Hacker News Reader

Comment by MenhirMike | Hacker News Reader

I was considering doing something like that for an Amiga, running AmigaOS 3.2. It's a cute idea, especially once you 3D print a shell that looks like the original (shrunken down).

I do think that the lack of an old school floppy drive means that something is kinda missing from the experience, but I do like the idea of having a machine dedicated to running this instead of just firing up an emulator on my existing desktop PC. (Edit: And I love how this MicroMac project isn't just "running Linux and an existing emulator" but actually trying to go lower level, essentially the RP2040 acting as a 68k)

View on HN

Amiga emulator on teensy 4.1: https://www.pjrc.com/amiga-emulator-on-teensy-4-1/

I would buy this! Especially if you got the sizing right so that an SD card could be inserted like a floppy, that would rock!

Someone will eventually make a Mac LC Mini ;-)

Just kidding. Apple would NEVER allow that.

Right on the money: "SD card could be inserted like a floppy"

You could check out the A500 mini, more of an emulator though - https://retrogames.biz/products/thea500-mini/

A500 Mini isn't as cool IMO. It's just a generic arm board running linux with an Amiga emulator. The keys don't even work. May as well just use a Pi or a PC.

Indeed. It's just a cash-grab device exploiting nostalgia.

The software it uses, amiberry, is open source and was made for the more powerful, useful and common Raspberry Pi boards. Getting one of these is a much better idea.

I wouldn't go _that_ far because the case, mouse, and controller are actually really good quality. But yeah, the bundled games are a bit underwhelming and ultimately it's just a Linux/Emulator box.

I wish someone would make an Amiga shell for a Raspberry Pi that's quality like that. I can 3D print my own, but injection molded plastic is still a quality level above.

Yeah, I have one, and the keyboard being non-functional is a real bummer. It's a neat mini console (especially once you add some additional games), but I wish they would make a version with a working keyboard, like they made TheC64. But the quality of the case is great, and the tank mouse definitely is the way to use workbench)

Need CRT too for the authentic experience.

We need doubly-curved OLED screens. We can already do Trinitron (cylindrical) ones with the flexible displays we have.

It is an interesting problem, though. I noticed in Disney's Loki, they used a combination of VFX and lenses on top of flat panels to give the impression they were using CRTs (notably in their ADM-3 lookalikes). For a 9~14" CRT it'd be a fairly large lens that would need to be optically connected to the panel below (so not to have internal reflections).

Can't it be done with a DLP device? CRT was X-ray projection device with phosphor paint applied inside to convert the rays to visible light.

CRTs were emitting an electron beam to draw images on a phosphorescent screen, not emitting X-rays: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode-ray_tube Blasting X-rays through a screen to the face of an observer would not have been a good idea…

X-rays are mentioned 28 times in the Wikipedia link about CRTs, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode-ray_tube

Although X-rays are not used to draw the image, they are generated as an unwanted side effect. The phosphorescent screen emits X-rays when struck by the electron beam. To protect the user, the glass must be a special kind of glass to absorb those X-rays, and the accelerator voltage has to be set not too high.

> X-rays are mentioned 28 times in the Wikipedia link about CRTs, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode-ray_tube

CTRL-F for "X-ray" gives me 1 result, "-ray" gives me 13 results ;)

Absolutely agree that X-Rays are generated in the phosphorent screen, but they are not emitted by the CRT.

> […] and the accelerator voltage has to be set not too high.

Yes, with electrons only so high that they reach the screen, which is low enough to only generate very minor secondary X-rays in the screen, which is then nicely shielded. If the phosphorous screen would be blasted with X-rays, the shielding of the screen would need to be much thicker and expensive.

(I’m working with shielded microCT machines, so speaking with a bit of experience)

Interestingly, a lot of folks used to repeat the x-ray thing, that's where the term "eyeball cancer machine" came from.

Well... Technically we spent a lot of time looking down the barrel of a particle accelerator...

I still do! Love my Sony CRT PVM. I bask in its glorious glow like a serpent in the sun.

Adding to my own shame, TIL not all free-flying electrons are X-ray

Ask the Therac-25 patients if the difference between electron beans and X-rays is important

The difference is important in the case of a CRT screen, and less important in the case of cancer treatment with Therac-25.

CRTs produce a (low-intensity) electron beam that has just high enough energy for exciting the phosphorous screen.

Therac-25 was able to produce both a high-intensity electron beam or an X-ray beam, depending on the therapy need.

With a 4K display and HDR, we can actually do really decent CRT emulation. It seems a bit ridiculous to need 4K/HDR to emulate 40 year old display tech, but you need the resolution to do the aperture grille in a way that's small enough to work, and you need HDR for that phosphor glow.

The Retrotink 4K has been pretty eye opening (and eye-watering, given the $750 price tag) in terms of where we are with CRT emulation these days.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com