What is the Atari ST like?

[Van Halbgott]

Out of curiosity, I ask about the system in case it would be worth collecting for depending on its features and software lineup.

 

I also consider the Atari 400 as my next computer if even possible. 

[oracle_jedi]

What are you looking to do with your Atari ST?  Knowing what you are hoping to get out of your ST retro experience would help inform an answer to what are they like.  

 

The Atari ST is part of the mid-80s generation of 16-bit personal computers that, along with the Macintosh, Amiga, Apple IIGS, Acorn Archimedes, IBM PC and others, brought 16-bit computing, often with a GUI interface, to the masses.

 

Most STs were used for games, and there is a vast library of 16-bit games for the ST.  You'll find most of the mid/late 80s classics such as Prince of Persia, Lemmings, Sim City, Cannon Fodder, Outrun, Secret of Monkey Island etc etc.  But to be blunt, if gaming is your thing, the Amiga has almost every title the ST has, and with much better sound.

 

The ST also had a good selection of productivity software including state-of-art desktop publishing.  If that interests you then good, but for myself, I am not going to write any documents on an ST today when I have MS Office on a Windows 11 machine right next to it.  The ST excelled at music given it built-in MIDI interface, and I guess if retro MIDI sequencing is your thing, then the ST might be a great option.  There are now some neat Raspberry Pi based MIDI sequencers that can emulate a Roland MT-32. 

 

Programming wise, there was a good selection of programming languages including C, Pascal and 68k assembler.  Modern tools exist to accelerate and simplify the process.

 

The ST enjoys great HW and SW support from a generous community.  Most of the old games have been cracked and dumped meaning you can easily download most of the library of titles.

 

Build quality is overall quite good but the mechanical bits (floppy disk drives) are well past their expected life spans.  Keyboards are mushy, but their are easy options to improve them and give a more positive feel.

 

If you're still interested, I would suggest a 1040ST with a Gotek solid-state floppy as a starting point.  The STE machines add some nice features but little software exploited it.  Older 520ST models are too limited and will lead to cable spaghetti.  Mega, TT and Falcons are too expensive unless you know you want one.  The Ultra SATAN hard-disk system is a nice add-on if you bore of floppy disk images.

 

And you'll need an RGB monitor able to handle 15Khz or equivalent.  The Atari mono monitor is also nice for hi-res work, but was best suited to productivity rather than games.

 

As for the Atari 400.  I love mine, but if you are new to the Atari 8bit, then get an 800XL or 130XE first.  They are much more capable than the limited 400.  

 

 

[Clint Thompson]

I would argue that in order of importance, the ST was or is most beneficial for music first and foremost. Followed by games, onto productivity stuff and so on,. which isn't realistic in modern times.

 

While I'm not saying there aren't good games for the ST, if gaming is really where you're wanting to go, just go with an Amiga something or other. This is coming from someone who only uses multiple ST computers for music applications but have used them a few times for gaming. But in the end, I don't feel it's ideal for games given there are better options. Or go with the 8-bit Atari computer line but why a 400? You would really be limiting yourself for no good reason. 800 is the best imo... or one of the XE variants with do the memory upgrade.

 

For MIDI and music production though, nothing beats an ST. I don't feel the STe is worth double the cost of a typical ST for what it gives you in the end.

[Zogging Hell]

5 hours ago, Clint Thompson said:

While I'm not saying there aren't good games for the ST, if gaming is really where you're wanting to go, just go with an Amiga something or other. This is coming from someone who only uses multiple ST computers for music applications but have used them a few times for gaming. But in the end, I don't feel it's ideal for games given there are better options. Or go with the 8-bit Atari computer line but why a 400? You would really be limiting yourself for no good reason. 800 is the best imo... or one of the XE variants with do the memory upgrade.

Blimey, each to their own, but I would not for any money take an Atari 8bit computer over the ST for gaming :) . It is super short on big titles of the mid to late eighties. If you like very early arcade games it might be a good choice, and there are some good exclusives, but I would still take a Speccy, Amstrad CPC or especially the C64 over it every day of the week, as the library just isn't there. Not saying it is not a good platform (all platforms are good platforms ) or anything like that (I have a 800, 800xl and 65XE) but if ever there was a computer that has better gaming alternatives on other platforms it is the 8bit Atari sadly. This is not the fault of the hardware, but the big name support was really lacking.

IMO the ST is a great gaming computer for certain niches, like Dungeon Crawlers, strategy/ god games or early 3D, but not so much for horizontal scrolling games or one on one beat 'em ups, in which case you will prefer a 16bit console.

[Hwlngmad]

On 7/3/2024 at 6:47 PM, Van Halbgott said:

Out of curiosity, I ask about the system in case it would be worth collecting for depending on its features and software lineup.

 

I also consider the Atari 400 as my next computer if even possible. 

Atari 8-bit computer wise, definitely I would recommend either the 800XL or 130XE.  The 800 is also not a bad option, but the other two are probably the better choices.  16-bit computer wise, I would recommend you go with what @oracle_jedi outlined, which is getting a 1040 ST and pairing it with an UltraSatan or Gotek.  Also, either one will get you into those machines robust gaming, productivity, and utility scenes.  I know that @pjedavison can testify to what all both ecosystems have to offer.

[CommodoreDecker]

Depends on what you want to do - real music development, general computing, games, a bit of hodgepodge to show off on a bookshelf as part of a collection, etc. I use real hardware, especially ST as the emulators I'd found are "meh" for the most part. And because I grew up with the 8-bits... I was an Amiga guy back in the day but have grown to adore the ST and its strengths over the years. Plus, that design is as timeless as it is 80s.  Like how the best disco music is disco yet feels futuristic and timeless. Which reminds, I need to pop in an ABBA or Donna Summer CD - anyone that can be of their time yet transcend it simultaneously is the sort of must-listen music that needs to be heard, but I digress... 

 

If you're only looking to collect, any model in good physical condition will do. If you're wanting to use it, know how well it was kept in storage (temperature and humidity controlled, preferably in a plastic bag with silica gel packet to minimize rusting). Capacitors will likely need to be replaced as the electrolytic capacitors do start to leak, piddle, and lose efficacy over time and that leads to dirtier power that causes system instability or even irreparable damage.  That's why I prefer the 800XL for collecting - the microchips are all socketed. No XE, and few ST computers have sockets and even then it's not for every chip. The XE boards are also a bit more fragile and can easily be damaged when desoldering or resoldering. 

 

P.S. For the 8-bit computer, if you see an 'ingot power supply', use it as a paperweight and get a better power supply.  The ingot, a medium-sized trapezoid of death, is notorious for causing short circuits that fry the computer.  Not cool for vintage, hard to replace, and precious circuitry for sure.  

 

 

(Yep, the babbletehon doesn't end on that!)

 

To my understanding, and correct me where I'm wrong 😇,  the ST was designed as a low-cost entry into the then-new 16-bit personal computing realm, to compete against the early-era Mac computers and the 8086/80286 PC.  Adding MIDI was one of the best happenstances, as the ST computer became a de facto standard for numerous music producers.  But for general computing - like word processing, games, even emulating Macs or PCs if one owned an Atari but worked in an office where Macs or PCs reigned - the ST held its own. Indeed, it ran Mac software faster than actual Macs due to the faster processor.  Even some games, like some 3D racers, run faster on the ST than the Amiga, and FPS counts for a lot in those 3D games.  Note that Atari's slogan for the new era was "Power Without the Price"...

 

...Atari - now purchased by the Tramiels (former of Commodore!) after the video game crash - was hemorrhaging money, and as the original deal with (what became the Amiga computer's custom chips) fell through, Atari had to scramble to get something - anything - out the door. The ST would adress the new, forward-thinking technology.  Meanwhile, a lot of 8-bit custom chips were handing around - these would be repackaged into the Atari 65XE, 130XE, and a year or so later, the XEGS (the only Atari to have a detached keyboard and is the only Atari to look more late-80s than the late-80s had!)

 

The ST was something of a success at the time, with a very stylish design, decent graphics output, an older-era Yamaha sound chip circa 1979(?) as that had cost less to procure.  Its success got Atari out of the red. 

 

As to the Atari 400 - that's where it gets real fun.  The 400 (and 800) were sold in 1979 and were a leap ahead of the competition, thanks to custom video and audio chips.  The custom chip designer, Jay Miner, went to develop the custom chips that would end up in the aforementioned Amiga.  Sadly, as good as Atari was under Warner communications (for which the box artwork for both 400 computer and 2600 game console are legendary), it was still seen as "games machine". 

 

The 800XL was the most popular model.  Having been the official computer (sponsor) for the 1984 Olympics didn't hurt, either. That said, the C64 was pretty much entrenched in the home computer market by then...

 

Then came the Commodore 64 in 1982. Slightly better resolution and arguably next-generation sound, which sounded great depending on how well it was programmed to take advantage of its octave range, the Atari may have still had a far larger color palette despite a couple extra jaggy lines, but the C64 wasn't prejudiced as "games machine" and pretty much won the battle. Then came the video game crash (due in part to computers replacing consoles), the kerfuffle at Commodore and Atari...

 

The funniest part is, the Atari 8-bit line (esp. the XL series) generally had a greater modern and stylized flair to it compared to the C64, yet the Atari ST looked far better than the Amiga's bland beige blop.  

 

 

P.S.  I do live with emulators for STE games. The hardware, while nicer, wasn't taken advantage of much at the time, and the hardware is too expensive nowadays.  Note that as working units become lesser in number, they're also going to be harder to fix...

Edited July 19 by CommodoreDecker

[roots.genoa]

Like others said, I would not recommend the ST for gaming. It was my first video game system and yet I have almost no nostalgia for it. There were a few good games I liked, sure, but most of them are available on Amiga and usually in better form, and these days you even have access to the original arcade games for instance. What makes it hard to come back to them are the loading times, the single-button joystick (that ruined a lot of games imho, not just SF2), and sometimes the slowness compared to other systems.

[English Invader]

I'm that elusive rarity - an ST Gamer and I use the system almost entirely for that purpose.  There are great games on the system but you will need to be selective and you'll need an entirely different taste in games to that required for the more mainstream fare on the Amiga.  If you like quirky and idiosyncratic games, the ST is for you.  If you want Lemmings and Cannon Fodder, you'll want the Amiga - both of these games are available on the ST but your experience will be heavily compromised.

 

There are a couple of misconceptions in your OP that I feel need to be addressed:

 

1)  The Atari ST has several different models and configurations.  Buying an Atari ST is not the same as buying a NES.  If you buy the wrong ST for your needs, all you'll have to show for it is a lot of problems.

 

2)  I think you will have a very limited experience if you approach the ST completely from a collector's point of view.  A stock 512k ST and floppy disks from eBay will get very frustrating, very quickly.  You will need to start thinking of yourself as a Computer User and that's when the ST will open itself up to you.

 

3) You won't make it on disk originals.  A digital solution is essential to getting any worthwhile use out of an ST in 2024.  The two main options are a Gotek floppy drive emulator or an UltraSatan external hard drive.  You will need to do a lot of due diligence to work out which one is right for you.

Edited July 19 by English Invader

[CommodoreDecker]

On 7/19/2024 at 3:04 PM, roots.genoa said:

Like others said, I would not recommend the ST for gaming. It was my first video game system and yet I have almost no nostalgia for it. There were a few good games I liked, sure, but most of them are available on Amiga and usually in better form, and these days you even have access to the original arcade games for instance. What makes it hard to come back to them are the loading times, the single-button joystick (that ruined a lot of games imho, not just SF2), and sometimes the slowness compared to other systems.

 

Having revisited Atari8, the load times are oddly charming and relaxing.  The ST no less so, it's just part of the experience. It also allows a nice potty break if needed. I had nostalgia for the Amiga and still do. The ST grew on me over time, not ever having one at the time, and for general purpose uses they were really on the mark.

 

Definitely agreed; the Amiga was better for sound and graphics, true, and I'll concede there are older games I avoid on the ST while wishing the Amiga chipset was in the ST's glorious case. The ST did it well enough at the time, especially for the price as that's what home users had to contend with the most, and Amiga's drawback was the price -- for the overall-beefier hardware. And yet, 3D racing games still feels faster on the ST.  That said, any game from Psygnosis unequivocally means "Don't bother with anything but the Amiga".  Even the Super Nintendo didn't match up with horsepower and resolution when it came out, though it did come close with sound. But all that was ~5 years after the A1000s launch, and even then Amiga still held its own... until VGA and SoundBlaster, but even then one can still make a claim for overall computing requirements - Amiga more often did loads in 512KB and a 1.8MHz CPU whereas yon PC with the extra hardware needed 1024+KB, a 10MHz x86 processor minimum, et al.  Obviously, x86 technology would overtake Motorola's eventually, but Motorola of the time seemed to have more going for it.

 

On 7/19/2024 at 5:47 PM, English Invader said:

I'm that elusive rarity - an ST Gamer and I use the system almost entirely for that purpose.  There are great games on the system but you will need to be selective and you'll need an entirely different taste in games to that required for the more mainstream fare on the Amiga.  If you like quirky and idiosyncratic games, the ST is for you.  If you want Lemmings and Cannon Fodder, you'll want the Amiga - both of these games are available on the ST but your experience will be heavily compromised.

 

Quirky and idiosyncratic are great! A novel and good gaming experience overcomes any nitpicks. 

 

On 7/19/2024 at 5:47 PM, English Invader said:

There are a couple of misconceptions in your OP that I feel need to be addressed:

 

1)  The Atari ST has several different models and configurations.  Buying an Atari ST is not the same as buying a NES.  If you buy the wrong ST for your needs, all you'll have to show for it is a lot of problems.

 

Very true. Even upgrading can be a hassle. But upgrading, and all the yelling and tantrums involved, does deliver the authentic original experience, too. That's why aiming for a Mega4 for productivity use beyond basic applications and Mac emulator, or a 1040ST for gaming, seems best. Or both, Atari models had the perfect look.

 

On 7/19/2024 at 5:47 PM, English Invader said:

2)  I think you will have a very limited experience if you approach the ST completely from a collector's point of view.  A stock 512k ST and floppy disks from eBay will get very frustrating, very quickly.  You will need to start thinking of yourself as a Computer User and that's when the ST will open itself up to you.

 

3) You won't make it on disk originals.  A digital solution is essential to getting any worthwhile use out of an ST in 2024.  The two main options are a Gotek floppy drive emulator or an UltraSatan external hard drive.  You will need to do a lot of due diligence to work out which one is right for you.

 

^^this, especially. Even on the Amiga or Atari8, Gotek or equivalent are must-haves. If only because the original disk material won't last forever. Still amazed at how 5.25" SD disks hold up better, even knowing the density of the magnetic domains in 3.5" are why they fail faster. Even then, 360KB 3.5" drives still seem to hold up better. For now.

 

 

[zzip]

On 7/19/2024 at 2:42 PM, CommodoreDecker said:

...Atari - now purchased by the Tramiels (former of Commodore!) after the video game crash - was hemorrhaging money, and as the original deal with (what became the Amiga computer's custom chips) fell through, Atari had to scramble to get something - anything - out the door. The ST would adress the new, forward-thinking technology.  Meanwhile, a lot of 8-bit custom chips were handing around - these would be repackaged into the Atari 65XE, 130XE, and a year or so later, the XEGS (the only Atari to have a detached keyboard and is the only Atari to look more late-80s than the late-80s had!)

That timeline is a bit off.   When Tramiel separated from Commodore,  he brought some Commodore engineers with him, notably Shiraz Shivji and set out to build a low-cost 16-bit computer to hopefully repeat the C64 success.   They started a company named Tramel Technology and the computer they were building eventually became the ST.

 

In the Summer of 84, the opportunity to buy Atari came up.   Len Tramiel said they were mostly interested in it for the name,  it was one of the most well-known brands at the time.   Much easier to sell an Atari computer than a Tramel Tech computer! 

 

It sounds like the Tramiels may not have been aware of the Atari/Amiga deal until after purchase?   The deal happened late in Warner's ownership.   And it was a loan to Amiga that if not repaid on time, meant that Atari would gain control of the company.  The Amiga people did not want to work for Jack Tramiel, so they scrambled to find a deal to payback the loan, and they ended up selling to Commodore instead.

 

So the ST didn't happen because Atari didn't get the Amiga, it was already in progress.   It's not clear what would have happened if Atari did get the Amiga chips,  would they be used to enhance the ST?  Continue the 1850XLD project?  Or the Amiga-based console Atari had been designing?    Or maybe they would just sit in limbo and never get released like the AMY sound chip

[CommodoreDecker]

On 8/5/2024 at 10:03 AM, zzip said:

That timeline is a bit off.   When Tramiel separated from Commodore,  he brought some Commodore engineers with him, notably Shiraz Shivji and set out to build a low-cost 16-bit computer to hopefully repeat the C64 success.   They started a company named Tramel Technology and the computer they were building eventually became the ST.

 

In the Summer of 84, the opportunity to buy Atari came up.   Len Tramiel said they were mostly interested in it for the name,  it was one of the most well-known brands at the time.   Much easier to sell an Atari computer than a Tramel Tech computer! 

 

It sounds like the Tramiels may not have been aware of the Atari/Amiga deal until after purchase?   The deal happened late in Warner's ownership.   And it was a loan to Amiga that if not repaid on time, meant that Atari would gain control of the company.  The Amiga people did not want to work for Jack Tramiel, so they scrambled to find a deal to payback the loan, and they ended up selling to Commodore instead.

 

So the ST didn't happen because Atari didn't get the Amiga, it was already in progress.   It's not clear what would have happened if Atari did get the Amiga chips,  would they be used to enhance the ST?  Continue the 1850XLD project?  Or the Amiga-based console Atari had been designing?    Or maybe they would just sit in limbo and never get released like the AMY sound chip

 

Thanks much for the corrections!

 

Still is a "what could have been" if the ST was the Amiga in a proper case with more professional-looking GUI.  Even then, the devil's in the quality of the software running on the OS.  No killer app means no adoption of said computer. But the looks (either graphics rendering and/or case) can have an effect as well as the price of the machine.  Tramiel was right about taking the "power without the price" angle. The 8-bit line lasting as long as it had as pretty impressive for sure, especially considering competition like the C64, Apple 2GS, etc.)

 

[zzip]

On 8/17/2024 at 11:52 AM, CommodoreDecker said:

Tramiel was right about taking the "power without the price" angle. The 8-bit line lasting as long as it had as pretty impressive for sure, especially considering competition like the C64, Apple 2GS, etc.)

Yes, the "Power without the price" definitely worked for the C64.   But I suppose it's one thing when the computer costs under $300 and different when your "power without the price" computer costs $1000 (like a color ST did in 1985 dollars).   I suppose when you shell out that much, then broad compatibility becomes more important, which is why the clone market took off.