Compatibility between Atari computer models

[Silence The Fallen]

I was wondering with what computer model did ST compatibility take a nosedive?

 

The STe is almost completely backwards compatible with the ST, but I hear that the Falcon has many compatibility issues running ST software. What about the Mega STe or the TT 030? Do they have as high compatibility as the STe?

[Rybags]

A big issue with lots of software for the 68000 is that it uses the top 8 bits of 32 bit address pointers to store other stuff.

 

Of course, that's not a problem on the lowly machines, since the 68000 only has 24 bit addressing, but is a headache with 68020/30/40 etc.

 

Then you have TOS issues.

 

There's also programs that even on base STs have problems with RAM expansions.

 

And, the STe, TT and Falcon also have extra graphics abilities - fair enough the STe is fairly close to the base machine but the TT/Falc have greatly enhanced graphics over the ST.

 

Finally, there's also the CPU speed difference. Maybe not such a huge issue, as most games back then were just based on VBlank timing anyway.

[Silence The Fallen]

So let me see if I have this straight.

 

Basically the STe and Mega STe can run ST software with very few problems, but can't run TT and Falcon 030 software.

 

The TT and Falcon can both run software designed for the 030 systems, but have major compatibility problems running ST software.

 

There might be a few exceptions here and ther but is this true, for the most part?

[Rybags]

I believe there are still some of the old cracker groups active and they've "fixed" quite a few games such that they work now on the higher machines.

 

Of course a base model won't necessarily run software designed specifically for TT/Falcons if that software relies on the higher colour/res modes or extended instructions sets of the higher 68K processors.

 

As for percentage of software in various categories that isn't upward/downward compatible - I don't know. Maybe someone's bothered to make a list?

[pps]

Imho the TT ist the machine with lowest backward compatibility.

 

The Falcon can be switched to very compatible by using a software like 'backwards', where you have the option to switch off the processor caches and many more. It saves a seperate config for each programme you want to start.

 

Then there is the D-BUG crew. They have patched a lot games to run on Falcon, TT, Mega STE (16 MHz) and at least they are now HD installable.

 

But if you want to run all the games, you still have to buy a 1040 STFM or STE and a FALCON.

[TheGreatPW]

I was wondering with what computer model did ST compatibility take a nosedive?

 

The STe is almost completely backwards compatible with the ST, but I hear that the Falcon has many compatibility issues running ST software. What about the Mega STe or the TT 030? Do they have as high compatibility as the STe?

 

I believe the STe computers ran almost everything except for the very early programs or the ones where the publisher did not adhere by Atari's development rules to guarantee future compatibility.

 

For the STe, TT and Falcon computers, Atari had a patch that tried to make incompatible software work but it rarely ever did the trick. For these computers, it almost solely relied on how good the developer was at following Atari's development rules.

 

Generally as a rule, I find that if a program will not run on STe, there is almost no chance it will run on a TT or Falcon or vice versa. Programs like The Software Toolwork's Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing, Domark's Star Wars and Taito's Renegade are examples of programs that will not run on anything but a ST or ST-FM. The better developers like Sierra Online and LucasFilm/LucasArts will have no problems running their software on any of the Atari platforms.

[Silence The Fallen]

OK... Thanks for the info everyone. It sounds like I made the right decision.

 

When I bought my Atari last year I purchased a 4 MB 1040 STe. So far it has ran every piece of ST software that I have tried. Regardless, I was looking at eventually upgrading to a Mega STe, TT, or Falcon. But I see no point in upgrading to one of those systems if they won't run most of my existing ST software.

 

Again, thanks for the info.

[RedBeard]

Hiya. When you say Mavis Beacon didn't work, can you describe what it does/doesn't do? Also, would it work properly in the emulators?

 

If you could direct me to find a Mavis Beacon as a disk image, please would you? I understand if it's not PD/abandoned, then I may be out of luck, but if you can help me with that...

 

><>RedBeard

 

 

 

/* BACK ON TOPIC: I own a 520st and a MegaSTE, so hardware-wise, I would be covered. I just need a falcon!

 

OT again: Ialso have M.B. Teaches Typing for PC and Mac, but that old stuph is buried in the garage right now, so can't find it... oh well... */

[krupkaj]

OK... Thanks for the info everyone. It sounds like I made the right decision.

 

When I bought my Atari last year I purchased a 4 MB 1040 STe. So far it has ran every piece of ST software that I have tried. Regardless, I was looking at eventually upgrading to a Mega STe, TT, or Falcon. But I see no point in upgrading to one of those systems if they won't run most of my existing ST software.

 

Again, thanks for the info.

 

well, it is not so easy. It depends what you want to do on Atari machines. If you want to run "clean" GEM applications, they will run on all machines. And in that case faster machine is better. For example you can run Calamus DTP on basic ST, but it is not so comfortable as on TT with graphics card and 128MB of memory.

But if you want to play games mostly, the STE is the right machine for you. Of course it is not possible to run Falcon games on ST.

[+poobah]

For what it's worth, my Atari ST history went:

 

520ST -> Mega2 -> MegaSTe

 

The MegaSTe ran *almost* everything, It was the most polished ST box.

If you can grab one, its not a bad choice for games either.

 

-Ken

[RedBeard]

I think krupkaj put it best above. (It depends what you want to do...) Sounds like you made and excellent choice, though, a 4MB 1040 STe is a fine machine!

 

><>RedBeard

 

/* The only game I remember not working on my Mega STe was (I forget the title) one where the intro animation ran fine, but then disk 2+, (the game) never worked. Something like Navy SEALS or Commandos or something... getting dropped off by zodiac boats... I guess I never thought that it was due to the STe, but it probably was. (Again, it's buried in the garage, so I can't find it right now.)

 

UPDATE: I tracked it down, the game is called Aquanaut. I found a copy and played it in an emulator, works fine. The graphics and animations are quite good, I think. The gameplay, so-so. */

Edited July 7, 2008 by RedBeard

[thrax]

In fairness to Atari, most competing systems had issues with software when going from 68000 to 030 or 040 systems.

[thrax]

OK... Thanks for the info everyone. It sounds like I made the right decision.

 

When I bought my Atari last year I purchased a 4 MB 1040 STe. So far it has ran every piece of ST software that I have tried. Regardless, I was looking at eventually upgrading to a Mega STe, TT, or Falcon. But I see no point in upgrading to one of those systems if they won't run most of my existing ST software.

 

Again, thanks for the info.

 

Same with me. I bought a 2mb 1040 ste and it runs everything i tried. I won't consider getting any of the later models unless i happen to see one dirt cheap on CL or a thrift store. I think a 1040ST set of systems is the best for first time buyers. The 1mb min memory means it has enough to run the majority of software without the higher cost and/or potential incompatibility issues of the later systems.

Edited July 7, 2008 by thrax

[ppera]

About games compatibility:

 

In many cases not HW, but TOS version is reason why game works not on STE or Falcon (and ST too).

Then, bad crack, launcher is many times the reason to not run on some higher TOS version.

More about it here:

http://www.ppest.org/atari/plafh.html

http://www.ppest.org/atari/playfhd.html

 

I started list of (in)compatibility, interactive:

http://www.ppest.org/atari/atricl.php

 

There is a place for solved incompatibilities and possibility to run from hard disk.

[+CyranoJ]

About games compatibility:

 

In many cases not HW, but TOS version is reason why game works not on STE or Falcon (and ST too).

Then, bad crack, launcher is many times the reason to not run on some higher TOS version.

More about it here:

http://www.ppest.org/atari/plafh.html

http://www.ppest.org/atari/playfhd.html

 

I started list of (in)compatibility, interactive:

http://www.ppest.org/atari/atricl.php

 

As usual from ppera, not quite true.

 

It's mostly HARDWARE and not TOS.

 

The major problem with the MSTE is the floppy spindown timers are different and sometimes a DMA loader will hang on the MSTE where it will run fine on other models (even the Falcon)

 

The Falcon's big problem is usally the Shadow Registers for the PSG (Soundchip) causing bus errors, where on all other STs (And even the TT) they will work. There's also the 32-bitness of the CPU registers (compared to 24 bit on the STs) and also the PMMU (memory management) that prevents most games from running low in memory. Another huge problem for the Falcon is the ACIA chip seems to have some problems with older software, the results of which are no keyboard/mouse/joystick input on certain games (again, requires fixing)

 

"Bad Crack" ?? Thats a joke. When the crack was released, there were no higher machines to test on. What usually causes this is something that intercepts the TRAP calls that load the data from the disk - the stack frame on the 68030 is diferent (1 extra word stored on the stack) so the depackers will fail.

 

There is a place for solved incompatibilities and possibility to run from hard disk.

 

Yes, there is - except it's here: http://www.dbug-automation.co.uk

Click on patches. At the very least, you won't get confused by the website layout (because it has one)

[ppera]

As usual from ppera, not quite true...

 

"Bad Crack" ?? Thats a joke. When the crack was released, there were no higher machines to test on. What usually causes this is something that intercepts the TRAP calls that load the data from the disk - the stack frame on the 68030 is diferent (1 extra word stored on the stack) so the depackers will fail.

 

There is a place for solved incompatibilities and possibility to run from hard disk.

 

Yes, there is - except it's here: http://www.dbug-automation.co.uk

Click on patches. At the very least, you won't get confused by the website layout (because it has one)

 

Yeah. As I expected... Well... I talked about what I did, saw recently. And I was focused on games which use system calls.

So called 'DMA' loaders not interesting me. Because they go out when doing adaptation for hard drive... So, why so many game still works not on STE when floppy loader is replaced?

Why doing all adaptations at once, when we can do it separately

 

Talking about Falcon shadow registers and other is another example that CJ just seeks how to play smarthead, instead reading really what criticises. And I mentioned most of those Falcon HW incompatibilites on site. And all talk it is pretty outdated, since is solved mostly with Backwards and STE2FALC. It is just for users comfort to do sompatibility settings in launcher.

68000 has 24 bit CPU registers? Interesting that one CPU has CPU registers... Interesting that TOS sets some vectors with 32 bit values even under TOS 1.xx ... Now I see why I have so much bugs in my programs - I trying to use 32bits

 

Bad cracks? Yes there is a lot of bad cracks with bugs, for instance loader for Commando by Replicants where one push is forgotten when doing pexec call. But it worked under TOS 1.02 for some reason. Not on higher ones. And what about cracks which work only with 512KB? Is STE introduced 1MB and more in Atari ST serie? Crap... Not to mention lot of incomplete cracks as Carrier Command by great Automation...

And again that floppy reading incompability... Who cares for floppies in 2008?

 

I started user fillable list for all possible (in)compatibility cases - what runs not on what, what incompability is solved on what, hard disk running possibilities, solutions, with easy, couple click downloads (if there is adaptation, patch) and then great CJ comes with his 2 page site to say that all you need is to click on patches.... So, it will help to know what is incompatible with what....

 

Better do something to increase number of ULS patches, or change it's name to NSULS

 

P.S. if someone did not notice, I just added some reasons in my first post here. Not tended to mention all them, especially not those already mentioned...

Edited September 1, 2008 by ppera

[ggn]

And all it is pretty outdated, since is solved mostly with Backwards and STE2FALC. It is just for users comfort to do sompatibility settings in launcher.

 

So, you want 100000 programs on your auto folder and root partition. Also, you want to run the games from floppies. And you have to remember which combination works for each game.

 

As opposed to double-clicking an icon from the desktop from any folder in your hard drive and the game running.

 

Yeah, pretty obsolete. My a**.

[ppera]

So, you want 100000 programs on your auto folder and root partition. Also, you want to run the games from floppies. And you have to remember which combination works for each game.

As opposed to double-clicking an icon from the desktop from any folder in your hard drive and the game running.

 

Yeah... reading carefully posts is not common here... Yeah... I do hard disk adaptations and mention here them to play from floppies later...

 

Just for record: It was talk about why some games work not on Falcon. Nobody said that it is easier to run with Backward.

But ggn enlightened us with it's discovery - double click in any folder

 

I expecting further D-bug compliants...

[+CyranoJ]

At least we're doing something.

 

All you do is talk crap and write bodgy arsed shit that goes in the AUTO folder stuffing the boot sequence up, then claim its the best thing since 1994. The patches on your page also have lots missing (like in some cases, complete intro sequences) but go ahead, poke fun at the work we've been doing. It makes you seem so knowledgable. Work arounds are a joke compared to fixes.

 

And you have the audacity to constantly slag off Automation - yet your website uses Automation graphics in the background and you claim about your software being able to run with their cracks.

 

You, sir, are a total hypocrite. Not that you'll know what that means of course. It's a long word, with more than 2 syllables.

 

You claim TOS is the main problem. Funny how nearly 90% of games don't use TOS as they autoboot low in memory. If it's not used, how can it be a problem?

 

512Mb - Last I checked, RAM was HARDWARE.

24 bit address line vs 32 bit address line > Last I checked, address lines were HARDWARE.

Shadow Registers - Controlled by a chip on the board that decodes addresses I believe? Gosh, could that be HARDWARE?

Floppy Drives - Isn't that HARDWARE?

 

And funny how every time someone points out that you're wrong you come back with the ever popular "I don't care" line?

 

Now please go away back to your lair and troll away at another "amazing" IDE interface that requires you to hand solder about 60 pins to your base board until it dies. Or at least start it and give up, as you do so well. Anyone looking at the pictures of your mods on your site will realise what a complete botch job you make of those as well.

 

Thank you, and good day sir.

[ppera]

.....

512Mb - Last I checked, RAM was HARDWARE.

24 bit address line vs 32 bit address line > Last I checked, address lines were HARDWARE...

And you have the audacity to constantly slag off Automation - yet your website uses Automation graphics in the background and you claim about your software being able to run with their cracks.

 

Again yeah. As expected our hard working CJ twistes and incorrect quotes - just to prove that he is perfect and me is dumb. evil etc.

 

Quote 1: "In many cases not HW, but TOS version is reason" - by CJ many is most. And he is Englishman as I know...

2: "There's also the 32-bitness of the CPU registers (compared to 24 bit on the STs)" - yea, CPU registers are HW. Even poor 68008 in QL has 32 bit registers.

Next time be more precise what writing. And don't mix Falcon with TT.

Using Automation pic on my site? Yes. Do you have copyright? Do you respect copyright? Automation is not only CJ. I'm sure that there was decent people too.

"claim about your software being able to run with their cracks." - haha ... I think that it is opposite. SW cracked by Automation is able to run with my SW.

But for CJ SW is not SW of their authors, programmers. It is exclusively 'their crack'. 100% Automation merit.

I will use everything what will make SW usage easier. Don't care if there writes CJ if it is done good. That's the difference.

Will not make pitty adapt. as that for No Second Prize when it is solved long time ago with game Save/Load working.

Will use as many general tool to run games instead hard fixing them.

Already found some 8 games working With Hole in couple weeks. And no any modification was necessary in games, not even in short loaders.

But everyone is free to do things as he considers as best. Just leave others too to do so.

 

 

We could continue this crappy discussion forever...

Or, we could start to respect others work and not using every opportunity to shit around. Or at least shut up if can not do anything useful.

 

CJ could add his opinions about incompatibility reasons in this thread. But he would never write here if I did not. Because his care about Atari people is overshadoved with his pathologic hate.

We could learn each from other, working in different areas, instead doing same many times. Respect the different.

But we are were we are. Atari 'community' is full of shit. Enjoy dinner what you cooked

[+CyranoJ]

Hey Mods,

 

Please come sort this guy out - he appears to have some sort of psychological disorder.

[ppera]

Hey Mods,

 

Please come sort this guy out - he appears to have some sort of psychological disorder.

 

Yeah. It will work. Psycho, who is banned from main Atari forum calls moderators to sort out things.

Sort out your own yard first asshole. Or it can be wiped

[Atariforce]

The Falcon's big problem is usally the Shadow Registers for the PSG (Soundchip) causing bus errors, where on all other STs (And even the TT) they will work. There's also the 32-bitness of the CPU registers (compared to 24 bit on the STs) and also the PMMU (memory management) that prevents most games from running low in memory. Another huge problem for the Falcon is the ACIA chip seems to have some problems with older software, the results of which are no keyboard/mouse/joystick input on certain games (again, requires fixing)

 

To make a game Falcon-compatible, another very useful trick is to clear the bits at memory address $ffff8007.

Bit 0 controls 68030 speed. Very useful on games like Buggy Boy, Rolling Thunder or Ocean Beach Volley.

Bit 2 controls blitter speed.

Bit 5 sets STE bus emulation on when cleared. It fixes many games (most of the Coktel Vision games for instance).

[Tempest]

Sigh... Am I going to crack some skulls here, or can you both act like adults?

 

Tempest

[ppera]

Some technical details to not let this thread staying with incorrect statements:

 

There is no floppy spindown timer in Atari machines. So no in Mega STE. Spindown (better said time while motor is on after last operation) goes so, that FDC chip waits 10 index pulses, and then turns off motor. So, spindown time depends from floppy drive rotation speed. Not from some MSTE specific HW.

 

Falcon bus. Falcon standard HW uses 24 bit address bus, same as ST machines. COMBEL chip has connected A23 line as max address line. And it controls RAM and all peripherals. So, if highest byte of address bus has some value different from 0 nothing will change, it will work. And it is proven in practice.

How it is by some expansion boards as CT60 is other thing, not relevant for old games.

 

Not technical: "slag off Automation" . Not at all. They did many good cracks, menu disks. But nobody is perfect. In any case, they just pulled my tongue with constant messages a lá "We are the best" . So, criteria is very high

Edited September 5, 2008 by ppera