Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-Atari16 Digest Vol. 89 Issue 732
=========================================================================
INFO-ATARI16 Digest Thu, 30 Nov 89 Volume 89 : Issue 732
Today's Topics:
"kneecapping" and TOS piracy
Blitter disappointment (was: Time to create comp.sys.atari.flames)
Comments on STE -- (un)known facts
EL CAL FOR APPLE II?
LYNX
PortFolio as a marketing aid ?
Shareware MAC
ST DRIVE AND SPECTRE/TRANSLATOR 1
Utrascript ST-1
Video pointer (2 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 89 09:31:14 GMT
From: eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!hwcs!neil@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Neil
Forsyth)
Subject: "kneecapping" and TOS piracy
Message-ID: <3845@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk>
(This is not a flame. I'm just using Steve's soapbox :-)
In article <34850@grapevine.uucp> koreth@panarthea.ebay.sun.com (Steven Grimm)
writes:
>In article <8911280802.AA18983@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> JOHNBARNES@ENH.NIST.GOV
>writes:
>>Why Not, I ask? If people want to burn their own ROMS, why not let
>>them? Atari should even provide diagnostic files that can be run to
>>test the validity of user-generated ROMS.
>
>I agree. I've been to two Atari dealers a number of times (most recently San
>Jose Computer a couple of hours ago, which is why I'm motivated to write
>this,) and have always been told that they were out of 1.4 ROMs.
With a dealer who's 'run out', you're closer than I am to having a chipset.
>If I had a binary image of the thing, I could go put it on EPROMs and have it
>in my machine tonight, as could a number of Atari-owning friends of mine.
True. If I had a binary image of the thing I'd be Mr. Big in the UK.
Personally I'm not sure I would trust an image that I did not take myself
from an offical ROM chip. Other peoples mileage may vary.
>I realize that Atari doesn't want to deal with trying to support hundreds of
>modified versions of 1.4, which would inevitably arise if the OS were released
>in this way. There are two solutions to that problem. The first, and easiest
>, is to put something like
>
> THIS CHIPSET IS PROVIDED AS A COURTESY TO THE ATARI COMMUNITY,
> AND IS NOT AN OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED RELEASE. ATARI ASSUMES NO
> RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROBLEMS ARISING FROM ITS USE. FOR THE
> LATEST OFFICIAL OPERATING SYSTEM RELEASE, SEE YOUR LOCAL DEALER.
>
>in the Desktop "About..." dialog box. Then Atari will be able to separate
>the real 1.4ers from the EPROMmed ones, and deal with each appropriately.
>(Actually, ideally the startup code would do a CRC or checksum on the OS
>image, inserting that message if it found a difference -- but putting it
>there all the time is fine, too.)
Sounds good. But the messages and CRC code could be hacked.
I guess only dealers should get the verification program.
>The second is to really do interim OS releases on disk. Apple and Commodore
>have been doing that for years, and they haven't had the problems Atari
>is afraid of. I don't expect this to happen, but it would be nice.
NO! I don't like the wasted memory, reloading it when I trample on it (this
would happen a lot to me!) and the open invitation to viruses (The ROMs are
a bit tight to squeeze in a virus I reckon)
>So far I've restrained myself from finding someone with 1.4 and just copying
>the whole kit and kaboodle to disk; I'd rather have an official set of chips.
>I imagine many others are in the same position. They, and I, aren't going to
>hold off much longer.
A least you could do that. TOS 1.4 ROMs are never seen in the UK at all!
My suggestion:-
Make TOS free. Distribute original TOS ROM's to dealers only. They program the
EPROMS and charge you for that. You feel better about the validity of your
new ROMs. Distribution is quick, widespread and ordered.
Developers can write apps that require TOS 1.4 or later and be sure that a
lack of ROM's will not halt sales. The rapidity of bug fixe distribution
would be good too!
(Atari UK wouldn't like this idea because the words 'free', 'cheap' or even
'sensible' are not in their dictionary file. To them everything is a money
making product :-)
>Well, that's my turn on the soapbox.
If the Rainbow TOSless UK ST owners follwed me to the soapbox then it would
quickly turn to dust!
>" !" - Marcel Marceau
"" - Bob Katz (Developers Support Atari UK) :-)
>Steven Grimm Moderator, comp.?sources,binaries?.atari.st
>sgrimm@sun.com ...!sun!sgrimm
Thanks you for your article. Food for thought.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
! DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, the above comments are entirely my own !
! !
! "I think all right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of !
! being told that ordinary decent people are fed up in this country with !
! being sick and tired. I'm certainly not and I'm sick and tired of being !
! told that I am!" - Monty Python !
! !
! Neil Forsyth JANET: neil@uk.ac.hw.cs !
! Dept. of Computer Science ARPA: neil@cs.hw.ac.uk !
! Heriot-Watt University UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!neil !
! Edinburgh, Scotland, UK !
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 89 15:08:00 GMT
From: apollo!rehrauer@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Steve Rehrauer)
Subject: Blitter disappointment (was: Time to create comp.sys.atari.flames)
Message-ID: <4725b108.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
In article <1819@atari.UUCP> kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) writes:
>As an aside, I should point out that our VDI guy has put a lot of work
>into the blit code for the TT, and it's pretty phenomenal _without_
>hardware assist. One other thing that will give a noticeable improvement
>is the lack of Line F compression in STE and TT ROMs. The Line F
>compression adds a bit of overhead to AES operations, and desktop/window/
>dialog operations are noticeably sped up when the compression is gone.
"Duuuhhhh" (he says in embarassed stupefaction),
"Whut's 'Line F compression'?"
I know what you mean by "Line F", but what's the "compression" refer to re:
ST ROMs? (Usually I'm only this dense on Mondays & national holidays...)
--
>>"Aaiiyeeee! Death from above!"<< | Steve Rehrauer, rehrauer@apollo.hp.com
"Flee, lest we be trod upon!" | The Apollo System Division of H.P.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 89 17:52:00 GMT
From: apollo!rehrauer@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Steve Rehrauer)
Subject: Comments on STE -- (un)known facts
Message-ID: <47264390.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
In article <1824@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes:
[ A description of some of the video nifties in the 1040STe. ]
[ Later KBAD discusses some of the differences between the STe and TT
video nifties. ]
This has probably already been asked & answered here, but...
The STe appears to be the first "ST" that offers fundamental hardware
improvements that software can take advantage of. The TT, of course,
is another beast altogether, although it will apparently be backwards
compatible with "ST software".
Obviously no one in their right mind will write STe software that isn't
downwardly compatible to the existing STs (for awhile yet, anyway -- I
HOPE!!). But it'd sure be nice to use the STe's video nifties when
present. Is there an approved method for software to discover what
platform it's running on, other than (KLUDGE ALERT!) checking the TOS
revision #?
Please tell me it IS so! (And also what it is! ;-)
--
>>"Aaiiyeeee! Death from above!"<< | Steve Rehrauer, rehrauer@apollo.hp.com
"Flee, lest we be trod upon!" | The Apollo System Division of H.P.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 89 20:19:24 EST
From: "Gerry Greenberg: 315-443-5378" <MAXG@SUVM.ACS.SYR.EDU>
Subject: EL CAL FOR APPLE II?
I realize this might not be the correct place for this message, but this
is where I turn to get info about computers/computer products/etc. On
top of that, there is always someone out there who knows the relevent
info. So here goes:
I'm in the market for a gift right now for someone who has an AppleIIe.
If this guy had an ST, I think he'd like El Cal, and I'd get it for him
for sure...unfortunately (for me, that is, since it makes my task more
difficult), he doesn't have an ST. So, I was wondering if anyone out
there knows of some type of super calculator type program for the
AppleII family?
Please email to me directly...no need to take up space on the network
with discussion of Apple products. Of course, thanks in advance for any
help.
---Gerry
maxg@suvm (bitnet)
ggreenbe@rodan.acs.syr.edu (internet)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 89 20:30:26 EST
From: "Gerry Greenberg: 315-443-5378" <MAXG@SUVM.ACS.SYR.EDU>
Subject: LYNX
I haven't heard too much about the LYNX on the digest recently, but I
would like to say that over the Thanksgiving weekend I was in Vermont
and saw an ad for the Lynx in the NY Times. The ad takes up about one
third of the page and says that the Lynx is available at ToysRUs,
Babbages, KayBeee Toy Stores, Lionel Kiddie City, Child World, FAO
Schwarz, Wards, and CircusWorld/Playland. There's a picture in the ad,
with a big headline and some text about the product. I don't think we
have them here in Syracuse (even though we do have some of the same
stores)...but I'm not really sure about that. Anyway, I just thought
some of you out there might be interested.
--Gerry
------------------------------
Date: 1 Dec 89 01:11:30 GMT
From: mfci!wilson@CS.YALE.EDU (Jeff Wilson)
Subject: PortFolio as a marketing aid ?
Message-ID: <1145@m3.mfci.UUCP>
By the way, noticed the Portfolio got a good mention in a
recent issue of Businessweek. It was positioned as the
no-frills alternative to the Poquet (correct spelling?)
PC.
Wish I could recall the issue. I remember that it
featured an article about the success of Taiwan. That
ought to be enough info to allow diehards to find the
right issue at the public library via the Reader's Guide
to Periodical Literature.
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: 1 Dec 89 00:33:27 GMT
From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!orca!quark!jeff@uunet.uu.net (Jeff Beadles)
Subject: Shareware MAC
Message-ID: <5500@orca.TEK.COM>
In article <4123@eagle.wesleyan.edu> jtreworgy@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
|The thing with a Mac emulator is that no matter what, you have to spend $140 on
|the ROMs. So what does it matter if you spend $20 for a shareware one or a bit
|more for a commercial one? The shareware one probably wouldn't "sell" anyway.
|It just seems silly for a lot of different people to invest a lot of time
|making a Mac emulator when the product already has several incarnations on the
|market. The time would be better spent making a Commodore 64 emulator, for
|example. (And some way to pipeline the ROMs out of a real 64... enough people
|own these anyway such that it wouldn't be illegal or unfeasible for each buyer
|to get them legally that way).
|--
|James A. Treworgy -- No quote here for insurance reasons --
|jtreworgy@eagle.wesleyan.edu jtreworgy%eagle@WESLEYAN.BITNET
Wait. GBS gets something like $300+ for the GCR. I think that the "plain"
version is > $100.00 (usd)
**THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ROMS**
Thus, if my math is correct:
Shareware GBS
Hw/Sw $20.00 vs $100.00
Roms $140.00 (same) $140.00
------ ------
Total
$160.00 vs $240.00
This makes it MUCH more affordable. Heck, I could be convinced to buy one for
that price. $80.00 is more than "a bit more"
-Jeff
--
Jeff Beadles jeff@quark.WV.TEK.COM
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 89 20:46:29 EST
From: "Gerry Greenberg: 315-443-5378" <MAXG@SUVM.ACS.SYR.EDU>
Subject: ST DRIVE AND SPECTRE/TRANSLATOR 1
Everybody (or almost everybody) out there knows by now that not all ST
drives are able to read a Mac disk when running Spectre or Magic Sac
with the Translator 1 (or SpectreGCR). Well I had one of those disk
drives...it is a Sankyo (at least that is what it says on it) and was
converted from an IBM drive to an ST drive by its previous owner. I
bought it before I got my Translator and so I was disappointed to find
out that it was one of "those" drives. Well, I have struggled (if you
can call it that) with only one drive that reads mac disks by booting in
the good drive and then ejecting my system disk and putting it into "the
other" drive so that I could put my mac disk into the good one (Yes, I
could have changed a and b drives, but "the other" drive is awfully
loud...I like it as the b drive). Well, I am writing this to encourage
those of you out there who have one of these "other" drives, because for
some totally unknown reason, the other day I put a mac disk into this
"other" drive...and the drive read the disk! I couldn't believe it, but
that drive now recognizes mac disks via the Translator1....I have
absolutely no idea why...everything is the same as before, but now the
drive works! (I hope this doesn't mean that the drive is "on its way
out".)
So, for those of you out there with one of "those" drives...try it with
the mac disk from time to time....maybe it'll work some day.
---Gerry
maxg@suvm (bitnet)
ggreenbe@rodan.acs.syr.edu (internet)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 89 17:17:08 PST
From: escd!es56!karl@decwrl.dec.com (Karl Rowley)
Subject: Utrascript ST-1
Message-ID: <8912010117.AA23074@es56.escd.uucp>
Has anyone out there tried Ultrascript ST-1? There is an add in the latest
Start magazine for this new version of Ultrascript. It supports all sorts
of output devices, including dot matrix printers and the HP Laserjet IIp.
Ultrascript ST-1 and the HP Laserjet IIp may be a good cheap postscript
solution. It sounds like the Laserjet may require a memory upgrade to
support this -- does anyone know if a memory upgrade is required?
Karl Rowley
Evans & Sutherland Computer Division
Mountain View, California, USA
escd!karl@decwrl.dec.com
...!amdahl!escd!karl
------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 89 14:59:55 GMT
From: eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!hwcs!neil@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Neil
Forsyth)
Subject: Video pointer
Message-ID: <3846@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk>
Could Atari not make a pin compatible MMU chip that could replace the normal
one in the ST and give us all word alligned and segmented video RAM just like
the STE.
From looking at the circuitry I don't see how these features would require
any pinout changes. Delaying the scan and adding the extra colours to SHIFTER
would be another matter.
If Atari would make this MMU then scrolling would improve right across the
ST range.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
! DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, the above comments are entirely my own !
! !
! Neil Forsyth JANET: neil@uk.ac.hw.cs !
! Dept. of Computer Science ARPA: neil@cs.hw.ac.uk !
! Heriot-Watt University UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!neil !
! Edinburgh, Scotland, UK "spam spaM spAM sPAM SPAM, lovely SPAM" !
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 89 22:48:23 GMT
From:
eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!harrier.ukc.ac.uk!gos.ukc.ac.uk!dac@bloom-beacon.mit.e
du (David Clear)
Subject: Video pointer
Message-ID: <2640@gos.ukc.ac.uk>
In article <3846@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes:
>
>Could Atari not make a pin compatible MMU chip that could replace the normal
>one in the ST and give us all word alligned and segmented video RAM just like
>the STE.
This sounds good. Ahhhh, I remember back to my 8-bit 800XL days (I've still
got it!!!). Such lovely things like smooth scrolling, display lists and
DLIs... And of course, sprites (oh, sorry, player-missile graphics :-) ).
>From looking at the circuitry I don't see how these features would require
>any pinout changes. Delaying the scan and adding the extra colours to SHIFTER
>would be another matter.
The problem with this I can see is that then, rather than people having to
write software for two types of Atari, they would now be faced with three.
Games software would like to take advantage of the new STE modes, but a
half decent game would probably try to do a half decent job on an old
ST.
I think the STE is a very good idea. I'd like a 68000 Atari to perform as well
as a 6502 Atari, although if you scale everything up you still end up with a
machine that is less than it ought to be.
Here's something for the guys at Atari:
Post the hardware specs of all Atari products (ie memory maps and programming
information) to the net. I don't want developer support. I can't afford to
buy the developer's kit. Nowadays some of the best games (and lets face it,
hardware scrolling, etc *is* for games), are written by enthusiasts at home.
Give these people the opportunity to harness the power of the machines you
produce. The more information that is public domain, the more people can
program your systems, the more software is written, the larger the software
base, the more computers you sell, etc.
Come on Atari, what have you got to lose?
Oh yes, gimme TOS 1.4 uuencoded, on the net, suitable for burning into EPROM.
Why not? It's free (isn't it?).
All this "give me this", "give me that", you may wonder what you get in return.
Well, you get USER SUPPORT. You be nice to us and we'll like you for it.
Dave.
--
% cc life.c | David Clear <dac@ukc.ac.uk>
% a.out | Computer Science, University of Kent,
Segmentation fault (core dumped) | Canterbury, England.
------------------------------
End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V89 Issue #732
*****************************************
