Larry

I have recently taken a modded 800XL out of retirement and put it back into service. It now works fine, but compared to my XE's, this video/color is quite "washed-out." I have to turn the color boost on my capture card settings way up, and it is still not right. Yes, a very well-known problem, but I put Super Video 2.0 (not 2.1) into this XL, so I was quite surprised. Since I did this years ago, I really don't remember a lot about it, but I did "piggyback" the resistors per the original Atari Classics article. It looks like it's correct, but I'm going to rip it out anyway and redo it with the correct (single resistor) values just to be sure. I never noticed this issue before, because I didn't install the chroma resistor/line when I originally did the mod (used it with a monochrome monitor). This time, I'll go ahead and put in 2.1 also. I don't have much experience with 800XL's. I originally used an 800 until the 130XE's came out, and have used XE's pretty much exclusively until now. Is this a common problem -- even with SV 2.1 (which deals some with saturation)? Do 800XL's still have washed-out color compared to XE's? I know that my "Clear Pic 2000, 1200XL looks great -- easily the equal of a 130XE. Perhaps this is a problem unique to this XL. -Larry

My 1200XL with 32-in-1 has a couple of issues, I wonder if you'll be affected by them... The BASIC XL cart only works with the 32-in-1 if I choose the 400/800 OS (revision A or B). It doesn't work with any of the XL OSes, not even APE Warp. The same cart works fine on an unmodded 800XL or an 800XL with 256K RAM, or even the 600XL I upgraded to 64K. Interestingly, even the 32-in-1 OS selection menu doesn't quite work right with that BXL cart inserted (there are control characters scattered through the menu screen). (snip...) When/if you do install the 32-in-1 in your 1200XL, if you own these two carts, let us know whether they work... Even if it turns out that BASIC XL just plain ain't compatible with the 32-in-1 on a 1200XL, I can live with that (I hardly ever use BXL anyway), but it'd be nice to get some confirmation. Hi Urchlay- That's interesting! I had never heard of BXL not working with any particular model Atari. I have a pretty good memory and I do use BXL quite a bit, so I should remember this issue -- will let you know how it turns out. -Larry

Hi Guus and Mathy- Thanks for your replies. I got it working, and the problem on this computer was the 32-in-1 OS. On this XL, the first thing I did was swap out the cpu from the XL that worked fine. Same issue using the new cpu. Then I did "Stable XL" mod #1 (74LS08 pin 4 to 13). Same result. Since it was easy to rip out, I pulled the 32-in-1 and replaced it with a single eprom OS -- success! Put in a Ramrod XL board with 3 OS's -- success! Mod #2 from CSS might well have cured it, but since the 32-in-1 is a board, it is a little more complicated to do, so I opted to leave it out. I'll save it for a 1200XL (no PBI). -Larry It may be a Q2 timing problem. On a 800XL you might try to make a connection between pin 4 (or 5, it's connected) and pin 13 of the 74LS08. This AND gate buffers the Q output of the Antic and this connecton shifts the signal a little bit. Mostly enough to solve the problem. (Pin 13 is connected to Plus 5V trough a pullup resistor) Alternatively, there is a discription of "stabelising mods" by the designer of the BB. BR/ Guus

Last night, I hooked up my BB to an 800XL that has two mods: a Newell 256K upgrade, and a 32-in-1 OS module. One of these appears incompatible with the BB. When I boot the computer, the boot halts randomly, and spurious characters start appearing on the screen. Is anyone using a Newell 256K, 800XL with the BB? Or how about Rambo? Same for the 32-in-1 module? The BB is not at fault. I use it frequently with a 130XE and after encountering the issue with the 256K XL, I got out a stock 800XL, and it worked fine with the BB. Also, when booting with an SIO drive, the 256K XL works fine. Thanks, Larry

Is your 65XE a 2-DRAM or 8-DRAM version? If it is 8-DRAM, then the Peterson 320K upgrade is fine. If it is 2-DRAM model using 64X4 chips, then no, it won't work (without some very serious changes). -Larry

Well, one problem I found with my CSS OS+, is the ultraspeed routines seem to ignore the actual speed byte returned by the drive. As long as it ACKs the command, it assumes $0A. Could never figure out why the replacement rom I made up for my Trak to add ultraspeed, never seemed to work, until I found out (from [email protected]) that this bug existed! Note, this also keeps APE from functioning at ultraspeed. Does anyone have a dump of the OS itself, so that it can be patched? I miss a lot of the functionality of this OS, but with that bug, it's really unusable. Can it be patched? It is inaccessible and must be installed with a "piggyback" 4051 chip and has several extra connections that are needed to get it working properly. (?) About the Trak: Did you ultimately get the ultraspeed working in the Trak? If so, what did you have to patch in the rom? Have you ever investigated getting the TRAK track buffer (sorry about that) working with a Dos other than Dos 2.0? IIRC, the track buffer was set up to recognize part of Dos 2 boot code, but therefore wouldn't open the track buffer with other Dos' such as MyDos. Likewise, someone was trying to increase the size of the track buffer so that it would at least hold a full DD track. Again, IIRC, the Trak had a (optional) max of a 16KB buffer to accomodate the printer feature as an option, but it looked like the rom needed to be patched so that it would recognize the larger buffer. -Larry

Hmm... I can see how you could use small partitions with 720 SD sectors using Dos 2, (or 720 DD if modified) but do you mean something else? I interpreted this to mean larger HD partitions. -Larry

A couple of folks have mentioned the Pokey/Gumby mod -- I was unaware that there is any significant body of software to use with it. (?) -Larry

I have a 1200XL that I'd like to "trick out." But I'm still undecided as to what mods to make. I'm open for suggestions. What OS's would you pick? What ram upgrade(s). How about an internal MyIDE? The only thing that is really not feasible is putting in a PBI, but pretty much anything else is on the table. OK, probably not a "1250XLD" or "portable 1200" either! What would you do? -Larry

Yep! Got one a couple of years ago for the VAPI project. It currently sets quietly waiting in a retro-PC that I set up at the same time. -Larry

Very interesting -- looks like a good start. -Larry

My topic title is a little off -- both Venture and Time Pilot were, of course, arcade games. But what I was trying to say is that they were then ported to the CV and I'm not aware of other ports. I don't think that a decent Venture would be too difficult to do. Just time-consuming! Although the CV had a little trouble with scrollers, I was amazed when I brought it home and compared it to my 2600. Incidently, I read one time in a publication that most of the CV games were done in Pascal! My daughter and I had lots of great hours together playing the CV. But my first and enduring love is still my A8! -Larry

How much money do you want to spend? I presume that you do not have a disk drive, since you don't mention it? Either way, an SIO2PC cable is the way to go, assuming that you can use a PC as the "slave." Atarimax is a great seller, but you can get a serial port SIO2PC cable from several European sources for quite a bit less. However, Atarimax currently has the only USB version of SIO2PC, and his APE for Windows is the premier software, IMO. There are several other "SIO2PC" software sources, including Windows, Dos, Linux, and (I think) Mac. A very good but lesser-featured alternative to APE is "Atari810" for Windows 2000, XP, etc. But the point is that an SIO2PC device gives you by far the most "bang for the buck" using disk images (ATR mainly) to provide an amazing volume of free software. Specific games? Search here at AA for threads on favorite games. -Larry

One of my favorite games from my Colecovision days -- was Time Pilot ever ported to the A8? And on the same subject, "Venture?" I do remember that there was a similar A8 cartridge game (a Romox cart?), but it was disappointing to say the least. -Larry

Thanks to all those who have replied. I now have a much clearer picture of the status of the SIO2SD. -Larry

What is the status of this device? Strictly DIY project-in-progress? Or some plans for PCB, partial or full "kit," or finished product sales? Have any European or US folks inquired about making/selling these? Or is it still mostly experimental? This looks to me like a very viable alternative to the ABBUC device, and I can really see a nice backlighted version installed in an 800XL/1200XL (as IIRC, Beetle has already done). -Larry

Thanks, Rybags. I'll go with the 100's (it actually costs more to go slower on some of these!) And BTW, you mentioned in another thread that the feature you liked most about APE was not having to physically change floppies (IIRC). How right you were! By moving all my 720K utility disks to images (and using Tom's Navigator), I've been able to move files around and get a lot better sorted/organized! -Larry

I'm getting ready to order some new Eproms, and I'm curious about what speeds other folks have been using. Most of my older Eproms are 200 ns types, but I see that more modern CMOS (e.g. 27C64's) run down to 40 NS or so. Any advantage on the Atari to having such fast speeds? I'm tentatively thinking about 100 ns parts. I've heard a couple reports of problems when using very fast Drams on an Atari (?), but never heard of any problems related to Eproms other than making sure that one used 250 ns or faster. Any thoughts? -Larry

I presume you mean the SIO (disk drive, etc.) port? I just got through with this same issue -- had a 1200XL that came with a broken SIO pin. Best Electronics used to stock them, so you'll have to email them and see if they are still available. Or if you have a dead drive or motherboard, they are not difficult to remove using solder braid, if you are adept with a soldering iron and braid or other desolder apparatus. In any event, you'll have to remove yours. You might also search here for a previous recent thread on this subject: SIO Pin Repair. I also ultimately satisfied myself that an individual pin could be replaced. But note that I never actually soldered this in and tested it. I found that by clipping the broken pin above the 90-degree bend and desoldering the base is a practical method of removing the broken one. The upper part of the pin will slide right out the the front of the jack. Then a large paperclip can be fashioned into a new pin. It will be a slightly loose fit in the jack "shroud" and would likely benefit from a little adhesive to hold it firm, although it might not be absolutely necessary. If you do attempt the pin repair, remember to smooth and preferably taper the end of the pin, and clean any metal bits thoroughly. This is of course more difficult (but cheaper) than just removing and replacing the jack. Good luck, and do let us know how you come out! -Larry

Yes, you're right it -- is not very clear. I've done several of these (a few years back), and I've always just clipped (as close to the MB as possible) and bent up pin 15. I've never messed with the resistor and I don't ever remember cutting any trace. I don't like cutting traces if at all possible. To me, the docs say bend up pin 15 *or instead* remove/cut. But I did look at a spare MB just now, and on my board R286 is just to the front of 206 that you mention. To me the docs are saying "cut the end of R286 that is closest to pin 20" -NOT- that R286 is closest to pin 20. (But this step is not applicable since you bent up pin 15.) If the problem is not in the piggyback '158 and it's connections, then I would look closely at extended bank of ram where you removed the chips and replaced them with sockets/41256's. On the first one I did (still in operation), I had one or two lifted traces to repair and I had a bad connection on the piggyback 158. But if MyDos thought it saw a 64K bank of ram for the ramdisk, then that may mean the computer sees at least an extra 64K (regular 130XE ram). I would definitely get an extended ram checker and see what it sees. The best one that I know of is the Satantronic memory tester. If it sees 128K, then your socketing and new chips should be good, leaving only the several '158 connections. Try--- http://www.atari.sk/satantronic/ Hope this helps you, and let us know how you do with this. -Larry

Have you used an extended memory tester to verify that it can "see" the extra ram? I use MyDos 4.50, but suspect its ramdisk feature is the same as 4.53 -- you must use the "O" command (without specifying the drive number) to tell MyDos about your ramdisk size. MyDos should respond in the process by telling you what it believes you need. In your case, it should respond by asking if you "default configuration for 256K?". If it does not see the extra ram it will respond with something less, depending on what it finds. -Larry

Thanks, JR and 1050- I appreciate the the pics! Mine now looks just like your photos, except I installed several sockets for the ram and CO25923 logic chip. I'd like to go to 320K, but I won't until I'm very confident that I have an upgrade that I can fully understand. (Call me cautious, but I just hate frying these little guys!) Everything I've looked at to date is for the 4164/41256 versions (not the 4464). There absolutely was a commercial upgrade for the XEGS to take it from 64K to 128K to 192K by Innovative Concepts. In fact, B&C still has the XEGS 128K upgrade listed in their catalog for $49+. I don't think I want it that badly... This required stacking 2 new 4464's on the existing 2-each drams, and was actually two separate upgrades. I've looked at several upgrades that provide for piggybacking, but as of yet, no 4464 piggybacks. Several folks recall seeing this elusive 4464 upgrade, so it's probably out there, somewhere. -Larry

Well, that would be a likely error code -- good thought! From the Happy 7.1 Docs (and don't I wish I'd bought the Tech Docs from Happy!) it would lead me to the conclusion that the Happy is only testing itself *internally*. The test is internal, but the computer must first upload the test program to the drive on each test step. What failed in your case is the transmission of the test code, not the test itself. 8C is the SIO error code, serial framing error. 1764 is the PC of the code (in the computer, not in the drive) when the error was produced. Hi ijor- Thanks! I think I've solved this little mystery, and you are correct about the actual cause of the error. The cause of the problem turns out to be the high-speed SIO transfers in some OS, or supplied by the Black Box drivers. (It can be disabled in the BB menu.) In the original tests, I was using APE Warp, but the CSS UltraSpeed Plus OS also produces the same errors, as well as the stock XE OS with the BB attached and using its high speed drivers. To make a long story short, if high-speed SIO is used, the Happy will normally fail the diagnostic test when doing "Ram Test #2." If regular SIO speed is used, it will pass 100% of the time. So long as the normal SIO speed is enabled, the BB had nothing to do with the error. -Larry

Can this board provide 80-column text, and/or maybe even multi-colored text (with the appropriate drivers)? -Larry

Hi Puppetmark- Well, that makes it pretty likely that is what I did! And you're right, the "+" marking on those particular caps is certainly *toward* one side, but I can see how I could have turned it around. Thanks for the info/confirmation! -Larry