🚀 go-pugleaf

I've been reading all these comparisons and I own a c64.
I think that straight comparison is out, there are too many
basic differances.
For a start the Atari machines have a display processor of sorts,
that make the video very powerful, but the c64 has a versatile
video controller that can tell the processor when to do things,
via the raster interrupt, and thus if you wanted
you could change video modes on every line also.
This uses a lot of main processor time if used in many screen locations
but can be used to give many effects not available using the display 
file on an Atari,for example a one line pixel scrolling message anywhere
on the screen.
The disk interface speed in now effectively cured, with small
alternative loaders. It now takes about 20sec to load 32k instead of
1min30sec that it takes normally, since Atari use serial interfacing
as well, I would assume that their disk speed is slower than this.
As for memory, I can't compare the XL machines with the c64 since
I'm not sure of the facts, but almost all commercial software is capable
of access to the entire 64k of memory.
Sound, the Atari relies on fixed oscillators with which one can only
make beeping noises (directly), the c64 has a synth which does more
than most other people mentioned. For a start you have a choice of wave-
form on all voices, this is for harmonic control. Triangle waves produce
the least harmonics and sound more like most wind instruments,
Sawtooth are very quite high up in harmonics, and pulse wave forms
are like most other micro beeps except you can change the step/mark
ratio. Finally there is the white noise generator, this is just another
optional wave form, so can be used on all voices(unlike what others
said). Next are the filters, there are digitally controlled
high,low and band pass filters which can be used to make tinny
sounds or bass sounds or whatever. Other features include
ring modulation, hard sync., envelope shaping, A to D converter
on voice 3, plus much more. I have heard very good speach synthesis
on the c64 with no extra hard-ware(it really sounds like a person.)
Graphics are next, the Atari highest mode is higher than that of
the c64 I think, but what makes graphics in games is colour.
The Atari is lousy at having a good range of colour on the screen
at once, with careful planning on a c64 there is no reason
why you can't use all 16 colours where you want when you want them,
i.e. no trouble getting more than 2 colours on one raster line.
The Atari sprites appear to be very limited too, why would one
want a sprite filling the whole screen? Admittedly there are only
8 sprites on the c64, but with the raster interrupts running
then any number can be used, and they CAN move in both directions.
Software, this is where my favorite machine starts looking a
little low, unfortunately where there are the same games on both
the Atari and the c64 the c64 looks worse off, I can see no real
reason why this is so, but I can only guess by saying that all of it
was originally written on the Atari and then made to work on the c64.
Thus when it designed all the graphics etc. were made to fit the Atari
in particular and it was hard to move. Where software was made for
the c64 (see Impossible Mission or Space Taxi) the quality is the
best.
In the case of support all I can say is that in England, where I live,
Atari seems to have vanished, and there appears to be no support whatever
despite all the Net News saying the 800XL is only about $120 over in
America.

		Dave (Maths @ Warwick University, UK)

P.S. These views are probably very biased. Who cares, flame me, I love
seeing pages of mail to me, etc..