>
> Now it seems stranger to me why the 2600 has no video memory at all. I
> thought it was because at the time it was too expensive...
>
I think the fact that the 2600 does not have video memory is what makes it so flexible. Look at the O2, it had 256 bytes of video memory, but it's graphics where very inflexible. The 2600 would require far more the 256 bytes to be able to control the entire display with is as much detail as it can without it.
In the Howard Warshaw video one of the original Atari 2600 programmers said that it was the things that were left out of the 2600 hardware that made it as good a machine as it was. If they had tried to incorporate more it probably would not have turned out as good.
Dan B.
PS. Thought it was about time for a more acurate subject line for this thread :)
--
Archives updated once/day at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsubscribing and other info at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/stella.html
