[comp.sys.atari.st] TT announcement

aking@BBN.COM (Allen King) (08/29/89)

   The first reports from Germany say nothing about multitasking, UNIX, X-WINDOWS,
or multiple GEM windows on the screen simultaneously. What's the scoup on that?

ramsiri@blake.acs.washington.edu (Enartloc Nhoj) (09/06/89)

We all knew about the Dusseldorf debut well in advance...
Does anybody know about any plans for a US debut?

Has anybody from ATARI made clear what has been holding up the
machine's release over here?  

Is it still in the design stage -> for the US model?  Has an OS for the
US model been decided on yet?  How about cases?  What's the US model
gonna look like?  If all of the above has been decided already, when
will the engineers at ATARI begin working on the product?  

Or is it just going to stay a model?

Maybe it will be shown with cars, planes and ships at the glue
show in Yakima.


ramsiri@blake.acs.washington.edu

bammi@dsrgsun.ces.cwru.edu (Jwahar R. Bammi) (09/07/89)

In article <3497@blake.acs.washington.edu>, ramsiri@blake (Enartloc Nhoj) writes:
>Has anybody from ATARI made clear what has been holding up the
>machine's release over here?  
>
anybody want to take bets that they will say its awaiting Fcc clearance?
 -:) -:)
bang:   {any internet host}!dsrgsun.ces.CWRU.edu!bammi	jwahar r. bammi
domain: bammi@dsrgsun.ces.CWRU.edu
GEnie:	J.Bammi

powers@cim1ni.enet.dec.com (Bill Powers) (09/07/89)

In article <545@cwjcc.CWRU.Edu>, bammi@dsrgsun.ces.cwru.edu (Jwahar R.
Bammi) writes:
> In article <3497@blake.acs.washington.edu>, ramsiri@blake (Enartloc
Nhoj) writes:
> >Has anybody from ATARI made clear what has been holding up the
> >machine's release over here?  
> >
> anybody want to take bets that they will say its awaiting Fcc clearance?
>  -:) -:)

  because the fcc droped the one and only unit.   8-)   8-)   8-)

  Bill Powers

---
Digital Equipment Corp. - Semiconductor Operations Hudson Ma. - The
POWER of VAX
The opinions expressed here are mine, not my employers.

Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com (09/09/89)

Jwahar R. Bammi sez:
 
>>Has anybody from ATARI made clear what has been holding up the
>>machine's release over here?  

>anybody want to take bets that they will say its awaiting Fcc clearance?
> -:) -:)
 
Nah... they used that excuse to explain away why they're breaking their
promises of a Blitter upgrade for the STs...
 
Umm... DRAM shortage...  naaah... that's already been used..
 
I know..!  "Unfair competition from Nintendo"..!  That's Atari Corp's current
"excuse" for everything...
 
BobR

gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (09/10/89)

In article <22003@cup.portal.com>, Someone writes:

>Nah... they used that excuse to explain away why they're breaking their
>promises of a Blitter upgrade for the STs...

How To Get A Blitter Upgrade:
============================

Either:
1a. Own a 1040 with a blitter socket, or
1b. Buy a ST accellerator board with a blitter socket.

2. Have your dealer order you a replacement blitter and some TOS roms
   that can handle it (either Mega ROMS (easy) or Rainbow TOS (harder)).

3. Plug in blitter and ROMS. Note the small speed increase, since you're
   running TurboST or QuickST already...

4. Decide that this upgrade wasn't worth the money.

Ever wonder if marketing reasons might keep Atari from doing something
stoopid? I used to be waiting for a blitter. Now I know it isn't worth
the money. Can we stop beating this dead horse and talk about something
interesting?


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

clong@topaz.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) (09/10/89)

On a related topic, *why* doesn't Atari come out with a machine that
comes with, as standard equipment, a PC emulator?  A Mac emulator
might not also be a bad idea.

Atari would clean up.
-- 
Chris Long, 272 Hamilton St. Apt. 1, New Brunswick NJ  08901  (201) 846-5569

"The proofs are so obvious that they can be left to the reader."
Lars V. Ahlfors, _Complex Analysis_

ramsiri@blake.acs.washington.edu (Enartloc Nhoj) (09/10/89)

In article <Sep.9.13.44.07.1989.11918@topaz.rutgers.edu> clong@topaz.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) writes:
>
>On a related topic, *why* doesn't Atari come out with a machine that
>comes with, as standard equipment, a PC emulator?  A Mac emulator
>might not also be a bad idea.
>
>Atari would clean up.
>-- 

A bit tough to ask of a "company" 
who can't even PROVIDE an updated OS for
a machine that has already existed for 4 years.

My question is: *why* doesn't ATARI come out with a machine
they purportedly have been designing for several years...


"might not also be a bad idea."

"Atari [should] clean up [their act] ."

-kevin
ramsiri@blake.acs.washington.edu

scksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Sean Kelly) (09/10/89)

In article <Sep.9.13.44.07.1989.11918@topaz.rutgers.edu> clong@topaz.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) writes:
>On a related topic, *why* doesn't Atari come out with a machine that
>comes with, as standard equipment, a PC emulator?  A Mac emulator
>might not also be a bad idea.

PCs certainly permeate the market.  Every decent computer industry magazine
today is abound with articles concerning clones.  Certainly, PCs are OK.
So are Macs.  But I'd rather have a Unix (*) box any day.  You might too,
if you just tried Unix (*) for a week.

--
kelly (sean)                      `What is the wasting?'
scksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu            `The wasting is ... the wasting!'
Std disclaimers apply             `Ahhhhh.'  --Dr ?
--

(  (*) Unix is a registered trademark of AT&T.   :-)

larserio@ifi.uio.no (LarsErikOsterud) (09/10/89)

I agree !!!
Quick-ST gives a BIOS text increase of 500%
The only thing the blitter gives is a GEM draw increase og about 5%
(yes, I've tried it myself !!)

  Lars-Erik   /   ABK-BBS +47 2132659   /   ____ ______
   Osterud   /   larserio@ifi.uio.no   /   /___    /
____________/  _______________________/   ____/   /

gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (09/10/89)

In article <Sep.9.13.44.07.1989.11918@topaz.rutgers.edu> clong@topaz.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) writes:
>
>On a related topic, *why* doesn't Atari come out with a machine that
>comes with, as standard equipment, a PC emulator?  A Mac emulator
>might not also be a bad idea.

There was a lot of speculation after the Apple ][ got its CP/M emulation
card with a Z80 on it that this card caused the demise of the Apple ][ in
the business market. After it came out, business vendors had no incentive
to port high-priced business software in Apple ][ native mode -- they told
their customers to just buy the Z80 card.

If everyone who had an ST had PC Emulation, then you could use off the
shelf ugly PC software instead of Atari-specific software with the nice
user interface. Then software development firms who already had PC versions
of their software would have little incentive to do an ST port, and
other firms wouldn't even enter the ST market because it was the "same"
as the pc market.

Would this really happen? Who knows.

Mac emulation gives more trouble, because Mac software can have a
similar user interface and runs as fast as the current low-end Mac
hardware. Would you re-write Excel from scratch (a very expensive
proposition) when everyone already had Spectre 128 and could buy
the "real thing" from Microsoft?

Would this really happen? Who knows. Should Atari take the risk?

Ask around and see if the software houses who support the ST would
like Atari to bundle PC Ditto I with the box...

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

obryan@gumby.cc.wmich.edu (Mark O'Bryan) (09/10/89)

In article <CMM.0.88.621382869.larserio@kyrre.uio.no>, larserio@ifi.uio.no (LarsErikOsterud) writes:
> I agree !!!
> Quick-ST gives a BIOS text increase of 500%
> The only thing the blitter gives is a GEM draw increase og about 5%
> (yes, I've tried it myself !!)

Turbo ST is even faster (about twice as fast).  I'm not sure about version
1.6 of Quick-ST (the latest I've seen is 1.46), and Darek and Ignac have
been too busy to post the comparison of 1.6 to Turbo-ST 1.6 that they
planned on about a month ago.

Here's some results from the (older) Quick-ST 1.46 vs Turbo-ST 1.6d (the
demo version) on a non-blitter, 2.5 meg 520 ST (using Quick-Index 1.5).
(running with TOS 1.0, in monochrome)

   Test      Quick     Turbo
   -----     -----     -----
   Text       151%      333%
   Strings    583%     1270%
   Scrolls    176%      185%
   GemDraws   168%      212%

Quick-ST 1.6 was supposed to be about 50% faster than 1.46.
For those who aren't aware, Turbo-ST is a commercial product, and 
Quick-ST is shareware.  As far as I know, Quick-ST is still sub-
stantially smaller than Turbo-ST, which may be a consideration if
you're tight on memory.

Standard disclaimers apply.  I haven't decided which one I want to
buy yet, mainly because I'd like to see what Quick-ST 1.6 can do,
and if they've got the little glitches out of it yet.

-- 
Mark T. O'Bryan                 Internet:  obryan@gumby.cc.wmich.edu
Western Michigan University
Kalamazoo, MI  49008

myers@odin.ucsd.edu (Margaret Myers) (09/11/89)

Does the TT have a cartridge port?  Will it work with Spectre 128 or GCR?

Hey -- since it has a 68030 can it emulate a Mac II?  (Are you out there
Dave Small?)

MM

tacook@stag.UUCP (Tom Cook) (09/11/89)

[bammi@dsrgsun.ces.cwru.edu (Jwahar R. Bammi) writes...]
> In article <3497@blake.acs.washington.edu>, ramsiri@blake (Enartloc Nhoj) writes:
>>Has anybody from ATARI made clear what has been holding up the
>>machine's release over here?  
>>
> anybody want to take bets that they will say its awaiting Fcc clearance?
>  -:) -:)
>
From what I remember VDE standards are harder to meet.

    Tom Cook                         |  What I said may or may not be true
    moundst!tacook@stag.UUCP         |  I'm not sure myself, if you can figure
    {tacook|sysop}@moundst.citadel   |  it out let me know.

                If all else fails read the instructions.

larserio@IFI.UIO.NO (LarsErikOsterud) (09/11/89)

Good question....
What software and cartridges will work on the TT ?
What about Quantum Paint, Spectrum 512, VIDI-ST and so on....

  Lars-Erik   /   ABK-BBS +47 2132659   /   ____ ______
   Osterud   /   larserio@ifi.uio.no   /   /___    /
____________/  _______________________/   ____/   /

hase@netmbx.UUCP (Hartmut Semken) (09/14/89)

In article <1989Sep11.160435.26342@stag.UUCP> moundst!tacook@stag.UUCP (Tom Cook) writes:
>
>[bammi@dsrgsun.ces.cwru.edu (Jwahar R. Bammi) writes...]
>From what I remember VDE standards are harder to meet.

True.
But there are no VDE standards for radio frequency emission (and other
RF stuff).

The VDE rules only apply to electrical security (metal case properly
grounded, no loose 220/110 V cables inside etc.).


The radio frequency rules for Germany are made by the Deutsche
Bundespost.
These are harder than FCC, too.

hase
-- 
Hartmut Semken, Lupsteiner Weg 67, 1000 Berlin 37 hase@netmbx.UUCP
Dennis had stepped up into the top seat whet its founder had died of a
lethal overdose of brick wall, taken while under the influence of a
Ferrari and a bottle of tequila. (Douglas Adams; the long dark teatime...)

kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) (09/15/89)

gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:

| 3. Plug in blitter and ROMS. Note the small speed increase, since you're
|    running TurboST or QuickST already...

  I beg to differ here, Greg.  TurboST 1.6 runs _much_ faster on a machine
with a blitter than one without.  Least it seems that way to me.

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

gl8f@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (09/15/89)

In article <1695@atari.UUCP> kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) writes:
>gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>
>| 3. Plug in blitter and ROMS. Note the small speed increase, since you're
>|    running TurboST or QuickST already...
>
>  I beg to differ here, Greg.  TurboST 1.6 runs _much_ faster on a machine
>with a blitter than one without.  Least it seems that way to me.

This is a classic "your mileage will vary" situation. A blitter does some
things much better than a 68000, and other things only as well as a 68000.
The stuff that *I* happen to do on my ST (mostly editing text in windows that
are aligned) the blitter can't beat the 68000. So it wouldn't be cost effective
for *me* to go out and buy a blitter upgrade. And I'm not going to whine
because Atari didn't provide me a blitter upgrade for my old 520.

If I was doing stuff that was sped up by a blitter, I'd buy one.


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

Xorg@cup.portal.com (Peter Ted Szymonik) (09/17/89)

The TT does have a cartridge port and should work with Spectre GCR.
Mac II ROMS are a completely different story however and I'm not sure
Dave (or anyone!) would want to work with them!

Peter Szymonik
Xorg@cup.portal.com

w-darekm@microsoft.UUCP (Darek Mihocka) (09/18/89)

In article <1695@atari.UUCP> kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) writes:
>gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>
>| 3. Plug in blitter and ROMS. Note the small speed increase, since you're
>|    running TurboST or QuickST already...
>
>  I beg to differ here, Greg.  TurboST 1.6 runs _much_ faster on a machine
>with a blitter than one without.  Least it seems that way to me.
>
>-- 
>   |||   Ken Badertscher  (ames!atari!kbad)
>   |||   Atari R&D System Software Engine
>  / | \  #include <disclaimer>

I beg to differ with _your_ observations Ken. My observations using a Mega ST
with TOS 1.2 and 1.4 with and without the blitter, with and without different
software accelerators. I don't disagree that Turbo ST runs faster with the
blitter chip, since it checks for and uses the blitter, but the speed increases
are far from being "_much_ faster". I'd use that term to apply to the speed
increase obtained by using Turbo ST alone, and the term "_slightly_ faster"
to describe the additional speed increase that the blitter gives you. Hope
you're not trying to sell us some vaporware blitter chips <grin>. Someone
else did mention that "your mileage will vary" but you have yet you convince
me that the blitter chip can significantly outperform tightly coded assembler
code in real life situations (not rigged Comdex demos).
Why not just apply some of the same types of optimizations that Turbo ST uses
in the next version of TOS? I'm sure there were better things to do with time
and code than putting rainbows into the desktop.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Darek Mihocka                   ST Xformer II              CIS: (out of order)
Box 2624, Station B            Quick Utilities                   GEnie: DAREKM
Kitchener, Ontario          MegaBlit   SSG   SPX                DELPHI: DAREKM
N2H 6N2                   Shareware, not Vaporware                 BIX: darekm
Canada      Blitter chip sucks!     CheapNet: ...!uw-beaver!microsoft!w-darekm
(519)-747-0386     A mind is a terrible thing to waste, so JUST SAY NO TO TOS.
Opinions expressed are my own and not those of anyone not named Darek Mihocka.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------