Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-Atari16 Digest Vol. 89 Issue 721
=========================================================================
INFO-ATARI16 Digest Wed, 29 Nov 89 Volume 89 : Issue 721
Today's Topics:
Help with Absoft Fortran
Mega chips & drive questions
Shareware Mac
ST Christmas - or STuff for sale
STe TOS BUG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 89 15:05+0100
From: Ritzert%DMZRZU71.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Help with Absoft Fortran
Message-ID: <891129140519.793251@DMZRZU71-UNI-MAINZ--GERMANY>
I have problems with Absoft Fortran. I am porting Erlgraph 2.1, a
graphics library of about 650 routines, to the ST. It is easy to compile
the routines. But I have problems to create the libraries (as the
Absoft's libraries are restricted to at most 210 routines, at least 4
libraries are needed):
The librarian is very rudimentary. You cannot drive it by
command line arguments or a script file. And input redirection
from gulam doesn't work. Of course, I don't want to type in
650 names by hand. And I want to avoid to look into the
program with a dissassembler and search for a possibility to
patch it.
Is there any substitution for the librarian/linker system? Since I use
Gulam and GNU make, I would prefer command line driven substitutes if
they exist. A linker that can use libraries in GNU format would be great
since I have gcc-ar.
Side question: is there any utility to convert dri and/or Absoft objects
to GNU objects and vice versa? I am not able to write such a thing. But
I would like to write the machine dependent parts of the GKS-Metafile
drivers in C.
Thanks!
Michael Ritzert
mjr@dmzrzu71.bitnet
------------------------------
Date: 29 Nov 89 00:38:04 GMT
From: fox!portal!cup.portal.com!Xorg@apple.com (Peter Ted Szymonik)
Subject: Mega chips & drive questions
Message-ID: <24548@cup.portal.com>
Here is what I've done to my machine: Mega 2, upgraded to 4 megs, with
a six chip EPROM TOS 1.4 set (dealer installed - honest.) When I got the
TOS 1.4 installed - all hell broke loose - bus errors, random bombs, etc.
Spectre GCR was unuseable. When I had the 4 meg upgrade done they aslo
replaced the two LS 373 chips with AS373 chips. Since then the machine has
been 100% without a bus error to be seen and Spectre GCR is 100%.
Peter Szymonik
Xorg@cup.portal.com
------------------------------
Date: 28 Nov 89 23:15:50 GMT
From: nsc!pyramid!infmx!robert@hplabs.hp.com (Robert Coleman)
Subject: Shareware Mac
Message-ID: <2716@infmx.UUCP>
In article <3268@brazos.Rice.edu> bro@eunomia.rice.edu (Douglas Monk) writes:
>
>A few points:
>
>1) In order not to violate Apple's copyrights, ROMS must be made available
>for this guy by way of a cartridge. That is going to be expensive, so the
>likely result is the shareware fee will be paid even less often than usual.
>
>2) In fairness to David Small and as an obvious business move, don't make the
>cartridge steal his thunder. (His software has checks to make sure the ROMS
>are in one of his cartridges and aren't EPROMS. Making a cartridge to get
>around this like the Discovery cartridge tries to results only in OUTRIGHT
>PIRACY of his software for use with the alternate cartridge. Also, if the
>cartridge is compatible, VIRTUALLY NO ONE WILL EVER USE THE SHAREWARE
>SOFTWARE OR PAY THE FEE: they'll just use his software and hurt his business
>AND yours.)
>
>3) Comparing David Small to Lotus is laughably self-serving, the kind of
>defense that pirates sometimes make: "No one gets hurt, only some big
>business..." David Small is a small businessman trying to make a living while
>producing outstanding technical achievements on a machine that much of the
>world can easily afford to ignore. The market for STs in general is too small
>to take the existence of such guys for granted: if they get burned enough,
>they'll just go work somewhere else. We cannot afford that. Dave Small sells
>STs with his work, and that helps keep my machine viable.
>
I cannot believe I am reading this. The hidden suppositions in this way
of thinking are truly amazing:
1. DAVID SMALL IS A SMALL BUSINESSMAN AND THEREFORE DESERVES SPECIAL PROTECTION.
Nonsense. There is nothing magical about a small businessman. Small
businessmen should be subject to the same level of competition as everyone
else; if they are good, they succeed and become big businessmen. If they are
not good, then the person who can produce it Better, Cheaper is the one we
"cannot afford <to have go work somewhere else>".
Incidentally, when is the magical point when we decide that David
Small is no longer a small businessman? Potentially, he stands to make a lot
of money producing, in "cooperation :~)" with Atari, a very cheap Mac. Lotus
was once a very small company with a big idea, too. When is it going to be OK
to "steal David's thunder"?
2. DAVID SMALL IS A GENIUS WHO MAY FAIL IF HE FACES COMPETITION.
Nonsense. Amazing how people who respect his accomplishments think he
may immediately fall flat on his face because he faces competition. That
doesn't say a lot for your opinion of him, does it? In fact, if he does face
serious competition from someone (I personally do not think it likely) he
will move onwards and upwards, produce new products, constantly push the
technology edge, JUST EXACTLY AS HE IS DOING NOW!
3. SHAREWARE IS NOT OK IF IT DUPLICATES SMALL BUSINESSPERSON'S SOFTWARE.
Hmmm. I wonder what shareware/freeware you own that you could have
paid for, that could have supported a small businessperson? You may very well
be consistent in this philosophy, but I guarantee most other people aren't.
You using Uniterm, for instance? Gulam?
Remember, even if a BIG company is issuing a product, it may have
purchased the product for distribution from a small businessperson. Does that
small businessperson have royalties? Will the company purchase any more
products from a small businessperson who's products have been undermined by
shareware/freeware? Are you against shareware/freeware as a concept? If it
duplicates anything a profession group has done, it is going to hurt someone
"small" (as opposed to big, not "David" :~) ) somewhere down the line...
4. UNSUPPORTED SHAREWARE WILL BE SNAPPED UP IN PREFERENCE TO SUPPORTED
PROFESSIONAL SOFTWARE.
Well, I notice Flash is still selling, in spite of glowing reviews and
the easy availability of Uniterm. In fact, the competition to Dave would be in
price points. Anyone who is willing to spend 400 bucks for a Mac will probably
opt for the supported Mac emulator by the man with the big rep; anyone who is
not interested enough to spend 400 bucks but might still want a Mac if the
price is right and they don't care for much support will purchase the
shareware (or just use it, as is the risk of shareware). They will not be
competing in the same market.
5. IF DAVID GETS BURNED BY SHAREWARE, HE WILL MOVE ON TO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
Where? Every computer I know has shareware/freeware. This is not an
Atari-only phenomenon. Sorry, I think David is smarter than to assume that
"moving on" will solve his problems. I'd be much more concerned that he
might realize that the potentials to sell anything he does on more major
computers is likely to gross greater returns...
6. THIS OTHER GUY IS NOT WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION.
I may misremember this mail, but what I recall is that both these
products were developed independently, and found different market niches
(American vs. Europe). This other guy (I wish I knew his name! I'm not
intentionally being insulting) got stomped on by Apple, and was put out of
business. David has not been stomped on by Apple...yet. This other guy may
very well be in the same league as Dave, but "nipped in the bud". Why does
this make Dave more worthy of support?
Just about the only thing I can agree with is that the product should
check that the Mac roms are roms, not EPROMS. I think that this may be
necessary, anyway, to avoid getting sued by Apple (it happened to this guy
once, you know...Apple is quite prepared to do this if they can, and tie up
assets if they can't).
I am not interested in a Mac emulator at any reasonable price (OK, 10
bucks? Well, if I don't have to do any work...). If I was, I would personally
use David's, because I would want the support on such a complicated product,
and because I wouldn't want to build the necessary hardware myself. However, I
find this "David Small is a Ghod and we must do anything to keep him happy"
philosophy repellent and, in a backwards sort of way, insulting to Dave. I
respect him (not worship) and I believe he will do just fine, competition or
no. You should, too.
Incidentally, has anyone asked Dave how he feels about this
competition? I bet he's not particularly worried...
Robert
------------------------------
Date: 29 Nov 89 01:42:19 GMT
From: fox!portal!cup.portal.com!Xorg@apple.com (Peter Ted Szymonik)
Subject: ST Christmas - or STuff for sale
Message-ID: <24553@cup.portal.com>
Cartridge Sale, just in time for Christmas!
1- DeskCart! A small 64K ROM cartridge that adds a battery-operated
clock, and many powerful accessories (all of which
occupy just one .ACC slot!) including: a powerful
calendar with appointment input and alarms, a notebook,
cardfile, calculator, address book and dailer, VT-52
terminal, keyboard macros, ramdisk, disk utilities,
disk formatter, print spooler, new control panel,
screen dump, and a memory test (whew!)
First $29 gets it.
2- Happy Cartridge, option 2 with ROM sockets and selectable program
switches. The ultimate disk copier. Retails
for well over $200,
first $145 gets it.
or buy both for a mere $160!
Software clearance (so I can afford to buy new stuff <grin>
Red Lightning SSI - $19
Firezone PSS - $12
Sorcerer Lord PSS - $12
Bismark PSS - $12
Wars in Middle Earth Melbourne - $17
Axe of Rage (Deathsword II) Epyx - $11
Colossus Chess X - $15
Universe III Omnitrend - $19
All software like new and includes original disks, docs, box, etc.
Take a $1 for every game you buy after the first one.
E-mail to xorg@cup.portal.com
Peter Szymonik
------------------------------
Date: 28 Nov 89 20:59:28 GMT
From: fox!portal!atari!kbad@apple.com (Ken Badertscher)
Subject: STe TOS BUG
Message-ID: <1832@atari.UUCP>
rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer) asks:
| are there ROMs which say "1.6" which really contain different things?
Yes there are! The STE_FIX.PRG knows which version needs the fix and
which version doesn't. The program is available in the countries
to which the earlier dated ROM revision was released. All a user needs
to do is run STE_FIX and it will refuse to install itself if the TOS
version doesn't need the fix.
Incidentally, the original 1.6 revision has an os_date in the os header
of 0x07291989, the corrected revision is dated 0x10171989 (that date
ring any bells for anyone? ;)
--
||| Ken Badertscher (ames!atari!kbad)
||| Atari R&D System Software Engine
/ | \ #include <disclaimer>
------------------------------
End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V89 Issue #721
*****************************************
