had the 7800 launched in 1984....

[DracIsBack]

Had the 7800 launched in 1984, Atari would still be the top company in the games industry and the world would be a better place.

 

Two questions:

How would they have dealt with the angry retail channel that hated "video games" and hated the name "Atari" because of the crash of 1983?

 

How would the public have warmed up to better looking versions of the same old games?

[kool kitty89]

SRAM is most commonly sold 'square' (in 2 * 2 ^ X increments), just like DRAM. The previous poster was listing kilobytes, not kilobits. So 8KB = 64Kb, 32KB = 256Kb -- just like DRAM, it started at 1Kb and went up 4x per generation.

 

In the early 80s, SRAMs were usually sold in kilobytes while DRAMs were usually sold in kilobits. This is because SRAMs usually had 8 data bins, so they could be addressed a byte at a time, whereas DRAM chips only had one data pin, so you need 8 DRAM chips to make a byte-wide bus. By 1985 or so, 4-bit wide DRAMs started to become popular, but they were still sold by the kilobit, not the kilonybble.

 

- KS

 

OK, so are the figures on this site: http://phe.rockefeller.edu/LogletLab/DRAM/dram.htm listing IC densities in "K" referring to Kbits rather than KBytes?

[kskunk]

OK, so are the figures on this site: http://phe.rockefeller.edu/LogletLab/DRAM/dram.htm listing IC densities in "K" referring to Kbits rather than KBytes?

 

Yes, correct. Note that prices are in $ per megabit to allow you to directly compare columns. So, if you were building a Commodore 64 (in 1982), you could buy 8 64 Kilobit chips (to make 64KB) for $87.60 per 1 megabit. Since 8 * 64K is 512 Kilobits or 0.5 Megabit, you would pay $87.60 * 0.5 or $43.80 -- which is about what 2MB cost in the Jaguar in 1994.

 

~$40 must be a sweet spot.

 

- KS

[kool kitty89]

Yeah, I understood the rest (Mbits is clearly listed), I'd just been taking the "K" and M values as KB/MB rather than K/Mbits, that does make a lot more sence with some of the timeline and prices. (as well as the IC sizes in general)

[mcjakeqcool]

@DracIsBack

Simple really, just releace Super Atari Bros, and sell it as the Pac in for the 7800.

[ApolloBoy]

@DracIsBack

Simple really, just releace Super Atari Bros, and sell it as the Pac in for the 7800.

Except that Super Mario Bros. didn't exist in 1984.

[Gorf]

I don't know where the NEO Geo prices for Atari 7800 carts come from.

 

I was exagerrating. I was talking about the need to add extra RAM and a Pokey.

Carts would have been much more expensive....not Neo Geo $ but not $50 either.

[mcjakeqcool]

One thing I have never understood, is where Atari went wrong in the Mid-Late 80s, I belive that Atari's relationship with the likes of Activision and Parker Brothers alone could have saved them, I'm not gonna go into details because I really don't know that much about any of this post crash Atari business, but I fail to see where Atari went wrong, I mean it's just logic that Atari are going to be sucsessful after the sucsess of the 2600, I don't see how Atari could fail so badly after beating competition to the margin the 2600 did, I mean logic suggests, if you've got a 2600, you'll buy a 5200 just because of the brand, but anyway, quit the yibber, yabber and jibber, jabber, in a nutshell, WHY OH WHY DID ATARI FAIL IN THE MID-LATE 80S?!

[kool kitty89]

I don't know where the NEO Geo prices for Atari 7800 carts come from.

 

I was exagerrating. I was talking about the need to add extra RAM and a Pokey.

Carts would have been much more expensive....not Neo Geo $ but not $50 either.

 

Something like that would probably be more practical as an expansion module (ie an add-on passthrough cart -possibly with built in game(s) as well to help justify the purchase), something similar in form to the high score cart (they might have been able to include that functionality as well), a 1 time purchase to expand the system.

 

In that respect they should have included some of this in the console in the first place, it would be cheaper still than buying a seperate add-on cart, and shouldn't have added unreasonable cost. (one earlier suggestion was to switch to a single, 8 kB SRAM, though this still wouldn't be enough for some of the things you were proposing) Other than cost, the only reason these weren't added (particularly the POKEY), was lack of board space, and lack of time for a redesign (for the proposed 1984 launch), though they could at very least have initially mounted the POKEY on a riser board in the intrim and later modify the board to encorporate it.

 

Of course, with a later release date, there's a number of improvements that could have been made (including more RAM and a POKEY), but development was basicly done with the hardware, and more importantly, it had already started production and had the limited release. (of course, even if this hadn't occurred, odds are Tramiel wouldn't be supportive of further development of the design)

From a practical standpoint, they probably could have released the POKEY+RAM cart expansion and later encorporated that onto the board itsself. (but would RAM through the cartridge bus be recognized and used in the same manner as the onboard SRAM?)

[kool kitty89]

I was thinking about the interleaving issue again (it came up in another discussion I was reading) and was wondering if it would become practical if the RAm was clocked faster. Or is the 7800's SRAM already running as fast as is practical? (withought excessive cost) Or then again, would MARIA still be the limiting factor, still being more limited with interleaving implimented. (for interleaving to work would the RAM need to be clocked faster than MARIA? I'm still limited in my understanding of this but would it work with the RAM runnig at MARIA+CPU speed ie 8.95 MHz with the 6502 only accessing every 5th cycle?)

[Curt Vendel]

That was actually a huge issue for Nintendo early on. The retailers came back to Nintendo saying that the system would have to come with and do more then just be a video game system, that was how the whole concept of Rob the robot with Gyromite came from, the lightgun and Duckhunt too... Nintendo had to dress up the system for retailers to accept it and carry it.

 

If it is Winter 1984, I think Atari would've had the clout and muscle to get the retailer penetration necessary, backed by Warner's ad budget Atari could've done a nice job of showing consumers "We've Listened" and by touting the computer add-on (remember - another element of the video game crash was that computers had dropped to video game prices and it became a question of - why buy a videogame, when you could buy your kids a computer" So touting the computer element and showing off the Atarilab modules for education, Star Typer (a new space version of Typo Attack) and the use of all of the Atari home computer disk drives, printers and such.... would've made a very strong selling point.

 

Next you have adds showing the High Score adapter cartridge, the simpler controllers, the pause button and out of the box 2600 compatibility... all strong selling points.

 

Last you top it off with first ever releases of Pole Position II (the pack in), Galaga, Xevious, Food Fight and Robotron 2084 on a home system, then new titles like Desert Falcon and show off the arcade classics included the enhanced Asteroids 3D and Centipede with dual player head to head gameplay modes... it shows that Atari is bringing home the hits again and bringing home new games as well.

 

At that point Atari should have the developers ringing their phones to sign up for devkits and such and by Spring of 1985 the next wave of titles should start to appear and with it, does the the NES and SMS appear? Tough to tell.

 

Curt

 

Had the 7800 launched in 1984, Atari would still be the top company in the games industry and the world would be a better place.

 

Two questions:

How would they have dealt with the angry retail channel that hated "video games" and hated the name "Atari" because of the crash of 1983?

 

How would the public have warmed up to better looking versions of the same old games?

[kool kitty89]

Interesting points there.

 

I was thinking about one of the points sometimes mentioned in the Atari/Nintendo negotiations, Atari being dubious of Nintendo's controller design. Anyway, that deal wasn't going anywhere either way, but Atari did know of the different controller design, so they could have picked up on it. (thechnically the Vectrex had a similar layout and was a bit earlier, albeit with an analog thumbstick instead of a directional pad)

Anyway, they could have seen this, and despit being reserved about the design, it's possible Atari could have tested it as an optional controller for the 2600 or 7800 to see how the public responded.

 

Just a thought, and somthing that really isn't critical (at least initially), of course the European veriation of the 7800 shipped with the Joypad (don't think it was available aftermarket in the US), and I think some versions of the 2600 Jr. shipped with it in other regions as well, but it would be nice to have a head star with it, or at least test the idea for themselves.

[gdement]

of course the European veriation of the 7800 shipped with the Joypad (don't think it was available aftermarket in the US), and I think some versions of the 2600 Jr. shipped with it in other regions as well,

I remember first seeing that controller in a 7800 ad in a later Sears catalog, or maybe some other major catalog.

I noticed it and was amused because by that time I had a NES, and thought it was funny Atari had finally caught on to gamepads.

 

So I'm confused to have read all over the internet that the gamepads were never released here (US), but maybe that catalog just used the wrong photo.

[DracIsBack]

So I'm confused to have read all over the internet that the gamepads were never released here (US), but maybe that catalog just used the wrong photo.

 

I think Atari originally intended to have them but pulled back. They were in Atari Canada's catalog (I tried to order them twice) and also featured in Atari US's posters. They just - well - never came out.

 

http://www.atariage.com/catalog_page.html?...p;currentPage=0

[kool kitty89]

If Maria is on a separate bus, then it needs access to graphics without interrupting the 6502. There's 2 solutions for that:

 

What were the timing limitations for simple multiplexer-based logic in those days? Would it have been practical to interleave CPU accesses and display accesses on the cartridge bus without needing double-speed memory, if the code and display data were fetched from different memory arrays? For example, assume the CPU is running at 2MHz and there is a 12MHz clock.

 

At step 0, drive phi0 to the CPU and start driving the CPU address to the chip. The data bus will hold the last byte of CPU data.

At step 1, have the chip latch the address, and start outputting the LSB of the last requested byte of display data.

At step 2, drive a new display address to the chip. At the end of this step, latch the data bus into the display controller.

At step 3, hold the address. Have the chip start outputting the MSB of the last requested byte of display data.

At step 4, hold the address. At the end of this step, latch the data bus into the display controller.

At step 5, hold the address. Have the chip start outputting the requested CPU byte.

 

The CPU memory will have a valid address by the end of step 1, and will have until the end of step 4 to supply data, so it would have at least a full half cycle (it would likely have the address sooner, and could likely supply the data later). The display memories (MSB/LSB) would have even longer to supply their data. If one were using off-the-shelf parts in the cartridge, one would have to use three separate ROM chips plus some glue logic. Integrating the three ROMs into one chip, however, shouldn't be a problem.

 

OTOH, using a separate bus wouldn't be evil either. A "chevron-shaped" cartridge slot would have allowed 7800 cartridges to have many more pins while still having 2600 carts fit nicely.

 

I responded to part of this post previously, mentioning the impracticality of a cheveron shaped cart slot (while still maintaining full physical compatibility with 2600 cartridges). However, I don't own a 7800 and hadn't seen the cart socket or circuit board edge connector at the time, so I'd been assuming the address pins had been expanded by using some of the other 12 pins on the 2600 cart connector that were unconnected in that system.

 

However, the 7800 adds extra pins outboard of the 2600 connections (rather like the expansion pins on the SNES slot), bringing the total up to 32, with 16 per side. With all connections still using only a single side. Had they utilized the second side (connecting all 32 pins) you could have a seperate 16-bit address bus dedicated to video. No change to the current cartridge/slot design necessary. (inless some the other 16-pins are already being used for something, but from photos of 7800 cartridge boards this doesn't seem to be the case)

[GroovyBee]

Wrong! All 24 connector pins are used on the 2600 cart connector. They are :-

 

A0 to A12 - 13 pins.

D0-D7 - 8 pins.

GND - 2 pins.

VCC - 1 pin.

 

Total 24 pins.

 

Similarly on the 7800 they are all used.

 

A0 to A15 - 16 pins.

D0 - D7 - 8 pins.

R/W# - 1 pin.

PHI2 - 1 pin.

IRQ - 1 pin.

EXTAUDIO - 1 pin.

HALT - 1 pin.

GND - 2 pins.

VCC - 1 pin.

 

Total 32 pins.

[kenfused]

However, I don't own a 7800 and hadn't seen the cart socket or circuit board edge connector at the time, so I'd been assuming the address pins had been expanded by using some of the other 12 pins on the 2600 cart connector that were unconnected in that system.

 

However, the 7800 adds extra pins outboard of the 2600 connections (rather like the expansion pins on the SNES slot), bringing the total up to 32, with 16 per side. With all connections still using only a single side. Had they utilized the second side (connecting all 32 pins) you could have a seperate 16-bit address bus dedicated to video. No change to the current cartridge/slot design necessary. (inless some the other 16-pins are already being used for something, but from photos of 7800 cartridge boards this doesn't seem to be the case)

The 2600 uses all 24 pins a0-12, d0-7, power, and a couple grounds (13+8+1+2=24).

The 7800 adds the remaining address pins, irq, r/w, audio in, halt to the new pins.

[kool kitty89]

Then how does the ribbon cable come into play?

[Polybius]

If the 7800 had been released under Warner in 1984, It Totally would of won over the NES. it would of been improved to the point that the graphics would have been superior due to Warner's deep pockets.

 

I do love my NES though, and I would love to have a 7800.

 

Also, in 1984, Nintendo made a deal with Atari to sell the NES under the Atari Brand in the U.S, but Atari turned it down.

 

Don't know why they turned it down, but if they didn't, the world would be a different place. Instead of the Nintendo Wii, we would probably have the Atari Wii.

[GroovyBee]

Then how does the ribbon cable come into play?

There is no ribbon cable inside or outside the 7800.

[+Allan]

If the 7800 had been released under Warner in 1984, It Totally would of won over the NES. it would of been improved to the point that the graphics would have been superior due to Warner's deep pockets.

 

I do love my NES though, and I would love to have a 7800.

 

Also, in 1984, Nintendo made a deal with Atari to sell the NES under the Atari Brand in the U.S, but Atari turned it down.

 

Don't know why they turned it down, but if they didn't, the world would be a different place. Instead of the Nintendo Wii, we would probably have the Atari Wii.

Instead of guessing why not find out the real story. Go to http://www.atarimuseum.com/videogames/cons.../7800/7800menu/

 

and listen to the speech by Steve Golson (at least from his point of view).

 

Allan

[gdement]

Also, in 1984, Nintendo made a deal with Atari to sell the NES under the Atari Brand in the U.S, but Atari turned it down.

 

Don't know why they turned it down, but if they didn't, the world would be a different place. Instead of the Nintendo Wii, we would probably have the Atari Wii.

It's not as simple as just turning it down. Atari was interested but they apparently didn't agree to terms. The premise of the deal would be that 1983 Nintendo couldn't handle North America themselves and needed help, which Warner could provide. Warner probably felt they were in a strong negotiating position so I doubt they offered much. It's not like they really needed the NES, as they had their own platform already in development.

 

A long time ago I remember seeing a memo (online) that was supposedly from someone at Atari regarding this negotiation. I have no idea if it was authentic though, and I don't know where to find it anymore.

Assuming it was legitimate, I remember it basically suggested they wanted to draw out negotiations with Nintendo until the 7800 was ready, so that they could do a better comparison. But negotiations didn't last long enough for that to happen.

 

The 7800 developers claim Warner intended to secure rights to the NES but not actually release it, so Nintendo would be locked out of North America (*). Of course just because Warner told them this doesn't mean it's the whole truth. I expect they would have given the NES a serious look before locking it away. This could have been another snag in negotiations (Nintendo wanting guarantees it would be sold, Warner unwilling to commit).

 

* = this is in the speech Allan linked above

Edited July 4, 2009 by gdement

[carmel_andrews]

I still can't understand why Atari dropped the expansion connector from the orig. 7800, it must have cost them as much again to manufacture both a new casing and a new mainboard just to loose the expansion connector

 

Remembering that tramiel was about saving money and not spending more of it

 

 

Or is there more to this that i do'nt know

[GroovyBee]

I still can't understand why Atari dropped the expansion connector from the orig. 7800, it must have cost them as much again to manufacture both a new casing and a new mainboard just to loose the expansion connector

It doesn't cost much to modify a plastic mould so that connector holes are filled. When the PCB is loaded (with components) you don't load the connector and associated resistors, ICs etc. and Bobs your Uncle, the product still fits together.

[Retro Rogue]

It's not as simple as just turning it down. Atari was interested but they apparently didn't agree to terms. The premise of the deal would be that 1983 Nintendo couldn't handle North America themselves and needed help, which Warner could provide. Warner probably felt they were in a strong negotiating position so I doubt they offered much. It's not like they really needed the NES, as they had their own platform already in development.

 

A long time ago I remember seeing a memo (online) that was supposedly from someone at Atari regarding this negotiation. I have no idea if it was authentic though, and I don't know where to find it anymore.

 

Was it this one? That's legit. Any of the documents on Curt's site are the real deal.