Jump to content
Goochman

New Atari Console that Ataribox?

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Agillig said:

So, the 400 model has 8 GB of ram.  For those of us who aren't tech savy, how does that compare to the base XBox One and PS4 models?

They both come with 8GB.


However, that's not to say that the VCS is going to have enough RAM to run the same games well, and that's particularly true if it's going to be running generic Windows or Linux versions when the recommended spec for AAA gaming on the PC has been at least 16GB of system RAM and another 4GB of video RAM for the past few years. Rather, it'll be like getting those games to run on a cheap laptop and, as anyone who's actually done that will know, the amount of RAM you've got can be the least of your problems.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Greg2600 said:

This is why crowdsourced consoles make absolutely no sense whatsoever.  Consoles don't sell unless the company takes a hit on the hardware cost and sells at a loss, while recouping that money and much more in licensing on games for several years to follow.  This will never happen on the VCS. 

 

Correct, completely different approach, which always fails.  Our company has had access to next-gen hardware since December.  You can't launch a system without software.  They are still fumbling over developer units. :roll:

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Agillig said:

So, the 400 model has 8 GB of ram.  For those of us who aren't tech savy, how does that compare to the base XBox One and PS4 models?

 

Last I knew (and atarivcs.com still says) the 400 has 4 GB and the 800 has 8GB, hence the model numbers.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CPUWIZ said:

Correct, completely different approach, which always fails.  Our company has had access to next-gen hardware since December.  You can't launch a system without software.  They are still fumbling over developer units. :roll:

Say what?  I thought they're "shipping production models" to backers in October?

7 minutes ago, racerx said:

Last I knew (and atarivcs.com still says) the 400 has 4 GB and the 800 has 8GB, hence the model numbers.

Ohhhh for Heaven's Sake, why are they selling two versions based on RAM? 

 

And isn't Rob Wyatt still suing them?  I have really tried to avoid following this mayhem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Greg2600 said:

in October?

 

Anyone want to start a betting pot? :ponder:

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, racerx said:

Last I knew (and atarivcs.com still says) the 400 has 4 GB and the 800 has 8GB, hence the model numbers.

 

Last I saw was the Atari 400 had 16K RAM and the Atari 800 had 48K RAM. leaving.gif.0ccf130b932d3aeff659d9a812b238ca.gif

  • Like 3
  • Haha 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Matt_B said:

They both come with 8GB.


However, that's not to say that the VCS is going to have enough RAM to run the same games well, and that's particularly true if it's going to be running generic Windows or Linux versions when the recommended spec for AAA gaming on the PC has been at least 16GB of system RAM and another 4GB of video RAM for the past few years. Rather, it'll be like getting those games to run on a cheap laptop and, as anyone who's actually done that will know, the amount of RAM you've got can be the least of your problems.

Thanks, and thanks to RacerX for the clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With 4GB of RAM you are only installing Windows 10 32-bit.
I would like to mention that Microsoft just ditched new OEM installs of 32-bit Windows. In addition to the VCS you are going to need a time machine.
So, that leaves 64 bit only installs, thus you will need 8GB minimum, 16GB if you do not want to smack your head on your desk with the poor performance of 8GB RAM on a 64 bit system.

*Don't worry 32 bit users, you will still be supported in a limited way, Microsoft is just starting to phase out 32 bit, I have a 32-bit install on my Desktop (64-bit system) for specific technical reasons.

Edited by OCAT
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's kind of amusing that RAM becomes the big thing in specs once again.

 

Although the thing is that Atari could slap 128GB of RAM into a VCS and it wouldn't change much at this point - your CPU & GPU are still going to have their bottlenecks, along with how the buses work. The latest CoD would still run like crap, especially if you started cranking the graphics up beyond "low."

 

Like CPUWIZ said though, software is what ultimately matters. When your brand name is powerful enough to sell on the name alone, that can get you some initial sales, but Atari only managing around 10k shows that they don't have 'it' anymore. That this thing will end up selling less than the Jaguar's lifetime sales is another big tell.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Scotterpop said:

Pretty much sums up this entire thread (and that’s no easy feat!)

Not that I'm defending the Taco, but why is it surprising an $1100 phone from one of the largest companies in the world is more capable than a $400 mini-PC by a company so small it needed crowdfunding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got done watching that video myself. I can see it from both sides. Yes a phone costs more but also this thing should have more power than a phone. It is both a fair and unfair comparison. 

 

Either way though trying to jockey this thing into a position to compete with next gen consoles is laughable. 

 

Clearly Atari has no idea how to market this thing. One day it is a console. Then a computer. Un-console. Streaming box. Next gen. Retro.... it can't be all of those things. Maybe some of those things but not all of them.

Edited by TACODON
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Ataco, all they're doing is delaying more and more mentioning they're pulling out the installed chips for other ones, as one of their "excuses."  Before you know it, the console, PC, Netflix-a-go-go, whatever-they-want-to-call-it with be nothing more than a heat source for your cat, albeit an expensive one.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Paul Slocum said:

FYI Atari finally responded to the Rob Wyatt lawsuit.  I guess they saw articles and Youtubers talking about it and finally remembered that they were being sued:

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/33315895/Tin_Giant,_LLC_et_al_v_ATARI_GAMEBOX,_LLC

 

Interesting. I have not seen the actual documents, nor am I an expert in Federal Civil Procedure, but it appears that Tin Giant did not oppose the motion to set-aside the default judgement. In other words, Tin Giant seemingly wants this to go to trial.

 

That makes little sense to me; if Atari makes an offer to settle (which is what usually happens in these types of disputes), it will be for less than what Tin Giant would receive as a default judgement. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still believe Atari is hoping for a buy out. Beyond that I don't understand anything they do.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Perhaps Atari should send Microsoft some cigars (Chocolate cigars)
They have been known to throw obscene amounts of $$$ at Hot Garbage in the past... (cough cough WindowsPhone; Windows8)

Edited by OCAT
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jhd said:

 

Interesting. I have not seen the actual documents, nor am I an expert in Federal Civil Procedure, but it appears that Tin Giant did not oppose the motion to set-aside the default judgement. In other words, Tin Giant seemingly wants this to go to trial.

 

That makes little sense to me; if Atari makes an offer to settle (which is what usually happens in these types of disputes), it will be for less than what Tin Giant would receive as a default judgement. 

Likewise I'm no lawyer, but my guess is that they feel they have a strong case and with Atari skipping previous deadlines (which puts them in a worse light with the court), they probably could end up getting everything they want. Some one correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I also might have missed it posted in this thread, but here's someone making his own VCS cases; They look the same as what has taken Atari 3+ years to crap out.

 

1274111068797726720

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OCAT said:

^ Perhaps Atari should send Microsoft some cigars (Chocolate cigars)
They have been known to throw obscene amounts of $$$ at Hot Garbage in the past... (cough cough WindowsPhone; Windows8)

There also was a point when Microsoft was actively investing in Atari assets, so that's not a completely off the wall suggestion.  I think we're a decade past that, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SoloZolo said:

Not that I'm defending the Taco, but why is it surprising an $1100 phone from one of the largest companies in the world is more capable than a $400 mini-PC by a company so small it needed crowdfunding?

Phones need radios, speakers, microphones, cameras, GPS, gyroscopes, etc. that all add to the price and draw without doing anything to boost the processing capabilities, and you're capped at around the 20W mark by the need to preserve battery life and dissipate heat.

 

A well-designed games console is basically just a big GPU with a smaller CPU and the bare minimum of everything else, and can consume around 200W when you plug it into the mains. Even at a third of the price it should be killing the phone when it comes to gaming and graphics.

 

The VCS is just not a well-designed console. It's more of a mini PC that should be selling at no more than $200 if it ever gets to retail, which still seems rather doubtful given all that's gone on so far.

Edited by Matt_B
spelling
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jhd said:

 

Interesting. I have not seen the actual documents, nor am I an expert in Federal Civil Procedure, but it appears that Tin Giant did not oppose the motion to set-aside the default judgement. In other words, Tin Giant seemingly wants this to go to trial.

 

That makes little sense to me; if Atari makes an offer to settle (which is what usually happens in these types of disputes), it will be for less than what Tin Giant would receive as a default judgement. 


I am suspecting there are a few factors here. One would be that Tin Giant feels it has a strong case and expects to win, so then why settle? Which leads right into the second point. Looking at past Atari lawsuits they seem to offer considerably less then what is owed by them and expect that this offer will be taken rather then dragging things out though court.

If Tin Giant expects to win, I doubt they would settle for a partial payment on what is owned. Might as well go for the full amount, plus Atari paying the court costs.

I think Atari has pulled this scam once too often, and this time Wyatt is not playing along with them.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Tavi said:

If Tin Giant expects to win, I doubt they would settle for a partial payment on what is owned. Might as well go for the full amount, plus Atari paying the court costs.
 

Possibly full amount+interest? And weren't there also allegations of defamation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tavi said:


I am suspecting there are a few factors here. One would be that Tin Giant feels it has a strong case and expects to win, so then why settle? Which leads right into the second point. Looking at past Atari lawsuits they seem to offer considerably less then what is owed by them and expect that this offer will be taken rather then dragging things out though court.

If Tin Giant expects to win, I doubt they would settle for a partial payment on what is owned. Might as well go for the full amount, plus Atari paying the court costs.

I think Atari has pulled this scam once too often, and this time Wyatt is not playing along with them.

That's a reasonable thought. I would be careful, if I were him, to make sure Atari actually *had* the money to pay if (when) they lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ If Atari does indeed become insolvent, Tin Giant could seize assets, Atari VCS consoles that the backers paid for. Imagine the arguments!
Backers:well if we never gave the money, Atari could never hire Tin Giant.
Well, if Tin Giant was never hired you backers would never have a console.
I have a feeling Atari is already unable to cover the costs of the console. Do not forget they have to pay warehouse fees, even if it is Just in Time delivery. THey have to actually pay staff to package up and ship out the consoles. They have to print documentation, box inserts...

Unless Atari is going to drop ship each unit to the customer directly from China!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tavi said:


I am suspecting there are a few factors here. One would be that Tin Giant feels it has a strong case and expects to win, so then why settle? Which leads right into the second point. Looking at past Atari lawsuits they seem to offer considerably less then what is owed by them and expect that this offer will be taken rather then dragging things out though court.

If Tin Giant expects to win, I doubt they would settle for a partial payment on what is owned. Might as well go for the full amount, plus Atari paying the court costs.

I think Atari has pulled this scam once too often, and this time Wyatt is not playing along with them.

Tin Giant has certainly looked at what happened with Feargal Mac, where Mac sued Atari over the exact same reasons, but Atari settled for much less. By what I've read, Wyatt was smart enough to keep all of his invoices and receipts, probably his communications with Atari about promises and so on. As long as he's got all of that, it seems like an open/shut case (combined with Atari snubbing the court up until now). 

 

Whoever Architect #3 is, they had better be keeping all of those communications/invoices in a bulletproof suitcase, as chances are pretty high from Atari's history, that they'll also be given the shaft on what they are owed. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...