Amiga and MIDI
David Paulsen
I know for a fact that MIDI interfaces do exist for the Amiga, and for around
$50 (fifty) dollars. Granted, the cheaper ones don't have a pass-thru, and
might even hog your printer port, but you CAN allow an Amiga to drive MIDI
stuff without a wallet transplant.
David Paulsen
...uunet.UU.NET!nuchat!seven
(713) 480-0114
"Take a deep breath upon impact. This way, you have enough
air to yell for help."
Rodney Ricks
>I know for a fact that MIDI interfaces do exist for the Amiga, and for around
>$50 (fifty) dollars. Granted, the cheaper ones don't have a pass-thru, and
>might even hog your printer port, but you CAN allow an Amiga to drive MIDI
>stuff without a wallet transplant.
Just as an example, not an endorsement:
From Skyles Electric Works: MIDI IN, 2 MIDI OUT, and MIDI THRU
for the Amiga.
$49.95 (Amiga 500 and 1000)
$59.95 (Amiga 2000)
It plugs into the RS-232 port.
I think Mimetics also has a MIDI Interface with similar features and price.
Overall, I feel that the Amiga is by far a better computer, and that the 500
should settle and objections as to the price.
Of course, that's only my opinion, unlike the "fact" that the ST has more
support. :-)
>David Paulsen
>...uunet.UU.NET!nuchat!seven
>(713) 480-0114
>
>"Take a deep breath upon impact. This way, you have enough
> air to yell for help."
NO WARRANTY EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED
Rodney Ricks,
Systems Programmer,
Atlanta University Center Computation Center
Rex Jolliff
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
In article <32...@auc.UUCP> rod...@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) writes:
>Just as an example, not an endorsement:
>
> From Skyles Electric Works: MIDI IN, 2 MIDI OUT, and MIDI THRU
> It plugs into the RS-232 port.
>
>I think Mimetics also has a MIDI Interface with similar features and price.
hmmm... This sounds pretty scary to me. If the interface is built into the
computer, then the software developers don't have to worry about writing
'drivers' to support all the different interfaces with 'similar features'.
However, if you have to hook the interface up as an afterthought, only the
software supplied by the interface manufacturer may be compatable.
The MIDI port is already there on the ST, so the musician who wants to become
'computerized' can just go buy an ST, and just any piece of music software, and
he's ready to go. This guy's gonna have enough problems trying to figure out
why the program won't do the same things to his Juno-106, that it does to his
Yamaha DX-7 (?). He really shouldn't have to worry about why the progam won't
talk to either of them (read: why the program wont talk to the interface.).
>..., I feel that the Amiga is by far a better computer, ...
Lets not start another war, okay guys?
>Rodney Ricks,
> Systems Programmer,
> Atlanta University Center Computation Center
(Both of them are far better computers... 8-))
--
Rex Jolliff (r...@otto.UUCP, {akgua,ihnp4,mirror,sdcrdcf}!otto!rex)
The Sun Newspaper - |Disclaimer: The opinions and comments in
Nevada's Largest Daily Morning | this article are my own and in no way
Newspaper | reflect the opinions of my employers.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What happened to our superior space program?
Bryce Nesbitt
In article <5...@otto.COM> r...@otto.UUCP (Rex Jolliff) writes:
>In article <32...@auc.UUCP> rod...@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) writes:
<>
<>I think Mimetics also has a MIDI Interface with similar features and price.
<
<hmmm... This sounds pretty scary to me. If the interface is built into the
>computer, then the software developers don't have to worry about writing
<'drivers' to support all the different interfaces with 'similar features'.
<However, if you have to hook the interface up as an afterthought, only the
<software supplied by the interface manufacturer may be compatable.
Sorry, not this time. The Amiga hardware supports MIDI, *all* these
manufacturers are supplying is the *connector*. The software interface
is identical. The only difference in some of the units as opposed to
others is the addition of MIDI THRU.
The midi.device work should ensure that in the future if non-compatible
interfaces *are* marketed, they will all talk with a clean, standard
multitasking interface.
|\ /| . Ack! (NAK, SOH, EOT)
{o O} . br...@hoser.berkeley.EDU -or- ucbvax!hoser!bryce
(")
U WARNING: hoser's spool directory eats a *lot* of mail. :-(
CARTER
>hmmm... This sounds pretty scary to me. If the interface is built into the
>computer, then the software developers don't have to worry about writing
>'drivers' to support all the different interfaces with 'similar features'.
>However, if you have to hook the interface up as an afterthought, only the
>software supplied by the interface manufacturer may be compatable.
The midi "interface adaptor" for the amiga consists of:
a DB-25 plug, a DB-25 socket, 4 DIN sockets, 2 toggle switches,
an optiosolator, and an op-amp.
In other words, the only thing not already MIDI about the port on the back of
the Amiga is that it's a DB-25 instead of a DIN. The op-amp and optoisolator
just make it safe (i.e. buffering). But as far as software is concerned, ANY
midi "adaptor" for the amiga will look the same.
The DB-25 socket and one of the switches are so the person can use his printer
too. Yeah, it would be nice to have a seperate, dedicated MIDI jack, but
a) you usually never print while MIDI-ing, and b) many people will never use
their Amigas for MIDI, so it would have been wasted money.
A friend had shown me a copy of a magazine article on "how to build a MIDI
adaptor for the Amiga." Does anyone remember what magazine/issue that was?
David Carter
Pete Yadlowsky
] In article <32...@auc.UUCP> rod...@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) writes:
] >Just as an example, not an endorsement:
] >
] > From Skyles Electric Works: MIDI IN, 2 MIDI OUT, and MIDI THRU
] > It plugs into the RS-232 port.
] >
] >I think Mimetics also has a MIDI Interface with similar features and price.
]
] hmmm... This sounds pretty scary to me. If the interface is built into the
] computer, then the software developers don't have to worry about writing
] 'drivers' to support all the different interfaces with 'similar features'.
] However, if you have to hook the interface up as an afterthought, only the
] software supplied by the interface manufacturer may be compatable.
Huh? Wait a minute. The interface is just a hunk of hardware that converts
RS-232 to MIDI current loop. There's no software compatibility problem...
it's just a connector, no intelligence whatsoever. Any program can drive it.
--
Pete Yadlowsky
Academic Computing Center
University of Virginia
e-mail: p...@vivaldi.acc.virginia.EDU
Pete Yadlowsky
> The midi.device work should ensure that in the future if non-compatible
> interfaces *are* marketed, they will all talk with a clean, standard
> multitasking interface.
What midi.device work? I'd kill for a midi.device (as would many others).
Who's doing this?
Richard Sansom
>... Yeah, it would be nice to have a seperate, dedicated MIDI jack, but
>a) you usually never print while MIDI-ing, and b) many people will never use
>their Amigas for MIDI, so it would have been wasted money.
>
I use my printer all the time with my current MIDI setup (1040 ST, various
software packages, DX27, TX81Z, TR505). If I had to disconnect my MIDI port
each time I wanted to print something, I'd go nuts. Also, what makes you so
sure "many people will never use their Amigas for MIDI"?
-Rich
--
Richard E. Sansom
TRW Space & Defense, Redondo Beach, CA
{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!trwrb!sansom
Brian Bishop
>
>computer, then the software developers don't have to worry about writing
>'drivers' to support all the different interfaces with 'similar features'.
>However, if you have to hook the interface up as an afterthought, only the
>software supplied by the interface manufacturer may be compatable.
This is hypothetically true, but I don't think there is a big difference
between the midi interfaces for thee Amiga, as I have seen several that
promise compatibility with all interfaces. So either they all use the
same setup, or they know about (and more importantly support) the others.
Note that this is merely an observation; I use Mimetics' interface, sampler
& midi software with my roommate's brand-spanking-new Casio 1000 :-) :-) :-)
I can cough in three octaves!!
>
>Rex Jolliff (r...@otto.UUCP, {akgua,ihnp4,mirror,sdcrdcf}!otto!rex)
>What happened to our superior space program?
brian bishop ---> bis...@usc-ecl.ARPA
---> bis...@usc-oberon.ARPA
(uscvax,sdcvdef,engvax,scgvaxd,smeagol) ---> !usc-oberon!bishop.UUCP
"You will be required to do wrong no matter where you go. It is the basic
condition of life, to be required to violate your own identity. At some time,
every creature that lives must do so. It is the ultimate shadow, the defeat
of creation; this is the curse at work, the curse that feeds on all life.
Everywhere in the universe."
- Wilbur Mercer, founder of Mercerism
have a nice day fnord.
d...@chinet.uucp
+The midi "interface adaptor" for the amiga consists of:
+ a DB-25 plug, a DB-25 socket, 4 DIN sockets, 2 toggle switches,
+ an optiosolator, and an op-amp.
+
+In other words, the only thing not already MIDI about the port on the back of
+the Amiga is that it's a DB-25 instead of a DIN. The op-amp and optoisolator
+just make it safe (i.e. buffering). But as far as software is concerned, ANY
+midi "adaptor" for the amiga will look the same.
+ ...
+David Carter
Actually, I suspect that the op-amp is to make a current loop out of an
EIA (RS-232 style) connection, the opto-isolator is for protection.
MIDI is a serial 5ma current loop with passive receivers, active
transmitters. The op-amp can be used to convert EIA to current loop for
the transmitter, the opto-isolator can be used to read the received data.
I'm not sure how the Amiga printer port is configured, and how the MIDI
devices are accessed from the program, but there are MIDI interfaces on
the market with different features, and this would seem to indicate that
not all Amiga MIDI adaptors are created equal from a programming standpoint.
Does the Amiga OS support MIDI devices? The ST OS does.
A question that must be asked before buying either machine to be part of
a MIDI set-up: Does the software that I want exist for this machine?
If the answer is no, you need to look into whys and whens. Don't let
a bunch of people from either fan club badmouthing the other machine
influence you too much. In most cases, neither party knows of what they
speak.
--
Daniel A. Glasser
...!ihnp4!chinet!dag
...!ihnp4!mwc!dag
...!ihnp4!mwc!gorgon!dag
One of those things that goes "BUMP!!! (ouch!)" in the night.
David C. Albrecht
> >
>
> hmmm... This sounds pretty scary to me. If the interface is built into the
> computer, then the software developers don't have to worry about writing
> 'drivers' to support all the different interfaces with 'similar features'.
> However, if you have to hook the interface up as an afterthought, only the
> software supplied by the interface manufacturer may be compatable.
>
> The MIDI port is already there on the ST, so the musician who wants to become
> 'computerized' can just go buy an ST, and just any piece of music software, and
> he's ready to go. This guy's gonna have enough problems trying to figure out
> why the program won't do the same things to his Juno-106, that it does to his
> Yamaha DX-7 (?). He really shouldn't have to worry about why the progam won't
> talk to either of them (read: why the program wont talk to the interface.).
>
Let me put Mr. Jolliff's fears to rest. The RS232 connection on the
back of the Amiga (500, 1000, 2000) is connected to a programmable UART
which accommodates a wide range of baud rates including that which MIDI
uses. The Midi interfaces are really just a RS232 to MIDI adapter which
given that there are standards at both ends should no more a problem than
a cable which goes between your printer and your computer. The interfaces
are just a matter of some hex buffers and optoisolators and 'features' like
pass-through or multiple outputs certainly have no affect on what
the program driving the interface sees. A typical interface is very simple
consisting of less than $5 of parts. He certainly could go buy an ST
but if the sole reason is fears of incompatibility from the MIDI interfaces
then he is being misguided by your information and you are certainly doing
him no favors in the department of making intelligent choices.
I will grant that there is more MIDI software available for the ST.
Now that a low cost Amiga has hit the streets I expect the Amiga MIDI
market will probably expand. Rather than start the wars going I will keep
any comparisons of the machines to myself. In the future you might consider,
however, that inaccurate speculation is one of the surest ways to cause
a furor.
David Albrecht
Lang Zerner
>I use my printer all the time with my current MIDI setup (1040 ST, various
>software packages, DX27, TX81Z, TR505). If I had to disconnect my MIDI port
>each time I wanted to print something, I'd go nuts.
>
Rich--
What Dave Carter was saying when he explained the dual use of the serial port
for MIDI and lower baud rate I/O was that you can use your serial port for
both, just not at the same time. The Amiga serial port already supports MIDI
rates, and there is a standard software interface to the serial port. When you
buy a MIDI connector you get a MIDI IN, a MIDI OUT, some models provide a MIDI
THRU, and a serial port pass-through. These are just connectors and a few
inexpensive parts to protect against line surges, etc. You plug the MIDI
connectors into the serial port, then your printer into the serial pass-through
on the MIDI adapter. The only time you can't use your serial port for printing
is while you are using it to send or receive MIDI data, as the serial data
destined for your printer would corrupt the MIDI data. There is no need to
plug and unplug your printer however; you simply wait until your MIDI I/O is
done, then print over the same port. Clear?
--Lang
Be seing you...
--Lang Zerner la...@athena.mit.edu ...ihnp4!mit-eddie!mit-athena!langz
"No one is exempt from talking nonsense; the only misfortune is to do it
solemnly" --Michel de Montaigne
Bryce Nesbitt
>In article <45...@pyr.gatech.EDU> gt4...@pyr.UUCP (David Carter) writes:
>+...
>
>...I'm not sure how the Amiga printer port is configured, and how the MIDI
>devices are accessed from the program, but there are MIDI interfaces on
>the market with different features, and this would seem to indicate that
>not all Amiga MIDI adaptors are created equal from a programming
You did not read what he said very well. To summarize:
>> ALL THE MIDI ADAPTORS PRESENT THE SAME PROGRAMMING INTERFACE <<
>> PERIOD <<
The only difference in the units seems to be MIDI THRU, this does not
change the above statement.
With a standard exec device interface (midi.device) it would not even
matter if the hardware *was* incompatible between manufacturer's
devices.
>Does the Amiga OS support MIDI devices? The ST OS does.
Yes, and no. The Amiga OS support works, but provides poor timestamping.
To do it "right" a dedicated MIDI driver must be written. Some
developers have chosen to pick up a solution from the Public Domain,
others have re-invented the wheel. It is not a problem any more
(a long time ago it was).
Scott Evernden
>
>I use my printer all the time with my current MIDI setup (1040 ST, various
>software packages, DX27, TX81Z, TR505). If I had to disconnect my MIDI port
I have an ECE Midi Interface (bought from Abel for $44.86, arriving in 3
days). It passes the serial port and has a nice fat push-button on the front
which allows you to switch from MIDI to serial. I don't have to disconnect
my MIDI stuff to print/modem either...
-scott
Chuck McManis
In article <19...@chinet.UUCP> d...@chinet.UUCP (Daniel A. Glasser) writes:
>I'm not sure how the Amiga printer port is configured, and how the MIDI
>devices are accessed from the program, but there are MIDI interfaces on
>the market with different features, and this would seem to indicate that
>not all Amiga MIDI adaptors are created equal from a programming standpoint.
Every MIDI interface that I know of on the market for the Amiga uses
the serial port. Some programs like SoundScape, provide their own device
drivers to get the speed up, but the MIDI 'Interface' is nothing more than a
EIA <-> CurrentLoop converter circuit. All of the programs and their
drivers talk to the serial port hardware which is in the same place, and
has the same flag bits as every other Amiga. Thus every MIDI 'Interface'
works with *every* MIDI capable program. There are conflicts when you
multitask two MIDI programs but that is to be expected, one of them can't
get the serial port because the other one has it. This won't be a problem
for a while on the Mac or the ST (or even the IBM-PC for that matter.)
>Does the Amiga OS support MIDI devices? The ST OS does.
The Amiga OS supports any device that has a device driver in
the DEVS: directory. Is there a standardized software layer interface
to a generic midi device (something the Amiga calls a handler), No.
>A question that must be asked before buying either machine to be part of
>a MIDI set-up: Does the software that I want exist for this machine?
>If the answer is no, you need to look into whys and whens. Don't let
>a bunch of people from either fan club badmouthing the other machine
>influence you too much. In most cases, neither party knows of what they
>speak.
This is certainly a true statement, with an example no less!
--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcm...@sun.com
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
Stephen King
>computer, then the software developers don't have to worry about writing
>'drivers' to support all the different interfaces with 'similar features'.
>However, if you have to hook the interface up as an afterthought, only the
>software supplied by the interface manufacturer may be compatable.
A MIDI interface is no more than an opto-isolator and a buffer. All
MIDI interfaces for the Amiga will be the same from a software point of view.
IT IS NOT AN AFTERTHOUGHT !!! The Amiga ROM kernel has ALWAYS supported the
MIDI data rate (somewhere between 31k & 32k baud). The flag for the serial
device is called SERB_RAD_BOOGIE and is documented in the Amiga ROM kernel
manual for vers 1.0!
Incidentally, the Amiga hardware supports serial data rates up to
292000 baud, although it is pointed out that the software may not be able
to keep up with data at this speed. (RKM 1.0 p3-168)
Finally, MIDI interfaces are dead easy to build and only cost about
$12 if you know where to pick up cheap parts (Active Surplus, Toronto;
Halted Specialties, Sunnyvale (I think)) The was an Amazing Computing article
about this just a short while ago. ...sjk
--
* Defence & Civil Institute * ...!utzoo!dciem!king
* of Environmental Medicine * Stephen J King
- Simulation & Training Group - (416) 635-2149
Scott Denham
> In article <5...@otto.COM> r...@otto.UUCP (Rex Jolliff) writes:
> >> [deleted text about MIDI 'interfaces' for the Amigas]
> A friend had shown me a copy of a magazine article on "how to build a MIDI
> adaptor for the Amiga." Does anyone remember what magazine/issue that was?
>
> David Carter
I believe the article you are looking for was in Amazing Computing,
Vol 2, No. 2.
Scott Denham
p...@boole.uucp
> There are conflicts when you
> multitask two MIDI programs but that is to be expected, one of them can't
> get the serial port because the other one has it. This won't be a problem
> for a while on the Mac or the ST (or even the IBM-PC for that matter.)
There is a PD amiga .library which addresses this very problem. This
library provides for the creation, deletion and management of MIDI
"nodes" and the "routes" that connect them. There are two types of
nodes: destination (receiving) and source (sending). Any number of
sources may write to a destination, with automatic message merging.
A source may write to any number of destinations, with automatic
message copying (fan-out). Furthermore, the routes drawn between
sources and destinations can be programmed to filter by message and/or
channel, to transpose notes, and a few other things.
Anyway, as to the multi-tasking problem, the library starts up by
creating two resident task-nodes, MidiIn and MidiOut, which do the
actual talking to serial.device. Any process which wants to speak/hear
MIDI goes through these nodes (which, as mentioned above, handle all
fan-in/fan-out), thus eliminating resource conflicts. All message
handling is done in the traditional Amiga manner, with routines
such as GetMidiMsg() and PutMidiMsg().
As a diagnosed MIDIot, I'm pretty excited about the possibilities this
library offers. I'm in the process of writing MIDI filter and soft device
modules which, through a graphic patch bay, can be interconnected in any
conceivable manner. I've already written a polyrhythm generator which
can tickle my synths directly, or be used to sync other MIDI tasks.
I'd really like to see this library become a popular standard and trigger
an explosion of modular PD MIDI stuff.
If anyone's interested, I can send more info.
d...@chinet.uucp
+[I wish people wouldn't comment when they don't have the facts.]
I stated quite clearly that my Amiga knowlege is not extensive.
I have plenty of facts, and don't claim to know anything that I don't know.
+In article <19...@chinet.UUCP> d...@chinet.UUCP (Daniel A. Glasser) writes:
+>I'm not sure how the Amiga printer port is configured, and how the MIDI
+>devices are accessed from the program, but there are MIDI interfaces on
+>the market with different features, and this would seem to indicate that
+>not all Amiga MIDI adaptors are created equal from a programming standpoint.
+
+Every MIDI interface that I know of on the market for the Amiga uses
+the serial port. Some programs like SoundScape, provide their own device
+drivers to get the speed up, but the MIDI 'Interface' is nothing more than a
+EIA <-> CurrentLoop converter circuit. All of the programs and their
+drivers talk to the serial port hardware which is in the same place, and
+has the same flag bits as every other Amiga. Thus every MIDI 'Interface'
+works with *every* MIDI capable program. There are conflicts when you
+multitask two MIDI programs but that is to be expected, one of them can't
+get the serial port because the other one has it. This won't be a problem
+for a while on the Mac or the ST (or even the IBM-PC for that matter.)
The main point of my article, on the technical side, was pointing out
that the op-amp was not being used for protection, but as an EIA to
current loop converter. I have sitting in front of me right now ads
for two different MIDI adaptors for the Amiga, one has four separate
MIDI out's, one has one. For my money, these are different!
Mind you, the same can be said for the ST -- there is only one built-in
MIDI out, and it is harder to add OS support for another serial device.
Multi-tasking? The ST hardware can support some, just not the ST ROM
operating system. I've seen a UNIX V7-like system working just fine.
+>Does the Amiga OS support MIDI devices? The ST OS does.
+
+The Amiga OS supports any device that has a device driver in
+the DEVS: directory. Is there a standardized software layer interface
+to a generic midi device (something the Amiga calls a handler), No.
I was, and am, not attacking the Amiga OS. I was asking a question.
+>A question that must be asked before buying either machine to be part of
+>a MIDI set-up: Does the software that I want exist for this machine?
+>If the answer is no, you need to look into whys and whens. Don't let
+>a bunch of people from either fan club badmouthing the other machine
+>influence you too much. In most cases, neither party knows of what they
+>speak.
+
+This is certainly a true statement, with an example no less!
I WAS NOT BADMOUTING ANYBODY OR ANYTHING!!!! Fully two thirds of the
articles on this topic have been from Amiga fans badmouthing the ST.
I have a full MIDI set up, including an Atari, DX-100, TX81Z,
Midi guitar and some other stuff, and I am under contract to produce
MIDI software for a major music software company. I know about the
Atari. I've read the Amiga manuals and some of the OS source code.
I have not the time or forum to flame the OS on either the Atari
or the Amiga, but suffice it to say that I've used and written
multi-tasking systems with better performance and real-time interprocess
communication and resource management than the Amiga OS in less than
half the space that either machine's OS takes up.
I was giving general advice. If a musician buys a computer for
MIDI and the software is unavailable at the time, he or she must
either wait or write. There are fine packages available on the
ST and PC and Amiga and Mac. Each has its plusses and minuses.
I was advising that what software is available should enter into
the decision, not attacking your precious Amiga!!!!!!!!!!!
If you want to attack my qualifications or motivations, post to alt.flame
or send me mail -- I do not like being attacked in any other newsgroup.
I've not attacked you or your machine. I like the Amiga. I don't
like it enough to buy one, but I like it.
+--Chuck McManis
+uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcm...@sun.com
+These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
SKI...@cup.portal.com.uucp
do when you want to use your modem? Disconnect the printer? Spend
a hundred bucks for a switch? Many of the available midi interfaces
for the Amiga have pass thru for the serial port so it can be used
with a modem (obviously not at the same time). Seems to me the question
isnt whether one system has built in midi interface or not (fifty bucks
for an interface isnt gonna break anyone whos seriously talking about
spending the money to get into midi music in a serious way). The question
should be which machine overs the most versatility for various applications.
If we were just talking about buying a machine for music we might as
well buy a Yamaha puter. Obviously offers some of the best internal
voice capability some fine application software. Im sure that there
are all kinds of machines that do one thing better than my AMI does.
I bought the machine because it does lots of things in a way thats
adequate for my needs
Mike McDaniel
Michael Ditto
In article <45...@pyr.gatech.EDU> gt4...@pyr.UUCP (David Carter) writes:
>... Yeah, it would be nice to have a seperate, dedicated MIDI jack, but
>a) you usually never print while MIDI-ing, and b) many people will never use
>their Amigas for MIDI, so it would have been wasted money.
First of all, a MIDI interface connects to the serial port, not the printer
port. So, although some people have serial printers, the problem is more
general than whether you want to print and 'MIDI' at the same time. I
have a terminal program running absolutely every minute that my Amiga is
powered on (usually 24 hours/day). Because of the Amiga's hard-coded
single-serial-port software design, I can not conveniently use MIDI on
my Amiga. Even if auxiliary serial ports were available, all Amiga software
that does non-trivial serial I/O (including MIDI) uses the built-in port.
The current system of software access to a MIDI device is consistent and
works well with any manufacturer's MIDI adapter. The software incompati-
bility between different MIDI adapters that has been suggested does not
exist, since MIDI access is done through the normal serial.device.
The problem is: Amiga system software supports the existence of other
serial devices, but does not allow using them to connect a serial printer
with a consistent software interface (i.e. printer.device won't work).
This means that serial printers can only be connected to the built-in
serial port. Amiga communications application software only supports the
built-in serial port. This means that modems can only be connected to the
built-in serial port. Amiga MIDI software only supports the built-in
serial port. This means that MIDI devices can only be connected to the
built-in serial port.
The cause of this is mainly that from the beginning, C=A has said to
developers: "If you want to do serial I/O, here's what you do: You open
the built-in serial-port, set up the parameters...". And that is what
the developers did.
I wish the Amiga's software were at least as expandable as its hardware.
In article <38...@trwrb.UUCP> san...@trwrb.dsd.trw.com.UUCP (Richard Sansom) writes:
>I use my printer all the time with my current MIDI setup (1040 ST, various
>software packages, DX27, TX81Z, TR505). If I had to disconnect my MIDI port
>each time I wanted to print something, I'd go nuts.
A 1040 ST, eh? What does this have to do with the subject "Amiga and MIDI"?
Oh, you're saying that it's nice to have a dedicated MIDI device. This is
fine, but that does not mean it has to be included with the computer. This
just increases the cost of the system without increasing its usefulness for
most people. The Atarioids are always saying that the Amiga costs too much,
but are so proud of their built-in MIDI port that increased the cost of
their system and will probably never be used.
> Also, what makes you so
>sure "many people will never use their Amigas for MIDI"?
Consider the number of people in this country who use MIDI devices. Let's
make a really liberal estimate and say it's a whole one percent of the
population. Now consider the people who own Amigas as a sample of that
population. Since many people who chose to buy an Amiga did so because
of some technical or artistic interest, let's say that there will be a
greater incidence of MIDI users, maybe even 5 times as many. Maybe even
ten times as many. That still leaves 90 percent of Amigas that will
never even be in the same room as any MIDI equipment. Whether that number
is "many" is a matter of definition, but it certainly indicates that
making those 10% of the users pay for everyone to have a MIDI port is
silly.
**** FLAME OFF ****
I think Commodore made a good compromise in providing a general purpose
port that can be used for modems, printers, MIDI, and many other things.
This minimizes the cost to the users with simple applications, and provides
a lot of functionality to the avarage user.
The problem is that the software was not made expandable enough for
sophisticated applications. The capability is there, but the software
implementation makes things difficult. Note that by "sophisticated
applications" I do not mean bizarre uses of the Amiga that its designers
never anticipated, nor some "power user" that wants the Amiga to do the
work of 25 computers. I mean the sorts of things that people expect
from computers these days; things that even IBM-PC's can do. The Amiga
is a sophisticated computer, I hate to see it limited in unnecessary
ways.
--
Mike Ditto -=] Ford [=-
P.O. Box 1721 ford%ken...@crash.CTS.COM
Bonita, CA 92002 fo...@crash.CTS.COM
Bill Mayhew
<< complaints about midi and terminal sharing same serial port>>
I've used the Amiga midi quite a bit with Deluxe Music Construction
Set (verion 1.2 or whatever it is; had to send in an extra $20 for
the upgrade and no copy-proof), and with Pro Midi Studio (no offer
of a copyable disk). Both DMCS (a true dinosaur) and Pro Midi
Studio do a pretty good job of thrashing the CPU.
If you expect to do a good job of time-stamping incoming events,
you need to assure very quick response to interrupts from
characters coming in from midi. Whith the current sophistication
of software, this is tantamount to saying that your midi receive
program should be the only user task running. Of course, I suppose you
could impose a little priority setting to prevent the terminal
emulator from munging the midi timing.
One thing that would be helpful would be to have a midi.device that
does the time stamping in the interrupt handler itself. It is my
understanding that is or will soon be avialable in Pro Midi studio.
Such a device handler would alleviate the need from the controlling
program being a hog to assure accurate timing.
There has been a lot of chatter about music-x being pretty neat,
but I haven't seen it yet.
Naturally the Atari STs will suffer from the same technical
problems with midi response as the Amiga. In the IBM world the
soultion has been to use the Korg MPU interface as an outboard
solution. Such an outboard solution would probably enhance the
functionality of either the ST or the Amiga, but it does cost
bucks. I have no involvement with the McIntosh, so I'll leave it
out of the discussion for the moment.
Just having a DIN connector doesn't necessarily imply midi
functionality. Serious music work requires that connector to have
accurate timing. Both the Amiga and ST series have about the same
shot at that. The Amgia has more complication, as it has a
multitasking O/S that opens up the possiblity of shoving matches
twixt programs. If a multitasking (as opposed to desk acessory)
version of TOS is released*, it will have the same "problems" as the
Amiga requiring programs to be good citizens.
*released meaning that it is announced *and* I can actually
purchase it. Of course, both Atari and Commodore know more than
a little about the art of vapor ware.
--Bill
Todd Burkey
>In article <45...@pyr.gatech.EDU> gt4...@pyr.UUCP (David Carter) writes:
>>b) many people will never use
>>their Amigas for MIDI, so it would have been wasted money.
>
>but are so proud of their built-in MIDI port that increased the cost of
>their system and will probably never be used.
>
>
On another tack...First, I doubt the cost of adding midi to the ST is
more than $2.00 or so in parts to Atari. Second, there are more uses
of midi ports than using them as connections to musical instruments. I
do happen to have a Casio keyboard attached to mine (nice since more
and more games coming out automatically play music TO the midi port just in
case a keyboard is attached...as well as through the normal speakers.)
And about 20% of the people I know have keyboards (I am not musical at
all, so that isn't the reason). In any case, I would say that there
are two other very good uses for midi on the ST right now. One is as
a cheap LAN (which is available from several companies already on the
ST, not sure about on the Amiga), and also for things like MIDIMAZE
(which, if it ever comes out on the Amiga will probably sell more midi
adapters than midi keyboards will). The Midimaze craze, if you haven't heard,
is where you get up to 15 other people to haul their ST's over to your
house, string midi cables from room to room connecting all the
machines, and then waste an entire afternoon (and evening) wearing out
your palms and firing button fingers (and lungs) wandering through
mazes shooting at other players. I think 8 of us were enough to
alienate my wife the last time we played (YES, I ADMIT IT, I PLAY
GAMES ON MY ATARI! Why not?)
Also, all this arguments over which computer is better is kind of
silly. I had an Amiga for a while (and still have a Mac and an IBM
PClone), and it was/is a nice machine. The Amiga was about 6 months behind
the ST on certain features that I found useful (Compilers, utilities,
etc) and was ahead of the ST in other areas (HAM pictures, psuedo
multitasking, sound applications). For some reason, I just found
programming on the ST more straightforward (I had problems on the Mac
as well.) It was probably just my background and my desire to be able
to move things back and forth between Unix that made it hard. Time
will tell.
-Todd Burkey
t...@stag.UUCP
or ...ihnp4!meccts!stag!trb
Rex Jolliff
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Sheesh! The first 2 or 3 replies to my post would have sufficed, but I can see
that their is a good chance that I'll probably get a reply from every Amiga
owner on the face of this planet with netnews access. I didn't mean for this
post to be a vicious flame, but all the Amiga owners obviously took it that
way. Don't take it to be a direct attack on your machine.
This is what I was trying to say:
If a musician decides he should have a computer, not only to help him with
producing music, but also to handle some other simple things like keeping his
checkbook in balance, to replace his typewriter, and of course to play decent
games on; he should look at how simple the machine is to acquire, assemble, use
and maintain. Having to worry about the midi level converter as an extra item
is not a problem with the ST. They both have very user friendly interfaces,
although it's debatable which one is more user friendly. Finally, as far as
the average musician is concerned, each machine is equally powerful (Read: they
both can play great music and great games!). One final comment: I've noticed,
from talking to various musicians around here, that they usually are not very
concerned about the built-in sound capabilities of computers, but rather if
the computer can make their own perticular keyboards sing.
Rex.
Hombre Malo
with it . I works fine . However there is the commands ASCII and ASCIZ that I
cant figure out how to use . ( I read and reread the asm.doc.update many time
and it says that these command should work) .
Yes, I am aware of the fact that there is an update to the disk 50 assembler.
(my cheque is in the mail) .
Have any of you tried ASSEMPRO by abacus ? (atari users are very satisfied with
it .The turbo pascal of assembly. )
-DW
the previous ideas were mine alone .... (am I supposed to type that ?)
Harald Milne
> On another tack...First, I doubt the cost of adding midi to the ST is
> more than $2.00 or so in parts to Atari. Second, there are more uses
> of midi ports than using them as connections to musical instruments. I
> do happen to have a Casio keyboard attached to mine (nice since more
> and more games coming out automatically play music TO the midi port just in
> case a keyboard is attached...as well as through the normal speakers.)
Sound through the MIDI for games would not be done if the ATARI had any
sound channels worth talking about. Gee, all of a sudden that $2 MIDI interface
costs as much as a Casio! Were talking dirt cheap here.
> And about 20% of the people I know have keyboards
And 50% of the people I hang around with smoke dope with the pope.
> The Midimaze craze, if you haven't heard,
> is where you get up to 15 other people to haul their ST's over to your
> house,
Well thats really stupid. The UNIX original is called HUNT. The limit
is 3 persons per machine connected via Ethernet. The game becomes more of
what unloaded machine your on. Dragging 15 computers into one locality sounds
really stupid. Whats the % of people are doing that, .00000000001?
> Also, all this arguments over which computer is better is kind of
> silly.
You got one point straight. With the Amiga and the Atari costing
the same amount for the least common denominator, the Atari is just silly,
and a waste of money. But we all know that.
> I had an Amiga for a while (and still have a Mac and an IBM
> PClone), and it was/is a nice machine. The Amiga was about 6 months behind
> the ST on certain features that I found useful (Compilers, utilities,
> etc) and was ahead of the ST in other areas (HAM pictures, psuedo
> multitasking, sound applications).
Great. Jack of all trades, a master of none. I can write utilities
in my sleep. The Amiga wasn't behind anything, just Atari's attempt to kill
what Atari knew was comming to market. Atari had the Amiga almost, but it
slipped through their fingers, being bought by Commodore.
What I can't write is hardware. I guess Atari can't either. Got a
blitter? Looks like Atari is learning what a silicon foundry is all about. Not
to mention yield factors.
Psuedo multitasking is a specialty of Apple, in the form of the
Multifinder, I suggest you move on to comp.sys.mac to talk about this
nonsense. Psuedo not spoken here. Speaking of multitasking, name ONE
Atari anything that runs on ANY Atari multitasking environments currently in
progress. Just one.
> For some reason, I just found programming on the ST more straightforward
I would too if the machine and OS did nothing. I always wanted ZERO
colors in high resolution mode. Oh wait, thats black and white, right?
> It was probably just my background and my desire to be able
> to move things back and forth between Unix that made it hard.
So why on earth do you have an Atari?
> -Todd Burkey
> t...@stag.UUCP
> or ...ihnp4!meccts!stag!trb
--
Work: Computer Consoles Inc. (CCI), Advanced Development Group (ADG)
Irvine, CA (RISCy business! Home of the CCI POWER 6/32)
UUCP: uunet!ccicpg!harald
Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab
>In any case, I would say that there
>are two other very good uses for midi on the ST right now. One is as
>a cheap LAN (which is available from several companies already on the
>ST, not sure about on the Amiga), and also for things like MIDIMAZE
>(which, if it ever comes out on the Amiga will probably sell more midi
>adapters than midi keyboards will). The Midimaze craze, if you haven't heard,
>is where you get up to 15 other people to haul their ST's over to your
>house, string midi cables from room to room connecting all the
>machines, and then waste an entire afternoon (and evening) wearing out
>your palms and firing button fingers (and lungs) wandering through
Our local software store has five Ataris set up to play MidiMaze.
Since I've wanted MazeWar on the Amiga ever since I first saw it, I
investigated the MidiMaze setup.
The cabling between the systems seems to indicate a ring network.
Packets are passed on to the next machine. It occurrs to me that all you
need for a ring network is an input port and an output port, and software to
interpret the data coming in.
Sounds like all you need for this is a vanilla serial port. Am I
wrong about this?
P.S: MazeWar is Yet Another game I'd like to work on......
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape ihnp4!ptsfa -\
\_ -_ Recumbent Bikes: dual ---> !{well,unicom}!ewhac
O----^o The Only Way To Fly. hplabs / (pronounced "AE-wack")
"Work FOR? I don't work FOR anybody! I'm just having fun." -- The Doctor
Lang Zerner
a high-heat, low-light response to t...@stag.UUCP (Todd Burkey)'s
article <2...@stag.UUCP> regarding a novel (for micros, Harald) use of
MIDI. Todd also wrote
>> all this arguments over which computer is better is kind of silly.
This is something which, at least in the comp.sys.amiga community, I
think we can all support. We've seen this discussion so many times,
with the same path of conversation each time, that most of us have
realized that the whole topic, as presented, is rather petty.
Harald had some things to say that were somewhat informative, for example:
>Psuedo multitasking is a specialty of Apple, in the form of the
>Multifinder, I suggest you move on to comp.sys.mac to talk about this
>nonsense. Psuedo not spoken here.
But then offset the value of his comment with this gratuitous spur:
>Speaking of multitasking, name ONE Atari anything that runs on ANY
>Atari multitasking environments currently in progress. Just one.
Todd had some fairly interesting things to say in his original article
regarding his opinions regarding the Amiga and the ST, and qualified
them by not only pointing out that they were based on his experiences
in the past, and not on current fact. Harald referred to a number of
Todd's comments as "stupid" and in several places strongly implied
that Todd was lying about a number of issues, including of all things
how many keyboard musicians Todd knows.
Harald closed his "critique" with some more Atari-bashing, and then
made some more comments about Todd.
The point? The point is, even though Todd had some things to say
about the Amiga, and even given that some of them were inaccurate, the
bulk of Todd's article was of interest to both the groups it was
posted to. Harald's response was lots of fun to read, but has turned
the discusion into to yet another ST vs. Amiga flame war, and belongs
in alt.flame. As do any responses to that article.
If you cannot resist rebutting Harald's or Todd's claims -- as history
has shown many of you will -- please edit your Newsgroups and
Followup-to lines appropriately. For informative though opinionated
commentary, comp.sys.amiga and comp.sys.atari is appropriate. Wanna
make something of it? Take it to alt.flame. See you there.
--
Be seeing you...
--Lang Zerner la...@athena.mit.edu ihnp4!mit-eddie!athena.mit.edu!langz
Rando...@cup.portal.com
>problems with midi response as the Amiga. In the IBM world the
>soultion has been to use the Korg MPU interface as an outboard
>solution. Such an outboard solution would probably enhance the
>functionality of either the ST or the Amiga, but it does cost
>bucks. I have no involvement with the McIntosh, so I'll leave it
Correction, the IBM's use the *Roland* MPU interface. Current street
price for the MPU clone ( voyetra's OP-4001) is $180 dollars. Roland
MPU is around $250.
Give me a quarter or I'll touch you
> Xref: oliveb comp.sys.amiga:12031 comp.sys.atari.st:6608
>
> Sounds like all you need for this is a vanilla serial port. Am I
> wrong about this?
>
> P.S: MazeWar is Yet Another game I'd like to work on......
A vanilla serial port is all that would be needed. Special cabling would
be required, though. But if you stuck a midi interface on any serial port
that could accept one, it would be pretty much the same. The advantage to
a serial port would be a higher speed possible, though, say, 115K baud.
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
> Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape ihnp4!ptsfa -\
[the .sig didn't look right in a followup, and we've all seen it before
anyhow :-)]
--
Dean Brunette {ucbvax,etc.}!hplabs!oliveb!olivej!dragon {ucbvax,etc.}!hplabs!oliveb!dragon-oatc!dean
Olivetti Advanced Technology Center _____ _____ __|__ _____
20300 Stevens Creek Blvd. | | _____| | |
Cupertino, CA 95014 |_____| |_____| |__ |_____ 'Such a strange girl, I think I'm falling in love' --The Cure
Chuck McManis
>> Sounds like all you need for this is a vanilla serial port. Am I
>> wrong about this?
>
>that could accept one, it would be pretty much the same. The advantage to
>a serial port would be a higher speed possible, though, say, 115K baud.
First off, if you are using the Amiga serial port there would not be any
reason to stick to MIDI data rates for your network, the medium (MIDI
current loop) could conceivably support data rates above 100K bauds.
The advantage to using MIDI ports is that the cables are a) Easy to find/build
and b) useful for something other than playing Mazewars.
Now I realize that the Atari folks don't care about the above because
they already have a MIDI port, however let me ask this. Has anyone
considered putting a MIDI adapter on the ST serial port and then
running the 'network' in the other direction? Then you could have
a counter rotating ring network that would make each host no more
than 8 hops away. Just pick the appropriate direction with :
DIRECTION = ((dstnode - srcnode) & 0x8) ? DOWNSTREAM : UPSTREAM ;
This could give added performance to time critical games.
--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcm...@sun.com
Todd Burkey
> [a bunch of ASSinine tripe about why HE is right and everyone else
> stupid...unless they like Amiga...]
Great technical discussion there, Harald...Glad to hear that all your
friends smoke dope...am sure they are pleased :-). Just so people don't get
the wrong idea about MIDI-MAZE (rumor is that it will be out for Amiga).
I do happen to have hunt on my Unix Box here (Symmetrics 375) and it
isn't anything like midi-maze. If you want to go back in your source
archives a year or so, you will see a program called MAZEWAR (early
PARC days). I know it has been upgraded to run on Xwindows and it is
more like Midi-maze (graphics, real perspective, etc). But even
mazewar doesn't come close to midi-maze. Course, even amiga people
will have to haul their computers over to friends houses. Explain to me
how you can hook three graphics terminals up to your Amiga and
Ethernet with all your friends??? I can only hook one extra terminal
up to my ST (my Wyse while in the Multi-tasking C-Shell), but that is
really only useful for editting and compiling...I can't hook other
graphics tubes up (and doubt I would ever care to). I wasn't ever able
to get my Wyse working as a terminal on the Amiga.
-Todd Burkey
t...@stag.UUCP
Todd Burkey
>Packets are passed on to the next machine. It occurrs to me that all you
>need for a ring network is an input port and an output port, and software to
>interpret the data coming in.
>
> Sounds like all you need for this is a vanilla serial port. Am I
>wrong about this?
that matter...Think midi runs at around 32K Baud. On the ST it was
used more 'because it was there'. Of course, in a ring LAN like this,
you are always affected when one of the machines gets turned off or
pulls out of the ring for some reason...
>
>P.S: MazeWar is Yet Another game I'd like to work on......
vers.), it wouldn't be too hard. I'm planning on proposing it as a group
project at our next ST developers meeting here in the Twin Cities.
Would be a nice winter project (plus gives us another reason to haul
our computers around). Does anyone know if it has been ported to the
AMIGA or IBM PC?
-Todd Burkey
t...@stag.UUCP
Bill Mayhew
I'm not cross-posting this to the Atari Group since they seem to
have an unprecedented ability to send my mailbox into a core
meltdown.
1. Can the ST's serail port hack high baud rates? Since the MIDI
specification is 32.5K buad, that makes it attractive if the RS232
serial port is limited to 9600. The Amiga serial port can operate
atastronomical baud rates to something over 200K baud. Never mind
that there ain't no way software is going to keep up with that and
that you'd have to keep cabling pretty short.
2. Midi cables [if you look around] are cheaper than RS232 cables.
3. Midi cables are Unisex, thus making them less error prone to
attach. Good to keep things simple for the game-oriented crowd.
[applies equally to Amiga and ST] :-)
4. Marketing appeal. Using the Midi port differentiates the
product from the rest of the crowd, even if use of the Midi opposed
to something else isn't significant. This dsicussion is eveidence
of that.
--Bill
Todd Burkey
>
>Now I realize that the Atari folks don't care about the above because
>they already have a MIDI port, however let me ask this. Has anyone
>considered putting a MIDI adapter on the ST serial port and then
>running the 'network' in the other direction? Then you could have
>a counter rotating ring network that would make each host no more
>than 8 hops away. Just pick the appropriate direction with :
>
>DIRECTION = ((dstnode - srcnode) & 0x8) ? DOWNSTREAM : UPSTREAM ;
Actually, I was hoping that we would use the RS232 port as a 'bridge'
on the network...i.e. via modem to another 'ring' of computers. I admit
it would be a slow bridge, but 2400 baud still could get a fair amount
of packet info across for games, mail, etc. (works for USENET :-) ).
I've still got the source for combat somewhere around (very early
version written in Basic, but with Gorns and the whole bit...anyone
remember back to those 110 Baud tactical shootout days?)
-Todd Burkey
t...@stag.UUCP
Bill Daggett
If MIDI is simple, a standard, and an important interface to have CBM ought to
build it into the A3000.
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
Bill Daggett, a.k.a. *Bilbo Baggins* Recombinant Hobbit and Sysop of
* Sometimes The Dragon Wins! * Bilbo's Hideaway = 213-640-6104
INTERNET: bi...@pnet02.CTS.COM
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd!crash, ihnp4!scgvaxd }!gryphon!pnet02!bilbo
Hans Bechtel
I was kind of curious on a certain possibility..
On an earlier Fred Fish disk, there was a listing on how to interface
an ibm pc with the amiga through the parallel port and send data
19.2k baud back and forth.
Has somebody yet created a modem that allows use of the parallel port
amoung amiga computers or others?
I would think that you could allow many more "serial" ports using the
parallel port, and at least expand the capability of more modem
hookup over the phone lines...
I have a feeling that there might be a software problem right at first,
but with everybody on the net writing excellent software, that would
solve that problem. I am not a hardware hacker so I do not
know if this will work or not.
Please reply on the net as a general post so everybody has a chance
to respond.
Hans Bechtel
dinosaur list:
apple 1
ti 99
timex sinclair
ibms...
amiga 100..(oops, I have one of those...)
Daniel A. Glasser
>
>sound channels worth talking about. Gee, all of a sudden that $2 MIDI interface
>costs as much as a Casio! Were talking dirt cheap here.
>
a rahter nice sound chip which by all accounts would have beaten the pants
off the AMI's sound chip.
>
> Well thats really stupid. The UNIX original is called HUNT. The limit
>is 3 persons per machine connected via Ethernet. The game becomes more of
>what unloaded machine your on. Dragging 15 computers into one locality sounds
>really stupid. Whats the % of people are doing that, .00000000001?
>
and it was called "mazewars", and it was running on Xerox Altos connected
via ethernet, one user per system.
>
> You got one point straight. With the Amiga and the Atari costing
>the same amount for the least common denominator, the Atari is just silly,
>and a waste of money. But we all know that.
>
lacks, but the atari is not a waste of money. It depends on what you want
to do with it -- The amiga makes a lousy cash register... I know, I've
seen it. The ST makes a lousy music box, but a very good MIDI computer.
>
> I would too if the machine and OS did nothing. I always wanted ZERO
>colors in high resolution mode. Oh wait, thats black and white, right?
>
monitor. I am not one of those people. I have a higher bandwidth than
that. 60 Hz is still annoying, 70 Hz is barely acceptable. Color monitors
are hard on the eyes, but Amiga doesn't have a monochrome monitor. Sure,
you can attach one, but without a non-color mode, the resolution and
screen refresh is no better. For music control applications, most word
processiong, and a majority of non-game activities can be done just fine
with two colors.
>
> So why on earth do you have an Atari?
>
2) The monochrome monitor's 70 Hz refresh is much easiser on my eyes.
3) When I bought my Atari ST, the Amiga cost about 3 to 5 times as much.
4) Every time I've gone to look at an Amiga at the local computer shop where
they push the Amiga much more than the ST, the demo copies of the
software are ALWAYS corrupted because the Amiga multi-tasking really
screws up royally on a single drive system and corrupts disks left and
right.
5) Application startup is usually very slow.
6) I've worked on good graphics systems that would leave you amigoids
crying into your HAM images, and know more about graphics hardware
than most of you. The Amiga is a limited purpose machine because
it has such a great video and audio capability that in order to utilize
the hardware, you really must fit your software to the hardware. This
is fine for games and graphics of sorts, but not great for general
purpose computing. I'm trying not to flame here...
>--
>Work: Computer Consoles Inc. (CCI), Advanced Development Group (ADG)
> Irvine, CA (RISCy business! Home of the CCI POWER 6/32)
>UUCP: uunet!ccicpg!harald
I'm not even going to go into your false statements about Atari
and Federated coporate policy. Don't talk so smugly about things
which you only assume. Until you know some of the facts, don't
claim to know the one true way. Enlightenment comes not to those who
insist that they are already enlightened thus blind themselves.
What I want to know is why you Amiga people insist on coming over here
to constantly flame the ST, and then attack anyone from here who goes
into amiga territory and flames the Amiga.
If you think we are all such fools in this group for owning Atari STs,
then let us be fools. We know about your wonder machine. You and it
can go and rot in peace, for all most of us care. We have made our
choices. It is not for you to say if our choice was right or wrong,
it would have been wrong for you, and that is fine, but I wish to
any god that might be listening that you and your friends would
S H U T T H E H E C K U P ! ! ! ! ! !
Leave it be. Let us live in our folly before we come over and dump
all over your front lawn and dig up your daisies!
Michael Czeiszperger
>My two cents:
>If MIDI is simple, a standard, and an important interface to have CBM ought to
>build it into the A3000.
>
speed serial port, and be able to use it for other things besides MIDI.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michael S. Czeiszperger | "HELP! I'm stuck in 3B HELL !!!"
Contracted to AT&T | Phone: (614) 860-4952
Unix Systems Administration | UUCP: cbosgd!dkc1!czei
6200 E. Broad Street | Disclaimer: "The above opinions are those
Columbus, OH RM 1L334 | of a large rodent with sharp teeth"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard Sexton
In article <2...@stag.UUCP> t...@stag.UUCP ( Todd Burkey ) writes:
>In article <69...@ccicpg.UUCP> har...@ccicpg.UUCP ( Harald Milne) writes:
>> [a bunch of ASSinine tripe about why HE is right and everyone else
>> stupid...unless they like Amiga...]
Oh no. I have an Amiga, and Harald thinks I'm pretty stupid.
>Great technical discussion there, Harald...Glad to hear that all your
>friends smoke dope...am sure they are pleased :-).
Damn! I knew I should have cultivated Harald's friendship when I had the chance.
>Just so people don't get
>the wrong idea about MIDI-MAZE (rumor is that it will be out for Amiga).
>I do happen to have hunt on my Unix Box here (Symmetrics 375) and it
>isn't anything like midi-maze. If you want to go back in your source
>archives a year or so, you will see a program called MAZEWAR (early
>PARC days). I know it has been upgraded to run on Xwindows and it is
>more like Midi-maze (graphics, real perspective, etc). But even
>mazewar doesn't come close to midi-maze. Course, even amiga people
>will have to haul their computers over to friends houses.
Well, shoot. Do we tell 'em now ? Aw hell, might as well.
Well, the REAL reason there isn't s MIDI port on the Amiga, is because
it would have interfered with PSI-net (tm), the telepathic network
driver developed by Sunny Kirsten. So you see, Amiga people don't need
to shuttle their machines around in the cold and snow just to play silly
games.
Oooooooooommmm.
>I can only hook one extra terminal
>up to my ST (my Wyse while in the Multi-tasking C-Shell), but that is
>really only useful for editting and compiling...I can't hook other
>graphics tubes up (and doubt I would ever care to). I wasn't ever able
>to get my Wyse working as a terminal on the Amiga.
Well thats it. The ultimate reason to buy an Atari ST.
You can hook up a Wyse terminal to it.
> -Todd Burkey
"Have a nice winter"
--
"Well they say, that Santa Fe, is more, than 90 miles away"
UUCP: {ihnp4!crash, hplabs!hp-sdd!crash}!gryphon!richard
INET: ric...@gryphon.CTS.COM
BoB teCh
>
> Well, the REAL reason there isn't s MIDI port on the Amiga, is because
> it would have interfered with PSI-net (tm), the telepathic network
> driver developed by Sunny Kirsten. So you see, Amiga people don't need
> to shuttle their machines around in the cold and snow just to play silly
> games.
>
> Oooooooooommmm.
>
there HAS been a bug found in PSInet v. 1.3
to wit: the system will function only if all Amiga users believe it exists.
now, we've got a couple Amigai here in the lab, and.. well...
i don't believe it.
<crash>
<maim>
<sound of Sunny Kirsten being outraged>
wups.
BoB
teCh
real man use computers without graphics.
REAL real man use computers without terminals!
REAL REAL real <gak>
Brian Rhodefer
Oh, Noooo! It can't be THAT bad, can it?
If only all the originators/promulgators of RS232 had just one neck,
and I could get my hands around it....
Brian Rhodefer
Michael J. Farren
>If only all the originators/promulgators of RS232 had just one neck,
>and I could get my hands around it....
There is an RS-232 standard. You can get it from (I think) the American
National Standards Institute. I've got a copy somewhere around here
myself. In that standard, everything having to do with an RS-232 interface
is defined, carefully, from the rise times of the signals to their meaning
to the pins and connectors they are supposed to go to. If you've got to
wring anyone's neck, wring that of the 95% of the manufacturers who
decided that truly following the standard was too much of a pain in the
neck, so went off in their own direction, leaving us poor users to try
and patch up the differences.
--
Michael J. Farren | "INVESTIGATE your point of view, don't just
{ucbvax, uunet, hoptoad}! | dogmatize it! Reflect on it and re-evaluate
unisoft!gethen!farren | it. You may want to change your mind someday."
gethen!far...@lll-winken.arpa | Tom Reingold, from alt.flame
cz...@cbdkc1.uucp
>
>Oh, Noooo! It can't be THAT bad, can it?
>
RS-232 is more of a general protocol that you'd want on a computer,
where MIDI is specialized so that it can only be used for music. If
you had a computer with only MIDI ports, you wouldn't be able to easily
connect to a variety of generic hardware devices like printers and
digitizers, to name a few. You are right that MIDI is a little more
defined that RS-232.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michael S. Czeiszperger | "HELP! I'm stuck in 3B HELL !!!"
Contracted to AT&T | Phone: (614) 860-4952 (formerly with Ohio
Unix Systems Administration | UUCP: cbosgd!dkc1!czei State University)
Bill Mayhew
Yes, you can order pulication RS-232-C form Electronic Industries
Association, 2001 Eye Street, Wash DC 20006. It is about 24 pages.
Back when I got mine about 10 years ago, it cost $5.10.
While going into excursiating detail about the elctrical
characteristics of the singals, it makes omits two useful items.
First the temporal relationships of control signals. (It does say
which ones should be on/off simultaineously for certain
conditions.) Actually, RS-334 defines the temporal reationships.
Second, RS-232-C says nothing about the physical design of
the connector beyond recommending that it have 25 pins.
Section Three says:
3.1 The interface between the data terminal equipment and data
communications equipment is located at a pluggable connector
signal interface point between the two equipments. The female
connector shall be associated with, but not necessarily
physically attached to the data communication equipment and
should be mounted in a fixed position near the data terminal
equipment. The use of an extension cable on the data
communication equipment is permitted. An extension cable with a
male connector shall be provided with the data terminal
equipment [Ha! --Bill]. The use of short cables (each less than
approximately 50 feet or 15 meters) is recommended; however,
longer cables are permissible, provided that the resulting load
capacitance (CL of fig. 2.1), measured at the interface point
and including the signal terminator, does not exceed 2500
picofarads.
3.1.1 When additional functions are provided in a separate unit
inserted between the data terminal equipment and the data
communication equipment (See section 1.7), the female connector,
as indicated above shall be associated with the side of this
unit which interfaces with the data terminal equipment while the
extension cable with the male connector shall be provided on the
side which interfaces with the data communication equipment.
That's it. But Appendix I suggests:
Interface Connector
While no industry standard exists which defines a suitable
interface connector, it should be noted that commercial products
are available which will perform satisfactorily as electrial
connectors for interfaces specified in RS-232C, such as those
connectors meeting Military Specification MIL-C-24308 (MS-18275)
or quivalent.
It is not intended that the above reference be considered as
part of RS-232C or as a standard for the devices to which
reference is made.
Holy avoiding the issue, Batman.
Ahhh, the beauty and simplicity of Midi cables. One pin
arrangement, one set of allowable pins, one baud rate.
Enjoy the Holidays,
--Bill
Eric Green
> In article <22...@tekig4.TEK.COM> bri...@tekig4.UUCP (Brian Rhodefer) writes:
>>If only all the originators/promulgators of RS232 had just one neck,
>>and I could get my hands around it....
>
> There is an RS-232 standard. You can get it from (I think) the American
> National Standards Institute. I've got a copy somewhere around here
> myself. In that standard, everything having to do with an RS-232 interface
> is defined, carefully, from the rise times of the signals to their meaning
> to the pins and connectors they are supposed to go to.
Unfortunately, even if you adhere completely to the standard, half the devices
in the world still won't talk to you without a breakout-box or cable
switching. When the only devices extant were computers and terminals, that was
no big deal, but tell me, how about hooking up a terminal concentrator/network
node to printers, computers, terminals, .... We're talking BIG-time troubles
here, we're talking about cabling nightmares to end all nightmares, even if
the standard IS followed (and it usually isn't -- e.g. a switcher which
arbitrarily decides to ignore an outgoing line if certain transitions don't
occure at certain times, and a network node which refuses to give the switcher
those transitions -- thus FUbaring things horribly.).
I hated having to mutilate my cable to flop RxD and TxD when I hooked up an
Amiga to a C-64 to transfer files at 9600 baud (yes, there's some magic
involved :-).
--
Eric Lee Green e...@usl.CSNET Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg Lafayette, LA 70509
"There's someone in my head, but it's not me...." -PF