nep.pgelhausen@AMES-VMSB.ARPA (09/16/85)
From what I understand, the new Atari has been carrying on the old
Commodore tradition of being relatively unfriendly to the press &
software developers (note high price on the pre-release developement
kit....it required a major investment from people who didn't know
how tha merket was going to go). BYTE gets information sent to it
more than it goes looking for it.....they get more than enough info
that way that they don't HAVE to go looking...they have more than they
can handle as it is (note the 3-4 month lag time). If Atari sent
them a machine, they would review/preview it....if they (Atari) DON'T
send a machine for review, the review will have to wait until BYTE has
a bit of slack in the material available to it.....don't blame BYTE
for Atari's PR faults.
-Richard Hartman
max.hartman@ames-vmsb
(P.S.: I am a definate Atari fan, however I think Tramiel is making som
misteaks about publicity here....I think he is deliberately
ignoring magazines, except for the ones that order the
developement kit themselves (Analog Computing did that). He
needs to go out & VOLUNTEER information, and he doesn't like
doing that.
-rmh
)
------freed@aum.UUCP (Erik Freed) (09/20/85)
> > > From what I understand, the new Atari has been carrying on the old > Commodore tradition of being relatively unfriendly to the press & > software developers (note high price on the pre-release developement > kit....it required a major investment from people who didn't know > how tha merket was going to go). BYTE gets information sent to it > more than it goes looking for it.....they get more than enough info > that way that they don't HAVE to go looking...they have more than they > can handle as it is (note the 3-4 month lag time). If Atari sent > them a machine, they would review/preview it....if they (Atari) DON'T > send a machine for review, the review will have to wait until BYTE has > a bit of slack in the material available to it.....don't blame BYTE > for Atari's PR faults. > > -Richard Hartman > max.hartman@ames-vmsb > I still feel that Byte's responsibility, as a member of the Press, is to give us the information that is important to us. The ST is, I feel, more important than a new IBM compatible. It should not matter what is *convenient* for them. They should have tracked down an ST and wheedled Tramiel into giving them info. I don't think they tried... I do blame Byte if they are not flexible enough to go out of their way when the situation warrants it. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik James Freed Aurora Systems San Francisco, CA {dual,ptsfa}!aum!freed
calway@ecsvax.UUCP (James Calloway) (09/24/85)
In article <8509172204.AA04363@UCB-VAX.ARPA> nep.pgelhausen@ames-vmsb.ARPA writes: >From what I understand, the new Atari has been carrying on the old >Commodore tradition of being relatively unfriendly to the press & >software developers... The new Atari actually has been very friendly to the press, at least in my experience. I have been able to get through to top people at Atari much more easily than at other companies. On the other hand, their public relations efforts - the outgoing "look at us" kind of efforts - dissolved to almost nothing by spring of this year. > BYTE gets information sent to it >more than it goes looking for it.....they get more than enough info >that way that they don't HAVE to go looking...they have more than they >can handle as it is (note the 3-4 month lag time). If Atari sent >them a machine, they would review/preview it....if they (Atari) DON'T >send a machine for review, the review will have to wait until BYTE has >a bit of slack in the material available to it.....don't blame BYTE >for Atari's PR faults. > > -Richard Hartman > max.hartman@ames-vmsb > >(P.S.: I am a definate Atari fan, however I think Tramiel is making som > misteaks about publicity here....I think he is deliberately > ignoring magazines, except for the ones that order the > developement kit themselves (Analog Computing did that). He > needs to go out & VOLUNTEER information, and he doesn't like > doing that. If I recall correctly, Compute! published a fairly early look at the 520ST. They simply went to Atari and said, "May we look at one?" and Atari said yes. On the other hand, Compute! was initially denied a chance to preview the Amiga, and only after they complained about it in print did the "misunderstanding" get cleared up. In other words, Commodore has been much pickier about who in the press could see the Amiga than Atari has been about the 520ST. -- James Calloway The News and Observer Box 191 Raleigh, N.C. 27602 (919) 829-4570 {akgua,decvax}!mcnc!ecsvax!calway
andy@lasspvax.UUCP (Andy Pfiffer) (09/27/85)
In article <480@ecsvax.UUCP> calway@ecsvax.UUCP (James Calloway) writes: >In article <8509172204.AA04363@UCB-VAX.ARPA> nep.pgelhausen@ames-vmsb.ARPA writes: >> BYTE gets information sent to it >>more than it goes looking for it.....they get more than enough info >>that way that they don't HAVE to go looking... Is there anyone from BYTE out there? I'd like to hear their side of the story... -- ========================================================= USENET: {decvax,ihnp4,cmcl2,vax135}!cornell!devvax!andy ARPA: andy%devvax@Cornell.arpa MAIL: Theory Center/265 Olin Hall "What do you mean Cornell University I watch too much Ithaca, NY 14853 TV?" PHONE: (607) 256-8686 =========================================================
jons@islenet.UUCP (Jonathan Spangler) (09/29/85)
In a previous article it was mentioned that Atari has
been ignored by the press and part of the reason being that Atari
was not "giving" machines/info that they should.
I strongly disagree. I believe that we have seen two very
different ways to market a machine as shown by the Amiga
and the 520ST. Commodore went to all of this hullabalo and
general hype -- WHERE IS THE MACHINE? On the other hand,
Atari didn't say anything UNTIL THE MACHINES HAD BEEN shipped.
Speaking of Byte, look in the next few issues -- GUARANTEED an
in-depth look at the Atari 520ST. Other magazines? Compute!, Creative
Computing, Personal Computing, Family Computing,
Infoworld, Computer Shoppers...
this list goes on. Well done ol' chap!
On another note: the people who brought you "Printworks" and "Set FX+",
Robert and Mary McDowell from SoftStyle (a Honolulu based company)
came into the store today to get some software from us -- "Mudpies" and some
demos... they also have the developer's
kit and are developing software for the 520ST.
Excitement in paradise,
Aloha,
Jonathan Spangler
PC Pricebusters
(downtown Honolulu)
{ihnp4,dual,vortex}!islenet!jonssjl@amdahl.UUCP (Steve Langdon) (10/01/85)
> ... > I strongly disagree. I believe that we have seen two very > different ways to market a machine as shown by the Amiga > and the 520ST. Commodore went to all of this hullabalo and > general hype -- WHERE IS THE MACHINE? On the other hand, > Atari didn't say anything UNTIL THE MACHINES HAD BEEN shipped. > ... > Jonathan Spangler > PC Pricebusters > (downtown Honolulu) > {ihnp4,dual,vortex}!islenet!jons Not true. Jack Tramiel talked to anyone who would listen, and promised all sorts of dates and features which proved to be excessively optimistic. If you need a current example (other than quality software) look at the Atari CD ROM. Yes CD ROMs do exist, DEC sells one, no they do not sell to end users for anything near $500, and they will not be near that price for over a year. -- Stephen J. Langdon ...!{ihnp4,cbosgd,hplabs,sun}!amdahl!sjl [ The article above is not an official statement from any organization in the known universe. ]
preece@ccvaxa.UUCP (10/03/85)
> Not true. Jack Tramiel talked to anyone who would listen, and promised > all sorts of dates and features which proved to be excessively > optimistic. ---------- I don't know that "excessively optimistic" is fair. The machine shipped a couple of months late, which isn't too bad, and the features seem to be in pretty good accord with the early discussions. ---------- > If you need a current example (other than quality software) look at the > Atari CD ROM. Yes CD ROMs do exist, DEC sells one, no they do not sell > to end users for anything near $500, and they will not be near that > price for over a year. /* Written 11:48 pm Sep 30, 1985 by > sjl@amdahl.UUCP in ccvaxa:net.micro.atari */ ---------- I don't know when/whether the Atari CD-ROM will ship, or what its delivered price will be, but I wouldn't write it off yet. It wasn't promised until Fall, anyway. -- scott preece gould/csd - urbana ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece