Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-Atari16 Digest Vol. 90 Issue 091
INFO-ATARI16 Digest Wed, 24 Jan 90 Volume 90 : Issue 91
Today's Topics:
Atari's Quarterly Results ($5.4 Million Lost) :)
PD Resource Construction Set?
problems with GNU-Emacs termcap file (sample file included)
Question on use of Interleaves
questions on GDos and the Okimate 20, meg upgrade, and the Break key
TT. More rumours?
VBL queue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 90 15:26:09 GMT
From: cunixc!cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!cmm1@columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz)
Subject: Atari's Quarterly Results ($5.4 Million Lost) :)
Message-ID: <2706@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu>
In article <720.25ada423@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> kacovert@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu
writes:
>In article <1990Jan7.084927.19588@csusac.csus.edu>, rohwerwd@csusac.csus.edu
(W. David Rohwer) writes:
>> The following is from "The Business Journal", p. 28, for the Week
>> of January 8, 1990.
>>
>> "Atari Corp. of Sunnyvale suffered a third-quarter
>> net loss of $5.4 million, or 9 cents per share, on net sales
>> of $81.44 million. During the third quarter of the year
>>
>>
>> Apparently, Atari is slowly fading into oblivion. :)
>>
>
> I don't know much about finances, but couldn't a lot of these "losses"
>be actually just expenses incurred on the development of the new systems that
>are about to be released and that Atari will compensate for this with the
>increase in sales projected for the new systems. I would say Atari will easily
>make this up with the sale of the new systems.
As plausible as your suggestion sounds to the non-economics type person,
the fact is that Atari lost money as a result of the financial bath they
took with Federated and the money they lost on a lot of inventory they
had lying around. For a company as highly leveraged as Atari, these kinds
of mistakes often prove disasterous and/or fatal. I expected a bit more
from the brothers Traniel. I had expected them to get the stock up to
$15-$16 range, dump the company and take profits, and buy Miniscribe. :-)
Hehe, the first half of that sentence is serious, the last part is not.
<grin> Well, with these guys, who knows???
>
> Just my humble opinion,
> The Kentster
> Kent Covert
> Miami University
> Oxford, Ohio
Well, my not so humble opinion. :-)
Chris
------------------------------+---------------------------
Chris Mauritz |Where there's a BEER,
cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |there's a plan.
(c)All rights reserved. |
Send flames to /dev/null |Need I say more?
------------------------------+---------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jan 90 17:52:46 GMT
From: mcsun!hp4nl!gufalet!bert@uunet.uu.net (Bert Bos)
Subject: PD Resource Construction Set?
Message-ID: <682@gufalet.UUCP>
Does anyone know if there is a Public Domain Resource Construction Set
for creating .RSC files under Atari GEM?
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jan 90 18:51:56 GMT
From: mcsun!unido!sbsvax!roeder@uunet.uu.net (Edgar Roeder)
Subject: problems with GNU-Emacs termcap file (sample file included)
Message-ID: <2370@sbsvax.cs.uni-sb.de>
Some people reported problems with termcap. If your termcap-file (example file
included below) is for example D:\bin\etc\termcap.gnu, you have to set the
following environment:
setenv TERM atari
setenv TERMCAP /dev/D/bin/etc/termcap.gnu
If you have edited the file with another editor, the file may contain ~M 's
as additional end-of-line delimiters. Please remove these. Emacs recognizes
termcap-entries iff only linefeed is the line-delimiter.
Another problem comes from some zoo-programs changing '-' in filenames to '_'.
Before trying to dump emacs, watch out for such files and change the names
back.
- Edgar
--------------------- cut here ---------------------
atari|vt52|Atari ST with VT52 emulation:\
bs:up=\EA:do=~J:nd=\EC:cl=\EE:ho=\EH:sr=\EI:ce=\EK:\
so=\Ep:se=\Eq:cm=\EY%+ %+ :co#80:li#25:am:km:
# another entry specifying also the function key bindings
vt52-emulator:\
up=\EA:do=\EB:nd=\EC:le=\ED:cl=\EE:ho=\EH:sr=\EI:cd=\EJ:ce=\EK:\
al=\EL:dl=\EM:cm=\EY%+ %+ :co#80:li#25:\
so=\Ep:se=\Eq:am:bs:K1=\E#7:K2=\E#9:K3=\E#5:K4=\E#1:K5=\E#3:\
k0=\E#D:k1=\E#;:k2=\E#<:k3=\E#=:k4=\E#>:k5=\E#?:k6=\E#@:k7=\E#A:\
k8=\E#B:k9=\E#C:kA=\E#R:kC=\E#7:kd=\E#P:kF=\E#2:kh=\E#G:kl=\E#K:\
km:kN:kR=\E#8:kr=\E#M:ku=\E#H:l0=f10:rc=\Ek:sc=\Ej:ti=\Ee:te=\Ef:\
vi=\Ef:ve=\Ee:ul=\Eb1:ue=\Eb?:
--
Mail: Edgar R\"oder E-Mail: roeder@cs.uni-sb.de
Liesbet-Dill-Stra\ss e 3
D-6602 Dudweiler -o- -o-
W-Germany ~
Phone: 06897/74643 '---'
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 90 15:38:48 GMT
From: shlump.nac.dec.com!engage.enet.dec.com!oldtmr!wallace@decwrl.dec.com (Ray
Wallace)
Subject: Question on use of Interleaves
Message-ID: <1441@engage.enet.dec.com>
In article <1230@lzsc.ATT.COM>, hcj@lzsc.ATT.COM (HC Johnson) writes...
>The information with the Adaptec 4000 controller that most MFM systems
>use is to use interleave=1. There are 17 sectors on each track. With
>an interleave of 1, all 17 are used. Any other interleave, they only use 16
>of the sectors. So, you immediately get more capacity by using 1.
When I run ICD software with an Adaptec 4000 I get 17 sectors with
interleave=1 and 18 sectors with any interleave other than 1. So contrary to
the above you get more storage with interleave greater than 1. Possibly this
varies depending on whose formatting software you use.
I've run RATEHD with the disk formatted with interleave at 1 and 2 with
virtualy the same results in both cases. Of course the real test would be to
run your applications on both formats and see if there is a difference in
performance.
I concur with Howard that Adaptec reccomends using an interleave of 1. But if
your application access the disk a block at a time and slowy at that then 1
may not be the optimum.
---
Ray Wallace
(INTERNET,UUCP) wallace@oldtmr.enet.dec.com
(UUCP) ...!decwrl!oldtmr.enet!wallace
(INTERNET) wallace%oldtmr.enet@decwrl.dec.com
---
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 90 16:05:25 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!carroll1!dnewton@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Dave
Newton the Late)
Subject: questions on GDos and the Okimate 20, meg upgrade, and the Break key
Message-ID: <1120@carroll1.cc.edu>
In article <9001240807.AA01775@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> JOHNMAR@IITVAX.BITNET
writes:
Can't help you with the GDOS problem. Sorry.
>SECONDLY, I RESENTLY ATTEMPTED TO UPGRADE MY COMPUTER TO 1 MEG. IT FAILED.
>I'VE CHECKED ALL THE CONNECTIONS AND THEY SEEM FINE. I WAS WONDERING IF THERE
>WERE A WAY TO CHECK THE RAM CHIPS IN CIRCUIT. I'VE PIGGY BACKED THE CHIPS ON
>MY 520 ST WITHOUT SOCKETS (VERY SILLY). I'D BE VERY HAPPY IF I WOULDN'T HAVE
>TO UNSOLDER THEM. WILL BAD RAM REGESTER OR JUST APPEAR NOT TO BE THERE?
>I HAVE GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE SOME OF THE CHIPS MAY BE BAD; THEY WERE SHIPPED
IN
>A BOX FULL OF STYROFOAM. ANY HELP WILL BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
They're supposed to be shipped in some sort of foam.
When you say you "piggy-backed" them, what exactly do you mean? It won't
work if you merely plopped them on top of the ones that are already there, they
need to be addressed yet. There are a number of articles that have been posted
on this topic, just ask someone to repost them or mail them to you, I'm sure
someone will.
>LASTLY, I HAVE A VERY BOTHERSOME PROBLEM. I HAVE ATTEMPTED TO HARDWIRE MY ST
>TO MY SCHOOL'S VAX. THAT WAS SUCCESSFUL (I THINK) BUT THE COMPUTER TAKES A
>[BREAK] TO LOGON. I HOOKED UP MY ROOMMATE'S IBM PC FINE AND IT WORKS BUT I
>DON'T HAVE A BREAK KEY! WHAT KEY COULD I PRESS TO BE EQUVALENT TO THE [BREAK]
>ON A PC? I'VE TRIED THE LONG AND SHORT BREAKS ON UNITERM BUT THEY DID NOT
WORK.
>WHAT CAN I DO?
Our AT&T requires a break also, UniTerm does just fine. The easiest way
to check if your connection works on the ST is to unhook the serial connector
for the briefest of time, thus sending a long break signal. Then hook it back
up and fire away. (That's what I did until I had UniTerm which can send a
break signal.)
BTW, is IIT Illinois Inistitue of Technology? If it is, do/did you know
Bernard Pontillo? (last I heard he was heavy into AI) Use lower case letters.
--
David L. Newton | uunet!marque!carroll1!dnewton
(414) 524-7343 (work) | dnewton@carroll1.cc.edu
(414) 524-6809 (home) | 100 NE Ave, Waukesha WI 53186
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 90 16:44:00 GMT
From: apollo!rehrauer@eddie.mit.edu (Steve Rehrauer)
Subject: TT. More rumours?
Message-ID: <483aa191.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
I haven't any idea why, but START decided to ship me their February issue
(my subscription to START expired long, long ago -- always did have flakey
problems with that subscription). It devotes a considerable number of
pages to a "preview" of a TT, apparently an "almost ready for release"
German version. I consider it an interesting source of grist for the
rumor-mill, not anything like a definitive statement of what the TT is.
Read if such may interest you.
(I barely skimmed the magazine, so I'll refrain from posting any "factoids"
about the TT. The TT reviewer mentioned that Unix would probably run on
the box, but was only interested in poking into the guts of TT TOS.)
--
>>"Aaiiyeeee! Death from above!"<< | Steve Rehrauer, rehrauer@apollo.hp.com
"Flee, lest we be trod upon!" | The Apollo System Division of H.P.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 90 13:40 EST
From: John R. Dunning <jrd@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: VBL queue
Message-ID: <19900124184016.8.JRD@CORD.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Can anyone tell me what are the do's and don't's for functions that get
inserted in the vblank queue? I've been fooling with some timer-based
stuff, and need to know what's ok to put there. For instance, what sort
of upper time limit should one impose? Which OS (if any) traps are
legal? What's the interrupt level and supervisor state when these
things are called? Should they be disabled while calling the OS for
other things?
Thanks in advance for any info.
------------------------------
End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V90 Issue #91
****************************************
