Games behaving differently on the Next

[PeterJ]

Does anyone know the default port that the ESP8266 uses. I'm just setting this up.

If you mean TCP/IP port, it doesn’t have a Next-facing TCP-IP stack. It communicates with the next using AT modem commands. Here’s an AT manual for the Espressif firmwares: https://github.com/Threetwosevensixseve ... 2.0.0).pdf

Or do you mean Z80 I/O port?

Note that the Espressif firmware is different from what you probably used with your arduino. You can actually switch between firmwares using my .espupdate tool, so you could potentially run your arduino firmware and custom program, if you’re willing to put in a bit of work dumping it from your other ESP and packaging it up into .esp format using my tools.

I used this:

https://randomnerdtutorials.com/how-to- ... duino-ide/

[TheSMoG]

Useful! Is it described in your manual somewhere? There's no index or contents in my copy so I can't find it. Thankfully SevenFFF has explained.

[mention]R-tape[/mention]The NMI menu is described albeit not in length in Chapter 20. The reason why it isn't, is that its functionality was still being enhanced when the chapter was being written. The second edition will have more details. At some point I'll write a very detailed post/blog (something anyway) about why the manual is the way it is, why some things are missing and what were the reasons behind some non-obvious choices I had to make. I believe it will make for an interesting read

[Seven.FFF]

AT+CIFSR from .uart will make the ESP tell you it’s own IP address.

[PeterJ]

I think it’s a client/server pair, so don’t you just choose a port for the server and tell the client to connect to the chosen port?

Thanks. I will check, there are a few grammatical issues in his readme which makes it a bit of a struggle (for me at least), but will contact him to find out. Its a very exciting project and most welcome. I'm excited to try it out. I love these sorts of projects.

[PeterJ]

If you offer a printed version for sale of the second edition manual, please consider including the Index. Thank you.

[TheSMoG]

That's fine @TheSMoG. It just means downloading an additional software tool for Windows users. Thanks for the Google Drive link. That's much better.

At least it's free software and actually supports a truckload of archive formats. I could have used RAR but... well ya know

[PeterJ]

I'm not disputing that it's excellent software, just that it's an unnecessary additional step for less technical users. I use it myself when I'm on Windows. It's excellent. I use Linux most of the time and love free software. Anyway, the Google drive link solves the problem.

[TheSMoG]

If you offer a printed version for sale of the second edition manual, please consider including the Index. Thank you.

We will offer a printed second edition IN COLOUR which will include a TOC and Index because unlike the one that ships with the cased version there's no hard limit on the pages the moment the Covid-19 situation subsides and we know where we all stand. Additionally I'm right now reorganizing the text a bit and since Phil and Henrique's foreward will be removed there's a good chance that the KS2 included copy will also have them (TOC and Index or at least a TOC). It was very difficult removing the dedication text for Rick from the manual for obvious reasons (one of the obscure reasons I was talking about)

[PeterJ]

I thought the manual was a collaborative thing on a Google Docs [mention]TheSMoG[/mention] ? I remember making some minor changes. Were you the one who put all of it together.

[redballoon]

Can you remember the first one you downloaded?

Among my earliest were Buzzsaw, BaldyZX, Dingo, Phaeton, Papyrus (I was playing it a lot then), GLUF, Slubberdegullion, MazeDeathRally(TomD's), More Tea Vicar, Mr Do!.

Ant Attack! It was my first game when I got my original Spectrum way back in 83 then I downloaded and played Vallation just to feel good about myself.

[TheSMoG]

I thought the manual was a collaborative thing on a Google Docs @TheSMoG ? I remember making some minor changes. Were you the one who put all of it together.

It started life as this but very soon it was understood that the result lacked cohesion (for many many reasons, none to do with all the guys involved which helped immensely). Moreover as NextZXOS and NextBASIC were being enhanced, the core changed and things were being constantly added, a one-person "team" (especially one that never slept much) was needed to respond to such changes. Suffice it to say I redid everything from scratch 27 times before we got to what we have now.

[PeterJ]

So, are you Phoebus Dokos from.Greece? It's a very good job [mention]TheSMoG[/mention] . Can I ask if you considered adding a credit to Stephen Vickers, as the new manual has very much the same feel as the original.one? Also why is the forward from Henrique being removed out of interest.from the next release.

Thanks for answering all the questions.

[TheSMoG]

So, are you Phoebus Dokos from.Greece? It's a very good job @TheSMoG . Can I ask if you considered adding a credit to Stephen Vickers, as the new manual has very much the same feel as the original.one? Also why is the forward from Henrique being removed out of interest.from the next release.

Thanks for answering all the questions.

Aye, I am he
Originally (and if you recall the early texts) it was going to be his name up there with all of ours; then the text diverged so much from the original and it ended up being written basically from scratch (not everywhere; why change a good thing?)
Anyway the full story is that Henrique was supposed to put his name in the acknowledgements which is one of the few things I didn't touch; just dropped in its place when I typeset the thing. But it's a grand omission and one I will correct once the second edition is out (and add Cliff Lawson there as well because he too deserves one).
Regarding the forewards: Simply put I will remove both because I need the space as I need to cover even more and there's a hard limit on the pages because once you increase them, then the ring in the binding increases as well and then the manual just won't fit the box. Production choices are a b*tch let me tell you! The situation with the space was so dire that I had to make the cover thinner than I wanted. I don't regret any of the choices I had to make although they were difficult except the one where I didn't start all chapters on the right side. That drove me insane and it still does but such is the nature of the beast

[Pegaz]

I would have thought at the time, the Spectrum 48K Rubber Key was the most compatible Spectrum ever as it run everything available at the time.

It still is.
Never underestimate the power of good old rubber Spectrum, my son.
https://omega.webnode.com/news/mqm5-effect/

[djnzx48]

Originally (and if you recall the early texts) it was going to be his name up there with all of ours; then the text diverged so much from the original and it ended up being written basically from scratch (not everywhere; why change a good thing?)

That doesn't really make sense. The manual clearly copies the text of the original manual extensively. Why remove the names of the original authors just because some changes were made? It seems a bit strange to require attribution in the license if you don't credit those authors yourself.

[TheSMoG]

Originally (and if you recall the early texts) it was going to be his name up there with all of ours; then the text diverged so much from the original and it ended up being written basically from scratch (not everywhere; why change a good thing?)

That doesn't really make sense. The manual clearly copies the text of the original manual extensively. Why remove the names of the original authors just because some changes were made? It seems a bit strange to require attribution in the license if you don't credit those authors yourself.

The manual did follow our original directions by SpecNext and that's to keep the original's organization as it was and still is one of the best introductory manuals for any microcomputer. So to that extent I did copy SOME of the text. Extensively? No.
Not that it matters because I know the amount of work I did, but It just so happens that I have the numbers So out of a total of 342 pages, 75 only are based on the original 48K and/or +3 (which is what we used to base the very first text prior the rewrite) and of these only 10 have no changes whatsoever (but they will in the next edition as well as things have now changed yet again). I've also redone every single graphic from scratch (Even the music chapter which I did include in the 75 pages and it's basically an amalgam of the +3 and 48K manual is still modified for the 3AY capability of the Next and ALL THE graphics were done from scratch there too). Examples were made anew for the new PRINT capabilities etc etc etc.
Regarding the actual manual (because much more was written that had to be cut, the total size of the final manual which will find its way into a second volume) was over 500 pages.
-EDIT- I actually spent some further time on this (you never know until you double check yourself) and I went over my files. Original unmodified Vickers text is less than 7% of the total text, so if you call that "extensively" I'll have to politely disagree
That being said, not attributing Vickers is an omission which clearly fell through the cracks as I've admitted many times and it <EDIT>is ALREADY FIXED in the source text and will be released in the PDF version soon<END EDIT>

[djnzx48]

Yes, I would call 75 pages of text 'extensive'. But even if it wasn't, it only takes a few seconds to add someone's name to the credits if you use their work. That includes Penny Vickers and Robin Bradbeer, who contributed to the original manual as well.

[TheSMoG]

Yes, I would call 75 pages of text 'extensive'. But even if it wasn't, it only takes a few seconds to add someone's name to the credits if you use their work. That includes Penny Vickers and Robin Bradbeer, who contributed to the original manual as well.

Well admitting one has made a mistake which is already fixed I think solves any issue. That being said (and I'm not making any excuses); you manage a task of this size and are suddenly told that you have 3 days to wrap up ALL corrections, typeset, print AND bind a book and arrange for its transport across Europe, because out of the blue finally all pieces fell together and the machine is assembling and unless a manual is delivered by x date, people will have to wait for the next window of manufacturing which was 4 months down the road, doesn't leave one second to spare and mistakes WILL HAPPEN and they did. Post facto it's easy to say "it takes a few seconds". It also took a few seconds to fix LINE x TO y but we didn't. Corrections wise 9 people were working 4 days straight to wrap up while having to deal with their day jobs too. So this falls under that category too if you really must know what happened. I just didn't think twice about it because it was supposed to be acknowledged in the foreward anyway and I just didn't look; I had editors for that. Does that excuse it? Absolutely not; does it explain it? Yep; I think it does
EDIT: Anyway for the PUBLIC record attached below is the updated first page with FULL reference to all authors whose work I did use. The next version of the manual will be available in mid-May after I enter all corrections for errors we've found this far and it will include this.

[garryl]

I would have thought at the time, the Spectrum 48K Rubber Key was the most compatible Spectrum ever as it run everything available at the time.

Interestingly, this isn't entirely true either as there were several ULA and board revisions in the rubber-key models. In particular, the change from issue 2 to issue 3 rendered a significant number of games incompatible. This was because the unassigned bits on the keyboard i/o ports were no longer guaranteed to be 1, and some software had been written assuming they were. There was quite a hoo-hah about this in the magazines at the time, IIRC.

So, you might need to revise your claim to only include issue 1 & 2 rubber-key Spectrums

[PeterJ]

I understand your point [mention]garryl[/mention], but I still think the 48K has to be classed as the most compatible.

However, looking at your previous work Garry, I'm not going to argue the point! Nice to have you here. I assume you are the same Garry responsible for 3e?

We have one of your early Sinclair User type-ins here!

https://spectrumcomputing.co.uk/index.p ... 6&id=23307

[1024MAK]

I would have thought at the time, the Spectrum 48K Rubber Key was the most compatible Spectrum ever as it run everything available at the time.

Interestingly, this isn't entirely true either as there were several ULA and board revisions in the rubber-key models. In particular, the change from issue 2 to issue 3 rendered a significant number of games incompatible. This was because the unassigned bits on the keyboard i/o ports were no longer guaranteed to be 1, and some software had been written assuming they were. There was quite a hoo-hah about this in the magazines at the time, IIRC.

So, you might need to revise your claim to only include issue 1 & 2 rubber-key Spectrums

Err, there are hardware problems with issue 1 and some issue 2 boards, due to a problem with the design of the first ULA, machine code programs running in lower RAM that use I/O may not work correctly...

Mark

[4thRock]

I had a TC2048 and never run into any incompatibility problems.
For all practical purposes, it was fully compatible with the Spectrum 48K

[PeterJ]

Apologies if I moved this thread off-kilter, I was just querying the suggestion that the Next was the most compatible Spectrum machine ever. I have never studied in detail the differences between the board revisions.

[1024MAK]

I had a TC2048 and never run into any incompatibility problems.
For all practical purposes, it was fully compatible with the Spectrum 48K

Any software that was released after Sinclair introduced the issue 3 board, should run without problems on any issue 1 or issue 2 board (that use the first ULA version and have had the hardware deadbug fix applied or where a later ULA version is fitted) through to the final 48K board version (6A).

Mark

[Ast A. Moore]

This was because the unassigned bits on the keyboard i/o ports were no longer guaranteed to be 1, and some software had been written assuming they were.

Actually, it was never guaranteed. Any games that masked those bits off had no problem detecting keystrokes. That “incompatibility” was squarely on the early coders. Why they assumed that the three highest bits will would always be set is anyone’s guess. The Spectrum’s ROM routines certainly didn’t.