4-switcher vs. 6-switcher

[mos6507]

I'm sure I'm not the first person to start a thread like this, but when the 2600 went from the 6-switch model to the 4-switch model back in the day, my first reaction was that it was a chintzy move on the part of Atari. The difficulty switches moved to the back of the unit didn't really seem very intuitive, or aesthetic. It smacked of cost reduction. Over time I got rather used to it, but to this day I much prefer the six switch model. I was wondering how many others had the same reaction back in the day, let alone the reaction to the loss of woodgrain in the Vader model?

[Ransom]

At the time, I didn't think much about it. I had a six-switcher, saw the new 4-switcher, and had no desire to get one. So it was sort of a non-issue for me.

[Lord Helmet]

My first 2600 was a 4 switcher. I always thought that the difficulty switches on the back were a pain, and the angle that the controller ports were at seemed odd, but I loved it anyway!

[gloriousconnor]

Yeah, I prefer the 6-switcher over the 4 if for nothing else the convenience of the difficulty switch placement.

[ninermaniac]

The sixer is my choice to play with. Call it nostalgia i guess. I think Atari made it tougher when they went with the 2600 Jr. model. It's smaller and saves spaces but when it comes to fixing one you gotta hope it's not the flex circuit gone bad with it. Ultimately, 4 switch was a good idea because of it's "scaled down" internals and having less of the traditional aluminum switches. I'll be honest, I use six switchers for parts to fix the 4 switch models I get. I hate ruining an early icon but I make up for it by making at least one out of four of the consoles I work on is a six switch brought back to life. So at least some good comes out of it.

[aftermac]

It has never really bothered me since my first Atari was a Jr., but the 6 switchers are more convenient.

[+Nathan Strum]

I agree - even at the time, I felt moving the difficulty switches to the back was a bad idea. Plus, the empty spots on the 4-switch front panel made the console look odd by comparison. As such, I thought the Vader was actually an improvement over the wood-grain 4-switchers, since I no longer compared them directly with the sixers. (I still think the sixers look the best... although it might be interesting to build a six-switch Vader sometime... )

[ATARIPITBULL]

Yep the good old 6-switcher for me any day. I do like the looks of the Vader and the Jr but when most people hear (Atari 2600) they think of the 6 switch woody.

 

[guyjin]

My first Atari was a 4 switcher, so I didn't know the difference.

 

Incidentally, One of my neighbors had one of the sears models - an all-black one, I think - and we got in an argument about it being a 'pirate' console (Nintendo Power propaganda had convinced me that anything different was a 'pirate' game/system)

[jboypacman]

Read my blog for my answer guys .......

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?a...;showentry=6220

[iwan-iwanowitsch-goratschin]

Read my blog for my answer guys .......

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?a...;showentry=6220

 

[Herbarius]

I think the big plus of the 4-switcher is it's smaller size.

 

However, if you ever openend one you see that the case is almost twice as big as the complete circuit board, so you have to wonder why they made it that big in the first place. From this reasoning you could also think I'd like the 2600 Jr model even more.

 

First of all, I have never seen that model in real. Of course I've seen enough pictures, but my opinion is: The idea is good, but I don't like how it turned out. From the pictures it looks very cheap, like a cost-minimizing model, instead of just a small but neat model. As I've never touched it, let alone owned and played one regularly, I can't say if it's really cheaply produced (and hence unreliable).

[kool kitty89]

The 6-switcher is better in terms of looks and praticality. I actually prefer the look of the Vader 2600 to the 4-switch Woody. The Jr is sleek, but it would have been nice if they'd moved the controller ports to the front... (and the difficulty switches to the top) I guess they had to keep things the same as they were using a similar board as the vader model, though I suppose they could have had cables for the controller ports running from the back of the board to the front, but that wouldn't be good for cost.

 

I think it would have been neat if they'd switched to a modified version of the 2700's case design when they went to the cheaper board. (it apears the 2700 had membrane buttons, which would be good cost-wise as well) The controller ports were on the (right) side, which is still a bit more convienent than the back. A nice sleek, updated apearance for it. (not to knock the six switcher )

Edited June 28, 2009 by kool kitty89

[Poopopyo]

I hate the 4 switch because it is so hard to put together if you open it up.

 

The 6 switch looks prettier and on the 4 switch the text next to the switches is big and ugly.

 

Well the question is, would you be more threatened if their were 4 tanks outside your castle, or 6 tanks. I always thought the switches looked like big cannons.

[shadowdoggie]

When I first started collecting Atari, I didn't know that the colors would be different between the 6 and 4 switch systems. So, when I got my first 4 switch I thought there was something wrong with it. Every game looked so dull. Later of course I found out that this was normal. The color is more vibrant in the 6 switch systems. So, my 4 switch systems stays in its box in the closet.

[frogstar_robot]

However, if you ever openend one you see that the case is almost twice as big as the complete circuit board, so you have to wonder why they made it that big in the first place. From this reasoning you could also think I'd like the 2600 Jr model even more.

 

At one point the 2600 was going to include speakers built in. You can even sorta see the "grilles" on some cases. This feature was dropped but not before the tooling and physical design were completed.

[Herbarius]

When I first started collecting Atari, I didn't know that the colors would be different between the 6 and 4 switch systems. So, when I got my first 4 switch I thought there was something wrong with it. Every game looked so dull. Later of course I found out that this was normal. The color is more vibrant in the 6 switch systems. So, my 4 switch systems stays in its box in the closet.

Mhh, IIRC, all the 6-switcher does is boost up the color saturation. If I turn up the color saturation on my TV to maximum and play my 4-switcher, the colors are already over-saturated, resulting in massive color bleeding, so even on the 4-switcher I've to turn down the saturation at my TV.

 

 

However, if you ever openend one you see that the case is almost twice as big as the complete circuit board, so you have to wonder why they made it that big in the first place. From this reasoning you could also think I'd like the 2600 Jr model even more.

 

At one point the 2600 was going to include speakers built in. You can even sorta see the "grilles" on some cases. This feature was dropped but not before the tooling and physical design were completed.

That doesn't explain the size of the 4-switch-model, which most likely wasn't planned until after the 6-switcher came out.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Herbarius

[+Nathan Strum]

I think the big plus of the 4-switcher is it's smaller size.

My six-switch and four-switch cases are exactly the same size.

[Herbarius]

I think the big plus of the 4-switcher is it's smaller size.

My six-switch and four-switch cases are exactly the same size.

 

Oh, if that's true then I apologize. I always thought the six-switchers are considerably wider than the 4-switchers (add circa the width of a game cartridge to the 4-switch-width)... But I am correct to assume that the woodgrain 4-switchers and "Vader" 4-switchers are the same size?

 

 

Of course that also explains how the size of the 4-switch case is also a result of the plans about including speakers in the console, so my above objection concerning that can be ignored.

Edited June 29, 2009 by Herbarius

[Emehr]

My first Atari was a 4-switcher (see avatar). At the time I never even knew about the 6-switcher until I acquired a manual for a Sears Telegames unit. The illustration showed 6 switches and I thought that was a feature unique to the Sears model . I wouldn't mind getting my grubby hands on a 6-switcher...

[kool kitty89]

At one point the 2600 was going to include speakers built in. You can even sorta see the "grilles" on some cases. This feature was dropped but not before the tooling and physical design were completed.

Huh, I was wonering what those circular ashtray looking moldings were for inside the case (it's definitely in the heavy sixer, I can't remember if it's in the light case as well, though it would make sence if it was absent as there would be no reason to keep it in the redesign)

 

I'd though it was to help secure the RF cable inside the case, but I couldn't understand why there were two...

 

That doesn't explain the size of the 4-switch-model, which most likely wasn't planned until after the 6-switcher came out.

 

Well, obviously the 4-switcher was a later redesign, but I think the original comment pertained to all the extra space in the original models (toward the front and sides in particular) The reason for the 4-switcher being the same size is due to the fact they used basicly the same case design. (I assume to save money on tooling)

[classicgamingguy]

Hmm, personally, I've always preferred the 6-switch over the 4-switch. I love the woodgrain "fake" finish, and just over all it's more aesthetically pleasing to my eye. However, on the side of the 4-switch, I loved the Vader as it was nicknamed "Vader", being a Star Wars fan, the unit appealed to me.

 

For switch placement, the 6 beats the 4 in my eyes. I've never owned a Junior model, so I can't comment on that one (although I DO like the color stripe on it from the pictures I've seen).

[littleman jack]

My first 2600 was four switch, so I like the look of the 4 switch better. My second was a Vader, which I also like quite a lot.

 

The six switch does seem to make things more convenient, but I like the look of the extra space on the four switch model.

 

In addition, I have heard the six switch has a problem with barely, or even not, fitting later cartridges, such as red labels and Imagic carts due to their extra wideness, but I don't know if that is true since I've never owned a six switch VCS.

 

I have heard, however, from many people who have six switchers that the extra shielding in the six switcher provides a much clearer, better picture than the light shielding in the later models. Again, I don't have any experience with a six switcher to know for sure. Any comments from those who own both?

[Herbarius]

I have heard, however, from many people who have six switchers that the extra shielding in the six switcher provides a much clearer, better picture than the light shielding in the later models.

 

That's the difference between "heavy sixer" and "light sixer"... The heavy sixer had extra shielding than the later models.

 

Also color saturation was boosted before output, but I think that was done in both heavy and light sixers.

[BigO]

I never understood why any designer thought that the switches on the back would make for an acceptable user interface. Then again, I thought the same thing about the controller ports being in the back of a system with so many different controllers.

 

There must have been some significant cost savings due to circuit board usage or something like that. Otherwise I would think the choice would have been to just put in cheaper switches rather than introduce another type of component into the mix, retool the case and retool the bezel.

Edited June 30, 2009 by BigO