> The whole hardware architecture was a series of hacks to make the machine as cheap as possible
Well, I mean, in a way, yes, but that's an uncharitable way to consider it, IHMO. It's a bit like saying "the entire Unix architecture was a series of hacks to make a multiuser OS run in 8 kilowords of memory and 1MB of disk."
I mean, it sort of is, but it's also a very negative way to assess it.
As a former Spectrum 48 owner, I saw it more as inspired ways to get a colour computer with primitive sound for under £175, when the American equivalent in market positioning, an Apple II, was equivalent to in the region of £1750.
> 64KiB of DRAM of which half of was non-functional!
Only some of them, AIUI. Also an inspired way to get around low yields at the time. Allegedly the Intel 486SX was a similar hack: got a 486DX with a working integer unit but broken FPU? Call it an SX and sell it anyway!
This is also how CPU speed binning works. Test one -> can it do max speed? -> yes, mark the whole batch for that speed; no -> test them slower, and remark as slower.
Thus the Pentium 60 and 66... then 90 and 100... then 120 and 133.
> the weird out-of-order memory layout for the screen
Quite possibly inspired by similar hacks by Wozniak in the Apple I and II.
Compare the Amiga, using the graphics chipset to drive the floppy drive. Pros: cheaper and more storage. Cons: nothing else can read the disks.
Well, I mean, in a way, yes, but that's an uncharitable way to consider it, IHMO. It's a bit like saying "the entire Unix architecture was a series of hacks to make a multiuser OS run in 8 kilowords of memory and 1MB of disk."
I mean, it sort of is, but it's also a very negative way to assess it.
As a former Spectrum 48 owner, I saw it more as inspired ways to get a colour computer with primitive sound for under £175, when the American equivalent in market positioning, an Apple II, was equivalent to in the region of £1750.
> 64KiB of DRAM of which half of was non-functional!
Only some of them, AIUI. Also an inspired way to get around low yields at the time. Allegedly the Intel 486SX was a similar hack: got a 486DX with a working integer unit but broken FPU? Call it an SX and sell it anyway!
This is also how CPU speed binning works. Test one -> can it do max speed? -> yes, mark the whole batch for that speed; no -> test them slower, and remark as slower.
Thus the Pentium 60 and 66... then 90 and 100... then 120 and 133.
> the weird out-of-order memory layout for the screen
Quite possibly inspired by similar hacks by Wozniak in the Apple I and II.
Compare the Amiga, using the graphics chipset to drive the floppy drive. Pros: cheaper and more storage. Cons: nothing else can read the disks.