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

Xebec

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    522

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Xebec

  1. Posted

    10 hours ago, Pmetzen said:

    Ich kann Fujinet auch nicht nach Belieben an einer SIO-Kette aufhängen. Es muss direkt auf dem Atari XL stecken, dann funktioniert es. Wenn ich es an einer SIO-Kette wird hängen, wird es nicht booten, selbst wenn ich ein Gerät anders mit dem SIO-Port des FujiNet verbinde, der geerdet wird. War das der Grund? Habe U1MB in meinem Computer und dem Turbo Freezer 2011. Ich habe den Turbo Freezer 2011 komplett weggenommen, um es ausprobieren. Sobald ich etwas mit der FujiNet-Verbinde, funktioniert es nicht.

    Mein Deutsche ist nicht sehr gut, aber ich kann kaffee bestellen :).

     

    - Have you tried a different SIO cable to chain / attach devices?

    - Can you connect another device first to the Atari, *then* the Fujinet - does that work?

     

    Google Translate if it helps:

     

    - Haben Sie ein anderes SIO-Kabel zum Verketten / Anbringen von Geräten ausprobiert?

    - Können Sie zuerst ein anderes Gerät an den Atari und dann an das Fujinet anschließen - funktioniert das?

  3. Posted

    3 minutes ago, pixelmischief said:

    You can buy both the adapter and a Mach chipset video card.  I just did it.  As far as how it works, you need to run NVDI with the Mach driver.  The system will first output via the onboard display and then switch to the video card when the driver loads.  It's a bitch to get set up, but pretty reliable after that.  I use a VGA auto-switcher to get both the bootup and the card video in pretty seamless fashion.

    Thanks sir!   Now to figure out where to buy a VME to ISA adapter since Google isn't being helpful..  :)

  4. Posted

    1 hour ago, snarkdluG said:

    There is the Nova VME card that uses a ET4000AX ISA gfx card (and ATI Mach32 I think) for the Mega STe.

    Is there any source for buying these today?

     

    And how does it work -- do you use one monitor for TOS, but if you run a program that runs at ST Low/Medium resolutions it outputs to a separate monitor?  or does this re-route everything through the Nova card?

     

    (and are there any other VME to ISA adapters out there that I could then stick a Tseng 4000 card in , since Nova cards may be hard to get?) 

     

    Thanks! 

  5. Posted

    Hi folks!

     

    I'm looking to get back into the ST a bit again (after a lot of time on the 8-bit and some time on the Amiga 1200)..    I have a 520STm (favorite for size) w/2.5MB RAM, 1040 STfm 1MB, and a Mega STE w/4MB.  I also have an UltraSatan and a Gotek Pro internal to the Mega STE.  I also have the Netusbee adapter.

     

    I'd like to mess around in TOS a but, play with BBS Software - hosting and dialing (Wifi232), write and compile a C program or two, and of course play games (HDD adapted and floppy based).

     

    I remember ST TOS and BBS stuff was *great* at ST high rez (though mono), and was decent at ST medium but not great at Low (more colors but 40 columns).  I also believe you can easily switch between medium and low, but high always requires a reboot.    

     

    Are there any ways to switch between high and medium/low without rebooting?    What is the monitor solution in this case?   Are there any aftermarket upgrades that are buyable for the MegaSTE that allow other resolution options? (i.e. on the Amiga there is an awesome Indivision adapter that clamps on top of Denise or Lisa and gives you higher resolution modes that make Workbench quite usable on a modern monitor).  

     

    P.S.  I have the SC1224 and a SM124 mono, and I also have some kind of scan doubler that will allow me to use a LCD, as well as a RetroTink pro if that helps..  Lastly, I think I have a Best Electronics Multisync cable for the ST, and I *know* I have a 19" multisync PC monitor I'd be happy to adapt for ST usage.  

  6. Posted

    Just got my Fujinet -- LOOVEEE this device!!

     

    Dumb questions:

    - Can I plug the Fujinet into an unused SIO port on the Atari 850 (attached to an Atari 800) or does it need to be the first device in the chain?

     

    - I saw that Fujinet on the Atari 800 won't produce the sound for disk swaps unless you have a ROM swap.  I'm using Incognito with XL/XE ROM (+various ram settings) and do not hear sound - is that still expected?

     

    - I am able to use Fujinet successfully on my 800 with the Colleen ROM without MicroUSB power, do I need to worry about anything?

     

    -  For those using U1MB/ Incognito - is the quickest/right way to boot with Fujinet -- reset-atari (get to bios), press L for loader, then CTRL-R for reboot basically?

     

    - Am I allowed to use Fujinet on an Atari attached to a Commodore monitor?  

  8. Posted

    1 hour ago, leech said:

    Yeah, I think Jay Miner and Co left due to how Warner was treating the engineers and because he really wanted to start on a project using the 68000 much earlier than others, and finally just said screw it and left and started their own thing.

    Basically Bushnell selling to Warner was the original downfall of a very profitable company.  I think up until that point they were one of the fastest growing companies and started an entire industry for the moat part. 

    I have said the same before, it was also the 16 bit era battle of C= vs Atari that hammered the nails in the coffin.  Sure, Jack murdered some of the heart and soul when he took over and made Atari Corp.  Seems they had a LOT of cool projects they were working on and he sort of smashed away all of them he didn't see as being profitable.  (I think I read somewhere that Atari wanted to get into VR as early as the early 80s.)

    Granted knowing all that I do now about VR, it really hasn't been ready for home use until the last few years.

    Agreed.

     

    It was also unfortunately really hard to get capital in the 70s (oil crisis), and in the early 80s only those companies with chip fabs were getting money (fabless wasn't taken seriously - Altera, the original FPGA maker, actually lied about buying/owning fabs so they'd get venture funding to get off the ground, in 1983 or so).  

     

    Did Bushnell give the go-ahead for the Atari 400/800 project?  or did Warner green light that?  

     

    Atari did finally do VR - sorta - with the Jaguar, and Missile Command VR and a few others that never got fully fleshed out.  I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't do something in the 80s -- along with the STacy, portfolio, etc and other cool things they had available.  

     

    It was kinda fun to live the C= vs. Atari battles of the mid/late 80s but yes.. that was unfortunately game over for both of them.   Perhaps the last real chance was the Amiga could have potentially taken down the Mac with proper investments and marketing, but C= leadership (post-Tramiel) was even worse than Warner Atari.. 

    • Like 2

  9. Posted

    On 12/18/2020 at 6:07 PM, Dmitry said:

    Speaking on the original topic, of Atari's lost opportunities, from my perspective, nobody made it.  I mean Sinclair, Commodore, Texas Instruments, Radio Shack, not to mention Osbourne, Kaypro, etc.  I was disappointed in Atari for a while, but nowadays, with the benefit of hindsight, I have to say, they never had a chance.

    In fact all those early companies are gone, except one, Apple.  ...and they nearly went out of business for a few years there.

     

    Speaking of Apple, what a turnaround.    I'm glad I got on the Mac train after Atari....  For me the Mac market is quite the exciting "little" market.  The fact that Apple just released M1 Mac's on their own silicon and on power per watt basis, is stomping the competition, to me this is about as an exciting time to be in computing, as it was in the 80's.

     

    That they introduce exciting languages like Swift and get this huge swell of focus on their free development platform, I see parallels to the old days of integrated-basic computing there as well.  in terms of buying a computer and writing code for it with a rich community of coders writing for a beloved platform - it's all there.  Just missing player missile graphics and a cartridge port.

     

     

     

     

    I sometimes think that..  but a few things to consider:

     

    - The Atari 400/800 did start outselling the Apple II for a couple of years, with the main failure point (imo) of the Atari being that Warner-Atari didn't open up the hardware and was much less friendly with developers than Apple.

     

    - The Apple II essentially gave Apple the $$ to fund the Mac

     

    - If the Atari 400/800 had embraced developers, and continued selling well - and Atari hadn't fucked over Jay Miner and friends with the bonuses, we could have seen something like the Amiga much earlier - given extra funding Atari would have had (up to the end of 1983 at least), and it might have even launched before the Mac - vastly overshadowing it.    

     

    Atari and Commodore were destined to destroy each other once Jack left Commodore, I don't think there was anything that could have saved either platform long term after that;  other than maybe the Amiga (with extra funding, focus on 3D graphics later, etc) becoming a brand of console like Playstation or Xbox..  

     

    I think Atari legitimately had a chance in 1979 to at least be second to the PC (like the Mac) but it was over once they failed to pay the hardware developers and didn't embrace their vision for the next generation .. 

    • Like 1

  10. Posted

    Hey folks - are there any still running Atari BBSes left that can be connected to with an analog modem?

     

    I have a few old models I want to test, and I think I can use a VOIP-analog phone adapter to connect at least at some kind of slow speed.. just to see if it works..   (Grandstream HT701)

     

    Thanks :)

  11. Posted

    6 hours ago, zzip said:

    Really?  That's weird.    Seems to be common thing for RPGs though.  ST has Ultima 2-6, but not 1.   Not even the "remastered" version of Ultima I that Origin released in 86.   And Questron II, but not I.

    No 68000 systems got Ultima I   for what it's worth:

    https://wiki.ultimacodex.com/wiki/Computer_ports_of_Ultima_I

     

    (Amiga also did not get Ultima 2!)

     

    Was really happy to play Phantasie I-III on the ST though back in the day :)

  13. Posted

    20 hours ago, Lynxpro said:

     

    Cost is not a real argument because Atari's own IBM PC compatibles at the same time had dedicated RAM for their video cards and the systems themselves were generally cheaper than the STs. And despite them having to license MS-DOS from Microsoft and GEM from DRI. And the first Atari PC clones had EGA graphics. In 1987/1988. 

    I apologize if I wasn't clear - I was responding to the earlier comments in this thread about how good the ST graphics were at the time of it's release in 1985;  EGA being a 'wide standard' (as it launched on the PC around the same time) seemed like a good comparison.  ST graphics are definitely ahead of PC CGA  (the Atari 8bit is basically CGA), but I'm not sure if the ST is actually any better than EGA.   

  14. Posted

    17 hours ago, zzip said:

    I bought a 520STfm in 1987 for something like $399 without monitor.  I think this was the first time Atari was selling them without monitors.

     

    The fact that your program had to copy all graphics data to video ram over an 8-bit 8mhz bus that was shared with other components meant that EGA wasn't doing high-performance graphics no matter what your CPU speed was.

     

    Back then I used to feel envious about systems that had better graphics capabilities on paper.  At the time I got all my information from magazines.   Pretty screenshots and tech specs don't always tell you how it performs at real world tasks.  When I got to use the machines, performance was a bit of a shock.  It was good for presentations, but not that great for gaming.

    Nice re: $399 - I was curious if the whole computer was the same price as "just a low end / average EGA card" :).

     

    On one hand, I definitely agree with the EGA card + PCs not being great for gaming.. but the 640x350 @ 4 colors definitely made it useful for productivity with *some* gaming.  You certainly had point and click adventures well at hand for 'off hours', with slowly improving GUIs and nice large spreadsheets on the other hand.

     

    That said - doesn't the base 520STf without the blitter have the same equivalent graphics performance potential as EGA on the ISA bus?  16-bit @ 8 MHz / 2 (shared) vs 8-bit @ 8 MHz (not shared memory), because the ST bus is shared between the video circuitry and the CPU? 

  15. Posted

    13 hours ago, Lynxpro said:

     

    I do remember that most of us were expecting VGA graphics - or at least matching or besting the Amiga - out of the STe and a faster CPU clock speed and it was disappointing when it didn't deliver those features upon release. Or a 68010 or 68020. Or a standard 1.44MB disc drive. Or multitasking. Or an FPU Socket. Or GDOS in ROM. Or in a Mega ST case.

     

    Interesting on the EGA/VGA graphics comparison

     

    At launch, EGA attached to the PC via an 8-bit bus @ 8MHz (maybe later 16-bit), but had it's own memory - 64KB.  That 64KB allowed for 640x350 with 4 colors (ahead of 640x400 / 2 colors on the ST).  320x200x16 color (4bit) was also possible which is equal to the ST, though the ST had a way better color palette - 512 colors vs 64 colors.  

     

    Another angle is cost -- a "low end" EGA card or "Standard" card - the ATI EGA wonder was $399 in March of 1987.  The 512KB STs were probably under the $700 launch price by this time.  

     

    A final angle would be around blitter or other capabilities;  if the ST has the blitter on 100% of machines as intended, that would have negated any advantages a separate buffer EGA cards had (Vs main ram), IMO.  EGA was pretty 'dumb' though as far as what it could do by itself.. 

     

    EGA definitely gave the PC the capability to look respectable vs. the ST 1985-1988 or so, but many PCs were still running CGA at this time, and an EGA PC would likely have been 2x the price of the ST so I think the ST would have been perceived as 'good' graphics at the time.

     

    As for STe;  completely agree.   It should have gotten at least a faster CPU ([email protected] MHz or better), and more than just the 4096 color palette on the graphics side - even if it was just more colors at same resolutions.  A [email protected] MHz TT + blitter would have been really nice..  

  16. Posted

    12 hours ago, leech said:

    Speaking of processors, I found it interesting in my 65816 Assembly language book, that they were planning on releasing a 32bit 65832 that would have been compatible with the 6502.  The lack of widespread use of the 65816 kind of killed the plans for it.

    Would have loved a 32bit 800xl.  😛

    There was a brief comment from Bill Mensch during a recent VCF video where he said he thinks he might still have the starting paperwork he (and someone else) did for the 32-bit 65816 variant.  It sounded like they may have only gotten as far as the instruction set ..  but it's something that can hopefully be preserved... 

     

    Sometime towards the end of this video IIRC   (3rd video in the playlist - ignore the Dave Haynie /Amiga face ;-) )

     

  17. Posted

    On 12/2/2020 at 5:13 PM, zzip said:

    Maybe if IBM had chosen 68000 instead of Intel for the PC then the Motorola ecosystem would have seen the rapid advancement and falling costs we saw in the Intel world, and that would have boosted ST and Amiga.   PC compatibility would have been easier to implement too. 

    The 68000 was in the running for PC, but I think IBM was concerned about supply issues.

    That's an interesting change I hadn't considered.  If the PC had gone 68000 - yes, it's possible x86 would have died a slow death in the 1990s...  software emulation of a PC on the ST or Amiga would have been much faster/easier too ..    

     

    I do also remember reading IBM considered the 68000 (as well as re-purposing the Atari 400/800 supposedly), but I think it was both supply of the CPU and also 'companion chips' not being ready in time for the launch of the IBM PC.  I also suspect there was a cost element there since the minimum 16-bit bus and related peripherals would impact that too.  

  18. Posted · Edited by Xebec

    On 11/24/2020 at 1:19 PM, calimero said:

     

    First MC68000 16MHz was manufactured at the end of 1989. http://www.cpu-collection.de/?l0=co&l1=Motorola&l2=68000

     

    STe have 16MHz MC68000 but if you turn off cache there is almost no difference to ST (probably) so you can "stiff" faster clocked CPU in ST and expect that everything will run faster. This is because ST was very tightly planned, and back in 1984. it was really extremely fast thanks to architecture that allow MC68000 8MHz to work at full speed. In contrast, Macintosh hardware was example of bad planning and designing. At same clock speed, Mac is almost 1/3 slower than ST (and with 1/3 lower resolution)!

     

    Shiraz left Atari for Momenta Corp.

     

    "After leaving Atari, Shivji designed the Momenta Pen Computer in 1991. This was one of the first full- sized tablet computers with a sophisticated hardware for that time. However, its operating system was based on DOS and did not deliver sufficient applications for its graphical user interface."

     

    https://www.microsoft.com/buxtoncollection/a/pdf/Shiraz_Shivji.pdf

     

    http://web.archive.org/web/20070110182526/www.byte.com/art/9611/sec4/art1.htm

     

    This probably latest article about Shiraz Shivji: https://www.digisaurier.de/computerhelden-2-shiraz-shivji-der-mann-der-uns-den-atari-st-schenkte/ 

    I do recall reading that Motorola was afraid to introduce 'too high of clock speed' 68000 CPUs to avoid overshadowing perceived performance gains of 68020/68030, and this did effectively hurt designs based on that CPU from being competitive with the decreasing price of x86 CPUs over time.

     

    According to wikipedia, Motorola did have a 12.5 MHz 68000 by June 1982, though the 16 MHz (16.67 Mhz actually) "was not available until the late 80's".   The 68010 was released at up to 25 MHz speeds and was highly compatible (though not 100%).  

     

    ..

     

    EDIT:  Thanks for the additional links - they provide good info on Shivji's next steps after Atari.  It's unfortunate he disagreed with the Tramiels and ran into health problems - he seems like he was a great engineer and leader for Atari..    Interesting this source says Shivji stayed with Atari to 1990..   I don't know why I had 87 stuck in my head.  

     

    ..

     

    It really seems like for the ST or Amiga to have succeeded we would have needed a lot of things.  A more successful and better Motorola, less than 3 68000 based computers competing (i.e. Amiga or ST to get a clear victory early on or one of them to never launch to effectively compete against the Mac mindshare), and then a lot of luck/good leadership on top of that.  

  22. Posted

    If inappropriate, please delete post

     

    ... but I saw what happened with TerribleFire* over in the Amiga community over a few years, and I hope we don't see anything similar happen in the A8 community.  I just wanted to say thank you again to all of the people here who make this community awesome and give us wonderful toys to play with and a strong dose of nostalgia at the same time.

     

    This group is especially awesome as I was a bit too young to really get super involved in local groups related to the Atari 8bit so, (outside of BBS experiences and 1 copy 8bit party back in the day) I enjoy getting a real taste of what that might have been like..  today.  

     

    Thanks Atarians! 

     

    *TF did a lot for his community (and for the ST) and seems like a great person.  I wish him well.  

    • Like 9
    • Thanks 1

  24. Posted

    Thank you all - learned a lot here actually from this thread.

     

    I didn't realize the Mega ST had an ability to mount a drive internally - I assumed with the pizza slice drives that meant external only.  I do like the Mega ST keyboard a lot though as Darklord points out (when I bought my Mega STE 5-6 years ago I asked for the 'older' style keyboard as it had the function keys that look like the AIO ST's..) 

     

    I'm sure the blitter alone helped TOS a lot..  it's ashame the original ST's never had that.

     

    Any recommendations on where I can go to read more about the video cards offered for the Mega ST (not-E)?    Did those cards drive all TOS / graphics output or was it basically a two monitor deal if you wanted to run all software? 

     

     

AtariAge
Forums
Store
General
Follow AtariAge

Copyright ©1998-2021 AtariAge

×
×
  • Create New...