Jump to content
Have You Played Atari Today?
2600|5200|7800|Lynx|Jaguar|Forums|Store  

GasMonkey

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    32

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by GasMonkey

  1. Posted

    Nice looking site. I enjoyed your history of the Amiga and it has got me interested in learning more about the workings of Commodore

    in the late 80s (and the failed Atari purchase) and why the Amiga did not get proper promotion and regular development.

     

    I'd suggest adding a section about the various joysticks and other gadgets that they release before the Commodore sale.

     

     

    I have heard the book on Commodore does a good job of discussing the antics at the company. While Atari Benefited from Jack's departure, Commodore lost out.

     

    Joysticks huh... that's a good idea. I was also thinking of adding a page on peripherals.

  5. Posted

    I've read quite a few articles on Bushnell,and not everyone praises him.I've seen him labeled as a stupid cranky jerk,who did nothing more than find a way to charge money for playing video games,and that the real geniuses are Ralph Baer,and Higinbotham.I guess one cant be respected by everyone.Like i said in my previous post,it still took someone smart and market savvy to do it,which Bushnell was.

     

    He may be many of those things, but then again, Tramiel was not that well liked either... businesses operated differrently back then I think -- times are different.

  8. Posted

    When bushnell ran ATARI,the Bushnell era,or after Bushnell?Although Bushnell did not invent video games,the first video game was built in the 60's,i think around 67 by a college or university student,and later the first home video system by the guy who invented the first run of the EARLY INCARNATION MAGNOVOX ODYSSEY,IIRC.But its Bushnell who took the idea and perfected it.It took alot of thought and knowledge and smart business savvy to make it work,and Bushnell was all that.The story of how PONG became an absolute success is a real good read,and makes one realize that Bushnell is a smart son of a gun,he was an absolute marketing genious,IMO.Bushnell started ATARI.After Bushnell sold ATARI,everything went down the tubes AFAIC.Tramiel came after Bushnell,and didnt do the company justice IMO.

     

    Baer was the Chief Engineer and Manager of the Equipment Design Division at Sanders Associates. He built a two-player video game using a standard television set where two dots chased each other around the screen. This may not seem like much, but sots bouncing round the screen was the basis for most video games for the next seven years.

     

    After Bear demonstrated the device to the company's director of R&D Herbert Campman, funding was approved. In 1967, they brought Bill Harrison on board and added a light gun was constructed from a toy rifle.

     

    With Bill Rusch joining the project, development speed up with the end result being a third machine-controlled dot that was used to create a ping-pong game. With additional funding, even more games were built for the console.

     

    Baer had the idea of selling the product to Cable TV companies that could transmit static images as game backgrounds. However, the Cable TV industry was slumping and the idea went nowhere.

     

    Development continued on the unit for a few more years. The prototype had two controllers, a light gun and sixteen switches that selected the game to be played. These first generation games were actually built into the unit. Baer eventually signed with Magnavox in 1969 with the prototype being released as the Magnavox Odyssey in 1972, some 21 years after the concept was imagined.

     

    The Magnavox Odyssey was with a combination of analogue and digital circuitry. While there has been some disagreement over where the unit is digital or not, it is the first game console and it does have a considerable amount of digital circuitry.

  9. Posted

    All the 16-bit computers had their strength and weaknesses. You also need to compare the computers available at the time it appeared. One can't compare a falcon to an amiga 1000 or compare an amiga 3000 to a 520st.

     

    The macs of the day were pretty state of the art but VERY expense. The macs available during the 16 bit days had the best OS but you had that tiny (albiet high resolution) 9" monitor. The color mac II was just not in the same price league.

     

    The last most 16 bit apple II, the IIGS, had and excellent graphics, a whopping 15 sound channels. It also had great expandibility options (8 slots) plus backward compatibility with the 8bit a2. But it was way overpriced and was clear it was going to be discontinued. Apple could of easily put in a motorola chip to make it faster but they wanted people to switch to macs. Apple had only made it to compete with the first ST an Amigas and didn't make any further models.

     

    The atari st just gave the best bang for the buck period. Both the atari and amiga had little software when they came out. I remember some people buying an atari with the spectrum adaptor to be able to run mac softare at a way lower price (without sound). This was a good for them since it took a little time for both atari and amiga to develop software packages. And as many have mentioned it had MIDI built in. I always thought the computer media/magazines always emphazed the higher colour counts on the amigas too much. Not all 16 bit computer users cared exclusively about gaming.

     

    Keep in mind that the Macs did not have multitasking until OS X came out, before that they used task switching at best. I'd say teh Atari ST and Amiga had better OSs. The Amiga had pre-emptive multitasking, but it did not have any memory management, which caused some apps to take down the whole system.

     

    Also, the Atari STs had built in Midi -- something the Amigas never had. Odd that they never added that as it is one of the things that had the Sts sell very well.

     

    I think the Apple IIs would have gone far if it was not for the Mac. It's amazing as the Mac almost never happened after the Lisa failed so badly.

     

    So true that each platform did have its strengths. If Commodore had teamed up with Newtek, I think that might have made a difference.

  10. Posted

    Some would say marketing makes the best computer and experience would back this up. However, this is an argument that is rather boring and lack emotion.

     

    From power, graphics, sound and other aspects, what do you consider to be the best 16-bit computer/model ever made?

     

    The price wars from the early 80s reduced the number of entrants into this category and saw the further rise of the Intel-based, or Wintel systems -- boo...

     

    However, true pioneering was still in the non-wintel world.

  11. Posted

    I always felt the best meant power, graphics, sound: the whole package. Usually when all areas were good or great, the whole system was better for it. The Amiga taught us that custom chips were the way to go. Today most systems are segregated: separate video cards and sound with little to know help from the processor.

     

    The Atari 800 was simply the best in my mind: but it needed better marketing -- the product itself was far better than the C64.

  13. Posted

    You have to go WAAY back past the 2600 to see the greatest minds in Atari. The facts are simple....technology without marketing and application is not profitable (Odyssey 100, ). Nolan is the PT Barnum of the digital age. He was not a programmer, designer, salesman, etc but rather all of these. He was smart enough to get help when he needed it and was charismatic enough to pull the business off. Luck certainly was on his side but there was a visionary view of things.

     

    Al Alcorn, The Woz, Jobbs, Gates, Deciur were all brilliant. I still think Nolan is responsible for videogames as we know them. For that, I would say he is the greatest mind.

     

    C

     

    I would have to agree! The Odyssey is a good example of this. It's too bad Nolan did not stay in the business. I look to Gates as a business hero, but there is no imagination there -- no spark. It's too bad the most boring of the technologies fromt eh 80s endured, the Mac excluded of course.

  14. Posted

    Very few were made and the ones that were never really made it to the market. I believe any of the 1400XL series are considered prototypes. (Any other vintage Atari Sages please correct me if I am wrong)

     

    You can learn more here :http://www.atarimuseum.com/computers/8BITS/XL/1400xl/1400.html

     

    Thanks, I actually thought they made a few of them for public release. Most articles I found on the 1400XL were not clear or seemed hearsay...

  19. Posted

    Was it Bushnell who founded the company and had the initial vision? Or, was it Trameil, the founder of Commodore who rescued Atari and spearheaded the Atari ST line of computers?

     

    Atari had a roller coaster ride after Bushnell sold the company to Warner and I wonder if the pull between developing a gam machine or PC was what eventually brought down the company.

     

    What do you think,

    S

     

    --

    http://VintageAtari.com

    http://VintageSega.com

    http://VintageNintendo.com

     

     

    What about Jay Miner? He was involved with the chip architecture of both the Atari 2600 and Atari 800 series...

     

    I think Bushnell had the initial vision, with help from the guy who developed the technology, but he was very much the visionary behind the 2600.

     

    I also think you are dead on about Jay minor, and if Atari execs would have listened to him, there would not have been an Amiga (as Jay was the brains behind that computer as well), or any need for Jack to rescue the company. In fact the Atari St would have been the Amiga and would have been released earlier than 1985.

     

    I would not down play Jack, but Atari was lost without Bushnell for too long. And of course when Jack left Commodore, Commodore had the same trouble.

     

    I wonder where Bushnell is today.

  20. Posted

    The 64 only had 16 colours and 64Kb of RAM.

    16 colors is kind of weak, but how many 8bit computers had more than 64 Kb of RAM?

     

    True, 64KB was a lot for 1982, but the 64 was around for a decade like many other 8-bit machines. The 64 never came with more than 64K. I think the 64 was a marketing success and Commodore's manufacturing and supply lines helped them reduce the cost, but I think there are many more makes that offer some better features. Granted, the SID chip was a great feature.

  21. Posted · Edited by GasMonkey

    On Monday, there was a bash regarding the 25-year history behind the Commodore 64. There is no question that it was the top selling model of all time but was it the best?

     

    The 64 only had 16 colours and 64Kb of RAM. It was truly a dynamic time, but top selling does not always mean it is the best.

     

    What do you think was the best 8-bit of all time?

     

    S

AtariAge
Forums
Store
General
Follow AtariAge

Copyright ©1998-2021 AtariAge

×
×
  • Create New...