Kalvan Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 Funny you should mention that... did you also know Nolan put together a porn movie to help finance things at Atari? Seriously, you can't make this up. We are actively seeking the 8mm film to transfer to PC video - perhaps a youtube post in the future? Ya never know... Curt Please, Curt, not Youtube. Youporn or Tube8 on the other hand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Rogue Posted April 22, 2010 Author Share Posted April 22, 2010 (edited) And yes I know Marty will respond that there is no bias, he just has all the facts and knows beyond a shadow of doubt what kind of man Nolan is. You may very well "know" what you think you know, that doesn't mean you're not letting some bias into your thoughts and perhaps your books. No, Curt "knows" the man, and he's posted his insight in regards to that. The only thing I've posted are corrections for literal documented facts as to what Nolan has or has not done, taken from direct interviews (fully corroborated) of the other people who were there (and "know" him), internal documentation, engineering logs, coverage of the time, etc., etc., etc. For example, it's fully documented (and admitted by Nolan himself and Al Alcorn) that the idea for PONG was taken from his viewing of the Odyssey in May of '72. It's also on record he initially denied it. So if he initially stated he didn't then fully admitted it (including under court testimony), and the person who actually did PONG (Al Alcorn) also admitted it, how is that a bias to say his story changes? If it's on record by him claiming Ted left because he was getting scared and wanted out, then Ted directly states to me no he left because Nolan forced him out, then Nolan answers back in email to us yes that's true and it "was just business and nothing personal", how is that showing a bias to state another story changed and was initially PR'd in his favor? Likewise, if Nolan is well documented to have left Atari in December of '78 (including directly by him, even to the point of writing a letter of regret immediately after to Warner which we have a copy of), and then states involvement in the development and release of Missile Command in a recent interview - when in fact Missile Command wasn't even proposed until May of '79 (which we have a copy of as well) let alone having the design work start until that Summer and then released in in July of '80 - how is that bias to state he's lying with his statement? In fact here, I'm attaching a copy of the Missile Command proposal that Scott already publicly released: missileproposal.pdf If it's first being specced out in May of '79, isn't released until July of '80, and Nolan left in December of '78 but is making recent statements like: Yahoo! Games: Did you have any involvement in the original Missile Command when it was released? Nolan Bushnell: "The coin-op version, I did.", "We actually got some criticism.....", "playing the Missile Command re-do transported me back to my office, playing Missile Command with some buddies...." How is that showing bias on my or Curt's part that there's a constant pattern of deception by him? I mean this is getting ridiculous already. Edited April 22, 2010 by wgungfu 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kool kitty89 Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 From a business standpoint - Jack did the best job of them all. He put out new product in record breaking time, made the company solvent - repaid Warner in just 2 1/2 years - brought the company public and really turned things around. He wasn't big on advertising and he focused more on his computers then on video games and that was a fault he had, but overall, while under Jacks control (until Sam took the reigns) Atari did remarkably well. Michael Katx was in charge of the entertainmnet division (and coresponding marketing), wasn't he? Granted, that would obviously be limited by budget constraints imposed by Jack. (unless Katz could persuade him otherwise) It seems like Katz did a pretty good job all things considered and probably a good match with Tramiel's buisness style. Katz knew the electronics entertainment market and was a pretty no nonsense straightforeward kind of guy when it came to things -at least internally, actual marketing would, of course be more than that. --I believe that was somewhat problematic at Sega eventually - in an interview he mentedoned the Japanese not wanting to "hear how things really were" and he wasns't going to sugar coat anything) It makes me wonder if Atari Corp may have benefitted from Katz staying on throught the Lynx and Jaguar years. (soem of the problems seem related to Sam's capabilities compared to Jack as well) In relation to curts point about Tramiels time at Atari, the only 2 things I would give Tramiel credit for is Putting Atari on a more international footing and not focusing solely on atari's core market (i.e united states) and also improving 3rd party software support for some of atari's products (before tramiel, in markets outside the United States, 3rd party software support was practically non existant, especially in europe/UK) That's a good point, that had already happened with Commodore establishing the C64 (and the Amiga later followed). Without the strong Europen market the ST (and Amiga) wouldn't have been anywhere near as successful as they were. (niche markets for the mose part in the US, mainstream platforms to the early 90s in EU) Likewise, the C64 wouldn't have had nearly as long a life span if it weren't for its persistance in Europe. (including UK, of course) It's a bit of a shame Atari Inc hadn't pushed the 8-bits in Europe more significantly, that turned out to be the longest lasting and most stable market for western 8-bit home computers. Plus, consoles competed directly against home computers as game platforms until the early 90s, an din many cases, computers were preferred over consoles (with game consoles having a stigma of being kiddie systems in some cases). Sort of like the immediate post crash North America, but persisting much longer. Homer really needs to pass that shit he's smoking. Powerful stuff! Hey whatever it is got him the record high score for VCS Galaxian. I think it's kind of funny that so many people are talking about looking at Nolan without any nostalgia or emotional involvement and then when I read what they are saying it's filled with what seems like hatred and vitriol for Nolan. I'm no expert on Nolan or Atari history, but I do get a sense of bias against the man. And yes I know Marty will respond that there is no bias, he just has all the facts and knows beyond a shadow of doubt what kind of man Nolan is. You may very well "know" what you think you know, that doesn't mean you're not letting some bias into your thoughts and perhaps your books. I'm not biassed against him personally: in fact, a year ago I was still buying into his PR nonsense (around the time I was really starting to get interested in retro gaming again). More information really opened things up more, and the more I learned, the more sense things seemed to make. I'll certianly give credit where it's due, and the man is a good showman (some use less flattering terms like carnie or con man) and certianly adept at making himself look good and getting people to give him money... (or agree to other things) That's the problem though, he really was detrimental to Atari compared to what might have been. (regardless of being full of himself, had he had some real business or management talent or real flair for innovation things would have been far different) That has little to do with my dislike though, BS PR and being ful of himself aren't mutually exclusive with good/successful buisness practices in such positions (and indeed are rather common), though I presoanlly have more respect for those who are more down to earth. The lies and stealing credit is what bothers me, as I said I like to give credit where it's do, and conversely am put off when it's blatently stolen... (or hijacked) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+jeremiahjt Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 How is that showing bias on my or Curt's part that there's a constant pattern of deception by him? I mean this is getting ridiculous already. How about where you give him absolutely no credit on who was hired? Your belief was that he hired people based on their willingness to take the job and not on their abilities. How do you know for sure Nolan didn't target specific people because of their past performance? How about where you say he had no management strategy? That he just wanted to party. Is it not possible that Nolan made a decision to have that kind of atmosphere because he thought it would help the employees be more creative? By the way I love the eye roll you gave me. I'm sorry if these questions are beneath one of your intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Jaye Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 (edited) Is there an ETA on when the book is coming out? Two books (one on Atari Inc. and one on Atari Corp.). Inc will be coming out sooner, and is actively advancing, but we're still vetting a lot of material and uncovering more material to answer questions to our satisfaction. Every question answered leaves another 5 uncovered it seems. Little parenthesis here while we're talking about Atari Corp.: will your book cover up to now, with the Midway IP going back to Warner Bros (and thus going full circle for the Atari Corp. part of what was Midway)? Edited April 22, 2010 by Lady Jaye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevefulton Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 Very, very interesting. I'm certainly looking forward to reading your books. Thanks. We're taking a unique approach with them. Rather than a dry repeating of facts, figures, and stories, it's more of a cross between Dealers of Lightning and Cringely's Accidental Empires. Really want to convey the emotions and feelings besides the details. Can't hardly wait! Marty, we need to read these as soon as possible. I mean, hell, even the Commode-Door has a book. -Steve 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt Vendel Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 LOL!!!! You made my night, thank you for the good laugh :-) Funny you should mention that... did you also know Nolan put together a porn movie to help finance things at Atari? Seriously, you can't make this up. We are actively seeking the 8mm film to transfer to PC video - perhaps a youtube post in the future? Ya never know... Curt Please, Curt, not Youtube. Youporn or Tube8 on the other hand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevefulton Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 The last time I talked To Rob Fulop, he told me that Bushnell hired him directly. That has to be a least one small point for Bushnell, as Fulop was a pretty good choice... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atari181 Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 (edited) The last time I talked To Rob Fulop, he told me that Bushnell hired him directly. That has to be a least one small point for Bushnell, as Fulop was a pretty good choice... Definately Rob was a great Hire/Programmer I have always been a Nolan Fan, for years and years, just look earlier in this thread. I would have to say I am changing my view as I read more and more. Nolan definately was a huge part of Atari and I will always be gratefull for him and Atari. I have read lots books on story of Video games and Atari. Most of this negative information is not in any of the books. As Curt and Marty have posted lots of info here and backed it up with documentation on some of it, I am changing my view of Nolan. Nolan has definately has been dishonest on many occasions. I believe my childhood memories has clouded my vision and made me want to believe in Nolan. The more I see unfortunately, the more dissapointed I am in one of my "Heroes" Curt and Marty, whatever else you can make public please do so. As "The Truth is Out There" and I would like to know it. Edited April 22, 2010 by atari181 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Rogue Posted April 23, 2010 Author Share Posted April 23, 2010 How about where you give him absolutely no credit on who was hired? No, I was responding to someone's claim that he had a talent for hiring. All the initial people were people from Ampex where he and Ted had worked, not anyone sought after or requiring some sort of head hunting process or active culling of top candidates from the valley. After that, the interviews and hiring were done by Al and others, not Nolan. Even Steve Jobs was hired by Alcorn, not Bushnell. Your belief was that he hired people based on their willingness to take the job and not on their abilities. Nope, never said that either. Clearly stated the people he hired were all people they already knew from Ampex. Which they all were. As far as their willingness to take it being an issue, absolutely. Jumping from a well paying job to an unknown little startup (which is what it was at the time) is a big deal. Al had to be lied to and lured away from Ampex for instance (which once again speaks volumes about Nolan's salesmanship skills). How do you know for sure Nolan didn't target specific people because of their past performance? Because we talked to all of them. As Curt already stated, we talked directly to the first 10 hires. These were the best people Nolan, Ted, and Al could get given their limited contacts - which were all from Ampex. Even the Cyan advanced research people they hooked up with by '74 were ex-Ampex people they had worked with there - hence the connection. How about where you say he had no management strategy? That he just wanted to party. Never said that either, don't recall discussing management strategy. What was clearly stated was that his management skills had Atari in almost constant bankruptcy during his 4 years before the sale, and what prompted the need for the sale. All a matter of financial record. And as far as Nolan's partying, even he talks about that (quite fondly). And even he admitted that after the sale he spent more time partying than actually running anything. Is it not possible that Nolan made a decision to have that kind of atmosphere because he thought it would help the employees be more creative? Not really, the atmosphere is more of a sign of the times - as every employee from the time has constantly stated. All of these early guys were professionally electrical engineers, not programmers and not "creative types" like what you have now. The people working manufacturing were another story, most were just local hippies/druggies tapped as cheap labor. By the way I love the eye roll you gave me. I'm sorry if these questions are beneath one of your intellect. No, just your accusations and inability to read what I stated. You're the one that started making assumptions and claims about what I "think" I know, or some sort of bias in the book before even one page has been read by anyone. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost child Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 Wow dude. Just "Wow." It is unbelievable how far you're willing to go to defend Nolan Bushnell. I strongly suspect that you have the same amount of information as I: NONE!!!!! It must be a continuation of his April Fools' joke. ... am I right, Homer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoundGammon Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 Hi Curt... In all your research about Atari, did you uncover whose idea it was to license Space Invaders for the 2600? I've always been curious... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComputerSpaceFan Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I'd like to make a prediction based on the coversation so far plus things I have heard Nolan say in interviews. Who agrees this is the way it's all going to go down: Atari/Infograms welcome Nolan to their board and look forward to that name recognition turning their gaming business around. Nolan tells Atari that the video game industry is at saturation point and they should divert their attention and focus in a new direction. Nolan checks out what the programming guys are doing and sees some young dude working in his own time on the next Facebook / Twitter and Nolan thinks to himself this is the next big thing to happen in technology. Nolan proposes the kid's idea (claiming he came up with it himself) as the new direction Atari should go and they'd be fools not to do it. Atari/Infograms thank Nolan for his time with them and they encourage him to take his ideas elsewhere. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homerwannabee Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 The last time I talked To Rob Fulop, he told me that Bushnell hired him directly. That has to be a least one small point for Bushnell, as Fulop was a pretty good choice... Definately Rob was a great Hire/Programmer Hmm, seems like this statement directly conflicts with what wgungfu is saying. No, I was responding to someone's claim that he had a talent for hiring. All the initial people were people from Ampex where he and Ted had worked, not anyone sought after or requiring some sort of head hunting process or active culling of top candidates from the valley. After that, the interviews and hiring were done by Al and others, not Nolan. Even Steve Jobs was hired by Alcorn, not Bushnell. So why would Rob Fulup say such a thing? Your post seems to indicate that Rob was not hired by Nolan. OK, this seems to be the first crack in your arguments so far. Wonder how many more cracks will be found? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homerwannabee Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 Wow dude. Just "Wow." It is unbelievable how far you're willing to go to defend Nolan Bushnell. I strongly suspect that you have the same amount of information as I: NONE!!!!! It must be a continuation of his April Fools' joke. ... am I right, Homer? Nope no April fools joke. You better be coming with some good stuff if you state things are facts. But again I am not a lawyer, and I might be totally off on this point. Cebus knows more about litigation than me, so if I am wrong it is not the biggest surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emehr Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I just gotta say I find this thread very interesting. What's even more interesting is the polarization. Myself? I couldn't give two sh*ts about crushed childhood dreams and fallen heroes. Nolan wasn't even part of Atari when our family opened our VCS on Xmas in 1980. Five year olds don't give a crap who started a company. I didn't care who made my Star Wars action figures. In fact, I don't think I ever heard Bushnell's name until I saw the box for Secret Quest in the late 80s/early 90s. Later I learned a bit more about him. I guess I should be shocked about what I'm hearing given this is the guy that named the company and got the wheels in motion, but really, it sounds like he's just another hustler/businessman. Knowing he's dipped into so many different business ventures over the years just solidifies that. It doesn't break my heart if he isn't the least bit nostalgic about any of this. It doesn't change the fact that I got an Atari in 1980 and enjoyed it all these years. The real "heroes" are the engineers that designed it and the programmers that made the games. Those are the people I respect, not a guy that lied about helping create Missile Command. That sh*t's just bogus. I don't care how much of a hero the guy is to anybody. There's no reason for that. I appreciate the fact that Curt and Marty are willing to step forward with these facts. It's nice to hear the other side of things for a change. EDIT: The Missile Command thing has been cleared up. Seems there was no deception, just misremembered facts. Apologies to Mr. Bushnell if I came off as harsh. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+jeremiahjt Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 So the first 10 hires of Nolan were all hired based simply on being from Ampex. Nolan didn't care one bit about their abilities or past performance. You interviewed all 10 and they all said that their work history had absolutely nothing to do with getting a job. So I wonder if Nolan had worked in bank and only known people from that bank would the first 10 hires be from that bank since Nolan didn't care at all about someone's abilities in programming, engineering, or anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homerwannabee Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 To be honest though. I can't really defend Nolan that much on his hires. I remember one documentary where he basically bragged about going to the unemployment office, and hiring people down there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desiv Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 My gut feeling is Curt and Marty should probably stop in this thread and leave it for the books. Yes, they are only responding, but it's coming on so strong, that I feel myself feeling more and more like there's a "chip on the shoulder" complex here. Yes, I know, they have facts and documents and I'm sure they are true, but the harder they push and belittle those who disagree (whether or not they "deserve" it), the less and less I'm interested in the story... Probably just me tho... desiv 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Rogue Posted April 23, 2010 Author Share Posted April 23, 2010 So the first 10 hires of Nolan were all hired based simply on being from Ampex. Nolan didn't care one bit about their abilities or past performance. Nope, never said that. Clearly once again: "No, I was responding to someone's claim that he had a talent for hiring. All the initial people were people from Ampex where he and Ted had worked, not anyone sought after or requiring some sort of head hunting process or active culling of top candidates from the valley." He and Ted brought in people from the easiest source they could tap, the Videofile division at Ampex where they worked. Plain and simple. Nobody working at Ampex in that division was there because they had poor abilities or past performance, i.e. that's why it was a big deal to go from a solid well paying engineering job to working at a startup in a brand new industry. Once again, that's why he had to lie to Al to get him to leave Ampex. You interviewed all 10 and they all said that their work history had absolutely nothing to do with getting a job. Never stated anything in regards to any of that, but please keep surmising and making things up about what I stated. That bank statement comparison is just silly. If Nolan had worked at bank he wouldn't be a recent engineer grad looking to do an arcade version of Spacewar, never would have met the more experienced Ted to do the work of designing it, and the two never would have started Atari. Now a better comparison would have been, had he worked at another firm would he have tried to get people from there instead of Ampex and the answer is certainly. As anyone we've interviewed from that time period stated, they were approached by Nolan and Ted because either they had known them at Ampex or had filled positions of people they used to know there. And it just so happens the Videofile division where they all worked was a division for a video storage and retrieval database system. So the engineers there all had some form of experience in making circuits that interface with a video signal/television. Something that he would not have been able to conveniently take advantage of had he and Ted worked somewhere else (forgetting even that he never would have met Ted and Computer Space would not have been done). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Rogue Posted April 23, 2010 Author Share Posted April 23, 2010 My gut feeling is Curt and Marty should probably stop in this thread and leave it for the books. Yes, they are only responding, but it's coming on so strong, that I feel myself feeling more and more like there's a "chip on the shoulder" complex here. Yes, I know, they have facts and documents and I'm sure they are true, but the harder they push and belittle those who disagree (whether or not they "deserve" it), the less and less I'm interested in the story... Probably just me tho... desiv No, you're probably right. At this point it's just getting frustrating being told I'm saying things I'm not, and the going around in circles, that I'd rather concentrate on actual work (i.e. the books). So this is about it for me. Probably the only thing I'm currently doing in relation to this yet is directly talking to Rob Fulop right now to get the correct context of his statement. From everybody I talked to at this time period for Rob (1978) they were usually simply just answering standards adds in the newspaper (which I have a few copies of) and then going through an interview process with either Al or one of the other engineering management. (Joe Decuir had a wonderful story about his interview process including a standard test of how he would rewire the building's lights to preform a specific function). That decision to hire would rest with these guys, which would then be passed on to the head who would sign off on it and it would go to HR (in the Warner days of '76 on). So the "head" being Nolan I could see that as what's meant by "hired" by him, as in signed off. Likewise I know Nolan would sit in sometimes on some of the interviews being done by Al, Steve Bristow, etc. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Rogue Posted April 23, 2010 Author Share Posted April 23, 2010 To be honest though. I can't really defend Nolan that much on his hires. I remember one documentary where he basically bragged about going to the unemployment office, and hiring people down there. That was in regards to the people they hired for manufacturing, i.e. to work the assembly line. Back in the roller rink days and just after. Hired anyone they could off the street just to have bodies putting the machines together. Came back to bite them later when they had issues of stolen merchandise and parts. Especially when the Warner buyout happened and they felt they weren't compensated for having been there the whole time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Rogue Posted April 23, 2010 Author Share Posted April 23, 2010 (edited) From everybody I talked to at this time period for Rob (1978) they were usually simply just answering standards adds in the newspaper (which I have a few copies of) and then going through an interview process with either Al or one of the other engineering management. (Joe Decuir had a wonderful story about his interview process including a standard test of how he would rewire the building's lights to preform a specific function). That decision to hire would rest with these guys, which would then be passed on to the head who would sign off on it and it would go to HR (in the Warner days of '76 on). So the "head" being Nolan I could see that as what's meant by "hired" by him, as in signed off. In relation to this, while I'm waiting for Rob to get back to me, I did just find this interview that also puts the "hiring" in the context I stated above: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=11832 Specifically the passage: “Atari was a dream job, given my inclination to use computer programming to make some sort of game,” he enthuses. “I was hired on the spot by Steve Calfee, who at that time was the software manager for the coin operated games division. My summer project involved making a sound effects editor for pinball machines. It was my first project using 6502 assembly code, which was the basis of all the Atari projects I would later do.” Edited April 23, 2010 by wgungfu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Run PC Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 (edited) That is not correct Atari did not account for 65% of Warner's income. At its peak, Atari accounted for a third of Warner's annual income. Nope, it's correct. Per "Master of the Game: Steve Ross and the Creation of Time Warner" (pg 167) for example - "By 1982 it would be producing more than of of WCI's 4 billion in revenues and over 65 percent of it's profits." Atari itself accounted for a 350% growth within Warner in just one year alone. Are you deliberately leaving out part of the quote? Fill in the blank: "By 1982 it would be producing more than ____________ of of WCI's 4 billion in revenues and over 65 percent of it's profits." The answer is a third of Warner's income/revenue/ Edited April 23, 2010 by Run PC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cebus Capucinis Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 That's funny because I'm getting the feeling more and more like Curt & Marty are friggin' awesome. 1 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