kacovert@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (05/26/90)
Does anyone have any information (actual figures please) concerning the sales of Atari Corp in Europe compared to other computer companies in Europe (such as IBM, Apple, Commodore, etc.)? I have heard stories that Atari is doing incredibly well in Europe, but I would like to have some facts to back that up. Thanx in advance, Kent Covert Miami Univerity Oxford, Ohio (Miami's in Ohio, Dammit!)
Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com (05/27/90)
Kent Covert asks: >Does anyone have any information (actual figures please) concerning the >sales of Atari Corp in Europe compared to other computer companies in >Europe (such as IBM, Apple, Commodore, etc.)? I have heard stories that >Atari is doing incredibly well in Europe, but I would like to have some >facts to back that up. There are also stories that Atari's onetime lead in the European market is beginning to slip... I too would like to hear some factual reports from "real people" in Europe... Today, Michael Schutz, one of the editors of Germany's "PD Magazine" stopped by the headquarters of AIM Magazine for a visit on his trip around the USA, and mentioned that TommySoft, one of their biggest software manufacturers has dropped their entire line of Atari software.. He wasn't familiar with the term "Another one bites the dust", but he understood the concept... BobR
hase@netmbx.UUCP (Hartmut Semken) (05/28/90)
In article <30241@cup.portal.com> Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com writes: >There are also stories that Atari's onetime lead in the European market is >beginning to slip... I too would like to hear some factual reports from >"real people" in Europe... True. The ST and Mega line tend to loose against the Mac (an Mac SE, 1/20 sells for DM 2700 under "student discount" and a Mega 2 with Atari or third party harddisk is a bit more expensive). Used Mac II and Mac IIx appear around DM 5000 to 8000 with 2MB/40MB. Since the long ago promised TT still fails to show up, it will have to be extraordinary cheap (rumor says, it will sell for DM 6500 with monochrome monitor ans 30 MB HD; this is to much to compete with a SE30, I think), if it finally arrives. the ST line is loosing ground against everything that can be easily expanded like the Amiga 2000 (some cards are actually availeble :-) or 386SX PClones (386SX machines with 1MB/20MB and VGA color monitor start at DM 3000...) hase -- Hartmut Semken, Lupsteiner Weg 67, 1000 Berlin 37 hase@netmbx.UUCP Hi! (Zaphod Beeblebrox)
csbrod@medusa.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Claus Brod ) (05/28/90)
Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com writes: >There are also stories that Atari's onetime lead in the European market is >beginning to slip... I too would like to hear some factual reports from >"real people" in Europe... > >Today, Michael Schutz, one of the editors of Germany's "PD Magazine" stopped >by the headquarters of AIM Magazine for a visit on his trip around the >USA, and mentioned that TommySoft, one of their biggest software >manufacturers has dropped their entire line of Atari software.. Most software manufacturers here in Germany have plans for migrating to other computers; in the moment, they are waiting and hoping for a production line TT that comes up to their expectations. The TTs that ATARI gives to selected developpers now are rather disappointing (personal opinion). This doesn't mean that all those German software manufacturers will drop their ST line completely; but they are preparing for other markets. I think I've read some figures like "8 percent of all PC sales in Europe are STs", and Commo sold approx the same here. I don't know how reliable this information is, and whether "8 percent" means 8 percent of all computers sold or just 8 percent of the total cashflow. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Claus Brod, Am Felsenkeller 2, Things. Take. Time. D-8772 Marktheidenfeld, West Germany (Stolen from unknown.) csbrod@medusa.informatik.uni-erlangen.de ----------------------------------------------------------------------
silos@bench.sublink.ORG (Paolo Pennisi) (05/31/90)
I can say how Atari is doin' in Italy. I'm a proud owner of a Mega ST 2 but i'm quite disappointed by the marketing policy Atari Italy showed during last years. Atari Italy is surely the subsidiary led in the closest way to the US mother company. Lack of advertising, when ads showed on newspapers and tv they were futile, silly sometimes also wrong (PC advertized as ST etc). In italy there has been a modest penetration of STs and Megas in the market. Amigas share the most, along with a lot of low cost PCs like Amstrad. Sincerely today Atari has nothing to say nor in Italy, nor in the rest of the world. They showed the wrong policy of squeezing the orange to get the last drop of bucks, without investing enough time, people and money in the development of a future for their products. The St, and then the Mega were very good products. Now they are out of date, slow and with limited expandibility. Atari upgraded the TOS too slowly, there were and there are many bugs, not compatible with a professional use. The lack of upward compatibility with 68020/30, the too close architecture kept locked to video clk frequencies and other amenities has killed the ST. Atari in Italy was and is just for hackers... Why the Tramiel family, instead of producing tons of vaporware and disillusion didn't give ST a real SCSI, a bug free op sys, real expandability and a child, more powerfull to satisfy the incoming needs of the new markets. Atari in Italy is doing BAD.... Paolo. -- (ARPA) silos@bench.sublink.ORG Paolo Pennisi (BANG) ...!deejay!bench!silos via Solari 19 (MISC) ppennisi on BIX & PTPOSTEL 20144 Milano ITALIA ----< S U B L I N K N E T W O R K : a new way to *NIX communications >-----
yegerleh@vivaldi.ecn.purdue.edu (James D Yegerlehner) (06/14/91)
Dear ST-Netters,
I am very much interested in how Atari is fairing over in Europe.
I don't think Atari is making much of a splash over here (yet?)
with the new STEs and TTs, but can any of you guys over in Europe
say how the new machines are being received there? Is Atari
maintaining the significant market share that it once had?
Jim
--
__ __ | |
\ / __ __ __ __ | __ |__ __ __ __ Jim Yegerlehner
\/ |--'| ||--'| ||--'| || ||--'| 1132 Hawkins Graduate House
| `-- `--|`-- | |`-- | || |`-- | W. Lafayette IN 47906psurge@cs.utexas.edu (Troy Carpenter) (06/14/91)
In article <1991Jun14.010821.9903@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> yegerleh@vivaldi.ecn.purdue.edu (James D Yegerlehner) writes: > >Dear ST-Netters, > >I am very much interested in how Atari is fairing over in Europe. >I don't think Atari is making much of a splash over here (yet?) >with the new STEs and TTs, but can any of you guys over in Europe >say how the new machines are being received there? Is Atari >maintaining the significant market share that it once had? > >Jim > >-- I am not from Europe, but I just spent 3 weeks there and I can tell you an American's perspective of the European ST market: If any of you thought the west coast was Atari-country (flashback...Atari's first ad campaign under the Trammiels) then you have obviously not been to Germany. I looked at one of the 3 Atari magazines at the newsstand in the train station of the former East Berlin and they advertised the Mega STE, the Notepad (handwriting ST), CD ROM players, and many other Atari products that we will probably never see in the States. Walking down the street in West Berlin showed that Atari was in most computer stores, and I passed at least one store with a huge neon Atari symbol in the window. In Denmark, I talked to a CS student there who told me that the ST was a very popular choice there in Denmark. I also saw Atari's in computer stores there. Then, to top it all, I was watching a soccer game televised from Germany, and there by one goal where the cameras got good shots of it was a huge "Atari Computers" sign familiar to all of us. (Logo and all!) In short, Atari is doing very well in Europe, as far as I could tell. (The only Mac store I saw in my 3 week stay was in Copenhagen!) Troy Carpenter Department of Computer Sciences THE University of Texas, Austin psurge@cs.utexas.edu "You're so open minded that your brain leaked out" - Steve Taylor *>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The best thing in life costs exactly that <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<*
grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Graham S Thomas) (06/15/91)
From article <1991Jun14.010821.9903@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, by yegerleh@vivaldi.ecn.purdue.edu (James D Yegerlehner): > I don't think Atari is making much of a splash over here (yet?) > with the new STEs and TTs, but can any of you guys over in Europe > say how the new machines are being received there? Is Atari > maintaining the significant market share that it once had? I'm fairly sure Atari's market share in the UK is declining. Most STs here have been sold as games machines, and judging from the relative amounts of software in the shops and the number and thickness of magazines on the newsstands, the Amiga's winning hands down in that arena. Anything else has been niche marketing. The TT is more expensive here than in some other countries, partly because Atari don't expect to sell many. The Mega STE hasn't even been released here yet - it's just been delayed even further until the beginning of July. Atari are still selling a fair number of STFMs (still!) and STEs, and the existing number of installed machines means that games and music software will continue to be produced here, along with the occasional non-games product. Also, Atari UK have started to advertise the ST as a 'serious' computer again. But, in my opinion, it's too little, too late. The best is not yet to come. Graham -- Graham Thomas, SPRU, Mantell Building, U of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9RF, UK Email: grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk Phone: +44 273 678165 Fax: .. 685865
blackbox@pfunk.hanse.de (Michael Kistenmacher) (06/17/91)
In <1991Jun14.010821.9903@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, James D Yegerlehner writes: > >say how the new machines are being received there? Is Atari >maintaining the significant market share that it once had? Hi, here in germany ATARI has it's best place on earth, I think. The Mega STE is going good, since the Mega isn't sold anymore. It's design has been accepted by the customers and we now have quite a few megabytes of software, supporting the new features of these machines. The TT, I think, is going quite well too. If you have a homecomputer and want to upgrade, but you hate IBM-clones and don't have as much money to buy a SUN, the TT is a good alternative. Many students from our University's buy a TT. Bye.....Michael -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | listen to the coolest ! | Michael Kistenmacher / blackbox | | Music from the Galaxy ! | 2000 Hamburg 61 / Schippelsweg 64 | | !!! P-Funk !!! | West Germany / ++ 49 40 552 37 66 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
likos@clinet.fi (Johannis Likos) (06/18/91)
grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Graham S Thomas) writes: Z >From article <1991Jun14.010821.9903@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, by yegerleh@vivaldi.ecn.purdue.edu (James D Yegerlehner): >> I don't think Atari is making much of a splash over here (yet?) >> with the new STEs and TTs, but can any of you guys over in Europe >> say how the new machines are being received there? Is Atari >> maintaining the significant market share that it once had? >I'm fairly sure Atari's market share in the UK is declining. Most STs >here have been sold as games machines, and judging from the relative >amounts of software in the shops and the number and thickness of >magazines on the newsstands, the Amiga's winning hands down in that >arena. >Anything else has been niche marketing. The TT is more expensive here >than in some other countries, partly because Atari don't expect to sell >many. The Mega STE hasn't even been released here yet - it's just been >delayed even further until the beginning of July. >Atari are still selling a fair number of STFMs (still!) and STEs, and >the existing number of installed machines means that games and music >software will continue to be produced here, along with the occasional >non-games product. Also, Atari UK have started to advertise the ST as a >'serious' computer again. But, in my opinion, it's too little, too >late. The best is not yet to come. >Graham >-- >Graham Thomas, SPRU, Mantell Building, U of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9RF, UK >Email: grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk Phone: +44 273 678165 Fax: .. 685865 __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Sorry, GUIs to dis-a-point you, but there is no future at all. Even in the biggest market (Germany) the software houses jump over to a faster train PC and Windows (see Borland, Technobox, etc.)... TT is not as powerful as IIfx or 486 (don't even think about NeXT)! Since 1985 ST & Amiga 'a fight between losers' (to be continued). Innovation and high tech is made by Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and others but not in Borregas Avenue... The old GDOS had only few driver... The new FSM-GDOS has not yet been released... ...but Adobe's Type Manager, Bitstream, True Type, etc. enjoy already the best critics as bestsellers in competitors' computer business community. It is really frustrating to support a TOS-based system for five year and to observe a very very slow progress (or degress?)... likos@clinet.fi
adamd@rhi.hi.is (Adam David) (06/20/91)
In <1991Jun17.190053.7342@clinet.fi> likos@clinet.fi (Johannis Likos) writes: [deleted negative comments about software houses abandoning ship] >TT is not as powerful as IIfx or 486 (don't even think about >NeXT)! Since 1985 ST & Amiga 'a fight between losers' (to be >continued). TT is rumoured to see a new incarnation "sometime soon". >Innovation and high tech is made by Bill Gates, Steve Jobs >and others but not in Borregas Avenue... Mustn't forget to mention Dave Small. I haven't seen an SST yet but heard they were shipping. If you can get a 50 MHz 68030 in one of those, it'll burn the pants off anything that has yet been mentioned here. >The old GDOS had only few driver... >The new FSM-GDOS has not yet been released... TOS has yet to be junked. In all seriousness Atari, why not have a REAL OS in ROM and the option to load TOS and GEM from disk for backward compatibility? There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Atari hardware, though there are certain limitations which I feel should not be imposed. The TOS ROMs are a joke though. (Does anyone know which compiler they used?). I would guess 20% or more of the space in them is wasted because the C compiler didn't optimise the code. There is plenty in need of revision. It seems the same compiler has been used for all TOS versions up to at least 1.62. Even recent TOS versions have backward compatibility to features of CP/M which have never been used on Atari ST/TT hardware products. Until very recently there has been no support for HD floppies. The list goes on ...... If the hardware wasn't useable and some good quality application software packages then I wouldn't have stuck with Atari. Despite their failings, the equipment (with third party support) is still a fair cut above the rest. -- Adam David. (adamd@rhi.hi.is)
csbrod@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Claus Brod) (06/21/91)
adamd@rhi.hi.is (Adam David) writes: >TOS has yet to be junked. In all seriousness Atari, why not have a REAL OS >in ROM and the option to load TOS and GEM from disk for backward compatibility? >There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Atari hardware, though there are >certain limitations which I feel should not be imposed. TOS is usable. TOS is useful. TOS isn't more bug-ridden than other OS's. And personally, I think GEM is a real gem. It has all the potential to rival the MacOS. So don't junk TOS, Atari. Instead, give us MultiTOS soon. Besides, you can run lots of other OS's on the Atari NOW: OS/9, Minix, MacOS, QL OS, MS DOS, Mirage... just to name a few. And with the advent of Atari Unix we also have a full-featured SysV.4. Think about it. >The TOS ROMs are a joke though. (Does anyone know which compiler they used?). >I would guess 20% or more of the space in them is wasted because the C >compiler didn't optimise the code. There is plenty in need of revision. >It seems the same compiler has been used for all TOS versions up to at least >1.62. Even recent TOS versions have backward compatibility to features of CP/M >which have never been used on Atari ST/TT hardware products. Until very >recently there has been no support for HD floppies. The list goes on ...... The XBIOS floppy routines worked with HD drives from the day they were created, likewise for BIOS and GEMDOS. Now, isn't that a sign of thoughtful design? You might start picking on other design mistakes like the troublesome GEMDOS I/O redirection, but HD drive support is a very bad example. With machines speeding up considerably and speeders all over the place, the need for fine-tuning the ROM code diminishes. It's more important for Atari to have control over the various TOS development lines, and this is near to impossible to do with hand-optimized code. And the only reason why Atari does not use Turbo C officially (though developpers at Atari Sunnyvale are said to be allowed to use their favorite dev package) is that it is not available in the US - no English docs and such. With the Turbo C developpers falling off from Borland and starting with a new distributor, this situation may change soon. >If the hardware wasn't useable and some good quality application software >packages then I wouldn't have stuck with Atari. Despite their failings, >the equipment (with third party support) is still a fair cut above the rest. D'accord. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Claus Brod, Am Felsenkeller 2, Things. Take. Time. D-8772 Marktheidenfeld, Germany (Piet Hein) csbrod@medusa.informatik.uni-erlangen.de Claus_Brod@wue.maus.de ----------------------------------------------------------------------
ytsuji@wucc.waseda.ac.jp (Y.Tsuji) (06/22/91)
Well, this is going to be the most familiar talk about whether Atari has a future or not. I have my personal opinion but I had bette keep it to myself so as not to offend Atari zealots, particulary German enthusiasts. But let us remember on this day next year that there were people who believed in Atari's future. Cheers, Tsuji (a very, very disappointed person, particularly by ATARI UK's developers support scheme).
adamd@rhi.hi.is (Adam David) (06/26/91)
Thanks Claus for stating a different side to what I said. In restrospect I see that some of my wording was not entirely clear. csbrod@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Claus Brod) writes: >adamd@rhi.hi.is (Adam David) writes: vvvvvv >>TOS has yet to be junked. In all seriousness Atari, why not have a REAL OS >>in ROM and the option to load TOS and GEM from disk for backward compatibility? I think a little explanation is in order. Maybe junked was a rather unwise choice of words. The point I intended was more in the sense of recycling. I sincerely believe that both TOS and GEM have outlived their allotted lifespan as the central OS foundation in ROM (where indeed they take precious space and considerable chunks are often replaced by RAM resident routines anyway). I did not say they had outlived their usefulness. I'm sorry if I implied that. To put things in perspective I still use CP/M on Z80. I don't get rid of a thing which still has some use in it. From a historical viewpoint, TOS started off as a RAM based OS probably because it was still being written. It stabilised into TOS 1.0 the first ROM version. Since then we have had infrequent updates usually with only minor changes. A few bugfixes are made (sometimes in the wrong direction :-() and a few utilities added. Suddenly in recent times versions 2.x and 3.x appear with a few more bells and whistles. A completely new GDOS is arriving (in RAM of course). TOS and GEM almost became fossils in ROM. Some of the material in the ROM should (IMHO) rather be made RAM resident so that updates can be made available and to give better system flexibility. Manipulation of system-specific hardware obviously belongs in ROM but I would like to be able to load GEM when I need it, and reclaim its space when I don't. >TOS is usable. TOS is useful. >And personally, I think GEM is a real gem. It has all the potential >to rival the MacOS. >And with the advent of Atari Unix we also have a full-featured SysV.4. >Think about it. Nice stop-gap :-) :-) :-) [explanation: In a few years time look back with nostalgia and say "I still use Unix"] >The XBIOS floppy routines worked with HD drives from the day they were >created, likewise for BIOS and GEMDOS. Now, isn't that a sign of >thoughtful design? Yes. The low-level stuff for this is all in place, as it should be. Only very recent versions have a GEM format option for other than a simple choice between single and double sided disks. IMHO the only sensible sector size to use on HD disks is 1024 bytes (except for MSDOS compatibility when needed). If I understood correctly, only the first and latest versions have been able to handle these. In which version number was it fixed? Wouldn't it be sensible to have reasonable control over disk format built into the desktop? Shouldn't a decent ramdisk be included in the ROM? A simple text editor would not be out of place in the ROM. >With machines speeding up considerably and speeders all over the place, >the need for fine-tuning the ROM code diminishes. It's more important >for Atari to have control over the various TOS development lines, and >this is near to impossible to do with hand-optimized code. It could be worked on in-house as a non-optimised version and then run through an optimiser for production. Both speed and space are at a premium even in these days of multi-megabyte accelerated systems (Whoever thought back then that 4 MB wouldn't be enough RAM). Optimisation could be made almost automatic, the only handwork necessary would be to mark which parts of the code must not be changed because they are in some way critical. Just eliminating redundant reassignment of variables and making absolute long references into absolute short where possible would save enough space to fit STE TOS versions into older ST computers without having to move ROMbase to the newer (and lower) address. Enough said for now. This is meant as constructive criticism. -- Adam David. (adamd@rhi.hi.is)
csbrod@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Claus Brod) (06/26/91)
adamd@rhi.hi.is (Adam David) writes: >From a historical viewpoint, TOS started off as a RAM based OS probably because >it was still being written. It stabilised into TOS 1.0 the first ROM version. >Since then we have had infrequent updates usually with only minor changes. A few >bugfixes are made (sometimes in the wrong direction :-() and a few utilities >added. Suddenly in recent times versions 2.x and 3.x appear with a few more >bells and whistles. A completely new GDOS is arriving (in RAM of course). TOS >and GEM almost became fossils in ROM. Some of the material in the ROM should >(IMHO) rather be made RAM resident so that updates can be made available and >to give better system flexibility. Manipulation of system-specific hardware >obviously belongs in ROM but I would like to be able to load GEM when I need >it, and reclaim its space when I don't. TOS is making its way in just the direction you're pointing at; it is becoming more modular. MetaDOS essentially replaces GEMDOS. GDOS is disk-based and allows for external screen drivers. (NVDI is such a GDOS/screen driver combo.) In fact, TOS is quite modular in itself due to the hierarchical architecture. If you like, you can work without GEM on your ST today. Just place a command shell into your AUTO folder. Isn't MiNT meant just for purposes like these? >>The XBIOS floppy routines worked with HD drives from the day they were >>created, likewise for BIOS and GEMDOS. Now, isn't that a sign of >>thoughtful design? >Yes. The low-level stuff for this is all in place, as it should be. Only very >recent versions have a GEM format option for other than a simple choice >between single and double sided disks. IMHO the only sensible sector size to >use on HD disks is 1024 bytes (except for MSDOS compatibility when needed). >If I understood correctly, only the first and latest versions have been able to >handle these. In which version number was it fixed? The current TOS versions cannot handle a physical sector size of 1024 bytes. It's not unreasonable to suppose that this won't ever find its way into TOS again due to compatibility problems. Older TOS versions won't understand the new format. It isn't even sure that new machines will have a 1772 built-in that offers such capabilities. As I stated a while ago, I tested a third-party floppy driver some time ago which offered 1024-bytes-per-sector support. I also haven't given up the idea of writing a floppy driver on my own. It's not impossible. The German magazine 'ST-Computer' recently had a full-featured listing of a replacement for the standard floppy driver allowing for up to ten disk drives connected to one ST. >Wouldn't it be sensible to have reasonable control over disk format >built into the desktop? A choice between 9, 10, 18 and 20 sectors per track would be nice, yes. >Shouldn't a decent ramdisk be included in the ROM? Dunno. I don't like the idea very much to include such a beastie into ROM. I would like to have some more RAM disk support in TOS when it comes to making memory reset-resident. >A simple text editor would not be out of place in the ROM. I disagree. This would be completely out of place. Except perhaps as a new GEM object type. (NeXTStep offers things like this.) >It could be worked on in-house as a non-optimised version and then run through >an optimiser for production. Both speed and space are at a premium even in these >days of multi-megabyte accelerated systems (Whoever thought back then that 4 MB >wouldn't be enough RAM). Optimisation could be made almost automatic, the only >handwork necessary would be to mark which parts of the code must not be changed >because they are in some way critical. The time-critical sections are already written in assembler, especially the BIOS and the lower screen driver routines. They could and should be faster, however. >Just eliminating redundant reassignment of variables and making absolute long >references into absolute short where possible would save enough space to fit >STE TOS versions into older ST computers without having to move ROMbase to the >newer (and lower) address. D'accord again. >Enough said for now. This is meant as constructive criticism. And, IMHO, it is! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Claus Brod, Am Felsenkeller 2, Things. Take. Time. D-8772 Marktheidenfeld, Germany (Piet Hein) csbrod@medusa.informatik.uni-erlangen.de Claus_Brod@wue.maus.de ----------------------------------------------------------------------