ST was a nice computer!

[Christos]

Not completely wrong. It was a computer and not a competitor to Nin or Sega. So he's right there. It did have some pretty cool games on it, too.

 

Pretty sure he's aware of the thread title, being that he started it and all

 

 

He he he, hadn't noticed that

 

Still mcjakeqcool, you seem to view the ST as a games console. It is not. If we are to discuss that aspect though, then I don't understand why the jaguar comes into the discussion. The jaguar has 4 good games while there are at least 400 good ST games. That is more than the entire jaguar library. Even the falcon has more games, and some of them are really good.

 

Still technically speaking the ST is just a 16-bit computer, while excellent for it's time it's no match for the jaguar or even the A8 in quite a few aspects.

 

Disclaimer: I really like the jag for what it might have been...

Edited May 11, 2009 by Christos

[mcjakeqcool]

I think that if there was a ST home console like the Atari XEGS, but with better design, marketing and joypad rather then a joystick, It would have outsold both the SNES and Mega Drive. For the record the ST is 16 bit, so do the math before anyone says the Jag was 16 bit and the ST 8.

[Bill Loguidice]

I think that if there was a ST home console like the Atari XEGS, but with better design, marketing and joypad rather then a joystick, It would have outsold both the SNES and Mega Drive. For the record the ST is 16 bit, so do the math before anyone says the Jag was 16 bit and the ST 8.

 

Too many hypotheticals there. The main problem Atari had in the console space post crash was always third party support. With Sega and Nintendo receiving the vast majority of third party support - you know, the titles people actually buy consoles for - not to mention untouchable first party stuff - there's no reasonable scenario where Atari could have succeeded, period, let alone somehow getting a reduced cost, consolized ST computer to market. The consolized ST would have arguably needed a better sound chip, among other things like better controller support and resythesized software to take advantage of TV resolutions (a la Commodore's failed CD32), to be truly competitive with the Genesis/Mega Drive and SNES.

[oky2000]

I think that if there was a ST home console like the Atari XEGS, but with better design, marketing and joypad rather then a joystick, It would have outsold both the SNES and Mega Drive. For the record the ST is 16 bit, so do the math before anyone says the Jag was 16 bit and the ST 8.

 

I doubt that, the 16 colour zero custom chipped ST would have been still born up against such technically ingenious machines as the Megadrive or SNES. And they were sold at cost too so no way to undercut them.

 

But anyway the ST was not a console and consoles always have better games historically. What I did love about my ST was the

 

a. it had an awesome GUI

b. looked amazing (had a 520STM which was such a classic design)

c. it taught me pixel art with a free disk inconspicuously named Neochrome

 

Funny thing is that's all I want from a computer even today is good GUI/looks/Pixel art program (not bloody Photoshop!)

 

[the.golden.ax]

WAS?!

 

AX

[TwiliteZoner]

I think that if there was a ST home console like the Atari XEGS, but with better design, marketing and joypad rather then a joystick, It would have outsold both the SNES and Mega Drive. For the record the ST is 16 bit, so do the math before anyone says the Jag was 16 bit and the ST 8.

 

Too many hypotheticals there. The main problem Atari had in the console space post crash was always third party support. With Sega and Nintendo receiving the vast majority of third party support - you know, the titles people actually buy consoles for - not to mention untouchable first party stuff - there's no reasonable scenario where Atari could have succeeded, period, let alone somehow getting a reduced cost, consolized ST computer to market. The consolized ST would have arguably needed a better sound chip, among other things like better controller support and resythesized software to take advantage of TV resolutions (a la Commodore's failed CD32), to be truly competitive with the Genesis/Mega Drive and SNES.

 

Well by the time of the SNES it would have been Falcon based as opposed to ST. The Falcon had more than enough horsepower to compete with the Sega and Nintendo consoles. But as Bill points out, it is the 3rd party support, or lack there of, that would have killed the unit.

Edited May 12, 2009 by TwiliteZoner

[+DarkLord]

WAS?!

 

AX

 

I'm with you!

 

I S ! ! !

 

[mcjakeqcool]

It's a shame that Atari could never get 3rd Party support after the game crash of '83, but Atari messed up making the 5200 to big, and making it incompatable with 2600 games (I don't think the controlers were a big issue, they were simalar to the ColecoVision's) ,then messed up shelveing the 7800 for 2 years, then messed up again in the late 80s by touting the ageing 2600 instead of the 7800 and again decideing to market the 7800 and XE at the same time, and yet again getting rid of the 8 bit line and ST before launching the Jaguar so add all those mistakes up, and they could not get third party support for the Jaguar, or afford a affective advertising campain for the Jaguar, and that lead to the faliure of the Jaguar and the demise of Atari. It was not the losses made with E.T and Pacman that killed Atari, it was the hole they dug after that killed them. Shame cos Atari were a great company, and had some great games, and decent hardware.

Edited May 13, 2009 by mcjakeqcool

[Fletch]

I've owned or still own many model from the 520ST - Falcon030 and have many fond memories of the ST days. GEM was what set the ST apart from the AMIGA in my mind and is what I most fondly remember about the ST.

 

Looking back though my fondest Atari memories come from the 8-bit Warner era. Atari never quite seemed as interesting or dynamic under the Tramiels.

 

I really did like my Falcon though. I'm sad I sold it.

[flashjazzcat]

I've owned or still own many model from the 520ST - Falcon030 and have many fond memories of the ST days. GEM was what set the ST apart from the AMIGA in my mind and is what I most fondly remember about the ST.

 

Looking back though my fondest Atari memories come from the 8-bit Warner era. Atari never quite seemed as interesting or dynamic under the Tramiels.

 

I really did like my Falcon though. I'm sad I sold it.

I had an Amiga for a short while around the time I was doing lots of programming on the 8-bit (and long before I got my hands on an ST - which was only a few weeks ago) and it didn't really excite me much (hope I don't start a debate here...). I realize the OS must have been far more advanced than GEM, and the hardware was in several ways superior to that of the ST, but I like the ST just as it is. Far more attractive than the Amiga in ways I can't really put my finger on.

 

I'd love a Falcon if one ever comes my way. I haven't even done much with either of my STs yet but I hope to have many years of pleasure from them; the 8-bit's kept me busy for twenty years.

[Bill Loguidice]

I had an Amiga for a short while around the time I was doing lots of programming on the 8-bit (and long before I got my hands on an ST - which was only a few weeks ago) and it didn't really excite me much (hope I don't start a debate here...). I realize the OS must have been far more advanced than GEM, and the hardware was in several ways superior to that of the ST, but I like the ST just as it is. Far more attractive than the Amiga in ways I can't really put my finger on.

 

I'd love a Falcon if one ever comes my way. I haven't even done much with either of my STs yet but I hope to have many years of pleasure from them; the 8-bit's kept me busy for twenty years.

 

:-) Yes, I think there's more than a couple of people who would disagree with that. One of the nice things of the whole Amiga/ST/IIgs era, was that was the last time when computers really had personality. Today, the personality, if any, is strictly tied to the OS. Back then, there were still only a handful of different models, so you could say you were an "Atari Falcon user" or an "Amiga 4000 user" or whatever. Today, you can't really say you're a "Dell 5127 user". It's not the same, even on the Apple side. Even saying I'm an "iMac" user doesn't mean much, as the specs vary so dramatically.

[flashjazzcat]

One of the nice things of the whole Amiga/ST/IIgs era, was that was the last time when computers really had personality. Today, the personality, if any, is strictly tied to the OS. Back then, there were still only a handful of different models, so you could say you were an "Atari Falcon user" or an "Amiga 4000 user" or whatever. Today, you can't really say you're a "Dell 5127 user". It's not the same, even on the Apple side. Even saying I'm an "iMac" user doesn't mean much, as the specs vary so dramatically.

Couldn't agree more. Me and a friend of mine (who was also a 65XE owner in the eighties but never touched a computer after that until he got a PC) were browsing the net the other day looking at old computer magazine scans, and marvelling at what a job it must have been to cover all bases for those non-specific magazines, since there was such a myriad of different hardware, operating systems, and flavours of BASIC. All my PCs have been self-builds but they're just jigsaw puzzles and - apart from the fancy case - have zero personality of their own. At school (and there's no irony implied here!) we used to have Atari/Commodore arguments, but now the nearest thing to that seems to be the Mac OS/Windows argument. Perhaps that's part of the reason I'm enjoying getting back into the 8-bit and the ST now: it's to the detriment of the PC, which I've spent no money on in over a year. From being a project in its own right once upon a time, the PC is becoming a vehicle for my work on the old Ataris.

 

Anyway, by talking about personality you may have absolutely nailed why I love these old machines so much.

[oky2000]

One of the nice things of the whole Amiga/ST/IIgs era, was that was the last time when computers really had personality. Today, the personality, if any, is strictly tied to the OS. Back then, there were still only a handful of different models, so you could say you were an "Atari Falcon user" or an "Amiga 4000 user" or whatever. Today, you can't really say you're a "Dell 5127 user". It's not the same, even on the Apple side. Even saying I'm an "iMac" user doesn't mean much, as the specs vary so dramatically.

Couldn't agree more. Me and a friend of mine (who was also a 65XE owner in the eighties but never touched a computer after that until he got a PC) were browsing the net the other day looking at old computer magazine scans, and marvelling at what a job it must have been to cover all bases for those non-specific magazines, since there was such a myriad of different hardware, operating systems, and flavours of BASIC. All my PCs have been self-builds but they're just jigsaw puzzles and - apart from the fancy case - have zero personality of their own. At school (and there's no irony implied here!) we used to have Atari/Commodore arguments, but now the nearest thing to that seems to be the Mac OS/Windows argument. Perhaps that's part of the reason I'm enjoying getting back into the 8-bit and the ST now: it's to the detriment of the PC, which I've spent no money on in over a year. From being a project in its own right once upon a time, the PC is becoming a vehicle for my work on the old Ataris.

 

Anyway, by talking about personality you may have absolutely nailed why I love these old machines so much.

I totally agree, the days when every 4-6 years would bring a revolution in power via a revolutionary bit of custom silicon or new CPU and then the OS was written to take advantage of these features meant your machine had a real personality, a bit like having a fondness for a particular type of car (rear wheel drive, 4 wheel drive, front wheel drive etc).

 

Mac is the same as PC really, I run Mac OS X 10.3 on my Dell D810 laptop! They just cost more and sometimes look worse.

 

The trouble with the PC vs Amiga/ST was simply one of investment in hardware R&D by Intel. The ST & Amiga were stuck with an 8/7mhz 68000 for wayyyyyyyy too long. And if Atari or Commodore had just ported some equivalent of WINE from Linux for DOS 3 or whatever in 1985/86 both the ST and Amiga (remember it can still read/write PC format floppies too due to intelligent FDD controls) could easily have run WordPerfect/Dbase/Lotus123 blah blah. So people could have quite happily used an ST/Amiga to run those crappy 16bit DOS applications at the same speed. Lack of focus on both their parts there.

 

Another thing is the ST/Amiga were really more aimed at the current console purchasers anyway. How many PCs were sold in the 8 years the Playstation 2 was in production to home users? See? That's the point, the original ethos of the Amiga was to create a home computer that would make a limiting games console redundant...best of both worlds...a home computer that played games as good as the competing console.

 

BUT...to have such a machine become dominant and successful you need CONSTANT R&D. Look at the life cycle of your average Sega console...3-4 years and that's not including in-cartridge hardware to boost performance. How long did the Amiga and ST base machines stay the same since their 86/85 launch year? Exactly!

 

The idea is sound, and in a strange way a PS3 + Ubuntu is the spiritual successor to the ST/Amiga as it plays the finest games as well as a PC costing 4x more and yet can still be used for everything you would want from a home machine. Funny old world, the games console has come full circle and potentially taken the place of the home games computer with enormous reserves of graphical/aural/processing power due simply to the fact it is not using x86 hardware...just like the Amiga 1000 compared to a CGA PC in 1985

[mcjakeqcool]

Hey Fletch! You have a Atari Falcon? I've never owned one, what games did it have on it? The only Atari computers I've owned are the 8 bit and the ST.

[Christos]

Hey Fletch! You have a Atari Falcon? I've never owned one, what games did it have on it? The only Atari computers I've owned are the 8 bit and the ST.

 

Take a look at my sig

[mcjakeqcool]

Cool vids Christos.

[Tickled_Pink]

Sadly the ST and the Amiga were the last of the home computers. Now they're all Personal Computers (including the Mac), whatever the hell that means. I always found that term a bit insulting ... today's computers are about as impersonal as they come. Machines like the ST, and those that came before it, on the other hand ... they were very personal.

 

Yes, the ST was quickly put together and yes, it was mostly off the shelf parts but hell - that's what makes it such a great design achievement and a great machine. I currently have four (at least two STEs and a Mega 1 will, unfortunately, have to go due to lack of room). I bought mine for almost £400 in '88. I still regret selling it on 10 years later for £30!

 

Dungeon Master was great. Super Sprint, which I got free, was great. I also thoroughly enjoyed Ranarama (another free game). Dynablasters with three of us hunched around the same system was a blast - and an often hilarious one at that.

 

The ST was also amazing to code. I did once get to have a quick look at the Amiga's kernel documentation and, compared to the ST, it was a nightmare. I learned a lot about coding thanks to the ST. I was a minor expert on Devpac (the world's greatest ever assembler). One of my personal achievements with the tool was discovering how to write a library of graphical routines that would work from both a program written in assembly or STOS. I can't remember the specifics now but I think it had to do with the way STOS passed its parameters onto the stack. I effectively installed the library as an OS extension by mapping it to one of the unused 68000 Trap calls.

 

Great days. I'd love to get back to 68000 coding on the ST again but haven't the time. The ST was more than just a nice computer. It was a great computer.

[phil_vr]

Commodore could have the whole world enslaved to the Amiga architecture by just pushing out its potential and radical capabilities and give licenses for clones, but instead they opted to compromise with sale numbers, and their proclaimed ibm compatibility for which they ranted over and over again (which came with software and hardware products as a messiah feature). That was like having a Vector car and promoting that it can be converted to a Ford T10. The easter eggs on the Amiga written by the developing team (http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/messages.html) shows the vision they had for that computer and the boundaries and nonsense logic they faced when they became Commodore's property. Even though Commodore kept making logical steps into evolving the operating system and expanding the Amiga capabilities, their marketing side was nothing but gaming. And even though I have a soft spot for my Amiga's and their legacy, I also do love my 520 STFM's (owning 6 of them!)..

 

Bill mentioned above (very accurately) that europe received those computers with great enthusiasm (right after the 8bit boom of early 80's that was dominating the european land) especially in Germany and England, where both ST's and Amiga's were thrashing in sales. But still for the wrong reason. Games. Yes, musicians and tv-stations embraced them with joy, but it was just not enough to turn around the massive dependence of the rest of the bussiness world that was struggling with sick green and yellow monochrome monitors facing a rude A:> for welcome every day. And both Atari and Commodore did what they always did best. Focusing on sales and producing the creepy lines of Atari PC and Commodore PC compatibles. Little did they know that they were hammering down the last nail to their coffin.

 

 

Software talking, my ST was burning hot for being turned on for countless of hours due to Legend Of The Sword - Maniac Mansion - Operation Stealth - Codename Iceman games, and of course GFA was a dream language to program and a good reason to brag for owning an ST!

Edited May 25, 2009 by phil_vr

[+wood_jl]

I thought the ST was a great computer in the day, and at an even greater price. As I was flipping burgers in high school, as well as paying for my first car and insurance - and all the other things teens waste their dollars on - I could barely afford one, and the Amiga came a little later at too high of a price for the A1000 at the time. The Amigas were impressive, but just not in the cards for me at the time.

 

As I bought a launch system 520ST, I desired the double-sided drive, 1MB, and cool integration so I sold it after about 1.5 years and bought 1040ST. I upgraded to 4MB later. I wanted a Mega4 but there was no need and I couldn't afford one anyway. This was the last Atari computer I would buy.

 

I waited for patiently for the blitter (that I was erroneously told I could add to my 1040ST) and the CD-ROM, but neither materialized for years - since 1985. By early 1990 I was ready for an upgrade. I think the STe had just come out. Noting that the specs were hardly improved (still only 16 colors in 320 x 200), and that I could build a "clone" 286/16MHz with VGA cheaply, I sold the 4MB 1040ST while it was still worth something, and bailed out.

 

The ST was a fantastic machine in 1985. I don't care that the Amiga was more capable; the ST was damn capable enough, and still comparable, at a significantly lower price, and that was the ST's original formula for success. It's the way Atari never pulled that off again that made everone "bail" from the ST. By 1990, there was no bang-for-the-buck anymore. The new machines were underpowered and overpriced, exactly the opposite of the ST in 1985.

 

I thought "CRAZY WORLD!!!" Ataris are now overpriced and underpowered, with ho-hum graphics, and PC's are cheap, and VGA/SVGA was like a dream come true. The TT was talked about for so long, and it was ridiculously overpriced with no software; I thank the lord I did not continue on to it, and instead familarized myself with an ancestor of what I am typing to you now on.

 

I remember regretting selling my 8-bit Atari to get an ST; I had to in order to throw the THOUSAND DOLLARS together. Because of that regret, and the fact that the 8-bit Atari was my "first love", I do not feel the same affinity for the ST as I do the 8-bit Atari. I occasionally toy with the idea of another ST, but the PC emulator handles it quite well when I need an ST fix. Besides - as others have pointed out here - the ST was kind of a cobbled-together design - hardly the recipe for the earlier Ataris. This made it pretty much "Atari in name only" as subsequent Atari products were. As for the 8-bit Atari, I MUST have a few of them around, and since SIO2PC eliminates bulky peripherals (while outperforming them) and a TV with S-video makes the optimal display, there are no regrets.

 

If there was a simple, USB-like ST-to-PC device, and a modern TV would suffice (not buying special monitors) then I would consider an original 520ST (no bulky floppy models) again, to run off PC disc images. I seriously doubt that's going to happen.

 

However, the ST was revolutionary, just make sure you're frame of reference is 1985.

[+DarkLord]

I thought the ST was a great computer in the day, and at an even greater price. As I was flipping burgers in high school, as well as paying for my first car and insurance - and all the other things teens waste their dollars on - I could barely afford one, and the Amiga came a little later at too high of a price for the A1000 at the time. The Amigas were impressive, but just not in the cards for me at the time.

 

As I bought a launch system 520ST, I desired the double-sided drive, 1MB, and cool integration so I sold it after about 1.5 years and bought 1040ST. I upgraded to 4MB later. I wanted a Mega4 but there was no need and I couldn't afford one anyway. This was the last Atari computer I would buy.

 

I waited for patiently for the blitter (that I was erroneously told I could add to my 1040ST) and the CD-ROM, but neither materialized for years - since 1985. By early 1990 I was ready for an upgrade. I think the STe had just come out. Noting that the specs were hardly improved (still only 16 colors in 320 x 200), and that I could build a "clone" 286/16MHz with VGA cheaply, I sold the 4MB 1040ST while it was still worth something, and bailed out.

 

The ST was a fantastic machine in 1985. I don't care that the Amiga was more capable; the ST was damn capable enough, and still comparable, at a significantly lower price, and that was the ST's original formula for success. It's the way Atari never pulled that off again that made everone "bail" from the ST. By 1990, there was no bang-for-the-buck anymore. The new machines were underpowered and overpriced, exactly the opposite of the ST in 1985.

 

I thought "CRAZY WORLD!!!" Ataris are now overpriced and underpowered, with ho-hum graphics, and PC's are cheap, and VGA/SVGA was like a dream come true. The TT was talked about for so long, and it was ridiculously overpriced with no software; I thank the lord I did not continue on to it, and instead familarized myself with an ancestor of what I am typing to you now on.

 

I remember regretting selling my 8-bit Atari to get an ST; I had to in order to throw the THOUSAND DOLLARS together. Because of that regret, and the fact that the 8-bit Atari was my "first love", I do not feel the same affinity for the ST as I do the 8-bit Atari. I occasionally toy with the idea of another ST, but the PC emulator handles it quite well when I need an ST fix. Besides - as others have pointed out here - the ST was kind of a cobbled-together design - hardly the recipe for the earlier Ataris. This made it pretty much "Atari in name only" as subsequent Atari products were. As for the 8-bit Atari, I MUST have a few of them around, and since SIO2PC eliminates bulky peripherals (while outperforming them) and a TV with S-video makes the optimal display, there are no regrets.

 

If there was a simple, USB-like ST-to-PC device, and a modern TV would suffice (not buying special monitors) then I would consider an original 520ST (no bulky floppy models) again, to run off PC disc images. I seriously doubt that's going to happen.

 

However, the ST was revolutionary, just make sure you're frame of reference is 1985.

 

Odd. I've heard others talk about that price. I picked up my first 520ST, with a floppy drive and monitor for about $599.00 from CDW in 1986, I think it was.

 

Some ST models did have the space for a blitter to be added - just depended on the motherboard.

 

The Tramiels did blow it, we all know that. The STe should have come out much sooner. The TT should have been way lower in price.

 

AND...did I mention marketing? Sheesh.

 

As far as revolutionary, I think that its just not 1985, IMHO. 1st 1meg computer, 2 megs, 4 megs, first machine with a DSP (Falcon), etc, etc,...

 

I'm just the opposite from you - I've got an 800XL, first computer I ever owned. Love it to this day. I still play games on the XL, some gosh-awful good ones there! It can't compete with my Mega ST, Mega STe, STacy and Falcon though, for me.

 

Oh, check the threads for some of the latest hardware "gadgets", like this:

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=142424

 

http://www.atari-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=15679

 

Sure makes life using an ST look a lot better.

 

See ya.

Edited May 26, 2009 by DarkLord

[mcjakeqcool]

The ST was the best non Arcade pre Jaguar Atari product. By a long shot aswell.

[mellis]

As far as revolutionary, I think that its just not 1985, IMHO. 1st 1meg computer, 2 megs, 4 megs, first machine with a DSP (Falcon), etc, etc,...

 

It's true that the Falcon was the first ST to incorporate a DSP, but even the very first NeXT cube (from 1989) included a Motorola 56001 DSP.

 

The NeXT was amazing, but the ST had the games. That's why I keep both.

[flashjazzcat]

I remember regretting selling my 8-bit Atari to get an ST; I had to in order to throw the THOUSAND DOLLARS together. Because of that regret, and the fact that the 8-bit Atari was my "first love", I do not feel the same affinity for the ST as I do the 8-bit Atari. I occasionally toy with the idea of another ST, but the PC emulator handles it quite well when I need an ST fix. Besides - as others have pointed out here - the ST was kind of a cobbled-together design - hardly the recipe for the earlier Ataris. This made it pretty much "Atari in name only" as subsequent Atari products were. As for the 8-bit Atari, I MUST have a few of them around, and since SIO2PC eliminates bulky peripherals (while outperforming them) and a TV with S-video makes the optimal display, there are no regrets.

I feel the same about the 8-bit. I was totally absorbed in the XE from 1989 to 1999 and by then it was time to buy a PC! I always longed for an ST back in the early nineties, but I could never afford one and it would have just got in the way of what I was doing with the 8-bit. I have two STs now, double the number of 8-bits, but that's just because it took me two tries to get the right ST (namely, STE), and I'll probably sell the STFM. I kind of envisage getting into the ST properly when I run out of things to do with the 8-bit, but the way the 8-bit scene is going I can't see that happening any time soon. I don't regret buying the STs, though - far from it. Upgrading the STFM to 1MB gave me a good grounding in soldering work, but I wasn't sweating in quite the same way as I did when I was desoldering the OS ROM on the 65XE!

[+DarkLord]

As far as revolutionary, I think that its just not 1985, IMHO. 1st 1meg computer, 2 megs, 4 megs, first machine with a DSP (Falcon), etc, etc,...

 

It's true that the Falcon was the first ST to incorporate a DSP, but even the very first NeXT cube (from 1989) included a Motorola 56001 DSP.

 

The NeXT was amazing, but the ST had the games. That's why I keep both.

 

Perhaps I didn't word that part well enough. IIRC, Byte magazine listed the Falcon during its review, as the first "home" computer to incorporate a DSP.

[Shredder11]

I'll probably sell the STFM. Upgrading the STFM to 1MB...

 

I'd keep it if I were you as the STFM is more compatible for games than the STe, although many of the games have since been patched to run properly on the STe. If gaming is not your thing I would sell it and keep your STe computers. Personally I would like to have a Falcon, maybe the mid 1990s C-Lab V version to add to my collection of three STe machines. A TT would be nice too for the extra power when using Steinberg Cubase!