[comp.sys.atari.st] TT's VME-slots

JALKIO@cc.helsinki.fi (Jouni Alkio) (10/30/89)

In article <801@carroll1.UUCP>, dnewton@carroll1.UUCP (Dave 'C is cool, but what about LOGO?' Newton) writes:
> In article <1160@cc.helsinki.fi> JALKIO@cc.helsinki.fi (Jouni Alkio) writes:
>>In article <4675ca0d.14a1f@force.UUCP>, covertr@force.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes:
>>> But, I will NEVER buy another computer from Atari. Especially
>>> a closed system like the TT/P. One lousy short VME card slot
>>> does not make an OPEN system. you need 5 or more. One slot
>>> just guarantees that no one will design for it. Lack of resources.
>>What do you need those 5 or more slots for. (And please don't answer:
>>"internal modems, hard-disks, etc", because that's only a cosmetic issue.) 
> 
>    Well, AD/DA cards, interrupt cards (for process control), parallel output
> cards, co-processors (i.e. high-speed DSP's, _Transputers_, an 80386 machine
> for doing DOS if you must), and probably some I can't think about.

Well, I still don't think you'll need that many (over 5) slots. It would
be nice if the TT/P had more than one slot, but that would certaily
raise its price. You could wait for the TT/X (I think it'll have more
VME-slots). I think it is nice that there are options to choose from. If
you want a cheap 68030 machine you can buy the TT/P. And it is possible
that there'll be some slot expansions, too. (You can build the Mega ST's
VME-bus for the 1040ST's if you want now.) And some of the devices above
could be connected otherwise than in the VME-slot. If you can afford
using all those devices at once, you certainly can afford buying a more
expensive host computer!


					Jouni Alkio

rwa@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Ross Alexander) (11/10/89)

gl8f@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>Right, and a HOME USER with a TT/P doesn't need the things you plug into
>lots of slots. Why should a HOME USER then waste money on slots they won't
>use?

Well, perhaps you and I disagree about what a Home User is :-).  I
myself would like a few slots - say three to five - because I like to
hack hardware.  And because SCSI isn't The Greatest Thing Since Sliced
Bread to me (to others, it may be, the world is big enough for both
opinions to coexist).

Something I would very much like to have on a VME card is a modem -
not a modem for the phone line (how passe' :-), but a nice quick
56kBaud HDLC radio packet modem.  I want it on a card so it can do dma
directly to the buss, and generate interrupts only on frame
boundaries. 8000 character interrupts per second is hard on a machine
that's trying to do other work (like pay attention to the keyboard).

I'd like some uncommitted ttl i/o ports - say about 32 bits worth.
I'd like an ethernet card, and maybe a multiport serial card.
I'd like some a/d and d/a, and maybe a DSP (digital signal processor)
coprocessor board.

Now maybe you can stick all this stuff on SCSI.  I don't know, I seem
to remember some rules about a total of 8 targets + initiators.  Maybe
that was SCSI-1, and has been relaxed.  I'd still feel uncomfortable
building the scsi adaptors, and the targets do need some local
intelligence, don't they?  I don't know whether I could make all that
fly, and it would be nice if I could just go straight to the buss
rather than screw around with talking to the scsi controller,
especially for coprocessors.

Anyway, I think I'm a home user.  I'll probably go with the TT/X iff I
buy another Atari at all.  The TT/P sounds like a fun box for the
right person, if the prices truly are in line.  Pricing is pretty soft
right now, though.  I wonder if AllanP or KenB could give us a price
_range_?  Probably not ;-).  I promise to bitch about the price
regardless [100 :-)].

	Ross

gl8f@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (11/10/89)

In article <1230@atha.AthabascaU.CA> rwa@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Ross Alexander) writes:
>gl8f@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>>Right, and a HOME USER with a TT/P doesn't need the things you plug into
>>lots of slots. Why should a HOME USER then waste money on slots they won't
>>use?
>
>Well, perhaps you and I disagree about what a Home User is :-).

Sorry, I should have said "AVERAGE" home user. The projects you describe
seem to be something that will interest about .01% of all Atari owners,
at the most ;-)

>Something I would very much like to have on a VME card is a modem -
>not a modem for the phone line (how passe' :-), but a nice quick
>56kBaud HDLC radio packet modem.

Read the fine print. Doesn't the TT have a HDLC connector ;-) ?

>Anyway, I think I'm a home user.  I'll probably go with the TT/X iff I
>buy another Atari at all.

Yeah, if you want to build your own hardware. But I don't, and I don't
want to cough out all that extra $$$ for slots I won't use.

------
Greg Lindahl
gl8f@virginia.edu                                             I'm not the NRA.

depeche@quiche.cs.mcgill.ca (Sam Alan EZUST) (11/10/89)

In article <2207@hudson.acc.virginia.edu> gl8f@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>In article <4699f8e3.14a1f@force.UUCP> covertr@force.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes:
>
>>> >Internal high speed modem?? Nope.
>>> 
>>> Why internal? Get it on RS232 and then it doesn't have to be VME or TT
>>> specific.
>>
>>Because internal IBM modem cards are cheaper then external modems. Just
>>price them yourself.
>
>A VME slot isn't like a PC-BUS slot. It's faster and more expensive. You
>put quite different things in them.
>
>> Furthermore, wouldn't it be nice for Atari to sell a truly open
>> system and let the Marketplace decide what to add to it.
>
To Richard E. Covert and others of your philosophy:

Expansion cards in computers were quite popular back in the early 80s
for computers such as the IBM and the APPLE. Expansion was a desirable thing
because a computer without any cards in it was USELESS!

you needed a focking expansion slot in your computer to run your bloddy
disk drive. Serial port? Buy a card! Parallel port? What kind? There ain't
no standard (with the Apple's anyway).

one card isn't really that bad anymore - we already have enough ports
built-in, and that was the primary purpose of one of these interface
cards anyway - for simple i/o.

Any analog-digital converter SHOULD be designed to plug into a DMA, SCSI
or some other fast port. This way, it won't be computer specific.

In general, computer specific hardware addons will be a thing of the past.
I mean, shit - if we have a DMA port which can transfer data at 10
megabits per second on our old clunking 1040sts, guess how obsolete a
card slot which works with IBMs will be (I wish I had some numbers, but
I bet that those card slots in the IBMs aren't much faster if they are at
all).

The only things we would need slots for nowadays is for accelerators,
graphics enhanceors, and perhaps emulators. But maybe even these won't
need to take up a VME slot if the computer is designed well enough.
Taking up a VME slot for a stupid graphics enhancer is like using a steam
roller to kill a spider...

-- 
 S. Alan Ezust aka "Depeche Modem"       depeche@calvin.cs.mcgill.ca
 McGill University Computer Science      Disclaimer: I claim everything!
 Montreal, Quebec, Canada                (je pense que.... ) je me souviens
       "This kind of pornography is a matter of artistic creativity"

depeche@quiche.cs.mcgill.ca (Sam Alan EZUST) (11/11/89)

In article <2207@hudson.acc.virginia.edu> gl8f@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>In article <4699f8e3.14a1f@force.UUCP> covertr@force.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes:
>
>>> >Internal high speed modem?? Nope.
>>> 
>>> Why internal? Get it on RS232 and then it doesn't have to be VME or TT
>>> specific.
>>
>>Because internal IBM modem cards are cheaper then external modems. Just
>>price them yourself.
>
>A VME slot isn't like a PC-BUS slot. It's faster and more expensive. You
>put quite different things in them.
>
>> Furthermore, wouldn't it be nice for Atari to sell a truly open
>> system and let the Marketplace decide what to add to it.
>
To Richard E. Covert and others of your philosophy:

Expansion cards in computers were quite popular back in the early 80s
for computers such as the IBM and the APPLE. Expansion was a desirable thing
because a computer without any cards in it was USELESS!

You needed a expansion slot in your computer to run your bloddy
disk drive. Serial port? Buy a card! Parallel port? What kind? There ain't
no standard (with the Apple's anyway).

one card isn't really that bad anymore - we already have enough ports
built-in, and that was the primary purpose of one of these interface
cards anyway - for simple i/o.

Any analog-digital converter SHOULD be designed to plug into a DMA, SCSI
or some other fast port. This way, it won't be computer specific.

In general, computer specific hardware addons will be a thing of the past.
I mean, shit - if we have a DMA port which can transfer data at 10
megabits per second on our old clunking 1040sts, guess how obsolete a
card slot which works with IBMs will be (I wish I had some numbers, but
I bet that those card slots in the IBMs aren't much faster if they are at
all) when the TT comes out?

The only things we would need slots for nowadays is for accelerators,
graphics enhanceors, and perhaps emulators. But maybe even these won't
need to take up a VME slot if the computer is designed well enough.
Taking up a VME slot for a stupid graphics enhancer is like using a steam
roller to kill a spider...

 S. Alan Ezust aka "Depeche Modem"       depeche@calvin.cs.mcgill.ca
 McGill University Computer Science      Disclaimer: I claim everything!
 Montreal, Quebec, Canada                (je pense que.... ) je me souviens
       "This kind of pornography is a matter of artistic creativity"
-- 
 S. Alan Ezust aka "Depeche Modem"       depeche@calvin.cs.mcgill.ca
 McGill University Computer Science      Disclaimer: I claim everything!
 Montreal, Quebec, Canada                (je pense que.... ) je me souviens
       "This kind of pornography is a matter of artistic creativity"

rwa@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Ross Alexander) (11/14/89)

gl8f@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>Read the fine print. Doesn't the TT have a HDLC connector ;-) ?

Does anyone out there know?  Does the TT/<n> (either model) have HDLC
capability?  Inquiring minds _need_ to know!!  I mean real HDLC,
capable of carrying AX.25 packets or PPP HDLC encapsulated SLIP
packets.  I am not especially crazy about getting an interrupt per
octet either ;-), or simulating the link protocol in the interrupt
handler, as I hope to run the link at 56 Kbaud and up.

	Ross

dnewton@carroll1.UUCP (Dave 'Post No Nicknames' Newton) (11/16/89)

>To Richard E. Covert and others of your philosophy:
>one card isn't really that bad anymore - we already have enough ports
>built-in, and that was the primary purpose of one of these interface
>cards anyway - for simple i/o.

   Maybe for you, but not for me:  I like to experiment, have some data
collection cards goin' in unison, have a coprocessor doing some crunching.

>Any analog-digital converter SHOULD be designed to plug into a DMA, SCSI
>or some other fast port. This way, it won't be computer specific.
>In general, computer specific hardware addons will be a thing of the past.

   Since when is VME a computer-specific thingy?  Seems to me I've seen a
lot of VME-based computers.
   SCSI-basid things would be okay, until you have more than seven.  DMA
is great too, but after a few daisy-chains, how do ya' do it?  (Don't know
how things are accessed using DMA.)

>I bet that those card slots in the IBMs aren't much faster if they are at
>all).

   Cards in the PC that don't do DMA are clocked at 8MHz on the AT.



-- 
David L. Newton       | uunet!marque!carroll1!dnewton  | The Raging Apostle-- 
(414) 524-7343 (work) |    dnewton@carroll1.cc.edu     | for the future--
(414) 524-6809 (home) | 100 NE Ave, Waukesha WI 53186  | for the world.
"Isn't it fun to take two unrelated sentences and mix the batter lightly?" -me

kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) (11/21/89)

dnewton@carroll1.UUCP (Dave 'Post No Nicknames' Newton) writes:

|    SCSI-basid things would be okay, until you have more than seven.

Remember that SCSI supports several logical units per physical unit.


-- 
   |||   Ken Badertscher  (ames!atari!kbad)
   |||   Atari R&D System Software Engine
  / | \  #include <disclaimer>

daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (11/21/89)

in article <1741@calvin.cs.mcgill.ca>, depeche@quiche.cs.mcgill.ca (Sam Alan EZUST) says:

> In general, computer specific hardware addons will be a thing of the past.
> I mean, shit - if we have a DMA port which can transfer data at 10
> megabits per second on our old clunking 1040sts, guess how obsolete a
> card slot which works with IBMs will be (I wish I had some numbers, but
> I bet that those card slots in the IBMs aren't much faster if they are at
> all).

The PC-AT bus at 8MHz has a maximum bandwidth of 4 megabytes/second.  Of course,
since it doesn't permit true DMA bus masters (it has a DMA chip for faster-than
CPU transfers, in theory, but in practice the DMA chip is slower than the CPU for
such transfers), the effective maximum rate on the bus is 2 mb/sec.  For an
8 bit card on that bus, you're down to 1 mb/sec, and if it's run at PC-XT
speeds, that's down to less that 512 kb/sec.

The Amiga bus runs at 7.16MHz, for a corresponding bandwidth of roughly 3.75 
mb/sec, which can be a bus-mastered transfer (most hard disks work this way).
That's not fast enough, but it's decent for many things.

For an asynchrous SCSI disk transfer, you probably wouldn't notice much
difference in raw transfer speeds between the DMAed Amiga, CPU copied IBM,
or DMA chip driven ST; the SCSI's upper limit is 1.5 mb/sec in all cases.
However, the Amiga would spend less time in the actual transfer, so there'd
be more CPU time available for other things.  So, in general, faster bus
access buys you bandwidth.  Even if you can't think of anything that
actually needs that bandwith, you'll get CPU cycles out of it.

> The only things we would need slots for nowadays is for accelerators,
> graphics enhanceors, and perhaps emulators. 

They always say you won't need more slots this time, because in general,
every time a real new computer comes out, all the stuff you put in the
slots of the previous generation are now on the motherboard.  So in 
the 70's you wasted a slot for a floppy controller, in the early 80s
you wasted a slot for a hard disk controller, and now both of those 
are built in.  But still, someone's going to find a use for as many
slots are you give them.  Just ask Apple -- they were the last ones to
think they'd taken care of everything, first in the Mac and then the
Mac Plus.

What goes in those slots is about 1/2 constant, 1/2 changing.  The 
constant 1/2 is the thing that'll never be popular enough for standard 
equipment on your machine, such as a special purpose data aquisition 
board, 8 extra serial ports, superhires graphics board, etc.  These 
things have always been around, always will be.  The second 1/2 is
the "move against obselence" stuff.  Open slots let you add those
floppy controllers in the 70's and hard disks in the 80s without
throwing out the whole machine.  This kind of thing will probably be
less and less common, because the average person's need for any level
of computer power won't forever be growing unbounded.  Human nature
will set an upper limit on how much you need here.  We're not there
yet, so this kind of slot still makes sense.

I've got every slot in my Amiga 2000 here filled with something.  I
just had to throw out 2 megs of RAM out of the machine to fit the 
ethernet card.  

>  S. Alan Ezust aka "Depeche Modem"       depeche@calvin.cs.mcgill.ca
-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
                    Too much of everything is just enough