scott@cs.odu.edu (01/25/89)
>Selling complete system Atari 1040 STF+ computer. Comes with: [...] > The computer itself uses a 68000 Microprocessor running at > 8 Mhz. It comes with 1Mb expendable to 4Mb. ^^^^^^^^^^ |||||||||| I love it! I have been following this disgustion on the expandable 1040st. Now I am confused-- can the 1040 be upgraded (easily) and is this upgrade reliable? And the blitter? I thought the answers were NO, NO and NO (In that order). So, to upgrade you must buy a mega, right? > Price: $1050. shipping included... > Hurry up!! It's a bargain.... Maybe I got lucky... I got the same deal plus mouse pad, modem cable, printer cable and dust cover for $800. There were also mac sacs advertised on the net just a while ago-- I don't see that in the listing? That ST needs a mac sac to run the mac stuff, right? --------- Now that I've got your attention, I have a couple more questions. The first has to do with disk formatting. I usually buy fairly reliable disks (I just bought some 2nd ibm disks that are sad, but I just use them for /tmp files...) and I was just wondering about all these formatting programs I see floating around. 9, 10 and now 11 sectors.... 80, 81 and now 82 tracks 700, 800 and now I can format my disks with 923k. Just when I thought it was safe to format a disk I found one with some sort of track offset (I just forgot the name... ) but it is supposed to speed up reading by 50% BUT even the docs say that it is NOT recommended! WHAT IS THE DEAL? Can any of these formatting procedure harm the drive by over extending a mechanism here or there? Are there any real problems besides loss of data? My next question is a probably much easier to answer.... if I wanted to port something over from a vax or a sun system and compile it on my st-- would this be an easy task? Can programs be easily moved? I am just starting with C but I just want to know if it is feasable-- I hear that you can do this quite easily with an Amiga... and I thought that it would also be just as easy with an ST.... but, I could be wrong. Scott D. Yelich scott@cs.odu.edu [128.82.8.1]
saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) (01/25/89)
In article <7367@xanth.cs.odu.edu>, scott@cs.odu.edu writes: [lots deleted] > My next question is a probably much easier to answer.... if I wanted to > port something over from a vax or a sun system and compile it on my st-- > would this be an easy task? Can programs be easily moved? I am just > starting with C but I just want to know if it is feasable-- I hear that you > can do this quite easily with an Amiga... and I thought that it would also > be just as easy with an ST.... but, I could be wrong. > > Scott D. Yelich scott@cs.odu.edu [128.82.8.1] I make a hobby of porting Unix stuff to the ST with Mark Williams C. The language and libraries are very much like the Unix standards. There are a few things to watch out for: VAX (and I think Sun) uses 32-bit int-s; ST uses 16-bit int-s. Everyone uses 32-bit pointers. The consequences are obvious, and must be watched for. It's also convenient to make your own string.h, which MWC doesn't have, because many UNix programs include it. A collection of common tools is nice: getopt(), curses and the Berkeley directory routines are used a lot. It's a good way to learn 1)the C language 2)to use a debugger. Steve J.
Xorg@cup.portal.com (Peter Ted Szymonik) (01/28/89)
Yes the 1040 can be easily expanded to 4 megs with an EZ-RAM board that requires a screwdriver to install and some chips. And yes the $1050 price is much too high... Pete
ritchie@hpldola.HP.COM (Dave Ritchie) (01/28/89)
/ hpldola:comp.sys.atari.st / scott@cs.odu.edu / 8:11 pm Jan 24, 1989 / >/tmp files...) and I was just wondering about all these formatting programs >I see floating around. 9, 10 and now 11 sectors.... 80, 81 and now 82 tracks >700, 800 and now I can format my disks with 923k. Just when I thought it was >safe to format a disk I found one with some sort of track offset (I just >forgot the name... ) but it is supposed to speed up reading by 50% BUT >even the docs say that it is NOT recommended! WHAT IS THE DEAL? Can any >of these formatting procedure harm the drive by over extending a mechanism >here or there? Are there any real problems besides loss of data? > Scott D. Yelich scott@cs.odu.edu [128.82.8.1] These are 2 seperate problems. The use of tracks > 80 is dependent upon the particular drive mechanism used - some will tolerate stepping past track 80, some won't. The use of sectors > 9 per track is dependent upon the rotational speed of the particular drive - 9 works best between different computers, 10 will work with most, 11 will work with drives that are slower than the standard 300 RPM (slower -> more time under head -> more time for FDC chip to convert). I usually stick with the standard 9/80, being in a post-college phase that allows me to buy disks, etc. :-> 10/80 should be fairly safe I would think. How much TOS support non-standard formatting, I do not know. dave
scott@flounder.cs.odu.edu (Scott Yelich) (01/30/89)
In article <11830032@hpldola.HP.COM> ritchie@hpldola.HP.COM (Dave Ritchie) writes: >/ hpldola:comp.sys.atari.st / scott@cs.odu.edu / 8:11 pm Jan 24, 1989 / > [... my original letter deleted ...] >> Scott D. Yelich scott@cs.odu.edu [128.82.8.1] > > These are 2 seperate problems. The use of tracks > 80 is dependent upon >the particular drive mechanism used - some will tolerate stepping past >track 80, some won't. The use of sectors > 9 per track is dependent upon >the rotational speed of the particular drive - 9 works best between different >computers, 10 will work with most, 11 will work with drives that are slower >than the standard 300 RPM (slower -> more time under head -> more time >for FDC chip to convert). I usually stick with the standard 9/80, being in >a post-college phase that allows me to buy disks, etc. :-> 10/80 should >be fairly safe I would think. How much TOS support non-standard formatting, >I do not know. > dave My drive formatted and used 11/82. Once and a while when doing a lot of reads-- the drive would make a clanking noise... That's when I decided that 82 was too much.. I still used 11/81. I have since found the name of that track offset-- TWISTED. I think what it is supposed to do is scramble the formated sectors on the tracks to allow the required access-time to decrease. But, I don't see how this can be considered dangerous! All you are doing is changing the sequential order of the formated sectors! (The old 8bit atari did this just fine) Scott D. Yelich scott@cs.odu.edu [128.82.8.1]
trb@stag.UUCP ( Todd Burkey ) (01/30/89)
In article <7367@xanth.cs.odu.edu> scott@cs.odu.edu () writes: > > I love it! I have been following this disgustion on the expandable >1040st. Now I am confused-- can the 1040 be upgraded (easily) and is this >upgrade reliable? And the blitter? I thought the answers were NO, NO and >NO (In that order). So, to upgrade you must buy a mega, right? Currently, the answer is YES, YES, and NO...I even have a 4 meg board in my 520 ST (no soldering involved), although I am waiting for prices on memory to drop before buying the extra memory chips. A blitter? Who really cares all that much anymore. To be truthful, if Atari offered a cheap (under $100) blitter upgrade today I am not sure I would even install it. I think most of the users out there get sufficient speed out of the normal Line-A calls, plus there are tools out today that can speed up the non-blitter routines. Now, if I were multi-tasking on the ST, it would be a different matter. >...but it is supposed to speed up reading by 50% BUT >even the docs say that it is NOT recommended! WHAT IS THE DEAL? Can any >of these formatting procedure harm the drive by over extending a mechanism >here or there? Are there any real problems besides loss of data? Certain drives can be damaged by the formatters that push you out past 80 tracks, but most of the earlier machines can handle 82 tracks fine. Doubtful that anything else could damage the drive...Just be careful about saving your only copies of sources to a 923K disk. If your drive gets slightly out of alignment or the speed changes, you could be out of luck. 923K and fast read is great for storing those demo programs, pictures, and compiler libraries or tmp directories on. > My next question is a probably much easier to answer.... if I wanted to >port something over from a vax or a sun system and compile it on my st-- >would this be an easy task? Can programs be easily moved? I do it all the time between the Sun or Apollos and my ST. I use MWC 3.0, but the GNU-C compilers are also very safe to use from a compatibility viewpoint. I have not had as much luck going back and forth between the Sun and Amigas, even though some of the early development enviroments for the Amigas were based on the Sun computers (I had the fun of having to cross-compile on the IBM PC for my early Amiga code...not fun at all). I assume GNU C is available now on the Amiga, so compatibility is probably no longer a problem (I don't have an Amiga anymore). -Todd Burkey "A member of STdNET-The ST developers' Network" trb@stag.UUCP "UUMAIL: Rain or snow, your mail beats you home :-)"
dlm@druhi.ATT.COM (Dan Moore) (01/31/89)
in article <7436@xanth.cs.odu.edu>, scott@flounder.cs.odu.edu (Scott Yelich) says: > My drive formatted and used 11/82. Once and a while when doing a lot > of reads-- the drive would make a clanking noise... That's when I decided > that 82 was too much.. I still used 11/81. About 30% of the 3.5" drives Atari has sold will work with more than 80 tracks. (This is based on info gathered when I was at Data Pacific.) If you have a drive that supports more than 80 tracks it works just fine. But if you ever need to read that disk on a drive that only supports 80 tracks you will be SOL. > I have since found the name of that track offset-- TWISTED. I think what > it is supposed to do is scramble the formated sectors on the tracks to > allow the required access-time to decrease. TWISTER (written by Dave Small and myself, published by STart) skews the sectors on the disk so that sector 1 is not always located by the index hole. Sector one is moved by 2 sectors for each track. (eg. track 0 has sector 1-10 in sequence, track 1 has sectors 9-10 followed by sectors 1-8.) The skew allows time for the head to step (3 milli- seconds) and for it to stop vibrating (about 30 milli-seconds) before sector 1 arrives. This allows the ST to read every track on the disk in just over 80 revolutions of the disk (single sided), a normally formatted disk takes 160+ revolutions of the disk to be read. TWISTER also formats the disk with 10 sectors per track instead of the standard 9 sectors per track. On a drive spinning anywhere near the correct speed (300 RPM) this is not a problem. The newer ROMs from Atari (Mega ROMs and the unreleased 1.4 ROMs) also skew the sectors on the disk, though they only shift one sector per track. That works as long as very little time is required for the head to stop vibrating after the step. > But, I don't see how this can be considered dangerous! All you are doing > is changing the sequential order of the formated sectors! (The old > 8bit atari did this just fine) The only "danger" with non-standard formats is lack of portability between different STs. Most STs can not handle disks formatted with 11 sectors per track since their drives are spinning at the correct speed. Only drives that are spinning slower than normal have the time to put 11 sectors on a track. Also most STs can't handle disks formatted with 81 or 82 sectors per track since the drives have a physical stop at the 80th track. If you are not worried about using disks on other STs then use 11 sectors per track with 81 or 82 tracks. If you want all other STs to be able to use your disks stick to 9 or 10 sectors and 80 tracks. Dan Moore AT&T Bell Labs Denver dlm@druhi.ATT.COM dlm@druwy.ATT.COM
c08_d102@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Stdnt102) (01/31/89)
In <7436@xanth.cs.odu.edu> scott@cs.odu.edu (Scott Yelich) writes: >In <11830032@hpldola.HP.COM> ritchie@hpldola.HP.COM (Dave Ritchie) writes: >> These are 2 seperate problems. The use of tracks > 80 is dependent upon >>the particular drive mechanism used - some will tolerate stepping past >>track 80, some won't. The use of sectors > 9 per track is dependent upon >>the rotational speed of the particular drive - 9 works best between different >>computers, 10 will work with most, 11 will work with drives that are slower >>than the standard 300 RPM (slower -> more time under head -> more time >>for FDC chip to convert). [etc] >> dave > >My drive formatted and used 11/82. Once and a while when doing a lot >of reads-- the drive would make a clanking noise... That's when I decided >that 82 was too much.. I still used 11/81. > Scott D. Yelich scott@cs.odu.edu [128.82.8.1] The problem is probably the 11 sectors. ST drives vary enough (as far as the rotation rates go) that 11 sectors probably is beyond most of them. Many of the newer drives are also unable to read past 80 or 82 tracks, but this doesn't sound like it's a problem for yours (this is a FEATURE of these drives; it can't be changed, as far as I know, so you're lucky). The rotation rate can be changed, although I don't know exactly what to do. Don't worry about the TWISTER format. This has been incorporated into the Mega ROMs (TOS 1.2, as opposed to the TOS 1.4 which so many of us are waiting for...). The "Format" feature on the "File" menu allows (maybe it forces you; I don't know) twisting the tracks. -- Jared J. Brennan I wish I'd remembered to copy my .signature c08_d102@jhunix.BITNET from my other account. The hologram was ins_bjjb@jhunix.BITNET astounding . . .
Fiacha of Glencar@hjuxa.UUCP (Fiacha of Glencar) (02/01/89)
From article <3872@druhi.ATT.COM>, by dlm@druhi.ATT.COM (Dan Moore): > in article <7436@xanth.cs.odu.edu>, scott@flounder.cs.odu.edu (Scott Yelich) says: >> I have since found the name of that track offset-- TWISTED. I think what >> it is supposed to do is scramble the formated sectors on the tracks to >> allow the required access-time to decrease. > TWISTER also formats the disk with 10 sectors per track instead > of the standard 9 sectors per track. On a drive spinning anywhere near > the correct speed (300 RPM) this is not a problem. I tried TWISTER thinking how wonderful. All was well until I tried to use the floppy. This led me to find a speed checker. It seems that my drive spins at 304 to 305 rpm and therefore has problems with 10 sector formats. I think that I used to be able to format with 10 sectors/track but I could be mistaken. How can I slow it down? If I can't slow it down, how much will Atari charge me to replace it. -- Nigel R Haslock | If you have to be warped to weave, __-------___ Manalapan NJ 07726 | what do you have to be to forge? |___ __ ___/ nrh%hjuxa.uucp@decuac.dec.com| | | or ...!rutgers!hjuxa!nrh | Hotter! Make the sparks fly. /____\
BobR@cup.portal.com (Bob BobR Retelle) (02/01/89)
Concerning the use of "Twisted" formats, the only "danger" that might be involved is that the original release of the "Twister Formatter" that came with STart magazine had a bug in it that could cause the ST to not recognize that you'd changed the disk, and could possibly cause data to be overwritten on the disk you'd inserted in the drive... This has been fixed, and Twister is now extremely reliable. In fact, the "Mega ROMs" use a "Twisted" formatting scheme to speed up disk access... The comparison to the sector layout of the 8-bit drives was correct.. essentially this is all that the "Twister Format" consists of. " BobR