Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Commodore Trivia 14
Not to leave you in the dark for too long, here are the trivia
answers to the previous edition of Commodore Trivia. I am posting the
answers at this time, and will post the scores and winners in a few
days. This time frame is set up to allow time for any discussions on the
correctness of these answers. By this time, the newest edition of
trivia has been posted. I encouarage you to enter it.
This edition of trivia answers has been posted to the USENET newsgroups:
comp.sys.cbm, alt.folklore.computers, and comp.sys.amiga.advocacy. It
ha also been posted to the FIDO Echo CBM. This file is copyright by
Jim Brain. It may be reposted on other networks, provided the file is not
changed (other than typos). This file is public domain. It may be used in
newsletters, magazines, etc., but I always appreciate knowing where it
goes. If you are planning on reposting or otherwise retransmitting this
file, it is best to wait a few days after the date of this post for any
errors to be shaken out.
Please mail any new questions for upcoming trivia (with answers) to my
address.
This edition and previous editions the trivia can be obtained from my
mailserver. Just mail my Internet address with the following in the
subject line (exactly):
FGET: trivia1
This will retrieve the first edition of the trivia. Replace the
number with the edition you want.
Here are the answers to Commodore Trivia Edition #14 for January, 1995
Q $0D0) How many keys were there on the "original" PET and what was special
about them?
A $0D0) the original PET had 73 calculator-style keys that were laid out
in a rectangular matrix, not typewriter-style.
Q $0D1) How do you produce the "hidden" message(s) on the Commodore 128?
A $0D1) SYS 32800,123,45,6. The screen will clear, and the software
and hardware developers on the 128 project will be named.
The exact text is as follows:
[RVS] Brought to you by...
Software:
Fred Bowen
Terry Ryan
Von Ertwine
Herdware:
Bil Herd
Dave Haynie
Frank Palaia
[RVS]Link arms,don't make them.
Q $0D2) How much memory did the "original" PET show on bootup?
A $0D2) The "original" PET came in two configurations, 4K and 8K, so:
The PET 2001-4 had 3071 bytes.
The PET 2001-8 had 7167 bytes.
Q $0D3) We all know the "reboot" sys for the 64 is sys 64738, but who knows
the same sys location to reboot the CBM 8032?
A $0D3) sys 64790
Q $0D4) Which computer(s) beeped at bootup? (May be more than one, but only
one required)
A $0D4) I know some of these are corect, but the sheer size of the
list prevents me from checking them ALL out.
FAT 40XX series
80XX series
PC-10 (I suspect a number of IBM clones did, and these things have
no consistent naming convention across country boundaries.)
PC-20
Amiga 1000
SP9000 (SuperPET)
Q $0D5) How much memory did the CBM 8032 show on bootup?
A $0D5) 31743 bytes.
Q $0D6) Certain Commodore computers provided emtpy EPROM sockets on the
motherboard. Give me the number of empty sockets on the following
machines:
a) CBM 30XX.
b) CBM 8XXX.
c) CBM C128.
d) Plus/4.
A $0D6) a) 3 sockets.
b) 2 sockets.
c) 1 socket.
d) 1 socket.
Q $0D7) In Germany, the CBM 8032 came with a 4kB EPROM for the EXXX area,
while the US version only had a 2kB EPROM. Why?
A $0D7) The German version had additional keybaord drivers for umlaut
characters and dead keys.
Q $0D8) Who published the first PET memory map in the "PET Gazette"?
A $0D8) None other than the infamous Jim Butterfield.
Q $0D9) Which is faster to move the sursor on a PET/CBM or C64: SYS or
PRINT?
A $0D9) PRINT is faster, since the sys approach must process the pokes
before the sys, which are very slow.
Q $0DA) On the Amiga 1000, where are the signatures of the first Amiga
developers located?
A $0DA) Inside the top case of the Amiga (1000).
There is an interesting footnote to this question. It seems
that at least some original Amiga machines were labeled as
Amiga (with nu number). Then, at some later point, the number was
added. In addition, Commodore produced some Amiga 1000 machines
without the signatures, but most had the telltale handwriting on
the inside of the case.
Q $0DB) On the 6502, what does the accumulator contain after the following
is executed:
lda #$aa
sed
adc #01
A $0DB) Assume carry was clear. If so, then $11 is the coprrect answer.
Q $0DC) What is the model number of the US NTSC VIC-II chip?
A $0DC) Its first number was 6567, and that is the number most people know
it by, but Commodore produced a VIC-II using a new manufacturing
process that was numbered the 8562.
Q $0DD) What is the European PAL VIC-II chip's model number?
(Not sure if that's its rightful term, but I hope you understand).
A $0DD) Same here. The part number 6569 is the most remembered number, but
an 8565 will work as well.
Q $0DE) Assume you have two computers, one with each of the above chips inside.
Which chip draws more pixels on the screen per second?
A $0DE) Note, for the purposes of the calculation I am performing, "pixels"
refers to picture elements that can be adddress and modified using
normal VIC modes, so there are 320*200 "pixels" on both the PAL
and NTSC screens. (I probably should have stated this, but it is
too late now.) Also, the screen refresh rates used in the
calculations are those defined by the respective television
standards (60Hz U.S., 50Hz European), even though the actual
frequencies are off by a small percentage. (for example, the actual
50Hz refresh rate on European VIC-II chips was calculates as
50.124567Hz by Andreas Boose)
So, the PAL draws 320*200*50 pixels per second = 3200000 pixels/s
NTSC draws 320*200*60 pixels per second = 3840000 pixles/s
Now, some people thought I meant the whole screen, not just the
display area provided by the VIC-II chip. Well, I am not sure
exactly you calculate pixels on a screen, since the numbers could
vary from display to display, but if we measure in scanlines:
PAL = 312 scanlines * 50 = 15600 scanlines/s
NTSC = 262 scanlines * 60 = 15720 scanlines/s
The NTSC machines wins both ways.
Q $0DF) In Commodore BASIC, which statement executes faster:
a = 2--2
or
a = 2+2
A $0DF) b is the correct answer, and there are a couple of reasons why:
1) 2--2 takes longer to parse in the BASIC interpreter.
2) Commodore BASIC subtracts by complementing the sign of the
second number and adding. This incurs extra time.
There are even more subtle ones, but I leave them as an
exercise for the reader. Send me your reason why.
End of Commodore Trivia Edition #14!
Jim Brain
brain@mail.msen.com
602 North Lemen (New address)
Fenton, MI 48430
(810) 737-7300 x8528
