Jump to content
Have You Played Atari Today?
2600|5200|7800|Lynx|Jaguar|Forums|Store

HiroProX

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    136

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by HiroProX

    The Tramiels

    in Atari 8-Bit Computers

    Posted

    Morgan would have done far better, if only he had been given a reasonable amount of time.

     

    But I have to admit, best thing out of the Tramiel years was the ST/XE styling. It was a pretty bold style that to me ranks second only to the XL styling.

    Atari TT Unix

    in Atari ST/TT/Falcon Computers

    Posted

    I'd like to know what happened to the ST version of Linux...is it still going or being maintained/developed

    Why? Are you planning on installing it?

     

    I just haven't heard anything in a long time (i thought the project was dead)

     

    It's BSD Unix, not Linux, but it can run the same open source software:

    NetBSD for Atari

     

    There was a Linux version for the ST, based on ucLinux that would run on a 68000 ST/STe. It hasn't been updated in a long, long time.

    What upgrades for a STacy?

    in Atari ST/TT/Falcon Computers

    Posted · Edited by HiroProX

    I'm working on a couple of screen replacement ideas. The first being a straight across replacement for ST High.

     

    Hi there.

     

    Okey-dokey, please keep us updated on anything you find out. I know

    I'm not the only one interested! :)

     

    What I'm looking at for a "direct" replacement is a 640x400 resolution EL panel the same size as the original LCD. The big advantage, it'd be MUCH more readable than the standard LCD, and provides a replacement for the numerous owners of STacys with dead screens.

    Why didn't/couldn't Atari Corp use the AMY in the ST?

    in Atari ST/TT/Falcon Computers

    Posted

    It wouldn't have anything to do with a PC though: the original AMY interface was intended to use a simple 8-bit MCU with am 8051 specifically referenced (successor to the older 8048 line -used in the Intellivision among many other embedded applications)

     

    Nope! The Intellivision uses the CP1610 which is a 16bit CPU and nothing like an 8051.

     

    Yep, true. The i8048 was used in the Odyssey 2.

    How do I use an Atari SC monitor with an Atari 8-bit?

    in Atari 8-Bit Computers

    Posted

    So I have to ask -what monitor do you feel matches the XL style? Maybe a TI monitor?

     

    None. Unless it had the cream/offwhite and brown with silver trim, and the bevelled edges of the XL design, it doesn't match. That's why I said it was a dream of mine. I guess I could paint my 1084S to some extent to match in color, but there's no monitor that I've seen with bevelled edges and brush metal trim. Though I don't recall what a TI monitor looks like, got a pic or link to a pic? I have a TI 99/4A, but just it and the voice synthesis module, no monitor, no drive and it's packed away at the moment. So I'm guessing maybe the TI monitor uses brushed metal trim like the TI 99/4A? Maybe it would make a good match with a little paint.

     

    Addressing that lack of an XL-look monitor is on my to-do list.

    1200XL Pizza Box w/detachable keyboard...

    in Atari 8-Bit Computers

    Posted · Edited by HiroProX

     

    If what you want is something similar to what the 1450XLD is/was/wouldve been, then remake the case, but with generic mounting options for varios common ATARI 8bit boards inside.. Then make different versions of the "port wiring" kit to accomadate each board type. (eg. 600/800/1200xl, 65/130xe). That is my "vote"...

     

    This one wins.

     

    Though my current project is building a 130XE into a Mega ST case.

    Another Tangent of My Atari Triumphant Timeline

    in Classic Computing Discussion

    Posted

    But the primary problem with the idea of an 'Atari Triumphant" timeline is that everything in the computer industry was headed for standardization. The closest possible thing would be three competing standards, with atari as a manufacturer of machines fitting one of those standards. Then again, I have trouble with the idea of Atari going to MIPS CPUs, as this would delay a replacement for the 8-bits by another year, when the 8-bits were getting hammered in the market by the C64. Likewise, a MIPS-based machine would be VERY expensive, like IBM PC/AT kind of expensive ($4000+). In that case, Apple could release a MC68000 machine for $2000 and be "the low price leader". If Apple had a hard time selling Macs OTL for $2000, Atari trying to sell a $4000+ machine would be hopeless. At least the IBM PC/AT had the PC's software library to use, and being an IBM product it could command a $4000+ price. Keep in mind that the major user of MIPS CPUs OTL was SGI, and a "cheap" SGI machine in the late 80s, the Personal Iris 4D/25 was a $10,000 machine. So I somehow doubt Atari could bring a MIPS based machine to market for under $4000.

     

    From the original discussion:http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/154910-reposed-from-general-chat/page__p__1897625__fromsearch__1#entry1897625

    (also this related discussion) http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/155306-one-tangent-of-my-atari-what-if/page__p__1903226__fromsearch__1#entry1903226

     

    At least the way I was trying to push the discussion, I suggested MIPS, or ARM rather than Alpha which is what Kalvan had been sticking on... However, in the context I was referring to (favoring ARM personally), RISC would not come in until the tail end of the 1980s at earliest, rather, they'd stay with the 650x architecture prior to that. (starting with faster 6502s, 65C02s, then 65816s prior to going to RISC) The Idea was that at soem point, atari could get a licence for the 65816 core (relatively easy for that chip) and implement it in their own cusom, integrated chip to provide backwards compatibility on later models.

    I preferred ARM as the lower cost and more reasonable option compared to MIPS. (though that became much more reasonable with the expansion to the embedded market int he early 90s)

    ARM would probably be easier to license or obtain from alternate vendors than MIPS would have been, at least prior to the mid 90s.

     

    This pretty much echos my thoughts. A movement to a fully incompatible RISC architecture would require more capable interim machines that would likely need to be backwards compatible with the previous 8-bit computers. And the insistence on the Alpha was kind of WTF? to me. I like Alphas, I owned some back then and still do, but they were expensive machines, and the architecture pretty much ran out of gas with the axp21264, as the axp21364 is a minimalist design meant to be used in massively parallel systems, not exactly a desktop box. Moving from more advanced 65xx designs tends to favor ARM more than MIPS. SGI went to MIPS CPUs from MC680x0 CPUs. Though it does become a possibility that if WDC can sell many more 65816s, that a "65832" might have happened, which would make a move to RISC more questionable, especially if the "WDC65832" offered performance comparable to the i386 or MC68020. Though I think that would result in a delayed move to RISC, probably when 64-bit RISC CPUs such as StrongARM, MIPS R4000, UltraSPARC, and DEC axp21064 became more available.

     

    But all of this would only be truely usable if Atari could move the 8-bits to an OS with an API so that major changes in the underlying hardware could be masked from programs. Otherwise, there would be massive compatibility problems with software that (as most A8 software did) directly access the hardware. In many ways, maintaining compatibility with the original A8s for Atari, or the C64 in the case of Commodore would have been next to impossible past 16-bit machines. PCs only managed this compatibility back to the 8088 by the use of several modes, Real Mode, 286 Protected Mode, 386 Protected Mode, and Virtual x86 Mode.

    Another Tangent of My Atari Triumphant Timeline

    in Classic Computing Discussion

    Posted

    But the primary problem with the idea of an 'Atari Triumphant" timeline is that everything in the computer industry was headed for standardization. The closest possible thing would be three competing standards, with atari as a manufacturer of machines fitting one of those standards. Then again, I have trouble with the idea of Atari going to MIPS CPUs, as this would delay a replacement for the 8-bits by another year, when the 8-bits were getting hammered in the market by the C64. Likewise, a MIPS-based machine would be VERY expensive, like IBM PC/AT kind of expensive ($4000+). In that case, Apple could release a MC68000 machine for $2000 and be "the low price leader". If Apple had a hard time selling Macs OTL for $2000, Atari trying to sell a $4000+ machine would be hopeless. At least the IBM PC/AT had the PC's software library to use, and being an IBM product it could command a $4000+ price. Keep in mind that the major user of MIPS CPUs OTL was SGI, and a "cheap" SGI machine in the late 80s, the Personal Iris 4D/25 was a $10,000 machine. So I somehow doubt Atari could bring a MIPS based machine to market for under $4000.

    Wargames Dialer?

    in Atari 8-Bit Computers

    Posted

    Occassionally the line would get interrupted and you'd hear someone from Sprint or MCI saying "hello???" and I'd do a Matthew Broderick, grab the phone, unplug it and hold it in my lap wondering if that was going to be the night that the police were going to come and ring the doorbell and I'd be sooooooo busted.

     

     

     

    Curt

     

    Heh, nothing like that to make your sphincter pucker. Lots of close calls, but it was deciding to use the VAX in military school as a rendering co-processor for my A500 that got me nailed.

    • Like 1

    Another Tangent of My Atari Triumphant Timeline

    in Classic Computing Discussion

    Posted

    Even then, MSX is going to be a primarily japanese-only platform, like in real life. The instant one MSX machine showed up on American shores with serious intent, Jack Tramiel and Commodore would do to them what they did to TI. Remember, Tramiel was absolutely paranoid about a japanese entry into the US computer market. ThE MSx2 and MSX2+ machines might have been contenders, but by the time they were brought out, the US market had already seen the introduction of 16-bit machines by Apple, Atari, and Commodore. MSX1 machines were no competition technically against either the Atari 8-bits or Commodore's C64. Even if they could be brought in against the VIC-20, they'd still be outclassed by the Atari 400 and 800. If they were to manage any degree of success, it'd be at the TI-99/4A's expense, and then they would meet TI's fate at the hands of Commodore.

     

    but even then, if a Z-80 machine didn't have an 80-column text display and run CP/M, it was toast.

AtariAge
Forums
Store
General
Follow AtariAge

Copyright ©1998-2023 AtariAge

×
×
  • Create New...