Mirage Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 For the 8-bit machines themselves though, the Atari computers are so much nicer hardware-wise (from a user's point of view) than the C64, C64c & Vic-20, except for the poor keyboard layout (Delete, Break, Caps and Return keys). oh shit! Umm... he means they're both great. Whatever you prefer is better. Ummm... nothing to see here. Move along! Yes, I agree... they're both great computers. I don't like either one particularly more than the other, they're just a little different and both have their strengths and weaknesses, but nothing deal-breaking on either side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirage Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 I have a couple c64's but since they don't have anything that works as well/inexpensively as sio2sd, my c64s sit totally unused even though there are *TONS* of games atari never got that I want to play. I did buy a c64 sd device, but was told it was worthless and that I needed to spend a truckload of money on a different one that may or may not be better. and the hell if I'm ever touching another floppy--which seems to be what the majority of c64 users run. I love my PC64 cable. Works like a charm. Maybe not as nice as the SIO solutions, as I haven't yet tried that, so I can't compare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ransom Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 For a device intended from the start to output to a TV, a monitor is an expensive, luxury option. The XL series was only sold for two years (and under tremendous price pressure from Commodore, at that). And the XE line was Atari's low end offering. If you wanted fancy graphical output and were willing to spend money on a single-tasking CRT to display it, you were expected to buy an ST. The 8 bit world of sub-$200 budget machines is not a target market that is going to be very enthused with buying an extra, optional box. Commodore got away with it in part because, even though the margins were small, the staggeringly high sales numbers from the C64 justified some R&D on relatively obscure devices. Atari didn't have anywhere near that kind of sales volume, so they had to be more judicious with where they spend their development money. The time where a monitor would have made sense, IMHO, would have been in the 1980-1982 time frame, when the machines were still high-margin devices, and when Atari had an unquestioned lead in graphical display. An "Atari 895 Hi-Resolution Color Monitor" would have been a great product. What you say is true, but it's still amazing to me that no monitor was ever produced for the Atari 8-bit line. You're talking about economic rationality, and you're correct as far as that goes. But we all know Atari was far from economically rational for its whole life (both Atari, Inc. and Atari Corp.). Given that the marketing department forced the terrible "360 degree" joystick idea on the 5200 just to compete with the Intellivision's 16-direction disc, why not a color monitor for the 8-bit line to compete with the other guys (Apple, Commodore, and TI all had color monitors for their 8-bit computers) and make Atari's computers look a little less like toys in the eyes of the public? I guess my point is that it's ironic that the company with the best video chips of any 8-bit computer line was also the one that consistently screwed up the output circuitry and also never bothered to produce a nice monitor to show off all that capability. It's almost as though they deliberately sabotaged their product's best feature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Philsan Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Atari: More Games for Your Atari 600XL (Interface Publications/Virgin Books). Not exactly the best title for a book.Neither one had anywhere near it's potential success. The Atari one even got licenced and published in Italy... we never saw any money whatsoever from that. So you are Gary, one of the two students from Camberra who have written the book! When I was young I have bought it (Italian version) and typed in many listings! Incredible! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
athleos Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 i pretty much stand equally in both camps, although i do tend to play favorites with my ataris... the commodores: • 4 Commodore 64's • Amiga 2000HD (+ lots of upgrades) • A1200 (pretty close to stock but has a few nice mods) the ataris: • 600XL (RAM upgrade/dual POKEY's/rev. C BASIC, etc.) • 800XL (same as 600XL) • 1040STe (4MB RAM/TOS 2.xx/etc..) • 2600 (S-video mod) • 7800 (stock) for a while i thought the ataris were far superior, especially with the addition of the SIO2PC/SIO2USB stuff, but i just recently got the C64TPC and i feel like my C64's can finally compete with the a8's. i definitely prefer to program on the ataris over the commodore stuff but each has it's own strengths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyR Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 I guess my point is that it's ironic that the company with the best video chips of any 8-bit computer line Honestly, VIC-II was better than Antic/GTIA. It's not a clean win, as it lacked Antic's per-scanline memory indirection, which was a powerful feature (Ballblazer is, in essence, a Antic demo clinic disguised as a game). But the higher (if admittedly quirky) color depth and much, much cleaner sprite architecture were better features for most purposes. That's not to slam the folks at Atari. They brought a custom NTSC/PAL ASIC chipset to market a full three years before Commodore/MOS did, and in many ways Atari's experience informed the design of the VIC-II. They got to see what worked and what didn't, and with the advantage of a more advanced process architecture produced a better product. But, honestly, a better product it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Wolfe Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 I'm definitely using both and my favorite C= forum is Lemon64.com. I have a HUGE commodore collection and use both the Atari & C= computers to play games all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+remowilliams Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 who, of you here have a foot in both the a8 and c64 camps Well, I suppose I do... Atari MegaSTE4 Atari 1040ST x2 Atari Stacy 4 Atari 1200XL *1 Atari 130XE x2 Boxed Atari 800 Atari 800XL Atari Falcon '030 Atari Portfolio Commodore 128 x2 Boxed Commodore 64 x2 Boxed Commodore 64C Commodore Amiga 1200 Boxed *4 Commodore Amiga 500 x2 Commodore SX-64 Commodore Vic 20 Boxed *1 Customized: 256K Rambo compatible upgrade / Internal SIO2PC USB / Supervideo 2.1 upgd / APE Warp 32in1 OS *4 Customized: GVP 1230 Turbo+ / Jaws (68030 @40Mhz w/FPU) / 20MB RAM / 4GB internal CF HDD / external Scandoubler / Catweasel MK2 / PCMCIA Ethernet I did buy a c64 sd device, but was told it was worthless and that I needed to spend a truckload of money on a different one that may or may not be better. The C64 SD solutions are not useless, but they are most assuredly limited. And if you are referring to the 1541Ultimate, yes it is by miles and miles the best solution for the 64 line. Of that there is no doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carmel_andrews Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 who, of you here have a foot in both the a8 and c64 camps Well, I suppose I do... Atari MegaSTE4 Atari 1040ST x2 Atari Stacy 4 Atari 1200XL *1 Atari 130XE x2 Boxed Atari 800 Atari 800XL Atari Falcon '030 Atari Portfolio Commodore 128 x2 Boxed Commodore 64 x2 Boxed Commodore 64C Commodore Amiga 1200 Boxed *4 Commodore Amiga 500 x2 Commodore SX-64 Commodore Vic 20 Boxed *1 Customized: 256K Rambo compatible upgrade / Internal SIO2PC USB / Supervideo 2.1 upgd / APE Warp 32in1 OS *4 Customized: GVP 1230 Turbo+ / Jaws (68030 @40Mhz w/FPU) / 20MB RAM / 4GB internal CF HDD / external Scandoubler / Catweasel MK2 / PCMCIA Ethernet I did buy a c64 sd device, but was told it was worthless and that I needed to spend a truckload of money on a different one that may or may not be better. The C64 SD solutions are not useless, but they are most assuredly limited. And if you are referring to the 1541Ultimate, yes it is by miles and miles the best solution for the 64 line. Of that there is no doubt. All i can say to that is.....Ouch, that must have hurt your wallet some, at least a 2-2.5 thou USD (and more) worth of gear there if you'd bought it full price, way back when Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogstar_robot Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 But, honestly, a better product it was. We have a real nice 2500+ post thread for that. Now run along to it......... http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=134852 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+bf2k+ Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 (edited) My first home computer was a C=64. I bought it on a Friday night! Took it back to the store the next Monday afternoon. It would not sync up with my TV. Turns out there was something weird with my new Zenith TV - C=64's would not sync up. Got an 800 instead for more money... that's the extent of my C=64 experience! Edited February 19, 2009 by bf2k+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirage Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 (edited) My first home computer was a C=64. I bought it on a Friday night! Took it back to the store the next Monday afternoon. It would not sync up with my TV. Turns out there was something weird with my new Zenith TV - C=64's would not sync up. Got an 800 instead for more money... that's the extent of my C=64 experience! There was usually an easy fix for that, but you wouldn't have necessarily have known that back then unless you thought to call service for the TV. Edited February 19, 2009 by Mirage1972 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+bf2k+ Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 My first home computer was a C=64. I bought it on a Friday night! Took it back to the store the next Monday afternoon. It would not sync up with my TV. Turns out there was something weird with my new Zenith TV - C=64's would not sync up. Got an 800 instead for more money... that's the extent of my C=64 experience! There was usually an easy fix for that, but you wouldn't have necessarily have known that back then unless you thought to call service for the TV. It was a brand new TV - the first color TV I have ever owned... I had no intention of opening it up... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonner242 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I own abit of both.... I am proud to say I love both too, If it came down to keeping just one I'll keep my Amiga hands down. Awesome Sound,better Graphic than anything I could ever put out on a Atari computer,Huge amount of Awesome titles. Maybe its because thats the system I programmed games for and did 90% of my Animation on and found it a blast. And GOD how I loved Lightwave in the early 90's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rybags Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 On the ownership side... 3x Amiga 500s, 1x C-64, 1xAmiga CD32, 1x Plus/4, 1x 1541 and probably 3 tape drives 1x 1040ST-FM, 3x A8 (130XE, 800XL, XEGS), 2x 1050, 1x 1010, 1x 7800, 1x Lynx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ransom Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I own abit of both....I am proud to say I love both too, If it came down to keeping just one I'll keep my Amiga hands down. Awesome Sound,better Graphic than anything I could ever put out on a Atari computer,Huge amount of Awesome titles. Maybe its because thats the system I programmed games for and did 90% of my Animation on and found it a blast. And GOD how I loved Lightwave in the early 90's. My wife and I both wanted one of those so much back in the 90s. We often say we would have been a lot better off with that instead of the DOS boxes we had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathanallan Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I have a few of both. Started with a C64 and eventually ended up using both pretty heavily through school and hobbying it. Both are pretty hard to get stuff for around where I live. But I do both. Have fun with both. Nathan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoTonah Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I own both, and love them both for different reasons. I do prefer the Atari units in many ways, in both the 8 and 16 bit computers. Here's what I currently have in my collection (and I'm only listing Atari and Commodore products, not anything else) - All Atari videogame consoles, including all PONG models, except Stunt Cycle. I have every VCS model available in North America. - Atari 400 - Atari 800 - Atari 1200XL - Atari 600XL - Atari 800XL - Atari 130XE - Atari XEGM - Atari 520ST - Atari 1040STfm wishlist: Atari PC, Atari Portfolio, Mega ST, Falcon, TT030. I'm not going to bother getting a 65XE 'cause it's practically the same machine as the 130XE... plus I'm running out of room haha - VIC-20 - C64 - C64c - C64SX - C128D - Amiga 500 - Amiga 2000 - Amiga 2500HD wishlist: Amiga 600, Amiga 1200, KIM-1 (would settle for a reproduction) Collecting is a serious hobby for me (my wife tolerates it though 'cause I'm so damn lovable haha). I still program on them, and I've been writing articles on programming for a few websites lately (focusing on BASICs for the Atari 8-bits, C64, Apple 2, and BlitzMax on the PC, Mac and Linux). Keeps me young (I think). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artlover Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Me, as I own computers in both camps. Vic20, C16, C64's, C128's (w/stereo sid & 64k VDC), C128D, Amiga500's. 1541's, 1571's, 1581 drives. 1750REU (upgraded 2 megs), 1351 mouse. 1902A, 1084, 1084S, 2002 monitors. A800, A800XL (w/Pokey-Gumby, 320k memory, ultra speed OS). 810, 1040 drives. 830 modem, 850 rs232, CX85 keypad, CX80 trackball (modded w/dual buttons for 7800 compatability). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artlover Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 (edited) . Edited February 19, 2009 by Artlover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 How cool an XL themed monitor would have been! The closest thing I know of is the Teknika MJ-10. It's dark brown and white like the XL's and was sold in the '80s. I have one and it's comparable to a 1702. My new A8 monitor is a JVC TM-H1700GU professional monitor. It has a 17" screen and handles NTSC and PAL. The picture is beautiful. It also has an underscan button which shrinks the picture so you can see what's going on in the borders (did you know that Antic generates random garbage for the last byte when you do horizontal scrolling?). I have noticed that "garbage" on ANTIC, but it's not random just like P/M graphics aren't random when displayed w/o DMA access... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 But, honestly, a better product it was. We have a real nice 2500+ post thread for that. Now run along to it......... http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=134852 Yeah, make sure you read all of the pages and take note of facts about compressed bit-depth of how 6-bit HAM images are better than 8-bit MCGA/VGA images, the number of graphics modes offered by Atari chipset (starting out with 56 described here at: http://www.atarimagazines.com/v3n5/allmodes.html), GPRIOR OR effects to produce colors, multiple color players/5th player effects to produce 23 colors w/o DLI/IRQ tricks (http://www.atariarchives.org/c1bag/page192.php), etc. and then your delusions like you stated will go away: I guess my point is that it's ironic that the company with the best video chips of any 8-bit computer line Honestly, VIC-II was better than Antic/GTIA. It's not a clean win, as it lacked Antic's per-scanline memory indirection, which was a powerful feature (Ballblazer is, in essence, a Antic demo clinic disguised as a game). But the higher (if admittedly quirky) color depth and much, much cleaner sprite architecture were better features for most purposes. ... Looks like you forgot that GTIA chip has GTIA modes that already give much much cleaner 80*200*16 than what you can do with a 40*25*16 color map. For "most purposes" that you use them for or are you speaking for everyone? If latter, make sure you also read up to page 96 [inclusive] about sprite curtains using only 0 CPU cycles, 0 DMA cycles, and 0 bytes of RAM and every other combination of use that can be made with the graphics modes and sprite useage. >That's not to slam the folks at Atari. You aren't because you are wrong. >They brought a custom NTSC/PAL ASIC chipset to market a full three years before Commodore/MOS did, and in many ways Atari's experience informed the design of the VIC-II. They got to see what worked and what didn't, and with the advantage of a more advanced process architecture produced a better product. >But, honestly, a better product it was. Looks like you haven't done much programming on Atari. Honestly, even after trying to beat out a chip set for three years, they produced a VIC-II that's inferior to the ANTIC/GTIA. Lesser colors still, fewer modes, less color depth, lack of 32-color mode, lack of shades, lack of WSYNC (video-timing), etc. etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 My first home computer was a C=64. I bought it on a Friday night! Took it back to the store the next Monday afternoon. It would not sync up with my TV. Turns out there was something weird with my new Zenith TV - C=64's would not sync up. Got an 800 instead for more money... that's the extent of my C=64 experience! Lucky guy! They had not yet put in "WSYNC" type circuitry for synchronizing C64 to TVs yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rybags Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 That article is kinda pointless. GTIA modes are only useful in modes where Antic is passing 40 bytes of information to GTIA per scanline. ie 2-5 and D-F. Not to mention it contains no information of software generated modes, although to be fair, most of them probably weren't even conceived when it was written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ransom Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 How cool an XL themed monitor would have been! The closest thing I know of is the Teknika MJ-10. It's dark brown and white like the XL's and was sold in the '80s. I have one and it's comparable to a 1702. My new A8 monitor is a JVC TM-H1700GU professional monitor. It has a 17" screen and handles NTSC and PAL. The picture is beautiful. It also has an underscan button which shrinks the picture so you can see what's going on in the borders (did you know that Antic generates random garbage for the last byte when you do horizontal scrolling?). That is very cool! I wish I'd known about the Teknika back then. I should have done a Google search back in '83, but I was too lazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.