same. Ideally, a program should be able to detect X8 easily and decide if it can run on the more limited X8 hardware: if it can, no changes should be required to the code, except for coping with the limitations.
   
   Having a stripped-down version of the X16 would be nice for developers, that can start making progress on a real hardware instead of the emulator. It could be a good thing to see how much real interest there is for the X16 and help finance the project.
   


2. 
   Should we still make a Phase-2 product?
   
   Only if it is as feature complete as the Phase-1 board. It could be good to have a mass-produced PCBA if there is enough people that can't afford the DIY kit of Phase-1 or simply doesn't have the tools or skills to build it, but still wants to enjoy a retro-style computer and be part of the community around it, without missing anything that would be made for Phase-1 hardware. I see Phase-2 as the non-DIY option of Phase-1. Release Phase-1 as a kit for those you can buy it and build it, and leave Phase-2 for all the others, but they should be functionally the same hardware, only in a different package that makes it cheaper and good for mass-production. If that's done, we don't even need a Phase-3, more so if you release the X8.
   


3. 
   For the X16 Phase-1, do you prefer a kit or a somewhat more expensive pre-assembled board?
   
   After all the things you said about assembly of a Phase-1 board, I think this should be only released as a DIY kit, without the option to buy it pre-assembled. That should be left for Phase-2, that should be hardware compatible with Phase-1 in every aspect, including expansions. Again, I don't see a point in having the Phase-3 if it's essentially an emulator "in hardware". It would make sense only if it's as feature complete as Phase-1 and compatible in every aspect, including expansions. Then it could replace Phase-2 of course. But I understand this might not be a viable option with an "FPGA does it all" kind of solution. A one chip solution would still make sense to me if the X16 becomes such a huge success that you're going to make a handheld gaming console out of it, with display and keypad included. Otherwise I don't see it as useful.
   

Basically, what I don't want is 4 different hardware platforms. Software should run mostly unchanged on anything you release under the X16 project. I understand you are calling X8 that way right because it's sufficiently different to not be an X16, otherwise you would've called it Phase-0 maybe, but... really I am afraid it could drive away people from the X16, thinking the X8 is just good enough. It could make sense only to raise some funds initially, but call it "X16-mini" or something, and make it fully compatible with X16 architecture. Sort of an appetizer for the real deal: a DIY kit with only DIP parts, released first mostly for developers or education, and an SMD version suitable for mass-production, released afterwards for everyone who could not afford the kit.

[crashputer]

Hi David & crew,

    I work for an electronics manufacturing company in Tennessee that has the capability to do through-hole and SMT manufacturing. Also, we may be able to help with the power supply issue, as our primary line of products are all power supply-based. I know PCBWay has done a lot to support this project, and I'm not looking to step on any toes. But I thought I would extend a greeting just the same.



Send a PM if we can be of assistance. In any case, I'm looking forward to seeing the project through and getting a kit myself.

[Fnord42]

1 hour ago, picosecond said:

Commander X8 is what this project should have been from the start.  Wasn't the whole point supposed to be retro bare-metal programming on a reliable, relatively inexpensive platform? Write off X16 as a bad idea and release the X8.



I never understood why anyone cares what package the transistors live in, surface mount vs. through-hole, etc.  It's the architecture that matters, not the appearance.



An FPGA 6502 core is no different than a discrete 6502.  Heck, all of WDCs new work is cores in FPGAs.



The biggest problem isn't manufacturing, it's licensing.  If you don't own your kernel (sic) you don't own your product.

I think you got the point wrong, or at least incomplete. To appeal to people's (admittedly irrational) love for retro(-like) hardware, the through-hole part is important. Also, it makes the kit version easier to build for beginners.

And don't forget the expandability of the X16 which is a very appealing aspect that the X8 lacks.

I do agree with your point about the licensing, though. I see the benefits of the current situation, but ultimately I'd love to see the X16 go completely open-source, including the Kernal.

[tlesher]

I honestly like the idea of the X8 shipping now and replacing the phase 3. As many folks have pointed out here, hardware hackers probably aren't interested in it--but that's ok, because they probably weren't interested in the phase 3 for the same reasons.

The X8 is self-consistent: it's close enough for the software oriented folks to deal with, it doesn't require a specialized keyboard or power, it's small enough that there will be 10 3d printable case designs on Thingiverse shortly after the technical drawings are public, and it's (apparently) easier to get from today to shipping than the X16, so it shouldn't be too much of a time sink.

There's a lot of assumption on my part in that paragraph, but if it's accurate, getting it out there with a little bit of a premium that helps fund the last mile of X16 development makes sense to me.

[TinyElvis]

For those who liken the X8/X16 to the V20/C64, I think that is a flawed comparison. At the time each Commodore product was released the market for computers was booming. However, for this product I'd be willing to say the market is pretty niche and stable, and I'd suspect the number of people who would buy one won't double in the next two years. Additionally, the V20 was a natural evolutionary predecessor of the C64 and not something sitting on a desk ready to go when they designed the C64.

[Fnord42]

I'd also buy an X8 without thinking twice if it were available(*), but I think the concerns about having two semi-compatible platforms cannibalizing each other's user (and more importantly: developer) base are valid.

(*) in addition to the X16 Phase1 Kit, which I still want most.