Same, though I bought one off Facebook marketplace recently- minus the expansion box. Lots of memories learning programming and the explosively better 'Extended Basic' vs the built in version.

Same here - parents bought one for me in 1982, IIRC. By 1984 I had moved to Atari XL, but I'll always have a soft spot for the TI-99/4A, Extended Basic cartridge, speech synthesizer, cassette drive, etc.

My sister and I used to co-type programs from "Compute!". The times were so much simpler then..

Can you drop this yt channel name?

Thanks. I wasn't looking forward to browsing all those pages in the hopes of finding the source. Did they never put it up on GitHub?

It's the first computer I ever programmed, I was twelve years old then. <3

I'm using a Pelco 9" PVM that had a former life as a security camera monitor. Suprisingly good video for composite, but alas its not very large.

Btw, there is a lovely third party replacement for the TI99/4a video chip that lets you output VGA. It’s a major life improvement if you are seriously using it. I Dremeled my case but you can route the ribbon cable to avoid it if you’d prefer not to modify anything. Happy to send you a link if you don’t already know about it.

While the CPU is a better fit than the 8 bit contemporaries, the 16kb of working memory is going to be a struggle.

A USB video capture device or a converter box. There are devices sold specifically to interface these old machines with modern displays. One of the more famous ones is the RetroTINK.

you only get 3 guesses

The TI99/4A was my first computer when I was 7 or 8. Unfortunately, no cassette drive. As soon as I shut it off, my basic program was gone!

My parents bought one for the house when I was in elementary school. I still remember the sound of the Speech Synthesizer, discovering 20 GOTO 10, and playing Hunt the Wumpus.

TI-99/4A was my first computer as well. I still have two of them, and they still work as well as they did in the '80s. I graduated to an Apple ][GS which I still have as well, although it needs some TLC before attempting to boot it so as not to let out the magic smoke.

I had one in grade school. Taught me the value of backups early in life. Spent all night typing in a game from a magazine. Started it without saving to tape first. It was so loud! Panicked and restarted the machine. Sadness ensued.

Replaced it with a C128-D. Didn’t get my first intel until I bought a 386 after graduating high school. Good times.

Thanks! I've got mine running in to a 9" Pelco PVM and it works well but yea, its tiny. I'd love to plumb in VGA and use a 15" flat panel. Would love a link.

Yeah it really was an interesting choice on their part. Makes sense as a move for TI. Not the target market.

It's cool because the registers are all in RAM, with a "workspace pointer" on the CPU pointing at where they are. This is slow, but a context switch is just changing that pointer.

The TI99/4A was also my first computer. I was about 5, and I didn’t really seriously try writing programs until I was about 8. Fortunately, since my father bought this for work, we had a large collection of peripherals, including the floppy disk drive. Unfortunately I learned the hard way why my father stopped using it: peripheral expansion bus devices were exquisitely sensitive to static shocks. I remember reeling in horror after watching hours of work just disappear from the disk drive. I suppose this was probably a good lesson to learn at an early age!

It's not all that slow as a concept at that time when RAM speeds were as fast as CPU speeds. I think it's just that TI's implementation of the concept in that particular cost-optimised home computer was pretty bad -- the actual registers were in 256 bytes of fast static RAM, but the rest of the system memory (both ROM and RAM) was accessed very inefficiently, not only 1 bytes at a time on a 16 bit machine, but also with something like 4 wait states for every byte.

The 6502 is not very different with a very small number of registers and Zero Page being used for most of what a modern machine would use registers for. For example (unlike the Z80) there is no register-to-register add or subtract or compare -- you can only add/sub/cmp/and/or/xor a memory location to the accumulator. Also, pointers can only be done using a pair of adjacent Zero Page locations.

As long as you were using data in those in-RAM registers the TI-99/4 was around four times faster than a 1 MHz 6502 for 16 bit arithmetic -- and with a single 2-byte instruction doing what needed 7 instructions and 13 bytes of code on 6502 -- and it was also twice as fast on 8 bit arithmetic.

It was just the cheap-ass main memory (and I/O) implementation that crippled it.

Well, it has 256 bytes of RAM which is basically a really big register file, and everything else goes in the 16kb of "video RAM" which you can read and write by poking at I/O registers. So it is not easy to program.

It's arguably the only 8-bit computer which has a really different architecture from the others. You could otherwise imagine pulling the SID chip off a C-64 and putting it on a TRS-80 Color Computer etc.

Sharing the main RAM with video was a weak point in computers of that time period because the video system stole many of the memory access cycles. Some recent retrocomputers that revisit that period like

https://www.c64-wiki.com/wiki/Commander_X16

have a full-size memory bank and a video RAM memory bank which is accessed through a port which can be pretty efficient because you can auto-incremement the address register and just write 1 byte to the port to write 1 byte to video RAM and repeat.

Yep, but it lacks a MMU so memory protection and paging are going to require a lot of work. I think the only reason this is feasible at all is they're running the OS out of a ROM cartridge.

The PDP machines that Unix was developed on had MMUs, which they needed because the 16 bit processors couldn't address the multi-megabyte address space the hardware supported.

I'm pretty sure the Centurion doesn't run Unix.

Did the minicomputers of the time have MMUs?

I thought UsagiElectric showed a case where his Centurion didn’t, but I may be misremembering.

The PDP-10 had an MMU similar to a modern MMU with page tables and such, the PDP-11 had an 8-segment-of-8kb MMU like what the TRS-80 Color Computer 3 had except the PDP-11 had a real supervisor mode and if a user mode program tried to change the MMU configuration it would fault.

In fact the 9900 itself was used in an entire line of minicomputers that included a hardware memory map.

The 9900 is a single chip implementation of the CPU board in the TI 990. They even created a dedicated memory mapper chip to go along with the product line, though it is significantly different than the one in the minicomputer line.

(edit: the 990 was first built in the early 70s, memory mappers are quite old conceptually)

(edit 2: in fact the necessity of using a memory mapper is what killed the platform, and was one of the things that made the IBM PC team decline the 9900.)

Unfortunately I don't think that there is a reasonable way to perform real hardware-level memory protection with that chip alone. I'm working on a project documenting the genesis of the 99000 chips, which include a privilege bit in the status register, from the minicomputer line.

Essay forthcoming, and probably an OS. Maybe a year...

One chip that could be used as a memory mapper for the 9900 (but wasn't in the TI99/4A) was the 74LS670, which was used in the IBM 5150 PC to allow the 8237 DMA chip to access more than 64KB (a limit that wasn't a problem when used in a 8080 system).