Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-Atari16 Digest Vol. 89 Issue 592
INFO-ATARI16 Digest Wed, 1 Nov 89 Volume 89 : Issue 592
Today's Topics:
386's, TT's, a machine I want
Atari ST multi-tasking/user operating systems
Bashing mania (2 msgs)
HyperScreen
Morse Code Translate
question SPECTRE GCR
TT vs 386 boxes and Apples...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 89 16:48:10 GMT
From: mcgill-vision!quiche!calvin!depeche@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Sam Alan EZUST)
Subject: 386's, TT's, a machine I want
In article <212@fjcp60.GOV> winston@fjcnet.GOV (Winston M. Llamas) writes:
>
>I don't think I said that the ST sucked. The gist of my previous post was
>that even if Atari manages to get the TT out in time, it will take a while
>(if ever) before a significant software base is developed for it. Yes,
>Uniterm is a nice program (thank's Simon). But let's get real. I want
[...]
what is really funny is that Apple's support of the ][ series was the
entire reason I switched to Atari in the first place!!!
Apple announced the ][x - a 16-bit ][e compatible computer approximately
three years before the ][gs finally came out. I had been waiting for it
for the whole time, and purchased my 1040ST approximately 4 months after
the ][gs came out on the market. This was simply because it was so over
priced for the relative power it offered I said, "screw it!"
well, now that I have left the APPLE world, I am never going back, so if I
end up leaving the ST world, it will also be for good - I hate companies
which screw their users around like this.
Well, I guess I will wait until the TT comes out, and then make my real
decision. It would be a terrible feeling to know that I purchased one
of those damned 386's and then saw how wonderful the TT was.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Nov 89 11:11:38 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!hybrid!spocom!gng@purdue.edu
Subject: Atari ST multi-tasking/user operating systems
I'm compiling a survey about Atari ST multitasking/user operating systems.
If you use such an OS, please help me by just answering these questions:
1) What is the name of the OS and the latest version of it?
2) Is this OS multitasking, multiuser, or both?
3) What is the minimal ST hardware (and software if necessary) configuration
for this OS and if possible, the usual/best configuration for it?
4) Who is the manufacturer of this OS, and how can they be contacted?
(address, phone, uucp, etc)
5) How much does it cost (at the present time if possible)?
6) How long have you been using this OS?
7) On a rating of zero to ten, how Unix compatible is this OS?
(An explanation following it would be nice too)
8) What strengths prevail in this OS (if possible, compared to others also)?
9) What weaknesses are noticeable in this OS?
10) Other comments about this OS, the makers of it, etc?
Please send replies to me by email, and I'll post a summary here when I get a
sufficient number of replies. Thanks very much.
--
George Ng (Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto) | "Sure, I would like Canadian
UUCP: uunet!mnetor!?becker,hybrid?!spocom!gng | winters too...if it weren't
or utgpu!ncrcan!ziebmef!spocom!gng | for the weather."
------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 89 19:27:00 GMT
From: apollo!rehrauer@eddie.mit.edu (Steve Rehrauer)
Subject: Bashing mania
In article <8910280704.AA11592@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> 01659@AECLCR.BITNET (Greg
Csullog) writes:
>Critics praised the NeXT machine for its foresight in not putting the smarts
>in its laser - have the computer use its RAM. When Atari did this industry
>analysts complained. Double standards - you bet.
Yes, but NeXT put a defacto standard page-description language, PostScript,
into its interface. Plenty of applications out there understood how to
do PostScript when NeXT arrived. If I understand Rich Covert correctly :),
it seems that almost nothing uses the Atari laser to its fullest. Whether
PostScript is Wonderful or Not is another argument; standards have a way
of being useful regardless of their degree of Wonder-making. Can you say
"IBM"?
>Everyone bitches about the TT being late. The Mac II has not been with us
>that long and Apple had a 1.5 year head start with the Mac over the original
>ST. The delay between the Mac and Mac II is now about the same as the ST
>and the TT (and in the same time frame, Atari developed and released their
>PC XT, AT and 386 line, the STACY, the Mega and the ATW).
The people at Atari like to say that the ST was conceived, born and
shipped in 6 months. (I may be wrong; that's the figure I recall
reading on the net at one point -- I believe from Landon Dyer.) I
suppose that set some expectations as to the pace of future development.
By anyone's yardstick, the TT has been a long time in coming. If it's
found to be Wonderful when it finally ships, then everyone will applaud
Atari. But the longer the wait, the more Wonderful it'll have to be to
impress anyone.
Actually, I have a question about the TT that I'm not sure was answered
by the technical blurbs posted here. Is the video refreshed at 60Hz?
One of the things I find Most Wonderful about the ST's monochrome monitor
is its 70Hz rate; much easier on my eyes. (Almost makes up for having
to swap @#$%@ monitors when I want color! ;-) (And don't tell me about
the 3rd party doodads that let me switch between monitors. I know about
'em; I just don't have space on my desk for both monitors.)
--
>>"Aaiiyeeee! Death from above!"<< | Steve Rehrauer, rehrauer@apollo.hp.com
"Flee, lest we be trod upon!" | The Apollo Computer Division of H.P.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Nov 89 00:24:11 GMT
From:
cs.utexas.edu!samsung!aplcen!haven!uvaarpa!hudson!astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8
f@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Bashing mania
In article <4694c052.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve
Rehrauer) writes:
> Yes, but NeXT put a defacto standard page-description language, PostScript,
> into its interface.
The NeXT Postscript for its printer is almost exactly like Ultrascript
for the ST, except the NeXT also uses Postscript for its display,
while the ST uses GDOS. GDOS, by the way, can drive the Atari Laser Printer
to "it's fullest" in many respects.
Richard Convert is not exactly the best expert for opinions concerning
the capabilities of Atari hardware.
------
Greg Lindahl
gl8f@virginia.edu I'm not the NRA.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Nov 89 01:13:33 GMT
From: pasteur!cory.Berkeley.EDU!jlemon@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Jonathan Lemon)
Subject: HyperScreen
In article <8911011636.AA18034@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> 01659@AECLCR.BITNET (Greg
Csullog) writes:
>Would someone on the net please repost information about HyperScreen?
>Thanks in advance.
I pulled this off the net a while ago. Unfortunately, I seem to have
forgotten who wrote it. Oh well. The software patch to go along with
this exists on terminator and (I think) panarthea. Enjoy.
================================================================================
Several people have asked me to expand on the circuitry from "ST-
magazin" to allow an expanded ST screen. The trick is this: a composite signal
is generated by ANDing together the HSynch and Vsynch signals and supplying
this signal to the MMU and Shifter chips instead of the normal DE (display
enable) signal from the GLUE chip. Note that the original DE signal must still
be passed on to the Timer B interrupt (pin 20) of the MFP68901. Additionally,
a switch is used to enable either the new DE signal or the original signal to
be used, allowing normal operation to be resumed when desired.
So, to describe the circuitry: the heart is an NPN transistor, type
BC555 or equivalent. They give a BC237 as an equivalent; offhand I don't know
what 2N series would be equivalent -- perhaps someone with access to a D.A.T.A.
handbook can comment. Next are two resistors: a 240 Ohm emitter resistor to
ground, and a 10K pullup on the base to +5 V. The collector is also connected
to +5, so it's essentially a common-emitter circuit; a 100 nF capacitor from
collector to ground takes care of the switching transients. Finally two
diodes, 1N4148, are also connected to the base, with their cathodes going to
HSynch and Vsynch respectively. Thus when either synch signal is low, the base
is pulled low via a diode and the transistor switches off giving a low signal
at the emitter; when both are high, the base is pulled high by the 10K resistor
and the transistor switches on, pulling the emitter high to ?4.4 V.
As for the actual connections, the original was built in a 520 STM
where the synch and +5 signals were conveniently located together at the
modulator. Here +5, HSynch and VSynch are pins 7, 5, and 4 resp. For older
520s +5 is on pin 6 instead of 7. My internals book gives H and V synch
signals at pins 37 and 38 of the GLUE chip, but there's a comment that the
signal should be taken from the modulator input connections even when it is
not installed. There's also a comment that a Version D 1040ST sometimes has too
weak a synch signal to properly drive the transistor circuit, and I think it
says you have to buffer the signals through two 7404 inverter gates (but it
might be saying that these gates already exist -- I had to quit my German
classes just when we were learning "werden").
That takes care of the inputs; the output from the transistor emitter
is taken to one side of a SPDT switch, while the original DE signal from the
GLUE chip (pin 39) goes to the other. Now, the PC trace for DE is cut so that
the it still goes to the timer chip but not the MMU and Shifter chips; the
common pin of the switch is connected somewhere on the MMU/Shifter side of the
cut. The three wires to the switch have to be long enough to allow the switch
to be mounted in some convenient location on the case of the ST -- personally
I'd prefer something a little more complex using DC switching so that the
signals weren't taken over such a long route (nearly 12 inches judging from the
photographs). The original was also constructed in a "fliegenden Aufbau", i.e.
suspended in mid-air by the component leads, and wrapped in insulating tape. I
would suggest a bit of perf-board or something so that a neater and more stable
construction can be made.
There's also a comment that you might have to remove C114 in a version
D 1040ST, I think to get a better risetime ("Flankensteilheit"); this capacitor
is at the upper left of the shifter shield (? "Shifter-Abschirmgehauese").
As for the software, I'm still baulking at typing in 2900 bytes of
hex-dump, plus I'm not sure of the legality of posting it to the net. However,
the introduction states that when a substitute DE signal has been arranged
"then compute-time intensive synchronisation tricks are unneccesary and a
modified TOS or BIGSCREEN (ST-Magazin 11/88 edition) runs with the new
Hyper-Screen resolution under GEM". Keith at UH Atari Computer Enthusiasts
(uace0@uhnix2.uh.edu) informs me that he has already modified the BIGSCREEN
code to suit, and is waiting on this detailed circuit description. I trust
that he will make the code available once it has been tested. By the way, it
is supposed to work in all resolutions: 420x284x16 colours in Lo-rez, 840x284x4
colours in Med-rez and 840x568 in monochrome Hi-rez. I hope this has answered
all the questions...
--
Jonathan ...ucbvax!cory!jlemon or jlemon@cory.Berkeley.EDU
------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 89 16:35:17 GMT
From:
mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watmath!watcgl!electro!carlo@tut.cis.ohio
-state.edu (Carlo Sgro)
Subject: Morse Code Translate
On that note, does anyone know of any shortwave listener's or ham radio
software out there for the ST?
--
Carlo Sgro Vote for your favorite .signature!
watmath!watcgl!electro!carlo Call 1-900-GOODONE ($2 on your phone bill).
------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 89 16:34:20 GMT
From: att!dptg!lzaz!hcj@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (HC Johnson)
Subject: question SPECTRE GCR
In article <617@kubix.kub.nl>, reus@kub.nl (Dick de Reus) writes:
>
> Does anyone know anything about floppy compatibility between ATARI-1040ST with
> SPECTRE GCR and Macintosh II. I mean: can I port data from ST to Mac (vice
spectre gcr will read and write native mac disks.
also a macII will read and write ms/dos format, which is native atari format
also.
Howard C. Johnson
ATT Bell Labs
att!lzaz!hcj
hcj@lzaz.att.com
------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 89 18:23:02 GMT
From: eru!luth!sunic!tut!hydra!hylka!jalkio@BLOOM-BEACON.MIT.EDU (Jouni Alkio,
University of Helsinki, Finland)
Subject: TT vs 386 boxes and Apples...
In article <23526@cup.portal.com>, Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com writes:
> Replying to my message, Jouni Alkio says:
>>People still buy ST's and MAC's, they are much the same technology
>
> True, except that in the same time period Apple has improved their product
> by expanding it, speeding it up, adding expansion capabilities and giving
> it far improved sound and graphics... Atari has not.
If you buy a Mac Plus, for example, it doesn't expand by itself. You
must buy a new model. How can a new model help you if you don't buy it?
And I guess the Mac Plus is still selling much more than the newer (and
more expensive) models. I admit that Atari hasn't brought many
interesting ST-computers lately (I don't like the MEGA ST's), but that
doesn't really matter, I've been quite satisfied with my good old ST.
>>Do you think introducing a PC-pocket clone is playing. Many people
>>really want to buy one. Do you mean that Atari should only introduce
>>computers - not video games?
>
> Not at all... they can of course make whatever they want, whatever makes
> them money. My objection is that they've neglected their computer market
> and owners of their computers by going out after the "gadgets" market.
> A PC-pocket clone does not benefit ST owners at all. (No arguments about
> the influx of R&D or advertising money please.. Atari Corp has already
> demonstrated that to be false).
Why should a PC-pocket clone benefit us ST owners? There are the new
ST-models, too (and the TT's). And what is a gadget for you is not
necessarily a gadget for some other people.
>
>>Do refer to the TT as nonstandard?
>>Is UNIX not a standard?!?! What about all the ST programs there are??
>
> Yes, the TT is non-standard. While it has a VME card slot, the rest of
> the system is non-standard. Atari Corp would have to obtain a VERY large
> market share before it could be considered a "standard".. this is not going
> to happen. UNIX _is_ a standard, but Atari has already announced that UNIX
> will _not_ be shipped with the first TTs. With their track record of
> "followup", I would not call a promise of UNIX a "standard".
As I understand you, all which is not a PC-clone, Apple-clone or
something like that can't possibly be a standard. Well, if so, how could
anybody introduce a new standard computer (not clones)???? They are
automatically non-standard if they aren't clones.
>
> ST programs are by definition "non-standard" because they run on the
> "non-standard" ST (in the same way Amiga is "non-standard" and now CP/M
> and Apple II have become).
>
And after all, how do you know where the line goes between standard and
non-standard? If you use the market share as the criteria, the ST could
very well be called a standard in West-Germany, for example. I doubt
Apple is selling much more there.
>>Haven't you heard of the Stacy and the ATW? They are not video games.
>
> Yes, I've "heard" of them. I've also "heard" of the Octobussy, the
> Moses PromisedLAN, the CD-ROM drive, the Atari hardware IBM emulator board
> and the AMY chip.
CD-ROM drives are (as far as I know) available in Germany. Stacy, too.
And think ATW will be very soon. And you don't have to believe all what
you hear. Atari has now "promised" that they won't introduce a new
device before than three months before the first shipments. I hope
this will make your life a bit easier.
>
> Even if the STacey ever makes it to the marketplace, it is only a portable
> version of a "non-standard" computer. They'll probably only sell to owners
> of STs and small niche markets like performing musicians. If Atari would
> develop the ST market so that it *WAS* a "standard", then they'd be able
> to sell a portable version of it.
Again, if you think the ST as non-standard, it's your problem. You could
buy another computer and stop complaining. It's so simple. If you don't
want it, you don't have to keep it.
>
> The ATW is not a video game, but it's not something that's likely to benefit
> you or me. Development of the Atari ST computer line _would_
The people who have an ATW don't think in the same way, I guess. And
who knows, I could even buy an ATW some day. As an ST user I'm quite
satisfied with the development of the Atari ST-line happening now.
>
>>> Will your company's President approve a purchase order for "Atari Computer
>>> because they make the "third rate" video games in the world..?
>
>>I certainly would not work for a company that has such a President! I
>>don't really like prejudiced people.
>
> It's not a matter of "prejudice", it's a matter of track record, credibility
> expertise and trust. Atari Corp has NONE of those. A company would be
> foolish to risk their financial wellbeing on using Atari computers.
> Computer companies like IBM and Apple have _demonstrated_ their ability to
> deliver and support their products. Atari Corp has not.
>
> BobR
Well, if I was a boss, I could choose Atari IF it had all the programs
etc. my company needs and IF it had the best price/performance
ratio. I certainly wouldn't reject it for that reason that Atari
produces video games, as well. (But I'm not a boss and I doubt I'll ever
be...)
Jouni Alkio
------------------------------
End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V89 Issue #592
*****************************************
=========================================================================
