Official firmware update?

[davy]

now i know why i did not work the usb cable inside was still connected

 

so it has no point off updating if v2.0.0 is old version

 

i have exp r6

 

maybe stupid question when is r7 comming ?

Edited October 19 by davy

[AtariYMás009]

35 minutes ago, davy said:

maybe stupid question when is r7 comming ?

Is not a stupid question, @raz0redsaid that It'll be released soon.

I thougt that the version at atari's page would be that but we already know that is not.

The 1.1x-r7 has a menu to select the video refresh rate of PAL games beetween 50/60hz to slove the problems that PAL users were having with their TVs' processing of 50hz signals

[John Stamos Mullet]

7 hours ago, Fred_M said:

Because you often create confusion with a lot of your remarks and create so much room for misinterpretation.

So now I'm responsible for other people misinterpreting the things I post (that are 100% factual)? No, that's not how this works. Everyone here is responsible for their own actions and statements.

 

I don't create confusion. I post factual comments, and correct people when they post incorrect, factless speculation. I have some knowledge of things that are happening behind the scenes that aren't public yet that have been shared with me by people who reached out to me, not the other way around.

 

I made one thread that had a vague, but POSITIVE message (based on info that I thought people here would eventually enjoy) as a means to try to get people excited, and instead I get the same 3 or 4 constantly negative, bickering goons trying to ruin it and posting all kinds of misleading, miserable complaints about Atari. All I try to do here is be a force for GOOD, and keep the conversation factual and positive. Some people appreciate it, but it seems others can't help themselves but to continually attack, and complain, and share incorrect, false information and biased speculation.

 

It's almost as if some people here are intentionally trying to ruin this line of products because they didn't get what they wanted (illegal ROM player) or just don't want to see Atari/Plaion succeed. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone who posts on ATARIage.com would want to see Atari fail. The reality is, it is much harder for Atari and Plaion to accomplish their goals and get updates out and new products to market, if the core audience on their customer feedback forum is dominated by a bunch of whining, nasty, fight-picking miserable jerks, whose apparent goal is to cause them to fail and discontinue the Plus line of products. 

 

 

[+Fred_M]

44 minutes ago, John Stamos Mullet said:

So now I'm responsible for other people misinterpreting the things I post (that are 100% factual)? No, that's not how this works. Everyone here is responsible for their own actions and statements.

 

I don't create confusion. I post factual comments, and correct people when they post incorrect, factless speculation. I have some knowledge of things that are happening behind the scenes that aren't public yet that have been shared with me by people who reached out to me, not the other way around.

 

I made one thread that had a vague, but POSITIVE message (based on info that I thought people here would eventually enjoy) as a means to try to get people excited, and instead I get the same 3 or 4 constantly negative, bickering goons trying to ruin it and posting all kinds of misleading, miserable complaints about Atari. All I try to do here is be a force for GOOD, and keep the conversation factual and positive. Some people appreciate it, but it seems others can't help themselves but to continually attack, and complain, and share incorrect, false information and biased speculation.

 

It's almost as if some people here are intentionally trying to ruin this line of products because they didn't get what they wanted (illegal ROM player) or just don't want to see Atari/Plaion succeed. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone who posts on ATARIage.com would want to see Atari fail. The reality is, it is much harder for Atari and Plaion to accomplish their goals and get updates out and new products to market, if the core audience on their customer feedback forum is dominated by a bunch of whining, nasty, fight-picking miserable jerks, whose apparent goal is to cause them to fail and discontinue the Plus line of products. 

 

 

Pfffffffffffffffffffff whatever, John Stamos Mullet: defender of Atari and positivity......

[John Stamos Mullet]

8 minutes ago, Fred_M said:

Pfffffffffffffffffffff whatever, John Stamos Mullet: defender of Atari and positivity......

Well, you can ask Ben if you like.

[+Philsan]

The firmware I downloaded today from Atari's website is definitely not Rev 6.

I think it's Rev 5.

 

I just checked with my game LEM (PAL60 version) and one row of terrain is missing.

The problem was in Rev 5 and was solved with Rev 6.

Colors were wrong with previous firmware releases therefore I think Atari's website Rev 2.0 is AtariAge Rev 5.

[+Fred_M]

6 hours ago, davy said:

now i know why i did not work the usb cable inside was still connected

I am just curious. Why did you connect an usb cable to the inside usb connection?

[AtariYMás009]

1 hour ago, Philsan said:

The firmware I downloaded today from Atari's website is definitely not Rev 6.

I think it's Rev 5.

 

I just checked with my game LEM (PAL60 version) and one row of terrain is missing.

The problem was in Rev 5 and was solved with Rev 6.

Colors were wrong with previous firmware releases therefore I think Atari's website Rev 2.0 is AtariAge Rev 5.

Thanks for the Discovery!

[Ben from Plaion]

1 hour ago, Philsan said:

The firmware I downloaded today from Atari's website is definitely not Rev 6.

I think it's Rev 5.

 

I just checked with my game LEM (PAL60 version) and one row of terrain is missing.

The problem was in Rev 5 and was solved with Rev 6.

Colors were wrong with previous firmware releases therefore I think Atari's website Rev 2.0 is AtariAge Rev 5.

I'll have to check on Monday when I asked Chris to make the boot screen show 2.0 official version, this was a few months ago because I was manufacturing restocks of 2600+. I thought it was 1.6 IMG with rev 3 EXE but might of been 1.5. I can't remember off the top of my head.

 

Of çourse the aim is to have any 'official' version same as the most recent stable exp version. But it's all a nonsense really as EXP is the only place any development is made for the 2600+.

 

 

[infinite.pies]

2 hours ago, Philsan said:

The firmware I downloaded today from Atari's website is definitely not Rev 6.

I think it's Rev 5.

 

I just checked with my game LEM (PAL60 version) and one row of terrain is missing.

The problem was in Rev 5 and was solved with Rev 6.

Colors were wrong with previous firmware releases therefore I think Atari's website Rev 2.0 is AtariAge Rev 5.

Thanks for that, I haven't installed yet, so now I know I can just ignore this one.

 

It's a shame the firmware numbering isn't just following a consistent numbering series instead of having independently numbered official and experimental versions. Simple sequential version numbers, either with or without a "beta" label, could be easier to follow. Please take that as a suggestion and not a criticism - like most people, I'm seriously impressed with  the quality of the work that's being delivered here.

[PowerDubs]

2 hours ago, Ben from Plaion said:

a few months ago because I was manufacturing restocks of 2600+

 

 

Soo...  I'll take that as confirmation that we are well past 60k made....

 

 

 

[raz0red]

The Atari 2.0 builds (dumper and firmware) are from June 23rd (2024).

 

They don't line up to an experimental release exactly. They were created with the current state of the code when requested.

 

Just to be clear, the experimental builds will always be ahead of the official releases. If they request a build, we deliver whatever the latest is, and they go through their testing process, etc. We simply post experimental builds whenever we have what seems to be a stable release, without a tremendous amount of testing (that is performed by the community). This is the primary difference between an "official" and an "experimental" build.

 

Also, to clarify why it is called "experimental" as that seems to raise a lot of questions. The experimental builds were started at a time when Atari/Plaion had their own "beta" and "official" releases. So, having two betas would have been even more confusing. We started experimental as we wanted to increase performance and compatibility, and knew there may be regressions. At this point, we could probably call it beta as that seems more appropriate, but again, that is an Atari/Plaion call. 

 

Thanks,

Chris.

Edited October 20 by raz0red

[davy]

17 hours ago, Fred_M said:

I am just curious. Why did you connect an usb cable to the inside usb connection?

to connect usb otg kabel and then powered usb hub and then few more things like usb stick with PCUAE on it Grtz Wizart

Edited October 20 by davy

[John Stamos Mullet]

4 hours ago, davy said:

to connect usb otg kabel and then powered usb hub and then few more things like usb stick with PCUAE on it Grtz Wizart

I don’t believe PCUAE stuff works on the experimental firmwares since the Retro arch front end is removed.

[Trebor]

Best of both worlds/wording:

 

Experimental Beta 2600+ Firmware and Dumper Builds

 

Retain the historic "experimental" connotation and call them "beta" as well.   The prior beta build thread has long since been unpinned and locked, pointing to the above linked thread instead.

 

For emphasis:

21 hours ago, Ben from Plaion said:

Of çourse the aim is to have any 'official' version same as the most recent stable exp version. But it's all a nonsense really as EXP is the only place any development is made for the 2600+.

15 hours ago, raz0red said:

The Atari 2.0 builds (dumper and firmware) are from June 23rd (2024).

 

They don't line up to an experimental release exactly. They were created with the current state of the code when requested.

 

Just to be clear, the experimental builds will always be ahead of the official releases. If they request a build, we deliver whatever the latest is, and they go through their testing process, etc. We simply post experimental builds whenever we have what seems to be a stable release, without a tremendous amount of testing (that is performed by the community). This is the primary difference between an "official" and an "experimental" build.

"Official Atari" builds = "Experimental AtariAge" builds source.

 

Ideally, "Official Atari" builds are close to more recent "Experimental AtariAge" builds, although they can be a few builds behind.

[davy]

21 hours ago, John Stamos Mullet said:

I don’t believe PCUAE stuff works on the experimental firmwares since the Retro arch front end is removed.

No works fine

[tradyblix]

On 10/20/2024 at 1:12 PM, Trebor said:

Best of both worlds/wording:

 

Experimental Beta 2600+ Firmware and Dumper Builds

 

Retain the historic "experimental" connotation and call them "beta" as well.   The prior beta build thread has long since been unpinned and locked, pointing to the above linked thread instead.

 

For emphasis:

"Official Atari" builds = "Experimental AtariAge" builds source.

 

Ideally, "Official Atari" builds are close to more recent "Experimental AtariAge" builds, although they can be a few builds behind.

So I've been playing Atari 2600 games. 60 of them. rare ones, 7800 ones All year with that so called "experimental" build.

 

Unless there's major issues that aren't on the original release or 2.0 release in r6 I don't know about, I have no idea why people still call it experimental.

 

It will just discourage people who are risk averse from picking it over "official" builds even tho you'll have a better machine if you pick r6.