apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) (01/29/91)
The thread so far... >>>If you already have a Quantum 80 or Syquest 44, you have to throw it in the >>>trash, or sell it in "Trading Times"... forget using it in a TT... >>Don't be ridiculous. The TT has external SCSI; you can hook up other >>drives without any trouble. >BUT... if you already own a Quantum 80, you CAN'T use it as your >primary drive... Horsefeathers! What do you mean by "primary?" SCSI device 0? You can set the SCSI device number of the internal drive to 1 and your external drive to 0 and that's that. Internal? You can unscrew Atari's drive from the TT (and toss it, if you like) and put your Quantum there. I don't know if all this about "Atari won't sell a TT without a hard disk" is true, but even if it is, you have to look at things from Atari's perspective. Only a TINY minority of potential TT purchasers have hard drives of their own, and the cost of manufacturing and stocking another flavor of TT for these few people could be more than the cost of the hard disk (at our high-volume price) in the first place! You could end up paying MORE for your diskless TT! This is another example of people ragging on Atari from a position of woeful ignorance. Somebody reports a rumor or speculation based on next to no data, and somebody else says, "In that case Atari is stupid/doesn't care about customers/deserves to go under." It gets tiresome. Another part of the discussion about configurations of TT's that could use some hard data is memory: you can't buy a 2MB TT and some SIMMs and get an 8MB TT out of it. The ST RAM of a TT doesn't use SIMMs, and the TT RAM uses SIMMs, but you can only get the daughter board and memory controller from Atari. The RAM is the primary cost, of course, but the custom chip is also expensive. It would probably not pay to buy the board and controller from us with empty sockets and then buy your own RAM. It is certainly not the case that you can buy just RAM and upgrade your TT. ============================================ Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt
twmanino@eos.ncsu.edu (TONY W MANINO) (01/29/91)
In article <2815@atari.UUCP>, apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes: > The thread so far... > > >>>If you already have a Quantum 80 or Syquest 44, you have to throw it in the > >>>trash, or sell it in "Trading Times"... forget using it in a TT... > > >>Don't be ridiculous. The TT has external SCSI; you can hook up other > >>drives without any trouble. > > >BUT... if you already own a Quantum 80, you CAN'T use it as your > >primary drive... > > Horsefeathers! What do you mean by "primary?" SCSI device 0? You can set > the SCSI device number of the internal drive to 1 and your external drive > to 0 and that's that. Internal? You can unscrew Atari's drive from the TT > (and toss it, if you like) and put your Quantum there. > [stuff deleted] > This is another example of people ragging on Atari from a position of > woeful ignorance. Somebody reports a rumor or speculation based on next to > no data, and somebody else says, "In that case Atari is stupid/doesn't care > about customers/deserves to go under." It gets tiresome. > > ============================================ > Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. > reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt No kidding! Why are people so impatient? I realize Atari has given people a lot of grief about expansion and other assorted things, but people are assuming too much before things make it to market based on some rumor that nobody really knows is true yet!!! On the other hand, if there is discussion in places like this where people like you at Atari can see what people are/aren't satisfied with (real gripes, not just whining just to hear oneself whine), it may valid to voice such things. I do, however, side with you on this one. -------------------------------------- I've got an ST, and I like it!!! Tony
davidli@simvax.labmed.umn.edu (01/30/91)
In article <38650@cup.portal.com>, Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com writes: > Apple and > IBM Corp don't force you into buying what *they* want to sell you. Remember this bit of stupidity as I answer Bob's questions below... > Why would Atari design the TT with memory "daughterboards" you can only > obtain from Atari otherwise..? Probably the same reason that Apple designed the Macintosh so that it was not 'upgradeable' except through hardware hacks. Know how much it cost to convert a 128K Mac to a 512K Mac? $900. Know how much it cost to convert a 512K Mac to a 1 Meg Mac? $900. Business practices appear to indicate that Atari is following the well-trod path of Apple at this point in time. > Why would Atari insist on selling you the hard drive THEY want to sell? Probably the same reason that Apple insisted on selling you the hard drive THEY wanted to sell -- until someone found a way to do things differently, and Apple made enough money in market share to give up the hard-drive business. > Just another example of how Atari Corp will always remain a backwater > "other" computer company. Like Apple Computer Corp. Sigh... Bob, why don't you go buy a Macintosh and plage someplace like comp.sys.mac? Your blood pressure would sure enjoy the change of place. You're recent posts have been pretty apoplectic. === David Paschall-Zimbel davidli@simvax.labmed.umn.edu
jerry@TALOS.UUCP (Jerry Gitomer) (01/31/91)
Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com writes:
:Allan Pratt wrote a message pretty much spelling out how Atari Corp plans
:to try to lock their customers into buying what Atari Corp wants to sell
:them, NOT what the customers may want...
If Atari, or anyone else, ignores what their customers want they will wind
up going out of business. The TT, the Portfolio, and the new 16-bit game
machines indicate that Atari =isn't= going out of business. Ergo, Atari
is selling what the customers want, although perhaps this does not
coincide with what =you= (or I) might want.
:It's really too bad that Atari Corp, as a third-rate computer company can't
:learn to accomodate their customers as their competition does. Apple and
:IBM Corp don't force you into buying what *they* want to sell you. They'll
:sell you the system you want, and allow you to upgrade it as you want.
You have obviously not looked at either a MAC Classic or a PS/1.
:Why would Atari design the TT with memory "daughterboards" you can only
:obtain from Atari otherwise..?
Atari will not, and cannot, stop you or anyone else from going into
business making and sellng daughterboards that replace those Atari
sells for the TT.
:Why would Atari insist on selling you the hard drive THEY want to sell?
Perhaps they want to minimize cost for the typical purchaser, perhaps they
want to maximize profit, perhaps they just want to make sure that the TT
users have a hard disk that is "performance tuned" to the processor.
:Just another example of how Atari Corp will always remain a backwater
:"other" computer company.
I don't agree, but to each his own opinion.
--
Jerry Gitomer at National Political Resources Inc, Alexandria, VA USA
I am apolitical, have no resources, and speak only for myself.
Ma Bell (703)683-9090 (UUCP: ...{uupsi,vrdxhq}!pbs!npri6!jerry apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) (01/31/91)
>Allan Pratt wrote a message pretty much spelling out how Atari Corp plans >to try to lock their customers into buying what Atari Corp wants to sell >them, NOT what the customers may want... > > [...] >Just another example of how Atari Corp will always remain a backwater >"other" computer company. Bob_BobR_Retelle wrote a message pretty much pissing in my coffee, NOT contributing anything useful to the discussion or giving any thought to what I was saying. Just another example of how Usenet tries my patience by people whining without thinking and flaming without meaning. Sorry that my posting is almost as content-free as BobR's, but I couldn't let this go totally unanswered. ============================================ Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt
buggs@cup.portal.com (William Edward JuneJr) (01/31/91)
Gee, all these wonderfull machines and NO? upgrade path/policy. Real bummer, I'd like to have a TT or MegaSTe, but I have this Mega4 sittin' here... BTW, what's the goin' rate for a used Mega4 with TOS1.4? HEY, I WANT to trade up for a new machine! Don't look good though....
bright@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Bob Bright) (02/01/91)
A small (and I hope reasonable) request for Bob Retelle and other
members of the comp.sys.atari.bashers.club:
Would it be possible for you to add a uniquely identifying string to
the subject line of all your posts and followups? Something short and
to the point, like "[abc]". This would serve two purposes:
1. My enjoyment index for comp.sys.atari.st increased dramatically
when I created a KILL file with these two lines:
/cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu/h:j
/Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com/h:j
However, I'm usually no more interested in the followups to your posts
than the originals themselves. I can weed out most of the followups
by changing the "h" to an "a" in the lines above, but then rn has to
scan the full body of each article for your address, which can take an
annoyingly long time if I haven't had a chance to catch up on the news
for a few days and there are a lot of articles pending. If you were
to put "[abc]" in the subject line, then rn could catch all of your
posts as well as followups to them just by scanning the headers.
2. If all ABCers adopted this convention (are you listening, Chris?),
then rn could do a _single_ pass through the headers to weed out all
of the bash trash, saving considerably more time.
Come to think of it, there might be a third benefit:
3. On those rare occasions when you want to contribute something
useful to the group, you could simply omit the "[abc]" in the subject
and the rest of us could read what you have to say, instead of junking
all of your posts indiscriminately.
Retelle and Mauritz should obviously be charter members of the Atari
Bashers Club. Others could be nominated by net consensus, should the
need arise (and assuming a cooperative spirit all around). And of
course, everyone is free to admit themselves to the Club on an
occasional or permanent basis, simply by sticking the appropriate
string in their subject line.
So what do you say, guys?
BBB
--
Bob Bright <bright@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
Dept. of Philosophy
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Man R3T 2N2 (204) 474-9680rohde@spaghetti.cis.ohio-state.edu (Joe Rohde) (02/01/91)
In article <2818@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes: >> [...] >>Just another example of how Atari Corp will always remain a backwater >>"other" computer company. > >Bob_BobR_Retelle wrote a message pretty much pissing in my coffee, NOT >contributing anything useful to the discussion or giving any thought to >what I was saying. > Agreed. . .I find it hard to believe a person with this attitude can be a sysop on one of the Atari forums on Compuserve...But it would suprise me more if there were multiple Bob Retelle's in the networked Atari world... Joe (Just my piece of wasted bandwith) -- :-- rohde@cis.ohio-state.edu ---- rohde@muon.eng.ohio-state.edu --: : "Happiness is being famous for your financial ability to indulge : : in every type of excess. The part I think I'd like best is crushing: : people who get in my way." -- Calvin (& Hobbes) :
seitz@netcom.UUCP (Matthew Seitz) (02/01/91)
In article <2818@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes: > >Bob_BobR_Retelle wrote a message pretty much pissing in my coffee, NOT >contributing anything useful to the discussion or giving any thought to >what I was saying. > Bob was a little harsh (as usual), but he does raise a valid point. Why did Atari require a daughterboard? I'm sensitive to this having just paid $275 to upgrade my ST from 1Mb to 2Mb. Of this, only $50 was for the extra RAM. $175 was for a daughterboard (including installation) and $50 to replace the 1Mb of RAM that had to be deactivated on the motherboard. Why do I have to play the daughterboard game again with the TT? -- Matthew Seitz seitz@netcom.UUCP netcom!seitz
ramsiri@blake.u.washington.edu (Enartloc Nhoj) (02/01/91)
In article <22475@netcom.UUCP> seitz@netcom.UUCP (Matthew Seitz) writes: > >Bob was a little harsh (as usual), but he does raise a valid point. Why >did Atari require a daughterboard? I'm sensitive to this having just paid >$275 to upgrade my ST from 1Mb to 2Mb. Of this, only $50 was for the >extra RAM. $175 was for a daughterboard (including installation) and >$50 to replace the 1Mb of RAM that had to be deactivated on the motherboard. >Why do I have to play the daughterboard game again with the TT? >-- > Matthew Seitz You don't HAVE to play the "game"... You don't HAVE to buy a TT. Do what I am going to do: buy the Gadgets 33Mhz 68030 that COMES WITH the co-processor and 8 FREE simm slots. I was seriously thinking I was going to buy the TT as soon as it comes out.. within the next 5 or so years, in other words. But, I would rather support David Small who seems EXTREMELY interested in supporting his customers and providing them with a variety of options. He's even open to suggestions! He actually "listens" to what people want and are willing to buy. But we shouldn't jump to conclusions prematurely: the TT is not on the shelves, so WE really don't know what options we will have. I don't think ATARI knows what they're going to give us either, to wit Allen's recent comment that he didn't "know if it were true or not" that one could buy a diskless TT. He did emphasize that you MUST buy a daughter board for memory from ATARI, in other words, your TT doesn't come with empty simm slots. I think we know that much. Someone correct me if I am wrong, please. kevin ramsiri@blake.acs.washington.edu
kurt@ritcsh.csh.rit.edu (Kurt Mosiejczuk) (02/04/91)
In article <1991Feb2.041933.3958@cs.mcgill.ca> depeche@cs.mcgill.ca (Acme Instant Dehydrated Boulder Kit) writes: [Stuff about getting Bob ReTelle to shut up deleted] > >The only other problem I have with the TT is that it is using a 68030 >chip.. While this would have been really neat 'n' groovy back in 1989, they >are quite obsolete now, and I want a 68040 box. Anyone know if there'll be >a quick 'n' easy way to upgrade a TT to 68040 without compatibility >problems? Now that would be a neat trick!!!!! > Well, first to address why Atari didn't put a 68040 in the TT. First, the original TT was based around a 68020, however, Atari realized that it would be hopelessly outdated by the time it got to market. So, Atari took the gamble that the 68030 would be available in mass quantities when they got the TT to market. The 68040, however, is still not available in large quantities from Motorola and is extremely backlogged. So, right now the 68040 is not feasible. Think about it, if Atari was wrong, David Small would not be messing with a 68030 board, he would go 68040. Okay, here I am a little shaky... I wouldn't imagine that the 68040 would be difficult to implement in terms of an upgrade, apprently Atari got TOS into a state where it is hardware independant (thus the increase in size). Therefore, I would think the 68040 would have no problems... Just my humble opinion.... Kurt Mosiejczuk kurt@nick.csh.rit.edu
stank@anvil.WV.TEK.COM (Stan Kalinowski) (02/10/91)
Somebody asked the question:
Why would Atari insist on selling you the hard drive THEY want to sell?
Here are my thoughts:
o perhaps because they can sell it pre-loaded with software. How else
would distribute all of the O/S, floppies, seems a bit inconvenient
o How would they do quality control on a diskless system? Seems to me
that selling half-built systems introduces a lot of complications.
Hard disks and hard disk drivers are not that stable yet despite
the general acceptance of SCSI. There are still compatibility
problems with some drives. Seems to me that selling a system with
a harddisk installed is the simplest route to go. Keep in mind that
the vast majority of people out there are not hardware hackers.
stank
US Mail: Stan Kalinowski, Tektronix, Inc., Network Displays Division
PO Box 1000, MS 60-850, Wilsonville OR 97070 Phone:(503)-685-2458
e-mail: {ucbvax,decvax,allegra,uw-beaver}!tektronix!orca!stank
or stank@orca.WV.TEK.COM