Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


OldAtarian last won the day on November 30 2010

OldAtarian had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

152 Excellent

About OldAtarian

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Ha ha! I love how you attempt to trivialize PRICE, by referring to it as "the only saving grace." PRICE IS EVERYTHING. Price is FIRST consideration of EVERYTHING. In 1985, a complete 520ST system cost about the same as a Commodore 128 system, and you know they weren't selling Amiga 1000s for the same price they were selling C128s. There was a significant price difference, for some time. The ST was close enough to the Amiga to give a similar 16-bit home computer experience - similar resolutions, etc. But sure, Amiga's impressive, too. C128 was £399 + 1541 mk2 for £150 or £499 as a bundle. An exclusive 80 column mode colour RGB-I capable 1901 monitor was about £299. So £799 or without 1901 £499+ £199 for high quality SONY TRITRON 14" TV with composite inputs +RGB = £699 (33% less than 520ST + SC1224 bundle) The 520ST needed a colour AND mono monitor, so with single disc drive and colour monitor came in at £999 with SC1224 and SF354 + £149 for SM124 so that's £1149 for 360kb disc drive + colour + mono monitors. £999 for no high res mono ability. ST had no composite out or RF out. £999 = 256kb Amiga and 880kb DS/DD floppy. £299 for 1081 colour and IIRC £150-125 for 256kb expansion RAM. So 512kb A1000 + 1081 = £1450 BUT first ST had TOS on disk so 512kb 520ST = same actual memory as 256kb Amiga A1000 which has extra 192kb protected RAM to load ROM OS. So that's £1299. Amiga could use SCART TV....Sony 14" professional quality TV/Monitor was £199 AND superior to Commodore AND Atari monitor goldfish bowl warm colour biased CRT tubes. So in conclusion 520ST with colour and mono monitors and SF314 720kb drive was £1199-£1249. You need the SM124 +SF314 to compare like for like. 520STM £399 + SONY TRINITRON £199 + SF314 £199 + £149 SM124 = £949 which is better value in 1986. (obviously £799 without ever using high res but Amiga didn't need separate monitor for high res) This is the same as Amiga A1000 256kb (+extra 192kb WOM built in for loading disk OS) 880kb drive + Sony Trinitron 14 TV monitor = £1199. £1349 if comparing to 520ST with TOS in ROM vs 256kb+256kb Amiga 1000. This dropped to £899 for "512kb" Amiga 1000 in 1986 though so £1099 vs £949 520STM (both bundle using just Sony SCART RGB TV but STM including SM124 in fairness for business/serious use to access 640x400 mode). The 520STM was the first attempt to lower price package by summer 1986, then 520STFM for £399 in 1987 was key to home user market but you were limited to 360kb disk drive internally and still needed SM124 for mono use. 520STM was offloaded at £199 by Silica Shop in 1987 + £149 SF314= £50 less than 360kb SS floppy 520STFM in 1987 which was the bargain of the century!! £299 for 520STM vs £299 C128 in 1987 = same price for games players using existing TV at home true. Both need £149 disc unit too. 512kb Amiga 1000 down to £699 in early 1987 vs £449 (£299+£149) 520STM+SF354 bundle. 35% cheaper than Amiga 1000. First point, C128 was a completely different class of computer, so shouldn't even be in this comparison, so that point is invalid. Second point, you did NOT need to own both monitors. I never owned a monochrome monitor until long after the ST had already gone out of production. There was a commercial program called Omnires that allowed the use of programs on a monitor it wasn't intended for, there was also at least one shareware utility that did the same thing. Third, your prices over there in UK/Europe have always been screwed up. Here in N. America the 1040ST with monochrome monitor was the first computer made by anybody that sold with 1meg RAM for under $1000. Macs and PC's with that much memory and a monochrome monitor cost thousands more so the ST was the value priced computer. The price difference with color monitor compared to a PC was even bigger and you couldn't even get color output on a Mac at that time. Fourth, I can't believe you consider the Amiga being able to output to a TV as a plus since a TV is incapable of displaying a computer's video signal at anything approaching the quality of even the worst monitor on the market at the time. I also just checked my first generation 520ST and they DID have an RF output, so your point about the Amiga being the only one that could output to a TV is FALSE. Fifth, a 256K Amiga sold for $1295 WITHOUT monitor when they were first released. $300 MORE than the 1040ST WITH Mono monitor, and with half the memory of the 520ST. Adding a monitor to the Amiga made the price difference even higher, so the Amiga was definitely no bargain compared to the 520 and 1040ST. Anything else you wanted to say?
  2. You know what? I'm a member of at least 30, maybe 40 internet forums and you know the only place anyone ever hassles me? Atari Age. So I'm thinking you people here are the ones with the problem, because I'm well liked everywhere else I go.
  3. Oh please! Atari Age has nothing to do with those sites, and they're not promoting anything. Straw-man fallacy, big-time! I think you're just want attention. You didn't seem to know that games had been patched for STe, in your earlier message. When someone PROVED you wrong, you want to sound off like some alarmist, moralistic messiah. HA HA HA! Oh please! Don't forget the sites hosting Amiga games patched for WHDload! HA! When you're done with that, clobber the all ROM sites. Good luck with all of that, and do let us know how it goes. But the point still stands, the games are patched for STe. You're just here to besmirch the ST, that much is obvious, now. I never said Atari Age had anything to do with those. I said a member was promoting a warez site in their forums. No, you said Atariage was "allowing" it. That ignorant statement suggests that Atariage has something to do with it (focus on your verb form of "allow" (actually a gerund, if you want to split hairs) if you're having trouble piercing through the dense fog that dwells between your ears). You're the only one laughing. I join the others who'd like to see you be given the boot. If you see anyone else laughing, be assured they're laughing AT you, not with you. If you're not here to besmirch the ST, then you're here to play "know-it-all." Now there's something that's slightly humorous - a "dummy trying to play know-it-all." Now the absolute depths of your ignorance and naivete are showing, here. That's a closed-minded, absolutely BIGOTED thing to say. It's bigoted, because I surmise by your besmirching the great state of Tennessee, that you fancy yourself from some more sophisticated locale. Well, by virtue of your bigoted comment, you have revealed an utter lack of sophistication, on your part. You're also completely IGNORANT because I'm not FROM Tennessee. I've lived in a few states, but spent most of my time in the North. So in your feeble attempt to impugn the literacy of a state that I'm not even from - in a halfass/ignorant attempt for reasons just noted - you yourself come across as a bigoted, ignorant jackass, with the mind of a [not-so-bright] child and the mental acuity of a mosquito. Stick to what you know, and better yet, keep out of the ST forum, where you're not wanted, and where others have been putting you on "ignore." And you think acting like a baby makes you any better? Putting someone on ignore because they don't happen to agree with you or you don't like what they are saying is tantamount to putting your fingers in your ears and shouting over the other person like a bratty child would. And it's not my fault that Tennessee ranks low in literacy. I actually took the trouble of checking the government statistics first before I posted that so someone couldn't attempt to shoot it down later. See, I back myself with facts before I say things like that. So my comment was not bigoted in any way, simply a statement of fact. If you can't handle it, that's your own fault not mine.
  4. Truth hurts, doesn't it? If you're downloading software that is still under copyright then you are a thief. That's not me saying it, it's the law. The law does not recognize the concept of "abandonware". If you were hauled into court for hosting or possessing illegally obtained software, it wouldn't matter to the judge if it was a new release or if it was 20 years old. It all falls under the same laws and the punishment for the crime is the same. If you don't like the law, then tell someone who has the power to change it instead of acting like a baby who doesn't get his way. Incorrect. Copyright law, specifically in the US was recently updated to specifically recognise abandoned computer software. OWNERS of abandoned software are now legally entitled to make as many copies of the software as they like, wether in contravention of the original licence terms or not. In addition, the law permits owners of said software to circumvent copy protection schemes (dongles et al) in order to back up the software. I suggest you check the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. http://www.joystiq.c...donware-rights/ And here it is from the horses mouth: http://www.copyright.gov/1201/ Note: You still have to own the software under the standard legal definition of 'own'. Piracy is still piracy, and since, as you correctly point out, the copyright on all computer software is still valid, you can't just make copies of copyrighted software to distribute to your friends or sell on eBay; regardless of what eBay might think. Did you even READ any of what you just linked to? Nothing I can see in there says that it is legal to set up a website for the sole purpose of distributing the copyrighted material of others, even if you already own a copy. Please post an excerpt that says what you think it says, because it does not say what you think it does. From the 2010 update (4) Video games accessible on personal computers and protected by technological protection measures that control access to lawfully obtained works, when circumvention is accomplished solely for the purpose of good faith testing for, investigating, or correcting security flaws or vulnerabilities, if: (i) The information derived from the security testing is used primarily to promote the security of the owner or operator of a computer, computer system, or computer network; and (ii) The information derived from the security testing is used or maintained in a manner that does not facilitate copyright infringement or a violation of applicable law. (5) Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are obsolete. A dongle shall be considered obsolete if it is no longer manufactured or if a replacement or repair is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace; Nothing in there says that you have a right to make or distribute copies of games, only that you can circumvent the protection to study how it works or to fix flaws in it's functionality that may compromise the security of your computer system if it is left intact. It also says dongles for old software may circumvented if they are no longer available so if you get an old Mac loaded up with AAVID cards and software but didn't get the dongle with it then you can circumvent it, but only after reasonable effort has been expended to acquire one. Going back to the 2006 update, it does say this 2. Computer programs and video games distributed in formats that have become obsolete and that require the original media or hardware as a condition of access, when circumvention is accomplished for the purpose of preservation or archival reproduction of published digital works by a library or archive. A format shall be considered obsolete if the machine or system necessary to render perceptible a work stored in that format is no longer manufactured or is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace. (This section also has a 3 year expiration and it's been more than 3 years since it went into affect, so it is now void) "These exemptions went into effect upon publication in the Federal Register on November 27, 2006, and will remain in effect through October 27, 2009." Even if the law was still in effect, however, YOU are not a library or archive, which are the only entities that were exempt under the Act. It does NOT say, that you can make a copy solely on the basis that you already own one and want a backup. Also, even though Atari computers are no longer made by Atari, they are still "reasonably available" in the marketplace simply by going on ebay or Craigslist or by going to a vintage computing/gaming show and searching for one. There are also new TOS machines still available for purchase from Medusa Systems, so as long as anyone, anywhere is still building TOS compatible systems that run all old ST software, then Atari ST software will never be copyable under the law because the format is not considered "obsolete" as defined in the law. And if you think I'm nit-picking the hell out of the law, what do you think lawyers who argue cases in court get paid so much money to do? Any competent lawyer can probably find hundreds of other ways that I completely overlooked to get the courts to say that you are in violation of the law for copying games.
  5. I know 5200 Pac Man is better than Intellivision Pac Man overall. They didn't even get the maze layout right on the Intellivision though the ghosts look a little more like the arcade ghosts than the 5200 ones do. The only one from that time frame that even comes close to the 5200 is the unreleased proto for the Colecovision and that one is overall about the same, a little better in some ways, a little worse in others. I wish they had managed to get that one out before the plug got pulled on Atarisoft. Here is a gameplay video of the Colecovision prototype. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uwMC7VtRC8
  6. I wonder if something to be able to access the internet would be possible, then someone could write a multiplayer shooter for the 5200!
  7. Nah, if anything I'd rather see the 1090XL expansion box reproduced and some cards released for it.
  8. I have one of these, too. I got it in a box lot of Atari stuff on ebay a few years ago for stupid cheap. Here's the clearest pic I could find online of the Wico arcade stick that I think it is based on. I hope hotlinking is allowed. Notice all the hardware that resides under the top of the arcade machine that the stick would be mounted in. I think that's what's inside the stick you have. I would think selling those sticks as Atari sticks would have been pretty expensive so they revised the design to the cone top model that is much more common.
  9. Congratulations, you have just discovered your next project! The 5200 XM
  10. True this. I remember back in 8-bit days hearing about guys who had corrected the "wrong" memory locations of most of the 5200 games making them playable on the 400/800.
  11. PET yes, (powerful professional side with DMA hard disks, PC/Mac killing SLM804+ST solution, good OS environment and user friendly business software) VIC20 maybe (VIC chip isn't cutting edge, but the VIC20 was only designed to 'distract' the Japanese from the work on the C64 as a sacrificial lamb, which is what the plan was all along from Tramiel) But the ST and C64 have nothing in common, the C64 may not be a Jay Miner way of doing things but it was still cutting edge at the time with sprites, SID sound and even the 8+4bit 12bit DMA architecture of VIC-II and 6510 on the system bus. And all components were Commodore proprietary ones not found in other machines anywhere right down to the 6510. C64 IS VIC-II and SID and those designers had nothing to do with Jack at Atari. Bob (SID) left to start Ensoniq for a start before Jack left Commodore. Without VIC-II or SID it's like trying to make an A8 with Amstrad CPC parts and no Pokey/GTIA/Antic etc. That's the soul of the machine. The ST was more like the 16bit version of the Colour Super PET. Lots of RAM, some very sophisticated software for business AND very high performance peripherals and interfaces (DMA/MIDI etc), and enough power to play some games if you wanted it to but no dedicated hardware all CPU driven by default. I do agree though that had the ST been badged a Commodore AND marketed to the old Commodore PET purchasers from half a century ago it would have sold a lot more in 1985/86. Business clients still attributed the name Atari to games machines in 1985 which was an uphill struggle for Jack that he never overcame in the business world I think. Shame as for DTP and music studio work as well as general office applications the ST should have cleaned up. What did the Japanese have to do with the VIC-20 or the C-64? The VIC-20 was originally conceived as a game console to compete with the 2600 but was changed to a home computer because it was thought that a cheap computer might appeal to parents more than a games machine. The Japanese had nothing to do with it. The reason why the VIC shipped with so little memory was because Commodore had a glut of 1k chips on their hands that they had no way of disposing of without taking a huge loss on them so they ended up in the VIC-20. The only COMPUTER system I can think of coming out of Japan in the 80's that might have been any sort of competition for the C64 was the MSX and those never sold well in N. America, only Asia, continental Europe and a few countries in S. America and had about the same chance of actually outselling the C64 with it's aggressive pricing as any of the others, which is to say, practically none. Of course, if you're referring to the NES, that would have no bearing on C64 sales, either, because all it could do was games. It wasn't a computer.
  12. WIll all this work with MultiTOS? I have a copy of that, too.
  13. Then whose interpretation is it? :-) I'm trying to point out that this is legal "stuff" and it's rarely as black and white as you seem to think. Case in point: From the "horses mouth" so to speak: http://www.copyright...fringement.html Notice the word "generally," which I think is pretty similar to my use of the word "largely" before... I'm not saying its OK to pirate... I'm just saying it's not as simple as you seem to think it is.. That's why copyright attorneys get paid what they do.. As for price, one of the main reasons I bought my Amiga 500 was that it was less expensive than the Macs or PCs at the time. Price was one of my (if not THE) main considerations. I'm glad I got the Amiga. I think (personally) it was the right choice for me, but I don't deny that, if there was a 520ST system at that store for less money, I might not have gone that way... Price is crucial. Now, Apple has shown that it's not the "only" thing. But Android is showing how important it can be.. desiv I didn't buy my first ST based on price, but because it could do what I needed it to do and because I had been a long time 8-bitter and wouldn't change for any amount of money. I have 2 C64's now, but didn't get my first one until around 2003 and even then I only took it because someone gave it to me for free. I wouldn't have paid anything for one. I also didn't consider all the extra capabilities of the Amiga hardware as necessary so it would have been wasted if I had bought one instead, just like the Falcon030 turned out to be a bad purchase for me at the time. For someone who actually needed the Amiga for it's multimedia capabilities, no other machine would do regardless of price because even PC's and Macs hadn't sufficiently advanced to the point yet where they could do all the things the Amiga could. By the time I actually needed a better machine, I was able to pick up a used 1040STF to replace my 520ST and that was all I needed. I bought the 1040STF not because it was cheap, but because it was a more practical decision than any other machine at the time. I had already invested a lot in the ST in terms of software and peripherals and would have had to start over again if I had bought anything else. I only bought the Falcon because I was young and dazzled by the specs and thought it was going to be a life altering event to own one, and it turned out not to be due to relative lack of support compared to my earlier machines. That's why in the STE/Mega STE thread I say that it's better to get just a normal ST/Mega, because I have always found them to be better supported than the models that came after.
  14. When did I ever say I was unwilling to do anything? I can't build an ethernet adapter for the ST because I don't know how, and I can't buy one because none are available to buy. In the same post where I said I didn't have a machine running Linux, I also mentioned that I didn't have, couldn't make, and can't find an adapter for the ST to connect to my ethernet. What part of that post didn't you understand?
  15. Any game that was cross platform didn't matter for the most part because developers would use a common set of tools to develop both versions so things like sprites and sound effects could be carried over unless the developer wanted the game to look better on one platform over the other then they would put in the extra work needed to make it so like today when a developer makes a game look better on an AMD or nVidia card. One big limitation of the ST hardware that you can easily see is in the port of Great Giana Sisters. The Amiga can do the side scrolling easily but the ST can't. On the ST a small portion of the screen loads then stops, and then when the sprite crosses a boundary the next section loads. You can't get smooth side scrolling and high quality sound playing at the same time as easily on an ST as you can with an Amiga.
  • Create New...