Atari 8bit is superior to the ST

[atariksi]

 

As an example in the world of cars which are massive seller outs I give you two...

 

Toyota Corolla....piece of shit bare minimum...god knows why people bought it.

BMW 3 series....outsold rivals from Ford/Renault/Opel(GM to you)/etc. Superior better designed car with more acceptable compromises won.

 

Whoa, whoa.... I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly, and this is certaily off-topic, but can't let this go without a reply: re: Corolla.

 

Are you saying the Toyota Corolla is a pice of shit? No way! The Corolla is a best-seller for lots of good reasons! First off, Consumer Reports (and just about anybody else) gives it TOPS in reliability. It gets high ratings in resale value and crashworthiness as well. It gets EXCELLENT fuel economy, and has great performance CONSIDERING that fuel economy; the 16-valve, variable valve timing 1.8L gets about as good a mileage (38mpg) as many competitors' 1.3-1.5L 8-valve engines. Also considering the fuel economy, an excellent/quiet ride. I had one of these when I lived in Alaska and it was one of the best cars I ever owned; it took ice-rutted rough streets like a luxury car compared to other econo cars. I just don't see how you can call a car that's top-rated in reliability, fuel economy, resale, and crashworthiness....a piece of shit. Pick on the Kia Rio or the Hyundai Accent or Dodge Neon.....

 

Even Lotus acknowledges the excellent engineering of the 1.8L Toyota Corolla engine when they put a supercharger on it and installed it in the Lotus Exige! (So you know the engine will stay together in naturally-aspirated form, in your Corolla)

 

edit: The BMW and other German cars usually rank far lower in reliability than *any* Toyota/Lexus offering. I seem to remember the electronics sucking in those cars

Please... Toyota is junk comapred to a neon. Check out Neon SCCA racing record holders. You wont find any Corollas..

Consumer Reports is so jap o centric its not funny. Cant tell you how often they are wrong from toaters to pc's. Read the ST amiga comparisons from those idiots back in the day. I'll be happy to pick on Toyota,Honda etc all day long. Lemming mobiles.

 

You can have good products sell well and you can have bad products sell well. So sales cannot be used to prove some product is superior or inferior.

[kool kitty89]

As far as things like the NES/SMS/Turbo-Grafx go these are dedicated sprite engines built solely to play specific types of games and they are quite a bit newer in technology compared to A8 and C64 chipsets. I will never argue that R-Type on SMS is possible on any other 8bit home computer because it is not, nor is the colour resolution. But to be fair you should really compare these machines to the Amiga given the time frame. Also you couldn't do Starglider 1/2, The Pawn or other games on those 8bit consoles either.

The PC Engine is granted, but the Famicom' shardware was closer to the C64's in age than the C64's was to the A8 by a good margin. (and was released about a year later) Sega's SG-1000 Mk.III was closer to the age difference between 8-bit and C64 though. (and it was released the same year as the Amiga, but obviously with much lower cost in mind, so far more limitations -one of Sega's contemporary mid-range arcade moards would be more comperable to the Amiga -with obvious architectural differences)

And Starglider I was released on NES. (in Europe only iirc)

 

My comment about colours is the choice of 16 colours not the number in total, and given the huge restrictions in even getting more than 4 on screen with the A8 @ C64 multicolour resolution it's better to have 16 well chosen colours on screen than 4 out of 128/256. PC EGA also has 16 colours but look how terrible those colours are even with higher resolution of 640x200ish. The Pawn looks superior on the C64 to EGA PC despite a 4x disadvantage in resolution

I think the C64's limited palette could have been a bit better, but being limited to 16 in general was still a big shortcoming for the VICII. (most of the C64's colors are pretty desaturated looking, especially reds and browns)

 

As for sound yes there is an element of subjective BUT the SID is the only sound chip that can replicate the soundtrack to the movie of Rambo (just play the game and see how close Martin Galway's SID rendition is of the movie soundtrack) and then in another game do a perfect electric guitar sound and in yet another game do some very triphop/electronica style sounds as in some of the good Hubbard tunes (compare the intro music on Flash Gordon with the intro of the Depeche Mode tune New Life to see what I mean) and then when you have listened to all that listen to Lazy Jones and Panther game soundtracks by David Whittaker. My point is different [good] composers where able to bring their own style of sound.

I know several retro game/computer fans who'd rather have had music composed on hardware excluding some capabilities of the SID (other than atarian63), say the SN76489 would be preferable. (but NES moreso) Again, the filter effects and arpeggio were the main comments. (I'm more in the middle, I like all of them, though the plain sounding AY-3-xx/YM2149, SN76489, or VIC's sound less so generally -I prefer variable duty cycle pulse wave to at least be available)

 

On the other hand ST and A8 music and effects pretty much sound identical from the start of each respective machine's life cycle to the end. There is a rendition of the Sanxion loading music on Pokey, and it's probably the best attempt at sounding different (and good) in my opinion. I wouldn't be able to tell you who did what tune on Pokey because ALL sound is too similar on the machine indicating a lack of actual diversity in the real world. If you like Pokey sound great...if not tough because you are stuck with it.

I dissagree, there are blander examples using plain square waves, but some cool envelope effects and simulated reverb (along with some cool bass beats) on better ST music, and much broader use of waveforms (variable pulse most often, but soemtimes saw/traingle-ish sounds -the latter often requiring 16-bit channels for good quality) opposed to simple square. (the Ghostbusters intro could have been a lot more varied and lively had it used more than just plain square waves -again variable pulse is significant -and what gives much NES music its distinctive sound)

 

On the other hand if someone says to me 'SID is crap' I know they are a fanboy trying to troll, why? Because the correct answer would be 'xxxx composer's tunes sound crap' but I challenge anyone to have heard EVERY style or type of SID music in one sitting, and funnily enough people who owned a C64 and did hear many different types of sound/music rarely speak badly of the chip.

Perhaps if a significant number of C64 games made use of unfiltered pulse/square/saw/trangle wave production, such people would have different oppions. (those people I've referred to do tend to recognize it was the composer's chioce, but also point out that soem composers may have used that sound just for the SID's characteristic sound, rather than the more "generic" unfiltered alternative -again, I'd have liked to hear a lot more unfilterd stuff for variety, the SID could certainly do it well -and with a good variety of waveforms -the exiting SID stuff is still cool to me personally though)

 

As for Atari and the A8...they desperately needed to update player/missile and colour resolution (ie total number of colours on screen in 320x200 or 160x200 resolutions) WITHIN 12 months of C64 launching. Once it became obvious that the A8 would plough along with inferior hardware and charge MORE for a 48k 800 model that was the final nail in the coffin and people traded in their machines for other less colour restricted machines...like the CPC and C64 etc.

I don't think so, the A8 was decently capable for the time, had it not been for the screw-ups (specifically those of 1983 -and not producing smaller cased A8s sooner), th eline could have served well through the C64's life until a good successor could have been made. (the ST is not that example, it wasn't part of Atari Inc at all, compatiblility would have ben preferred in any case -same with the C64's successor, though like the Amiga and ST, that may not have been the case if something like the Sierra or Gaza designs were used)

The A8s were definitely superior to CPC and Speccy for games and I'd say better than speccy in pretty much every respect. However, the A8s never got the sort of market pennetration in UK/Europe as the others, so who knows how things may have gone in that respect. (with late generation games goign into the early 90s)

 

Whether it would have rivaled the C64 in overall sales is certainyl depatable, but I think it's pretty obvious that the A8 could have sold much better is Atari hadn't screwed up with the 1200 XL and halt in late '83, plus following problems tied to the crash and liquidation to form A Corp. and A Games. (had they had the 600 and 800XL released properly in place of the problematic 1200XL and no halt in '83, things could have been quite different, not to mention a cleaner A5200 -and even with an insuing gaming crash, a more popular computer lien would cushin Atari substancially)

 

Which games you wanted to play probably plays a big role in your opinion of whether the ST was a waste of time OR a superior machine....me...I bought an ST for Neochrome, those favourite games of mine listed above where a bonus to be honest. People in the early 90s bought a PC and certain games were either identical or inferior to the much cheaper Amiga, however they were probably happy given that they bought it as a general purpose computer to run business applications too so any games they liked where a bonus regardless of if a better version was out....same thing with the ST early adopters. Only one computer was light years ahead of ALL it's competitors at the time of it's launch and that only ever happened once and never again....and it still never lasted more than a decade....go figure.

The ST also apealed as a gaming machine for those who couldn't afford an Amiga, at least prior to the A500. (though the lack of RF or composite on some models hurt this side of the system, particularly in the US market -without SCART)

[+wood_jl]

Please... Toyota is junk comapred to a neon. Check out Neon SCCA racing record holders. You wont find any Corollas..

Consumer Reports is so jap o centric its not funny. Cant tell you how often they are wrong from toaters to pc's. Read the ST amiga comparisons from those idiots back in the day. I'll be happy to pick on Toyota,Honda etc all day long. Lemming mobiles.

The only thing that has a lower resale value than a Chrysler product is probably any of the Korean brands. Toyota and Honda brands have the highest, percentagewise. Since they're allegedly junk, why do you think this is the case then, seriously? (I love American cars nevertheless, by the way)

[PeteD]

Everyone knows the A8 came out at the ass end of 1979...maybe a handful of 800s were ready for sale in 79...therefore it is not a 70s machine at all.

Well, that's kinda arbitrary, I bought my 800 in 1979. Where I come from, 1979 was in the 70's

 

No denying that the SID chip was quite the audio system tho, definitely a selling point for the C64.

Especially if you like the sound of angry bees (SID)

 

Even if that was all it could do I'd still prefer it to everything sounding like it's made from springs. *HUGE GRIN SMILEY*

 

 

Pete

[kool kitty89]

Otherwise, my list will also grow to only include those things present in original STs-- 256K, no RF modulator, TOS from disk, or whatever other bugs/problems they had. RF modulator is significant as it affects the price significantly of getting RGB monitor.

 

It's more colors and less shades. So it's a trade-off since now ST has problems representing some of the gradiences and shaded images of A8. So not a clear cut win for ST. Humans perceive luminances more than colors-- just study the TV signal construction. So don't just declare ST wins. I rather have more shades. As I stated before, I rather have 64 shades and 4 colors.

Rubbish - RGB video is a better standard, ( and in Europe it was in a hell of a lot of TV's , with SCART/Peritel eventually standardising it )

...

Bullcrap. I have NO REASON for a RGB video for A8. It's targetted for TVs and pictures are excellent. It's based on the TV color clock (3.57Mhz color subcarrier).

So what, plenty of RGB based systems used the colorburst clock for various reasons (commonality of the oscilator used or as a provision to faciliate composite/S-video) With RGB you can make hardware which simply uses different video encoders for PAL/NTSC/SECAM rather than different video chips. (hence the Amiga, Master System, Mega Drive, etc).

And I also think RGB is a better standard (it's what a color CRT uses natively), too bad it didn't catch on in the states, we had to wait for YPbPr to get that kind of quality, and even then you need a transcoder for older hardware. (save a few games who used Amiga/ST monitors instead for console gaming)

Hell, if you used sync on green and a common ground, you could fit RGB onto an s-video connector.

[Crazyace]

I can scroll a GPRIOR mode 0 as well as an overscanned screen Graphics 9 screen w/translucency. These are a couple of examples impossible for ST.

Good for you - I'm glad the rest of the gaming world took to graphics 9 so much

Several demos seem to scroll overscanned full screen images with more than 16 colours, so I wouldn't say it's impossible though.

 

You're speaking rubbish. Don't compare with quarter screens then. If you think low-res modes are not needed then be prepared to replicate pixels and lines to mimic the A8 modes at CPU cost. Of course, some cannot be mimiced, but that's your problem. Games I mentioned won't play any better with higher resolution; in fact, they will most likely slow down or perform worse on ST with the higher resolution. So don't say ST wins just because it has higher resolution. Text modes are also significant. You can't paint a text screen in the same time or less as an A8 doing it. In fact, I can repaint any of the A8 text modes within the VBI. More time penalty for ST just like scrolling.

Text modes are really useful - I'm not sure I'd include Mr Robot as something impossible to do on the ST though.

But you can't reproduce 320x200x16 colours per pixel in any way possible on the A8 - ( and forget 640 pixels ). On the ST I can reproduce any display on the A8 - it may just take more time. Therefore I say that the ST display is superior.

 

 

Even with GTIA - I can happily say pallette of 512 colours is better than pallette of 128 colours, as the only 16 shade modes aren't palletted.

...

It's more colors and less shades. So it's a trade-off since now ST has problems representing some of the gradiences and shaded images of A8. So not a clear cut win for ST. Humans perceive luminances more than colors-- just study the TV signal construction. So don't just declare ST wins. I rather have more shades. As I stated before, I rather have 64 shades and 4 colors.

The pallette on the A8 only has 8 shades, so it's a fair comparision 512 palletted colours vs 128 palletted colours.

 

 

So given A8s fast I/O using joystick I/O, that also has to be put into the comparison not just "oh, now we can use the parallel port."

Feel free to put abuse of joystick port as an A8 advantage - I won't argue with your opinion on that

That's the biggest bullcrap you have written thus far. I can also say parallel ports for laplink, ZIP drives, etc. is utter abuse of the parallel port; you need help. I suppose putting in bidirectionality in the joystick ports was a big mistake or some accident by Atari. SYNC is ABUSE of video circuit on ST, but doing I/O is perfectly good use of joysticks as PIA wasn't just meant for reading digital joysticks.

I'm not arguing with you? - so why are you continuing. I'm quite happy with the advantages you've already given for the extra use of joystick ports.

[Crazyace]

Problem is in 80 columns regular CRT dot pitch/native resolution is insufficient anyway, and well 320x200 doesn't need RGB as you put it, using an ST or Amiga via S-Video or composhite [not a typo] video is perfectly adequate for gamers (and 320x200 is too low for serious applications anyway) The reason why you can't read 80 column txt on an ST is not because the converter is low quality, but the TV input technology itself.

 

I've never had any problems reading 80 column txt on any TV I had via RGB ( I had one of these ( Ferguson mc-01 http://www.worldofspectrum.org/showmag.cgi?mag=YourComputer/Issue8411/Pages/YourComputer841100192.jpg ) that I used with my 800(via s-vhs) and my ST for a while before I got a Trinitron RGB/Composite monitor. ( Like this one http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3a/Trinitron_computer.JPG/800px-Trinitron_computer.JPG )

[oky2000]

 

As an example in the world of cars which are massive seller outs I give you two...

 

Toyota Corolla....piece of shit bare minimum...god knows why people bought it.

BMW 3 series....outsold rivals from Ford/Renault/Opel(GM to you)/etc. Superior better designed car with more acceptable compromises won.

 

Whoa, whoa.... I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly, and this is certaily off-topic, but can't let this go without a reply: re: Corolla.

 

Are you saying the Toyota Corolla is a pice of shit? No way! The Corolla is a best-seller for lots of good reasons! First off, Consumer Reports (and just about anybody else) gives it TOPS in reliability. It gets high ratings in resale value and crashworthiness as well. It gets EXCELLENT fuel economy, and has great performance CONSIDERING that fuel economy; the 16-valve, variable valve timing 1.8L gets about as good a mileage (38mpg) as many competitors' 1.3-1.5L 8-valve engines. Also considering the fuel economy, an excellent/quiet ride. I had one of these when I lived in Alaska and it was one of the best cars I ever owned; it took ice-rutted rough streets like a luxury car compared to other econo cars. I just don't see how you can call a car that's top-rated in reliability, fuel economy, resale, and crashworthiness....a piece of shit. Pick on the Kia Rio or the Hyundai Accent or Dodge Neon.....

 

Even Lotus acknowledges the excellent engineering of the 1.8L Toyota Corolla engine when they put a supercharger on it and installed it in the Lotus Exige! (So you know the engine will stay together in naturally-aspirated form, in your Corolla)

 

edit: The BMW and other German cars usually rank far lower in reliability than *any* Toyota/Lexus offering. I seem to remember the electronics sucking in those cars

Please... Toyota is junk comapred to a neon. Check out Neon SCCA racing record holders. You wont find any Corollas..

Consumer Reports is so jap o centric its not funny. Cant tell you how often they are wrong from toaters to pc's. Read the ST amiga comparisons from those idiots back in the day. I'll be happy to pick on Toyota,Honda etc all day long. Lemming mobiles.

 

You can have good products sell well and you can have bad products sell well. So sales cannot be used to prove some product is superior or inferior.

 

My point exactly.

 

And to answer Wood...The Corolla is a way to get from A to B, that's it, it has no redeeming features at all, interior design is crap, ergonomics are crap, body shape is crap, engine is crap, gearbox (manual) is crap, suspension is about as effective as a 70s yank tank despite being a small non USA car. The list is endless, it is hardly art in motion OR an exercise in engineering excellence. There are probably golf karts that do 95% of what the Corolla does

 

edit: Reliability comment, well BMW/Mercedes/Lexus/Audi drivers pay 3x more on car purchases so expect perfection, the old age pensioner in the Corolla gives it 100% and is over the moon as long as they never get stranded on the highway. I took a BMW back to get rid of a faint hissing noise from the exhaust...something you would never hear on a boomy Corolla with it's gruff almost utilitarian engine aha

Edited December 29, 2009 by oky2000

[oky2000]

Problem is in 80 columns regular CRT dot pitch/native resolution is insufficient anyway, and well 320x200 doesn't need RGB as you put it, using an ST or Amiga via S-Video or composhite [not a typo] video is perfectly adequate for gamers (and 320x200 is too low for serious applications anyway) The reason why you can't read 80 column txt on an ST is not because the converter is low quality, but the TV input technology itself.

 

I've never had any problems reading 80 column txt on any TV I had via RGB ( I had one of these ( Ferguson mc-01 http://www.worldofspectrum.org/showmag.cgi?mag=YourComputer/Issue8411/Pages/YourComputer841100192.jpg ) that I used with my 800(via s-vhs) and my ST for a while before I got a Trinitron RGB/Composite monitor. ( Like this one http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3a/Trinitron_computer.JPG/800px-Trinitron_computer.JPG )

 

It's readable but I wouldn't want to be writing letters all day in black on white text etc over a PC monitor which has at least 2x the native resolution on the CRT tube

[oky2000]

Everyone knows the A8 came out at the ass end of 1979...maybe a handful of 800s were ready for sale in 79...therefore it is not a 70s machine at all.

Well, that's kinda arbitrary, I bought my 800 in 1979. Where I come from, 1979 was in the 70's

 

No denying that the SID chip was quite the audio system tho, definitely a selling point for the C64.

Especially if you like the sound of angry bees (SID)

 

Even if that was all it could do I'd still prefer it to everything sounding like it's made from springs. *HUGE GRIN SMILEY*

 

 

Pete

 

Think he means it is superior to the angry bees noise of pokey in the A8 version of Forbidden Forest by comparison

[oky2000]

Please... Toyota is junk comapred to a neon. Check out Neon SCCA racing record holders. You wont find any Corollas..

Consumer Reports is so jap o centric its not funny. Cant tell you how often they are wrong from toaters to pc's. Read the ST amiga comparisons from those idiots back in the day. I'll be happy to pick on Toyota,Honda etc all day long. Lemming mobiles.

The only thing that has a lower resale value than a Chrysler product is probably any of the Korean brands. Toyota and Honda brands have the highest, percentagewise. Since they're allegedly junk, why do you think this is the case then, seriously? (I love American cars nevertheless, by the way)

 

I like cars not manufacturers, Toyota's MR-2 in the 90s was fantastic, as was the Celica etc. Honda make the NSX and Type-R which are also good cars and Nissan make the Skyline..in it's current guise a major technical triumph.But all 3 have really crap mediocre cars in their lineup too.

 

It's rare to find a manufacturer who only has ever made bad cars still around.

[+poobah]

USB sticks have to be used through some device driver due to nonstandard means of accessing the USB sticks.

 

USB protocol also is serial so not as fast/efficient as a parallel port or A8 joystick port.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

That's strike two, poobah. Initially you argued STs joystick ports aren't slow and now this.

Resorting to outright lies now?

...

You wouldn't keep arguing with me if you already agree that ST joystick ports are inferior (slower) than A8 joystick ports. There's no meaning to:

 

"I said they were more than fast enough to do the job they were designed for, and that other ports on the ST were more appropriate for high speed tasks."

Not arguing, just pointing out that you LIE when it's convenient for your argument, nothing more.

 

 

 

How do you babble about "nonstandard means of accessing the USB sticks" and then mention HIDs? Either it is standard or it isn't. (Hint: it is)

...

No, you are mixing up HARDWARE level standard vs. device driver access. Of course, there's an API standard method to access joysticks but that's inefficient compared to doing direct I/O access. You misunderstood.

No mixup, your words not mine. HIDs are part of THE USB standard (shocker, the standard describes hardware and software), no special device driver needed.

 

Do you really think you know more about this stuff than the rest of us? (hint #2, you don't)

Don't ask questions if you're not going to wait for the right answers. You are arguing with yourself using straw-man arguments and assuming you are winning. I have programmed joystick I/O for many machines.

It's called a rhetorical question.

I'll be clearer... You don't know more than the rest of us. Better?

 

Your 2 microsecond time is also wrong.

POKEY & the PIA don't instantly latch stick & button presses to the memory mapped registers.

Oh wait, you also conveniently left out the triggers, would it be because you need 4 more reads to get them?

 

Your half-truths and narrowly crafted measurement criteria are laughable.

 

LDA 54016 is always valid. There's no waiting needed. Once again, you want to argue against the A8 having superior joystick interface and the sametime admitting "ST has enough to do the job." Make up your mind.

Yes, you can read the register anytime you want. It may not be be current, but you are correct about reading it.

Once per frame (60 Hz) is more than fast enough for joysticks. Both the A8 and ST meet this criteria.

 

It doesn't matter if you read joysticks or buttons, you have to go through the serial protocol on USB and ST. Why do I need 4 reads to read the triggers? I am comparing reads of 4 joysticks. First try just reading one joystick. Then we can combine for 4 joysticks. I specifically gave the code that I am comparing-- if you want to add the trigger-- go ahead but be consistent. I gave the example code of Amiga reading joystick and it was directions only. A8 reading joystick is directions only (it just so happens that two get read at the same time). I am transmitting data directly through joystick ports and I can do consecutive LDA/LDX 54016 without any problems. Impossible on ST. QED.

blah blah blah... let's pick the worst part: "Why do I need 4 reads to read the triggers?"

Go look it up, I'll wait.

 

You ignore the triggers because it costs time and damages your argument.

I think most people would consider "reading one joystick" to include the fire button(s).

 

You cherry pick tiny details, and ignore everything else in a pathetic attempt to (try to) be right.

It's sad.

[Crazyace]

It's readable but I wouldn't want to be writing letters all day in black on white text etc over a PC monitor which has at least 2x the native resolution on the CRT tube

 

It's all a long time ago now - Once I moved on to coding on a host PC I switched to using Brief in 132 column mode ( I think on some Cirrus Logic video card? )

[atariksi]

USB sticks have to be used through some device driver due to nonstandard means of accessing the USB sticks.

 

USB protocol also is serial so not as fast/efficient as a parallel port or A8 joystick port.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

That's strike two, poobah. Initially you argued STs joystick ports aren't slow and now this.

Resorting to outright lies now?

...

You wouldn't keep arguing with me if you already agree that ST joystick ports are inferior (slower) than A8 joystick ports. There's no meaning to:

 

"I said they were more than fast enough to do the job they were designed for, and that other ports on the ST were more appropriate for high speed tasks."

Not arguing, just pointing out that you LIE when it's convenient for your argument, nothing more.

 

 

 

How do you babble about "nonstandard means of accessing the USB sticks" and then mention HIDs? Either it is standard or it isn't. (Hint: it is)

...

No, you are mixing up HARDWARE level standard vs. device driver access. Of course, there's an API standard method to access joysticks but that's inefficient compared to doing direct I/O access. You misunderstood.

No mixup, your words not mine. HIDs are part of THE USB standard (shocker, the standard describes hardware and software), no special device driver needed.

...

Well, go try reading the various joysticks out there using direct hardware access and see for yourself that it's slower than A8 reading the joystick. First find joysticks that actually follow the standard hardware. Because there's a standard generic HID driver-- doesn't mean that the joystick hardware is read the same way. I know there's joysticks with 10 buttons, some with 2 buttons, some use greater resistances, etc. You would rather have consistent hardware that can be directly accessed. And my point still stands-- it's still slower than A8.

 

Do you really think you know more about this stuff than the rest of us? (hint #2, you don't)

Don't ask questions if you're not going to wait for the right answers. You are arguing with yourself using straw-man arguments and assuming you are winning. I have programmed joystick I/O for many machines.

It's called a rhetorical question.

I'll be clearer... You don't know more than the rest of us. Better?

...

Well, that's not something that's being debated. I am giving rational arguments and you have to deal with them rather than attacking and speculating about what someone knows or not. You did the samething before-- starting accusing my personally rather than addressing the argument. I guess you must have learned something else that you came scampering back to argue some more after resigning.

 

Your 2 microsecond time is also wrong.

POKEY & the PIA don't instantly latch stick & button presses to the memory mapped registers.

Oh wait, you also conveniently left out the triggers, would it be because you need 4 more reads to get them?

 

Your half-truths and narrowly crafted measurement criteria are laughable.

 

LDA 54016 is always valid. There's no waiting needed. Once again, you want to argue against the A8 having superior joystick interface and the sametime admitting "ST has enough to do the job." Make up your mind.

Yes, you can read the register anytime you want. It may not be be current, but you are correct about reading it.

Once per frame (60 Hz) is more than fast enough for joysticks. Both the A8 and ST meet this criteria.

...

Don't try to equate things that are VERY DIFFERENT in speed. I can read/write to A8 joysticks using consecutive LDA/STA with different values. I don't know where you get your speculations from. If you think I am lieing then provide the code that shows how they are equivalent.

 

It doesn't matter if you read joysticks or buttons, you have to go through the serial protocol on USB and ST. Why do I need 4 reads to read the triggers? I am comparing reads of 4 joysticks. First try just reading one joystick. Then we can combine for 4 joysticks. I specifically gave the code that I am comparing-- if you want to add the trigger-- go ahead but be consistent. I gave the example code of Amiga reading joystick and it was directions only. A8 reading joystick is directions only (it just so happens that two get read at the same time). I am transmitting data directly through joystick ports and I can do consecutive LDA/LDX 54016 without any problems. Impossible on ST. QED.

blah blah blah... let's pick the worst part: "Why do I need 4 reads to read the triggers?"

Go look it up, I'll wait.

 

You ignore the triggers because it costs time and damages your argument.

I think most people would consider "reading one joystick" to include the fire button(s).

 

You cherry pick tiny details, and ignore everything else in a pathetic attempt to (try to) be right.

It's sad.

 

I'm being consistent so blah, blah yourself. If you properly read the thread, the PC spends most of its time reading the directions. That's the worst case. There's only two trigger buttons for two joysticks not four. Here's the code to read both joysticks on A8:

 

LDA 54016

LDX 53764

LDY 53765

 

It doesn't hurt my argument at all. ST is so SLOW in joystick readings I can add a few hundred more cycles and A8 would win. You have no case. Using straw-man arguments like "lie" is your only way out of it.

[atariksi]

I can scroll a GPRIOR mode 0 as well as an overscanned screen Graphics 9 screen w/translucency. These are a couple of examples impossible for ST.

Good for you - I'm glad the rest of the gaming world took to graphics 9 so much

Several demos seem to scroll overscanned full screen images with more than 16 colours, so I wouldn't say it's impossible though.

...

That's a lame argument to claim gaming world doesn't use it. I am discussing which hardware aspects are superior-- whether some application uses it or not is not my problem. Most games don't even use GTIA modes at all what to speak of translucency effects and scrolling them. You can't show 16 shades nor do you have the bandwidth to do the scroll/overscan for 16 colors what to speak of >16 colors.

 

You're speaking rubbish. Don't compare with quarter screens then. If you think low-res modes are not needed then be prepared to replicate pixels and lines to mimic the A8 modes at CPU cost. Of course, some cannot be mimiced, but that's your problem. Games I mentioned won't play any better with higher resolution; in fact, they will most likely slow down or perform worse on ST with the higher resolution. So don't say ST wins just because it has higher resolution. Text modes are also significant. You can't paint a text screen in the same time or less as an A8 doing it. In fact, I can repaint any of the A8 text modes within the VBI. More time penalty for ST just like scrolling.

Text modes are really useful - I'm not sure I'd include Mr Robot as something impossible to do on the ST though.

But you can't reproduce 320x200x16 colours per pixel in any way possible on the A8 - ( and forget 640 pixels ). On the ST I can reproduce any display on the A8 - it may just take more time. Therefore I say that the ST display is superior.

...

I never said those games were impossible to do on ST, they are better on A8. You keep repeating the samething over and over again. Yes, ST has higher resolution and better processor but lower resolution modes are also useful and shades are also useful. Yes, TEXT modes are useful as well. ST display is inferior when it comes to games relying more on motion rather than hi-res static imagery. And even static imagery that requires shading doesn't look so hot on ST. If ST had a 256 color A8 palette, its imagery would look more like Amiga's (using high resolution). Just having high resolution doesn't make the display superior else you can say CGA with 640*200 and 320*200*4 has better display than A8.

 

Even with GTIA - I can happily say pallette of 512 colours is better than pallette of 128 colours, as the only 16 shade modes aren't palletted.

...

It's more colors and less shades. So it's a trade-off since now ST has problems representing some of the gradiences and shaded images of A8. So not a clear cut win for ST. Humans perceive luminances more than colors-- just study the TV signal construction. So don't just declare ST wins. I rather have more shades. As I stated before, I rather have 64 shades and 4 colors.

The pallette on the A8 only has 8 shades, so it's a fair comparision 512 palletted colours vs 128 palletted colours.

...

Even Gr.9 is paletted. The palette of 16 shades is chosen from 256. And you can toggle modes to get colorful imagery in there as well.

 

So given A8s fast I/O using joystick I/O, that also has to be put into the comparison not just "oh, now we can use the parallel port."

Feel free to put abuse of joystick port as an A8 advantage - I won't argue with your opinion on that

That's the biggest bullcrap you have written thus far. I can also say parallel ports for laplink, ZIP drives, etc. is utter abuse of the parallel port; you need help. I suppose putting in bidirectionality in the joystick ports was a big mistake or some accident by Atari. SYNC is ABUSE of video circuit on ST, but doing I/O is perfectly good use of joysticks as PIA wasn't just meant for reading digital joysticks.

I'm not arguing with you? - so why are you continuing. I'm quite happy with the advantages you've already given for the extra use of joystick ports.

YOU ARE arguing. You're claiming it's "ABUSE" of joystick port. That constitutes an argument.

[atariksi]

USB sticks have to be used through some device driver due to nonstandard means of accessing the USB sticks.

 

USB protocol also is serial so not as fast/efficient as a parallel port or A8 joystick port.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

That's strike two, poobah. Initially you argued STs joystick ports aren't slow and now this.

Resorting to outright lies now?

...

You wouldn't keep arguing with me if you already agree that ST joystick ports are inferior (slower) than A8 joystick ports. There's no meaning to:

 

"I said they were more than fast enough to do the job they were designed for, and that other ports on the ST were more appropriate for high speed tasks."

Not arguing, just pointing out that you LIE when it's convenient for your argument, nothing more.

 

 

 

How do you babble about "nonstandard means of accessing the USB sticks" and then mention HIDs? Either it is standard or it isn't. (Hint: it is)

...

No, you are mixing up HARDWARE level standard vs. device driver access. Of course, there's an API standard method to access joysticks but that's inefficient compared to doing direct I/O access. You misunderstood.

No mixup, your words not mine. HIDs are part of THE USB standard (shocker, the standard describes hardware and software), no special device driver needed.

...

Well, go try reading the various joysticks out there using direct hardware access and see for yourself that it's slower than A8 reading the joystick. First find joysticks that actually follow the standard hardware. Because there's a standard generic HID driver-- doesn't mean that the joystick hardware is read the same way. I know there's joysticks with 10 buttons, some with 2 buttons, some use greater resistances, etc. You would rather have consistent hardware that can be directly accessed. And my point still stands-- it's still slower than A8.

 

Do you really think you know more about this stuff than the rest of us? (hint #2, you don't)

Don't ask questions if you're not going to wait for the right answers. You are arguing with yourself using straw-man arguments and assuming you are winning. I have programmed joystick I/O for many machines.

It's called a rhetorical question.

I'll be clearer... You don't know more than the rest of us. Better?

...

Well, that's not something that's being debated. I am giving rational arguments and you have to deal with them rather than attacking and speculating about what someone knows or not. You did the samething before-- starting accusing my personally rather than addressing the argument. I guess you must have learned something else that you came scampering back to argue some more after resigning.

 

Your 2 microsecond time is also wrong.

POKEY & the PIA don't instantly latch stick & button presses to the memory mapped registers.

Oh wait, you also conveniently left out the triggers, would it be because you need 4 more reads to get them?

 

Your half-truths and narrowly crafted measurement criteria are laughable.

 

LDA 54016 is always valid. There's no waiting needed. Once again, you want to argue against the A8 having superior joystick interface and the sametime admitting "ST has enough to do the job." Make up your mind.

Yes, you can read the register anytime you want. It may not be be current, but you are correct about reading it.

Once per frame (60 Hz) is more than fast enough for joysticks. Both the A8 and ST meet this criteria.

...

Don't try to equate things that are VERY DIFFERENT in speed. I can read/write to A8 joysticks using consecutive LDA/STA with different values. I don't know where you get your speculations from. If you think I am lieing then provide the code that shows how they are equivalent.

 

It doesn't matter if you read joysticks or buttons, you have to go through the serial protocol on USB and ST. Why do I need 4 reads to read the triggers? I am comparing reads of 4 joysticks. First try just reading one joystick. Then we can combine for 4 joysticks. I specifically gave the code that I am comparing-- if you want to add the trigger-- go ahead but be consistent. I gave the example code of Amiga reading joystick and it was directions only. A8 reading joystick is directions only (it just so happens that two get read at the same time). I am transmitting data directly through joystick ports and I can do consecutive LDA/LDX 54016 without any problems. Impossible on ST. QED.

blah blah blah... let's pick the worst part: "Why do I need 4 reads to read the triggers?"

Go look it up, I'll wait.

 

You ignore the triggers because it costs time and damages your argument.

I think most people would consider "reading one joystick" to include the fire button(s).

 

You cherry pick tiny details, and ignore everything else in a pathetic attempt to (try to) be right.

It's sad.

 

I'm being consistent so blah, blah yourself. If you properly read the thread, the PC spends most of its time reading the directions. That's the worst case. There's only two trigger buttons for two joysticks not four. Here's the code to read both joysticks on A8:

 

LDA 54016

LDX 53764

LDY 53765

 

It doesn't hurt my argument at all. ST is so SLOW in joystick readings I can add a few hundred more cycles and A8 would win. You have no case. Using straw-man arguments like "lie" is your only way out of it.

 

That should be: LDA 54016, LDX 53264 and LDY 53265. Typo.

[atariksi]

Not arguing, just pointing out that you LIE when it's convenient for your argument, nothing more.

...

It's no lie. You can go back and read post #559 and others where you also tried to minimize the A8 superiority of joystick ports by lame excuses like "no reason to do fast I/O through joystick ports" or "no sane reason to use it." or "enough to read joystick and keyboard" and other similar remarks. If you already accept A8 has faster joystick I/O, then stop arguing. I don't care if speed isn't important to you. It's important to me as I see it all adds up.

 

Making lame arguments to dismiss a clear A8 advantage doesn't cut it for me.

[Crazyace]

That's a lame argument to claim gaming world doesn't use it. I am discussing which hardware aspects are superior-- whether some application uses it or not is not my problem. Most games don't even use GTIA modes at all what to speak of translucency effects and scrolling them. You can't show 16 shades nor do you have the bandwidth to do the scroll/overscan for 16 colors what to speak of >16 colors.

Whatever, You dismiss the 640 by 4 colour and 320 by 16 colour pixel screen modes on the ST as any kind of advantage, and concentrate on the 80 pixel by 16 colour scroller.

As I said - there seem to be demos that already do this on the ST, so I don't feel the need to make another one.

 

 

I never said those games were impossible to do on ST, they are better on A8. You keep repeating the samething over and over again. Yes, ST has higher resolution and better processor but lower resolution modes are also useful and shades are also useful. Yes, TEXT modes are useful as well. ST display is inferior when it comes to games relying more on motion rather than hi-res static imagery. And even static imagery that requires shading doesn't look so hot on ST. If ST had a 256 color A8 palette, its imagery would look more like Amiga's (using high resolution). Just having high resolution doesn't make the display superior else you can say CGA with 640*200 and 320*200*4 has better display than A8.

Please back this up? Mr Robot doesn't use 16 shades - it's completely non GTIA. What are you comparing a static ST image with? Everything I've seen looks technically way better than the A8 best. ( And why are you bringing CGA into it again - the discussion is A8 vs ST )

[atariksi]

Otherwise, my list will also grow to only include those things present in original STs-- 256K, no RF modulator, TOS from disk, or whatever other bugs/problems they had. RF modulator is significant as it affects the price significantly of getting RGB monitor.

 

It's more colors and less shades. So it's a trade-off since now ST has problems representing some of the gradiences and shaded images of A8. So not a clear cut win for ST. Humans perceive luminances more than colors-- just study the TV signal construction. So don't just declare ST wins. I rather have more shades. As I stated before, I rather have 64 shades and 4 colors.

Rubbish - RGB video is a better standard, ( and in Europe it was in a hell of a lot of TV's , with SCART/Peritel eventually standardising it )

...

Bullcrap. I have NO REASON for a RGB video for A8. It's targetted for TVs and pictures are excellent. It's based on the TV color clock (3.57Mhz color subcarrier).

So what, plenty of RGB based systems used the colorburst clock for various reasons (commonality of the oscilator used or as a provision to faciliate composite/S-video) With RGB you can make hardware which simply uses different video encoders for PAL/NTSC/SECAM rather than different video chips. (hence the Amiga, Master System, Mega Drive, etc).

And I also think RGB is a better standard (it's what a color CRT uses natively), too bad it didn't catch on in the states, we had to wait for YPbPr to get that kind of quality, and even then you need a transcoder for older hardware. (save a few games who used Amiga/ST monitors instead for console gaming)

Hell, if you used sync on green and a common ground, you could fit RGB onto an s-video connector.

 

I wasn't arguing which standard is better. Yes, RGB can display better higher resolution imagery, but A8 doesn't need RGB to output it's various graphics modes so take out the monitor price and take out the advantage that RGB output of ST is better than A8 as a separate advantage. It's just the same as saying ST has higher resolution and you have to pay for that with a special monitor.

[atariksi]

That's a lame argument to claim gaming world doesn't use it. I am discussing which hardware aspects are superior-- whether some application uses it or not is not my problem. Most games don't even use GTIA modes at all what to speak of translucency effects and scrolling them. You can't show 16 shades nor do you have the bandwidth to do the scroll/overscan for 16 colors what to speak of >16 colors.

Whatever, You dismiss the 640 by 4 colour and 320 by 16 colour pixel screen modes on the ST as any kind of advantage, and concentrate on the 80 pixel by 16 colour scroller.

As I said - there seem to be demos that already do this on the ST, so I don't feel the need to make another one.

...

I am not dismissing your high resolution modes. I already stated ST has better processor and better resolution. So when I argue that A8 low resolution modes are better than STs, you can't bring resolution back into the picture. You cannot do the Gr.9 translucency effect (period). As far as GPRIOR mode 0 doing 23 colors/scanline, that's also not possible on ST but you can use up processor speed to re-use colors but so can A8 and get 40+ colors/scanline. But ST cannot scroll and/or overscan those 23 colors/scanline since it would be using up the processor power to re-use the colors.

 

I never said those games were impossible to do on ST, they are better on A8. You keep repeating the samething over and over again. Yes, ST has higher resolution and better processor but lower resolution modes are also useful and shades are also useful. Yes, TEXT modes are useful as well. ST display is inferior when it comes to games relying more on motion rather than hi-res static imagery. And even static imagery that requires shading doesn't look so hot on ST. If ST had a 256 color A8 palette, its imagery would look more like Amiga's (using high resolution). Just having high resolution doesn't make the display superior else you can say CGA with 640*200 and 320*200*4 has better display than A8.

Please back this up? Mr Robot doesn't use 16 shades - it's completely non GTIA. What are you comparing a static ST image with? Everything I've seen looks technically way better than the A8 best. ( And why are you bringing CGA into it again - the discussion is A8 vs ST )

I'm sorry-- I think you mixed up two different points here. The games I mentioned were not examples of GTIA modes. They were example of games that use either sprite multiplexing, overscan, or scrolling so they take a big hit on ST (motion not static stuff). Everytime I brought CGA into the picture it was an analogy not a separate argument. Static imagery would look better on ST except those involving more shades than ST can handle.

[atariksi]

And for the joystick I/O debate, I don't know why people would even argue that point; it's so simple that A8 with it direct register memory mapped is superior to ST doing some serial protocol. I think they may have made it memory mapped in future STe models-- don't have the memory map to check.

 

It's not like I said Atari joysticks are:

 

(1) faster than the speeding bullet

(2) more power than a locomotive

(3) able to leap tall buildings in a single bound

(4) look up in the sky, it's a ...

 

If I had said that, perhaps you can argue something like it's a UFO and not an Atari 8-bit joystick.

[Crazyace]

No problem,

 

GPRIOR0 and 23 colours per scanline ( scrolled ) would be a big advantage to the A8 apart from it having quite stringent limitations - The best image I saw was the Tetris game in the other thread. That's why I treat it in the same way as the 48 colour/line Spectrum 512, which is also limited , but has quite an impact.

( It might be interesting to try to reproduce a particular image if you've got something in mind though )

 

I've seen some of the Photochrome pictures that look pretty amazing, but I guess they are in the same class as the hip mode pictures on the A8 - they are using 2 frames to get effectively 16 shades rather than 8 , but the flickering seems a lot less noticeable than some of the A8 pictures. I guess that's because the A8 is trying to mix a base colour with a brightness , but the ST is just trying to flicker between two consecutive brightnesses to suggest an inbetween value.

 

Mr Robot is a game that I couldn't see any problem with replicating on the ST though, so that's why I raised it. ( The character animation might seem complex, but there's nowhere like a full screen animating on any of the levels )

[PeteD]

And for the joystick I/O debate, I don't know why people would even argue that point; it's so simple that A8 with it direct register memory mapped is superior to ST doing some serial protocol. I think they may have made it memory mapped in future STe models-- don't have the memory map to check.

 

It's not like I said Atari joysticks are:

 

(1) faster than the speeding bullet

(2) more power than a locomotive

(3) able to leap tall buildings in a single bound

(4) look up in the sky, it's a ...

 

If I had said that, perhaps you can argue something like it's a UFO and not an Atari 8-bit joystick.

 

It's the fact that you can make a post like this and then say A8 is also faster than C64 when in this case it isn't so when someone points that out you change tack again and it's some other reason for being better. You also tried it with Amiga by using some really odd code to try to make it take more cycles...

 

 

Pete

[carmel_andrews]

Reading some of the replies here, is this supposed to be an ST vs A8 thread, or an A8 vs c64,amiga, st, speccy, nes, sms etc etc thread

 

The ST doesn't need to have scroll registers, the likes of Steve Bak (Return to genesis and Goldrunner etc) as well as Wayne Smithson (Anarchy and ST version of Blood Money etc) proved that ST could smooth scroll without the need of registers and be as good at scrolling like the A8/c64/amiga etc

 

On the other hand though, If the ST really did need scroll registers or increased colour range, why were'nt there more support for STe specific games

 

Only thing I would gripe about the ST, was the positioning of the mouse/joystick ports...they chose possibly the worst location for them, what was wrong with placing them next to the cart area (like they did with the STe analog ports)

Edited December 29, 2009 by carmel_andrews

[Thorsten Günther]

Didn't RGB popularize in europe prior to S-video (or even composite in many cases) became standard? (or composite with RGB simultaneously with SCART adoption, but S-video still later)

 

Exactly. A fully wired SCART connector has default pins for R, G and B input along with composite (also used as sync in RGB mode), while S-video is usually only available on the second SCART connector (when available) or after altering the TV's settings.

 

Thorsten