henry@rochester.UUCP (09/13/85)
From: Henry.Kautz
I just played with some ST's at the King of Prussia shopping mall
(the country's largest!). I was extremely impressed with the ST. The
monochrome display was EXTREMELY sharp: it was just as sharp as the
MacIntosh, but with a larger display. I saw a demo of a super
spreadsheet program, which not only had multiple windows, but the
ability to adjust the font size in each: you could make the characters
and lines large enough to read across the room. Programs load and
execute VERY fast. Maybe the Amiga will do color better, but for black
and white, I suspect that all those chips are just wasted horsepower.
The dealers were particularly unhelpful, even for computer salespeople
(I suspect that there is an IQ test for becoming a computer
salesperson: if you score in 2 digits, you sell Apple and IBM; if you
score in 1 digit, you sell Atari; 3 digits and they throw you out). At
one place they had removed the mouse, and REFUSED to plug it in!
(Finally I discovered how to manipulate the curser and "click" from the
keyboard.) None the less, the machines were selling themselves.
One of the major factors that sold and continues to sell the Mac is its
sharp display. All the spinning cubes in the world won't help a user
if he can't read the text on the screen (and anyway, the ST can spin
cubes and bounce balls, even if it does so slower than the
Amiga.) Commadore really screwed up by not giving the Amiga a hi-res
non-interlaced display. A 200 line display is GARBAGE. Period.
I am amazed at how the ST is being ignored by the computer press.
Nothing touches it for price/performance. The Atari ads people are
complaining about are a lot more factual then 99% of the ads you see
(yeah, tell me why NRC "builds a better computer", why ATT "has the
future built in", or why "an Apple can balance your budget"; if you
want to flame, then flame about the AT ads which stress its enormous
address space, but don't mention that DOS can't use it...)
---- Henry Kautz
:uucp: {seismo|allegra}!rochester!henry
:arpa: henry@rochester
:mail: Dept. of Comp. Sci., U. of Rochester, NY 14627
:phone: (716) 275-5766rb@ccivax.UUCP (rex ballard) (09/19/85)
> From: Henry.Kautz > I am amazed at how the ST is being ignored by the computer press. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Nothing touches it for price/performance. The Atari ads people are > complaining about are a lot more factual then 99% of the ads you see > (yeah, tell me why NRC "builds a better computer", why ATT "has the > future built in", or why "an Apple can balance your budget"; if you > want to flame, then flame about the AT ads which stress its enormous > address space, but don't mention that DOS can't use it...) > ---- Henry Kautz > :uucp: {seismo|allegra}!rochester!henry > :arpa: henry@rochester > :mail: Dept. of Comp. Sci., U. of Rochester, NY 14627 > :phone: (716) 275-5766 Many seem to be holding judgement until they can get some software for the machine. Infoworld just gave the ST a rather poor rating, the main problem, lack of software, lack of support, lack of documentation. Unfortunately, the "Developer's Kit" was not included with the system. With the developer's kit, you have a very powerful machine!!! Without it, you are sort of stuck with LOGO and a few DEMO's. Unfortunately, the "Developers Kit" is also not a "product" either. Try to apply to the bank for two separate loans, one for software and one for the ST. My hope was that, like the old "CP/M" machines, they would at least include the assembler, linker, and minimal developement tools. Instead, they want you to "Mail Order" for eight disks, several of which contain Public Domain software. My guess is that Atari is trying to encourage more third party developement, but they don't seem to realise that anyone crazy enough to buy a machine less than a month after release is probably a "developer". MS-DOS came with BASIC, but don't you think it's time we started to discourage bad habits like "poking in" machine dependent code, goto's, and "peek's"?!! Even PASCAL would be better than another hack of MS BASIC (Or are they reviving McPherson?)!! There are structured basic's such as BASIC-09 with incremental compilers, but then the prospect of OS-9 has occurred to everyone but ATARI. The developer's kit also included a lot of documentation that should have been included with the machine. Remember to manuals to the old APPLE ][, those things had everything but the source code to APPLESOFT in it. I have a few old CP/M manuals that were as big as a telephone book (SUPERBRAIN). The 4000 page manual could have been broken up (How much of that is EMACS,MINCE, KERMIT...) and at least things like "hitchiker's guide to the BIOS", hardware, VDI, and BDOS documentation could have been provided. With reduction, proper binding, and a little imagination, a manual with the "meat" could have been included or sold for less than $40. Support for the ST is also a new approach. Depending on Atari user's groups is a very good idea. ACORN (the rochester group) meets once a month, has no bulletin board, and those with developement kits are bound by "Non-disclosure" agreements not to allow even reproduction of the general documentation. The one member without a developer's kit couldn't even get a copy of KERMIT!!. What am I supposed to do if it breaks, wait until the next user's group meeting? I hope that Atari can come up with a NATIONAL BBS, for direct question and answer sessions with other users. One of the Atari dealers in Rochester has already done this. He's even considering shareware over the phone, too bad some people can't load it. The 800 has always been a "cult machine", anybody who owned one and wrote any software at all, got so familiar with the GTIA concept, they could program it like a second processor (GTIA has now moved to Commodore). Let's hope that kind of expertise can develope for the ST. Even purchasing "Presenting The ATARI ST" didn't provide any real insight into the real POWER the machine has. In fact, it is even inaccurate in MANY places. I like the machine, and will probably buy one, but I hope that this "Bumpy Start" is not the shape of things to come!
dan@BBN-LABS-B.ARPA (09/20/85)
From: dan@BBN-LABS-B.ARPA Thanks for your corrections to my chart. I still think I'm right about Atari's comparing a color Amiga to a monochrome ST, but the Amiga's price has been fluctuating so much recently that the retailer I spoke to may have been wrong. The price Atari quoted is definitely within a hundred dollars of what it costs to get an Amiga with color monitor. > The point of this ad is not which machine is techically better (Commodore > is Clearly a better machine), but whether the Commodore is at least TWICE AS > GOOD, and whether you want to pay that much. You're right, of course. I think the answer depends on the application; specifically, if you care a lot about color or sound, and all that that implies, the Amiga is probably worth it. If your main need is B&W, for text processing, telecommunications, and program development, then the ST is clearly the better buy. Also, given that neither machine may last very long and that there may never be a lot of software for either one, if you buy an ST you're risking a lot less money. I should know--I just bought one! > It is interesting that they > didn't compare themselves to the ... APPLE ][, and ... VT100. Yes, it is. Why would anyone want to buy an Apple ][ now? Software, of course. Gee, I wonder how hard it would be to do a 6502 emulator for the ST... It could probably run almost as fast as the real thing. That would sink the Apple ][ completely. And an ST plus the VT100 emulator ($125) is a lot cheaper than a VT100! The ability to do local editing at this price (the emulator includes Kermit and MODEM7 transfer protocols) ought to make every software company in the world run out and buy them to relieve their overloaded VAXes. > My guess is that Atari is > trying to encourage more third party developement, but they don't seem > to realise that anyone crazy enough to buy a machine less than a month > after release is probably a "developer". Mostly I agree. But this machine is so cheap, and has such a nice monochrome display, that if you were hesitating about buying a machine just for word processing or using as a terminal this would probably be your choice. Sure, Express is a toy by Mince standards, but it's a lot better than a typewriter. I think Atari really is encouraging third-party development, especially compared to Commodore. To get the Amiga's program development package you have to be certified as a real, bona-fide developer who's going to help make them rich. To get the Atari program development package all you have to supply (in addition to $300) is the serial number of your machine. My guess is that they're afraid that the people who bought it to run Express would find 4000 pages of documentation and a user-hostile development environment much too intimidating. (Why don't we rename this list info-amiga-st?) Dan Franklin
hen@bu-cs.UUCP (Bill Henneman) (09/20/85)
I am confused. None of the ST stories I read on the net bear even a remote resemblence to my experiences in Boston. It could be we are lucky (my local atari dealer, who also carries the amiga starting this week) is interested in pushing these machines. Every time I go in there, he has demo disks of "things to come" (he was running HUDraw in mid-July). If the amiga had been available in July, I would certainly have bought one instead of the ST. I had three uses in mind: a driver for a DX7, a terminal, a toy. The amiga is still hands down a better machine in all respects, but I am very impressed with the maturity of the ST's software environment. Despite all the opinions to the contrary in this newsgroup, I don't find the ST's software offerings sparse. Maybe I'm spoiled, but I find the developer's package useless until the silly hard disk arrives. I refuse to spoon feed floppies to the silly disk drives while compiling C programs, so all that stuff is in a box on the shelf. I am currently writing all my hacks in FORTH. 4xFORTH from the Dragon Group is the most professionally done piece of PC software I've ever bought. Aside from some minor misspellings, the manual is accurate and detailed (it weighs more than the double-sided disk drive). I have tried a test to destruction of the language, and have yet to find a single thing that doesn't work as described in the manual. The graphics are primitive (mainly straight lines and boxes), but a GEM interface is promised in about a month. There's a beautiful terminal emulator (complete with KERMIT) which I find superior in every way to MacTerm. The network manager at BU was pleasantly suprised by the quality of the package. I can't remember the name of the company, Unicorn or Dragon or Umber Hulk, or some damned cute name like that. My dealer has lots of stuff for the double-knit crowd: mailing label programs integrated with WP and Email, etc. In the toy department, I've bought HEX, HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy and Mud Pies: HEX and Mud Pies have ok sound. I'm going to see a demo of Dragon's Lair on Saturday: the dealer says it's "almost as good as the video arcade version". In summary, I have more than enough software to keep the ST busy the entire time I'm around the house. Bill Henneman Boston University
peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva) (09/22/85)
Another reason you might want the AMIGA over the ST (or the MAC!) is Intuition.
Look at how Sidekick is selling and ask yourself whether it wouldn't be better
to get a multitasking O/S in the first place instead of 4700 more-or-less
compatible desk accessories later.
> (Why don't we rename this list info-amiga-st?)
I suggested net.micro.windows before it came out, when AMIGA/ST stuff was
flooding net.micro.cbm and net.micro.atari. That would let MAC people in on
the discussion, too. I don't know about the ST but the AMIGA is definitely
capable of giving the mac a run for their money, and the MACnuts can probably
add to the current discussion. How about info-home-works?hachong@watmath.UUCP (Herb Chong) (09/24/85)
In article <3702@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> dan@BBN-LABS-B.ARPA writes: >I think Atari really is encouraging third-party development, especially >compared to Commodore. To get the Amiga's program development package you have >to be certified as a real, bona-fide developer who's going to help make them >rich. To get the Atari program development package all you have to supply (in >addition to $300) is the serial number of your machine. My guess is that >they're afraid that the people who bought it to run Express would find 4000 >pages of documentation and a user-hostile development environment much too >intimidating. does this mean that i, a private individual who has no serious intentions of marketing software but am a real hacker, cannot get enough documentation to do heavy duty development using the system interfaces without starting my own company? i have more than 40Mbytes of public domain C source that i'd like to convert to the Amiga, but if they don't tell me how, i'd rather buy an Atari, even though its graphics are not nearly as good. Herb Chong... I'm user-friendly -- I don't byte, I nybble.... (will disappear September 30) UUCP: {decvax|utzoo|ihnp4|allegra|clyde}!watmath!hachong CSNET: hachong%watmath@waterloo.csnet ARPA: hachong%watmath%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa