Commodore Announces New Quad-core C64x Extreme

cool as oldschool hell... but $1500
pass

oh, and the optical drive should be in a 1541 case.

some good photos at http://hothardware.com/News/Commod [...] e-On-Sale/

Win!

Trying to compete with Alienware and the Razer Blade??
Hahaha

Just need to find a really ancient crt monitor, hopefully without any cigarette stains, and you're good to go...

Personally, I like the concept of it. It's a truly portable workstation you can take anywhere as long as you have a screen waiting for you.

Old news, TH.

But can it play Uridium? (Thumbs up if you remember that game)

I realize it is likely due to the size limit but the lack of a dedicated GPU makes it simply undesirable for that price nostalgia or not.

The next nostalgic release will include the older case designs of the Tandy 1000 and Packard Bell systems, though nowadays, they include rubberized chain-mail gauntlets for the squeamish system builders.

I actually still have my old Commodore 64 in my closet. Working condition with the box. Hopefully, it will be worth something in 30-40 years when I retire haha.

"The next nostalgic release will include the older case designs of the Tandy 1000 and Packard Bell systems"

Unlike PB, my C64-C was very reliable. I dont think too many people will be nostalgic for the malfunctioning messes that PB put out in the US.

I'd rather they did an Arm version for $500 with a Tegra 3 quad core SOC and a custom version of Linux. $

they should have instilled an nvidia 480 mobile sli setup for that price

Why don't they attempt to market quality portable computers at a reasonable cost like the product that made the Commodore64 a classic? They actually could find a place in the world today for a device that wireless hooked up to your TV and did everything you need a computer to do for $200 (Atom CPU & Linux). Or $600 and put an i5-2310M and GT 540M in it (Windows Optional)?

Instead, they want to market an overpriced novelty item on nostalgia...I'm just saying that if I went through the trouble to produce it at all, I'd produce a product with a target market wider than "nerds who got rich in the 80's".

The price is understandable since it's entirely R&Dd and made in USA. Back in the day, average machine was this expensive ('80s). I still have 2 C64s one that works and second one for parts and 1541 with bunch of retail games. Emulator on my Mac Pro is OK, but nothing beats the sound of SID coming from the TV.

http://westernmass.craigslist.org/sys/2636384615.html

...better than paying $1,500 which is, for lack of a better word, ludicrous.

It can't play Crysis. It is not worthy.....

http://www.notebookcheck.com/NVIDIA-ION-2.24290.0.html

'Tis but thy name that is my enemy.
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What’s Montague? It is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet.
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo called,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name, which is no part of thee
Take all myself.

I'm pretty sure Juliet would agree that regardless of what they call this "thing", it's no Commodore 64. Commodore chose NOT to use the 8086 line when the created the 64. If it doesn't use something based on the 6502 (like the 6510), support sprites, and run 64 software natively, cost $600 or less, and make people wonder how something with so much memory costs so little, it's not a Commodore 64. Heck, if they had any sense of history, they'd at least have used ARM processors, which were at least partially based on the 6502.

A PC in drag is not a Commodore 64.

If the apps that came on the original C64 where updated to their current OS, and performance tests to show that it is faster than what I can build for $1499, then it might be a fit. Otherwise it fits into the same category as Appleware $$$$$$$$$$ for nothing.

That's a lot of money for an over-sized keyboard!

I agree, just who is gonna buy these things?
"Lets see, I want an extremely fast processor, 8 gigs of ram and no video card please."

I agree that C= was a hit in the 80s due to it's cheap computers.
When I think about it, they were games consoles packaged as a computer.
More parents agreed to buy their kids a computer in the hope that it's educational than a games console.
There would definitely be a market for an all-in-one to connect to your TV via HDMI, just to play movies, browse the web, play music, and ssshhh don't tell the parents ... play games on. Price would need to be under $500 in my opinion., no need to go for the breadbox design, make it more upto date in appearance.

Why don't they atop using the Commodore64's name - this is ridiculous. C64 was a unique kind of machine, with it's own personality and history. "Current" C64 is just another PC. It's like Amstrad, when they launched PCs with the Spectrum stab over it or like Apple nowadays. No personality, no something special, just a freaking PC.

Hmmmmmm are they trying to revive a Mummy?

I dont' need to spend that amount of money for that type of machine