Rick Dickinson Interview 2016 - Sinclair ZX Spectrum Computer

[@sambagogo777]

First time I'd viewed this. The sight of the late, great, Rick Dickinson playing Jetpac on a Speccy will likely stay with me forever. The guy was a legend in his own lifetime to many of us. I backed the second crowdfunding campaign for Sinclair ZX Spectrum Next a few days ago. Hail Rick.

[@Eratosthenes0815]

Your Spectrum will be kept in mind. The ZX Spectrum Next though will be your legacy. - RIP Rick

[@ChrisWalshZX]

I met Rick Dickinson at the Spectrum 30 event in Cambridge in 2012. Amazing guy. RIP.

[@baze3SC]

The ZX Spectrum 48K+ still manages to look sleek, even after nearly 40 years. I find that unbelievable.

[@alperbektas7131]

RIP rick we will miss you

[@petegreenwood2793]

Enjoyed that, lovely video.

[@UXXV]

That was a great video :)

[@j.dietrich]

Rest in peace.

[@mharding1258]

Before Rick died he worked on a final project called the ZX Spectrum Next.... check it out.

[@mikekwarner]

“‘it had word processing capacity” - I am not sure if this sentence was due to the writer having had no experience whatsoever of the Speccy or whether they did and it’s a subtle dig at the Sinclair ZX Printer 😂

[@jamesthompson6557]

....well they DID call the ZX Spectrum "powerful" so I guess they simply had no idea what they were talking about. ;)

[@SpeccyMan]

@@jamesthompson6557 I'm not sure you do either.

[@alperbektas7131]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasword

[@lunakid12]

...and they applauded the "innovative keyboard technology" -- the crappiest part of the entire product, so...

[@jamesthompson6557]

..."and powerful ZX Spectrum computer? Lol. Sorry, but even as a Speccy fan that is the most ridiculous think I have never heard! The Speccy was built to be a entry level, cheap and affordable introduction to computers for the average man on the street. As such MANY compromises had to be made including NO sound hardware being included, no sophisticated video hardware that was present in many game consoles and computers of the time (Atari 5200, Commodore 64, Atari 400/800, TI99 etc) a cost effective rubber membrane keyboard instead of a proper keyboard, no joystick ports etc etc. it was truly the most basic and cut down of computer platforms and could not compete in "power" with other systems of the day - C64, Atari 8 bit, Ti99 etc etc. This is part of why it is such an attractive retro platform these days - it is amazing to see what can be squeezed out of such basic, primitive hardware..... but calling it "powerful" is quite hilarious. ;)

[@davidkmatthews]

I'd have to - not entirely - disagree with you, particularly with regards to its (relative) power. It did have audio hardware - ie an in-built tiny loudspeaker, fed by associated electronics. Where it did struggle, particularly in terms of speed, was its slow BASIC interpreter/executor. However... Its Z80A processor comprised a very sophisticated instruction set which meant that certain operations could be completed in fewer cycles - and therefore quicker - than rivals. As such, software developed in machine code was often impressively fast, notably complex and graphics-heavy "action" games such as Elite. As you say yourself, once software developers gained a deep insight into the machine's technical fundamentals, some quite amazing software was produced. You're essentially correct in saying it was a "cheap" machine - but I think of it more in terms of being great value for money considering what it was capable of - albeit with obvious cost shortcuts such as the keyboard and audio capabilities. But, like its Sinclair predecessors, it was essentially a "starter pack". The lack of direct accommodation for accessories such as a printer and joystick was addressed with the the ZX Interface 1 and, for example, Kempston's own interface & joystick package. Of course the BBC Micro, for example, was a far better machine overall... but then it cost more than twice the price of the 48K Spectrum. I couldn't decide between the Speccy and the BBC Micro... so I bought - and love - both!

[@baze3SC]

They cut every corner they could that's for sure but computers like C64 were powerful only in the sense that they had dedicated circuitry that improved gaming experience which I find a bit one-dimensional. When it came to raw computing power, Z80 clocked at 3.5 MHz with 48 KiB of RAM was actually pretty good for the time. Consider that the first IBM PC released in summer 1981 had Intel 8088 clocked at 4.77 MHz with 64 KiB of RAM and cost 15-times as much. I think it was more the lack of storage and interfacing options that prevented Speccy from being taken "seriously". But Sinclair still managed to sell 5 million units at a time when most people only had a vague idea what computer even was so who am I to argue :)

[@SpeccyMan]

I'm not so sure you understand the meaning of the word power.

[@KarlHamilton]

RIP

[@qviewq2071]

The only good thing about the computer was the case design.

[@laurencevanhelsuwe3052]

It's amazing, but nearly 40 years after that era, feelings of "Bah, the Spectrum was crap compared to the C64" still manage to infect a grey-haired adult.

[@malcomflibbleghast8140]

hope you find the therapy you need.

[@laurencevanhelsuwe3052]

@@malcomflibbleghast8140 I'm afraid it would have to be gene therapy ;-)

[@gnuemacs1166]

Laurence Vanhelsuwe the 64 had no soul

[@jamesthompson6557]

@@gnuemacs1166 Course not. It had better graphics, better sound, better keyboard, better expand-ability, better games, better productivity software, more commercial software releases, more homebrew software releases, more demo scene releases (and arguably STARTED the demo scene)... so I guess you are right. It MUST have had no soul. Rolls eyes. Stupid comments like these make me embarrassed to be a Speccy fan. :(

[@jamesthompson6557]

The Spectrum WAS "crap" compared to the C64.... but that's the entire point. Have you seen some of the stuff talented programmers managed to squeeze out of the humble Speccy? Games like Turrican II, Sams Journey, Mayhem In Monsterland etc are amazing on the C64, but the C64 was really BUILT to do that - the Speccy has NO scrolling hardware, NO sprites, NO collision detection, NO audio hardware (in the original 16,kb, 48kb and + versions... even in the later 128kb version the AY chip is not in the same league as the C64s SID). Fast scrolling games were a dime a dozen on the C64 and the norm, but when someone made the Speccy scroll with lots of sprites and no flicker THAT was an achievement. This is the lure of the Speccy, for me at least. Taking the most basic of hardware platforms and seeing it pushed beyond its perceived limits. That's what drew me into the Speccy scene anywayz. Don't get me wrong, I love the C64 too, but for completely different reasons.