Xorg@cup.portal.com (Peter Ted Szymonik) (08/11/89)
Commentary:
-----------
There is a theory in political science and historical circles
that states that one of the main reasons why Central and South
American society is so fragmented and vulnerable to military coups
and drug cartels is because of an underlying feeling of defeatism
in the society itself.
This defeatism started with the conquest of the great Mayan,
Inca, and Aztec empires at the hands of a handful of Spanish
conquerors. These were centuries old cultures that disappeared
almost overnight. The native people of the time believed that
somehow they had failed their gods with the result being the
destruction of their worlds and their enslavement at the hands of
the conquistadors.
From that time on, Latin society was heavily influenced if not
completely dominated by foreign powers. Latin American history from
Cortes to 1989 is almost completely intertwined with European and
American history to the point that Latin American almost has no
history to call its own. Behind almost every major event or era
in Latin American history is a foreign influence calling the shots or
offering threats and/or aid.
The effect of these centuries of domination is a complete
breakdown of society. Latin Americans see no need to work for change
because they feel that they are not in control of their own destinies.
A strong defeatist attitude has taken over Latin America and often
this manifests itself into open hostility and attacks against foreign
influences of any kind - usually American influences.
A group of Latin American intellectuals has studied and observed
this phenomiium of Latin society in great detail - among them the
author Carlos Wrangel. They point out that until and unless Latin
America stops blaming its problems and failures
on outside powers
and finally comes to grips with its own internal
deficiencies as a
culture and society, it will be forever doomed to the a cycle of
internal unrest, military take-over, and social revolution.
>> Uh...Pete, this history lesson is great, but isn't this
>> a magazine about the ST??
Wait! The morale of the story is on the way! Just keep
reading, but keep everything you've just read in mind...
Welcome back to 1989 and the Atari ST community. Community?
Yep, just like an other organization of people, ST users form a
community in the United States. Because the ST is not exactly a
household word here in the States (yet :-]), we come together and
meet in user group meetings or on-line.
As with any other community we have our leaders and our
followers, our producers and consumers, and our 'good apples' and
our 'bad apples'. Our society is also unique in that relatively few
of us get to see each other face to face - almost all communication
is done solely through on-line conferencing, e-mail, or phone
conversation.
In the past few weeks I've noticed a problem with our community.
Our problem is deeply entrenched and it threatens to eventually
destroy our community and in the very least, severely damage it.
The problem is defeatism.
This problem is not one that is a stranger to me. My favorite
hobby is board wargaming. Wargamers also form a very unique community
since our hobby requires a lot of time, dedication, and personal study.
If I had to take a guess I would say that there are perhaps 50,000-
75,000 wargamers in the United States, not a large community at all.
Yet even though one of the most prolific publisher of wargamers
(SPI) went bankrupt in 1981, a few die-hard wargamers managed to keep
the hobby alive. I'm happy to report that in the past few years I've
witnessed a lot of new blood [pun intended] coming into the hobby and
the mass return of old veterans coming back into the fold.
How did we keep the hobby alive? For one we refused to buckle
under to the assault our hobby was taking from a strong outside
influence -> Advanced Dungeons and Dragons and role-playing games.
[Did you catch the reference to 'outside influence?']
Wargamers banded together and kept in touch through newsletters
and computer e-mail and recently a wave of wargaming clubs have
appeared across the United States.
When someone asked about the stack of wargames piled into our
closets we took the time to calmly and slowly explain to them what
what we did and why. When someone expressed an interest in the hobby
we slowly introduced them to a beginner's game and were very careful
not to scare them away with over-bearing terminology. And most
importantly - when someone bad-mouthed the hobby or thought it was
all a waste of time we carefully but sternly defended what we were
doing. Accusations that it was a 'dead' hobby fell on deaf ears, we
stuck to our guns and kept doing what we enjoyed doing.
>> Pete please! Now your going off into a history of wargaimg!
Ok, sorry about that! Keep reading...
Defeatism is an ugly word. It is devoid of any hope or success.
It closes the door on progress and change. And it terms of a society,
it leaves a community wide open to outside influences.
In the past few months Atari has waved some pretty big carrots
in front of our faces in the form of STacy, the TT, the PC4, the
Portfolio. But none of these great machines had yet to grace a
single store shelf.
The ST community is also under attack from all quarters of the
computing establishment. The most obvious and damaging being from
an established and widely know figure in the computing community,
Mr Gilman Louie, CEO of Spectrum Holobyte.
Even though Mr. Louie has probably never attended a ST user group
meeting, even though Mr Louie hasn't frequented any of the on-line
services, and even though Mr Louie probably doesn't subscribe to any
St publications, he saw fit to make the claim that "...piracy seems
better accepted by ST users" in an 'open letter' which he circulated
not only in the ST community, but the entire computing community.
The result is obvious, computer users everywhere pointed fingers
at use and said 'see? I told you so!' Developers who were unsure
about releasing ST software because they didn't know enough about the
machine or the ST community were now made aware that the ST was a
'pirate's machine' by one of their own. Recent articles on computing
in both "Chess Life" and "The Wargamer" had disturbing references
about the 'demise' of the Atari ST line.
But this is not about the attacks on our community, its about
defeatism, defeatism in the ST community. After Mr Louie's letter
was circulated there was almost NO reaction from ST users, not a
word was said by anybody.
Even more incredulous was that most every
ST publisher saw fit to print the letter without questioning the
comments about our community!
Do the editors of our ST magazines really believe that ST users
tolerate piracy? Do the leaders of our ST community really believe
that ST users tolerate piracy more than MS-DOS or MAC users? Do
YOU really believe that YOU tolerate piracy more than your fellow
Amiga user? Then why was there no outcry? There can only be one
answer - defeatism.
We let Spectrum Holobyte make us feel bad for 'accepting' the
piracy of their game Falcon ST while it soared to the top of the
sales charts. We let Spectrum Holobyte make us believe that they
were losing money hand over fist as their price for supporting the
ST market, in the meantime they were readying scenario disks for us.
If Falcon ST was a money-loser then why would they bother to make
scenario disks?
We rolled over like so many sheep and said "Thank you Mr
Louie! We know we're the bad boys of the computer world, thank you
for giving us this heavily protected game and its code-wheel!
Thank you, thank you!" Patethic!
And this is not the only case. Visit to any rumor/chat
section of any on-line service and you'll find it flooded with
messages knocking Atari Corp. You'll find the bases flooded with
people who use the ST as one of their 'other' machines lauding all
the great new programs for their clones while bad-mouthing the ST.
You'll find developers who seem to take extreme joy pointing out to
us that they make much more money in the MS-DOS world. They blame
us for not buying the same numbers of programs
even though as a
percentage, ST owners are far more likely to buy a new piece of
software than the average MS-DOS or MAC owner.
And we sit there and take it, never asking what these people
have done to promote the ST, never asking these people if they have
anything better to do than to make ST owners feel like the black
sheep of the computer world, never asking them if they've written
any letters to computer and general interest magazines to defend
the ST.
Worse still, we watch all this, we see Computer Shopper
feature an article on low-budget DTP systems without even once
mentioning the ST DTP (while an Apple II is highlighted no less!)
and we sit there and do nothing. The following should sound
familiar:
Unless and until we are willing to stop kicking ourselves
for buying the most powerful computer on the market, unless
and until we act * as a community * to respond to attacks
on our community from outside organizations and infulences,
unless and until we work to let others in the computer know
that the ST is a serious machine with serious user, we are
doomed to accept the fate handed down to us - the ST WILL
become a 'demised' computer.
Regards and Thanx,
Peter SzymonikSML108@PSUVM.BITNET (08/11/89)
In response to an interesting story comparing Atari to Latin America.... Your points on piracy are well taken, and in fact very valid. However, there is NO way I am going to stop badmouthing Atari until I see them release and support something, period.... It really isn't difficult to do. Unless of course they are taking the dyslexia approach to the computer market: Build a great machine, and then give it zero support rather than build a mediocre box, and then advertise it to death... I bought my ST within 3 months of its initial release. I love it. I developed and released the program Genesis through Antic Software, and am currently preparing a second program for release. I still believe in the ST, but I am now aiming somewhat for the European Market as the American market is limited du to the small number of dealers out there. I realize that the program WILL be pirated to death. This does not mean I won't make alot of money, but to you people that do pirate it, you're scum, and there will be some interesting twists built into it JUST for you. Nothing illegal mind you, but I certainly hope to make you pound your machine a few times in frustration... The point of that last paragraph is that I still support the ST, but Atari appears to be the Rainman of the computer industry, and if they don't get their act together with the TT, they will perish, and justifiably so... I have never cared much for what people think of me, so I have generally stated with reasonable pride that I own an ST, and when people snicker, I laugh in their faces, very loudly generally. The ST market is far from dead, you just have to be cagey about what and where you buy. However, a bozo is a bozo is a bozo, and most of them own IBM's and Apple IIgs's because of their names, the same reason that one purchases a BMW over an Acura or Nissan. These people won't change, so why worry about them ? Scott Le Grand
Xorg@cup.portal.com (Peter Ted Szymonik) (08/14/89)
Hi Scott, although I completely agree with most of what you wrote, one falining among most people who bad-mouth the ST is not recognizing that unlike the Apple or MS-DOS machines, the ST was sold internationally and like it or not, the United States was never tapped as the major market for the ST. Yes, Atari has been brain-dead when it comes to the U.S> market, but that may well have been on purpose - going after and against MS-DOS and MAC's with the multi-BILLION dollar war-chests would hardly have been a wise business decision on the aprt of Atari. Atari's strategy HAS also worked by the way - financially the company is very strong and solid and 400 on the Fortune 500 list - far from an easy achievement for a compnay that appeared a mere four years ago!
logajan@ns.network.com (John Logajan) (08/15/89)
Xorg@cup.portal.com (Peter Ted Szymonik) writes: > Atari's strategy HAS also worked by the way - financially the company is > very strong and solid and 400 on the Fortune 500 list - far from an > easy achievement for a compnay that appeared a mere four years ago! Atari is also number 91 as far as all US companies involved in electronic equipment manufacture (not just computers!) Atari is a relatively large (net income wise) company. -- - John M. Logajan @ Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 - - logajan@ns.network.com / ...rutgers!umn-cs!ns!logajan / john@logajan.mn.org -
lake@ka3ovk.uucp (Marshall Lake) (08/16/89)
In article <1559@ns.network.com> logajan@ns.network.com (John Logajan) writes: >Xorg@cup.portal.com (Peter Ted Szymonik) writes: >> Atari's strategy HAS also worked by the way - financially the company is >> very strong and solid and 400 on the Fortune 500 list - far from an >> easy achievement for a compnay that appeared a mere four years ago! > >Atari is also number 91 as far as all US companies involved in electronic >equipment manufacture (not just computers!) Atari is a relatively large >(net income wise) company. > >-- >- John M. Logajan @ Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 - >- logajan@ns.network.com / ...rutgers!umn-cs!ns!logajan / john@logajan.mn.org - Aren't these statistics more than a year old? I had thought they weren't true any longer.
logajan@ns.network.com (John Logajan) (08/18/89)
<1989Aug16.111307.22118@ka3ovk.uucp>, lake@ka3ovk.uucp (Marshall Lake) writes: > >Atari is also number 91 as far as all US companies involved in electronic > >equipment manufacture (not just computers!) Atari is a relatively large > >(net income wise) company. > > Aren't these statistics more than a year old? I had thought they weren't > true any longer. The 91 ranking is for calender/fiscal year 1988, so they are about 8 months old. The 91 figure appeared in the July 24, 1989 issue of Electronic Business magazine, where they rated the top 200 electronics companies. In 1987, Atari's ranking was 82 (ranked according to electronics revenues.) (By the way, I don't think you can conclude anything from that apparent slip in ranking -- since it might be entirely due to other companies growing faster, rather than Atari shrinking.) Electronic Business also rated Atari: Third (microcomputer manufactoring) behind Apple and Compaq in revenue per employee. Second (against all 200) in return on equity. Seventh (against all 200) in return on investment. And fourth (against all 200) in the ratio of foreign versus total revenue (so surprise here.) -- - John M. Logajan @ Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 - - logajan@ns.network.com / ...rutgers!umn-cs!ns!logajan / john@logajan.mn.org -
Xorg@cup.portal.com (Peter Ted Szymonik) (08/19/89)
The Fortune 500 list is as of THIS year, and does account for the dumping of Federated. Peter Szymonik Xorg@cup.portal.com (moving up the Fortune 500 while dealing with the Federated fiasco speaks volumes about the strength of Atari Corp.)
rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer) (09/11/89)
In article <1574@ns.network.com> logajan@ns.network.com (John Logajan) writes: >In 1987, Atari's ranking was 82 (ranked according to electronics revenues.) > >(By the way, I don't think you can conclude anything from that apparent slip >in ranking -- since it might be entirely due to other companies growing faster, >rather than Atari shrinking.) There's a difference? You don't grow, you die. You don't out-grow, you die. The TT sounds like a nice box. It'll be interesting to see how closely reality matches what / when net.talk says it is. -- >>> "Aaiiyeeeee! Death from above!" <<< | Steve Rehrauer Fone: (508)256-6600 x6168 | Apollo Computer, a ARPA: rehrauer@apollo.hp.com | division of Hewlett-Packard "Look, Max: 'Pressurized cheese in a can'. Even _WE_ wouldn't eat that!"