If you wanted to play around with retro hardware the KIM-1 is a fine machine. Actual KIM-1's go for $1K or so on eBay, but fortunately there are a few clone kits out there. For the most part too they use the same chip set as the original.
I have both the PAL-1 [1] and PAL-2 [2] kits and enjoy them both. (For the price difference, I would recommend the PAL-1 if you are just wanting to play around with a retro 6502 computer.)
There are even online KIM-1 emulators if you can figure them out [3][4].
The best jumping off point though is probably Hans' report computer pages [5].
On GitHub there are PCBs and BOMs to build close to identical KIM-1 boards. And there is even a WIP 6530 replacement so you don't have to substitute a 6532+random logic. That being said there are nice compact 6532 boards that slot right into the 6530 sockets.
Before anyone runs out and buys a modern-day KIM-1, be sure you know what you're getting.
I got one based on an Arduino (also hooked up to my Mac), and it's more of a simulator than a re-creation. It works fine if you want to play MicroChess and a few little loops and subroutine things in the assembler, but once you get beyond what's in the PDF you find out quickly that you're in a sandbox.
At the same time, someone getting a full-on KIM-1 clone like I listed above may find that after running MicroChess, etc. that the machine is not that interesting. And that's fair — even in its day people were clamoring for graphics, color … the things the Apple II and Commodore machines followed on with.
The KIM-1 is partly enjoyable because it is simple enough that you can wrap your head around the schematic, how the bus connects RAM, the processor, keypad, LED display. The 6502 chip is also knowable — the KIM-1 is a great machine to learn and play around with 8-bit assembly. And yet it is (or was!) a legitimate machine.
The clones I listed can all be connected via serial to your computer (Mac/PC) of choice. I have never owned the KIM Uno so cannot say if that is possible. It would definitely crimp its utility if it cannot be connected to via serial.
This wild book from 1978 had me (a young teenager) wishing I could afford the (then $400) KIM-1 as it showed how to interface it to a robot of your own creation — interfacing with motor drivers, impact sensors ("How to Build a Computer-Controlled Robot"): https://archive.org/details/howtobuildcomput0000loof
But to your point, yeah, you would need one of the clones I listed in order to interface to this degree.
The clones I listed can all be connected via serial to your computer (Mac/PC) of choice. I have never owned the KIM Uno so cannot say if that is possible.
Sorry, I see you mentioned it in your previous comment.
Short of hooking it to external hardware, there's probably only "authenticity" to be gained from a proper clone then? To be sure though, that authenticity is a big draw that an emulator/simulator can't provide.
At the same time, perhaps you just find vintage computers boring — and I get that.
My first computer was a TI-99/4a but the computer I really wanted was an Atari 800. Years later I finally got an Atari, an Atari ST, and I loved that machine.
So many times I've had eBay open with some vintage computer on the screen and my mouse hovering over buy-it-now, but I just can't do it. Most recently it was a TI-99/4a with a fully loaded peripheral expansion box that I couldn't afford in 1983.
I'm not into retro gaming (they are unforgiving and often not very fun) and I can't think of anything else to do with it. I've thought about some basic home automation tasks, but these old machines draw so much power it feels bad. So I know it would become décor (or as my grandmother would say - just another damned thing to dust. She wasn't into tchotchkes).
I sometimes think about how wonderful it would have been if Atari, and Be, and Amiga, and all the other 80s machines had survived and we had a diverse market of computing ideas. I suspect though that the end would have been the same. The Electron people would have showed up and paved over everything unique and interesting in each of these machines.
> I'm not into retro gaming (they are unforgiving and often not very fun) and I can't think of anything else to do with it. I've thought about some basic home automation tasks, but these old machines draw so much power it feels bad.
That's what dissuaded me from ever attempting to resurrect overly-old hardware, although at least a KIM-1 isn't going to be a power hog. On the other hand, something like a PDP-11/70 would suck down a ridiculous amount of juice for much less computing power than a modern microcontroller.
Then there's the whole parts problem. Tracking down boards and components that will never be made again is another nightmare. Emulators make far more sense when you don't want to be your own component-level repair tech.
Huh, that record format on the paper tape is almost identical to the Intel Hex format that still unfortunately gets used a bunch in embedded systems. All it's missing is a 1-byte "record type" field and it uses ";" instead of ":".
Also while confirming that I discovered that the Intel Hex format was standardized in 1973... so right around the same time as this KIM-1.
If you wanted to play around with retro hardware the KIM-1 is a fine machine. Actual KIM-1's go for $1K or so on eBay, but fortunately there are a few clone kits out there. For the most part too they use the same chip set as the original.
I have both the PAL-1 [1] and PAL-2 [2] kits and enjoy them both. (For the price difference, I would recommend the PAL-1 if you are just wanting to play around with a retro 6502 computer.)
There are even online KIM-1 emulators if you can figure them out [3][4].
The best jumping off point though is probably Hans' report computer pages [5].
[1] https://www.tindie.com/products/kim1/pal-1-a-mos-6502-powere...
[2] https://www.tindie.com/products/kim1/pal-2-a-mos-6502-powere...
[3] https://maksimkorzh.github.io/KIM-1/
[4] https://maksimkorzh.github.io/KIM-1/
[5] http://retro.hansotten.nl/6502-sbc/kim-1-manuals-and-softwar...
On GitHub there are PCBs and BOMs to build close to identical KIM-1 boards. And there is even a WIP 6530 replacement so you don't have to substitute a 6532+random logic. That being said there are nice compact 6532 boards that slot right into the 6530 sockets.
Before anyone runs out and buys a modern-day KIM-1, be sure you know what you're getting.
I got one based on an Arduino (also hooked up to my Mac), and it's more of a simulator than a re-creation. It works fine if you want to play MicroChess and a few little loops and subroutine things in the assembler, but once you get beyond what's in the PDF you find out quickly that you're in a sandbox.
Yeah, that's the KIM Uno.
At the same time, someone getting a full-on KIM-1 clone like I listed above may find that after running MicroChess, etc. that the machine is not that interesting. And that's fair — even in its day people were clamoring for graphics, color … the things the Apple II and Commodore machines followed on with.
The KIM-1 is partly enjoyable because it is simple enough that you can wrap your head around the schematic, how the bus connects RAM, the processor, keypad, LED display. The 6502 chip is also knowable — the KIM-1 is a great machine to learn and play around with 8-bit assembly. And yet it is (or was!) a legitimate machine.
The clones I listed can all be connected via serial to your computer (Mac/PC) of choice. I have never owned the KIM Uno so cannot say if that is possible. It would definitely crimp its utility if it cannot be connected to via serial.
This wild book from 1978 had me (a young teenager) wishing I could afford the (then $400) KIM-1 as it showed how to interface it to a robot of your own creation — interfacing with motor drivers, impact sensors ("How to Build a Computer-Controlled Robot"): https://archive.org/details/howtobuildcomput0000loof
But to your point, yeah, you would need one of the clones I listed in order to interface to this degree.
The clones I listed can all be connected via serial to your computer (Mac/PC) of choice. I have never owned the KIM Uno so cannot say if that is possible.
It is. That's how I use it.
Sorry, I see you mentioned it in your previous comment.
Short of hooking it to external hardware, there's probably only "authenticity" to be gained from a proper clone then? To be sure though, that authenticity is a big draw that an emulator/simulator can't provide.
At the same time, perhaps you just find vintage computers boring — and I get that.
This is really cool.
My first computer was a TI-99/4a but the computer I really wanted was an Atari 800. Years later I finally got an Atari, an Atari ST, and I loved that machine.
So many times I've had eBay open with some vintage computer on the screen and my mouse hovering over buy-it-now, but I just can't do it. Most recently it was a TI-99/4a with a fully loaded peripheral expansion box that I couldn't afford in 1983.
I'm not into retro gaming (they are unforgiving and often not very fun) and I can't think of anything else to do with it. I've thought about some basic home automation tasks, but these old machines draw so much power it feels bad. So I know it would become décor (or as my grandmother would say - just another damned thing to dust. She wasn't into tchotchkes).
I sometimes think about how wonderful it would have been if Atari, and Be, and Amiga, and all the other 80s machines had survived and we had a diverse market of computing ideas. I suspect though that the end would have been the same. The Electron people would have showed up and paved over everything unique and interesting in each of these machines.
> I'm not into retro gaming (they are unforgiving and often not very fun) and I can't think of anything else to do with it. I've thought about some basic home automation tasks, but these old machines draw so much power it feels bad.
That's what dissuaded me from ever attempting to resurrect overly-old hardware, although at least a KIM-1 isn't going to be a power hog. On the other hand, something like a PDP-11/70 would suck down a ridiculous amount of juice for much less computing power than a modern microcontroller.
Then there's the whole parts problem. Tracking down boards and components that will never be made again is another nightmare. Emulators make far more sense when you don't want to be your own component-level repair tech.
Then there are the lonely few of us who get the most enjoyment from being your own component-level repair tech.
Yeah, I don't know why either.
Huh, that record format on the paper tape is almost identical to the Intel Hex format that still unfortunately gets used a bunch in embedded systems. All it's missing is a 1-byte "record type" field and it uses ";" instead of ":".
Also while confirming that I discovered that the Intel Hex format was standardized in 1973... so right around the same time as this KIM-1.