Proud Owner of Falcon again

[AtariSociety]

I once owned a Falcon.  Sold it...

Kicked myself these last years for doing so.

Was able to get one again, now a boxed Falcon.

Cost me $1K more than I sold my last one for.

Live & Learn BUT happy that I am now an owner again... for good!  

TJ

 

[eightbit]

Congrats! This is the one computer that has eluded me for decades. It wasn't so much the money aspect than it was the fact that I just couldn't *find* one those years ago. Now it is probably both

 

Still, if there is a goal that I need to complete before I die it will be to own a Falcon and actually get to use one. 

 

Congrats again!

 

Also, you sort of look like Santa in that picture. I will imagine that you are and you are handing me that Falcon for being a good boy all year long!

Edited November 14, 2021 by eightbit

[TGB1718]

Just so green with envy ?

 

Congrats

[Tillek]

I had always wondered what Santa got for Christmas.

[tjlazer]

I sold my spare NIB Falcon030 for like $900 10 years ago on eBay.  Regret that now!  Good thing I still have a Falcon030.  

[Guest]

That's awesome! Please post any new goings on with it! New hardware or games played. etc....

 

I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out which scsi2sd adapter to order and how to config it on mine. Someday I'll get back to that.

[The V-Man]

Don't forget to download Towers II for it.  Plug Plug. 

 

[ParanoidLittleMan]

On 11/22/2021 at 2:31 PM, Zeptari1 said:

...

I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out which scsi2sd adapter to order and how to config it on mine. Someday I'll get back to that.

There are other solutions which cost less, and will work faster:

Internal IDE port of Falcon is faster than SCSI port. You can attach there Compact Flash cards via IDE-CF adapter (passive, cheap). Yes, CF cards are now harder to find, are more expensive than SD cards. There are IDE-SD adapters too, and they are usually cheaper than SCSI-SD adapters. So, you can have better speed of IDE port with cheaper adapter. Only drawback is that IDE port is inside, but it can be solved that SD card slot is accessible from outside.

Configuration is not big deal: need SCSI cable for SCSI-SD way, giving +5V power to adapter - that can be done with external PSU, but that has it's problems. Better is to get it from Falcon (power consumption is low, no need to care about giving power to external PSU).  Similar is with internal - IDE cable (44 to 44 or 44 to 40, depending from what is on adapter). +5V is there around.

Will need driver SW too, of course.

[leech]

3 hours ago, ParanoidLittleMan said:

There are other solutions which cost less, and will work faster:

Internal IDE port of Falcon is faster than SCSI port. You can attach there Compact Flash cards via IDE-CF adapter (passive, cheap). Yes, CF cards are now harder to find, are more expensive than SD cards. There are IDE-SD adapters too, and they are usually cheaper than SCSI-SD adapters. So, you can have better speed of IDE port with cheaper adapter. Only drawback is that IDE port is inside, but it can be solved that SD card slot is accessible from outside.

Configuration is not big deal: need SCSI cable for SCSI-SD way, giving +5V power to adapter - that can be done with external PSU, but that has it's problems. Better is to get it from Falcon (power consumption is low, no need to care about giving power to external PSU).  Similar is with internal - IDE cable (44 to 44 or 44 to 40, depending from what is on adapter). +5V is there around.

Will need driver SW too, of course.

Huh, I always figured the SCSI would be faster.  Anyone have benchmarks for this?  It is used a lot for audio editing and such on the old bird.

https://temlib.org/AtariForumWiki/index.php/ACSI,_SCSI_and_IDE

This says that the TT's SCSI is twice the speed as the Falcon's, but uses the same chip?  Odd, unless it is tied to the bus speed (which would be 2x).  Doesn't state how fast the IDE is.

I have a 120gb SSD in mine...

[ParanoidLittleMan]

9 hours ago, leech said:

Huh, I always figured the SCSI would be faster.  Anyone have benchmarks for this?  It is used a lot for audio editing and such on the old bird.

https://temlib.org/AtariForumWiki/index.php/ACSI,_SCSI_and_IDE

This says that the TT's SCSI is twice the speed as the Falcon's, but uses the same chip?  Odd, unless it is tied to the bus speed (which would be 2x).  Doesn't state how fast the IDE is.

I have a 120gb SSD in mine...

Yes, that's one of most common people's mistake - assuming something just like that. What differs is DMA for instance. Speed of some transfer depends from not only one thing - and as is known that slowest part will determine max speed. Additionally, Falcon was with IDE internal drive in most cases, so they saved on SCSI port, assuming (correctly, I would say) that it will be not used so much.

You can see my Falcon IDE tests: http://atari.8bitchip.info/ahpt.html

Did not put TT speed tests from some reason online, but remember that was significantly faster than Falcon, with same drive.

In case of IDE it is mostly memory bandwidth (bus speed) what determines max speed, and it is 2x more than in some ST(E) - so 3.2 vs 1.6 MB/sec .

I wrote couple times here that no sense to use some new, very fast storage media/device with now about 30 years old computers - their speeds are way slower.

Then, there are possible some unusual ways in storage, which can give some benefits, and I'm who invented some:

Twisted IDE - DOS compatible partitions with HW byte swap .

ACSI-CF - uses 8-bit DMA mode of Sandisk CF cards (which have IDE/ATA compatible mode)

CATA - special single phase transfer, needing small HW mod in ST(E) - double IDE speed. Up to 3.6 MB/sec

And even with ZX Spectrum - very simple CF card adapter, using memory mode of them - PIO mode with 8 bit bus.

 

[Clint Thompson]

On 11/22/2021 at 2:27 PM, tjlazer said:

I sold my spare NIB Falcon030 for like $900 10 years ago on eBay.  Regret that now!  Good thing I still have a Falcon030.  

Regretfully sold mine 20-years ago but had to. That's a long time kicking! Now I have an actual use for a Falcon but can't seem to land one. eBay prices are unrealistically insane and in subpar condition. The 3 on eBay right now, both price and their condition aside, all ruled out due to being in Germany/UK (I'm in the U.S.)

 

Congrats on the pickup @AtariSociety! Your posts/video has reinvigorated my interest once again after years of searching but failing...

 

Begs the question: How much would it take for someone to sell one of their unused/spare Falcons? An actual question for those who have unused/spare Falcons. No need for a box, would just like a nice clean stock machine that has been well cared for to actually use in the studio.

 

Would have to break the piggy bank and sell whats leftover for bacon bits but if anyone has a stock non-modified U.S. Falcon in well cared for condition literally collecting dust and would actually consider selling one early next year after the holidays, please PM me. I'm willing to crack the piggy for all the oinks on the right set of wings. It would no doubt be well cared for and equally well used.

 

 

In the very unlikely event that I do manage find a Falcon to adopt as a result of your post @AtariSociety ,you owe me a new piggy bank

[complicated]

Congrats getting a Falcon 030 again. I bought a Falcon in the late 90s for around 200 euro but when i stopped using Atari i traded it away for almost nothing, one of my biggest mistakes. Not sure i want to pay 1-2k euros getting a new one, we will se in the future. Still got my old STE though which have been in my fathers basement for 25 years and recently bought an Mega STE which was a total wreck, i managed to reapair to full working condition though but i did cost some money.

 

Anyway have fun with your Falcon, its a nice machine

[leech]

Falcons are awesome, and were dealt a terrible hand.  I think if they had come out 2 years sooner, there is a strong maybe that it could have reinvigorated Atari.. well basically if we had gotten them instead of the STe.  Granted, even then we would have needed Atari to start kissing some developer hineys...

[leech]

On 12/8/2021 at 5:52 AM, ParanoidLittleMan said:

Yes, that's one of most common people's mistake - assuming something just like that. What differs is DMA for instance. Speed of some transfer depends from not only one thing - and as is known that slowest part will determine max speed. Additionally, Falcon was with IDE internal drive in most cases, so they saved on SCSI port, assuming (correctly, I would say) that it will be not used so much.

You can see my Falcon IDE tests: http://atari.8bitchip.info/ahpt.html

Did not put TT speed tests from some reason online, but remember that was significantly faster than Falcon, with same drive.

In case of IDE it is mostly memory bandwidth (bus speed) what determines max speed, and it is 2x more than in some ST(E) - so 3.2 vs 1.6 MB/sec .

I wrote couple times here that no sense to use some new, very fast storage media/device with now about 30 years old computers - their speeds are way slower.

Then, there are possible some unusual ways in storage, which can give some benefits, and I'm who invented some:

Twisted IDE - DOS compatible partitions with HW byte swap .

ACSI-CF - uses 8-bit DMA mode of Sandisk CF cards (which have IDE/ATA compatible mode)

CATA - special single phase transfer, needing small HW mod in ST(E) - double IDE speed. Up to 3.6 MB/sec

And even with ZX Spectrum - very simple CF card adapter, using memory mode of them - PIO mode with 8 bit bus.

 

Yeah, it's almost sad that the TT still ends up being faster than the Falcon at most things.  They use the same SCSI chip in the TT and Falcon, but as you point out, the DMA is faster in the TT, as is the overall bus of it.  The Falcon's history as originally being some upgrade to the STe makes itself known in the almost 16/32 bit mix that is still sort of there in the Falcon (though it's more about the slower bus, from my understanding. 

Curious, does the CT60e upgrade make any differences to SCSI speeds?  Granted, this is off topic a bit, and I should probably ask in a separate thread...

[gilsaluki]

Congrats~  Never went into the ST/TT/Falcon realm.  Wish I had.  I look at magazines for complete systems for real cheap towards the end of the STs life. But, I was trying not to chase the latest, greatest thing, as a lot of people with very understanding spouses did.  My spouse would not have put of with me getting the latest/greatest.  So, I stuck with the A8.  I really would like a TT or even one of the Atari PCs (PC1) and the like.

[+DarkLord]

1 hour ago, leech said:

Curious, does the CT60e upgrade make any differences to SCSI speeds?  Granted, this is off topic a bit, and I should probably ask in a separate thread...

 

I honestly don't know about the SCSI side of things but it certainly accelerates IDE stuff. 

 

[leech]

15 minutes ago, gilsaluki said:

Congrats~  Never went into the ST/TT/Falcon realm.  Wish I had.  I look at magazines for complete systems for real cheap towards the end of the STs life. But, I was trying not to chase the latest, greatest thing, as a lot of people with very understanding spouses did.  My spouse would not have put of with me getting the latest/greatest.  So, I stuck with the A8.  I really would like a TT or even one of the Atari PCs (PC1) and the like.

I have a PC3(?) It is the last one with an Atari made motherboard.  A nice effort, but really should have kept their money going into R&D for the ST or TT line..  Atari had way too many projects that went no where.

[gilsaluki]

1 minute ago, leech said:

I have a PC3(?) It is the last one with an Atari made motherboard.  A nice effort, but really should have kept their money going into R&D for the ST or TT line..  Atari had way too many projects that went no where.

I agree. I see the PC thing as a last desperate act by a family (The Tramiels) owned company to bring in some cash.  By that time they were bleeding badly.  It's an old story, but Jack and his crew couldn't manage getting out a wet paper bag.  Their marketing was terrible, follow-up was non-existent, customer service after the sale was atrocious,  On and on, and On and on it went.  I am surprised the developed anything after 1991.  The Jag is another sad tale..

With all that said, we are still here being loyal to a company that was never loyal to its customers. They innovated and made some quality products.  Made some stinkers as well.  XEP-80....Atariwriter 80...

[leech]

Ha, there is a USA Falcon on eBay right now for a 'Buy it now' at 2,999...  Really?  Also, why do people care really about low serial numbers?  Mine is apparently B337021000291  Not sure if that's low or not, but I mean it's a Falcon... also mine is awesome as it has a CT60e and SV

[ParanoidLittleMan]

11 hours ago, leech said:

Yeah, it's almost sad that the TT still ends up being faster than the Falcon at most things.  They use the same SCSI chip in the TT and Falcon, but as you point out, the DMA is faster in the TT, as is the overall bus of it.  The Falcon's history as originally being some upgrade to the STe makes itself known in the almost 16/32 bit mix that is still sort of there in the Falcon (though it's more about the slower bus, from my understanding. 

Curious, does the CT60e upgrade make any differences to SCSI speeds?  Granted, this is off topic a bit, and I should probably ask in a separate thread...

I'm not expert about CT60, and does it make diff. to SCSI speeds ? Really, does it matter ? All I can say from top of head - is TT faster with ACSI because it's faster bus ? Nope. DMA chip has it's cycle counts, and it will not go faster if bus speed is higher. To add for case, DMA chip is not same by TT for ACSI and SCSI .

[Clint Thompson]

10 hours ago, leech said:

Ha, there is a USA Falcon on eBay right now for a 'Buy it now' at 2,999...  Really? Also, why do people care really about low serial numbers?

While it appears to be a nice machine, feels to me about $1,000 overpriced. (some may argue by even more) Also not sure about low serial numbers being a good thing, thought the earlier machines had clock timing issues that needed to be resolved.

[Chri O.]

33 minutes ago, Clint Thompson said:

thought the earlier machines had clock timing issues that needed to be resolved.

Low serial numbers = TOS 4.02 ?  Anything below TOS version 4.04 can only boot from hard drive partition size max 512MB or less (TOS 1.00 to 1.02 only 256).

 

[ParanoidLittleMan]

11 hours ago, Chri O. said:

Low serial numbers = TOS 4.02 ?  Anything below TOS version 4.04 can only boot from hard drive partition size max 512MB or less (TOS 1.00 to 1.02 only 256).

 

That's correct about partition sizes and TOS versions. However, it is not 'can only boot ..' - it can be understood as limits are only for boot partition, and others can be larger. Nope. Limit stays for all partitions. And max count of partitions what TOS (1.00-4.04) can handle is 14   C-P .

I guess that confusion might be because some sites, pages which claim that there are TOS limits special for first partition (C), like 16 or 32 MB. NO - it is limit of some hard disk driver SW.

Here to add that price of possible max 1GB partitions with 4.04 is more RAM allocated for driver and TOS filesystem. Maybe better to stay at smaller ones if disk/Flash card capacity is not very big.

[leech]

On 12/10/2021 at 12:55 AM, ParanoidLittleMan said:

That's correct about partition sizes and TOS versions. However, it is not 'can only boot ..' - it can be understood as limits are only for boot partition, and others can be larger. Nope. Limit stays for all partitions. And max count of partitions what TOS (1.00-4.04) can handle is 14   C-P .

I guess that confusion might be because some sites, pages which claim that there are TOS limits special for first partition (C), like 16 or 32 MB. NO - it is limit of some hard disk driver SW.

Here to add that price of possible max 1GB partitions with 4.04 is more RAM allocated for driver and TOS filesystem. Maybe better to stay at smaller ones if disk/Flash card capacity is not very big.

Curious about something.  So this is a TOS limitation, right?  Not one based on anything that's a hardware limit?  If so, couldn't we feasibly increase that with a patched TOS in ROM?  Granted I think part of this also might be a limit on FAT16 partitions?

 

Ha, so started digging... apparently FAT16 could handle up to 2GB partitions... depending on sector sizes... and which version of DOS was used.  So maybe what we have in the Falcon is likely the best that could be done.  Though it'd be nice to at least somehow get some patches in to address the largest the Falcon will support onto other systems, for example if I were to try to boot a drive off the Falcon onto one of my other Atari ST computers.  Granted with the Falcon being the only one with IDE, and the only others with SCSI are the Mega STe and TT030... it would be problematic.  It's nice that all (but the Falcon) have ACSI, but one would need an SCSI to ACSI device to be able to use the UltraSatan (for example) on the Falcon.

 

On 12/9/2021 at 9:48 PM, Clint Thompson said:

While it appears to be a nice machine, feels to me about $1,000 overpriced. (some may argue by even more) Also not sure about low serial numbers being a good thing, thought the earlier machines had clock timing issues that needed to be resolved.

Yeah, I'd consider it if it were like 1k shy of that price... likely if it were 1,500 - 1,800 even more likely... but really I just want a proper Y key on my Falcon haha... well and to figure out how to close the thing without cutting a hole in my case...

[ParanoidLittleMan]

20 hours ago, leech said:

Curious about something.  So this is a TOS limitation, right?  Not one based on anything that's a hardware limit?  If so, couldn't we feasibly increase that with a patched TOS in ROM?  Granted I think part of this also might be a limit on FAT16 partitions?

 

Ha, so started digging... apparently FAT16 could handle up to 2GB partitions... depending on sector sizes... and which version of DOS was used.  So maybe what we have in the Falcon is likely the best that could be done.  Though it'd be nice to at least somehow get some patches in to address the largest the Falcon will support onto other systems, for example if I were to try to boot a drive off the Falcon onto one of my other Atari ST computers.  Granted with the Falcon being the only one with IDE, and the only others with SCSI are the Mega STe and TT030... it would be problematic.  It's nice that all (but the Falcon) have ACSI, but one would need an SCSI to ACSI device to be able to use the UltraSatan (for example) on the Falcon.

 

Yeah, I'd consider it if it were like 1k shy of that price... likely if it were 1,500 - 1,800 even more likely... but really I just want a proper Y key on my Falcon haha... well and to figure out how to close the thing without cutting a hole in my case...

It is TOS limitation, but things are more complicated than people usually think. Atari TOS FAT16 is not same as widely used DOS FAT16.

Page about:  http://atari.8bitchip.info/ASTfamMS.html

Btw. Windows NT supported FAT16 partitions up to 4 GB size. However, that's bad way, causing lot of space loss on disks - because max count of clusters is 64K (with TOS FAT16 it is just 32K) and that means that max file count is it too - what is just not acceptable today. I have about million files on my partition D .

Cluster size with 2 GB partition is already pretty large - 32 KB , and that is what very short files will take on disk. If file is 32K +1 byte will take 64K, and so on.

FAT32 and NTFS, Linux filesystems allow much more clusters, files on 1 partition.

I made modifications of TOS 1.04 and 1.62 (and combos of them with 2.06), and I don't call it patch, there is much more changed, and took loot of time.

So, in my improved TOS, or 1.04i, 1.62i max partition size is 1 GB (could go on more, but at price of more RAM usage, more ROM space needed too) . I think that it is more than enough for Atari ST(E) SW and data. And other impr. : max 30 partitions instead 14 .  And despite all it, it needs less RAM - because no need to allocate extra buffer space, so existing 2 KB is enough (what TOS allocates at start). Normally 32 KB buffer space is min for usual TOS size partitions. And I did not talk about extra limits of TOS 1.00 and 1.02 - and will not here ?

Btw. TOS 'patch' for large DOS FAT 16 partitions was made long time ago - it is called BigDOS, and there is special Falcon version too. It is PRG, what needs to be in AUTO folder, begin of it.  Takes some RAM, is longer code, so no way to put it in TOS ROM. And it is obsolete now, despite can 2 GB partitions. Main problem is that lot of good old Atari SW works not with it.