euaanu@eua.ericsson.se (Arto Nummelin) (03/05/90)
I've just tested 1M x 8 SIMMs from a Mac IIcx in my 520 STE. IT WORKED!!! I took out the 256k x 8 SIMM (150 ns) and replaced them with two 1M x 8 (80 ns) made by Samsung. Then I booted up and checked with a DA the amount of memory installed. 2048k it said!!! Then I tried to add my own SIMMs to the two free sockets. When I booted, it rebooted, rebooted ....... So it seems that you can't mix the 1M and 256k SIMMs. Here's the pinout for the SIMM if anybody is interested: 1 +5V 2 CAS 3 D0 4 A0 5 A1 6 D1 7 A2 8 A3 9 GND 10 D2 11 A4 12 A5 13 D3 14 A6 15 A7 16 D4 17 A8 18 A9 19 - 20 D5 21 WE 22 GND 23 D6 24 - 25 D7 26 - 27 RAS 28 - 29 - 30 +5V I found an article in BYTE Jan 88 (Ciarcia's circuit cellar, BCC180 computer) with a SIMM in the schematic. The article number for that SIMM (a 256k x 8) was HB 561009A. I checked that my SIMM had the same pinout (except for pin 18 which is only on 1M SIMMs). So now you know. /Arto Nummelin Arto.Nummelin@euas20.ericsson.se
apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) (03/06/90)
euaanu@eua.ericsson.se (Arto Nummelin) writes: >I've just tested 1M x 8 SIMMs from a Mac IIcx in my 520 STE. Here we go again: Standard SIMM Reply #1: The SIMMs are there mainly for the cost and space savings on the PC board, not so you can add memory to your machine. Sometimes we use SIPs, not SIMMs, and they're soldered right into the board! Don't rush out and buy a 520STe expecting to be able to upgrade it. ============================================ Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt
D.C.Halliday@newcastle.ac.uk (D.C. Halliday) (03/07/90)
RE: Arto Nummelin says... >I've just tested 1M x 8 SIMMs from a Mac IIcx in my 520 STE. IT WORKED!!! >I took out the 256k x 8 SIMM (150 ns) and replaced them with two >1M x 8 (80 ns) made by Samsung. Then I booted up and checked with a DA >the amount of memory installed. 2048k it said!!! >Then I tried to add my own SIMMs to the two free sockets. When >I booted, it rebooted, rebooted ....... So it seems that you can't >mix the 1M and 256k SIMMs. As far as I can tell Atari have recoded the memory config table. Testing the bits in the table on an STE give a 512K machine as having 512K in bank0 and 128K in bank 2! This means that it should be possible to use say 3 1M simms and get 3 MEG of memory. (It may also be possible to put in 4Mx8 simms if you can find any.) With a small patch to stop the MMU causing an exception for addresses above 4Meg the STe _might_ be expandable above the 4Meg limit of an STfm. [ simm pinout deleted]the SIMM if anybody is interested: Anyone know more about the possibity of more than 4Meg on an STe? Dave H. (D.C.Halliday@newcastle.ac.uk)
perand@nada.kth.se (Per Andersson) (03/07/90)
In article <2069@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes: >The SIMMs are there mainly for the cost and space savings on the PC >board, not so you can add memory to your machine. Sometimes we use Well, for us greedy devils who would like to have a 2 meg STe - is there a way to identify these machines without opening them ? Or is that perhaps classified... Inquiring minds want to know. Per -- --- Per Andersson Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden perand@admin.kth.se, @nada.kth.se
rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer) (03/08/90)
In article <2069@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes: >euaanu@eua.ericsson.se (Arto Nummelin) writes: > >>I've just tested 1M x 8 SIMMs from a Mac IIcx in my 520 STE. > >Here we go again: Standard SIMM Reply #1: > >The SIMMs are there mainly for the cost and space savings on the PC >board, not so you can add memory to your machine. Sometimes we use >SIPs, not SIMMs, and they're soldered right into the board! Don't rush >out and buy a 520STe expecting to be able to upgrade it. Allan, I know such decisions aren't in your hands, so this isn't directed at you. It seems such a short-sighted policy, though. I don't purchase parts or build hardware, so my opinions on the matter are just that. But just by browsing the back pages of Computer Shopper, I get a gut-feel that Atari's per-shipped-CPU savings couldn't possibly amount to more than $5 by juggling use of SIMMs/SIPs. That "savings" means that RAM upgrades will cost an ST owner more, repairs will cost an ST owner more, and it may be the "nit" that discourages someone from buying in the first place. Why does Atari do this sort of thing?? I can speak from experience when I say that customers do appreciate the use of SIMMs, and the ease and lower cost of memory upgrades they provide. The HP/Apollo DN2500, an entry-level 68030-based workstation, uses standard SIMMs. The DN2500 has been quite well received, and in fact we get many favorable comments regarding our use of SIMMs in this box. It really does help sell the box, especially to budget-minded customers. I know Atari and HP/Apollo aren't selling to the same people, but I don't believe anyone is so dim that they can't appreciate a line like, "More memory can be easily added in the future, using widely available standard parts" in the eye- catcher glossies. For that matter, I'd think it would give your "authorized dealers", wherever the heck they live, higher margins on upgrades they perform. So again: Why? Why? Why? >============================================ >Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. >reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt -- >>"Aaiiyeeee! Death from above!"<< | Steve Rehrauer, rehrauer@apollo.hp.com "Flee, lest we be trod upon!" | The Apollo System Division of H.P.
aimd@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Davidson) (03/08/90)
In article <2069@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes: >The SIMMs are there mainly for the cost and space savings on the PC >board, not so you can add memory to your machine. Sometimes we use >SIPs, not SIMMs, and they're soldered right into the board! Don't rush >out and buy a 520STe expecting to be able to upgrade it. Who should we contact in order to change this policy? I believe this would be in the interest of saving Atari from becoming a worldwide laughing stock.... Obviously Atari never bothered to tell UK magazines that the SIMMS weren't a feature of the machine so when they opened the machine SIMMS were what they found - can you blame them for assuming this to be a 'feature' of the machine (rather like the square 68000 being a 'feature')? Amiga owners (sorry!) just take off a panel on their machines and shove in a 60 quid upgrade. How can the STE be a 'machine for the 90s' if we still have to fart around with soldering irons or making sure that our MMU and Shifter are socketed so that we can fit a board??? Mark.
drp9500@ultb.isc.rit.edu (D.R. Paradis) (03/08/90)
What could I do to my 1040ST to have it take SIMMs?
I want to upgrade to 4 megs as cheap as possible.
Is this a possible way?neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) (03/08/90)
In article <2668@castle.ed.ac.uk> aimd@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Davidson) writes: >Obviously Atari never bothered to tell UK magazines that the SIMMS >weren't a feature of the machine so when they opened the machine SIMMS >were what they found - can you blame them for assuming this to be a >'feature' of the machine (rather like the square 68000 being a 'feature')? I do blame them! It's people making assumptions that have given the ST a bad name so far. Look at all the software that breaks on TOS 1.4 and 1.6 because of 'assumptions'. Unless Atari say so officially then nothing is guaranteed. If your STE has SIMMs, congratulations. If not, too bad, that's the luck of the draw. Does anyone think it unreasonable to ask a dealer to supply an STE that definately has SIMMs an not SIPs? I can't imagine many dealers opening them up for you to have a look. If SIP machines don't sell then Atari might change their policy but few buyers would ever be aware of the difference. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ! DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, the above comments are entirely my own ! ! ! ! Neil Forsyth JANET: neil@uk.ac.hw.cs ! ! Dept. of Computer Science ARPA: neil@cs.hw.ac.uk ! ! Heriot-Watt University UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!neil ! ! Edinburgh, Scotland, UK "it's pronounced Throatgobbler Mangrove" ! +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
exspes@bath.ac.uk (P E Smee) (03/08/90)
In article <2668@castle.ed.ac.uk> aimd@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Davidson) writes: >In article <2069@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes: >>The SIMMs are there mainly for the cost and space savings on the PC >>board, not so you can add memory to your machine. Sometimes we use >>SIPs, not SIMMs, and they're soldered right into the board! Don't rush >>out and buy a 520STe expecting to be able to upgrade it. > >Obviously Atari never bothered to tell UK magazines that the SIMMS >weren't a feature of the machine so when they opened the machine SIMMS >were what they found - can you blame them for assuming this to be a >'feature' of the machine (rather like the square 68000 being a 'feature')? I'd second the notion that 'easy upgradability' would be well worth preserving. I think that's probably even proven by the success of 3rd-party memory upgrades for the ST's (and Megas?). However, more to the point, from today's Popular Computing Weekly (a UK 'home computing' rag -- issue 402, Mar 8-14): 'The 499 (pound) STE is seen by Atari UK boss Bob Gleadow as a more professional machine, with its SIMM sockets for memory upgrades, ...'. This statement is farily typical of local press reports, and it appears to carry a strong implication that Atari UK have 'announced' the SIMM sockets as a feature (which might, of course, be incorrect). Looks to me like either (a) Atari HQ had better have some words with its international subsidiaries; or (b) the international subsidiaries better have some strong words with their local computer journalists; or (c) UK (at least) STEs had better have SIMM sockets. I'd prefer option (c). In a 500 pound (about 800 dollar) machine, your profit margin would certainly not be greatly harmed by spending 50 cents on a couple of extra SIMM sockets. Would probably be more than offset by eliminating phone calls and letters to Atari(UK) asking where they are. (As an aside, I'm not sure where that price came from. From the ads, it looks like that probably would get you a 1040 STE + mono monitor, or a 1040 STE + 'business software pack' + 1/2 the monitor. But then, no-one actuallys sells anything at the recommended price any more.) -- Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!ukc!bsmail!smee - Tel +44 272 303132
mreiss@ncrcam.Cambridge.NCR.COM (mreiss) (03/08/90)
In article <2358@ultb.isc.rit.edu> drp9500@ultb.isc.rit.edu (D.R. Paradis ) wr >What could I do to my 1040ST to have it take SIMMs? > > I want to upgrade to 4 megs as cheap as possible. > > Is this a possible way? There is now !!! John Russel Innovations P.O. Pox 5277 Pittsburg, California 94565 (415) 458-9577 Order a RAM+ board. It has space for 4, 1 megabyte SIMM modules. A little tight fit, but I have one and it works great! Cost - $125, you supply the SIMMs. You can probably buy them too, but I had my own. mike, just a happy customer
jfbruno@rodan.acs.syr.edu (John F. Bruno) (03/09/90)
In article <4592@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes: >In article <2668@castle.ed.ac.uk> aimd@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Davidson) writes: >>Obviously Atari never bothered to tell UK magazines that the SIMMS >>weren't a feature of the machine so when they opened the machine SIMMS >>were what they found - can you blame them for assuming this to be a >>'feature' of the machine (rather like the square 68000 being a 'feature')? > >I do blame them! Well I don't!!!!! If Atari gave some magazine a machine to be reviewed, I think it reasonable to expect them to also include a description of the machine, including what are and are not features. Otherwise, all they would be able to publish is a picture of the machine! (Not even that, because then they would be "assuming" that Atari won't change the look of the machine) >It's people making assumptions that have given the ST a bad name so far. No, it's (say it with me, now...) INEPT MARKETING AND MANAGEMENT AT ATARI that has given the ST (and the rest of the product line) a bad name. Does anyone REALLY think that charging people $200 - $300 for documentation and then forcing them to sign a non-discosure agreement for contents therin is a good idea? I sure as hell don't! I realize that you get more than the docs for the money, but my point is if you want any documentation, you have no choice but fork it over. >Look at all the software that breaks on TOS 1.4 and 1.6 because of >'assumptions'. Unless Atari say so officially then nothing is guaranteed. TOS itself has bugs, does this mean Atari made 'assumptions'? And since when does Atari say anything "officially"? The reason people have to 'assume' is that Atari is mute. > >If your STE has SIMMs, congratulations. If not, too bad, that's the luck of >the draw. Does anyone think it unreasonable to ask a dealer to supply an STE >that definately has SIMMs an not SIPs? I can't imagine many dealers opening >them up for you to have a look. If SIP machines don't sell then Atari might >change their policy but few buyers would ever be aware of the difference. Well, I know that if I was an Atari Service Center, I'd be pretty pissed off at having to deal with lots of little variations of a machine because Atari found it could save $0.68 by changing something... How much does Atari spend re-designing parts of their boards so they can save a couple of cents on parts? No wonder nobody takes them seriously! Get your act together, Atari! > +--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, the above comments are entirely my own > ! > Neil Forsyth JANET: neil@uk.ac.hw.cs > Dept. of Computer Science ARPA: neil@cs.hw.ac.uk > Heriot-Watt University UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!neil > Edinburgh, Scotland, UK "it's pronounced Throatgobbler Mangrove > +--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---jb
aimd@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Davidson) (03/09/90)
In article <4592@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes: >In article <2668@castle.ed.ac.uk> aimd@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Davidson) writes: >>Obviously Atari never bothered to tell UK magazines about SIMMS >>Can you blame them for assuming this to be a 'feature' of the machine. > >I do blame them! >It's people making assumptions that have given the ST a bad name so far. >Look at all the software that breaks on TOS 1.4 and 1.6 because of >'assumptions'. Unless Atari say so officially then nothing is guaranteed. OK, I take your point Neil but I still think some sort of statement from Atari about what exactly the new features of the STE were would have helped. If there was such a statement then fair enough, it is totally the fault of the magazines and I certainly agree that they are always the first to spread stuff about. However, Atari should know by now that people 'assume' everything where they have little information, that goes for TOS as well as the STE in general. Anyway, the damage is done, if Atari doesn't change it's policy in the light of assumptions made about the STE then further damage will follow. Everyone has believed what they have read about the STE, dealers who advertise the STE as having upgradable memory and companies who have started advertising SIMM plug-ins for the STE will be made to look fools when SIPP STEs appear. This *can't* do Atari any good but it can severly damage the reputation of the STE. The STE is a great machine but it has been bashed about by the magazines for a few months now, any further damage may be difficult to recover from. I'll shut up now, Mark. Documentation? Wots that then?
qralph@dna.lth.se (Ralph Haglund) (03/11/90)
Here it goes again..... Alan Pratt repeats his "don't expect to be able to upgrade your STE", but refuses to comment on what some German wrote recently, that there the STEs are advertised as "easily upgrradeable to 4Mb" or similar. Let's forget the hints that it actually should be rather easily upgradeable to 16Mb. Anyway - I like the rainbow - this tells he's got a sense of humour, that he works late evenings and I would probably like to share a beer with him. BUT - his disclaimer is all wrong! He is 2, possibly 3 persons. Couldn't he reveal for us netters a way of knowing who he is for the moment, ending with one, two or three dots maybe? Just as long as no officlal Atarian could under- stand it. Sometimes he is just himeself talking freely, that is good. Some- times he is an Atari representant, refuting the disclaimer about Atari Corp., like in this case about the SIMMs. And sometimes the part ".. or anyone else" in the disclaimer is valid, like when he, both publicly and privately scolds me and others for telling secrets, like about the STE - especially when I reported the use of the addresses/registers but also clearly mentioned I had got it from a German magazine and just translated it. He never ever asked for an excuse for the scolding. The argument that Atari corp has to suffer if the info is wrong is so infernally stupid so that too has to be referred to his 3rd personality - when he represents noone. IN ANY CASE - whatever Atari ST you have, use SIMMs! piggybacking is out. Even if you upgrade a 520 to an 1040 use it. So much easier to solder wires to a SIMM holder than piggybacking expensive chips. Concerning STEs - never buy anything but 520s, then upgrade the memory yourslef. Someone on the net talked about the net about the 520STE and 1040STE, that the 520 had 2 256x8 while the 1040 had what??? Impossible of course, SIMMs always come in pairs, 8 bit each. A 1040STE cannot come as 1040x8, it must come as 256x8x4. That is, 4 256x8 SIMMs. Hmmm, sorry my bad Swenglish. Should i refer to the late G Gamow, of whom it was said, that he spoke 10 languages atrociously - but everyone understood him.... |-------------------------------------------------------------| | Want to talk to me? Try: | | QRALPH@SELDC51 || QRALPH@SELDC52 || qralph@dna.lth.se | | My name? In official Sweden it is: 4.901.185.654 (secret) | | Anywhere else: Ralph Haglund | | Disclaimer: If it works, it's out of date. | |_____________________________________________________________|
gl8f@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (03/11/90)
In article <1990Mar10.162957.26323@lth.se> qralph@dna.lth.se (Ralph Haglund) writes: > Here it goes again..... Alan Pratt repeats his "don't expect to be > able to upgrade your STE", but refuses to comment on what some German > wrote recently, that there the STEs are advertised as "easily > upgrradeable to 4Mb" or similar. Look, Allan is a software guy. He is not in charge of European STE marketing. He's just telling you what he's seen in California. If your dealer in Germany tells you that your STE can be upgraded with SIMMS and it can't, that's your dealer's statement. If you find out your dealer is wrong, I'd try to get him to give you a STE with SIMMS. Whether or not you get SIMMS or SIPS, it is not Allan's job to figure out things other than bugs in TOS. Allan's statement means that you shouldn't be surprised when SIP-equipped STE's show up. It means that you know to make sure your dealer promises, maybe in writing, that your STE can take SIMMs. Allan's statement may save you money someday, and all you do is complain about it. Oh, once again, Allan, even though I never can remember the right way to spell your name ;-), I just wanted to say Thanks! for the technical information you occasionally post about TOS. It's too bad that people attempt to demand official Atari statements from you when you're here on your own time because you like listening to us argue ;-). Greg Lindahl gl8f@virginia.edu Astrophysicists for Choice.
Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com (03/11/90)
Neil Forsyth says,
> ...Unless Atari say so officially then nothing is guaranteed.
Do statements by Bob Brodie, Atari Corp's User Group Coordinator count as
"official"..?
If so, then Atari has "officially" announced that the STE is easily
upgradable by use of SIMM modules.
He showed a 4160STE recently, but said that Atari doesn't plan to make
many 4 Meg STEs, since the 1040STE is so easily upgraded.
Seems Atari needs to not only get their act together, but they need to
get their representatives together...
BobRcmcmanis@stpeter.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (03/12/90)
In article <2069@atari.UUCP> apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes: >Here we go again: Standard SIMM Reply #1: > >The SIMMs are there mainly for the cost and space savings on the PC >board, not so you can add memory to your machine. Sometimes we use >SIPs, not SIMMs, and they're soldered right into the board! Don't rush >out and buy a 520STe expecting to be able to upgrade it. Allan, your a reasonable guy, where did you get this reply? You make it sound like Atari Corp is not interested in doing anything to make its customer's lives any easier. Why not ? You might consider suggesting to your management that it is a "feature" in the opinion of your potential customers that they can upgrade the memory of their machine. This "feature" costs about 0.28US$ and yields quantifiable customer satisfaction. I think this is a symptom of a bigger problem. However, a thousand mile journey begins with but one step. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "If it didn't have bones in it, it wouldn't be crunchy now would it?!"
cmcmanis@stpeter.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (03/12/90)
In article <4592@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes: > Unless Atari say so officially then nothing is guaranteed. Hmm, "As-is" Software might be the name of a successful software business. :-) Is it possible to even write software with what Atari has said "Offically" ? Can someone detail the canonical list of things that Atari has said "officially"? Lets see : The DevKit - Ok, but not all of it is applicable to the ST. How to parse command line arguments. What to use to avoid the 40 folder bug. My impression is that most of what Atari say's officially is what you can't do and not what you can do. Maybe that is part of the problem no? --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "If it didn't have bones in it, it wouldn't be crunchy now would it?!"
apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) (03/20/90)
OK, kids, here's the scoop: I don't know anything, I only report what I think is true. I'm a real person behind the glass screen you see, and I can be wrong or misinformed. Don't blame the messenger: if you don't like Atari's policy, say so, but don't say it in such a way as to blame me. Also, it won't help much to say it on Usenet. Write to Sam T. if you want to be heard. As it happens, I *am* misinformed about the RAM situation, and I'm REALLY sorry I got in the middle of this. It turns out that a policy decision was made a while ago to the effect that SIMMs (the socketed kind) are to be used when building STe's. I don't know if any were built before that decision, and whether SIPs were used in them. As has been pointed out, using SIMMs makes a machine upgradable without solder. It does NOT make them user-upgradable, at least not in the USA, where opening the shield (or maybe the case) voids your warranty. Furthermore, policy decisions are subject to revision by future policy, so I still maintain it's a bad idea to assume that an STe has SIMMs rather than SIPs. Finally, a side note: using SIMMs is not all rosy. The advantages of (dealer-)upgradability must be balanced against the disadvantages inherent in socketed SIMMs. They're less reliable: the sockets break, the contacts get dirty, the SIMMs come loose, etc. So your upgradable STe is less reliable than it would have been with soldered-in SIPs, along with being more expensive because socket+SIMM usually costs more than a SIP alone (I think). Lower reliability also translates into higher production costs because it lowers the yield in manufacturing, making the cost-per-shippable-unit higher. Remember, what I say here is *not* "The Voice of Atari" and in fact what ANYBODY says is to be interpreted in the context of what that person knows to be true, or has "heard" is true, and how likely it is that the person would have heard if the policy changed. I am *not* likely to be up-to-date on policy in manufacturing, because it's FAR from my concern, and I pass things along only to be helpful, not to be official. My disclaimer: Read it. Live it. Be it. ============================================ Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt
roland@cochise.pcs.com (Roland Rambau) (03/20/90)
apratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) writes:
->Here we go again: Standard SIMM Reply #1:
->The SIMMs are there mainly for the cost and space savings on the PC
->board, not so you can add memory to your machine. Sometimes we use
->SIPs, not SIMMs, and they're soldered right into the board! Don't rush
->out and buy a 520STe expecting to be able to upgrade it.
At least in Germany easy expandability to 4 MB is an
_advertised_ feature of the STE ( was announced on the System'89 flyer
and is still being advertised right now ).
So a STE with no (working) SIMM-Slots must be considered broken ...
--
I know that You believe You understand what You think I said, but
I'm not sure You realize that what You heard is not what I meant.
Roland Rambau
rra@cochise.pcs.com, {unido|pyramid}!pcsbst!rra, 2:507/414.2.fidonet
Roland Rambau
rra@cochise.pcs.com, {unido|pyramid}!pcsbst!rra, 2:507/414.2.fidonet roland@cochise.pcs.com (Roland Rambau) (03/20/90)
aimd@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Davidson) writes: ->In article <4592@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes: ->>In article <2668@castle.ed.ac.uk> aimd@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Davidson) writes: ->>>Can you blame them for assuming this to be a 'feature' of the machine. ->> ->>It's people making assumptions that have given the ST a bad name so far. ->OK, I take your point Neil but I still think some sort of statement from ->Atari about what exactly the new features of the STE were would have ->helped. If there was such a statement then fair enough, it is totally To reiterate my former remark: It's not a journalists "assumption"! Atari Germany itself on last years "Systems" exhibition in Munich provided data sheets of the new STE which promised easy expandability to up to 4 MB. I have a specimen of this sheet! This promise has been repeated in Atari's advertisements in the meantime. Since Allan ( Sorry, Allan ) uses a disclaimer, but Atari Germanys sheet does not, I am willing to believe them, not him. ( And, btw, this expandability is the _only_ feature of the STE over the ST which I consider relevant for me. Imagine: 4MB and NO NOISE!!! ) Roland Rambau rra@cochise.pcs.com, {unido|pyramid}!pcsbst!rra, 2:507/414.2.fidonet