Why did ATARI not use the 7800 GFX-chip for the XL ?
Jindroush
> The 7800´s video hardware is more advanced - why did ATARI not improve
> the XL by using the advanced 7800 graphics hardware + the old CTIA for
> compatibility ?
Don't forget that 7800 is not an Atari developed machine. Also, whole XE
line is just repackaged old stuff.
--
Jindroush <jind...@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz>
http://jindroush.atari.org - Home of Atari Cartridge Dumping Project
Remove both 'nospam's from the address to reply.
TXG
>line is just repackaged old stuff.
This is not completly true, The 7800 was made before the XE line, secondly
the latest XE (China version with GTIA bug) where made at the end of 198x
and beginning of 199x. For this last batch they made new GTIA chips with a
buggy mask.
Because Atari wanted to have a 'new' XE style XL compatible system they
continued there design from the XL series. A super XE would be cool... I
think it can be done when someone connects the 7800 graphics chip to the XE,
Atari can disable ANTIC so a new video chip can be addressed at full
speed...
Is there someone that would want to make such a upgrade? :-)
richard cortese
news:fcd76a9e.03040...@posting.google.com...
> The 7800´s video hardware is more advanced - why did ATARI not improve
> the XL by using the advanced 7800 graphics hardware + the old CTIA for
> compatibility ?
The powers that be decided there was no future in 8 bit systems.
You have to remember that even the design team for the Atari 800 had moved
on to projects like the Amiga.
Apple pushing the Mac, IBM got in bed with the Intel and MS got in bed with
IBM. It became a 16 bit market place.
> Most software programmers complained that the ATARI has not enough
> sprites - compared to the C64 , this would have been no problem if the
> ATARI 800 XL had the 7800´s graphics hardware.
C64 came out ~3 years after the Atari. Kind of like comparing a PC to an AT.
That they are so close in performance is what is unusual except that C64 had
a better price point.
The great price and success in the market place is the reason why most
software programmers supported the C64 and didn't support the Atari. Atari
had a much smaller user base then the C64.
The bottom line is it ultimately didn't make a difference. Both C64 and
Atari went south. Yes it would have been nice had Atari come out with
improved graphics, but they still would have gone under.
Frank Schuster
Hi TXG,
would be a nice mod to put the Maria into an XL/XE. The 7800 OS is
pretty much the same as of the XL except the screen handling.
As far as I know the Maria decodes it's address range itself as the
Antic but at a totaly different address area. I think it's page 1 but
I'm not sure.
The question is what is easier, to modify a XL/XE to put the Maria in
or to modify a 7800 to be a XL/XE?
In the later case the SIO and keyboard connectors must be added and
the OS rewritten as in the first case.
I think the second approach would be easier.
What do you think?
Regards
Frank
TXG
> Hi TXG,
>
> would be a nice mod to put the Maria into an XL/XE. The 7800 OS is
> pretty much the same as of the XL except the screen handling.
> As far as I know the Maria decodes it's address range itself as the
> Antic but at a totaly different address area. I think it's page 1 but
> I'm not sure.
This could be tricked by some logic, to let the system think it works in
page 1....
> The question is what is easier, to modify a XL/XE to put the Maria in
> or to modify a 7800 to be a XL/XE?
The XL/XE only has to be attached to the MARIA chip, this is much easier....
Maybe we can use the socket of the original ANTIC for an adapter board...
> In the later case the SIO and keyboard connectors must be added and
> the OS rewritten as in the first case.
> I think the second approach would be easier.
not interested.... would like to have a MARIA chip as an option so that I
could turn it off or on.....
Frank Schuster
Then let's do it!
I've got some documentation on the MARIA as well as the 7800 OS source listing.
Are you interested?
Hon Tseng
news:<add8fcf3.03040...@posting.google.com>...
>
> You may also ask at ATARIAGE (www.atariage.com) , maybe there are some
> more ATARI-Fans interested there.
>
> An ATARI 800 with a Maria chip would blow the C64 away ...
Why not adding a GFX or Maria chip for Atari 8bit Emulator? I just
onder... -tseng
>
> ZR
TXG
I need to know the pinning layout, if it supports DMA like the ANTIC does...
Is there a site with technical info about this chip?
TXG/MNX
"Frank Schuster" <f-sch...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:add8fcf3.03040...@posting.google.com...
Frank Schuster
> Hmm I am interested but who has the datasheet of the MARIA chip?
>
> I need to know the pinning layout, if it supports DMA like the ANTIC does...
> Is there a site with technical info about this chip?
>
> TXG/MNX
>
trigger inputs. The GTIA could stay in the system with MARIA just for
reading triggers and switches.
MARIA does DMA but does not support DRAM!! No refresh. Means change
XL/XE completle to SRAM or build a sepparate refresh.
I found the following info:
Pinout MARIA II (1702B):
___ ___
VSS 1-| U |-48 SYNC" Pins marked: ' have an ANTIC
equivalent
!NMI' 2-| |-47 LUM1" " have a GTIA
equivalent
xtal1 3-| |-46 blank MEN works like !RESet on ANTIC
xtal2 4-| |-45 LUM2"
MEN' 5-| |-44 LUM3" Pins description in lower case
letters do
PCLK2'" 6-| |-43 COLOR" not have an ANTIC or GTIA
equivalent.
tclk 7-| |-42 LUM0"
PCLK0'" 8-| |-41 READY' xtal1: Oscilator input 14,318080
MHz
DEL" 9-| |-40 !HALT'" xtal2: Oscilator output
!sram0 10-| |-39 R/!W'" MEN: Maria enable input, when
low chip
A0 11-| |-38 D0 held in reset
A1 12-| |-37 D1 !tiasel: TIA clock 3,58
A2 13-| |-36 D2 PCLK0: 6502 Phase0 clock output.
Drives
A3 14-| |-35 D3 processor at 1,19 or 1,79
MHz
A4 15-| |-34 D4 !sram0: SRAM chip select 2k
A5 16-| |-33 D5 !sram1: SRAM chip select 2k
A6 17-| |-32 D6 !s32: 6532 chip select
A7 18-| |-31 D7 blank: Video blanking output
A8 19-| |-30 A15 PCLK2: 6502 Phase2 clock input.
Not all
A9 20-| |-29 A14 synchronization is done
from this
A10 21-| |-28 A13 pin.
A11 22-| |-27 A12
!s32 23-| |-26 !tiasel
!sram1 24-| |-25 VDD
-------
I was wrong with page 1 it is page 0.
Maria addresses:
0020 - Background color
0021 - Palette 0 color 1
0022 - Palette 0 color 2
0023 - Palette 0 color 3
0024 - Wait for Sync
0025 - Palette 1 color 1
0026 - Palette 1 color 2
0027 - Palette 1 color 3
0028 - Maria Status
bit 7: 1 = VBLANK/0 = Not VBLANK
0029 - Palette 2 color 1
002A - Palette 2 color 2
002B - Palette 2 color 3
002C - Display List List pointer high
002D - Palette 3 color 1
002E - Palette 3 color 2
002F - Palette 3 color 3
0030 - Display List List pointer low
0031 - Palette 4 color 1
0032 - Palette 4 color 2
0033 - Palette 4 color 3
0034 - Character base address
0035 - Palette 5 color 1
0036 - Palette 5 color 2
0037 - Palette 5 color 3
0038 - Reserved for future expansion
0039 - Palette 6 color 1
003A - Palette 6 color 2
003B - Palette 6 color 3
003C - MARIA control
Bit 7: Color Kill 0 = Normal Color/1 = No Color
Bit 6,5: DMA control
0 = Test A (DO NOT USE)
1 = Test B (DO NOT USE)
2 = Normal DMA
3 = No DMA
(Note: The Atari MARIA documentation says to NOT USE test
mode A or B since it can damage the 7800's hardware)
Bit 4: Character Width 0 = Two byte characters
1 = Single byte characters
Bit 3: Border Control 0 = Background color border / 1 = Black
border
Bit 2: Kangaroo mode 0 = Transparency / 1 = Kangaroo mode
Bit 1,0: Read mode
0 = 160x2 or 160x4
1 = Not used
2 = 320B or 320D
3 = 320A or 320C
003D - Palette 7 color 1
003E - Palette 7 color 2
003F - Palette 7 color 3
But as you said, it can be mapped where ever we want to.
If you like I could mail you a more detailed chip description
(ca.940K)
Frank
Andreas Magenheimer
I don`t think an Atari with Maria chip would blow the C64 away. Hint:
How many programs are there for the A8 that support or use a Maria chip
?!?!! None !!!
-Andreas.
Zothen Runecaster schrieb:
>
> f-sch...@gmx.net (Frank Schuster) wrote in message news:<add8fcf3.03040...@posting.google.com>...
> This is very interesting and I want to see such an ATARI.
>
> You may also ask at ATARIAGE (www.atariage.com) , maybe there are some
> more ATARI-Fans interested there.
>
> An ATARI 800 with a Maria chip would blow the C64 away ...
>
> ZR
Andreas Magenheimer
the 7800 does not have the Pokey chip, meaning no sound, no
add-on-equipment to save any data (like floppies, tapes, harddisks,
etc.). Not sure if the PIA is inside the 7800. Anyway, I guess it would
be easier to install a Maria chip inside the XL/XE Ataris, than
upgrading the 7800 to an XL/XE compatible but improved computer...
-Andreas.
Frank Schuster schrieb:
Steve S
for Atari" written on their resume, as they are nothing but idiots. Any
company who has a good management team can weather just about anything.
Atari started out with good people and a good product. Then a bunch of
orangutans came in and started tearing the place apart. The good people
left and only a bunch of monkeys were left to manage it.
I am not good on Atari History, but if I recall correctly... the guy that
started Atari left out of disgust for what was going on and began another
successful business called "Chuck E. Cheese's". The clowns that took over
eventually moved our USA jobs abroad somewhere, laying off the entire Atari
staff in California (I think that's where it was at). Then they sold the
company a couple of times, majorly screwing it over each time. I think
Hasbro had it last, and it may have closed down the "Atari" department all
together some time in the last few months as I seem to remember reading
something about it.
All this sound about right?
Any good management that has control of a company that was successful enough
to sell on the New York Stock Exchange would have kept up with the times.
If necessary, build a 16-bit machine, or a 32-bit machine. Make a deal to
make it compatible with IBM somehow. Hell, if they are smart enough, make a
16 or 32-bit compatible with both an IBM and an 8-bit Atari, make it
backwards compatible. That's what gave IBM the extra edge that it needed,
backwards compatibility.
If Atari had not been taken over by the idiots, I imagine they would have a
product line similar to the Playstation or the X-box and a few other systems
to keep up with the times. Atari did not like advertising and marketing for
some reason, and it was Apple that got the contracts with the schools (at
first), and sold their systems to the local schools. Nice deal... another
failure for Atari though.
Atari was an excellent machine. It was nice having different systems out,
preventing the IBM and Microsoft Monopoly that we have now (but probably
instrumental in paving the way for the monopoly). I enjoyed the games, and
machine language is much easier to work with for an 8-bit too. Atari rarely
crashed and one hardly ever heard of a 'virus' for an Atari.
"richard cortese" <rico...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:F6Dja.9593$ey1.7...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> "Zothen Runecaster" <zot...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:fcd76a9e.03040...@posting.google.com...
> > The 7800愀 video hardware is more advanced - why did ATARI not improve
> > the XL by using the advanced 7800 graphics hardware + the old CTIA for
> > compatibility ?
>
> The powers that be decided there was no future in 8 bit systems.
>
> You have to remember that even the design team for the Atari 800 had moved
> on to projects like the Amiga.
>
> Apple pushing the Mac, IBM got in bed with the Intel and MS got in bed
with
> IBM. It became a 16 bit market place.
> > Most software programmers complained that the ATARI has not enough
> > sprites - compared to the C64 , this would have been no problem if the
> > ATARI 800 XL had the 7800愀 graphics hardware.
Iain Laskey
> Any
> company who has a good management team can weather just about anything.
pear-shaped due to market forces or economic situations. Good management
can last longer but they can't avoid the inevitable. Also, hindsite is
very useful to see where a company went wrong.
> I am not good on Atari History, but if I recall correctly...
You recalled most of it fairly innacurately I'm afraid!
Steve S
"Iain Laskey" <ilask...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.20030415...@ilaskey.cix.co.uk...
atari-man
spelling right, but....), as being a day late and a dollar short. I REALLY
believe that their management believed that the computer industry would
continue to respond to tough talk and threats of court cases. That may work
when you're selling 100,000 C-64's a month, but when you're Atari, you need
to treat vendors and software manufacturers good. Selling development
systems at list price to software houses when you are trying to get a
machine off the ground is NOT the way to get them to support you. Selling
machines to your loyal user groups at list is NOT the way to get them to
continue to be loyal.
Where the Tramels went wrong (in my opinion):
1) 8 bit development. By 1986 the 8-bits were on their way out, BUT, I
would have done a redesign like a mini apple IIe, and stopped there. Maybe
make a card or 2 but let hobbiests and manufacturers take over. A
peripheral manufacturer LOVES it when YOU supply the power supply,
shielding, and case for THEIR product.
2) The Federated Stores. C'Mon, what were you thinking?? What they should
have done was 'do it like DELL', before there was a Dell. At the time I
KNEW there were problems just by reading Analog magazine and hearing about
them selling computers at Federated, Mail order, Computer stores, and retail
outlets and I was thinking "who handles the pricing and shipping schedules
for all those folks", and sure enough, there were stories of shortages and
price wars.
3) Pushing the European Sales. Jack, Jack, Jack.... the US is/was the
largest economy.....I know you probably made more money selling in Europe,
but quantity would make more people buy (people bought C-64s just because
their friends had them)
4) The Mega ST. They made an ST smaller and added a blitter chip. The
Atari 1040ST wasn't too bad size wise, so IMO the Mega was a waste of
resources since it didn't push the technology forward at all.
5) Not selling the STBook. Geez... harden up the case a bit, and it would
have been a leader.
6) Since they liked vertical markets (music, DTP), they should have released
that ST Tablet of theirs. They would have been about 5 years ahead of the
tablet leaders and about 12 years ahead of Microsoft and the folks now.
7) The Jaguar. GREAT idea, but 4 processors in one machine? I think
handcuffing an octopus might have been easier...
Well, thats all for now.
Tony