Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-Atari16 Digest Vol. 89 Issue 650
Today's Topics:
Atari, Mac and Amiga vs the PC
clarification
DSP, ATW graphics, TT/P
Languages!!!! (cont.)
MODERATOR, PLEASE...!!!
RTS Electronik's keyboard keys replacements
Tech Specialties
TOS 1.4 Incompatibility List
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1989 10:01 EST
From: Greg Csullog <01659%AECLCR.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Atari, Mac and Amiga vs the PC
Time and time again, we see postings about cheap '386 boxes. Yeah,
there are lots of cheap '286 boxes out there as well. However, for
some reason people keep focussing on the hardware and its price
when its the software that determines how good your computer is.
Sure you can get DesqView and Windows for the PC and multitask; but
multitask what? A whole mess of unrelated codes, developed without
a common interface and with no ability to swap data unless some
kind of file importing routine is run.
Try turning a Window based environment loose on a secretary who has
a grade 12 education and limited computing skills. How long would
it take to train the secretary to use WordPerfect, dBASE and LOTUS
and to port information back and forth?
The company I work for standardized on Mass 11 as a word processor,
20/20 as a spreadsheet and ORACLE as the database. Ever hear of
Mass 11 and 20/20? Unfortunately I have. Sure ORACLE is powerful
but it takes LOTS of training to use it effectively. The same
company also promoted PCs as the standard computer for years
(before it became VAX crazed). We are stuck with a legacy of LOTUS,
WordPerfect and dBASE training courses. The effort and $$$ that
have gone into training for PCs and VAX systems is staggering!
The company also has Ataris, Amigas and Macs on site. No training
courses are offered AND NONE ARE NEEDED. These user friendly
machines, each with its own standard interface for all the software
written for it, do not require training support like the PCs do.
Once again netters, YOU do not represent the majority of users in
the world. Quite simply, until the PC world finally gets a user
interface that truly dominates the market and for which there are
lots of software packages that conform to the interface standard
(which seems to be happening for Windows) you can take all your
'286 and '386 machines and @#%@$#@$%#%$ with them because they just
cannot measure up to machines that have standardized interfaces and
integrated software that is easy to learn, easy to use and FUN to
use.
Go ahead and bash Atari that the TT is not on the streets yet. I
would rather wait until hell freezes over than buy a '386 and use
the myriad of EXPENSIVE and unrelated PC codes that are out there.
Do not come back and accuse me of not knowing about PC stuff
because I am the PC support person in my work group. I have had my
fill of getting PC codes to talk to HP LaserJets, of teaching Word
Perfect, and configuring software (What monitor do you have...
followed by a list that no beginner has any knowledge of). Just
yesterday I was asked to get Grapher to talk to a postscript
configured HP LaserJet and because Grapher talks to the user in ITS
own way, I had to sift through menus I had never seen before to set
up the system. Damn, NO STANDARD INTERFACE AGAIN!!!!!
I also have the pleasure of being a Mac and an Atari support
person. Do you know what that involves? Answering questions about
new software (have you seen it? is it good?). None of this
installation, set up and teaching, teaching and re-teaching crap
like PC support involves.
Dear '286 and '386 people; stop pestering us about your FAST
machines because in overall productivity your machines just do not
cut it. You have already accepted a substandard system; Mac, Atari
and Amiga users refuse to do the same.
Disclamer: I have never OWNED a PC (but I have had the unfortunate
job of using them for years) and considering the current software
state in the PC world I cannot see owning one for a long, long
time.
------------------------------
Date: 14 Nov 89 16:40:31 GMT
From:
cs.utexas.edu!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!marque!carroll1!dnewton@tu
t.cis.ohio-state.edu (Dave 'Post No Nicknames' Newton)
Subject: clarification
To avoid getting more answers not dealing with my question, I'll clarify my
problem: I want to scroll text in a GEM window, not the whole screen. Sorry
for the confusion.
--
David L. Newton | uunet!marque!carroll1!dnewton | The Raging Apostle--
(414) 524-7343 (work) | dnewton@carroll1.cc.edu | for the future--
(414) 524-6809 (home) | 100 NE Ave, Waukesha WI 53186 | for the world.
"Isn't it fun to take two unrelated sentences and mix the batter lightly?" -me
------------------------------
Date: 14 Nov 89 15:42:30 GMT
From: att!chinet!saj@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Stephen Jacobs)
Subject: DSP, ATW graphics, TT/P
Enough about multi-tasking in spite of all obstacles. If you want it on an
ST RIGHT NOW, and are willing to put up with some problems, don't ask Atari
for it, buy MINIX from Prentice-Hall. It's a bit slow, because of the
message-passing design, but it's capable, flexible, affordable and EXTREMELY
well-supported (through the newsgroup comp.os.minix). If you need it, it's
there. Otherwise, forget about it.
Steve J.
------------------------------
Date: 14 Nov 89 16:03:01 GMT
From: davidli@UMN-CS.CS.UMN.EDU (Dave Meile)
Subject: Languages!!!! (cont.)
In article <8911140429.AA09971@jupiter.nmt.edu> ehsnsr@JUPITER.NMT.EDU (Eric
Hobbs) writes:
> I have received a few replies that mention that some versions of GFA BASIC
>are in the public domain. Is this true? If so, where can I get it without
>having to spend money for it. It must be legal, of course. What can I say? I'm
>a cheap S.O.B. who doesn't really want to spend $15 for a back issue of
>STart. :-) :-P'''
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!
There are NO versions of GFA BASIC in the public domain. You can pirate the
software, if you really want to, I suppose, and contribute to the Gilman Louie
Hall of Infamy, but I'd suggest that you actually
PAY for the January 1989 issue of START magazine instead. (Or, purchase
version 3.0 from ANTIC...)
There -- see what misinformation gets you folks? [This pointed at all those
well-meaning, but nevertheless WRONG, people who said "I think it must be
in the public domain 'cuz it was published in a magazine".]
Get your facts straight guys!
-- David Paschall-Zimbel
------------------------------
Date: 14 NOV 89 08:24:30 CST
From: Z4648252 <Z4648252%SFAUSTIN.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject: MODERATOR, PLEASE...!!!
Being in a rural area where the only Atari products that exist are my
ONE Atari ST and a couple of PortFolios at our campus, I appreciate the
net here more than most would imagine. This little ST output in the
middle of IBMs and Macs is constantly hungering for ST information, hints,
and techniques.
And it is this information, hints, and techniques that I wish we
could return to. The Atari bashing needs to go elsewhere, folks. Pretty
please???? Is there a way that the moderator could step in someway without
it being censoring?
There is a wealth of ST information out there: GFA Basic tips, hardware
tips, etc., that I think we could all benefit from. It would be marvelous
if the net could only return to this.
SIGH
Larry Rymal: |East Texas Atari 68NNNers| <Z4648252@SFAUSTIN.BITNET>
------------------------------
Date: 14 NOV 89 11:39:44 CST
From: Z4648252 <Z4648252%SFAUSTIN.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject: RTS Electronik's keyboard keys replacements
Hello all,
In a recent ST Format magazine (UK magazine), a picture shows an
ST keyboard with modified keys, i.e., different shades, function keys
finger surface better separated, etc. selling for 105DM for the Megas
and 99DM for the 520/1040 units.
Could a kind European send the address of the company to me? Secondly,
could there be any possibility of a distributor in the U.S.
marketting this fine-looking keyboard modification?
Larry Rymal: |East Texas Atari 68NNNers| <Z4648252@SFAUSTIN.BITNET>
------------------------------
Date: TUE, 14 Nov 1989 12:58:58 EST
From: Jim McCabe <MCCABE%MTUS5.BITNET@VM1.NoDak.EDU>
Subject: Tech Specialties
Dom Alvear writes:
> I bought TWO (2) of their memory upgrades for my 520ST, and they
> DIDN'T work! It seems the instructions for installation were
> misprinted, and the owner wouldn't (or didn't know) tell me!
I bought one memory upgrade from them, and although the hardware
works good enough, their service is so unbelievably bad that I feel
it is my duty to inform everyone else about it. This is probably the
third time I've posted this info, but it's good to make sure everyone
new hears it.
> It took over SIX MONTHS (from Dec. '88 to July '89)
> for me to get the cases in working condition, and I STILL DON'T HAVE
> EVERYTHING PROMISED!
This sounds familiar. They have a tendency to delay and delay and delay.
I ordered a memory upgrade from them, and after two weeks I still hadn't
received it in the mail. So I called them up again, and of course they
are too cheap of an outfit to have a 800 line, so inquiring about my
late order had to be done at my expense. I wouldn't have minded paying
for a call or two, if only they had told me the truth.
Tech Specialties are outright lairs. They told me my upgrade was "in
the mail," so I left them alone for another week. But it still didn't
arrive, so once again I called. (This is getting expensive, on a
starving college student's budget.) They said, more or less, "oops,
gee darn, we ran out of parts, and we never shipped your order after
all. And, in the time since you ordered, the chip shortage has raised
the cost of your order to ...." Great. The guy on the phone was
actually angry at ME for wondering what the problem was. They weren't
even going to tell me that they wanted more money! Instead they were
just waiting for me to call them!
So, t.s. is slow. And, they lie to you to cover up their screw ups.
And, worst of all, AFTER I HAD MADE MY PURCHASE AGREEMENT (an oral
contract over the phone), they demanded more money!!! They already
had one check from me, but wanted another $20 or $30 before they'd ship
my order!
Being the young freshman that I was, I stupidly sent them the extra
money. I should have talked to some government business agency about
them and tried to put them out of business.
Overall, I would stay as far away from Tech Specialties as possible.
They are crooks, and their hardware is just average, certainly not
worth the seemingly endless nonsense you have to endure to get your order.
-- Jim
------------------------------
Date: 14 Nov 89 18:09:13 GMT
From: pasteur!euler.Berkeley.EDU!jmorton@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (John Morton)
Subject: TOS 1.4 Incompatibility List
Dave Megginson has pointed out to me that Chessmaster 2000 works OK
on his system, contrary to the experience of whoever reported that
the program bombs when a save is attempted.
As Dave suggests, let's limit the reports of failure to cases in
which TOS 1.4 is in ROM and there are no auto folder programs in
place.
Please speak up if you find errors in the incompatibility list.
"Down John Morton M.E. Machine Shop
Down in the basement jmorton@euler.berkeley.edu Etcheverry Hall
We hear the sound of machines..." Univ. of Calif.
------------------------------
End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V89 Issue #650
*****************************************
=========================================================================
