Talk:Commodore Plus/4

Memory map

It wasn't a difference in memory map that solely accounted for the big difference in BASIC memory between the 64 and the Plus/4. The major difference is that the Plus/4 BASIC used bank switching to access the RAM "under" the ROM. Using the same technique, the 64 BASIC could have made another 12K available. And with greater difficulty, another 12K on top of that. The Plus/4's memory map is definitely a help, though. Mirror Vax 07:14, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

264

I own what might potentially be the only 264 in existence, though I have no way of verifying that. Mine was pulled from a CBM warehouse that was liquidated years after the CBM bankruptcy. I can provide photos if desired: Jim Brain (brain@jbrain.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.30.53.215 (talk) 03:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

chiclet vs membrane

"the 116 used a rubber chiclet keyboard like less-expensive Timex-Sinclair computers and the original IBM PCjr"

I dont know what the 116 used but the TS used a membrane keyboard. the PC jr used a proper chicklet kb —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petchboo (talk • contribs) 18:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Bil Herd Wikipedia Comments

I think one of the engineers tried to type his comments right into the Wikipedia page? "Most of the developers of the Plus/4 also worked on the later Commodore 128 project, which was much more successful. The lead hardware designer Bil Herd commented directly on the wikipedia article adding: «The TED series (Plus4) was specifically designed to not encroach on the successful C64, it was designed to sell for 49 US$ and to go head to head with the Timex/Sinclair computer line, specifically the color Timex (Spectrum?). Targeting the office more than the game market, the smallest version of the computer had a total of 9 IC’s, cheapness was the main metric as defined by Jack Tramiel. After Tramiel left Commodore, the remaining management seemed to not know what to do with the Plus/4 line which resulted in untold variations and lack of focus on the targeted market. Since most of the management at that time had only experienced the C64, they tried to market it as another C64 which was exactly what Tramiel had set out not to do.»

This shortcomings of the end product were the inspiration for the C128 series as the designers calculated that if they created a computer that was compatible with the C64 that ultimately management and marketing could not damage the C64 software base (much) in spite of how they were to take the product to market." JettaMann (talk) 18:11, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

My understanding of the TED project was that it was designed to overcome the limitations of the PET architecture ; namely, that when you expanded the memory the memory map changed so that each memory configuration was incompatible with each other. The PET limitations were carried over to the :Vic 20 and the C64, which is why memory expansion was not available on the C64 until the late 1980s when switch banking circuits became more affordable.

The Plus/4 could be expanded to 1 MB, it was intended originally to replace the PET series, but by the time it was released CP/M and IBM PC systems had replaced the PET's market. The C16 was supposed to be a "hobby" system like the Vic 20 but without the memory problems, but it was deliberately :nobbled with the expansion port removed so it wouldn't undercut the Plus/4.101.178.163.92 (talk) 03:39, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

"The PLUS/4 was derived from an ..."

This sentence:

 The PLUS/4 was derived from an existent commercial program “TRILOGY” published by Pacific Tri – Micro. 

Works better as:

 The PLUS/4 ROM-based software was derived from an existent commercial program “TRILOGY” published by Pacific Tri – Micro. 

It took me a moment to realize that it wasn't saying that the design for the computer was somehow cribbed from the software, but the builtin software on the plus/4.

Thoughts?

Units Sold?

Please add number of units sold to the "unitssold" field of the infobox, similar to Commodore 64 and Commodore 128. Thanks. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 11:32, 19 February 2019 (UTC)