tle33710@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (10/18/89)
Hello out there. I was wondering if you would help me... I'm doing my research paper for Rhetoric on the topic of the apparent demise of Atari 8-bits. Don't get me wrong, though: I'd die for my 13OXE! What I'd like to know is would you do the same. What are your opinions? Do you think Atari (at least the 8-bits) is a dead letter? Or is there enough support to keep our Ataris alive? Sure, there are alot of magazine articles out there, but I would appreciate hearing from you. I have no access to Compuserve or Genie, etc. So if this message could possibly get there, that would also be appreciated. Responses to this note are acceptable, but sending e-mail to my address would be better. Thank you! Genghis - c/o Tim Elliott at University of Illinois at Urbana email: tle33710@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
tle33710@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (10/19/89)
I'm doing a research paper on the apparent demise of the Atari 8-bit computers. Don't get me wrong, I love my Atari, and I'd die for my 13OXE, but I'd like to know all your opinions on the subject. Did you use to own an 8-bit? What made you upgrade? What do you think is in store for the future of 8-bits and STs? I know there are a wealth of articles written on the subject (ANTIC, ANALOG, etc.), but hearing from you would really help. Responding to this note is OK, but email would be better. Thank you. Genghis c/o tle33710@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu University of Illinois at Urbana
tle33710@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (10/20/89)
Please keep the responses coming! All of your help has been greatly appreciated! Genghis.
w-darekm@microsoft.UUCP (Darek Mihocka) (10/21/89)
This message will probably offend a few people, so press 'N' at the More (20%) prompt. By continuing to read this message, you are saying, "yes, go ahead. offend me. I won't take it personally" <grin> In article <115200037@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> tle33710@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > > I'm doing a research paper on the apparent demise of the Atari >8-bit computers. Don't get me wrong, I love my Atari, and I'd die for >my 13OXE, but I'd like to know all your opinions on the subject. Ok, let me slit your throat, and I promise your 130XE will go unharmed. <grin> >Did you use to own an 8-bit? What made you upgrade? What do you think >is in store for the future of 8-bits and STs? I know there are a wealth >of articles written on the subject (ANTIC, ANALOG, etc.), but >hearing from you would really help. Yet another message from a die hard 8-bitter who claims he would die for his machine. heh. He's doing a scientific paper on why the 8-bit has demised. Well, how's this for an answer. It's old and uses out of date technology. Let's poll a few of these die hard 8-bit users out there. Have you ever bought a scientific calculator, even though you know that a simple 4 function calculator can do anything a scientific can, given enough time. Have you ever sold your old 2 head VCR and bought a 4 head stereo VCR. Or sold an old car that ran just fine so that you could get a new 1989 model? Why is the 8-bit Atari any different? Yes, it may bring back warm and mushy memories of the days of trying to figure out whether Maxell or BASF tape works better with the cassette player, or trying to tune in your TV to get the best picture in Atari BASIC, or using modems that interface to the joystick port. But it is not exactly leading edge. Sure, I've heard 8-bitters tell me that their computers work just fine and do everything they want them to, but usually these people were too ignorant to be aware of the capabilities of other brands. If you prefer to listen to a vacuum tube radio, that's your right. Don't go out and buy yourself a brand new component stereo system, but on the other hand, don't go around advocating that others should buy vacuum tube radios. And don't go weeping about the demise of the vacuum tube. That is the nature of technology. 5 or 10 years from now, we'll be looking back and laughing at the 80486 chip as being old and out of date. So let nature take its course. The 8-bit is dead. Forget about it. Bury it. Deep six it. Get out of the 70's and 80's and live for the 90's. I paid $900 for an Atari 400 in 1981. That's about $1500-$2000 of today's money, for which you can now buy a machine 100 times faster. If anything, I should be worrying about the demise of that $900, not the silly beige box with the membrane keyboard. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Darek Mihocka ST Xformer II CIS: 73657,2714 Box 2624, Station B Quick Utilities GEnie: DAREKM Kitchener, Ontario MegaBlit SSG SPX DELPHI: DAREKM N2H 6N2 Shareware, not Vaporware BIX: darekm Canada The 8-bit is dead! 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (10/23/89)
You would be hard pressed to call that posting "offensive," but I might call it less than totally accurate. We are lacking a definition of "dead" here. Without knowing the question, how can you possibly answer it? There are a couple "kinds" of dead. And the 8-bit is not universally dead by all definitions. The machine itself is certainly not dead. The machine runs, runs pretty well. I challenge any statement that says the 8-bit is out-of-date. The Atari 8-bit, designed in '78 or not, can still produce graphics beyond the capabilities of the current IBM standard, EGA. (It'd be VGA, but it's too steep.) With EGA being the graphics standard that MOST computers have (by raw numbers) I dutifully define that as "current" graphics. VGA is NOT what the bulk of people have, though getting there, and would be "current plus." Having lived most personally with EGA for a long time, it's got an edge on 8-bit graphics, but they are comparable in many ways. When everyone has VGA or an Amiga, then it will be out of date. Certainly, we are on the edge of that time. 10+ years for any given design is pretty good though! The 8-bit software is dated by virtue mostly of memory size. There is a real extended memory standard for 8-bits now, but it's nt being taken advantage of for the most part. The 8-bit DOES have a vast array of language options, utilities, and compilers - to it's credit. But I wouldn't look for too much ADA or C++ work on the 8-bit, indeed, a functional C compiler would be a step up. Too bad they went with a 128-char set. If anything is "dead" on the 8-bit, it's the market. We have reached the point where I'm interested in knowing if anything at all is released for new sale. The entire market is NOT dead though. You can still get parts and supplies from several different suppliers. The used 8-bit market is rolling right along. Shareware software is cranking out stuff the likes of which we only wished for a few years ago. Bob Puff is some kind of junkie! And in the vacumn of commercial software, a lot of otherwise quiet places have felt free to release things. A signifigant indicator of the state of a machine, I feel, is the demise of the magazines. The magazine market for a given computer is usually the best idea of how it's doing. In the 8-bit case, though, it's a bit strange, because even as the last magazine dies on the stands, the electronic Z-Mag is so successful that they are looking to go to a printed format! Another signifigant indicator of the state of a machine is what the ORIGINAL producer is doing. And in this case, nothing. Credit should be given for late Atari products like the XEP-80 which certainly are going to be hard pressed to make back the money it cost to develop them. Another big credit goes to Atari for the XE game system which, whether they realize it or not, was the best -possible- thing Atari could have done for 8-bit owners - creating a new, captive market of non-pirate compatibles. As even diehards begin bashing the company for its vile abuses of customers, it's important to remember that rarely is anything wholly good or wholly bad, and these are some damm big concessions to the 8-bits. However, it's historically true that when the original company stops working on it's product, it is a toll of the bell, and a cold wind blows through the 3-rd party support industry, no matter how big. Even the IBM PC's shuddered when IBM dropped all PC sales. The thing to remember about machine "death" is that it is not an instant or atomic process. It's a sliding scale of the environment. From the peak of new products and excitement, (I STILL think they could sell 1450 XLDs in numbers, even now) to the waning days where you rarely find another person who has one, it's a slow continuous process. How far along is "dead?" There's no such thing. The question YOU need to ask is how far along can you go? The ultimate factor is always the machine - and it NEVER stops being able to compute. But can YOU handle the slowly declining support (sales, software, repairs, tech) by yourself? For someone like myself, or Ken Sumrall, or several of the people online here, the answer is "forever." There will never be a machine "death" because none of us -really- needs any external support. If there are enough of these self- supportive people (who naturally help others) they form a "core" by which the other no-so-self-supportive people can continue indefinately. Indefinately? Well, the TRS-80 users were almost ALL techincal and thus the Mod I/IIIs still have active channels, even though the market "died" outright MANY years ago. It seems to me that A) given the suprising number of early technical people from the original 400/800 days, B.) the number of owners over three generations of machines and C) Z-Mag, a well spread, quality channel of news and info, that the "support environment" will die VERY slowly, indeed. And add all these new Shareware titles on top of that, it may even hold steady for a time. Sorry about the book! Sheez, didn't realize. Can I turn this in and get some course credit?. Terry Conklin conklin@egr.msu.edu uunet!frith!conklin The Club - (517) 372-3133 The Club II (313) 334-8877 <-- 8-bit files, Z-Mag, stuf
tle33710@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (10/23/89)
Thanks for your reply. I have been getting many "positive" responses to this, and your opinions have definite merit. To others: Some responses have suggested I post the results in the future, so look out for them. Please, if you have an opinion on the subject (I could use a few more "negative" ones,) write to me! Thanks again, Genghis.
rbrown@svax.cs.cornell.edu (Russell Brown) (10/23/89)
In article <5072@cps3xx.UUCP> conklin@frith.UUCP (Terry Conklin) writes: >I challenge any statement that says the 8-bit >is out-of-date. The Atari 8-bit, designed in '78 or not, can >still produce graphics beyond the capabilities of the current >IBM standard, EGA. I'm not real up on new math, but how is (320 X 192 X monochrome) > (640 X 350 X 16 colors)? If that was a typo, and intended to be CGA, rather than EGA, then I ask, how is even (320 X 192 X monochrome) > (320 X whatever X 4 colors)? I mean, player missiles and stuff like that are neat, and all that, but I'm not buying. I mean, I have two each 400s and 800s, and together they don't add up to EGA. Which brings up a point. Does anyone know offhand why Atari didn't use the TI sprite chip, instead of the (oh, shoot. I'm confused now. Was it the Antic that controlled the player-missiles? My father has all of the manuals and I can't remember offhand.) Am I misremembering due to my tender age and all that, or weren't those chips available at the time? Russell G. Brown, rbrown@svax.cs.cornell.edu
a344@mindlink.UUCP (Tom Klok) (10/23/89)
> rbrown writes: > > Msg-ID: <33446@cornell.UUCP> > > (320 X 192 X monochrome) > (640 X 350 X 16 colors)? > > If that was a typo, and intended to be CGA, rather than EGA, then > I ask, how is even > > (320 X 192 X monochrome) > (320 X whatever X 4 colors)? > > I mean, player missiles and stuff like that are neat, and all that, but I'm > not > buying. I mean, I have two each 400s and 800s, and together they don't add > up to EGA. Ah, but resolution is not everything! If technology marches on, then why can I move my entire screen around hundreds of times faster on my XL than anyone else can on their IBM whatever or ST? Why is it that the IBM's EGA card doesn't support IRQ's for horizontal and vertical sync? How come you can't overlay something on the screen without going through all sorts of code to mask it in and out? Why can't you change your colour selections on the fly, without watching closely (spending almost all your CPU time) to see when a status bit flips? Why use a blitter when a pointer does the same job? Their graphics may be "bigger", but they are certainly not more advanced. In fact, they are a definite step backwards. My little Atari does a fine job for what I ask of it: telecommunications, and an interesting platform to write assembly language and Forth code on. I may buy a PC clone in the future, but if I do it will be for job opportunities -- not for pleasure. Tom Klok a344@mindlink.UUCP
cs2531bz@carina.unm.edu ( Marc Bluefire) (10/23/89)
First, I would like to say, Mr. Mihocka, I agree with you that the old 8 bit isn't a top of the line computer.. and that I did not take your comments personally. However, I will reply to each of your comments and questions with logical reasons, and the then I will add my own thoughts at the end of this article. ******************************************************************************** In article <8135@microsoft.UUCP> w-darekm@microsoft.UUCP (Darek Mihocka) writes: > Yet another message from a die hard 8-bitter who claims he would die for >his machine. heh. He's doing a scientific paper on why the 8-bit has demised. >Well, how's this for an answer. It's old and uses out of date technology. It is true that the atari 8-bit is old, but it isn't true that it's technology is 'out of date'. It works on the same principles that the newer 16 bit computers use, only it's processors handle smaller loads, and it's operating system is therefore slower, and handled differently. > >Let's poll a few of these die hard 8-bit users out there. Have you ever >bought a scientific calculator, even though you know that a simple 4 function >calculator can do anything a scientific can, given enough time. Have you ever >sold your old 2 head VCR and bought a 4 head stereo VCR. Or sold an old car >that ran just fine so that you could get a new 1989 model? Why is the >8-bit Atari any different? Simple: Why would I want to spend $1000+ for a new 16 bit computer when I just bought this 130XE less than 2 yrs ago, and I paid only $150 for it? It does everything I need at this time. None of my friends on the net, and those who use 'forum' (a talk program wich allows multiple net users to communicate, much like the unix 'write' command.) seem to have any care wether I talk to them with my atari 130XE using a vt100 emulator and 80 columns, or a newer 16 bit computer with the same type of emulator (except for the 80 columns), or if I go down to school and use the VAX machine directly. Another thing is, VCR's don't change that significantly in how you operate them, a stereo VCR still has a PLAY key, and recording is done the same; a car still has an accelerator, and a simple brake. I wouldn't have to totally relearn to drive to hop in that new car, I would have to learn a new OS, and buy all new software for a new computer! ...accesories go simply from one car to the next, and so does that VCR tape, and the cover... > Yes, it may bring back warm and mushy memories >of the days of trying to figure out whether Maxell or BASF tape works better >with the cassette player, or trying to tune in your TV to get the best >picture in Atari BASIC, or using modems that interface to the joystick port. Bwahahahahahah! <sorry..> I don't have those "fond" memories, I have a top of the line monitor with composite and EGA graphics.., and two 1050 disk drives.. Not to mention an okidata printer (Okimate 10) and an SX212 modem. >But it is not exactly leading edge. Sure, I've heard 8-bitters tell me that >their computers work just fine and do everything they want them to, but usually >these people were too ignorant to be aware of the capabilities of other brands. I am fully aware of the capabilites of the "other brands", and of the advanced Atari 16 bit line. Could you loan me $3,000+ dollars, so I could get a new Mega 4? How about $5,000+ so I can buy a new Amiga? No, thanks....they don't really do that much more (practicality-wise) than my Atari 130XE, or my Commodore 128. (Yes, I do have a real 80 column computer...too bad it is no where near as reliable as my Atari 130XE.) I find my C128 spending most of it's time in C64 mode, evidence that it isn't the 8-bit that is dying, but rather Atari's poor management and marketing that was the downfall of the 130XE and it's XL family. Don't get too comfortable, the Atari ST is soon to join the 8bits in a lack of support and software. The only Atari store in New Mexico finally went out of business a couple of months ago. Most of the software stores who quit carrying Atari 8bit software in the past few years have dropped the ST software too. They know a company that failed once will do it again...Yet why? Atari has great machines... As for depemdability and reliability, my 8bits have never needed repair.. Not something I can say for any Commodore that I have ever known. The reason Atari doesn't do well in the PC market is because they never broke the myth that Atari means games... My Atari hardly ever plays games....It is mainly a communication computer. >If you prefer to listen to a vacuum tube radio, that's your right. Don't go >out and buy yourself a brand new component stereo system, but on the other >hand, don't go around advocating that others should buy vacuum tube radios. >And don't go weeping about the demise of the vacuum tube. That is the nature >of technology. 5 or 10 years from now, we'll be looking back and laughing at >the 80486 chip as being old and out of date. Your comparison of a vacuum-tube radio to a comp stereo system is outrageous! That is nowhere near the difference.. So, what do you suggest? Buy a new computer and software every year, or more? Keep up with the constant improvements in computers? That is outrageuos! > So let nature take its course. What ever that means! This has nothing to do with nature..it is purely human-kind. >The 8-bit is dead. Forget about it. Bury it. Deep six it. Get out of the >70's and 80's and live for the 90's. I paid $900 for an Atari 400 in 1981. >That's about $1500-$2000 of today's money, for which you can now buy a >machine 100 times faster. If anything, I should be worrying about the demise >of that $900, not the silly beige box with the membrane keyboard. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Darek Mihocka ST Xformer II CIS: 73657,2714 >Box 2624, Station B Quick Utilities GEnie: DAREKM >Kitchener, Ontario MegaBlit SSG SPX DELPHI: DAREKM >N2H 6N2 Shareware, not Vaporware BIX: darekm >Canada The 8-bit is dead! 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. >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ If you think nothing of the atari 8-bits, then why do you waist your time reading our news group? Are you truly that bored with your 'superior' computer's abilities? Why pick on those who are happy with what they have? Are you not happy? BTW, I'd love to see this computer that can run 100 times faster than my 8-bit, for only 1500-2000 dollars.. I think it is quite funny that you waisted $900 on an 8-bit, and now you say what a waist they are...foolish indeed. If you are willing to throw away a few thousand here, and a few thousand there, it is entirely your choice. I have never forced my 8-bit on anyone, nor do I recommend it to anyone, but people like you who tell me and other Atari eight bitters that they shouldn't be happy have no right to do so. On many occasions others have posted articles much like yours, if I wished to upgrade to a new computer and leave my Atari 8-bit behind I wouldn't be reading this! Now, if you have nothing to say that would add to what we find as useful information for our 8-bits, I suggest you stop this waist of band-width on the net... If you have a reply, send it to me at cs2531bz@carina.unm.edu.UUCP, I would be happy to tell you what I think of you and your hotty opinions. I like my Atari 130XE, I wouldn't die for it, nor will it always be my main computer, but for now it is, and I enjoy it, so thankyou, and please go back to your 16-bit newsgroup. If you haven't noticed, they have a newsgroup for your ST, use it, and stop cluttering up our newsgroup. BTW, since I do owe a few of you the vt100 emulator which will work with the SX212, I want you all to know, I am almost finished writing a unix uploading program, so I can get that to you, sorry it has taken so long! Marc Bluefire M B Marc Bluefire <aka cs2531bz@carina.unm.edu.UUCP> [=] [=-=] [=] | |=-=-| c |-=-=| | _|_|____|_^_|____|_|_
w-darekm@microsoft.UUCP (Darek Mihocka) (10/27/89)
In article <808@ariel.unm.edu> cs2531bz@carina.unm.edu.UUCP ( Marc Bluefire) writes: >First, I would like to say, Mr. Mihocka, I agree with you that the old >8 bit isn't a top of the line computer.. > and that I did not take your comments personally. >However, I will reply to each of your comments and questions with logical >reasons, and the then I will add my own thoughts at the end of this article. > Now, now, Marc. Calm down. You started your message in a civilized manner, and ended up calling me a fool and told me to get off this newsgroup. Now that's not polite, and doesn't indicate to me you used any "logical reasons". I have as much right to use this newsgroup as any other user. As a former 8-bit user who has seen the errors of his ways, I feel that I can offer some points of view that 8-bit users like yourself have shut their eyes to. It's no crime to admit that you made a mistake and bought the wrong computer. Now, I'm not saying "go and buy an Atari ST" (that's hardly a good buy nowadays anyway) or "go and buy a 386", but as with any technology, you should not shut your eyes to new advances. Let's look at some of your remarks: >Simple: Why would I want to spend $1000+ for a new 16 bit computer when I >just bought this 130XE less than 2 yrs ago, and I paid only $150 A common belief amoung 8-bit users is that their computers are cheaper than others. A stock $150 130XE is about as useful as a hole in the head. What can you do with it? Plug it in and watch the READY prompt. You need a disk drive, or even two to do anything useful. Add another $300 or so. Unless you have a good health plan to cover eyeglases, you'd better get yourself a real color monitor and leave the TV for watching movies. Add another $300 or $400. And let's not forget that 256K or 512K memory upgrade which everyone seems to be getting these days. I don't know what they go for. Say $100. And you have to get SpartaDOS X because everyone says it the best DOS to get. Now, already you're spent close to $1000 to make your XE useful. What you've got is the equivalent of a 520ST with color monitor. A 520STFMD goes for about $400 or $500, and the monitor is about $300 or $400, so you see, the 8-bit system cost you about the same as the ST system. And if you consider IBM clones, you can get them for even cheaper! My 1040ST and 20 meg hard drive cost about $1500 3 years ago! Hard drives, modems, printers, and other accessories are going to cost you the same, whether you own an 8-bit, ST, IBM, or whatever. So put this lie about low price to rest, will you? > I would have to learn a new OS, and buy all new software for a new computer! Well, unless you plan on using computers _only_ in your home, you'd better get used to the idea of learning other operating systems. I've got news for you. Operating systems on 16-bit machines are a lot more use friendly and their programs don't put "please wait. initializing" on the screen all the time. >I am fully aware of the capabilites of the "other brands", and of the advanced >Atari 16 bit line. Could you loan me $3,000+ dollars, so I could >get a new Mega 4? How about $5,000+ so I can buy a new Amiga? >BTW, I'd love to see this computer that can run 100 times faster >than my 8-bit, for only 1500-2000 dollars.. Once again, we're back to the price issue. Your ignorance of the real world is amazing. You speak of the 386 machines as if they do not exist. Under $2000 386 systems have been around for about a year now. Once again, I will repeat my point about early prices of the 8-bit machines. When they first came out, a 48K Atari 800 system with disk drive cost about $2000, 1980 dollars too! In 1989 dollars, that is _more_ money than what a 386 system costs. Now if in the early 1980's, so many people bought the Atari computers because of their advanced technology, even though they were paying more for them than they would for say, a cheap Apple II clone, then why the sudden about face? You said it yourself. Your friends would not care if you telecommunicate on an Apple II, or Atari 400, or ZX81. Why did you buy the Atari? I suspect you are an Atari dealer groupie. I'm not saying go to Computerland and take a look, since they probably wouldn't let you in. But there are a lot of small dealers who will take the time to show you the other machines and give you a good deal. A friend of mine just bought a 12 MHz 286 machine with 40 meg hard drive, printer, and EGA monitor for under $2000. Funny thing is, he bought it from an Atari dealer who has turned to selling IBMs so he can stay in business. >The reason Atari doesn't do well in the PC market is because they >never broke the myth that Atari means games... > Well, I find it hard to believe that Atari's are good for anything but games. Just look at the new Atari STE. 6 damn joystick ports! >If you think nothing of the atari 8-bits, then why do you waist your time >reading our news group? Are you truly that bored with your >'superior' computer's abilities? >Why pick on those who are happy with what they have? Are you not happy? > >I think it is quite funny that you waisted $900 on an 8-bit, and now you >say what a waist they are...foolish indeed. > I was once fooled into the power without the price myth too. I was 14 at the time. Excuse me for not having better judgement or the benfits of services like Usenet to get other people's opinions. >Now, if you have nothing to say that would add to what we find as >useful information for our 8-bits, I suggest you stop this waist of >band-width on the net... First, I would recommend that you learn to spell the word "waste". Secondly, who are you to censor my opinions? An ignorant 8-bit user who does not know what he's talking about. At least if you had been able to make some valid points I might have taken you seriously. I am not saying some brand of computer is better than some other brand. I am saying that there comes a time when old technology must be put to rest, and the time has come for the 8-bit computers (all of them, not just your beloved 130XE). - Darek ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Darek Mihocka ST Xformer II CIS: 73657,2714 Box 2624, Station B Quick Utilities GEnie: DAREKM Kitchener, Ontario MegaBlit SSG SPX DELPHI: DAREKM N2H 6N2 Shareware, not Vaporware BIX: darekm Canada The 8-bit is dead! 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cs2531bz@carina.unm.edu ( Marc Bluefire) (10/27/89)
In article <8231@microsoft.UUCP> w-darekm@microsoft.UUCP (Darek Mihocka) writes: >Now, now, Marc. Calm down. You started your message in a civilized manner, and (cut down to shorten this posting..) >I have as much right to use this newsgroup as any other user. As a former 8-bit >user who has seen the errors of his ways, I feel that I can offer some points >of view that 8-bit users like yourself have shut their eyes to. It's no [....] [you should not shut...] >eyes to new advances. Thanks, but as I said before..I am tired of pople like you trying to show us the 'errors' of our ways..... I did not buy the 'wrong' computer....I bought a very versatile, and fun computer...for an 8-bit...... I have considered many computers that are better in some ways than my 130XE! I am going to eventually buy one, but not until I find one I really like! The NeXT looked promising...but I don't have $5000 or even $500 to invest in any computer right **--now--** ! I will admit, before I continue to answer your reply, that I did get a little too abrasive, and I apologize. It's tough to stay logical at 2 to 3 am!!! Right now it's 2:57, and like that night, I've just gotten off work (cooking on the broiler at Chili's); quite exhausting work, yet I stay wound up for a couple of hours after work.. >A common belief amoung 8-bit users is that their computers are cheaper than >others. A stock $150 130XE is about as useful as a hole in the head. What <<examples of prices ad comparisons to other computers deleted..>> This hole-in-the-head is what I am writing to you with RIGHT now.. The equipment I have with it are: 130XE -- 150 1050 -- 150 1050 -- 20 (got it from a friend. Used one's go for about $50..) SX212 -- 75 Oki 10 - 250 (got it when it was brand new stuff....Used go for less than 50) (printer) Magnavox 350 (supports RGB and composite...RGB for my C128) ----- 995 True, it wasn't cheap...but that was only 1 to 6 yrs ago!! 130XE: 2yrs ago 1050: 2yrs and 3 months SX212: 6months Oki 10: 4yrs Magnavox: 2months Then, there's my old 600xl (sold it) over 5yrs....and my old GE tape drive ($50) 5yrs ago too! But, the biggest hurt is the software: over $400 in software.... including Flight Sim II, Paperclip II, Star Fleet I, XE games... Not to mention the shareware! >Well, unless you plan on using computers _only_ in your home, you'd better >get used to the idea of learning other operating systems. I've got news for >you. Operating systems on 16-bit machines are a lot more use friendly and >their programs don't put "please wait. initializing" on the screen all the time I know other operating systems...Unix for one. And I am aware I will have to learn new OS's...I just don't want to have to do that right now for my home, since I am busy learning one's at school... The NeXT is Unix based, so it wouldn't be so bad...I really would like to get a computer that has a unix OS, as DOS is soon to die. >Once again, we're back to the price issue. Your ignorance of the real world >is amazing. You speak of the 386 machines as if they do not exist. Under $2000 >386 systems have been around for about a year now. Once again, I will repeat >my point about early prices of the 8-bit machines. When they first came out, >a 48K Atari 800 system with disk drive cost about $2000, 1980 dollars too! >In 1989 dollars, that is _more_ money than what a 386 system costs. Now if in >the early 1980's, so many people bought the Atari computers because of their >advanced technology, even though they were paying more for them than they >would for say, a cheap Apple II clone, then why the sudden about face? >You said it yourself. Your friends would not care if you telecommunicate on >an Apple II, or Atari 400, or ZX81. Why did you buy the Atari? I am not ignorant of the real world....I KNOW tht there are more important things in reality than keeping a 'top technology' computer in my home at each change... The REAL world my friend, doesn't revolve around personal computers, and what kind you own! Might I ask what it is you do for a living? have you ever had to work a truly tough 8-12hr day? I've done 17hr days, have you? have you ever worked on a non-white collar job? THAT'S the REAL world! BTW, a computer that operates at 100 to 200MHZ I would LOVE to see for less than $2000!!!! That is what a computer that runs 100 times faster than mine would be! A VAX runs about 25 to 36MHZ...Those are incredible speeds!! >I suspect you are an Atari dealer groupie. I'm not saying go to Computerland >and take a look, since they probably wouldn't let you in. But there are a lot >of small dealers who will take the time to show you the other machines and >give you a good deal. A friend of mine just bought a 12 MHz 286 machine with >40 meg hard drive, printer, and EGA monitor for under $2000. Funny thing is, >he bought it from an Atari dealer who has turned to selling IBMs so he can stay >in business. i am not an Atari dealer groupie..that would be impossible in NM... Our last Atari dealer went under this year.... I have been in Computerland plenty of times, and not truly impressed!!! When I get my next computer, I want to REALLY be as impressed as I was with my 130XE!! I have a friend who just did that same thing, only a 20Meg hard drive... As for user friendly...nope! DOS is a bitch...he still is having troubles with many functions. I'm supposed to sit down and help him someday.. Our dealer did the same about changing to IBMs and other computers as well.. they still went under. >Well, I find it hard to believe that Atari's are good for anything but games. >Just look at the new Atari STE. 6 damn joystick ports! Yeah, it's true they are good at games, but that doesn't limit them to games... >First, I would recommend that you learn to spell the word "waste". Secondly, >who are you to censor my opinions? An ignorant 8-bit user who does not know >what he's talking about. At least if you had been able to make some valid >points I might have taken you seriously. I am not saying some brand of computer >is better than some other brand. I am saying that there comes a time when old >technology must be put to rest, and the time has come for the 8-bit computers >(all of them, not just your beloved 130XE). > >- Darek Real nice ending there..... I thought you were dissapointed with my closing, then why come back with the same lousy attitude? I am definetly not ignorant.... I do know what I am talking about. Many friends and co-workers come to me when they are looking for a computer... Not one has been unsatisfied with the computer they have bought due to my input. They haven't bought Atari's, but rather IBM clones and the like, so I know what I am talking about on prices.. I had many valid points which you just kind of swept under your delete key....and a few which you argued with. The computers you mentioned for around $2000 I wouldn't buy, even if I did have the money. I will only go to the top of the line, best and most versatile computer for my next one. Sorry about spelling waste wrong... BTW, I heard that you are the one who wrote the STXFormer, better know as the 8bit simulator for the ST computers. Looks to me like you really do like the 8bit and it's capabilities...It takes a lot of work to write an emulator, so it wasn't just a 'for the heck of it' type of project... M B Marc Bluefire <aka cs2531bz@carina.unm.edu.UUCP> [=] [=-=] [=] | |=-=-| c |-=-=| | _|_|____|_^_|____|_|_
jdd@db.toronto.edu (John DiMarco) (10/27/89)
The question of whether or not the Atari 8-bit is an obsolete computer is one
that's near and dear to every Atari 8-bit owner's heart - because it IS an
obsolete computer. I doubt if '386 owners worry too much about whether their
machines are obsolete or not, because they're not.
I don't think it's a good idea to choose the Atari 8-bit for a new computer,
because there are much more powerful and capable computers available for
a similar cost. But many of us (like me!) bought our Atari 8-bits when they
were a much better deal. I'm not prepared to fork out $1000 for a new machine
right now, so I have to make do with the Atari 8-bit system I forked out
$500 for three years ago (800XL, plotter, 1050w/USdblr, amber monitor, s/w; it
was used, though). Yep, it's obsolete. Yep, it does the same kind of stuff as
it did when I bought it. Yep, there are lots of machines out there that do a
whole lot more (I'm typing this message on a UNIX box which makes my Atari look
silly). When I get a new machine, will it be an updated Atari 8-bit? Certainly
not! But until I get a new machine, I'm still interested in my 8-bit.
Marc, your 8-bit is still good for something, and people like yourself or
myself who still have some interest in an 8-bit will keep the market going
(somewhat). But Darek, you're absolutely correct in stating that there's not
much future in the 8-bit market, especially for new machines. (There's the
8-bit 'video game' market - that's another story)
One caution for Marc and other Atari 8-bit owners out there: don't let your
fondness for your machine and your sense of nostalgia interfere with your
decision-making capabilities. Eg: is it really worth it to buy a MIO and
a hard disk for $1000 and run it on your 8-bit? Why don't you buy a cheap
PC and stick the hard disk on it? You still might decide to go the MIO route,
but make sure your reasons are good.
John
BTW, Darek, I still use your GUP package occasionally.
---
John DiMarco jdd@db.toronto.edu or jdd@db.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto, CSRI BITNET: jdd%db.toronto.edu@relay.cs.net
(416) 978-8609 UUCP: {uunet!utai,decvax!utcsri}!db!jdddaryl@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (daryl.l.monge) (10/27/89)
In article <8231@microsoft.UUCP> w-darekm@microsoft.UUCP (Darek Mihocka) writes: >In article <808@ariel.unm.edu> cs2531bz@carina.unm.edu.UUCP ( Marc Bluefire) writes: >A common belief amoung 8-bit users is that their computers are cheaper than >others. Really? How did you arrive at that determination? And define cheaper! Based on a feature by feature comparison? Are you including features the customer may not want? Are you discussing a brand new system or upgrade paths for existing owners? >Now, already you're spent close to $1000 to make your XE useful. What you've >got is the equivalent of a 520ST with color monitor. I think you missed the point. Most 8 bitters already have hardware they have gotten over time. I certainly would not recommend a 8 bit as brand new high tech machine. But for me, the 130XE system was only $130 because I was already an 8 bit owner and had other hardware. Another example is that I can get a useful terminal emulator by simply adding a XEP80 for ~$80. PS, the disk drive is only ~$180 mail order. >> I would have to learn a new OS, and buy all new software for a new computer! > >you'd better get used to the idea of learning other operating systems. Typically CS attitude: I have a great new system for you and too bad if you are comfortable with your current system. Throw out all your software also. >>I am fully aware of the capabilites of the "other brands", and of the advanced >>Atari 16 bit line. Could you loan me $3,000+ dollars, so I could >>get a new Mega 4? >Once again, we're back to the price issue. Your ignorance of the real world >is amazing. You speak of the 386 machines as if they do not exist. Under $2000 >386 systems have been around for about a year now. Define the amount of memory, disk capacity, machine speed, etc. Lets talk price/performance instead of price. I've seen these prices also. > When they first came out, >a 48K Atari 800 system with disk drive cost about $2000 So what? >A friend of mine just bought a 12 MHz 286 machine with >40 meg hard drive, printer, and EGA monitor for under $2000. Funny thing is, >he bought it from an Atari dealer who has turned to selling IBMs so he can stay >in business. Smart move. Different strokes for different folks. Are you suggesting that everyone should own PC compatibles and that no alternatives such as ST and AMIGA should exist? >>Now, if you have nothing to say that would add to what we find as >>useful information for our 8-bits, I suggest you stop this waste of >>band-width on the net... >who are you to censor my opinions? True, but I would like to point out that in my opinion these articles lack tact and I find them irritating. Concentrate on comparisons of capabilities, price, support, etc. particularly with respect to things the 8 bit Atari can do. Keep in mind that you want to compare both new machine sales as well as upgrades to existing systems. Daryl Monge att!ihuxy!daryl
briann@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COM (Brian Nakata) (10/28/89)
In article <8231@microsoft.UUCP> w-darekm@microsoft.UUCP (Darek Mihocka) writes: >I have as much right to use this newsgroup as any other user. [...] True Darek, but people will appreciate helpful information other than "your computer now sucks, get a new one". >A common belief amoung 8-bit users is that their computers are cheaper than >others. A stock $150 130XE is about as useful as a hole in the head. [...] I believe what Marc was saying was it's cheaper for him (and me!) to get a new 130XE ***and use the peripherals we already own*** than to get an entirely new machine and new peripherals and new software. You misinterpreted his statement. >First, I would recommend that you learn to spell the word "waste". Pretty low, Darek! I think that this "discussion" has degraded to the point of being simply ranting and raving and lots of hand waving and finger flipping. The facts are: some of us don't feel that our computing needs require a more up to date computer; some of us feel that everyone should have the latest model. This is like a lot of other issues, say abortion, for instance. Either side is going to be hard pressed to convince the other that it is wrong. I propose that we drop this discussion and go onto more informative postings from people who have knowledge about 8-bits and are willing to share it with people who want to use their computers better. Brian
usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (10/29/89)
No typo there - I meant EGA. Having done EGA emulation under a multitasking DOS operating system, I'm MORE than familiar with it! You can't compare any graphics on raw resolution. It is, to some extent, application specific. Certainly CAD is better suited to higher resolutions with precision. But most people dont realize that color choice is far more important than pixels. Consider the pictures on your television set. TV is of amazing quality. How good is TV resolution compared to EGA? A few million times better? Actually, it's the other way around. Television is only 160 X 200 (or so) hi-res. (Remember that 8-bit's 320 resoultion is HALF a color clock, which is basically a pixel.) On the other hand, it's in 16 Million colors! (well, analog!) EGA can't touch the 8-bit's 256 color onscreen capacity. Likewise, sprite support is worth a LOT. Try doing sprites on an ST or EGA. These bit-mapped screens are great - but on an ST, every sprite you draw IS going to steal a color - and there aren't that many available. The fact that EGA is slower than molasses might be worth mentioning. In the speed vein, the 8-bit's redefinable character sets are a GREAT tool for fast, super compact graphics. Look at Bruce Lee, a masterpiece in character graphics. It's hard to believe that that game fits IN MEMORY with all those animated, colorful hi-res screens. Enter 4-color character set mode. The 8-bit may lose in CAD apps, but when it comes to overall graphic output, the 8-bits power tools easily match EGA's slow-and-simple approach. Terry Conklin conklin@egr.msu.edu uunet!frith!conklin The Club (517) 372-3131 The Club II (313) 334- 334-8877 <- 8-bit files, sources, ARC, memory software and examples!