Falcon030, resolutions, TRUE color, and DSP
steve wells
> a 3.5" 1.4 meg drive, a 5.25" 1.2 meg drive, and a SVGA monitor for
> $799.
>
Please, tell us where, the best I've seen for that sort of config' is
about $1400!
=============================================================================
| O O If I told you how much I needed this, | ||| |
| o I wouldn't have time to eat it. Zaphod B. | ||| TARI |
| \_/ Steve Wells - Wellington, New Zealand. | / | \ |
=========================WEL...@KOSMOS.WCC.GOVT.NZ==========================
shepp...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
>In article <1h2r5b...@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> aa...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Len Stys) writes:
>
>>Ed, I can buy a 386 DX 25 MHz clone with an 85 meg HD, 8 expansion slots,
>>a 3.5" 1.4 meg drive, a 5.25" 1.2 meg drive, and a SVGA monitor for
>>$799.
>
>
>You have overlooked too many things. For one, the Falcon with it's Multitos
>should run quite smoothly. I have heard the opposite claim many times for
>386 PC's using windows. The Falcon is also a COMPLETE computer with quite
>some performance in many respects. That's the edge.
>=*= Odisseas Kosmatos =*= "Cul bien vide, tete plein d'idees."
>=*= kosm...@jsp.umontreal.ca =*=
>=*= sha...@mafalda.math.mcgill.ca =*=
Well the are a few 'does it have' that seemed to be left out...
Does it have a good dealer support network..??
Does it have county wide service..??
Does it have a range of books, technical or software to support it...???
Does it have a good range of software support..??
Come on chaps, no more Computer Jokes here Please, lets be real....??
Roger................ shepp...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Hans Holmberg
[stuff deleted]
>Ed, I can buy a 386 DX 25 MHz clone with an 85 meg HD, 8 expansion slots,
>a 3.5" 1.4 meg drive, a 5.25" 1.2 meg drive, and a SVGA monitor for
>$799.
But you forget that to get the same *subjective* performance as a F030 you
would have to buy a 486DX33 with a very fast graphicscard that have at least
64k colors, a DSP board of any kind AND something like the soundblaster.
Tell me the price of that!
(btw, I have run Windows on a 486DX25 in 256 colors.. It crawls..)
>Oh, and it would include 2 Megs.
Well, memory aint expensive... Atari should have put in 4 megs as minimum.
>Along with Windows and the choice of THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of
>software titles.
I wouldn't put my name on a product like Windows. I would be *ashamed* to
release such a lousy done software. Oh, could you please tell me of some
software which doesn't exists on the ST??
(btw, windows isn't a software title, it's a substitute for MS/DOS ;)
>There are also MANY developers working on new software for it, not
>just a handful. Anyone will fix it if it breaks. And there
>is no need for me to beg the company for support.
Correct!
>No, Atari's needs an edge besides the DSP.
I think Atari has an egde, the question is wether they will blow it or not...
/Hasse
--
/ email: ha...@solace.hsh.se, irc: Knightman, flames: /dev/null \
\ snail-mail: Hans Holmberg, Sommarvagen 5, 854 67 Sundsvall, Sweden /
/ phone: +46 60 569169, fax: +46 60 569266 \
\ "In a crazy world a sane person would appear to be crazy." /
Len Stys
EXACTLY!
The Falcon030 MAY be a great machine for music.
The DSP MAY open a few more doors.
And some games MAY be able to be written for the Falcon030.
BUT-- if you don't have developers, dealers, users, and publications
that are helping PUSH this machine into millions of homes, the
Falcon030 MAY NOT have a chance.
I was kind of disappointed by the lack of a graphics coprocessor and
so far, no one has checked to see if Atari may let us add one to the
Falcon030 in the future. I don't think we can.
What's going to happen is that the Falcon030 will be competitively
priced with PC clones out there. The people that want a computer that
plays GREAT games will not see a great advantage with the Falcon030.
And some people have told me, "You want great games? Get an Amiga 1200!"
Hey, this is a billion dollar market, Atari better be thinking about it.
--
Kosmatos Odisseas
>In article <1992Dec21....@cc.umontreal.ca>, kosm...@JSP.UMontreal.CA (Kosmatos Odisseas) writes:
>>In article <1h2r5b...@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> aa...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Len Stys) writes:
>>
>>>Ed, I can buy a 386 DX 25 MHz clone with an 85 meg HD, 8 expansion slots,
>>>a 3.5" 1.4 meg drive, a 5.25" 1.2 meg drive, and a SVGA monitor for
>>>$799.
>>
>>My guess is this $799 mix-n-match computer you mention has many shortcomings.
>>
>>You have overlooked too many things. For one, the Falcon with it's Multitos
>>should run quite smoothly. I have heard the opposite claim many times for
>>386 PC's using windows. The Falcon is also a COMPLETE computer with quite
>>some performance in many respects. That's the edge.
>
>
>Does it have a good dealer support network..??
>
>Does it have county wide service..??
>
>Does it have a range of books, technical or software to support it...???
>
>Does it have a good range of software support..??
So you agree that the PC setup described falls short of being complete
or having any performance. That's the ticket.
>Roger................ shepp...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
--
___ ___ , ^ ,
Risto Juvonen
: By the time they get the productions flowing, you bet they will need
: that graphics chip!
:
: Atari is already BEHIND in technology with the Falcon030. The only thing
: that the Falcon has over ANY other system is the DSP chip.
:
Just asking: why do you even look for falcon, if you really need
64-bit graphics? If you're prof., go with Silicon and live Falcon
alone. If not, it really doesn't matter is there 16 or 64 bit
graphics...
_/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/
_/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/
_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/
VISUAL ART PRODUCTION
Risto Juvonen Internet: al...@clinet.fi
Merisotilaantori 3 c 26 Fidonet: @SMACK! (2:220/110.0)
00160 Helsinki, Finland tel.358-(9)0-654804
------------------- Generation X --------------------------
Ed Krimen
>Ed, I can buy a 386 DX 25 MHz clone with an 85 meg HD, 8 expansion slots,
>a 3.5" 1.4 meg drive, a 5.25" 1.2 meg drive, and a SVGA monitor for
>$799.
Deja vu?
Wow, a 386 clone is about as exciting as watching re-runs of "Designing Women."
--
||| Ed Krimen
||| ekr...@wet.uucp
/ | \ E.KRIMEN (GEnie)
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
>You forget, it's an entry-level machine. It's not supposed to have the
>latest technology.
You forget.. it has the PRICE of a "latest technology" machine,
without the features..
For $799, you can get a heck of a PC.. *including* RAM and
a hard disk drive...
An "entry level" computer should be priced a lot lower, or at
least include the basics..
BobR
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
Scum of the Earth..
Sure.. but can your Falcon do *anything*...?
Without software, you've got a high-tech (and expensive)
paperweight..
Meanwhile, that poor, misguided PC owner is happily computing
using his lousy, clunky, "everyone knows" has problems PC to
do exactly what he wants it to do.
He had to pay $89 more to get 11 voice FM synthesis music, with
VOC sampled voice support.. so what..? It works.. NOW..
He had to pay $19 more to get a mouse.. so what..? It works..
NOW...
He's got an IDE drive.. so what? That's what the Falcon has too!
The point that seems to be universally missed here is that if
someone decides that they want to use a computer *NOW*, instead
of waiting for the ever present Atari "RSN", they CAN do it..
If someone decides they want to get some actual work done NOW
instead of waiting continually for the NEXT broken promise,
why shouldn't they..?
Why wait forever for the "ultimate" pie in the sky dream, when
you can get a REAL computer NOW..?
(OK, maybe some of us can afford to wait forever for Atari to get
their act together.. maybe someday they'll actually come up with
a killer machine that *everybody* just HAS to HAVE... but until
then, why spite yourself just to make Atari feel good...????)
BobR
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
>Wow, a 386 clone is about as exciting as watching re-runs of "Designing Wome
Tell me about it Ed.. tell me about 16 Mhz. 16 bit bus 68030s..
Tell me about yesterday's technology while you're at it...
BobR
Kevin o donovan
play a decent version of Battletech (Mech Warrior) on my Atari.
Kev
Kosmatos Odisseas
>Odisseas Kosmatos lists lots of "reasons" why PCs are the
>Scum of the Earth..
>
>Sure.. but can your Falcon do *anything*...?
>
>Without software, you've got a high-tech (and expensive)
>paperweight..
>
>Meanwhile, that poor, misguided PC owner is happily computing
>using his lousy, clunky, "everyone knows" has problems PC to
>do exactly what he wants it to do.
>
>He had to pay $89 more to get 11 voice FM synthesis music, with
>VOC sampled voice support.. so what..? It works.. NOW..
>
>He had to pay $19 more to get a mouse.. so what..? It works..
>NOW...
I understand your narrow-minded point of view, and cannot flat out say
it is a load of rubbish, but let's not get off the original topic, which
was that the Falcon has nothing going for it. I've shown at least twice
my reasons for why I think so, and we've seen your opposite reasoning too.
The original point was that the $799 PC was not much of a performer,
and that you would have to spend more money to get it to do
anything, whenever the need arose.
>He's got an IDE drive.. so what? That's what the Falcon has too!
>
>The point that seems to be universally missed here is that if
>someone decides that they want to use a computer *NOW*, instead
>of waiting for the ever present Atari "RSN", they CAN do it..
>
>If someone decides they want to get some actual work done NOW
>instead of waiting continually for the NEXT broken promise,
>why shouldn't they..?
>
>Why wait forever for the "ultimate" pie in the sky dream, when
>you can get a REAL computer NOW..?
>
>(OK, maybe some of us can afford to wait forever for Atari to get
>their act together.. maybe someday they'll actually come up with
>a killer machine that *everybody* just HAS to HAVE... but until
>then, why spite yourself just to make Atari feel good...????)
>
>BobR
Kosmatos Odisseas
3 lessons to be learned...
1. A processor is not the only thing that makes a good computer.
2. A 486/66Mhz does'nt necessarily mean 'loads of fun'
3. Yesterdays technology was only 24 hours ago. :-)
Jan T. Kim
>For $799, you can get a heck of a PC.. *including* RAM and
>a hard disk drive...
>
>An "entry level" computer should be priced a lot lower, or at
>least include the basics..
Hmmm... the question is, isn't that "heck of a PC" just another
instance of an "entry level machine"?
Greetinx, Jan
+- Jan Kim -- X.400: S=kim;OU=vax;O=mpiz-koeln;P=mpg;A=dbp;C=de -+
| Internet: k...@vax.mpiz-koeln.mpg.dbp.de |
| |
*----=< hierarchical systems are for files, not for humans >=-----*
dav...@simvax.labmed.umn.edu
>If someone decides they want to get some actual work done NOW
>instead of waiting continually for the NEXT broken promise,
>why shouldn't they..?
Just a quick question here, Bob. What computer do you use most of the time?
This includes those times you're online answering CompuServe questions about
the Atari ST line...
-- David Paschall-Zimbel
dav...@simvax.labmed.umn.edu
Bob, please tell us about all the non-EISA 486DX-33 machines out there with
16-bit buses...
-- David Paschall-Zimbel
Ed Krimen
>
>>You forget, it's an entry-level machine. It's not supposed to have the
>>latest technology.
>
>You forget.. it has the PRICE of a "latest technology" machine,
>without the features..
>
>For $799, you can get a heck of a PC.. *including* RAM and
>a hard disk drive...
>
Oh, forgive me lord BobR, for I have ruffled ye feathers. I beg of you
a thousand pardons so that I may continue to read and post on this newsgroup.
You are unequivocably correct, lord BobR. I do not understand how I could have
ever misunderstood and have been led away from your teachings, oh lord BobR.
I plead with you once more, lord BobR, to forgive me for I have not believed
and followed what you have preached. I promise to respectfully obey your
every thought and desire, even if it spells doom and gloom of the entity for
which we know as Atari.
Once again, lord BobR, please forgive me for I have sinned.
(geez...)
--
BobR Ed Krimen
BobR ekr...@wet.uucp
BobR E.KRIMEN (GEnie)
Gordon Farrell
[the firey flames of hell deleted]
>
Ouch! That hurt just to read :-). Not to say BobR didn't have it coming.
This interminable flame war has forced me to ask a question of BobR that
I once asked of Darek Mihocka a few months back: What's the problem?
What did Atari ever do to you to get you so rabid?
I got a polite, enlightening response from Darek, and look forward to yours.
>(geez...)
>--
> BobR Ed Krimen
> BobR ekr...@wet.uucp
> BobR E.KRIMEN (GEnie)
^^^^ (Nice touch...)
________________________________________________________________________________
Gordon Farrell |e-mail:gfar...@cs.sfu.ca |"Shee, you guys are so unhip
| gor...@sfu.ca | it's a wonder your bums
Simon Fraser University | | don't fall off."
Burnaby, B.C., Canada | | -Zaphod Beeblebrox
steve wells
released, just about all that was available for them, was the nice slow
Operating System (PC-DOS or something similar it was called back then).
and a couple of spread-sheets etc.
The Falcon is basically a new-beginning for Atari, and there is already
a lot of software currently available that will work okay on the Falcon.
(A lot won't, but that's the price you pay for advancement).
*If* the thing takes off, you can bet your a** that people *will* write
software for the thing!
Comparing computers is a pointless waste of time, people will buy the
computer which has the features that *they* are most interested in, or which
will be of most use to them.
As someone so well stated previously, they are only computers anyway, it's
not as if they were relations, or (as said) a religion!). Jset seen /thread
Just lumps of plastic, metal and silicon.
steve wells
Wait for the Falcon, and then write an Am*ga 600, (or evern 1200) emulator.
Even with emulation slow-downs, the speed should be pretty close!
(Except if the a1200 has a 32Mhz... But the ST's disk drive is a LOT
faster than the amiga's so, speed is just about made up there 8-)
Len Stys
In a previous article, dav...@simvax.labmed.umn.edu () says:
>In article <72...@cup.portal.com>, Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com writes:
>>Tell me about it Ed.. tell me about 16 Mhz. 16 bit bus 68030s..
>
>Bob, please tell us about all the non-EISA 486DX-33 machines out there with
>16-bit buses...
>
>-- David Paschall-Zimbel
>
Hey, hey...
I'll be first to admit that the Falcon030 even with a Motorola 68030 CPU
at 16 MHz is a good machine.
If Atari could produce say, 500,000 next year and sell them all over
the world, this would definitely work for the company.
But in the back of my mind, I'm afraid that ATARI will only produce
around 50,000 by November of next year.
And in the back of my mind, I'm afraid that ATARI will not advertise
anywhere about this system.
The problem isn't quite with the Falcon030, it is a good computer.
The problem is that the company producing them will need to REALLY
get off their butts and produce and market it.
That's what worries me.
And there is no doubt in my mind that a 16 MHz home computer will
be obsolete BY mid'94.
Can Atari really do anything with the system in less than a year?
I don't know.
--
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
3 lessons to be learned...
1. A processor is not the only thing that makes a good computer.
2. A 486/66Mhz does'nt necessarily mean 'loads of fun'
3. Yesterdays technology was only 24 hours ago. :-)
Very good points..!
Ok.. for a somewhat different discussion.. what exactly is it that
makes a computer "exciting"..?
Pattie Rayl doesn't like PCs because of the way they look. She
likes the looks of the Mac, so I guess that for her, the physical
appearance of a computer would be what is "exciting"..
A lot of people like to compare specifications.. is a 32 bit bus
better or worse than a 16 bit bus running with a CPU that can
implement "look ahead" caching.. in that respect, the internal
aspects of a computer are what are "exciting"..
Others are excited by what the computer can actually do in
"real world" applications..
The Falcon is "exciting" because it combines a lot of features
that are either "leading edge" or have the potential for unusual
applications.
A VAXcluster might even be "exciting" for some people because of the
idea of multitasking a lot of processes and the system resources associated
with a large system.
To me, a '386 clone IS exciting, because I can use it to play
Red Baron on the Sierra Network and shoot down (or get shot down
by) friends from all over the country, something that can't
be done with any other kind of computer at the moment.
So, what is it that makes a computer "exciting"...?
BobR
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
>Hmmm... the question is, isn't that "heck of a PC" just another
>instance of an "entry level machine"?
Yes.. thinking about how fast the PC market is moving, you're probably
right that a '386SX with VGA or SVGA monitor, 2 High Density floppy
drives and a 100+ Meg hard drive would probably be considered as an
"Entry Level" system today.
BobR
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
>Just a quick question here, Bob. What computer do you use most of the time?
>This includes those times you're online answering CompuServe questions about
>the Atari ST line...
Gotta wonder a little about the relevance of the question.. but
as David is so predictable, I can just hear the "must be personal
problems with Atari Corp" comments coming...
Well, the answer is.. it depends on what I want to do..
(the classic "decide what you want a computer to do before you
decide on what computer to get")
Right now my XT is re-compressing some GIF pictures, the PS/2
is waiting for me to get back to playing Eye of the Beholder II,
and my ST is busy composing this message.
When I want to display those GIFs, I'll use the VGA of the PS/2,
and when I want to program a little, I'll use the Hercules XT
system for its larger hard drive. Llamatron belongs to the ST..
I played it on the PS/2, and it truely sucks.
Then there's the mini-tower with its '286 motherboard and pieces
all over the room, waiting to be assembled. What it doesn't know
is that the '286 board will never be installed, since '386DX
boards have dropped in price so much. When that one is done,
I'll be able to play Ultima Underworld and the other games that
require the speed and memory.
CompuServe..? That belongs to the ST.. I still haven't found
a telecommunications program for any other computer platform
that works as well, or meets my needs like Flash does. In fact,
my ST is seldom ever turned off, since the capture buffer in
Flash usually holds a megabyte or more of online sessions from
all the boards and services I use. (The only exception is the
Sierra Network, which only works with PCs for the time being).
Oh.. and when I want to print out huge doc files, I use a VAX
8550 in a cluster of a dozen VAXes to use their high-speed
lineprinters..
But.. since most of my time is spent online somewhere, the
answer to the original question would have to be that I use my
ST more often than any of the others..
Any other questions..?
BobR
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
>-- David Paschall-Zimbel
Nice try, David.. by quoting a line of my message out of context,
you've once again managed to twist it into something it wasn't
and attempted to give it a completely different meaning.
Sorry.. I don't play that game.. try again.
BobR
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
Yeah, you're forgiven... just don't let it happen again..
BobR
Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com
>What did Atari ever do to you to get you so rabid?
Basically, and essentially, Atari Corporation, under the
management of the Tramiel family took a promising, leading-edge,
fresh approach, user friendly, and very hopeful computer system,
and for all intents and purposes, ruined it.
In the process, they also affected the lives and livelihoods of
a lot of people who tried very hard to support the Atari computer
line, a lot of whom were, and are, my friends.
Perhaps one of the worst things they've done, again and again,
is to raise false hopes among those who still support them and
their computers.
I've been involved with Atari computers since the Warner days,
and I've supported Atari computer users all that time. I'll be
among the last group out the door when they turn out the lights
whenever that might be, too.
I like my 520ST best of all the computers I've owned over the
years and use it daily. It makes me awfully sad to think of
what it might have become, if only its parents had cared about
it.
BobR
Erik Funkenbusch
>First of all, I'm told that 640x480 TRUE COLOR would require 4 Megs
>of memory for NICE games. I'm told that 2 Megs would not really be
>enough since there must be room for other stuff like sound.
Except that the falcon only allows 3 memory configurations. 1M, 4M, and
14M. You can't have only 2M of memory.
>Secondly, no one seems to know if this resolution (interlaced of course)
>could be displayed on TV without flicker. Does anyone know?
If this is interlaced, it SHOULD work, it'll have SOME flicker, but TV's use
slow phosphor, so it won't be as noticable on a TV as a monitor.
>Thirdly, I have talked with someone that said that 640x200 (I'm not sure
>if you can get true color in this resolution) would also produce some
>pretty good games. I guess that could be pushed to 640x240, but
>anyways, I'm told that 300k for ONE screen. And you'll need at least
>TWO screens. This would allow this game to produce with only 2 Megs
>easily--MAYBE even 1 Meg.
Again, there is no 2 meg configuration. Though 640x400 should give too much
display contention to get good frame speed, 640x200 might be usable.
>I have been also informed that the Blitter REALLY would not be fast
>enough to move graphics around. And someone suggested that Atari should
>have used the TI30410. My question is, would the DSP work just as well?
>The Atari Advantage article states these things:
It's probably fast enough to do simple graphic moves, but nothing complex.
The DSP doesn't really have the "oomph" to pretend to be a blitter.
>Image management: Shapes, sizes, contours, shading, highlights
>Vector manipulation; grahics "engines"
>CAD/CAM workstations' 3-D image generators
>Flight (and other transportation) simulators; arts and film sequences
>
>If anyone knows anything about the 56001 DSP, please join in and
>say something!
I've seen posts from people that work for Motorola and know EXACTLY what the
56001 can do. They tell me the 56001 is not powerful, or precise enough to do
large graphical computations. The 96001 is supposed to be much better for
this. In any case, you lose the DSP to do audio things if you attempt to do
graphics with it.
>Will the DSP be able to produce CD quality sound AND generate graphics
>in a game?
The DSP doesn't give you the sound, the DAC's do, however, i'm sure the DSP
feeds the DAC's so you will probably lose your sound.
>What is the 32Kx24 bit (96K bytes) of local zero wait state SRAM for?
>What does the DSP do with it?
Well, it's program and data have to be stored somewhere..
>And lastly, the Jaguar is rumored to run off of a RISC 64-bit chip.
>We don't know what type of chip this is.
>
>Could the Jaguar POSSIBLY be a Motorola 68030 at 16 MHz and have a
>RISC DSP?
Well, knowing Atari's penchant for being dishonest, and alluding to things
that aren't so, I'd say it's a possibility, but, for those that buy a jaguar
(if it ever sees the light of day) I hope not. That would be one SLOW game
system.
Michael Olin
>The Falcon is "exciting" because it combines a lot of features
>that are either "leading edge" or have the potential for unusual
>applications.
Let's put that into perspective, shall we?
The Falcon COULD BE "exciting" if only the Shot-In-The-Foot guys can
actually get it on the market before its "leading edge" claim becomes
old news...
I'm betting even Sam "We're talking about a machine that will be
available next week" Tramiel won't hold his breath until they're
available here in the U.S. (But I'd sure LIKE TO SEE HIM DO IT!)
The Falcon rollout would make a great title to a movie sequel:
Falcon: The Debacle Contiues.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
||| Sing a happy tune and
mo...@ptb.cl.msu.edu ||| happy dancers will join
Canton, Michigan USA / | \ your trip. -T. Golas
Michael Olin
>I like my 520ST best of all the computers I've owned over the
>years and use it daily. It makes me awfully sad to think of
>what it might have become, if only its parents had cared about
>it.
I couldn't have said this better myself. (And I haven't even TRIED
to take it out of context yet!
:)
Randy Hoekstra
|>someone decides that they want to use a computer *NOW*, instead
|>of waiting for the ever present Atari "RSN", they CAN do it..
|>
'using' it ever since. I have since upgraded to a Mega and have added-on to
the best my budget could handle and the ST continues to be a perfectly
acceptable solution to my computing needs. It's a good thing that PC prices
have fallen to the point they have, as they need all that 'power', ram, and
disk space to get anything done.
You can also add me to the list of people who are getting real tired of your
negative, bitter, and personal attacks on Atari and others who post here.
Granted that Atari has it's problems and has made more than it's share of
mistakes, others have made plenty of mistakes too. There is no perfect
computer just as there is no perfect software, etc.,etc. The fact is, many
of us reading this newsgroup do so because we like and support the Atari
platform and we do not enjoy the continual badgering from you. Dave Bagget
has a legitimate beef with Atari and I appreciate his view on that situation,
but I am tired of you riding his coat-tails on his dealings with Atari. Why
don't you go deal with them and then come tell us about it.
In the meantime can we please stick to worthwhile information that will help
those of us who have decided to make the most out of our STs (and eventually
our Falcons).
Randy
Craig Shore
>So, what is it that makes a computer "exciting"...?
Ability to do things fast enough so I don't have to wait all the time
Nice Graphics (to support a decent image of 2 programs on the screen at
once)
Nice Sound
A price tag that reads $cheap .. which I think all the atari owners will
want.
Available software to do the job.
Available spare parts for servicing (something atari doesn't have here)
Craig.
--
* Craig Shore | Phone (voice) | Internet:cr...@yonder.equinox.gen.nz *
* 20 Tasman Pl,| +64 3 3852501 | :craig...@equinox.gen.nz *
* Christchurch, New Zealand | SLNET: 250:700/1266 FIDONET: 3:770/180 *
Dave_Ninj...@cup.portal.com
grow up. Most of the people who make it to Usenet know the failings of
Atari, some better than Bob, most of us have managed to avoid the pit he
wallows in.
Sherry Mackiewicz
In a previous article, ren...@crchh610.BNR.CA (Randy Hoekstra) says:
>In article <72...@cup.portal.com>, Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com writes:
>|>The point that seems to be universally missed here is that if
>|>someone decides that they want to use a computer *NOW*, instead
>|>of waiting for the ever present Atari "RSN", they CAN do it..
>|>
>Around 7 years ago I bought my 'real' computer (1040ST) and have been happily
>'using' it ever since. I have since upgraded to a Mega and have added-on to
>the best my budget could handle and the ST continues to be a perfectly
>acceptable solution to my computing needs. It's a good thing that PC prices
>have fallen to the point they have, as they need all that 'power', ram, and
>disk space to get anything done.
>
>You can also add me to the list of people who are getting real tired of your
>negative, bitter, and personal attacks on Atari and others who post here.
>Granted that Atari has it's problems and has made more than it's share of
>mistakes, others have made plenty of mistakes too. There is no perfect
>computer just as there is no perfect software, etc.,etc. The fact is, many
>of us reading this newsgroup do so because we like and support the Atari
>platform and we do not enjoy the continual badgering from you. Dave Bagget
>has a legitimate beef with Atari and I appreciate his view on that situation,
>but I am tired of you riding his coat-tails on his dealings with Atari. Why
>don't you go deal with them and then come tell us about it.
>
>In the meantime can we please stick to worthwhile information that will help
>those of us who have decided to make the most out of our STs (and eventually
>our Falcons).
>
>Randy
I agree. We all know that Atari as a company performs in a lousy way..
But since we all know that, why blather on about it?
Sorry about the length, I have no idea how this quoter works...
>
>
--
Atari is a religion.
Welcome to the 90's.
Sherry ||| Mackiewicz
/ | \
Ed Krimen
Happiness is BobR in a kill file.
At least I don't have to read his whining any more.
And people wonder why Atari doesn't read/respond to the net.
--
||| Ed Krimen
||| ekr...@wet.uucp
/ | \ E.KRIMEN (GEnie)
Patricia Snyder-Rayl
Organization: GREX Public Access Unix +1 313 761 3000
Pegasus Press
3487 Braeburn Circle
Ann Arbor, MI 48108
(313) 973-8825
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Announcing CONNECT -- A New Telecomputing Magazine
ANN ARBOR, MI -- For a limited time, Pegasus Press is offering dramatically
discounted subscription rates on its new magazine, CONNECT. Covering the
major commercial online services, Internet/Usenet and bulletin board system
networks, CONNECT focuses on telecommunications from a user's perspective.
The first bi-monthly issue of CONNECT will be available in March, 1993.
Issue after issue, CONNECT shows you how to get the most from the
commercial online services you're using -- CompuServe, Delphi, America
Online, Prodigy, GEnie and BIX. With columnists on staff to cover these
services in depth, you'll find CONNECT a valuable resource.
CONNECT also shows you what "free" networks like Internet have to offer.
Every issue of CONNECT contains Internet coverage that helps you find your
way around the biggest network in the world.
But CONNECT doesn't stop there. BBS callers also receive a wealth of
information from each issue. All varieties of computer platforms are
covered in the pages of CONNECT, as are the many different types of
bulletin board software and services found on these computers. Articles
spotlighting BBSes in specific cities or similar categories (such as
medical BBSes or handicapped-related systems) appear regularly.
Finally, each issue contains platform-specific columns highlighting
programs available online for IBM and Macintosh users. Of course, you'll
also find hardware and software reviews in CONNECT. From high speed modems
and LAN-based BBS systems to shareware terminal programs, we cover it
all.
Until February 28th, 1993, a year's subscription to CONNECT will be only
$12. On March 1st, 1993, the normal subscription price of $18 per year goes
into effect. This offer is available only to US addresses.
For more information, please contact Pegasus Press at 3487 Braeburn Circle,
Ann Arbor, MI 48108 or phone (313) 973-8825. For the fastest response and
a copy of the subscription form, please email us at
peg...@grex.ann-arbor.mi.us
Don't delay. Get CONNECTed today!
Dan Cable
>[ thoughtful but somewhat wordy stuff deleted ] 8 )
>So, what is it that makes a computer "exciting"...?
Should one's choice of computer(s) be an emotional issue? I am forced to
agree with you that it is. "New" is what makes a computer "exciting". New
peripherals, new programs, new experiences of sight and sound. Newfound
functionality. This is what drives the ever upward spiral of processor
speeds and graphics resolutions. How many people really need 66mhz? For what?
How many things do you need to do that couldn't adequately be done on an 8
bit machine? I'm sure there are some but not many. Perhaps Atari's
salvation will be that they will market cans of "new computer smell" to
stimulate the users olfactory senses until Falcons arrive to tempt us with
new sights and sounds.
Please accept my opinions on this matter in the light they were given even
if the original question was thought provoking.
David Baggett
IMWO: (weary)
Sorry, but people only publically make this kind of acknowledgement
that Atari has *serious* problems after a huge Atari Cheerleaders v.
Anti-Cheerleaders flamewar reminds everyone how bad it really is to own
an Atari computer (and therefore rely on Atari for anything) these
days. It's like some of us get really tired of the lies, ludicrous
rumors, and dreams that urge people to sink more money into a dying
compnay's products, and we feel compelled to post some arguments,
therbey eliciting a massive backlash of ill-will.
If you are SO sure about your decision to buy a Falcon, then hearing
criticisms of it (or Atari) shouldn't sway you one way or the other.
If you aren't so sure, then it's probably good to hear even a devil's
advocate giving his side of the story. (I don't know about you, but I
still consider a US$1000 computer a major purchase, and hence one I
would not want to make without adequate research and soul-searching.)
Bob is about the only person who's willing to contest some of the
*absurd* Pollyanna visions some people who post here have, as well as
the rampant disinformation we are drowning in in this group. (A case
in point being the "demos" thread wherein Bob had to explicitly provide
pathnames to software that's been around for quite a while, and that
anyone who'd read even a week's worth of comp.sys.ibm.pc.games would
know about.) Bob may be *wrong* on some points, but at least he's
broadly informed, and isn't just arguing from the point of view of
someone who's had his head in the Atari sand for 7 years. We should
really compile a FAQ, "Incorrect Crap Atari and Amiga People Think is
True about PC's and Mac's" so that we don't have to keep explaining
that YES you CAN get 386/33 motherboards for $185, or that GEE, Mac's
have had software-transparent 24-bit color support for two years, or
UH-HUH, PC's DO run good Unix implementations these days.
People like BobR keep Atari honest, and they keep Atarians from getting
more deluded than they already are.
Sometimes Bob may cross the line between "cynical" and "belligerent,"
but that is not, I think, what you are faulting him for when you say he
"wallows in a pit." Few people are willing to take as much abuse as
Bob just to defend their viewpoints. Being (as someone pointed out
here recently) a "Type A personality," I respect that. :) It seems
like the usual way readers of this group deal with Bob is to gang up on
him to such an extent that he can't keep up with all the posts he has
to respond to, and then gives up. It's easy to post a "me too, Bob
sucks" message, but what does that contribute? Like saturation
bombing, this is effective but not very inspiring strategy. If he's
such an idiot, you should have no trouble dispatching him quickly with
well-reasoned arguments. Right? Right?
If you disagree with what Bob says, respond to him pointedly, but lose
the personal attacks. If you use them then he will find it hard to
resist retaliating with a bit of the same. It usually looks to me like
people who get criticized for personal attacks have been drawn into
that sort of thing by a constant barrage of ad hominem from their
"opposition." In theory we are trying to get at the heart of Atari's
problems in these threads; that's the first step to fixing the
problems, and that's why it's a useful endeavor and appropriate to this
group. If a vocal minority thinks that Atari computers are hampered by
their closed architectures, for example, that's indicative of a similar
opinion in the world at large, and hence suggests that it's crucial for
Atari to understand and address that issue before cranking out yet
another home computer.
These discussions (ones that Bob typically plays a key role in) are a
gold mine of information for Atari. If only they read this stuff and
took into heartfelt consideration, they wouldn't be where they are
today. (Do you think Sam knows that 386/33 motherboards are $185? I
bet you he doesn't. Do you think Sam cares two hoots in hell about
open vs. closed architectures? I bet you he hasn't really thought
about it. Do you think Sam has ever heard of the TI34010? I have
a funny feeling he hasn't.)
Dave Baggett
--
d...@ai.mit.edu MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
ADVENTIONS: interactive fiction (text adventures) for the 90's!
d...@ai.mit.edu *** Compu$erve: 76440,2671 *** GEnie: ADVENTIONS
Bill Rayl
HOORAY Dave! I don't think anyone could have said it any better!
Pattie Rayl *Unicorn Publications*
James Hague
IMO "exciting" computers are the ones that let the
user be in charge. You buy a machine and you can
decide what to do with it. That was one of the big
principles of the home computer revolution. Rather
than having to put up with annoying MIS-oids and
system administrators, you could type in a word processor
from a magazine--the key being that you could do whatever
you wanted yourself. You had choice. That's where all
the religious computer wars came from, people were
defending their choices.
The mainstream PC market puts users back in the
subservient position, or at least very far behind
corporate interests. You have to upgrade your computer
when you are told or you won't be able to run the
latest software. You get tied to particular companies
and have to respond to their every move. There is
less competition--only two or three real choices when
it comes to Windows word processors, for example.
You can dodge this nonsense, of course, making things
a bit brighter. You can look into alternative products
from smaller companies that give you more freedom. But
if you choose this route you are basically in the same
boat as ST users. You rarely find write-ups of smaller
products in magazines. The companies don't have flashy
four-color ads, etc.
--
James Hague
exu...@exu.ericsson.se
David Baggett
>Happiness is BobR in a kill file.
It sure works great for beasts of bruden. (Blinders, I mean.)
It keeps them from getting spooked.
>At least I don't have to read his whining any more.
Instead you have to read meta-whining about his whining!
>And people wonder why Atari doesn't read/respond to the net.
For the same reason they don't do everything else that might
put them in touch with their user base -- they don't give
a damn about the people who own their computers.
Derk Haendel
>Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com writes:
>
>>[ thoughtful but somewhat wordy stuff deleted ] 8 )
>>So, what is it that makes a computer "exciting"...?
>
>Should one's choice of computer(s) be an emotional issue? I am forced to
>agree with you that it is. "New" is what makes a computer "exciting". New
>peripherals, new programs, new experiences of sight and sound. Newfound
>functionality. This is what drives the ever upward spiral of processor
>speeds and graphics resolutions. How many people really need 66mhz? For what?
>How many things do you need to do that couldn't adequately be done on an 8
>bit machine? I'm sure there are some but not many. Perhaps Atari's
>salvation will be that they will market cans of "new computer smell" to
>stimulate the users olfactory senses until Falcons arrive to tempt us with
>new sights and sounds.
>
The many things I can do with my old MST 4 / TOS 1.2 serve me well, but
since I do a lot of DTP now, I'd love to get a faster Computer, without
changing the Software ;-)
>Please accept my opinions on this matter in the light they were given even
>if the original question was thought provoking.
I hate postings like 'I have the best computer'. People who know, what they
want to do with their computer, should buy the machine, on which they can
do anything they want.
Excuse my bad English HANK
--
ha...@longus.north.de
Derk Haendel, Ostpreussenstrasse 17, 2887 Elsfleth, Tel. 04404 - 3294
John Hutchinson
>
>I've bought my Computer, because of the SM124 flickerfree-monochromemode!
>The many things I can do with my old MST 4 / TOS 1.2 serve me well, but
>since I do a lot of DTP now, I'd love to get a faster Computer, without
>changing the Software ;-)
Why not consider an accelerator board for your MST 4? There are a slew of
options available to you from ICD, Fast Technology, and Gadgets by Small
not to mention some of the European accelerator boards.
>Excuse my bad English HANK
No worries, Hank... your English is great!
---
___________________________ John "HUTCH" Hutchinson _________________________
_________________ Fair Dinkum Technologies Member - IAAD _______________
________________ "No worries, mate... it's from Fair Dinkum!" _______________
____________ email: hu...@bellman.lanl.gov GEnie: FAIR-DINKUM _____________
neu...@cuphub.cup.edu
*VERY* well said, Bob. Though not a developer, I was an early user...
and "believer...yes, I'm using my 1MB 1040STf right now. But after
watching Atari shaft Shiraz and many other good people, I now only read
this group for a good laugh. However, I had to give Bob some support.
Eric R. Smith
>In article <49...@wet.UUCP> ekr...@wet.UUCP (Ed Krimen) writes:
>>And people wonder why Atari doesn't read/respond to the net.
>For the same reason they don't do everything else that might
>put them in touch with their user base -- they don't give
>a damn about the people who own their computers.
There are many Atari employees who read Usenet. There are some who
post to Usenet (I'm one of them). Those of us who do generally try
to avoid getting involved in threads that are "no win" propositions,
or about which we don't know the details. I understand that David is
upset at Atari; I wasn't around when he was here, and so I can't
comment on what happened during his visit. But I can assure him (and
anyone else reading) that Atari employees do care about the people
who own our computers. Indeed, most Atari employees I know own
an Atari computer.
I am not an Atari spokesperson, nor do I have anything to do with
marketing or manufacturing (so don't bother flaming me about our
problems in those areas... which the appropriate people do know about,
and are taking steps to ameliorate).
Eric Smith ers...@netcom.com ers...@atari.uucp
Christopher Mauritz
(neu...@cuphub.cup.edu) wrote:
OS/2> In article <72...@cup.portal.com>, Bob_BobR...@cup.portal.com writes:
OS/2> > Gordon Farrell asks:
OS/2> >
OS/2> >>What did Atari ever do to you to get you so rabid?
OS/2> >
OS/2> > Basically, and essentially, Atari Corporation, under the
OS/2> > management of the Tramiel family took a promising, leading-edge,
OS/2> > fresh approach, user friendly, and very hopeful computer system,
OS/2> > and for all intents and purposes, ruined it.
OS/2> >
OS/2> > In the process, they also affected the lives and livelihoods of
OS/2> > a lot of people who tried very hard to support the Atari computer
OS/2> > line, a lot of whom were, and are, my friends.
OS/2> >
OS/2> > Perhaps one of the worst things they've done, again and again,
OS/2> > is to raise false hopes among those who still support them and
OS/2> > their computers.
OS/2> >
OS/2> > I've been involved with Atari computers since the Warner days,
OS/2> > and I've supported Atari computer users all that time. I'll be
OS/2> > among the last group out the door when they turn out the lights
OS/2> > whenever that might be, too.
OS/2> *VERY* well said, Bob. Though not a developer, I was an early user...
OS/2> and "believer...yes, I'm using my 1MB 1040STf right now. But after
OS/2> watching Atari shaft Shiraz and many other good people, I now only read
OS/2> this group for a good laugh. However, I had to give Bob some support.
I'll throw in my support as well. How many of you guys remember when
Bob Retelle was one of Atari's biggest boosters on GEnie back in the
mid 80's? In spite of all his whippings at the hands of those
bumbling buffoons in Sunnyvale, he still seems to spend a significant
amount of time on this group helping out pigeo...um...new users with
problems and such.
It is truly a sign of things to come when you see the Baggetts, the
Retelles, the Johnsons, the Eisvogs (I know I didn't spell that right)
and yes, even the Darek Mihokas and Ignak Kolenkos disappear from
the Atari scene. These guys often went above and beyond the call
of duty to get out quality products to the Atari community. Let's
face it, there's no reason for these talented people to hang around.
There's no money in supporting Atari products and there's not only
minimal support from Atari for developers, but they even go so
far as shitting on the few knights of the Fuji table who are still
around.
Atari's balance sheet and sales are the laughing stock of the computer
world and Wall Street. Their products are not even close to
being on the cutting edge of technology anymore, nor are they a
good bargain (once you add a usable amount of memory, disk, and
a decent monitor to it). It has gotten to the point where Atari
could start selling a capable machine (perhaps a 68040-based Falcon)
and they wouldn't be able to find anyone to write software for it.
The fat lady is taking a deep breath and preparing for one hell of
a song. Start saving up those Atari stock certificates, they'll
soon make great kitty litter. Actually, that would be a great
idea for you militant disaffected users. For $20 bucks
you could buy enough Atari stock (at about one dollar a share)
to make a respectable amount of kitty litter. Let your cat use
it for a few days and then start mailing it to Sunnyvale. :-)
Cheers,
Chris
--
Christopher Mauritz | My views reflect those of my
ri...@ritz.mordor.com | company since I own the company.
{backbone}!rutgers!spcvxb!ritz!ritz | Ritz International, Inc.
OS/2 OS/2 OS/2 OS/2 OS/2 OS/2 OS/2 | Import/Export Consultants