Atari 8-Bit as a Legitimate Business Machine

[BlueMoon_001]

All the big corporations and government instituations would go with IBM since they already had mainframes networked to terminals throughout their offices. The Atari 8-bit did not have a good network device other than a modem. Terimals directly connected to the main frames through COM serial ports. Atari needed to make a converted to connect to a mainframe. Plus the limitations of the 40 column screen. Now IBM was considering using the Atari 800 as their PC because of its modular design. But backed away because IBM had a good working relationship with Intel. They did not favor using the 6502 processor and went with the Interl 8088 for their first model. Plus Atari did not fit into their culture. When IBM created the PC, they even wanted more than once company making the microprocessors. That is why we have AMD We had Cyrix for awhile, but pulled out of the market not long after 2000.

 

Now if Atari did make a model designed to use 80 columns and hook up to a monitor, some people may start looking to use them for their businesses. Atari would had needed to get away from everything soldered to main board. Put video and memory on some connected board. Have a detached keyboard.

[JamesD]

I wasn't aware that IBM ever considered a relationship with Atari. Where did that info come from?

[BlueMoon_001]

Google search IBM PC development, It is in some of the development history articles.

[mellis]

 

The Google machine says it was a whopping $8,495. Remember, however, that this was the state-of-the-art desktop computer from the company that defined business machines; hell, it was their name! Corporate money would have gladly paid four times as much for the IBM against even a competitive machine with the name Atari on it. And it wouldn't have been only the gaming association, although that would certainly have been part of it. The fact is that Atari was not ready to provide the kind of volume, build quality, and day-two support that businesses who could afford to invest in desktop computing would demand.

Lets not forget this beauty for only $6500 dollars back then. I ultimately owned one in the early 1990s. Fantastic machine.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT_Computer

[pixelmischief]

Lets not forget [the NeXT Computer] for only $6500 dollars back then.

 

A great machine, in retrospect, but too innovative by a long shot for businesses of the time to gamble on. Combine that with the fact that Jobs was damaged goods, having been ousted by Apple, and it is clear how something so excellent essentially dies on the vine. No one was bold enough to pick it.

[mellis]

 

A great machine, in retrospect, but too innovative by a long shot for businesses of the time to gamble on. Combine that with the fact that Jobs was damaged goods, having been ousted by Apple, and it is clear how something so excellent essentially dies on the vine. No one was bold enough to pick it.

Perhaps ironically, billions ended up choosing it 20 years later when its direct descendent, the iPhones iOS, took the market by storm. As a NeXT user and developer, I was tickled when Mac OS X (and later iOS) came along.

[pixelmischief]

Perhaps ironically, billions ended up choosing it 20 years later when its direct descendent, the iPhones iOS, took the market by storm. As a NeXT user and developer, I was tickled when Mac OS X (and later iOS) came along.

 

No doubt, Jobs and his NeXT Station were fully vindicated. A real-life Phoenix if I have ever seen one.

[peteym5]

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/06/ibm-pc-history-part-1/

 

Atari offered IBM to assist in the development of the IBM PC, but later decided to do it all in house. They were attracted to the Atari 800, most likely because it had a full keyboard, 40 column text display, and faster CPU. Basic and DOS were not in ROM chips on board, either on cartridge or loaded in RAM. Atari 800 already had one of the best display capabilities at the time. First PC was Intel based to 4.77 mhz, monochrome or CGA. Also DOS and Basic was also not on board in ROM chips, loaded into RAM. Atari and IBM wanted to compete with the Apple II. The Atari 800 already was a more powerful machine compared to the Commodore PET or TRS-80. It was not until the Commodore 64 came out that something that could compete against the Atari 800 display abilities.

 

If Atari did something with an 80 column display sooner hooking up to a monitor, they would had a very competitive machine.

Edited December 30, 2018 by peteym5

[oracle_jedi]

Apparently a picture of an early IBM proposal based on the Atari 800:

 

https://plus.google.com/108984290462000253857/posts/ZHLeJ1nQpZq

[Faicuai]

Apparently a picture of an early IBM proposal based on the Atari 800:

 

https://plus.google.com/108984290462000253857/posts/ZHLeJ1nQpZq

 

So there it is, the story seems confirmed (I reported this, as well, weeks ago... but nothing like seeing IBM's internal proto-vision of the product!)

 

Nevertheless, it seems clear that, gram-by-gram, byte-for-byte, the sweet 800 is the real McCoy, and never had any real substitute in Atari line-up, afterwards. I can see why IBM lked it as well (had a more industrial, office-like appeareance, although it looks strange white-colored, instead). Truly the best of the best, in my opinion (and as much as I like my 800 XLs)... And with today's electronics' density, the 800 is a POWERHOUSE for pretty much any upgrade you can conceive! If it does ALL the cool things it does with just a personality board (e.g Incognito), imagine the kind of things we could do on the remaining three expansion slots + PBI bus on Incognito (!!!)

 

GREAT story, here!

Edited December 30, 2018 by Faicuai

[Bill Loguidice]

While IBM would have never partnered with Atari to produce a home computer for a variety of reasons, I do love how nice the confirmed mockup from a few years back looks. Even with just that color scheme and a keyboard tweak, it looks far more business-ready than anything Atari produced until late in the life of the ST series.

[JamesD]

Apparently a picture of an early IBM proposal based on the Atari 800:

 

https://plus.google.com/108984290462000253857/posts/ZHLeJ1nQpZq

Ahem... "It was a straw man: the real idea was to get approval to run an internal startup business, free from interference and free to use external suppliers of hardware and software. And that was the idea IBM ran with, as we know."

They weren't serious, they just used it as a means to an end.

[Bill Loguidice]

Ahem... "It was a straw man: the real idea was to get approval to run an internal startup business, free from interference and free to use external suppliers of hardware and software. And that was the idea IBM ran with, as we know."

They weren't serious, they just used it as a means to an end.

 

While I agree that IBM never would have went with it, it's still a fact that they had some discussions around it. It's just a historical footnote, true, but an interesting one, much like the whole Atari creating a combo 5200 + ColecoVision: https://armchairarcade.com/perspectives/2017/09/06/blockbuster-memo-uncovered-atari-planned-incorporate-colecovision-back-1983/ . Not practical in any real way, but cool it was at least being thought about in a documented manner.

[JamesD]

While IBM would have never partnered with Atari to produce a home computer for a variety of reasons, I do love how nice the confirmed mockup from a few years back looks. Even with just that color scheme and a keyboard tweak, it looks far more business-ready than anything Atari produced until late in the life of the ST series.

It certainly looked very IBM. Can't say I care for the numeric key arrangement. I'm guessing it's just a block of foam mostly.

[_The Doctor__]

What always gets me is how quick people dismiss the things we casually talk about, and not believing folks re counting of what they did or what they know. A good number or people thought whatever their hand was in projects were of a crucial nature and were excited about it. The memory fades, they may miss remember who did exactly what. Having given my information on it and seeing it line up with others, as well as the short answer from Hardy, you can pretty much thread it all together and see the truth of it.

 

Tom was the IBM designer assigned to this project. He stated the story is factual and the photo Is of the actual design model built on the 800 chassis with an IBM keyboard. It's always great to see a person willing to put it in concise to the point writing. Glad he did. Thank you for pointing out that particular thread leading us to his post.

What other slight differences do you see?

it was a little more cut throat.. wonder where that post is now...

Edited December 31, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[peteym5]

It certainly looked very IBM. Can't say I care for the numeric key arrangement. I'm guessing it's just a block of foam mostly.

If IBM did go forward with it, they probably would had needed to make a lot of changes. Maybe have Atari make a backward compatible video chip that can do 80 columns, and be capable of going beyond 64K right away. To make it capable to run some of the business applications like word processors, spread sheets, and terminal programs. Could have control keys on either side, and function keys on the top. That is probably why they ended up going with Intel 8088 processors because it could address 640K RAM. My first PC was an 386 40 mhz with VGA card. We had an EGA based machine. Imagine Bill Gates jumping in and making DOS and BASIC for that computer also?

Edited December 31, 2018 by peteym5

[JamesD]

 

What always gets me is how quick people dismiss the things we casually talk about, and not believing folks re counting of what they did or what they know. A good number or people thought whatever their hand was in projects were of a crucial nature and were excited about it. The memory fades, they may miss remember who did exactly what. Having given my information on it and seeing it line up with others, as well as the short answer from Hardy, you can pretty much thread it all together and see the truth of it.

 

Tom was the IBM designer assigned to this project. He stated the story is factual and the photo Is of the actual design model built on the 800 chassis with an IBM keyboard. It's always great to see a person willing to put it in concise to the point writing. Glad he did. Thank you for pointing out that particular thread leading us to his post.

What other slight differences do you see?

it was a little more cut throat.. wonder where that post is now...

 

Tom's response was to the very article I quoted from.

If he confirmed the story was true, wouldn't that also confirm what I quoted was true?

[oracle_jedi]

Ahem... "It was a straw man: the real idea was to get approval to run an internal startup business, free from interference and free to use external suppliers of hardware and software. And that was the idea IBM ran with, as we know."

They weren't serious, they just used it as a means to an end.

 

Right. That's why I called it a "proposal" and not a "prototype".

 

And for all the Capt. Obvious comments in this thread with respect to IBM never being serious about a relationship with Atari that wasn't the point. That IBM ended up releasing anything that wasn't proprietary IBM in 1981 is in of itself an incredible achievement by the team.

 

Alas that forward thinking was quickly lost. I interned with IBM 1989 thru 91 assisting on projects such as the PS/2 Model 90/95, the XGA and the release of OS/2. Even a teenager could see IBM leadership had no idea how to bring new products to market. We literally competed with ourselves (XGA vs SVGA vs 8514/A), couldn't decide if the graphic card should be built into the PS/2 motherboard or sold only as an option card, and several of the OS/2 lead engineers refused to talk to their counterparts in Microsoft due to all manner of idiotic reasons.

 

My favorite memory of IBM management though was the head of technical marketing for Europe - a Poetry graduate - declaring to the Hursley campus in late 1991 that the PS/2 would be dead within 2 years and that the entire Intel PC user base world wide would embrace IBM's new line of POWER based machines that would run OS/2. Most of the rank and file didn't share his optimism.

 

Had IBM embraced the Atari 8-bit line as the basis of their entry into personal computers the question would be would that have killed the platform as a viable choice faster than Warner did.

[BlueMoon_001]

If IBM did go forward with it, they probably would had needed to make a lot of changes. Maybe have Atari make a backward compatible video chip that can do 80 columns, and be capable of going beyond 64K right away. To make it capable to run some of the business applications like word processors, spread sheets, and terminal programs. Could have control keys on either side, and function keys on the top. That is probably why they ended up going with Intel 8088 processors because it could address 640K RAM. My first PC was an 386 40 mhz with VGA card. We had an EGA based machine. Imagine Bill Gates jumping in and making DOS and BASIC for that computer also?

 

They would certainly would go to an 80 column display. It is not just because of 80 column printers, editing documents, program code, and spread sheet is much easier with an 80 column display because you can see more information at once without scrolling the screen. 40 Columns is a good start, not sure why all these other computer models were trying to be sold with 22 and 32 column displays, you need to spend a lot of time typing list to review your basic program.

[talanthalus]

After I got into computers and progressed along to running a BBS back in the 80s (I was 11 at the time I fired up my first BBS.), my dad got his own personal setup and eventually invested in an 800XL, ATR8000, and a pair of 8" drives to set up at his job working for the city to manage inventory and other things they needed to keep track of. At that time, everything was still done on paper mostly. The city had a central IT department and used mostly IBM PC / compatibles, but everyone seemed quite impressed with what he was doing there with the Atari. It is part of what I still have today, as he'd paid for everything with his own money and took the hardware with him when he left.

 

Not necessarily business, but I did everything I ever needed to do on a computer on my Atari 8-bit gear until the early 90s when I was able to build my own PC. I also used it to get online for a while until around 94ish, when I was provided a notebook computer for my job. Most people were amazed I was online with my "Atari" then, but I had a dial-up shell account and a nice modem, so it was nothing to telnet around to my favourite hang-outs or browse usenet.

 

I think the computers were capable of doing whatever needed to be done at the time, but as I've seen mentioned while browsing, there were other systems that offered some features that made them a little more appealing for the job.

[_The Doctor__]

 

Right. That's why I called it a "proposal" and not a "prototype".

 

And for all the Capt. Obvious comments in this thread with respect to IBM never being serious about a relationship with Atari that wasn't the point. That IBM ended up releasing anything that wasn't proprietary IBM in 1981 is in of itself an incredible achievement by the team.

 

Alas that forward thinking was quickly lost. I interned with IBM 1989 thru 91 assisting on projects such as the PS/2 Model 90/95, the XGA and the release of OS/2. Even a teenager could see IBM leadership had no idea how to bring new products to market. We literally competed with ourselves (XGA vs SVGA vs 8514/A), couldn't decide if the graphic card should be built into the PS/2 motherboard or sold only as an option card, and several of the OS/2 lead engineers refused to talk to their counterparts in Microsoft due to all manner of idiotic reasons.

 

My favorite memory of IBM management though was the head of technical marketing for Europe - a Poetry graduate - declaring to the Hursley campus in late 1991 that the PS/2 would be dead within 2 years and that the entire Intel PC user base world wide would embrace IBM's new line of POWER based machines that would run OS/2. Most of the rank and file didn't share his optimism.

 

Had IBM embraced the Atari 8-bit line as the basis of their entry into personal computers the question would be would that have killed the platform as a viable choice faster than Warner did.

os/2 keylogs/kilogs.... lol yeah paying for bloat by microsoft... that is why some started getting pissy with MS... eventually MS was gone (with a lot a dollars) but who knows how the rolls change over the years, thank God too! They spent years digging all that extra bloated code out of the OS and to be honest Warp is pretty solid and much leaner now... OS/2 Warp and convenience packs.... it marches on.

Edited December 31, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

I didn't accuse you of anything. where do you get that idea? you're clearly a little touchy about it. I made a friendly suggestion as to how to consider the way you word things on public forums. i don't have any ongoing problems with you. You're far too sensitive about this if you think you're even a dot on the radar. My issue is with comments like those you made. This is 2018, not 1978! - try (for a change) to address your own attitude instead of deflecting blame at the person who raises a valid point.

who you employed (colour, religion, sex) is not relevant and doesn't make your comment okay. the only point is your comment is inappropriate.

 

however, your reply has just made my point perfectly. You back up your first sexist comment with another.

 

Perhaps if you'd referred to "someone else you knew who couldn't operate a computer" who happened to be male, then you may have a point. But using another female as evidence only goes to make your original comment more blinkered.

 

stop trying to be a social justice warrior for some office pc luddite back in '78 who happened to be female and was treated very well for the time. people like you are the reason industry pioneers like bushnell (who did employ women developers at a time when female programmers were unheard of) missed out on awards, but all people rave about are the pot smoking hot tub parties, which btw were not mandatory but many male and female employees voluntarily attended. take a step back and view history in context won't you? dont fault someone because the values they held 40 odd years ago clash with the current status quo. dont cry out "mee too" unless you were there or shared similar life experiences. you are obviously too young to be around in '78, much less managed a department then. people do grow and do change. i would certainly hope i do not share the same values now at 38 (will be next month) that i did at 18 twenty years ago. the poster likewise does not share the same values from 40 years ago, before my time and yours.

[Guest]

 

 

stop trying to be a social justice warrior for some office pc luddite back in '78 who happened to be female and was treated very well for the time. people like you are the reason industry pioneers like bushnell (who did employ women developers at a time when female programmers were unheard of) missed out on awards, but all people rave about are the pot smoking hot tub parties, which btw were not mandatory but many male and female employees voluntarily attended. take a step back and view history in context won't you? dont fault someone because the values they held 40 odd years ago clash with the current status quo. dont cry out "mee too" unless you were there or shared similar life experiences. you are obviously too young to be around in '78, much less managed a department then. people do grow and do change. i would certainly hope i do not share the same values now at 38 (will be next month) that i did at 18 twenty years ago. the poster likewise does not share the same values from 40 years ago, before my time and yours.

 

FYI i was 15 in 1978.

but way to go with the sweeping judgement.

 

you respond to a reply from ELEVEN days ago with all the ferocity of an instant respondent.

 

With your "don't" this and "don't" that and "don't" the other...get over yourself and your own self-importance.

who died and made YOU God? - oh yes of course, how silly of me - YOU DID

 

happy new year.

Edited December 31, 2018 by Guest

[JamesD]

 

Right. That's why I called it a "proposal" and not a "prototype".

 

And for all the Capt. Obvious comments in this thread with respect to IBM never being serious about a relationship with Atari that wasn't the point. That IBM ended up releasing anything that wasn't proprietary IBM in 1981 is in of itself an incredible achievement by the team.

...

I'm pretty sure that is exactly the point.

This isn't a thread about how the IBM PC came into being, or it was a miracle it came into being, it's a thread about the Atari as a serious business machine.

Someone mentioned that IBM considered selling it as their PC seemingly to support the argument the Atari is a legitimate business machine.

IBM didn't take it serious as a product they would sell, and touting an agreement with Atari doesn't really bolster the argument that the Atari is a legitimate business machine.

IBM management wanted a personal computer in a short amount of time, the Atari was arguably the most capable personal computer at the time, and the PC team pretty much said... well, this is what we could do in that time frame... unless... you turn us loose.

The PC team was simply manipulating IBM management.

 

FWIW, I'm not saying the Atari isn't a legitimate business machine. I just don't think it was quite what people at IBM thought was a legitimate IBM machine.

 

 

...

Had IBM embraced the Atari 8-bit line as the basis of their entry into personal computers the question would be would that have killed the platform as a viable choice faster than Warner did.

I disagree. Anything with the IBM name would have sold just due to the IBM name.

You have no idea how many times I heard things like "Isn't IBM the best?" when I was selling computers.

Some people wouldn't even buy a PC clone that was significantly faster than the IBM.

They had to have an actual IBM because they were somehow the best due to the IBM name badge on the front.

No question IBM makes good stuff, but I knew people that ran their business on "Turbo XT" clones for over 10 years without a glitch.

 

IBM probably would have developed a 16 bit machine within a couple years anyway, and the Atari would have filled the PCjr niche.

The impending price war certainly would have pushed IBM to cease their 8 bit line early, but as long as they didn't purchase Atari, the machine would have continued to sell in some form.

Perhaps Atari would have been able to produce machines with any enhancements IBM had made.

 

People's suggestion that IBM would have added 80 columns is likely, and possibly include Microsoft BASIC instead of Atari BASIC by default.

Some ROM changes for color, font, etc... would also be likely. Maybe the ability to expand RAM to 64K?

Atariwriter would have had a serious face lift to be more IBM like for their version.

They would have done something to set the machine apart from the existing Atari 800 besides just a different keyboard.

 

[_The Doctor__]

Having actual meetings with Atari meant things were a little more serious than just a 'tell' this is what we could do promo to get to a something else. Since we have have already posted the facts and there are enough tellings, notes, et al. - I don't understand what the re visiting and speculation does. A simple search on AtariAge will get you the relevant posts and links. They didn't want to go the route of using someone else.. they either wanted to buy it lock stock and barrel, own the whole company or make it themselves. The chess game was fully described and was meant to give two outcomes.

 

Atari was used in all manner of business, it controlled machines, cnc or otherwise, was a POS system, did inventory, issued checks, was used for stock market, and on and on. I pointed out the paper tape reader and electrostatic pad someone ended up buying that is a member here on AtariAge. Video stores, cable systems, cnc, books, checks, word processing, mailing lists... that's all business. Weaving, CNC, motor control etc, that's industrial business. Straight up legit. They were used in r&d and education, again established fact. Check out some pod casts etc. Listen to the history of it all, read the backing documentation, buy some weird stuff, go to some of the archives, recreate it if you wish. Atari machines ran businesses, in some cases were a persons business, what else is there to say?

Edited December 31, 2018 by _The Doctor__