b3300876@rick.cs.ubc.ca (george chow) (06/20/91)
There was an AtariFest just over the weekend and I picked up a copy of AtariUser. There was a column for the Portfolio and I thought that some of you may be interested in some of the stuff there. Here it is reproduced without permission: ;) PORTFOLIO ALERT Atari has release the APB (Accessories, Peripherals Bulletin) for the Portfolio. This twenty page mini-manual/magazine includes hints and tips, as well as listing third party vendor's hardware and software for the Portfolio. For a copy, see your dealer, or write to Atari, 1196 Borregas Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089-1302. Megabyte Computers in Texas will now upgrade the Portfolio to 512K of internal memory. The modification must be done at their site and includes a six month warranty on the Portfolio. The cost is $350, or new Portfolio units with the upgrade already installed are available for sale. For more information call, (817)589-2950. The Portfolio Chronicles Bigger Isn't Everything In a interview done in Germany by PD Journal, Alwin Stumph indicated that Atari is not as interested in expanding the Portfolio as it had been. The Managing Director of Atari Germany and President of Atari Worldwide Sales and Marketing, Alwin says that Atari is planning to enter the notebook computer arena by producing a notbook version of the Atari ST, called the ST-BOOK. The price spread betwen a built-up Portfolio and a base ST-BOOK would be too small. What does this mean for Portfolio users? Perhaps we shouldn't expect a Portfolio II soon, despite rumors that it is already in production. But Atari and a number of other vendors are continuing to support the Portfolio. On the horizon, Atari is planning to release the Power BASIC compiler, and Hyperlist, an outliner. XoteriX (81 8-888-7390) is developing a 512K RAM expansion unit, as well as a 20 Megabyte Hard Disk unit. Word Perfect is looking into developing a version of its popular word processor for the Portfolio as they have for the competing POQUET. TIP: WordPerfect Jr., designed for the IBM PC Jr., will work on the Portfoliio. You can create and edit files up to about 20K. WordPerfect no longer sells the Jr. version, but it can often be found at computer swap meets. The Portfolio contains 256K of application code, burned into unchangeable ROM chips. That is quite a large piece of sofware, and unfortunately, it does have a few bugs. There's no easy way to upgrade the ROM chip-you'd have to replace the entire machine. So, Atari has released an UPDATE program to fix these buts. This fix, in conjunction with a few hints and tips, should keep your Portfolio up and running. The UPDATE program is available from several sources. You can get the program from Atari on the DOS Utility Card (HPC-701, $89.85) or on the File Manager/Tutorial Card (HPC-704, $20.00). You can also download the program from the Portfolio area on both GENIE and COMPUSERVE. It can also be found on Atari's own bulletin board (408-745-2191), but new users will have to wait two business days for validation after their first call. Once you have the program, place the UPDATE command in your AUTOEXEC.BAT file (use the Text Processor) so that it is activated when you reboot your machine. TIP: When the system crashes, you'll typically lose the contents of drive C:. The best approach is to set drive C: to 8K with the FDISK command so as to give maximum RAM to the computer, and keep all your files on a RAM card. The best defense against losing your data is to make backups. Using the File Transfer program, FT, and the parallel port, you can copy all your files to a PC. If you're using a serial port for file transfers, be sure to keep an extra copy (or two) of the serial transfer program you use on your memory cards. Here are the batch files that I use to copy the contents of Drive C: to a memory card. You can make them with the Text Processor, and name them with the .BAT extender for easy use from DOS-just type the filename as a command, and the batch is run. RESTORE.BAT copy a:\system\*.* c:\system copy a:\root\*.* c:\ BACKUP.BAT md a:\system md a:\root copy c:\system\*.* a:\system copy c:\*.* a:\root TIP: If you try to load a zero length file into one of the built-in applications, the Port will lock up. This can be automatic and frustrating if the zero file is the default load file for the application. Reboot the machine, delete the zero length file from DOS, and you should be ready to go. Because of the unique design of the Portfolio, not all program designed for a PC will run it. The most common reason is that a program directly address the computer's hardware, which is different in the Portfolio than in a typical PC. To make the Portfolio as compatible as possible with a PC, access the SETUP menu and under DISPLAY set EXTERNAL MODE to TRACKED, REFRESH to BOTH, and SPEED to FAST. Note however, that the FAST setting will use up your batteries quicker. These settings will help, but not always. Some programs will still lock up the machine. When the Portfolio locks up, there are three ways to reboot the machine. First try the "first finger salute", <CTRL><ALT><DEL>. If this has no effect, turn the machine upside down, and above the Atari label, there is a hole. Use a paper clip to depress the switch in the hole. If the Portfolio still refuses to reboot, you will have to cold boot the machine. Remove the battery cover. Use a paper clip to depress the small metal tab. The cold reboot will take your Portfolio back to when you first got it. You will even have to tell it what language you want to use. Everything on drive C: will be lost. But that's no big deal since you ARE doing backups now, right? - B.J. Gleason
BJGLEAS@auvm.american.edu (bj gleason) (06/21/91)
It is neat to see one's own work posted by someone else... ;) For those people interested, AtariUser is a new magazine that costs 1.00 an issue, and is given away free (yes, free), at many user groups. For more information, and/or subscriptions, call Atari User at 1-800-333-3567. bj
jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) (06/21/91)
In article <1991Jun20.001203.24928@rick.cs.ubc.ca> b3300876@rick.cs.ubc.ca (george chow) writes: ... >Megabyte Computers in Texas will now upgrade the Portfolio to 512K of internal >memory. The modification must be done at their site and includes a six month >warranty on the Portfolio. The cost is $350, or new Portfolio units with the >upgrade already installed are available for sale. For more information call, >(817)589-2950. > >The Portfolio Chronicles >Bigger Isn't Everything > >In a interview done in Germany by PD Journal, Alwin Stumph indicated that Atari >is not as interested in expanding the Portfolio as it had been. The Managing Now that was interesting because I thought I'd heard that the Portfolio was expandable back when it was first introduced. So from the above 2 notes I guess that Atari never expanded Portfolios beyond 128K RAM? >Alwin says that Atari is planning to enter the notebook computer arena by >producing a notbook version of the Atari ST, called the ST-BOOK. The price >spread betwen a built-up Portfolio and a base ST-BOOK would be too small. >What does this mean for Portfolio users? Perhaps we shouldn't expect a Portfolio >II soon, despite rumors that it is already in production. But Atari and a number Well, I'd guess that a "Portfolio II" would still fit into the current scheme of things. I have no information about such a machine, but from my current messing around, and in light of the HP-95LX I could see them bringing out something. I think what might be a sellable product would be 320 * 100 pixels of display, an "industry standard" memory card slot in place of the current slot, a slightly revised keyboard and at least 258K RAM standard with the expansion up to 1 Meg., but with the current 60 pin expansion buss. That would be usable to "bridge the gap" between the current Portfolio and some future machine that might take off in a new "form factor" direction. Especially a 320 pixel wide display. That would be a neat trick to play on HP. It's only a few more pixels than the HP-95LX as far as I can tell (nobody has counted them for me, but I'd guess they are using 240 * 128), but there are some nifty tricks you can use by having special fonts for 64 character and 80 character lines. A 64 character line would be readable enough for spreadsheets and an 80 character line could be used for "text format previewing". I wouldn't advertise the 80 character line font as being "readable" but in fact it can be read. We used to use a font of this pixel range on the original Radio Shack Color Computer for "previewing" and I found that I could get used to it enough to read the text. But the 64 character line font would be the *real* surprise. Such a font would be quite usable for spreadsheets. So for a display that would cost about the same as the HP to make you could have greater functionality. I could see HP executives pulling out their hair on that point. >is planning to release the Power BASIC compiler, and Hyperlist, an outliner. Hmm. I thought these were supposed to have been available by now? >XoteriX (81 8-888-7390) is developing a 512K RAM expansion unit, as well as a The mockup they showed in Atari Explorer was an external unit. >The Portfolio contains 256K of application code, burned into unchangeable ROM >chips. That is quite a large piece of sofware, and unfortunately, it does have a >few bugs. There's no easy way to upgrade the ROM chip-you'd have to replace the >entire machine. So, Atari has released an UPDATE program to fix these buts. This >fix, in conjunction with a few hints and tips, should keep your Portfolio up and >running. Ick. That was something I was just about to look into. Literally look into -- I was about to take apart my Portfolio and see what the guts were like. Sounds like a surface mounted ROM, or worse. . . . -- Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880 lsuc!jimomura Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
laird@think.com (Laird Popkin) (06/21/91)
In article <1991Jun20.190320.8089@lsuc.on.ca> jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: >In article <1991Jun20.001203.24928@rick.cs.ubc.ca> b3300876@rick.cs.ubc.ca (george chow) writes: > >>Megabyte Computers in Texas will now upgrade the Portfolio to 512K of internal >>memory. The modification must be done at their site and includes a six month >>warranty on the Portfolio. The cost is $350, or new Portfolio units with the >>upgrade already installed are available for sale. For more information call, >>(817)589-2950. >> [munch munch] > Now that was interesting because I thought I'd heard that >the Portfolio was expandable back when it was first introduced. >So from the above 2 notes I guess that Atari never expanded >Portfolios beyond 128K RAM? The Portfolio was designed to have either 128K or 512K of internal SRAM. All MegaByte Computers is doing is (carefully) pulling out the surface mounted SRAM chips in the PF and replacing them with higher capacity chips. Atari may have decided that since a third party company was selling a PF internal RAM expansion there was no need for Atari to release a "fat PF". Atari's market for the PF is the "pocket organizer" market, and I'd guess that they don't see too much of a market for a $700 PF (a guess at what a PF would sell for with 512K SRAM). >>Alwin says that Atari is planning to enter the notebook computer arena by >>producing a notbook version of the Atari ST, called the ST-BOOK. The price >>spread betwen a built-up Portfolio and a base ST-BOOK would be too small. >>What does this mean for Portfolio users? Perhaps we shouldn't expect a Portfolio >>II soon, despite rumors that it is already in production. But Atari and a number > > Well, I'd guess that a "Portfolio II" would still fit into >the current scheme of things. I have no information about such >a machine, but from my current messing around, and in light of >the HP-95LX I could see them bringing out something. I think >what might be a sellable product would be 320 * 100 pixels of If there are too many pixels, either the pixels shrink (bad for visibility) or the PF would have to be larger (bad for portability). The current display is sufficient for my needs. Lots of pixels would be OK as long as the characters stay large, I suppose. But the more pixels there are, the more power the display draws. Everything's a tradeoff... I like the PF particularly because it's small, runs forever on batteries, and readable. >display, an "industry standard" memory card slot in place of the I would like to see a PF with the new PCMCIA slot. Of course that means incompatibility with all of the PF cards out now, but it opens the doors to all of the ROM applications available for other DOS palmtops. >current slot, a slightly revised keyboard and at least 258K RAM Where did you come up with an odd number like "258K"? >standard with the expansion up to 1 Meg., but with the current >60 pin expansion buss. That would be usable to "bridge the gap" >between the current Portfolio and some future machine that >might take off in a new "form factor" direction. Especially >a 320 pixel wide display. That would be a neat trick to play >on HP. It's only a few more pixels than the HP-95LX as far >as I can tell (nobody has counted them for me, but I'd guess they >are using 240 * 128), but there are some nifty tricks you can >use by having special fonts for 64 character and 80 character lines. >A 64 character line would be readable enough for spreadsheets and >an 80 character line could be used for "text format previewing". >I wouldn't advertise the 80 character line font as being "readable" >but in fact it can be read. We used to use a font of this pixel >range on the original Radio Shack Color Computer for "previewing" >and I found that I could get used to it enough to read the text. >But the 64 character line font would be the *real* surprise. Such >a font would be quite usable for spreadsheets. I'd like to see a Portfolio II, with 512K RAM standard and a nicer (but no larger) keyboard. The current display is sufficient, though I wouldn't object if Atari could expand the display to use more of the "cover" area. But I wouldn't want much smaller characters -- IMHO readability is more important than the number of characters on the display. Incidentally, someone has posted a program that displays 60 columns by 10 lines on the current PF. He is working with Atari, apparently, on a way to patch the OS to add a 60x10 display mode transparently to applications. > So for a display that would cost about the same as the HP to >make you could have greater functionality. I could see HP executives >pulling out their hair on that point. Well, the HP95LX has a faster processor, but processor speed isn't a big deal (IMHO) for a handheld. It'd be interesting to see if Intel has made a CMOS (low power) 8087 -- that would be nice, though probably too expensive to be worth while. Perhaps as an add-on? >>is planning to release the Power BASIC compiler, and Hyperlist, an outliner. > > Hmm. I thought these were supposed to have been available by now? Me too. Power BASIC has been done for a while as far as I know. I have seen programs that were compiled using Power BASIC... I plan on buying both of these when they come out. > Ick. That was something I was just about to look into. Literally >look into -- I was about to take apart my Portfolio and see what the >guts were like. Sounds like a surface mounted ROM, or worse. . . . You could hardly expect Atari to use socketed DIPs in something as small (and low cost) as the PF. >-- >Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880 >lsuc!jimomura >Byte Information eXchange: jimomura - Laird Popkin, Thinking Machines Connection Machine: Massively parallel supercomputer. Also a cool black cube with more blinking lights than you can shake a stick at.
jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) (06/21/91)
In article <1991Jun21.010142.14033@Think.COM> laird@think.com writes: >In article <1991Jun20.190320.8089@lsuc.on.ca> jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: >>In article <1991Jun20.001203.24928@rick.cs.ubc.ca> b3300876@rick.cs.ubc.ca (george chow) writes: > >The Portfolio was designed to have either 128K or 512K of internal SRAM. >All MegaByte Computers is doing is (carefully) pulling out the surface >mounted SRAM chips in the PF and replacing them with higher capacity chips. >Atari may have decided that since a third party company was selling a PF >internal RAM expansion there was no need for Atari to release a "fat PF". >Atari's market for the PF is the "pocket organizer" market, and I'd guess >that they don't see too much of a market for a $700 PF (a guess at what a >PF would sell for with 512K SRAM). > ... >> Well, I'd guess that a "Portfolio II" would still fit into >>the current scheme of things. I have no information about such >>a machine, but from my current messing around, and in light of >>the HP-95LX I could see them bringing out something. I think >>what might be a sellable product would be 320 * 100 pixels of > >If there are too many pixels, either the pixels shrink (bad for visibility) >or the PF would have to be larger (bad for portability). The current Yup. I thought about that. But the case top has a *lot* more space for a bigger display if you move the speaker to the underside of the keyboard. And I think you could get a smaller speaker. I'm not sure about that. I still haven't disassembled the thing. And it wouldn't hurt to have the pixels a *bit* smaller. Keep in mind that the "normal" resolution could still be 40 columns wide by using a thicker font which would be even easier for some people to read. >display is sufficient for my needs. Lots of pixels would be OK as long as >the characters stay large, I suppose. But the more pixels there are, the >more power the display draws. Everything's a tradeoff... I like the PF Yeah, again, that's why I'd keep it to "just a bit more" resolution than the HP. I've confirmed that the HP is 240 * 128 = 30,720 pixels. The 320 * 100 would be 32,000 (oh wow I can work that out in my head! :-). Interestingly, the 320 * 100 layout would allow square pixels. I'm not sure, but I think the HP doesn't have square pixels. I didn't look into that when I was playing with one recently. >particularly because it's small, runs forever on batteries, and readable. > >>display, an "industry standard" memory card slot in place of the > >I would like to see a PF with the new PCMCIA slot. Of course that means >incompatibility with all of the PF cards out now, but it opens the doors to Ah, now I anticipated that problem. The solution is in the expansion buss. What you do is bring out a "dual standard card drive". That would have 2 busses and be switchable. I don't think this would be hard. Now a person who has bought a bunch of "old Atari cards" could still use them as "B:" drive cards. That expansion buss is the one thing that could give the Portfolio a market that the HP-95LX can't get into. >>current slot, a slightly revised keyboard and at least 258K RAM > >Where did you come up with an odd number like "258K"? Well that was easy. You just think 256 and type it wrong. :-) Although in light of what you've told me about the RAM upgrade, I'd guess it would have to be a 512K size if anything. Which brings up another point regarding your battery life. I'm wondering what the battery life for the HP-95LX is really going to be. If the same RAM technology is used, then the drain has to be 4 times faster. Are the higher capacity RAMs more efficient? >>standard with the expansion up to 1 Meg., but with the current >>60 pin expansion buss. That would be usable to "bridge the gap" >>between the current Portfolio and some future machine that >>might take off in a new "form factor" direction. Especially >>a 320 pixel wide display. That would be a neat trick to play >>on HP. It's only a few more pixels than the HP-95LX as far >>as I can tell (nobody has counted them for me, but I'd guess they >>are using 240 * 128), but there are some nifty tricks you can >>use by having special fonts for 64 character and 80 character lines. >>A 64 character line would be readable enough for spreadsheets and >>an 80 character line could be used for "text format previewing". >>I wouldn't advertise the 80 character line font as being "readable" >>but in fact it can be read. We used to use a font of this pixel >>range on the original Radio Shack Color Computer for "previewing" >>and I found that I could get used to it enough to read the text. >>But the 64 character line font would be the *real* surprise. Such >>a font would be quite usable for spreadsheets. > >I'd like to see a Portfolio II, with 512K RAM standard and a nicer (but no >larger) keyboard. The current display is sufficient, though I wouldn't For the keyboard, I'd cut off the top of the Return key and stick the Insert/Delete key below the Backspace key. Then I'd re-arrange the cursor keys into either an "inverted T" or a "+" formation, but leaving a space beside the "Space bar". At least that's all I'd do for now. In the long run I'd look to a new physical package. But I'd want them to have this intermediate stage product to give a "smooth upgrade path." >object if Atari could expand the display to use more of the "cover" area. >But I wouldn't want much smaller characters -- IMHO readability is more >important than the number of characters on the display. > >Incidentally, someone has posted a program that displays 60 columns by 10 >lines on the current PF. He is working with Atari, apparently, on a way to >patch the OS to add a 60x10 display mode transparently to applications. Sonofagun! He's doing pretty much what I described. Though I wouldn't bother with more row. I'd just work on more characters on a row. But the 80 character line is the Holy Grail for a lot of things, like text format previewing. That's why I feel that the 320 pixel width is the magic trick that HP missed. >> So for a display that would cost about the same as the HP to >>make you could have greater functionality. I could see HP executives >>pulling out their hair on that point. > >Well, the HP95LX has a faster processor, but processor speed isn't a big >deal (IMHO) for a handheld. It'd be interesting to see if Intel has made a >CMOS (low power) 8087 -- that would be nice, though probably too expensive >to be worth while. Perhaps as an add-on? More than a faster processor, the HP-95LX really is a major step over the Portfolio. But the cost difference and expansion buss give the Portfolio possibilities over the HP. The overall "human packaging" difference is more than the Byte article covered. Of course, the Byte article didn't give a real "in depth comparison" between the two. The software in the HP has some huge advances over the Portfolio, but you have to get into really using the machines to tell this. On the otherhand, there are some areas where one might prefer the Portfolio despite the advances in the HP. The big point is the Scheduler packages. The HP has 3 methods of approaching the concept, but the main display that I'd probably use most is the one that resembles the one in the Portfolio. In this area the HP seems to only display on 1/2 hour increments. This is good to give you a "feeling" for how your day is organized, but it means that on the Portfolio I will probably see more of my scheduled events on the screen despite having fewer lines. But the breakthrough is having the background notes tied to the scheduler in HyperText fashion on the HP. ... >> Ick. That was something I was just about to look into. Literally >>look into -- I was about to take apart my Portfolio and see what the >>guts were like. Sounds like a surface mounted ROM, or worse. . . . > >You could hardly expect Atari to use socketed DIPs in something as small >(and low cost) as the PF. Well not a big thick DIP package, but something "interchangeable". :-) -- Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880 lsuc!jimomura Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu ( EVENSONG) (06/24/91)
When I was talking back and forth with Atari Portfolio (Adam Rubino in
particular) they expressed to real merit to rumors of a portfolio II. He
may have just been playing coy, but he was more apt to refer me to some of
the after market developers rather than lead me to believe that I should
wait and see....
swood
--
---- Insert favorite .signature here ---- | swood@argo.acs.oakland.edu
| swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu
Bitnet: swood@Oakland | swood@unix.secs.oakland.edu
UUCP: ...!uunet!umich!{vela, argo, unix, nucleus}!swood"Michael Graff" <graff@mlpvm2.vnet.ibm.com> (06/25/91)
Regarding the HP 95LX calendar function, jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: > the HP seems to only display on 1/2 hour increments. Actually, there are several options. Press {MENU} Settings Timeline, and you have the choice of 15-Min, 30-Min, 60-Min increments, or appointments only. I typically use the latter which uses one line per entry, so you can see up to 10 entries at a time. ...Michael
jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) (06/26/91)
In article <9106252030.AA24372@grape.ecs.clarkson.edu> graff@mlpvm2.vnet.ibm.com writes: >Regarding the HP 95LX calendar function, >jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: > >> the HP seems to only display on 1/2 hour increments. > >Actually, there are several options. Press {MENU} Settings Timeline, >and you have the choice of 15-Min, 30-Min, 60-Min increments, or >appointments only. I typically use the latter which uses one line per >entry, so you can see up to 10 entries at a time. I didn't get that far playing with it. I think that that "appointments only" setting is equivalent to what the Portfolio has as its only mode. Indeed, I expect it's what most people will use. A couple of minor points I've confirmed since my last posting: First, the pixels of the HP are, as I surmised, oblong rather than square which is not ideal for pie-charts and any general graphics. Also, for some reason the HP only shows 28 characters in the appointment mode for each entry's detail line while the Portfolio shows 30 (didn't that just thrill you to bits? :-). In general, the HP screen formats look very neat and impressive, but they tend to be a tad wasteful. If you look at the function key definitions on the bottom of the screen, they use 2 lines instead of 1, probably just to have longer labels, and then they end up with wasted space because they didn't need as much as they allocated. It's like they got carried away with how much more screen they had compared to the Portfolio and the "dinky little" screens on the dedicated pocket organizers and forgot that compared to "real computers" they are still pretty dinky themselves. Compare this wastage to the efficiency of the latest Casio BOSS organizers that show 2 months of calendar on the screen at a time. -- Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880 lsuc!jimomura Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
rrd@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Ray Depew) (06/26/91)
>Regarding the HP 95LX calendar function, >jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: > >> the HP seems to only display on 1/2 hour increments. > >Actually, there are several options. Press {MENU} Settings Timeline, >and you have the choice of 15-Min, 30-Min, 60-Min increments, or >appointments only. I typically use the latter which uses one line per >entry, so you can see up to 10 entries at a time. You can enter appointments on the HP95LX for odd times, like 12:10 p.m., and it will display them in the appointment list, inserted between the appropriate half-hours (or hours, or quarters). As the ">" response says, the / Settings Timeline menu in the Appointment application gives you the option of displaying your day in Appointment-only, 15-minute, 30-minute or 60-minute mode. It also allows you to specify the first hour to display (8:00 a.m. is default). Regards Ray Depew HP ICBD, Fort Collins, CO rrd@hpfitst1.hp.com
dan@i10s4.ira.uka.de (Dan Mosedale) (06/27/91)
In article <1991Jun21.010142.14033@Think.COM> laird@think.com writes: > >The Portfolio was designed to have either 128K or 512K of internal SRAM. >All MegaByte Computers is doing is (carefully) pulling out the surface >mounted SRAM chips in the PF and replacing them with higher capacity chips. How hard would this be to do myself -- and how much (approx) would the SRAM cost? Any thoughts or perhaps instructions would be much appreciated. -Dan dmose@bright.math.uoregon.edu