Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-Atari16 Digest Vol. 90 Issue 485
=========================================================================
INFO-ATARI16 Digest Fri, 27 Apr 90 Volume 90 : Issue 485
Today's Topics:
Application(s)
Disassembling TOS and documentation issues
STE TOS / TOS 1.4/1.6 etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 27 Apr 90 23:49:52 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.lsa.umich.edu!hyc@ucsd.edu
(Howard Chu)
Subject: Application(s)
Message-ID: <11868@stag.math.lsa.umich.edu>
In article <1990Apr27.205437.21807@agate.berkeley.edu>
ericco@stew.ssl.berkeley.edu () writes:
%I bought my 1040ST to hack with. But I'm currently working on a
%business application. I simply don't have the time to write the code
%from scratch. I've HEARD (here) that the ST is capable of running
%business applications. If so, is there software available to do the
%following:
%
(form entry, computation) - Not being much of a database user,
can't really say. Most database applications handle this though.
% o Form letter. Using entries in the database, generate a form
% letter. This letter will contain numeric values based on the
% entries in the database. The ideal software will allow graphics
% to be inserted in the form letter.
WordUp 2.0 lets you do this, with no trouble. Import graphics as well. It's
a very capable program. I also just received an upgrade notice for 3.0 in
the mail today. I was pretty pleased at seeing the upgrade notice for 1.x to
2.0, but this 3.0 stuff sounds Really Awesome. (Now I wonder if they made it
resolution independent this time. No mention in the [abbreviated] fixlist.)
I suspect that WordFlair can handle this pretty easily as well. The demo is
300K, available for downloading. It has an integrated spreadsheet feature,
so it may be capable of handling the computation requirement you mentioned
above. I've only played around a little with the demo, so I haven't got any
real idea of what features it offers.
%
%I don't think that there is the slightest chance in the world that
%such a piece of software exists. I would be pleased if I could find a
%group of programs that handle this functionality. I don't think that
%this is an unreasonable business aplication. If the ST and Atari are
%serious about business users I think that this type of system should
%be relevently simple to buy and install.
There are many many many database applications available for the ST. That
much I'm sure of. You might try looking into Findex V, advertised in the
E. Arthur Brown catalog. Apparently it's also popular in the MSDOS world,
so it can't be too amateur, eh? (I've never seen it, just passing on my
impressions from their catalog.) It seems that this program handles forms
entry, so it should do pretty well, and it's supposed to be very fast.
As for simplicity of installation... Every now and then someone posts here
about how they can't get such-and-such GDOS application working. I've never
had any trouble with it, but if that worries you, here's another bit of info.
WordFlair uses GDOS, WordUp 2.0 does as well, with custom printer drivers.
WordUp 3.0 seems to come with its own custom version of GDOS, from what I
saw in the update notice. It's supposed to be very fast and very memory
efficient, only loading fonts and drivers when they actually need to be used.
It sounds slick, and I'm looking forward to receiving it.
If it seems like I'm being overly fond of WordUp, I probably am. I have no
relation to the publisher, Neocept, other than being a satisfied customer.
However, another point of interest... I did a human-factors analysis of the
program for a class I took last year, (geeze, you can get away with *anything*
in a doctorate level course! ?-) and it performed very well adhering to
"Good Practice" guidelines. For the most part the user interface is very
complete and very consistent. There are a couple rough spots in both the
manual and the program, but overall it's a very well put together package.
Some of the specific problems I discovered in my analysis were specifically
mentioned as being fixed in the 3.0 upgrade notice, so I'm even more eager
to get the new version...
--
-- Howard Chu @ University of Michigan
... the glass is always greener on the side ...
------------------------------
Date: 27 Apr 90 19:44:58 GMT
From: eagle.wesleyan.edu!ncastellano@CS.YALE.EDU
Subject: Disassembling TOS and documentation issues
Message-ID: <19425@eagle.wesleyan.edu>
In article <2179@atari.UUCP>, apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes:
> I wrote that you had to become a developer to get technical information
> on the STe. While that may or may not be true, some people have asked
> why they have to shell out more money just to write programs that
> take advantage of the new hardware.
>
> What you get when you pay for the STe is the machine and the customer-
> level support that Atari gives. That's what the person who buys a car
> gets. He doesn't get the maintenance manual, the engineering drawings,
> the designer's notes, or the tools for repairing or improving it. That
> price point is for users, not necessarily programmers.
>
I can't help but disagree with this. A car and a computer are very
different types of things. One buys a car (in general) for the
purpose of driving it. While one may buy a computer simply to "drive
it" by using existing software, many of us (especially ST users!) buy
the machines to program them. That _is_ part of the machine's use, as
evidenced by the wide variety of compilers and interpreters which are
available.
> What you get when you pay for the developer's kit is the MUCH HIGHER
> level of support that Atari gives to people who are going to write
> programs that (presumably) will help sell ST's -- this is known as
> "enlightened self-interest." I see what you want: an intermediate
> step, at a lower cost, which would give you some technical information
> about the machine. In return for the lower cost you would give up the
> support we offer (which is to say, the right to ask people like me hard
> questions). I don't know, but some subsidiaries might offer that:
> documentation without support, at a lower cost.
>
This is _exactly_ what many of us want. I don't want Atari Corp. to
hold my hand; I just want enough information to be able to write a few
public domain programs. And I don't have $250 to shell out for this
information. If money wasn't a concern I might have got an IBM; there
is no end of free information about PC internals.
> Personally, I think that is dangerous, because it gives people
> "a little knowledge, and a little knowledge is a dangerous thing."
> You end up with people who ONLY know technical things, and the result
> is programs which are impolite to the system and make upgrades and
> compatibility the nightmare it is.
>
Please, you can't really expect me to take this seriously. With no
knowledge of the "right" ways to do things, programmers have no choice
but to do everything the "wrong" way. The only way to prevent this is
to make information available. If you don't tell us how to make our
programs "polite," then they are going to chew their food with their
mouths open, if not spit it in your lap. To this day I still do not
have documentation on the Bios and Xbios calls; all of my ST
programming has been done by guessing what these calls do based on
the names given to them in the OSBIND.H I got with Sozobon C. How can
a program based entirely on guesswork be at all "polite" to the
operating system? What would be the harm in Atari publishing a small
free reference on Bios, Xbios, and GEM? This information alone would
be extremely valuable.
> If you have a gripe about the level of support you get for your money,
> that's legitimate. You should complain to the president of the
> subsidiary you're dealing with, or to Charles Cherry, who is the
> Developer Coordinator for Atari headquarters. You can even write Sam
> Tramiel. If you do, try to be brief and specific, but not technical,
> about your problems, and name names. If you just write and whine
> you're wasting your time and his.
>
Fine, what's their email addresses? :-)
> I don't make decisions, so those are just my personal beliefs. Nobody
> comes to my office, taking notes, asking, "What levels of support
> should we offer, and how much should we charge?" They don't do that
> here in the US, much less in other countries, where we have
> independent, wholly-owned subsidiaries. We throw machines and
> documentation at them, and they do what they like with them. (There is
> feedback the other way, of course, but that's the basic picture.)
>
Just because nobody comes to you and asks you these things doesn't
mean you can't make suggestions. If you went to Mr. Tramiel and said
"at least 50 people on comp.sys.atari.st have complained about the
level of support offered by Atari" don't you think he would be
interested?
I'd like to add that for all the griping I do here about documentation
(or lack of it) I'm very pleased that Atari even bothers to have
someone on the Net to discuss their equipment with us. I've found
most of your postings dealing with technical issues to be extremely
enlightening. I hope you'll continue to contribute in the future.
Thank you for your time,
nick
> ============================================
> Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp.
> reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt
--
ncastellano@eagle.wesleyan.edu ncastellano@wesleyan.bitnet
Sinkhole!dEADHEAd@mast.citadel.moundst.mn.org
"We are happy. (_silence._) What do we do now, now that we are happy?"
-Estragon, _waiting for godot_ by samuel beckett
------------------------------
Date: 27 Apr 90 10:17:54 GMT
From: mcsun!ukc!icdoc!syma!grahamt@uunet.uu.net (Graham Thomas)
Subject: STE TOS / TOS 1.4/1.6 etc.
Message-ID: <2512@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
From article <2178@atari.UUCP>, by apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt):
> J.Derrick@newcastle.ac.uk says he disassembled the ROMs and found some
> things out. Here's my reply:
(one para on the dangers of unofficial publishing omitted)
>
> If you want to know all about developing software for the STe, you can
> become an Atari developer and get the real information from Atari.
> There's a whole STe Developer's Addendum, and a TOS 1.6 Release Notes
> document, and more. There's example code for using the hardware screen
> scrolling, the light gun, and paddles (analog joysticks), and detailed
> explanations of all the new hardware, registers, etc.
>
> Since we're not in this for our health, we do charge for the
> documentation and support you get as a developer, but we think that
> it's worth it: we have a new commitment to supporting developers
> at a higher level than in the past. (The February newsletter
> included a re-issue of almost the entire developer's kit, just
> so everybody would be up-to-date.)
(rest of message omitted)
A month ago I would have been up in arms about this. I would have said
something along the lines of, "Allan, you forgot to check where the
original message came from. Atari UK doesn't treat developers nearly as
well as Atari USA now does, etc. They certainly haven't reissued the
entire developers' kit."
However, there seems to have been a new start on developer support here
recently. A co-ordinator (Alistair Bodin) has been appointed, and he's
certainly willing to be helpful.
The only troubles are a) developers who want to reregister under the new
ProSupport scheme have to sign a badly-worded nondisclosure agreement,
and b) becoming a UK developer is a lot more expensive than it is in the
USA. The last I heard, it cost over 300 pounds, which is getting on for
$500. If ProSupport lives up to its promise, it may be worth it, but on
past performance it's a bad investment for an individual or even a small
company. No wonder UK users want to get information another way.
Graham
--
Graham Thomas, SPRU, Mantell Building, U of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9RF, UK
JANET: grahamt@uk.ac.sussex.syma EARN/BITNET: grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk
ARPA: grahamt%syma.sussex.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
UUCP: grahamt@syma.uucp Phone: +44 273 686758 Fax: +44 273 685865
------------------------------
End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V90 Issue #485
*****************************************
