OldAtarian

That proto expansion module would be something to keep on the lookout for.

Hi Crapahute I can't help with the Donkey Kong box you are looking for. I have only the image itself from the same brochure as you. But the picture you have with the 3 versions of the Donkey Kong for ColecoVision, Atari and Intellivision is not the image I have in my big brochure. You have 3 boxes, while I instead have 3 cartridges. Note: On the picture with the 3 cartridges, it is a U.S. cartridge with a U.K. label. The photo I gave previously is from a brochure of 1984. Here is what I've got from another brochure of 1983 : In this case, it is a US cartridge... But it's not a US box. That's a UK box. Here's the US box

Same reason they made more Atari 2600 Pac Man cartridges than actual systems, in case you lost it If you lost it, would you really replace it? Seriously?

As well, Condor Attack and Karate just popped up out here in Denver for $400 "OBO": http://denver.craigslist.org/vgm/2096217393.html Also not mine! :-) Where are the T handles?

True that. I would be wary of buying anything with a rarity of 7 or better that they have in stock. They may have enough of them to push the rarity down 2 or more levels and then you're stuck with a common when you thought you were getting a rare, like Ikari Warriors and Motorodeo. Some people are still trying to get the extremely rare prices for them but it's too late because they are R5's at best now and may be even more common than that by the time they empty the warehouse. I'd hold off on buying anything rare that they are currently selling from any seller until then because the price will bottom out.

Never use surface mail when dealing with international buyers. Always use the fastest method available and make sure you put in your listing that you will not ship any other way. If the buyer doesn't want to pay it, he shouldn't bid on it. Oh, and you should try to verify the tracking number for yourself. Don't take their word that it is invalid.

Are they even listed anymore? If they're listed anywhere it would be on the French stock exchange since that's where Infogrames comes from, who bought them out. "Atari Group In October 2001, IESA relaunched the Atari brand when Atari Interactive, Inc., at that time a wholly owned subsidiary of Infogrames Interactive, Inc., released MXrider. On May 7, 2003, IESA officially reorganized its Infogrames Inc. US subsidiary as a separate Nasdaq listed company known as Atari Inc., named its European operations as Atari Europe, renamed Infogrames Interactive, Inc. to Atari Interactive, Inc., (a wholly-owned subsidiary of IESA), rebranded Infogrames Australia Pty Ltd as Atari Australia Pty Ltd, renamed Infogrames Melbourne House Pty Ltd to Atari Melbourne House Pty Ltd, Infogrames UK became Atari UK, while IESA became a holding company Atari Inc. is a public company that, as of 2007, has as majority stockholder the company California U.S. Holdings, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of IESA. Atari Inc. licences the Atari trademark from Atari Interactive, Inc., a license which will expire in 2013. Atari Inc. has the rights to publish and sublicense in North America certain intellectual properties either owned or licensed by IESA or its subsidiaries, including Atari Interactive, Inc." So you'd never be able to buy enough shares to do anything because Infogrames will always control the majority. According to news sources, the NASDAQ listed part of the company was delisted at the end of 2008 for not being able to maintain a $1.00 per share price.

$11 million dollar judgement against website for libel and slander Read That's not a judgment against the individual who wrote the story, it's a judgment against the website owner for publishing it.

This simply doesn't happen. See below. No, it isn't, and no, they don't. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode47/usc_sec_47_00000230----000-.html within United States code: "[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" This is a part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Nevermind the fact that practically every single website has an independent agreement that you electronically sign when you sign up for the site stating specifically that you are responsible for your own generated content and not the site itself. These agreements have held up in courtrooms for exactly what you're imagining to happen -- libel and defamation suits. They don't work for copyright claims, but they do work whenever a whiny dipsydoodle thinks that they've been "flamed" too hard. An individual could sue the person making the claims, sure, which has its own set of circumstances that have to be proven, and generally the "internet-flame" cases go absolutely nowhere, but bringing suit against an administrator of a website because another user posted defamatory content is definitely not going to go anywhere fast. To be frank, anyone bringing a suit against an admin or owner of a site for content generated by other users not only is going to get a judgment in favor of the site with prejudice against the plaintiff (meaning in this case the plaintiff will be paying the site owner's legal fees for the whole 15 seconds it was in a courtroom), but it is incredibly likely that said plaintiff will be receiving a countersuit within 24 hours for bringing forth a frivolous suit with the tables turned, as an admin can claim that the suit is legitimate defamation. That one won't get thrown out of court in 15 seconds, either... NOTHING in what you just linked applies to someone libeling someone else on an internet forum. The only protection that applies according to that is if an owner of a site DOES censor someone else's comments to prevent someone else from taking offense, then they are protected from being sued for free speech violations by the poster of the offensive comment NOT if the owner of a site does nothing and allows the targeted person to be offended. If I posted a repulsive thread targeting people of color or of a certain religion and Al deleted it, then I have no cause to sue and neither does anyone else because the law you linked to protects him. If he allowed it to stand unedited, then he could be just as if a newspaper allowed a similar editorial or opinion piece to appear in it's pages. If I made a post disparaging blacks anywhere and it was left up the NAACP lawyers would be all over it.

It's like those coin auctions where someone has hundreds of crud encrusted Roman bronze coins and promises to throw in a silver or gold one for every so many lots sold. I didn't think those kinds of listings were still allowed.

That's a UK box.

I'm not sure if it was in Europe, but I heard of a version sold with Mouse Trap instead of DK. The common European box for DK is this one : which is different from the one I showed : I also look for any proof of existence of the one showed on the left on this picture (still from a brochure) : This one is my graal Your holy grail of DK boxes would be the German release version, correct. I saw the Intellivision box in a picture on eBay Germany and if memory serves me right, the seller listed the cart for CBS ColecoVision. The box clearly used dark blue and said Intellivision. Why would the German version have French text on the front?

I remember when I first saw the Snowman demo, it blew me away. That was the first time I had seen full motion video on any computer. I was amazed it could actually fit on a single floppy.

The 2600 is more impressive now than it was then. Developers now can make bigger programs than they were able to then because the price of memory chips has fallen a lot since. Back then you were limited to 4k or sometimes as much as 8k for a really special project and you were usually time and budget constrained. Without having deadlines or budgets and limited memory no longer an impediment, the old consoles can really be unleashed. There are still hard limitations that can't be worked around, true, but you can still do things now that just weren't possible before. The original programmers were also pioneers, the first ones to work with the system. The knowledge that today's batch of homebrewers take for granted, they didn't know back then. They were learning as they went. That made it even harder to write quality programs. They also didn't have an internet back then where they could access huge amounts of information with a few keystrokes or consult with other programmers around the world if they got really stuck. They were pretty much on their own. They also didn't have huge development houses with hundreds of employees working on a single game. You usually had one guy per game who was under a lot of pressure to get the job done quickly. It's not exactly an environment conducive to creativity or attention to detail.

I don't know who does the porting but as far as drive capacity goes: I was thinking more like using a banked ROM cart so there would be no disk drive access; that would speed up load times significantly over the CGA version which does pause as you go from one screen to the next. Imagery is compressed so the RAM requirements was I was worried about since you would need a place to decompress and room for a frame buffer for ANTIC (double buffered) as well along with all other RAM requirements for audio/text/etc. But 130XE or Rambo XLs should work fine. Or you make a custom cartridge that does RAM and ROM to support the Atari 400/800. King's Quest came on a 360k floppy. When was the last time you saw a 360k cart for an A8? Even the OSS supercarts weren't that big. I don't think even Neo Geo carts ever had that much memory. And if you're going to release as a cart, then you can't release only for people with ridiculous amounts of RAM installed or you won't sell any.

It's doubtful. Now that Macs can run Windows natively with full hardware support devs have even less incentive to make games for the Mac than they did before.

That would be awfully inconvenient for the CT63 owners if it did. The Falcon has already an MC68030 cpu running at 16MHz so the TOS 4.x has to accomodate for that. The ST and Mega ST TOSes did not support MC68010 and higher. My Mega ST 1 has a PAK68/2 and needs KAOS instead of TOS. Would swapping in a set of TOS 2.06 chips work?

You would think with all the great programming tools OSS came out with that they would have created a compiler for their Basic's. I guess if they did that, though, it might discourage you from buying Action! or MAC/65.

Apart from any new commands that were added to support the 130XE, is Basic XE fully backwards compatible with Basic XL?

Apart from the obvious extended memory support for the 130XE, what other differences are there?

http://www.free-webhosts.com/free-unlimited-webspace.php

Highest bidder has 15% of their total bid activity with this seller and the second highest has 20% of their total bid activity with this seller. Shills?

That would be awfully inconvenient for the CT63 owners if it did.

You mean like this lamp? Atari joystick lamp

Memory would have been another issue. The PC probably would have at least 256k RAM to work with and the video card might have a few K of it's own.