32 in 1 OS from AtariMax

[SS]

are there any compatibility problems I should be aware of once its in the 130XE, not really worried about other exotic hardware add ons, more with booting games / utils etc that the U1MB could directly affect.

 

If I recall correctly, I had to keep the "ATR swap button" option set as "Disabled" or else I had incompatibility problems with my UNO Cart. At least I think that was the setting that I had to disable; my old mind gets a little fuzzy at times. As it is, I don't have a SiDE2 Cartridge or any other sort of HDD emulation device so it is no big deal to me. I keep my U1MB rather minimally configured and haven't noticed any other compatibility issues with any of my other devices (UNO, Ultimate Cart, 1050, SIO2SD, and SDRIVE-MAX).

[Mclaneinc]

Thank you SS, I do have an AVG cart so hope its fine, not seen any posts from any one that I remember but I'm in the same fuzzy state as yourself

[tjlazer]

Is there a way to test these 32-in-1 on an Emulator?

[Mclaneinc]

I was hoping the same myself, the bin file that was added in the thread could help....A 32 in 1 emulator would be good fun to see it going just like the U1MB emulation is, but the U1MB emulation also aids in debugging on the real item for drivers etc so its more than just a nice little add on in Altirra..

 

32 in 1 would be nice but technically its all there to do already in Altirra with multiple profiles allowing almost any machine config you could wish for sitting there with all the others at your mouse clicks enjoyment

[Guest]

Is there a way to test these 32-in-1 on an Emulator?

 

I'm not sure how possible it is. why?

 

well, (so far) in this thread alone - we have a couple of very different .bin files. These appear to be compatible with the boards their particular PLCC was built onto initially.

there's going to be some incompatibilities with PLCCs/boards (the Amic chips being a case to point). - at the moment we have no idea which PLCCs will work with most/all of the 32-in-1 boards, but this does imply some differences between board builds.

 

maybe i'm reading this wrong - but on the basis of the assumptions made (so far) in this thread (see Nezgar and flashjazzcat comments, page 2) - i see some high hurdles

 

the emulator would need to have:

■ each type of board/PLCC combination as a individual options.

■ a general 32-in-1 emulator option would serve no purpose - unless you have/intend to have a board/PLCC fully compatible with the version added to the emulator

 

sure, a single board/PLCC combination could be added to an emulator - but as the purpose is to test the 32-in-1 in an emulator, any tests carried out using a single option will not necessarily be compatible with/relevant to the other board/PLCC combos in the wild.

 

 

i would think it may be easier to load individual OS rom files into an emulator and test them in isolation

[Mclaneinc]

Technically any add on that 'adds' a usage that the original machine does not have is viable to emulate, the 32 in 1 adds extended comparability to an XL / XE and vice versa so as in the wild its valid to be considered for emulation. Does it do something that others don't do, yes, it offers a programmable way to choose between 32 OS variants at boot up of which some have more real use than others BUT its still a valid candidate for emulation as much as it was for producing the real thing.

 

Do others do similar stuff, yes as Jon pointed out the U1MB offers a reduced initial choice of OS's but the ability to flash any 4 choices you want and mix and match as you wish BUT the U1MB also has far more far reaching uses beyond OS choice so becomes a more likely emulation advocate as it did. The 32 boards in the wild seem to work well so emulation actually could short cut any issues that there may be in any case, how well the boards work in the wild is an unknown to me personally but I've not seen any full blown negs about them.

 

The bottom line is that the 32 in 1 could be added, of that I'm pretty sure but the factor of any incompatibilities with other products is a nil point here, if the 32 in 1 works on a machine then it can be replicated if wanted on an emulator, that is the base point, if it does not work with other items then that is a fault / issue between those products and each other, its not emulation relevant other than if you want perfect emulation of that product then it must retain those issues or fix them in the emulation..That is an authors choice..

 

What works with what in the wild technically should mirror the emulated items, we don't really need Frankenstein machines that cannot be replicated with real add ons if we can help it, emulation fixes for issues are nice but its a moral choice for any one wishing to do the emulation.

 

In truth we don't really need a 32 in 1 but in truth there's other add ons that come under a similar banner...I personally say, the more the merrier but the real total bottom line is that its down to Avery and his time and effort...Do you add a device that can already be semi replicated as it stands...I'd probably say no in all honesty but then we have to look at how much of the stuff added actually is used and there's where I say add them unless there's a direct replacement already there because someone will use them...

 

But as always, that's Avery's call, not ours..

Edited November 20, 2018 by Mclaneinc

[Guest]

 

The bottom line is that the 32 in 1 could be added, of that I'm pretty sure but the factor of any incompatibilities with other products is a nil point here, if the 32 in 1 works on a machine then it can be replicated if wanted on an emulator, that is the base point, if it does not work with other items then that is a fault / issue between those products and each other, its not emulation relevant other than if you want perfect emulation of that product then it must retain those issues or fix them in the emulation..That is an authors choice..

 

 

please bear with me, as I'm only beginning to learn stuff myself about the 32-in-1. I thank Jon, Nir and Nezgar for their patience and help with my learning (so far).

 

i think you've maybe not fully considered my point re: incompatibilities. I've never referred to any issues with other products. my concern is what issues any 32-in1 has with other 32-in-1 boards/PIC and corresponding PLCCs.

I really think you need to have one of these beasts/attempted to work on it (outside of Steve's online configurator) to understand the inconvenience

 

if 32-in-1 "x" is different to 32-in1 "y" it's not a fault - it's design - (Steve's design, for why, we may never know).

it appears there are several revisions of these boards/PICs and more than one type of PLCC used. for whatever reason there are some incompatibilities between different boards and different PLCCs.

 

therefore, we need to know exactly which PLCCs work/don't with which boards/PICs - before we can begin to think about emulation.

and remember: these boards don't have rev numbers printed on them like many other 3rd party atari boards, so it's not just a case of looking at your board and being able to say "well mine's a rev2 and i have an Amic PLCC so therefore rev2 works with Amic"

 

each 32-in-1 emulation would need to be for the different "working" flavours in existence.

 

and, although there's an argument for creating ONE standard 32-in-1 emulation, it serves little "real world testing" purpose if the 32-in-1 you have (or later buy)| isn't the same flavour.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Guest

[_The Doctor__]

You know this is all ridiculous it's no different than when any of the logic is change fixed or upgraded on any device... how many folks have used a jtag on their candle u1m or ultimate cart or any number of devices or pulled the cpld to program them and they are modern? These early devices were all designed back when nothing else existed other than stacking eproms with a physical switch... or putting 1 thru 4 roms in a a selectable arrangement in what was an expensive larger eprom at the time.

 

Making it sound like there are so many variations and problems is making a mountain out of a mole hill. You have the amic chip with matching logic or you have the later chip with matching logic. All you ever needed to do if you were unhappy was exchange it. Try that if you are not royalty with these later solutions, it won't happen.

 

So when a person has trouble with product B and has to go from v1 to v2 or xv it's all a ok par for the course do it this way or that, if there is a problem, it's really not a problem. and then you can flash it with this or that and also upgrade the firmware bios whatever and you should be overjoyed, and if it bricks or doesn't work out try this or that jtag pull chip programmer flash and again you should be happy.

 

32 in 1.. reprogram the the gal/pic logic for one of the two flash chip variants and it's beyond all terrible to do... sigh. And you could just get steve to actually help or swap it.

 

oh and before Jon made his tools and bios etc. for u1m/incognito etc. you were SOL to do much at all with any of the candle/lotherik u1m, incognito stuff.

 

Pretty darn sure if a third party wanted to make the same for the ancient stuff to ease the 'pain' it would be great too.... a pack if you will to choose from... read chip type use this tool or the tool selects the appropriate crap to burn or flash... or tells you to change the 'SOCKETED' easy to swap chips....

 

If it makes a person feel special, they could put their name or cats name or Special pet name for computer in or on the selection menu somewhere....

 

I bought my 32 in1's on sale, never had one brick act weird or die, always cost 49 or less. simple for me to update, maybe not for others. I have a u1m currently with issues, I have one that works fine. I use both 32 in 1 and u1m but on different machines. Having myIDE self built work with 32 in 1 holding the patches for it back in the day was awesome. I know some one will wish to rant about buy 200 dollars worth of stuff and get side2 u1m blah blah blah.... but my old stuff works great I don't need to. I like being able to select any OS on the real thing and test whatever there is and know it works, I don't have to reflash this or that slot all time and then have that flash chip wear level out and fail or whatever. I suspect if the u1m had larger flash to hold them all and avoid the reflash all the time I'd never look back... that's not how it is.

Edited November 20, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[Guest]

but the point is, we don't know how many variants there are - there could be 3, there could be a dozen.

and each would require it's own emulator option.

 

nowhere have i said it's impossible, all i've ever said is that to have the 32-in-1 as a practical emulation option, then we'd need either

■ one option for each different 32-in-1 flavour, or

■ a "one-size for all" monster.

 

Altirra, has so many different 1050 options, ram settings etc etc - so if a 32-in-1 setting is being created, then it too should cover all existing ones

 

 

not all of us have all of the technical skills/knowledge to follow circumvent the built-in shenanigans contained within each 32-in-1 variant. therefore, for testing/comparison to the specific 32-in-1 hardware we own, ONE version of the 32-in1 for the emulator does nothing for a huge slice of the 32-in-1 owners.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Guest

[_The Doctor__]

You do know, your just being a pain about it.

 

okay so we moved on to talk about emu...

 

Short answer most of the work is already don in the emulator, it already allows for different rom slots. it already allows maxflash8mbit emulation. Burn your image with that, talk the resultant chip image and plug into whatever slot menu the emu has... You might have to choose like so many other devices for expample black box with whatever rom or enhancer or floppy board.

 

I don't think it would be beyond phaeron's ability to do 32 in 1 and have an 'amic' logic tick box or option and it chose the matching flash image

 

Since you can already plug whatever rom you want individually for Altira he probably didn't feel this was a highly needed add on...

Edited November 20, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[Guest]

You do know, your just being a pain about it.

 

okay so we moved on to talk about emu...

 

Short answer most of the work is already don in the emulator, it already allows maxflash8mbit emulation. Burn your image with that, talk the resultant chip image and plug into whatever slot menu the emu has... You might have to choose like so many other devices for expample black box with whatever rom or enhancer or floppy board.

 

I don't think it would be bey'ond phaeron's ability to do 32 in 1 and have an 'amic' logic tick box or option and it chose the matching flash image

 

Since you can already plug whatever rom you want individually for Altira he probably didn't feel this was a highly needed add on...

 

i didn't know that at all. and it's wrong of you to assume someone is "being a pain" just because they don't know something that you do.

i had thought my last paragraph

not all of us have all of the technical skills/knowledge to follow circumvent the built-in shenanigans contained within each 32-in-1 variant. therefore, for testing/comparison to the specific 32-in-1 hardware we own, ONE version of the 32-in1 for the emulator does nothing for a huge slice of the 32-in-1 owners.

made it quite clear my knowledge on the 32-in-1 was not that great.

 

also, i think it's a little presumptive to to say what you think phaeron can/will do - and whether it's as easy as you think it is.

 

re: your final sentence - i already covered that in reply #55 above.

 

i think i'll withdraw from this thread as I'm clearly not providing the help I thought i was.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Guest

[_The Doctor__]

shenanigans ALL the variants... x y x how many oh oh oh.

 

it's real simple, there are two amic and non amic and logic for each... to select the proper bank in flash and provide it where it belongs as the rom image. There is a menu only loaded at start up with key pressed.. you select from the menu, it puts the image in proper and saves. boot without key it loads the selected provided image.

 

The online tool is a plus for some a minus for others, feel free to have someone make an offline one for you.

 

Bent over backwards to provide links, a method of access, and explanations. I wonder if there was any point to it.

 

Having been warned, I should have known better. I don't particularly like folks who swipe stuff from under others anyway. I'll leave the best buds to it.

 

I hope the links, online editor, and other stuff help everyone to get what they need out of their devices.

 

Based on Phaerons work so far, he could do this sort of thing in his sleep. That's called a compliment. Based on similar conversations, he had already said as much about roms, rom slots, and no need to do such things...that's not presumptive. that's called paying attention.

Edited November 20, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[Mclaneinc]

I would also take an educated guess that Avery could put together a 32 in 1 together fairly quickly with his library of stuff, the complexity of the 32 in 1 pales against the code he's done all over the atari to emulate devices, the question was, would he write the emulation?

 

My best guess would be No simply because its already in there at least in two easy to use ways, the U1MB and the profiling option..

 

As for the 32 in 1, I think its a great device if you purely want to have access to multiple OS's, if you got it hoping for more then hard luck, it does what it says on the tin..

 

Me, I'm still opting for a U1MB because I've listened to users and been given good advice and that is perfect, the fact that Jon still updates it at times is also a great extra but it seems to be perfect for what I want...

 

Now the hard part....Buying it

 

HyperJapan in London just cost me an amount that's not high but big enough BUT the smile on my daughters face when the press were taking pictures for web sites etc made every penny worth it...The U1MB will hold on (I hope) and I'll add it soon

[+Nezgar]

The concern with AMIC vs AMD flash EPROM I think is only relevant for programming. If you have a programmer compatible with whatever chip you have in your 32-in-1 then once it's programmed it will work in any revision board.

 

I also think that the 512KB ROM image should be compatible all hardware revisions of the 32-in-1, again as long as you have a programmer compatible with your particular flash chip. Steve's online tool does not have any parameters related to chip types.

 

I'll build my own ROM image soon and share it here.

[flashjazzcat]

If I recall correctly, I had to keep the "ATR swap button" option set as "Disabled" or else I had incompatibility problems with my UNO Cart.

As I said: extended RAM, SDX and PBI BIOS are extras which can be disabled if desired, and it's specifically the PBI BIOS hard disk driver which deliberately suppresses external cartridges when the ATR button is enabled. Since the presence of the UNO or other cartridge usually makes the presence of SIDE (i.e. the HDD) impossible, you should disable the PBI HDD handler as a matter of course (although you can still use the U1MB PBI high-speed SIO driver with any external cartridge).

 

The concern with AMIC vs AMD flash EPROM I think is only relevant for programming. If you have a programmer compatible with whatever chip you have in your 32-in-1 then once it's programmed it will work in any revision board.

This was not my experience with a previous board belonging to Brenski. When I copied the flash ROM (probably Amic or Bright) to an SST or AMD part (or the other way around: it was a long time ago), the system wouldn't boot. This may have simply been a stability or timing issue (after all, I have witnessed U1MB board which won't work with an AMD PLCC flash ROM installed), in which case the fact that the latest attempt at a chip swap (on a second board) didn't work either is pure coincidence.

 

I also think that the 512KB ROM image should be compatible all hardware revisions of the 32-in-1, again as long as you have a programmer compatible with your particular flash chip. Steve's online tool does not have any parameters related to chip types.

One would hope so, unless the boot menu has to communicate directly (via the JEDEC flash protocol) with the ROM chip and this is not done in a generic manner which would recognize different vendor and device IDs (although in essence the only difference one needs to account for is some devices having 4K sectors and others 64K sectors, and if the device is not flashable in-situ, even that's a 'don't care'). Perhaps this is all handled by the PIC, on the other hand, and if that's the case, hopefully the PIC is capable of working with different flash chip brands (although I have not seen any board which supports this supposition).

 

As for emulation: on the one hand, pointless for such a simple device (one may accomplish the same thing via System->Configure System->Firmware->Firmware Manager in Altirra), and probably pointless for the purpose of development and testing unless someone proposes to develop and test for the 32-in-1. Avery would also require at the very least a complete hardware and logic specification (probably including the PIC source code, which I somehow doubt Steve would be happy to provide; Avery's reason for not yet implementing Incognito emulation is that he does not have the CPLD sources for that device, despite the fact it is functionally similar to the U1MB which is already emulated, which implies anything but precise emulation is not worth doing).

 

EDIT: forgot 'on the other hand'. Erm...

 

As for different flash devices (4K and 64K sector sizes, fort example): such customisation is already present in Altirra and I would imagine that most flashable emulated devices (U1MB, SIDE, MYIDE, etc) avail themselves of the exact same JEDEC flash emulation engine. So the presence of different flash devices on its own would not be a barrier to emulation.

Edited November 20, 2018 by flashjazzcat

[flashjazzcat]

You know this is all ridiculous it's no different than when any of the logic is change fixed or upgraded on any device... how many folks have used a jtag on their candle u1m or ultimate cart or any number of devices or pulled the cpld to program them and they are modern?

While I will not advocate phystically pulling the CPLD from an U1MB PCB (I fancy extensive trace damage would result), I'll also point out that logic fixes and updates need to exist in the first place before there is any point in purchasing a JEDEC flash cable. There are currently three clearly identifiable versions of the U1MB JED file whose functionality is plainly documented. If anyone knows of the versioning of the PIC programming on the 32-in-1, what was broken, what got fixed, how it works, where the registers are, etc, I'm sure we'd all love to hear about it.

 

All you ever needed to do if you were unhappy was exchange it. Try that if you are not royalty with these later solutions, it won't happen.

So we're clear: precisely which 'later solution' from which vendor is subject to a 'no returns' policy even if the item is deemed faulty?

 

So when a person has trouble with product B and has to go from v1 to v2 or xv it's all a ok par for the course do it this way or that, if there is a problem, it's really not a problem. and then you can flash it with this or that and also upgrade the firmware bios whatever and you should be overjoyed, and if it bricks or doesn't work out try this or that jtag pull chip programmer flash and again you should be happy.

As already written: three JED versions for the U1MB, and you cannot brick the device by flashing them. The only way to brick the device is by applying my updated ROM firmware to a device with the v1 JED (of which very few remain in the field). This is all clearly documented, and I will add that the large number of U1MB updates out in the field (and the isolated number of 'bricked' devices caused by various user oversights, power-cuts, etc) was driven by the kind of relentless firmware development which would be completely incongrous if applied to a device which swapped OS ROMs and nothing more.

 

32 in 1.. reprogram the the gal/pic logic for one of the two flash chip variants and it's beyond all terrible to do...

It's proved difficult so far. I tried manual editing and was hampered by strange-looking menu content the reasons for which we have not yet established despite being three pages into this thread. At that time, I did not even know an official editing tool existed. Now we know it exists, but we can't share the login and it appears to me that there's no way of editing an existing ROM: it seems you basically have to build a new one. We also have no details of how the bank switching works, and we're not yet certain that you can use flash ROMs from different vendors.

 

Regarding two flash chip variants: are we talking AMD and Amic here? Or were Bright chips ever used as well? I have seen the Bright PLCC ROMs on various AtariMax devices, but I can't recall if they ever appeared on the 32-in-1.

 

oh and before Jon made his tools and bios etc. for u1m/incognito etc. you were SOL to do much at all with any of the candle/lotherik u1m, incognito stuff.

What is this supposed to demonstrate? UFLASH was written about three years after the U1MB first appeared, and other customisation tools existed prior to that. 32-in-1 apparently dates from 2003 and there is still no editing tool available to the public, no emulation, no hardware spec, and no documentation on the organisation of the ROM fifteen years later.

 

Pretty darn sure if a third party wanted to make the same for the ancient stuff to ease the 'pain' it would be great too...

No flash tools or alternative firmware would exist for the U1MB or Incognito if the hardware developer had not published information essential to the creation of said tools.

 

I don't have to reflash this or that slot all time and then have that flash chip wear level out and fail or whatever. I suspect if the u1m had larger flash to hold them all and avoid the reflash all the time I'd never look back... that's not how it is.

Yep: flexibilty is such a bind, is it not, especially when it takes all of two minutes to update an OS slot. But for those busy individuals who manage to use thirty-two operating systems in rotation on any given day, clearly only one device fits the bill.

 

Using the wear-levelling argument (which would probably only become a factor after several thousand flash cycles) as a means of making the inability of an older device to be updated and customised without the use of a PLCC extraction tool and an external USB programmer a VIRTUE is inventive - I'll give you that.

Edited November 20, 2018 by flashjazzcat

[_The Doctor__]

awe you came to his aid...

such a long drawn out bs argument over nothing...

it's simple you were given the device, you can read the numbers off the chips as well as manufacture.

you can ask Steve for help,

you can go to his forums and read...

you can use the tools,

you were given links,

you have passwords,

the logic is simple,

The idea that with your' skill set that this simple durable robust easy to repair device is so difficult doesn't even come off as intellectually honest. But my opinion of you may be too high and that's on me. Of course that makes my opinion look bad now in retrospect. I can't win on that one.

I don't want to take 2 minutes flashing the ultimate all the time.... Prefer instant gratification...

 

I have a xilinx to replace on yet another u1m... (not a very tolerant toy)

 

as for popping it off or out... well I use a spring wire popper, I hit it with hot air till the solder melts and the chip pops off the board.... I'd think you knew that already as well, you have all the tools as well.

 

the 32 in 1 is all socketed, too bad the u1m isn't

 

I should think you could exchange your problem device since it has a 'lifetime' warranty and all that...

 

I wouldn't be fixing u1m's if they could just exchange them... nor would macrorie, as I understand he's done one or two....

 

yes we are aware of the resistor fix for the the older u1m's and yes the current white u1m was working in the 130 XE for about a year and a half (at least) before death... nothing wrong with the XE by the way, works great with everything.

 

things happen,

and no he wouldn't exchange my, or anyone else u1m that I am aware of.. but a hey almost two years old... I of course couldn't see any reason for the death. Did I ask for video on what they did with it no. I know the one of mine was correct and undisturbed after install. It simply died. The other one I used your posting about how you fixed up the scrambled brains on one of yours to fix the other one I had. It is what it is. I find the back and forth comical. And might I add you just earned me a fiver! I won the bet, that you would be all over this and proceed just as you did, within a three post spread. A well reasoned post followed by the other.

 

I don't know if you do thankgiving, so, Merry Christmas is the best I can offer.

Edited November 20, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[flashjazzcat]

awe you came to his aid...

Whose aid?

 

such a long drawn out bs argument over nothing...

I did not perceive any argument at all until you implied I was nit-picking the 32-in-1 purely because I'm personally not a particular fan of it, thus misrepresenting my commentary. The only reason I was participating in this discussion in the first place is because someone asked me to place a customised selection of OS ROMs on their 32-in-1 and I happened to find it much more difficult than expected, to the extent that I gave up rather than spend further time figuring it out. I documented my experiences here, and provided a dump of the ROM and anything else which might be helpful to people like Nezgar who are attempting to figure out the menu layout, etc. I reached some plausible conclusions about what I saw with my own eyes when attempting to hand-edit the menu, and I've shared those conclusions as well.

 

If you don't like the way my Sunday evening panned out, the fact I gave up and sent the device back to its owner, the fact the ROM dump doesn't make sense, or the fact I concluded - even after being given the login for the 32-in-1 editing tool - that the whole fucking business is too big of a pain in the arse to bother with, then that's not my problem. If you choose to misconstrue this as a hate camapaign against the hardware in question, that's not my problem either, but it is an inaccurate respresentation of the information I presented.

 

Nevertheless: if you're vicariously offended on behalf of the 32-in-1 and wish to promelgate another 'my favourite device is better than yours' debate and call - yet again - aspects of my character into question, I'll happily put forward a fairly compelling argument for why people might consider Ultimate 1MB or SysCheck instead of the 32-in-1.

 

The idea that with your' skill set that this simple durable robust easy to repair device is so difficult doesn't even come off as intellectually honest. But my opinion of you may be too high and that's on me. Of course that makes my opinion look bad now in retrospect. I can't win on that one.

Here we go again: straying into matters personal again; so I'm now deliberately dishonest or downright incompetent. If you can possibly confine the discussion to the relative merits or otherwise of one device over the other, I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.

 

I have a xilinx to replace on yet another u1m... (not a very tolerant toy)

OK: now the Ultimate 1MB is a piece of shit because reasons... I'm pleased a high level of discourse is being maintained here.

 

as for popping it off or out... well I use a spring wire popper, I hit it with hot air till the solder melts and the chip pops off the board.... I'd think you knew that already as well, you have all the tools as well.

No: I just assumed you were using 'CPLD' and 'PLCC' interchangeably.

 

the 32 in 1 is all socketed, too bad the u1m isn't

Wrong. The last 32-in-1 I had here in my hands had a socket under the PLCC flash ROM and the PIC was soldered directly to the board, and I do not believe that to be an atypical configuration.

 

I wouldn't be fixing u1m's if they could just exchange them... nor would macrorie, as I understand he's done one or two....

Well: every Ultimate 1MB I have been sent whose CPLD required replacement was damaged via incorrect installation or other mishaps described to me by the owner. One device required nothing more than a reflash of the CPLD. Blowing up the CPLD requires a degree of human intervention since current limiting resistors were added to compensate for the CPLD's lack of reliable 5V tolerance (a modification which happened immediately after Candle's first run). This is not to be overly critical of those who have blown up said CPLD, especially if the damage occured during the design and manufacture of a completely reimaged Atari 8-bit motherboard (the 1088XEL).

 

But it's clear that you're now Hell-bent on rubbishing Ultimate 1MB just because I happened to suggest it as a viable alternative to the 32-in-1, and because I spent a frustrating evening trying and failing to customise the latter. I enthusiastically suggested SysCheck as a potential alternative too: perhaps you want to start rubbishing Jurgen's device now as well. Perhaps there were a couple of incidents where the user damaged their SysCheck somehow and you can use these as anecdotal evidence that the 32-in-1 is much better.

 

I find the back and forth comical. And might I add you just earned me a fiver! I won the bet, that you would be all over this and proceed just as you did, three post spread. A well reasoned post followed by the other.

Well done. You accurately predictated that I would find your childish, babbling posts and your inevitable tendency to veer towards the personal extremely irritating, and that your inability to focus on the topic at hand is disruptive and annoying.

 

EDIT: I see you added season's greetings to the post after the event which makes my initial response seem unjust. I have edited accordingly, so please don't complain about stuff I deleted.

Edited November 20, 2018 by flashjazzcat

[Guest]

there's a very simple solution to all of this:

 

@the_Doctor - if reprogramming the thing in the raw is so easy, then how you show us ignorami exactly how?

 

i'm sure (from what you say) it wouldn't take you half an hour.

 

only 3 conditions:

■ a live YT broadcast

■ use a hex editor and not the web confirgurator

■ use the .bin file Jon dumped from my 32-in-1

 

okay? thought not.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Guest

[_The Doctor__]

And it just keeps coming....what a waste.

 

I did compliment you and have many times, but you can be quite ill tempered. You are very crafty with your words and remind me of a politician or a child with and extended vocabulary giving people a dress down all the time, saying and doing something about, to or, of a person. Then making the accusations and personal attacks afterwards while folks are busy dining on the zing of whatever point you make, hoping they won't notice you doing the same.

 

It's not personal, I thought you had a skill set and found you at some point in time quite intelligent. So it is my fault. I admitted that. I even denigrated the validity of my own opinion.

 

Just because you couldn't do it all by yourself or by hand didn't mean you couldn't have asked Steve or went to the forum or got help from anyone. That's all you.

 

You could still get the device swapped or he can.

 

I understand you wish to promote the device with your hard work in or on it. But the 32 in 1 is/was way cheaper for me, I don't go around telling people to buy it and all that. Like some folks do, every chance they get.

It is an instant on the fly thing that I like. I was able to program both types without issue using the tools provided by Steve, in an open forum where his only request was you e-mail him. Cake. I know that goes against what you kept saying about it not being anything other than what it came with or whatever stuff you were saying in the other threads. Which wasn't true and you didn't bother to ask/look. It is what it is.

 

Childish? I leave that to Brenski and you his big brother who gives childish return messages with silver tongue lashings to make it seem otherwise.

[_The Doctor__]

Just use the link like everyone else and do it. It works for all of us.

 

Talk to Steve, why is that so hard?

 

You can get a brand new one! get it exchanged!

 

this is a simple simple thing explained on the forums, go read. Since all you can do is argue. If you want it to work, do what everyone including myself has done! If it's defective get it exchanged. This is endless.

 

A video of me flashing an AtariMax cart? really? Or of a pic chip sitting in a programmer? What for? 8 million people already have examples posted. What? you think I have do a repair channel like your buddy? get real.... I am truly sorry I bothered looking up software and providing it to you over the years, and I might add believing being nice to you and getting you links and a way to edit the 32 in 1, it is clear neither one of you ever had good faith in using it... I should have realized when I said there was an editor, the whole--- no there isn't crap--- ending in the put up or shut routine was just a foreshadowing of the sh*t show to come.

You have never seen a video of me, and you won't... I'm that kind of person, I don't do photos either.

 

I gave a mouse a cookie, now he wants, milk, a blanket, ending with the house.

 

Get the thing exchanged... I was about to swallow more of both your sh*t and ask you send it to me and I'd fix it for you. But you know what. Why bother. Make a video of yourself mailing it to steve.... oh that's right you need to hold on to it so you both can moan about it, never going to ship it to him or me....

 

oh and there is more than one tool over the years, and instructions about some of them in the pm's or on the atarimax forums. mr. atari also helps out over there a bit as well, maybe you will find either of those guys helpful... but I realize you haven't bothered in ALL of this time, so getting this sorted isn't what it is about.

 

Terrible. Selfies and videos... meh. This kind of reminds me of biff to marty... laying out conditions and saying what are yah chicken? Grow up.

Edited November 20, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[flashjazzcat]

I'm not sure you're able to recognize a personal attack when you see one, or when you write one. You've just written a derogatory analysis of my character, in which you accuse me of making personal attacks. I find the irony striking.

 

If owners of 32-in-1 want to send Steve emails and wait on replies, let them. I don't own a 32-in-1, and I'm not going to email Steve about it. You email Steve about it.

 

Anyway: it's obvious you don't like me, so the fact you're now insulting me is not surprising. There have been about three people who have managed to rub me up the wrong way this badly during my entire time on this forum, and you're one of them. I already pointed out the way in which you bait and switch: unreliable, bleary-eyed memoirs one minute, clear-headed character assassination the next. Probably this kind of nonsense brings out the worst in me. I definitely have no time for idiots.

[Guest]

@the_Doctor

 

do you not think people actually try contacting Steve first?

that's exactly what we do. this thread (and many like it) exist because the atarimax forums garner replies (whether to actual posts or PMs) every once in a blue moon.

 

so in reality, the only way to get some kind of solution is to post questions on the bigger atari forum and hope some experienced users can help.

 

generally, many users here, I find very helpful. However, there is a "superior" almost condescending tone from a minority that;

make people feel stupid for asking, and

make people feel unwelcome.

 

you clearly have far greater knowledge on most atari hardware compared to myself, but that's no need to talk down/insult people who have a thirst for knowledge.

how in the name of f*** are people supposed to learn if the standard response is

"You do know," and "your just being a pain about it." [sic]

 

can't you see that's just being dickish for the sake of it?

[Guest]

A video of me flashing and AtariMax cart? really? Or of a pic chip sitting in a programmer? What for? 8 million people already have examples posted. What, you think I now I have do a repair channel like you buddy? get real....

 

you didn't read what i typed - what's new eh? and who said anything about flashing an atarimax cart?

no. a video of YOU editing the .bin file that Jon uploaded...using a hex editor only

to prove the menus co-relate to the actual items displayed on that chip.

 

actually, forget it. you're quite obviously avoiding the issue, because you know it is an issue.

 

i would suggest that the process of using a hex editor to

■ edit a bin file - replacing individual roms

■ editing the menu to make sense

■ reflashing the whole thing back to a working 32-in1

 

is (maybe) nowhere near as simple as you suggest

 

i'd hoped to remove myself from this thread some time ago, so please stop baiting me further - and i promise i'll stop trying to justify myself to you ...pointless exercise that it is.

 

thanks to your tone, i now find myself un-following a thread i was very interested in...and it's not the first time. cheers

Edited November 20, 2018 by Guest

[_The Doctor__]

So glad I took the time to dig up who knows how many year old stuff for the pair of you. Thanks for showing just how ignorant and terrible you can be to folks, You were both given what you asked for in pm's no less... sorry you didn't really want it. steve seems to always answer folks by about every weekend or so.

 

you didn't read the part about a pic in a programmer... in general

I take all the padded hex files and concatenate them on the command prompt...

sometimes I change things right in the terminal...or I edit it in a word processor.... you can just type... sometimes you can just type over a name or word and if there is no checksum it's all good....

I use the terminal program to send the config and then I send the entire file to the programmer via the terminal...

when it report it's all good... I take the chip out... I put it in the thing... whatever the thing is and it works...

 

this is different for each programmer though...

some of mine are windows based...

each one is slightly different..

in windows i have to select the chip if it isn't already detected, then I can load the entire thing or each one and lay them out... and then I click and it burns it... and when it says okay...

 

when I use quartus, it tells me what it detects.... and I load whatever file and ... this is not hard. If you wanted to learn you can read. and since everyone has pretty much covered all of this what else is there to do?

 

Nezgar made a short post about what he did as well. He seemed to have an understanding of what's up.

While you might not Brenski... FJC certainly knows how to use a programmer, he's said as much and since you are such good buddies, you could have learned everything you need from him... why ask strangers when you have an expert friend?

 

I think programming a BIOS would be hard, I think burning chips, is easy, even for an idiot such as myself... as Mr Decorum pointed out.

 

I get a kick out of it, I'm the idiot... so remove me from it.

The superior being can't figure it out.. and can't waste his time talking with or to the man who created the thing he doesn't grasp. I suspect he never had time to for any of it in the first place.

 

I do hope Candle is alright though. He did make some nice stuff.

Edited November 21, 2018 by _The Doctor__