MRC%PANDA@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA (Mark Crispin) (01/23/86)
Have you seen the JS&A ad for the ST? It's on the first page of the March '86 Playboy. If I were you, ST owners, I'd be worried. JS&A specializes in selling other companies' failed products with mucho hype. This ad sure fits the mold. I haven't been able to verify the rumor that the new ST's can't address more than 512K of memory, but this sort of shenigans is typical of Atari. If anybody remembers the final blowout 400's from the old Atari, they had a sabotaged ANTIC chip that couldn't address more than 16K. Fortunately, I had a source of good ANTIC's so I was able to replace the bogus ANTIC. I am really getting sick of the childish messages on this list that make fun of serious concerns related to the ST's marketing. It is ridiculous to talk about $400 Crays. Seymour Cray only makes multi-million dollar machines, and it costs him millions of dollars (presumably less than what he sells them for) to make each one. -------
turner@imagen.UUCP (D'arc Angel) (01/26/86)
> > I haven't been able to verify the rumor that the new ST's can't address > more than 512K of memory, but this sort of shenigans is typical of Atari. as a 1 meg ST user allow me settle this, if 1 meg chips weren't so expensive you could upgrade your ST to 4 meg and it would address it just fine. > I am really getting sick of the childish messages on this list that make *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** and what i am getting sick of is silly and irresponsible rumors, the $400 cray was far more entertaining than your cheap character assasinations and unconfirmed rumors -- ---- god bless Lily St. Cyr -Rocky Horror Picture Show Name: James Turner Mail: Imagen Corp. 2650 San Tomas Expressway, P.O. Box 58101 Santa Clara, CA 95052-9400 AT&T: (408) 986-9400 UUCP: ...{decvax,ucbvax}!decwrl!imagen!turner CompuServe: 76327,1575
ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank) (01/27/86)
> > I haven't been able to verify the rumor that the new ST's can't address > more than 512K of memory, but this sort of shenigans is typical of Atari. Speaking of shenigans, it appears that most if not all computer companies stoop to such standards. Years ago I purchased a 16k pet with the idea of upgrading it to a 32k. Upon opening it up I discovered that the board had been drilled through with 3/8" holes to destroy that area of the mother board where the extra memory chips would go. Nice huh? By the way, and I hope Commordore is listening, I was able to upgrade not only mine but other peoples as well. ray
rroux@spp2.UUCP (Ray Roux) (01/28/86)
> > > > I haven't been able to verify the rumor that the new ST's can't address > > more than 512K of memory, but this sort of shenigans is typical of Atari. > > as a 1 meg ST user allow me settle this, if 1 meg chips weren't so > expensive you could upgrade your ST to 4 meg and it would address it > just fine. > > and what i am getting sick of is silly and irresponsible rumors, the > $400 cray was far more entertaining than your cheap character > assasinations and unconfirmed rumors > -- For your information, I've gotten responses back from people you have NOT been able to update their 520ST to 1meg. So far no one has been able to verify if the mmu has changed or not, in the other peoples machine the drams had a metal cover (unremovable) on them so you couldn't piggy back the chips. I would guess that you might be able to replace all the chips but I don't know. I put the previous rumor on the net because I felt it was important to put up a warning flag. I, for one, don't want to spend $1000 on a machine only to find it can't be upgraded. I fail to see how this falls into the "silly and irresponsible rumor" category. I hope the rumor is false, but isn't that why we read this net to find answers to questions we have, and to pass along some information that might be usefull? I talked to a local dealer who will be getting some new 520s this week, he said he'll check it out (he also does upgrades), and I'll report back when I hear from him. -- Ray Roux {ucbvax|decvax}!trwrb!trwspp!spp3!rroux
stephan@kontron.UUCP (Stephan W. Wendl) (01/31/86)
> > For your information, I've gotten responses back from people you have NOT > been able to update their 520ST to 1meg. So far no one has been able to > verify if the mmu has changed or not, in the other peoples machine the > drams had a metal cover (unremovable) on them so you couldn't piggy back > the chips. I would guess that you might be able to replace all the chips > but I don't know. > > > Ray Roux > {ucbvax|decvax}!trwrb!trwspp!spp3!rroux I would like to add my experience to these rumors. Having an early 520ST (rev A) I was able to upgrade to 1Meg. Now the bad news: The now avai- lable ROM version of TOS will ignore this upgrade. It will still work if the additional DRAMs are in but without using them. Furthermore if you change the appropriate system variables to update top of memory and 'MMU" configuration byte the system will NOT work after a reset. One has to turn it off and on again. I haven't found the routines yet who make it appearently impossible to utilize a selfupgraded 520ST (any hints?) Some remarks about the ROM version: The ROM version seems to be more stable when recovering from a system crash. It boots up in ~less than 10 seconds (still reads the *.INF and *.ACC files from disk). The 'MUSHROOMS' were replaced be the pictore of little bombs (they DON'T explode). Stephan W. Wendl
lbl@druhi.UUCP (LocklearLB) (02/03/86)
>I would like to add my experience to these rumors. Having an early 520ST >(rev A) I was able to upgrade to 1Meg. Now the bad news: The now avai- >lable ROM version of TOS will ignore this upgrade. It will still work if >the additional DRAMs are in but without using them. Furthermore if you >change the appropriate system variables to update top of memory and 'MMU" >configuration byte the system will NOT work after a reset. One has to turn >it off and on again. I haven't found the routines yet who make it appearently >impossible to utilize a selfupgraded 520ST (any hints?) > >Stephan W. Wendl I think the problem you are having is probably more related to the fact that you have a Rev. A board. I just put in the ROMs on Rev. B board and I still have 1 MEG of memory that works just fine. Are you sure you have the final ROMs and not the EPROMs that were available early? Barry Locklear AT&T Information Systems Labs Denver, CO
emjej@uokvax.UUCP (02/09/86)
/* Written 2:34 pm Jan 23, 1986 by MRC%PANDA@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA in net.micro.atari */ I am really getting sick of the childish messages on this list that make fun of serious concerns related to the ST's marketing. /* End of text from net.micro.atari */ I have yet to see a message displaying serious concerns about the ST's marketing. What I *have* seen are "Nyaah, nyaah"-style messages from folks who seem to feel insecure about their choice of computers, and thus look for any imagined opportunity to tear down the 520ST, claiming that any inexpensive computer is a "toy," that nobody will write software for a computer that doesn't cost too much, and posting innuendos about the 520ST's or Atari's alleged imminent demise. Up until very recently, nobody has bothered posting any of the various articles describing Commodore's financial troubles to net.micro.amiga. I know I've refrained from posting items I saw a while back in *Info World* about delays in software development for the Amiga. Have fun, folks; I'll be back when OS-9 is out for the 520ST. With luck, notes might have additional filtering capability by then. Even better, people who seem less interested in technical matters than in bolstering their egos may go away. James Jones