COMSAT@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU (Communications Satellite) (03/17/88)
FAILED: TETHER at MITLNS.MIT.EDU; Funny reply from foreign host after sending message.
Last reply was: {554 Unable to deliver mail to given recipient(s)}
Failed message follows:
-------
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 MAR 88 00:43:08 EST
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Thu 17 Mar 88 00:40:22-EST
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU with TCP/SMTP; Thu 17 Mar 88 00:44:22-EST
Date: Wed 16 Mar 88 20:40:09 PST
Subject: Info-Atari16 Digest V88 #120
From: Info-Atari16 Digest <Info-Atari16@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: Info-Atari16-request@Score.Stanford.EDU
Errors-to: Info-Atari16-request@Score.Stanford.EDU
Maint-Path: Info-Atari16-request@Score.Stanford.EDU
To: Info-Atari16 Distribution List: ;
Reply-to: Info-Atari16@Score.Stanford.edu
Info-Atari16 Digest Wednesday, March 16, 1988 Volume 88 : Issue 120
This weeks Editor: Bill Westfield
Today's Topics:
Re: Computer Mail Order, Inc. looooong shipping delay
Re: UniTerm 2.1a wishlist
Re: MX2
Re: Atari Advertising Idea
Laser C question
src for less (ST) wanted
Re: Micro RTX Description (discussion, predictions)
Re: Termcap.
Re: MWC 3.0
UUPC for the ST
Packaging Microsoft Write
Buying an ST, need info.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 88 16:49:06 GMT
From: nunki.usc.edu!sal22.usc.edu!rjung@oberon.usc.edu (Robert Jung)
Subject: Re: Computer Mail Order, Inc. looooong shipping delay
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
In article <8803022013.AA23316@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> #FJMORA@WMMVS.BITNET writes:
>And some retailers complain that since Atari purchased Federated, they
>dump all the STs they make into the Federated warehouse, and that
>independant retailers just can't have STs. Is that true?
Not from what I've heard. There's a local Atari-only store near L.A.
called Logical Choice, and they've been getting Mega ST's and other hardware
without problems. I've heard, however, that there is a shortage of ST's in
America in general (apparently they're going over to Europe, where everybody
is buying them like hotcakes [can anyone confirm?])...Seems us AmericAtarians
will have to wait awhile...
On a similar vein, Sam Tramiel/Neil Harris admitted on GEnie that they've
been neglecting the US market quite a bit, to focus on overseas sales...
--R.J.
B-)
______________________________________________________________________________
Bitnet: rjung@castor.usc.edu "Who needs an Amiga?" = == =
= == =
Power WithOUT the Price = == =
===== == =====
Just because it's 8-bits doesn't make it obsolete. ==== == ====
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 88 16:38:48 GMT
From: weaver@TUT.CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (Andrew Weaver)
Subject: Re: UniTerm 2.1a wishlist
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
In article <2866@brspyr1.BRS.Com> tim@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Tim Northrup) writes:
>From article <186@forty2.UUCP>, by poole@forty2.UUCP (Simon Poole):
>> mcvax!ukc!mupsy!liv-cs!sqrkl, Richard K. Lloyd writes >Wishlist for
>
>>>6) Retain the screen display when switching from or to 132 column mode,
>>> rather than clearing the screen and homing the cursor.
>>
>> Wrong! No VT1XX, VT2XX or VT3XX compatible terminal works this way,
>> all clear the screen and home the cursor. The command set of D*C
[stuff deleted]
>Sorry Simon, but I use an HDS2200 (VT-220 compatible from Human Designed
>Systems), that *does* retain the screen on size change.
>
>
>I kind of like the feature, but then again I don't switch screen size
>all that often.
>--
>Tim "The Enchanter" Northrup
This "change size without clear screen" feature is also
found on the Wyse wy85 terminal (and, I believe, another vt2xx clone
made bye some company called Draco I believe.) True, it would be a nice
feature to have, but admittedly not one that I'd die without. :-)
I have been following this discussion, and if there is one
thing that I'd like to see (maybe this is in 2.0, I only have 1.8 as of
yet, and am looking for an arpa/uucp/ftp archive for 2.0) is a small
editor, perhaps in a window, that would allow one to edit a small file
while still on-line (without leaving Uniterm.) This is the only feature
of FLASH! that I haven't seen Uniterm sufficiently beat the hell out of.
(As far as I am concerned, I have never seen such a nice term package as,
Uniterm, commerical or otherwise, including Procomm for the PCs, a nice
program in its own right.)
Thanks again for Simon for making the world, at least the world
of ST, a bit of a nicer place.
--
Andrew Weaver weaver@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
OSU College of Business soon: weaver@osu-pisa.UUCP
"What's the watermelon do?" "I'll tell you later." -- from Buckaroo Banzai
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 88 05:55:30 GMT
From: mh4x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Mark Edward Hamill)
Subject: Re: MX2
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
If someone has not posted the sources of the MX2 kernel already
(as of 3/2), would some kind soul mail them to me.
(We had a few problems with our feed of this group, so if these
were posted after 3/2, please disreguard this message)
Mark Hamill
mh4x@andrew.cmu.edu -Arpa
mhamill@drycas -Bitnet
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 88 02:39:21 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com!roger_warren_tang@uunet.uu.net
Subject: Re: Atari Advertising Idea
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
Of course, a 40 share on Thursdays can do a LOT of mind changing.....
The truth is, of course, a black has be a bigger star with bigger clout
than an equivalent white. Superstars are superstars; it's the next rung down
that has the problems.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 88 23:21:15 GMT
From: agate!saturn!ssyx.ucsc.edu!koreth@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Steven Grimm)
Subject: Laser C question
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
I'm porting a program (BB/ST, my bulletin board system)) to Laser C
(from Megamax 1.1). All the C stuff compiles without a hitch, but the
inline assembly is a bit different. In particular, I need to know how
to reference a label defined in an inline assemble segment, from the
rest of the program. This code worked on the old compiler:
extern foo();
asm {
foo:
clr.l A7
rts
}
You could call foo() from another part of the program. That doesn't seem
to work in Laser C. My other question is probably closely related; I want
to install some trap handlers. The code
lea trap1hand(PC), A0
move.l A0, 0x90 ; or whatever address
worked in Megamax C; now it says "trap1hand undefined", even if it's defined
in the same asm{} block. I've tried taking away the "(PC)", changing it
to move.l #trap1hand, 0x90 (which would be the ideal way to do it), and a
couple other things, to no avail.
Any help would be appreciated.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 88 10:11:25 GMT
From: linus!alliant!rosenkra@husc6.harvard.edu (Bill Rosenkranz)
Subject: src for less (ST) wanted
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
could someone please post or email the source for the ST version of less?
i really do not fancy the idea of porting the un*x version....(i have
executable, so pls do not post that).
thanx a priori
-bill
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 88 18:09:44 GMT
From: uflorida!codas!burl!clyde!watmath!watdcsu!ttims@gatech.edu (Tracy Tims)
Subject: Re: Micro RTX Description (discussion, predictions)
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
Your RTX system sounds really, really nice. (I wrote my own mini message
passing kernel for the Atari, but it has only a small fraction of the power
of yours.)
So, considering that it exists, and that it sounds like it's in good taste,
technically speaking:
Why isn't Atari licensing it from you and distributing it
with all their machines?
It sounds like a better software system than they will ever be able to design
and distribute. Are they holding out because they think they can do better?
Is their management unable to appreciate the future marketing value of a
message passing multitasking operating system (especially in a networked
environment)? Are they simply unaware of it? Do they take the point of view
(regrettably common) that they can do economically better by producing a poor
product for less money?
Would you accept a binary licensing fee of say, 15 dollars (US) per copy for
distribution with every Atari ST? If Atari was willing to simply pass this
fee onto each consumer by raising the system cost by 15 dollars would this
impact hardware sales in a meaningful way? (What would be a more optimal
licensing fee?) Consumers, would you pay 15 dollars more for an Atari with
RTX built in?
If it was distributed (and became the new Atari operating system standard)
would this encourage more sophisticated software development for the machine,
and would this increase the market for the hardware (and for the RTX)? Is
it possible that RTX could add more reliability to stock TOS?
*If* your RTX would port nicely to a system with an MMU, I'd say it sounds like
it could be the software salvation of TOS and the whole ST line.
I don't think there are any medium term prospects for personal computers that
are not addressing the memory protection/multitasking/software reliability
problems. The only primitive operating system that will survive will be MSDOS.
The workstation manufacturers are showing cheaper and cheaper products that
have worlds more functionality and reliability that current personal computers.
More and more people are coming to understand the value of these types of
machines and (like me) will demand that value in their personal computers.
There will be two choices for decent operating systems: UNIX, and anything
else that implements the minimum technical niceties. I'm not saying that UNIX
is the best, or even desirable. It exists, and it can be ported and it can
work. The biggest obstacle to the popular acceptance of UNIX systems (with
windowing) is the high, high cost of the application and system software.
There is good application software out there for workstations: it would never
sell in the mass market unless the prices dropped by a factor of 10.
It's in this niche that "other decent operating systems" will fit. With
foresight and planning, cheaper operating systems and software could be
highly competitive (in terms of price/(functionality+reliability)) with
more sophisticated workstations. Apple seems to have no problem understanding
this. Foresight and planning means the development of RELIABLE and SECURE
hardware and software. I think there is a better chance (technically) that
the Atari could evolve into the budget workstation that the Apple. The
Atari hardware and software is less crufty and cast-in-concrete than Mac
hardware and software. (This is mostly because the software is more loosely
organized, and because the hardware is cleaner.)
It think it would be very difficult to produce a Mac which one could leave
turned on for large periods of time, and do useful work on, without being
worried about memory corruption. I think that with intelligence and taste,
TOS (with RTX?) could be made to operate reliably in a memory protected
environment.
Reliability and functionality are the two things which sell machines. A user
needs *both* to get work done.
Tracy Tims
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 88 10:26:32 GMT
From: linus!alliant!rosenkra@husc6.harvard.edu (Bill Rosenkranz)
Subject: Re: Termcap.
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
In article <8803040939.AA14001@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> VILJANEN@FINUH.BITNET writes:
>
> Has anyone compiled TERMCAP succesfully? I've tried many times
>with my Megamax, but with not too good results. If someone has a working
>compiled copy, I'd be eternally grateful if that someone could mail me
>a copy to the address below. Thank you in advance...
i have (with alcyon). worms and some other tests i wrote work fine.
i don't recall if any changes were necessary. i usually change SOMETHING
to make it as un*x compatible as possible.
-bill
(sorry, can't send u megamax object)
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 88 21:54:18 GMT
From: littlei!ajw@uunet.uu.net (ajw)
Subject: Re: MWC 3.0
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
In article <162@bdt.UUCP> david@bdt.UUCP (David Beckemeyer) writes:
>I personally think it is a good idea for MW to hold off the release if
>they have to. I'd rather have a well-tested version that is 100%
>compatible and bug-free, than get a new version that breaks things
>and needs another update 3-weeks later.
>
>You flame them for being late, and you flame them if it's not perfect
>when it ships. What can one do?
Now that Mr. Beckemeyer (a good guy) has made this extremely valid point
about Mark Williams Company (also pretty much good guys), maybe some
readers of this group will pause for the odd nanosecond before flaming
Atari (hiss the villain!!) for not having shoved "fixes" out of the
door while they were still warm on the coding pad.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 88 01:01:50 GMT
From: amdahl!drivax!holloway@AMES.ARC.NASA.GOV (Bruce Holloway)
Subject: UUPC for the ST
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
I'll be losing this account soon, and really need UUPC so I can keep in
contact with the net.
1] Is anyone out there willing to send me the sources or objects to
UUPC for the ST?
2] Does UUPC handle news and mail?
Thanks,
Bruce
--
*******************************************************************************
* Bruce Holloway - Terminal Netnews Addict uunet!amdahl!drivax!holloway *
* ALBATROSS, ATARI*TROS @ Plink ALBATROSS @ Delphi *
************Cuzqoirm mluyh, "Ulu! Buyrf xumh megjux ubb nuth juq!"*************
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 88 17:09:52 GMT
From: nunki.usc.edu!castor.usc.edu!rjung@oberon.usc.edu (Robert Jung)
Subject: Packaging Microsoft Write
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
I was talking on the phone with a dealer at the local Federated store the
other night, chatting about software. The discussion turned to Microsoft
Write, and specifically its high ($140) price:
Me : "$140?!?"
Him : "Well, I think Atari is deliberately pricing it high, to keep you
from buying it separately. I think we have a package special
where you get Microsoft write FOR FREE when you buy a 1040."
Anybody know if this is right? Is this just a mistake on my friend, or is
this some sort of (potentially terrific) promotional scheme we haven't heard
about? And if so, why isn't Atari PUSHING it???
Fearful of software over $40,
--R.J.
B-)
Summary of the ST/Atari: It's a great machine, with a heluvalotta potential,
all it needs is the right marketing and a few tweaks.
______________________________________________________________________________
Bitnet: rjung@castor.usc.edu "Who needs an Amiga?" = == =
= == =
Power WithOUT the Price = == =
===== == =====
Just because it's 8-bits doesn't make it obsolete. ==== == ====
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 88 19:20:18 GMT
From: sunybcs!ugthomps@AMES.ARC.NASA.GOV (Gregory Thompson)
Subject: Buying an ST, need info.
To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
Greetings,
I am about to buy an ATARI 520st and would like to procure some information
about the machine first.
1) Is the blitter being distributed at all with 520st's that are currently out
there and if so, where can I get one?
2) With the new 520st's the drive is internal, akin to and in the same box as
a 1040st. Is it still possible to get a 520st with the drive external,
and hopefully at a cheaper price?
3) There are several mail order houses out there. What are the bad ones,
the ones to stay away from, and the better ones? I would *really* like
to do this mail oder since it would be cheaper than buying locally,
but am mega paranoid about getting an ST that doesn't work.
4) I've heard of and seen the AVATEX 1200 modem before.. It seems to be
a very nice modem that can be had for $79-$95 (mail order to local prlocal prices). Is there another modem of equal value at a lesser price?
I'm definetly set on an ST but neither do I want to shell out more than
$1000 for a color system with modem.
I've already looked in the local swap sheets :-) Nobody is selling...
- Greg
------------------------------
End of Info-Atari16 Digest
**************************
-------