Do you think Atari will bring out a new home computer?

[zzip]

On 10/12/2019 at 1:24 AM, x=usr(1536) said:

Confused on this point - macOS doesn't work that way.  Yes, there is software you can purchase (or download for free) from the App Store, but it's not like iOS where that's your only option, jailbreaking aside.

 

Granted, macOS Catalina may be making some changes in that regard.  This is one major reason why I'm sitting that particular upgrade out until it's clear how the dust is going to settle.

 

MacOS definately seems to be moving towards the walled garden approach.   On the Mac I use from work, I have some software I downloaded from the net because it wasn't available in the store,  and it's become more annoying to install and use such a package than it used to be

[zzip]

15 hours ago, Keatah said:

It is important to remember Linux is too technical for the everyday user - unless a purpose built UI is used. Or if it's embedded into a device that serves a single purpose like a thermostat or a stand-alone GPS or even a phone.

I disagree.   I replaced my technically inept Mother-in-Law's Windows desktop with Linux years ago.   I did this because she kept hosing Windows with spyware and ransomware by clicking on everything she shouldn't.    She had no problem using the Linux desktop because it was similar enough, and the support calls from her ended.   But use a distro designed for such uses so they never have to deal with a command prompt.

[zzip]

15 hours ago, Keatah said:

Rather than new platforms I'd like to see a reduction in API quantity, bloat, and duplicity. Rather than developing new hardware to handle the bloat I'd rather see intelligent and efficient programming. And definitely less focus on getting into your wallet with subscriptions and excessive performance-sapping DRM.

Haha, not going to happen.   I work in software development,  and programmers only optimize when they are forced to.  I've been in meetings where people actually asked "Why do we need to optimize, new hardware is cheap?".   That plus they love to adopt new technologies just because they can, when the existing ones do 98% of what they needed,  so this means new APIs will continue to proliferate.

[+slx]

9 minutes ago, zzip said:

MacOS definately seems to be moving towards the walled garden approach.   On the Mac I use from work, I have some software I downloaded from the net because it wasn't available in the store,  and it's become more annoying to install and use such a package than it used to be

Catalina is killing a lot of older freeware apps, emulators, etc. by removing 32bit compatibility. Apparently the percentage of users that want to use other than included or mainstream apps is too small to be of concern and from a development/support POV it’s much easier. There was no revolution when 68K support or PPC support were killed, so why would there be now. 

[almightytodd]

So far as a "new" retro/home/simplified computer goes, the 8 - bit guy is working on a project that is probably as close as we'll ever get... ...and as close as we really need to.

 

 

[+x=usr(1536)]

52 minutes ago, slx said:

Catalina is killing a lot of older freeware apps, emulators, etc. by removing 32bit compatibility. Apparently the percentage of users that want to use other than included or mainstream apps is too small to be of concern and from a development/support POV it’s much easier. There was no revolution when 68K support or PPC support were killed, so why would there be now. 

And this sort of arrogance on Apple's behalf is precisely why I'm staying away from Catalina for the time being.  Apple doesn't know how I use my computer; I do.  There's absolutely no reason why there can't be a 32-bit compatibility layer, even if it's something that has to be installed optionally.

 

Eventually I'll be forced into it, kicking and screaming, because there will be something with no Mojave compatibility that I need to use (my guess: Office).  In the interim, I'm not going to break my workflow until I absolutely have to.

[+slx]

Just now, x=usr(1536) said:

Eventually I'll be forced into it, kicking and screaming, because there will be something with no Mojave compatibility that I need to use (my guess: Office).  In the interim, I'm not going to break my workflow until I absolutely have to.

Same here. Will succumb once there are no more security updates for the previous version.

 

As for the OT, I don't even see a "mini 400" lurking on the horizon, much less a really "new computer". We have to face the fact that the 8-bit Ataris simply did not have the same market penetration as the C64 or the VCS and so there just isn't enough of a market of people fond of it from junior days to sell "minis" to. 

[Gunstar]

IF the AtariVCS becomes a reality, on store shelves, then I plan on buying one for exactly the reason the title of this thread asks basically; will Atari release a new computer? If the AtariVCS becomes a commercial reality the answer is YES, it is a computer, in console form, and I love the small footprint and look and already have all the USB stuff I need to use the sandbox mode right away. I haven't upgraded my PC in ten years, don't need too, I use it for the Internet and that is it. I even use my Atari 8-bit for real-world applications still. So it will be an upgrade to my PC, if nothing else, in an Atari branded box, with cool new controllers. I want one for the exact reasons the media and social chatter and...ahem...people here are laughing at and calling them revalations of weakness in the the console and the success of the console. I actually HOPE it arrives on store shelves AND FAILS. Then I can get myself a new PC in an awesome form-factor at a rock-bottom, bargain bin price! And the Atari OS side is just bonus with a 100 classic games, like a flashback system. I can still do emulation and streaming services and anything else in sandbox mode as a PC, even if the AtariVCS fails and there is no support through the Atari OS! IF it's actually a success, then I'll wait a year or what ever for a price drop and get a new PC and going-concern console for one low price., with a library of new console games to choose!

 

Before I actually investigated what the AtariVCS was supposed to be all about in recent months, I actually cared less about it and the current Atari. It was not the Atari I fell in love with and know it never will be again (unless Nolan Bushnell were back in charge). Any new Atari has to earn my favor from scratch with far more success than the old Atari's had after the original VCS. And be a console or computer that has it's own uniqueness and a true alternative to the big 3 console companies today. And I don't care for the way the industry is going with downloadable content threatening to take away physical copies of games to collect, and early on, it looked like the AtariVCS was going to be a proprietary console that required monthly fees and everything only downloadable. It was when I found out the AtariVCS was Unix based, with a sandbox mode and enough USB ports that I became interested in it at all.

Edited October 22, 2019 by Gunstar

[bfollowell]

Not necessarily a "new" Atari computer, but what I'd love to see, is something along the lines of the 1088XEL project for the 8-bit line, but for the 16/32-bit series. I have everything for my 1088XEL purchased except for the custom case lid and the custom rear panel, and can't wait to start building my own Super Atari 8-bit that is more powerful than any real 8-bit that was ever put out, but can also, through the right settings, basically become any of the original 8-bits that came out. I'd love to see a similar product for the ST/TT/Falcon line, but made with modern components with modern video outputs; basically a super ST/TT/Falcon clone that we could build ourselves.

 

I wish I had the technical knowledge to do more than just suggest or dream of a project like this.

[leech]

10 hours ago, zzip said:

Haha, not going to happen.   I work in software development,  and programmers only optimize when they are forced to.  I've been in meetings where people actually asked "Why do we need to optimize, new hardware is cheap?".   That plus they love to adopt new technologies just because they can, when the existing ones do 98% of what they needed,  so this means new APIs will continue to proliferate.

I mostly just quoted this for truth.  While I work more on the dev-ops side, I know all too well that whenever something new and shiny is out and about in the world, software developers love to dump what they're working on and dive head first into the new tech, which horrifies me, because then I have to try to keep things stable while they're doing it!

[Gunstar]

The bottom line for me, with the AtariVCS is that were the consensus seems to be, if it's built and sold, it's too under powered to hang with the next or even current Playstations and Xboxes, won't get the software industries support, and Atari is trying give too many options on how to use it, because they don't believe it will compete with the big boys themselves and the system is "built for failure." Where as I see a system that's architecture is powerful enough (look at Nintendo product for this example) if not all-new, state-of-the-art tech, and is made with all it's ways of being able to use it as a "golden parachute" for early adopters of the console if it does fail and Atari goes under and can't support the Atari OS side, in that it won't be a useless brick with no service and just 100 old-school games like a flashback otherwise, but can still be used with a choice of OS as a TV-top PC, still capable of being used in all the popular recreational ways, through the sandbox mode. It's not wasted money if it fails. Though I'd still never pay as much as the current suggested retail prices!

[leech]

3 minutes ago, Gunstar said:

The bottom line for me, with the AtariVCS is that were the consensus seems to be, if it's built and sold, it's too under powered to hang with the next or even current Playstations and Xboxes, won't get the software industries support, and Atari is trying give too many options on how to use it, because they don't believe it will compete with the big boys themselves and the system is "built for failure." Where as I see a system that's architecture is powerful enough (look at Nintendo product for this example) if not all-new, state-of-the-art tech, and is made with all it's ways of being able to use it as a "golden parachute" for early adopters of the console if it does fail and Atari goes under and can't support the Atari OS side, in that it won't be a useless brick with no service and just 100 old-school games like a flashback otherwise, but can still be used with a choice of OS as a TV-top PC, still capable of being used in all the popular recreational ways, through the sandbox mode. It's not wasted money if it fails. Though I'd still never pay as much as the current suggested retail prices!

Hardware wise with it's bump, it seems to be about on par power wise to the original PS4 at least.  Though as with anything, without any software support it'll be dead in the water.  But as you pointed out, since it's an open platform, doesn't matter if we can slap Linux on it and turn it into a Linux game machine...

[MrMaddog]

On 10/21/2019 at 7:08 PM, Keatah said:

It is important to remember Linux is too technical for the everyday user - unless a purpose built UI is used. Or if it's embedded into a device that serves a single purpose like a thermostat or a stand-alone GPS or even a phone.

Using a desktop UI isn't that hard coming from Windows or even MacOS.  It's the fact that all the Linux support community (Neckbeards) insist on everyone using the CLI Terminal like it's still on version 1.0, that's what repulse many from using it.  Using pre-made distros for like the RPi...no problem if you follow directions.

13 hours ago, slx said:

Catalina is killing a lot of older freeware apps, emulators, etc. by removing 32bit compatibility. Apparently the percentage of users that want to use other than included or mainstream apps is too small to be of concern and from a development/support POV it’s much easier. There was no revolution when 68K support or PPC support were killed, so why would there be now. 

Apple is trying to move the Mac platform to being ARM-based so they can keep it more closed off.  True story, my mom was worried that upgrading to Catalina will stop all of her games from working but thankfully her Mac Mini doesn't "work" with the upgrade.  Sometimes it does pay to use older Apple products.

 

As a Windows user, killing off 32-bit support makes me smh...

20 minutes ago, leech said:

But as you pointed out, since it's an open platform, doesn't matter if we can slap Linux on it and turn it into a Linux game machine...

I would expect the VCS community (actual will-be-users, not the idiots on social media) to come up with their own solution if Atari SA will not.  Something that's a cross between RetroPie & Kodi that boots off a flash drive would work for a home TV setup for example.

[leech]

23 minutes ago, MrMaddog said:

Using a desktop UI isn't that hard coming from Windows or even MacOS.  It's the fact that all the Linux support community (Neckbeards) insist on everyone using the CLI Terminal like it's still on version 1.0, that's what repulse many from using it.  Using pre-made distros for like the RPi...no problem if you follow directions.

Apple is trying to move the Mac platform to being ARM-based so they can keep it more closed off.  True story, my mom was worried that upgrading to Catalina will stop all of her games from working but thankfully her Mac Mini doesn't "work" with the upgrade.  Sometimes it does pay to use older Apple products.

 

As a Windows user, killing off 32-bit support makes me smh...

I would expect the VCS com

Being one of those neckbeards.... once you know how powerful the CLI can be, you would understand... anyhow I don't insist on it, it is simply more efficient at things.  I find myself using the Amiga CLI for a lot of things as well, and shocker, I use bash under FreeMiNT too!  Ooh, and prefer using cli under macOS for a lot as well.  Only place I don't use cli much is Windows, and that is because until recently, the cli for it was pure garbage.

[Gunstar]

I'm certainly no Neckbeard myself in the physical sense or social sense and only in "obsessed with computers" sense when it comes to the Atari 8-bit. And I don't have a problem using CLI, but I'm definitely not the "average user/consumer" that is repulsed by it either, even though I haven't used Linux since the 90's. And then I only knew the basics of the Linux CLI, enough to get my job done that I had to do, using Linux CLI to find files and use stacks of connected old-school back-up tape drives (I think we could copy about two dozen tapes at the same time, from one written with the Linux PC CLI, IIRC) to make tape updates of the latest Automobile manufacturer parts and pricing catalogs for dealers and garages nation-wide that were still using these old Linux systems as fast as I could (which ironically included a lot of sitting and waiting for tapes to write and work again for a few minutes to prepare the next catalog or make more tapes of the same one. And it's been a decade since I've used MS-DOS at all. But, for the last several years I've gotten heavily into using SpartaDOS X with an IDE CF card virtual HDD on my Atari 8-bit, and have become quite experienced with it's CLI commands and making config.sys files and batch files and navigating all the HDD partitions. I love all the control and all the ways I can setup and use my Atari and customize it's boot-strapping of the system that can't be done with other Atari DOS's and I use custom Atari OS's for even better control than with the standard Atari 8-bit OS. If I want, it also works well with GUI desktops that came out for the A8, like Diamond GOS or ATOS. And SpartaDOS X, especially the latest incarnations is very similar to MS-DOS. So considering all that experience, I don't think I'll mind using a CLI with Linux once I re-learn/learn it's CLI. I've actually been meaning to do an extra partition on my PC for years to have both Linux and Windows, but just have never gotten around to it. Eventually to drop Window entirely. But I do want to have a GUI like Ubuntu as a starting point and fall-back while I learn the Linux CLI. I want the ability to access my PC and it's power with a true CLI and not have to worry about full access to the in's and out's of my PC becoming severely redistricted a "nanny" GUI keeping me buffered from the hardware, like has happened more and more with Windows since they got rid of MS-DOS all together. I like the old-school desktop environments like Workbench or GEM were you still had direct access to TOS and whatever the Amiga equivalant was to TOS  (Was it just called Amiga OS or DOS?) and the CLI. I owned an Amiga 2000 loaded with upgrades for about a year more than a decade ago, but I never did anything with it but play 3D games with an 030, and extended memory on-board, so I don't recall much beyond the basic use of Workbench. 

 

@leech but you mention the Windows CLI was pure garbage until recently, is this an advent of Windows 10? I still use Windows 7 on my decade-old PC and Windows XP on an even older PC I use, only as a file-server and using PC "studio" apps for upgrading firmware or flashing games to flash-memory devices and cartridges for my Atari computers. I haven't used the Windows PC CLI since Windows XP was a going concern, and never that often, I found it easier to write to or burn CDR's for the PC and for burning CDR's for use with consoles like the Jaguar CD, Sega CD, 3DO and Dreamcast, via the command line than through Windows apps like Nero or CloneCD.

Edited October 23, 2019 by Gunstar

[zzip]

10 hours ago, Gunstar said:

The bottom line for me, with the AtariVCS is that were the consensus seems to be, if it's built and sold, it's too under powered to hang with the next or even current Playstations and Xboxes, won't get the software industries support, and Atari is trying give too many options on how to use it, because they don't believe it will compete with the big boys themselves and the system is "built for failure." Where as I see a system that's architecture is powerful enough (look at Nintendo product for this example) if not all-new, state-of-the-art tech, and is made with all it's ways of being able to use it as a "golden parachute" for early adopters of the console if it does fail and Atari goes under and can't support the Atari OS side, in that it won't be a useless brick with no service and just 100 old-school games like a flashback otherwise, but can still be used with a choice of OS as a TV-top PC, still capable of being used in all the popular recreational ways, through the sandbox mode. It's not wasted money if it fails. Though I'd still never pay as much as the current suggested retail prices!

There are enough Linux games on Steam already to make it a viable console alternative even if Atari (probably) fails to support it properly.   That plus you can emulate and run virtually any game from the past--   even using emulators a Pi would choke on. 

[zzip]

13 hours ago, leech said:

I mostly just quoted this for truth.  While I work more on the dev-ops side, I know all too well that whenever something new and shiny is out and about in the world, software developers love to dump what they're working on and dive head first into the new tech, which horrifies me, because then I have to try to keep things stable while they're doing it!

Sounds like me at my last company.   I was hired to bring a build and deployment process under control.   The deployments frequently did the wrong thing, and there was much stress and screaming.   I stabilized it, it was working reliably, so naturally a bunch of new people come in and want to change the deployment process using "technology X" because they can (without first understanding the existing one, and the specific problems it was addressing).   I was getting into constant arguments about it, and when I eventually convinced one, another new person would get hired and want to change it using "technology Y".   It was crazy.    At my current job, we are much more stability-focused so I don't have to have these fights anymore :)

9 hours ago, leech said:

Being one of those neckbeards.... once you know how powerful the CLI can be, you would understand... anyhow I don't insist on it, it is simply more efficient at things.  I find myself using the Amiga CLI for a lot of things as well, and shocker, I use bash under FreeMiNT too!  Ooh, and prefer using cli under macOS for a lot as well.  Only place I don't use cli much is Windows, and that is because until recently, the cli for it was pure garbage.

Yeah, I don't use the Linux Bash CLI because the GUI tools are lacking.  I use it because it's far more productive.  Knowing how to properly use command history and command completion means you have to do very little actual typing in the CLI.   That said,  I am wary of pushing Linux newbies towards CLI because I know that will likely turn them off.  Maybe they'll get there eventually, but first they just need a familiar enough desktop environment.

 

9 hours ago, Gunstar said:

but you mention the Windows CLI was pure garbage until recently, is this an advent of Windows 10? I still use Windows 7 on my decade-old PC and Windows XP on an even older PC I use

The Windows CLI has definitely improved greatly over the years.   But I still find it much more to use than say Bash.   But I understand you can now get an officially supported version of Bash on Windows 10.

[leech]

27 minutes ago, zzip said:

Sounds like me at my last company.   I was hired to bring a build and deployment process under control.   The deployments frequently did the wrong thing, and there was much stress and screaming.   I stabilized it, it was working reliably, so naturally a bunch of new people come in and want to change the deployment process using "technology X" because they can (without first understanding the existing one, and the specific problems it was addressing).   I was getting into constant arguments about it, and when I eventually convinced one, another new person would get hired and want to change it using "technology Y".   It was crazy.    At my current job, we are much more stability-focused so I don't have to have these fights anymore

Yeah, I don't use the Linux Bash CLI because the GUI tools are lacking.  I use it because it's far more productive.  Knowing how to properly use command history and command completion means you have to do very little actual typing in the CLI.   That said,  I am wary of pushing Linux newbies towards CLI because I know that will likely turn them off.  Maybe they'll get there eventually, but first they just need a familiar enough desktop environment.

 

The Windows CLI has definitely improved greatly over the years.   But I still find it much more to use than say Bash.   But I understand you can now get an officially supported version of Bash on Windows 10.

Yeah, being able to get a proper shell through Windows 10 is what makes it acceptable.   Powershell is pretty good too, but they had to make it quite different due to Windowsisms.  Funny, Windows finally gets an official way to run Bash and other cli things, and just before macOS decides they are ditching bash in favor of zsh.