Atari 7800 module for the Atari 5200

[Henry Lee]

Was this hardware completed?

Could it be done today?

 

wondering..

 

 

 

http://www.atarimuseum.com/videogames/cons...7800/7800-20th/

 

[JB]

It never made it to production.

 

And it could be done today, if you had the parts.

Heck, a PS2->5200 adapter could be done today. All that is is a 7800 feeding audio and video into the AV in lines of the 5200 cart slot(that were added for the 2600 adapter).

[bjk7382]

And the word "Wirewrapped" on the picture refers to a rats nest of wires on the inside connecting everything. So they probably didn't even have the circuit boards for it made.

[Henry Lee]

Thanks for your answers. I guess we should leave it to history.

But It would of been great for 5200 owners, if it was actually released in 85.

My Pa was thinking of getting me a 7800 to replace my 5200.

But he waited a year and got me an Amiga instead .

Edited May 19, 2006 by Henry Lee

[Ferris]

It likely would have cost nearly as much as the 7800 itself had it been released.

[phaxda]

I believe I paid nearly as much for my adapter as a full 2600 would have cost, back in the day. I'm not sure, but I remember that buying a 2600 instead was a definite consideration.

 

I remember, however, that an "adapter" was a much easier sell than "another system" to my parents, even though I was paying for it myself. They always thought I spent my money on somewhat frivolous things.

 

Now, of course, I have the adapter and about 3 2600s and the 7800. This is what happens when you are denied certain things for so long...

[HammR25]

Of course it was frivolous. That's what being a kid is all about.

Edited May 21, 2006 by HammR25

[Atariboy]

Where are things like the difficulty switches on it? On the top? Did it have controller ports for 2600/7800 controllers?

[Paranoid]

So... it would also effectively be a 2600 module for the 5200 too?

 

So you could play 5200, 2600 and 7800 games all on one console.

 

Cool.

[Bruce Tomlin]

As I recall from looking at the schematic, it could play 2600 games (after all, the 7800 uses a TIA for sound), but since it didn't have a boot ROM, you had to manually flip a mode switch to select between 2600 and 7800 games. There was no reason it couldn't have a boot ROM, but this was probably based on an earlier version of the 7800/3600 design.

[JB]

As I recall from looking at the schematic, it could play 2600 games (after all, the 7800 uses a TIA for sound), but since it didn't have a boot ROM, you had to manually flip a mode switch to select between 2600 and 7800 games. There was no reason it couldn't have a boot ROM, but this was probably based on an earlier version of the 7800/3600 design.

Wouldn't they have HAD to add the boot later? Leaving it open would blow a major hole in their boot key security system.

[jbanes]

Wouldn't they have HAD to add the boot later? Leaving it open would blow a major hole in their boot key security system.

You mean the "major hole" like the Euro 7800?

[jpfalcon2003]

It would be cool to play all games for one system, but I don't like the bulky 5200. It would be much better if the 7800 could play 5200 games instead.

[Ferris]

I'm sure they could have developed a board off of the same principals but it would likely have been a cartridge almost the size of the 7800 itself.

 

Unless I'm completely wrong in which it wouldnt be.

[JB]

Wouldn't they have HAD to add the boot later? Leaving it open would blow a major hole in their boot key security system.

You mean the "major hole" like the Euro 7800?

Yeah. Except it'd be in America, on 60Hz NTSC systems.

[Bruce Tomlin]

Wouldn't they have HAD to add the boot later? Leaving it open would blow a major hole in their boot key security system.

Clearly they hadn't decided to add it at the time they designed the module. And as someone else has pointed out, they never bothered with the security check on the PAL version.

[JB]

Wouldn't they have HAD to add the boot later? Leaving it open would blow a major hole in their boot key security system.

Clearly they hadn't decided to add it at the time they designed the module.

Indeed.

 

And as someone else has pointed out, they never bothered with the security check on the PAL version.

That was due to legal restrictions, as I understand it. They COULDN'T export the lockout scheme, and the US was the primary market anyways, making the benefits of a second lockout for european systems less signifigant.

On the other hand, a single exportable lockout would have served them better. It would've still made unlicensed development difficult(albeit not AS difficult), and done so globally.

[Paranoid]

The security algorhthm used on the 7800 was so complex it faced DOD export restrictions?!?

 

*snort*!

 

I mean, it makes a certain sense. Why have a key there if any kid with a PC can crack it...

[jbanes]

The security algorhthm used on the 7800 was so complex it faced DOD export restrictions?!?

 

The DOD security restrictions were extremely tight up until the mid-to-late 90's. Anything that wasn't easily crackable was considered a "controlled munition" and was illegal to export. For this reason, Netscape shipped with 40-bit encryption, and the author of PGP butt heads with the DOJ. Eventually, the restrictions on encryption were lifted. The key factor was that international banking and trade was becoming increasingly insecure despite the fact that other countries already had the necessary encryption technology.

 

What's interesting is that many European countries retained strict laws on the import of strong crytography, even after the US backed down. So if the European version of the 7800 had been released in the late 90's, it probably still would have shipped without crypto.

 

I haven't kept up on the topic, but I believe that the EU regulations are slowly loosening the controls on European crytography. A breakdown of crypto-law by nation can be found on the Crypto Law Survey website.

[ziggystar]

I'd pay good money for one of these adapters. If anything, because it's slick. And another, to only have one console hooked up.

 

Besides, being a 5200 fan, it would allow me to collect for the other systems a little more "justified". I know it sounds silly but, if you can build one, PM me with a price!

 

[JB]

The security algorhthm used on the 7800 was so complex it faced DOD export restrictions?!?

 

*snort*!

 

I mean, it makes a certain sense. Why have a key there if any kid with a PC can crack it...

It's an absurdly long key even by modern standards. And the sheer length of the key was what got it killed, not the complexity of the algorythm.

As jbanes said, the DOD had serious restrictions on encryption exportation. Key length was a biggie.

[Eckhard Stolberg]

It's an absurdly long key even by modern standards. And the sheer length of the key was what got it killed, not the complexity of the algorythm.

As jbanes said, the DOD had serious restrictions on encryption exportation. Key length was a biggie.

But the 7800 doesn't encrypt anything. It's only validates a signature key. And almost all NTSC 7800 consoles were made in Asia. How could Atari do that, if there were export restrictions for the boot ROM code? Also the Asteroids game in the boot ROM is compatible with PAL and NTSC consoles. It even checks which type of console it is running on. So Atari must have planned to use the new boot ROM with NTSC 7800s as well.

 

The PAL 7800 was released in late 1989. I suppose the Tramiels just thought that it would be cheaper to have a build-in game on a slightly bigger boot ROM than to have a seperate pack-in game cartridge. Also in 1989 having to keep developers away from writing games for the 7800 probably wasn't much of a problem for Atari anymore.

 

 

Ciao, Eckhard Stolberg

[jbanes]

But the 7800 doesn't encrypt anything. It's only validates a signature key.

Which requires the use of encryption software to verify. Now, it's unlikely that Atari placed a generic encryption/decryption routine in the ROM (for space saving purposes, at the very least), but the key checking software would still have been considered munititions. Which would have gotten our Fearless Leaders just as worried as when Saddam Hussien imported a bunch of PS2s because he heard he could make a Beowulf cluster of them. (That obviously worked well. )

 

And almost all NTSC 7800 consoles were made in Asia. How could Atari do that, if there were export restrictions for the boot ROM code?

 

Hard to say. However, there was an amusing little workaround to the export restriction laws. Apparently, if you printed it out on paper and physically carried the source to another country, you wouldn't violate US law. My memory is a bit fuzzy on the precise circumstances that needed to take place to use this loophole, but it's possible that Atari did something similar.

 

Or possibly, they simply ignored the laws and never got caught.

 

Also in 1989 having to keep developers away from writing games for the 7800 probably wasn't much of a problem for Atari anymore.

[Paranoid]

I think they must make exceptions for the manufacturing process... because Intel has had fabs in other countries producing restricted technology for a *loooooong* time. I do know that internally, Intel is *very* sensitive to these issues, both at domestic and in foreign plants. Just as an example, I was in the cafeteria once, and an Indian guy was walking around taking photographs. 4 guards came up on him, took his camera, and literally pulled the film out of it right there. This is in the Cafeteria at an Intel site that is primarily global IT operations, mind you. Not a lot of proprietary trade secrets at Intel Folsom, on a relative scale, outside of some Flash development.

 

I always got the impression that Intel is allowed to import restricted technology, but held *very* accountable for the security of that information which is considered vital to "national security". Kind of a balance between Government allowing domestic business to prosper unhindered while also letting those companies know that they're on a VERY short leash.

[Zonie]

I think they must make exceptions for the manufacturing process... because Intel has had fabs in other countries producing restricted technology for a *loooooong* time. I do know that internally, Intel is *very* sensitive to these issues, both at domestic and in foreign plants. Just as an example, I was in the cafeteria once, and an Indian guy was walking around taking photographs. 4 guards came up on him, took his camera, and literally pulled the film out of it right there. This is in the Cafeteria at an Intel site that is primarily global IT operations, mind you. Not a lot of proprietary trade secrets at Intel Folsom, on a relative scale, outside of some Flash development.

 

I always got the impression that Intel is allowed to import restricted technology, but held *very* accountable for the security of that information which is considered vital to "national security". Kind of a balance between Government allowing domestic business to prosper unhindered while also letting those companies know that they're on a VERY short leash.

 

Did the guy have a camera pass???