==================================================================== (C) 1992 by Atari Corporation, GEnie, and the Atari RoundTables. May be reprinted only with this notice intact. The Atari RoundTables on GEnie are the *official* information services of the Atari Corporation. To sign up for GEnie service, call (with modem in HALF DUPLEX) 800-638-8369. Upon connection, type HHH Wait for the U#= prompt. Type XJM11877,GENIE and hit RETURN. The system will now prompt you for your information. ==================================================================== ************ Topic 20 Thu Aug 13, 1992 STRAMIEL [Atari CEO] at 15:41 EDT Sub: Atari Falcon 030 Computer Discussions on the Atari Falcon 030 Computer, being unveiled at the Duesseldorf Atari Messe August 21-23 in Germany. Be sure to check the CO transcript from the library, file #25262, FALCONCO.LZH 204 message(s) total. ************ ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 1 Tue Oct 13, 1992 B.GRIER at 06:56 EDT This spring I purchased my TT. I ran the Quick Index numbers and was very depressed, the TT was only 10% faster than my 520ST/ADSPEED. Needless to say I was despressed. Then Maureen my wife, said well at least this one has color. Now that set off a bell. I re-ran the Quick Index numbers with the TT in ST Hi- Res not TT-Med,. Guess what, the TT was many times faster than my Hi-Res ST, ST with Quick ST and TT with no help. Now that I have Warp 9... The moral, you knew there would be one, compare apples to apples, The more colours the more work The Falcon has to do. A different video memory implementation could yield better overall results at a very high cost to the user, or a very limited flexibility. to Lexicor: Will you be supporting the DSP chip with Render? I think it would make the Falcon30 my choice for this type of processing. to Atari: Are the Falcon developer Docs available to anyone, or only developers at this time. to Everyone: Let's post some ideas as to the system HW/SW that Atari should send to Jerry Pournelle. (e.g. falcon 30 4/210mb Pagestream, LDW power, PHASE IV, DBMAN, and Word Perfect) Brian ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 2 Tue Oct 13, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 11:49 EDT The DSP used in the Falcon is an SMD mask rom version of the 56001, it's tiny and costs around $15, moving up the scale would be much too costly for a $799 computer. BTW, the same DSP is used in Cincinati Microwave radar detectors...Escort/Passport. The Falcon is a putt putt, make no bones about it, even with a faster blitter, it's a low cost machine, targeted at a whole new market area. It is NOT a TT replacement, it's not a DTP/CAD workhorse, it _IS_ a video and sound wonder machine. The only regret I have is that once again Atari has delibrately limited the expandability of the machine to fit what _they_ believe it should be used for, rather than allowing the _user_ to decide ultimately what the computer is used for. The Falcon does NOT have a PDS...Processor Direct Slot...it has a 68000 chip compatible peripheral bus to make it easy to add an ATSPEED type board, and other simple things. Why this was done, the "reasoning?" behind it will only be known to us in the future, hopefully Atari will provide a DTP/CAD platform to the market eventually, that is more advanced than the TT. On the good side, the Falcon production models are VERY well built, real clean, there won't ever again be a need for the "drop fix" on an Atari computer. Almost total surface mounting, excellent use of space and modern technology. All they had to do to bat 1000% was to use a real 32bit expansion connector with the 68030 signals on it....but Noooooooo. But not to worry, wating for me in the mail when I came back from WAACE was a catalog from a company that has built a QFP adapter, a connector that solders in place of the SMD 68030 chip and provides a bed of pins to allow connection of....a REAL full 030 expansion device ;-) So long as there are no "gotcha's" in the 68030 circuits (like the blitter not placing it's address on the 030 bus during operation) an accelerator for the machine can be built, and the Falcon will indeed be useable for DTP/CAD applications in the future. We'll see. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 3 Tue Oct 13, 1992 REALM [Joey] at 18:38 EDT Brian which QuickIndex did you use? The older versions aren't accurate. Not only that but you get lower readings unless you change it to run in TT RAM. I've got 2.2 and shows the TT being 801% faster then an ST. I can give the exact numbers if you want but screen redraws are faster in mono. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 4 Tue Oct 13, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 20:07 EDT Jim, Everyone knows by now that Atari will always cripple their machines to fit what they THINK the computer should be like and what they THINK the user will need. I don't think Atari will EVER design an open end computer. The were getting there with the Mega STE and TT. Take one step foward and then 3 steps back as far as user configuration. The Falcon could have been a lot more for a tiny bit more money if any at all. I will wait on the 040 version if it ever comes about. They better make it seperate keyboard and such if they want to sell. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 5 Tue Oct 13, 1992 V.CROSS1 [Vince_C] at 20:23 EDT The Falcon vs IBM/Mac/OtherSystem comments are really tiresome. Who gives a rat's ass? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 6 Tue Oct 13, 1992 K.HOUSER [Kevin MQ Def] at 20:41 EDT Jim, maybe they left out a real PDS so you could have enough work to do while trying to fix their UNDERSIGHT. :) I've heard rumors both ways about the PDS. Please, Atari why in the hell would you let an engineer take the time to make a screwey 68000 bus rather than just run all of the '030 lines to a connector? --Kevin ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 7 Tue Oct 13, 1992 SLP at 22:01 EDT One thing that the Falcon needs to be the great multi media machine for everyone is a CD ROM drive. I'm noticing more and more titles in the stores on CD, and I wonder if I'll be able to use any of them with the Falcon. Scott ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 8 Tue Oct 13, 1992 SLP at 22:04 EDT I forgot to mention in my last message that I know a SCSI CD/ROM drive can be attached, but it would be useless if there isn't any software support. Does anybody know if someone makes CD packages that work with an ST? Scott ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 9 Tue Oct 13, 1992 C.KLIMUSHYN [-Chuck-] at 22:24 EDT ARGH, not a real processor direct slot?!? J.Towens say it ain't so.... -Chuck- ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 10 Tue Oct 13, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 23:01 EDT Vince_C: > Who gives a rat's [expletive deleted]? I do! Jim Allen: I guess it would have to be called a PIS (pronounce it any way you like) for "Processor Indirect Slot". Actually, if the Falcon030 is really the low end 'consumer' model, there's really no need for such expandability. Most consumers wouldn't upgrade it. As long as the Falcon040 is announced by the end of the year, and released in the 1st quarter of '93, they should have no trouble satisfying the needs of the loyal Atarians who need the expandability, and not upsetting too many people to the point of jumping ship. If they stall around, there's going to be a lot of lost sales. (Provided that the F040 is as expandable as rumored). Everyone: Being guilty of being an Atarivangelist (tm), I've managed to convince several (3 so far) co-workers _not_ to buy a PC clone, and to wait and see what my Falcon030 can do before buying a computer. They are _very_ interested in the Falcon030's potential. However, the Falcon040 sounds more and more like the machine _I_ need for myself. I really think I'm going to have to wait for the F040, to be happy. If too much time passes between now and my F040 purchase, I think these _potential_ sales will lose interest. I fear many Atarians are in the same predicament... the Falcon030 is an excellent competitor against the PC clones, but the Falcon040 is potentially the hands down ultimate clone killer... an awful lot of us are going to wait for the higher end machines, and the evangelists are going to be without ammunition in the meantime. I suppose a "Falcon030-33" would be a suitable substitute, if the Falcon040 is still far off in the future. At the very least, there _are_ surface mount sockets which the 68030 could be placed in, providing 3rd parties an upgrade route. Maybe one or two sockets could be added to the Falcon030? I'd even pay a few dollars more if it's a cost matter. Time to get off the soapbox. I'm sure everyone feels the same way as I do, so I don't know why I had to write all this. ____________________________ \hunderbird ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 11 Tue Oct 13, 1992 WALLY.W [ _Wally_ ] at 23:08 EDT Howdy, Al, how can I get copies of your articles? Thanks, Wally ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 12 Tue Oct 13, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 23:18 EDT Thanks T-Bird, that's the best Atari related laugh I've had in a while ;-) Here's the QIndex 2.2 for the Falcon in "ST HIGH" compatibility mode: MEMORY 487 REG 406 DIV 507 SHIFT 1737 TEXT 167 STRING 172 SCROLL 219 DRAW 204 And the "SPEEDMET" program reports: 319% I look forward to the wizards of Codehead porting Warp9...hurry hurry ;-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 13 Tue Oct 13, 1992 C.FLUEGEL [Curt] at 23:18 EDT Jeez... let the complaints begin. It is still DSP, graphics, REAL sound, and more, for $200!!!! more list than a 1040STE!! compare it to that for awhile. After all, a 2meg version retails about the same as a mega STE. Curt I STILL WANT ONE!! SEND IT TO ME... ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 14 Tue Oct 13, 1992 R.MARTIN22 [NETWORK 23] at 23:42 EDT SAM: True, the digital system will be better in some aspects (not sure about who will have the better resolution), but my major complaint is the lack of a world standard. We had the chance and we lost it. Live And Direct [2:26 AM-13/Oct/92], Rod Martin, Network 23/ST Connection ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 15 Tue Oct 13, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 23:54 EDT Atari needs to take lessons from Jim Allen or Dave Small. The Falcon should have been designed so that all you would have to do is pop in a new clock and 030 and have 32+ mhz. Atari's wisdom at work again unfortunately. I can see the headlines now. "If you want a crippled, non-expandable, all in one computer, buy an Atari". Yea, yea, I know, it's just the entry level. What will I have to mortgage to get the 040 seperate keyboard version though? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 16 Tue Oct 13, 1992 EXPLORER at 23:57 EDT Scott, The ICD Link includes CD-ROM drive software (ICD's and Atari's MetaDOS) that allows the use of standard SCSI CD-ROM drives connected to an ICD Advantage ST, AdSCSI ST, or The Link host adapter. High-Sierra or ISO-9660 format and can be read with the software. Ron @ Atari Explorer ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 17 Wed Oct 14, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 01:29 EDT Z-NET - The only problem with me writing something is that half way through an article I'd probably start writing things like "if Atari hadn't screwed up so badly..." Seriously, though, I'll think about it. A.DIPIETRO - Hell! I've been wishing they'd rename the whole RT. R.WATSON15 - So perhaps popping in a 32MHz 56002 would work, and possibly faster??? Interesting! Anyone at Atari? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 18 Wed Oct 14, 1992 M.ALLEN14 [Mike Allen] at 03:50 EDT Maybe we are missing a point about the Falcon030. Seems to me that Atari probably felt (correctly) that they needed NEW customers in order to survive. Looks to me like the Falcon030 is just the machine and the proper price to attract new converts. I suspect that those of us who are already Atarians would like a little more. Maybe that is the Falcon040. Releasing a more capable (and expensive) machine right off the bat might have generated a flurry a sales amongst the converted but might not do anything to increase the market. I suspect that the future of the Falcon040 will depend on how the Falcon030 does at expanding the Atari market. I know that I, while impressed with the Falcon030, will not rush out and buy one. Why? Primarily because of the one-piece design. I like to move the keyboard around and it gets to be a bit of a hassle especially if one has a bunch of cables plugged into the unit. Also there is a lack of expandability implied in the single case design. I'll wait for the Falcon040. But I don't think Atari was wrong in what they did with the 030. They've come up with a very capable unit at a reasonable cost. Those of us who want the more capable unit better hope that the 030 flies. I suspect that the viability of an 040, and maybe Atari itself, depends on 030 sales. Of course for the 030 to fly it needs software. Bill R. says the 030 is very compatible with existing ST software - that is good. But new software that really shows the Falcon's stuff is sorely needed. I hope that Atari is serious about helping all those 3rd party developers get Falcon stuff out. (They might start by getting the CodeHeads a Falcon!!!!!) Let's root for the Falcon030. It might not be exactly what we had hoped for, but I suspect it is just what is needed to gain some converts! Mike Allen ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 19 Wed Oct 14, 1992 L.ROCHA1 [ Lou {SysOp}] at 06:49 EDT Ron, a message 5 posted in Category 4 Topic 22 today indicates a problem with the ICD driver for the CD ROM. Apparently ICD is working on a fix. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 20 Wed Oct 14, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 09:33 EDT What was done wasn't the smart thing to do. Atari actually spent money and put in an extra effort to limit the expandability of the machine. Slapping in a 96pin DIN connector...like VME, MacSE30, MacLC, MacIIci, etc, etc...and wiring it up to the 68030 pins is a no-brainer, any idiot can do that, what Atari did was put extra circuitry in to mimick a 68000 bus so they could do "what"? Heck, I'm still trying to figure out what. One thing we could do is produce a 68000 board, a "compatibility" addon ;-) The appropriate word is...typical. BTW, after some careful measurment, it IS possible to make a memory board that accpts 4 SIMMs and could be user upgradable for 1, 4, 14Megs. Expect to see such a thing from the many memory board 3rd partys out there. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 21 Wed Oct 14, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 23:00 EDT Jim Allen: Are you sure that that PIS connector really mimics the 68000 bus? What on earth would prompt them to do that? I don't suppose this backwards leap is intended to allow connection of existing ST (68000) expansions? I suppose you'll tell us next that the slot only runs at 8Mhz, and that it only has 16 bit data paths, and a 24 bit address bus. If Atari claims to have a variety of user optional configurations like 14/65 or the 4/65 or the 1/0 and other combinations, so that everyone gets exactly what they want. I'd like to suggest building a version _without_ the PIS, 'cause I hate paying for things I'll never use. I can't understand why they would put so many advanced features in the thing, limit other things because of cost considerations, and then ADD circuitry to limit expandability. Is this feature another way for Atari to 'encourage' purchase of a more expensive machine? Prevent the user from upgrading to the same place himself? Arrrgh. I love the falcon, and to find out something so bizarrely wrong with it is very disconcerting. I'm upset. - - - - End of tirade - - - - This space intentionally left blank. - - - - Beginning of plea - - - - Someone from Atari _please_ explain why the expansion of the F030 is limited in this way. I've heard your statements about how you have been listening to your users and developers when you designed the F030, and I can't help but wonder why none of them pointed out what an unpopular feature this would be. I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say that the 'new' F030 rumored to be out soon would be worth waiting a little longer for, if it meant having a plain old 96 pin connector on it with simply the 68030 signals brought out, and not the current port. My main fear is that the Mac, IBM, Clone, and Commodore advertisers will have a field day with this 'feature'. I don't think I can evangelize a suitable defense for this without looking like Dan Quayle under stress. The Atari user can only defend so much. ________________________ \hunderbird 'cause I still love Atari, and the F030. This is only a temporary setback, I'm sure. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 22 Thu Oct 15, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 00:52 EDT Z-NET - The only comment I have is that I'd like to see the article. D.ENGEL - Better yet, use the composite out. J.ALLEN27 - I'm really getting tired of Atari 'crippling' their own machines. I'm just worried that later Falcon's won't be much better in that department, other than that they'll probably have VMEbus slots and have the 1280x960 mono graphics mode. SLP - Supposedly, Atari won't be pursuing the CD-ROM thing until late '93 because they don't expect the CD-ROM market to really take off until then. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 23 Thu Oct 15, 1992 A.FASOLDT [Al Fasoldt] at 03:22 EDT Wally, You can get them in the next book I'll be coming out with. And maybe also if you send me a couple of disks. Send me e-mail, Wally, and I'll explain more... Al ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 24 Thu Oct 15, 1992 SAM-RAPP [<>] at 20:02 EDT Yeah for SIMMS. A recent ad in computer shopper puts 4Mx8 SIMMs at only $112. ($99 in qtys of 12 or more). I am having a lot of trouble deciding whether or not to buy a Falcon right out of the starting gate. I just can't understand why Atari put it in a 1040 style case. Why not a mega/TT case? It seems that it would have given more freedom as to the board design and layout. I REALLY want a detachable keyboard. I personally LIKE the mega/TT case design. Jim's statement about the processor slot are also a reason for concern. Hopefully, Atari will come out with at least two more Falcon models in mega/TT cases: a 32Mhz 030 and a 40Mhz 040, both with a 56002 instead of 56001 as an option. As it stands, I think I will wait till after the first of the year and see where Atari is going with Falcon. -----------------> Sam ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 25 Thu Oct 15, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 23:14 EDT I know alot of other 3rd party folks, and I know of two ram boards in development for the Falcon, so just about any ram recipe you can imagine will be ready when the machines ship. Sam, I'm still waiting for an answer about how the blitter does its work, and whether the blitter can be "watched" by an external cache and coherency can be maintained. Until that question is answered we won't know if an accelerator can be done for it...this impacts an 040 chips internal cache also. The mechanical "barrier" has been bypassed by good old American ingenuity, so only an electrical barrier stands in the way. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 26 Fri Oct 16, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 00:10 EDT I wished they would make up their minds on an expansion buss also. Let's see... No BUS Mega BUS No BUS VME Bus and now teh crippled Expansion slot in the Falcon. WHAT NEXT??? I doubt Atari will EVER STOP crippling their computers. The disposable computer is their philosophy. Their idea of upgrading is selling the one you have and buy a new one. It was a MIRACLE!! they went to SIMMS in the STE/MSTE/TT. Actually, I think it was an accident!!! ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 27 Fri Oct 16, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 01:54 EDT J.ALLEN27 - Oooo! A 68000 board??? Wow! Can you do a 25MHz one for us? I can't believe after past experiences that Atari's still pulling this kind of crap. D.ENGEL - What would prompt them to do that??? Hey! Atari's had dumb ideas before, you know. While 65,536 colors and 16-bit stereo sound are quite nice (especially compared to the ST/TT) and the Falcon030 is quite impressive as is, I'd SERIOUSLY hoped ALL Falcon machines would offer AT LEAST up to 800x600x256 and 1024x768x16 (and the 1280x960 mono mode) with a 24-bit palette as standard. I'd also hoped for a less cheaply-designed case for the '1-piece' Falcon design, including a better keyboard and repositioned mouse/joystick ports. Now hearing about all these other 'deficiencies' is disappointing. And I don't think what I had hoped for is unrealistic, either. After all, it's not as though I was expecting 24-bit True Color in every or even ANY resolution, expected it to be a 32-50MHz 68030 machine, or expected it to have built-in IBM emulation. Maybe even an external processor bus (like on the STBook, etc.) wouldn't have been unrealistic. Well, now I'll DEFINITELY wait for a different Falcon machine, if there IS one and Atari doesn't cripple IT either. Sure, the Falcon030 is usable as is, but just 'usable' isn't enough anymore. If future Falcon machines are the same, only faster with VMEbus slots, I won't be too impressed. I WILL, however, probably buy one. Atari computers are the worst computers we have, except for all the others. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 28 Fri Oct 16, 1992 S.DANUSER [Soul Manager] at 03:26 EDT Well, great, everybody wait to buy a Falcon until the next model shows up. The only problem is, if nobody buys this one, there ain't gonna be a next model. Everyone is complaining that the machine will be unexpandable. If you had gone up to a brand new 520 ST owner in 1985 and told him/her that the machine could be upgraded to a 68030 processor with 8 megs RAM and a 24 bit graphics card, they would have scoffed and said there was no way the machine could be expanded that way. Yes, there are technical holes in this analogy, but the premise is sound. The Falcon 030 _will_ be expandable in its current configuration, albeit through a more difficult route than we would like. Read Jim Allen's post about 3rd parties making RAM boards that would allow multiple configurations. Remember a few weeks ago when Atari reps were saying that the only possible configurations were 1, 4, and 14? Whatever needs arise, developers will find ways to fulfil them. It might just take a little extra effort. So please, don't let dismay over some temporary limitations drive you into waiting for a machine that may never arrive. After all, the Falcons aren't even here yet, and may not be for a few more months... Soul Manager ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 29 Fri Oct 16, 1992 FIFTHCRUSADE at 03:45 EDT I'd like to personally urge Atari to pay little attention to what is said about the Falcon030's design here. It's good enough for me. It's not "crippled". It's a fine piece of work. And to all you people who can't find any thing better to do than complain endlessly about the Falcon030 not being EXACTLY to your specifications, PLEASE BE RESONABLE. Do you remember the ST BOOK? From the moment it was introduced all that could be heard were complaints. "8Mhz is too slow." "It's not backlit." "There's no internal floppy." "You can't hook up a monitor." There were even complaints that the battery life was too long. And what happened to the ST BOOK? Atari released it in Europe, but decided it would be uncompetitive here in the US because it was too slow/not backlit/floppyless. THE ST BOOK WAS NOT RELEASED IN THE US AT ALL. So please Atari, don't listen to them. Don't spend the next year redesigning the Falcon030. Don't reconsider selling Falcons in the US. Just continue with your Falcon rollout plans. It's a fine computer. I like it. Ben White ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 30 Fri Oct 16, 1992 S.WINICK at 06:45 EDT Ben, I doubt you'll have to worry too much -- Atari is apparantly going full speed ahead with their U.S. plans for the Falcon. We should hopefully be seeing them begin appearing on dealer shelves sometime next month. As for the complaints of limited expandability -- have any of you tried to 'expand' an older PC and try to bring it up to current standards? Most times, its cheaper to sell it and buy a new machine. Take a look at how many of those PC-clone "expansion slots" have to be used up just to make the system usable -- things we all take for granted on the Atari platform, like mouse and game ports, monitor ports, printer and serial ports, stereo sound, etc. Are all those ports really so fantastic when most have to be used up just to make the thing work? That's not to say I wouldn't prefer a little more expandability potential myself, but you must keep in mind the Falcon030's target market. The machine is clearly aimed at the MIDI and home computer market where the price/performance ratio is extremely critical. Just compare the Falcon's "standard" features to any other manufacturer's entry level product line. I think you'll find that the Falcon is indeed quite impressive. And for business and professional customers who need maximum power, speed and expandability, the TT030, especially with its new price structure, remains the system of choice. It appears that Atari is headed in the direction of producing a well-rounded product line that can only be a positive influence on the marketplace. Sheldon (Computer STudio - Asheville, NC) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 31 Fri Oct 16, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 10:16 EDT Sheldon, the Falcon030 isn't "some old PC", it is the brand new whoopetyDoo from Atari and should not have been given a "governor" like some so-called sports cars. The Falcon will make it or not based on the success in the new market Atari is targeting, not in the traditional business SW market the ST line was successful in. Whether we buy one or not is irrelevent, it is whether a "multi- media" buyer buys it that matters. Folks who need MAXIMUM power, speed, and expandability should invest in an original MegaST with a Turbo030 board and one of many video addons...the TT is a putt putt in comparison. On the 3rd party ram cards, the options will be 1, 4, and 14. That's all the memory controller knows how to deal with. One will use SIMMs the other will use DIPs, both are user upgradable easily. The construction of the Falcon is impecable, almost totally SMD, well done sheilding, far fewer screws and tabs, a very clean layout, and a multilayer PCboard. Top quality parts, a fan, and an umphy power supply. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 32 Fri Oct 16, 1992 LEPULLEY [Lloyd Pulley] at 17:26 EDT Soul Manager - re post #178, This time we are in agreement. I personally could care less that the new Falcon is supposedly "unexpandable" - for my usage and in it's price point, it is plenty expandable. While I would wish that the Falcon had a detach- able keyboard, I can live without one (I did for many years with my 1040). My only complaint (?) about the Falcon is that it needs to be out to the dealers in quanity - quanity doesn't mean 1-2 per dealer - NOW!! Lloyd E. Pulley, Sr. Personal Opinion Only ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 33 Fri Oct 16, 1992 M.LYDA [mike] at 20:00 EDT I agree with Lloyd Pulley. The crucial factor in the success of the Falcon 030 is not what kind of slots it has.. the average consumer is going to look at the back of the machine and be impressed with all the sockets! What is going to make or break the Falcon 030 is the amount of the machines that the consumer sees available. Advertising won't help if there isn't any product in the store. So when I go home to Asheville, NC for Thanksgiving I DO hope to see at least one Falcon 030 at The Computer Studio! And I know Sheldon will do his best to get them if Atari will supply them. oh, and did Atari ever say anything more on a word processor being bundled with the Falcon 030? Mike Lyda The Plantation BBS (215)923-6618 ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 34 Fri Oct 16, 1992 REALM [Joey] at 20:00 EDT I agree with Lloyd... this time!:-) Lets try to keep it in some sort of realistic perspective. Atari has chosen to introduce an entry level machine first. I think it's a smart move since no business is going to take them serious anyway. Thats all it is... if you need a 1024x768x256 colors then your buying the wrong computer. It's not up to Atari to build a computer to your specs. It's up to you to buy a system that meets your needs. If you don't like the Falcon don't buy it. Atari will be forced to make a better system or finally go belly up... On another note, 90% of what we're talking about probable makes no sense to a first time buyer. All Atari needs to sell the Falcon is exactly what they've got. It's plenty expandable for a first time user and I'm sure they can suck a bunch of people in with some spiffy demos.:-) If you don't believe me just stop and ask someone if the Falcon having a 68000 instead of 68030 direct expansion slot effects them in anyway. In other words their not going to care because they have no idea what your saying. They've seen the color demos and there pretty.:-) That and the price will sell it, not the specs. Next they'll have to get a machine out superior to the TT in the same TT price range for all the people complaining the Falcon doesn't do enough for $699.:-) Of coarse then we can complain about the price but at least buy then they'll be working on a larger customer base. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 35 Fri Oct 16, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 20:08 EDT What it boils down to is that Atari was stupid enough to spend money to CRIPPLE it. It would have been cheaper to include all the lines from the 68030. Instead, they spend EXTRA money to CRIPPLE it. That is what Jim and I were complaining about. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 36 Fri Oct 16, 1992 SLP at 21:14 EDT Sheldon, price/performance is always critical, and that's why it was stupid for Atari to intentionally spend time and effort to make the Falcon less of a value. While it is true that new users won't really know much about uses for an expansion bus, in the future they probably will want to expand the machine and then they might realize what could have been. I think that the resolution/color depth tradeoff was a good decision for the intended market of this machine, but why go out of the way to make something less desirable. Why give the consumer less than they could? A company like Atari that is trying to get back into the marketplace with word of mouth promotion should foster good will, not destroy it by pulling stunts like the bus situation. Scott ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 37 Fri Oct 16, 1992 J.RICHTER [J.RICHTER] at 23:04 EDT ThunderBird... YES the 486 has its roots from the 8088.. like a Formula One Car got its roots from the Model T. The 68000 flat addressing sceme is superior to 8088 especially when it comes to assembler development language! Yes Windows 3.1 has MORE power the standard GEM and YOU have not seen MultiTOS.. or programmed for it! I read a message from Alan Page who previously wrote Flash and the new STORM.. a credible person, would you agree? ... he agrees with me on Windows 3.1!! ... in total the Falcon sounds AWSOME as a complete solution for Home computing! ... so I will probably buy one! .. Please look into the facts yourself, we'd all appreciate it.... The Falcon will STAND on its OWN thankyou.. David FAIRWEATHER, Apples and Oranges.. THE FALCON WILL BLOW AWAY.. AWAY.. The MAC performa 200.. Even my best MAC bodies say so!!! Its kind of like saying... GEE how come that Portable CD player costs twice as much as that Portable cassette player? .. they both play the same music! ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 38 Fri Oct 16, 1992 EXPLORER at 23:36 EDT Just because the expansion bus was not designed to handle CPU accelerators does not make it "crippled" or even "expandability disadvantaged" ;-) Sounds to me like the designers went out of their way to make the Falcon compatible with IBM emulators, or at least minimize the effort (e.g. shorten the time to market) to convert current PC emulators to the Falcon. To state Atari intentionaly "crippled" the computer is very near sighted. I'd bet 99.999'% of potential *new* customers would ask "Can I run IBM software" before asking "can I add a hardware accelerator." Just look at all the "SX" computers that are sold if you think the base line consumer is interested in performance first. A full 68000 bus with ~80 pins of address, data, signals, interrupts, clocks, power and ground is nothing th sneeze at in any event. At a minimum, the Falcon internal expansion port beats the standard PC expansion bus spec in every way, and we all know how much hardware has been designed to take advantage of the "crippled" PC slots. Ron @ Atari Explorer ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 39 Fri Oct 16, 1992 S.NOAH [Stu] at 23:59 EDT Advertise, Advertise, Advertise, Advertise !!! Produce, Produce, Produce, Produce !!! It is my belief that Atari would virtually own the hand held game market today if they had been able to produce enough Lynx units when the machine was initially introduced. Sooo... Advertise, Advertise, Advertise, Advertise !!! Produce, Produce, Produce, Produce !!! ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 40 Sat Oct 17, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 00:11 EDT Jim Allen: Can you explain to me what happens in a Falcon030 if I populate only 8 Megs. I don't understand why this doesn't work because of some experience I've had with 'unusual' RAM configurations I've seen while repairing ST's in the past... I've seen RAM chips fail in various ways... all with interesting and useable results. Let me explain: In a Falcon, with only 8 megs populated, and the appropriate register in the memory controller cleverly 'adjusted' to whatever the register value is appropriate for a 14 Meg system (since it only supports the three), why does the system not have a memory map which has the populated 8 megs of RAM at the bottom, and above it resides the 'unpopulated' RAM addresses. The 'unpopulated' RAM addresses _should_ be transparent to any software which attempts writes to them, and reading anything back from them would yield indeterminate values. This is _exactly_ what I have seen in an ST with a defective RAM (and other types of microprocessor systems). Granted, the Falcon030 probably has a auto RAM size detect routine at bootup, which would see RAM greater than 4Megs but less than 14Megs, causing either an error, or a jump back to the 4 meg size, plus, the BIOS possibly was written around this limitation, and would be hard to 'teach' new RAM configurations to. BUT... is there some heinous factor involved which breaks the whole system if you put unknown RAM configurations on the bus? Or is it simply _not_ "impossible" to put in 'wierd' RAM configurations (albiet with a lot of work). To whom it may concern: My gripe about the "Processor Direct Slot" on the Falcon030 is not that it is woefully inadequate for serious expandability... my gripe is that they spent EXTRA MONEY to INSURE that it is woefully inadequate for serious expandability. Please bear in mind that _my_ needs are for a _seriously_ powered computer. I can only afford to buy a computer every so often (hint: I'm still using an ST circa 1985... it came with TOS on disk!). Because I intend my computer to last a while, it must have the following criteria: 1) It must be years ahead of the competition in graphics, sound, and speed, or other areas. 2) In the areas it fails to be years ahead of the competition, it must be _at least_ as good as the competition. 3) In the areas which meet criterion #2 only, it must be easily expandable. 4) In meeting #1, #2, and #3 it should _not_ cost over 50% on top of the price of a competitors top machine. (If a super duper clone was $1000, I'd spend $1500 just to get the Atari name instead.) My 520ST met these goals (when I bought it) and it took the clones 5 years to catch up to them. I only expect the Falcon030 to meet them as well. They are _not_ outrageous, and allow _plenty_ of leeway. Currently, the Falcon030 meets #1 in graphics and sound mainly, but only meets #2 with speed. That would be fine, _except_ that someone went out of his way to add circuitry which (by design) causes the Falcon030 NOT to meet the 3rd criteria in every way (except maybe sound). Meeting #3 on the Falcon030 would probably violate #4, so I'm stuck. So now, for better or for worse, I must decide if I want to get a Falcon030 and gamble that clever 3rd parties will be able to crack it's expansion protection scheme (similar to copy protection in a sinister way), or, should I wait and see if the Falcon040 meets my needs. Of course the doomsayers can argue that if I don't support the computer, Atari will simply go under. To this I can only point out that I bet the market value of an 'orphaned' machine would be low enough to make me forget my criteria and pick one up just for laughs. So, in the end _I_ will have satisfied _my_ needs. __________________________ \hunderbird P.S. I feel compelled to add that I know _some_ of you are thinking: "See, he didn't buy another Atari for 6 years! They made the ST too well, and lost money because nobody bought the new machines." To this I must respond that I really WANTED to get a new machine. First, I wanted a Mega ST, then I wanted an STe, then a Mega STe, then a TT. I have had money waiting for a new computer for some years now. BUT... none of these machines (except the TT) met the above criteria. I cannot get a TT because a) My local dealer closed, and b) I really mean "and b)", or rather the lack of "B" for "FCC Class B Certification". Even if the TT is now class "B", time has passed, and the machine is starting to fail to meet my criteria. (And my dealer is still gone.) I _LOVE_ Atari. They have somae of the greatest minds in the personal computer field working there. They make _GREAT_ computers. Do not misunderstand. I want to buy a new Atari so badly, you can't imagine. Mainstream clones make me want to blow chunks!!! It's my sensibilities which tell me that if I compromise on my criteria, I will wind up _very_ disappointed. I find anticipation to be much easier to bear than disappointment, so Atari can take it's time and redesign the F030. If they tell me what they're up to, I will promise to wait. If they tell me the exact specs of the thing (and they meet my critieria) and that it will be out in 6 months, I'd even put a downpayment on it. I want one _that bad_. P.P.S. The Falcon030 would meet _all_ of my criteria if it were 32Mhz, since I would have no need to expand it, I wouldn't care about the processor direct slot. I wouldn't need it. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 41 Sat Oct 17, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 00:19 EDT SAM-RAPP - Personally, I'd really be peeved if they used the same silly MSTE/TT case for later Falcon models. That is TRULY one of the most ridiculous-looking computer cases I've ever seen. I'd rather it be in a standard IBM PC/AT case. J.ALLEN27 - Do you know if other RAM configurations besides the 'official' Atari ones (1, 4, and 16MB) CAN be done on the Falcon, or is that all the Falcon HARDWARE will recognise? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 42 Sat Oct 17, 1992 WALLY.W [ _Wally_ ] at 00:30 EDT Howdy, Al, INCOMING!! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- I think the Falcon is a great _new_ base-model platform for Atari to build from (like they should have done when they first introduced the ST). Only, this time it sounds like they are going to try doing things in a smarter fashion. Either way, it looks like I'll be getting a TT, and then replacing my STe with the Falcon030 a bit later...that video/PIM stuff has gotten my attention. I think it is safe to say that the ST/STe line really isn't the base/entry model in the Atari line of computers anymore. I also think it isn't reasonable to expect all your years of "fantasizing the perfect Atari computer" to be fulfilled in a base-model computer like the Falcon. It has a lot to offer - more than the STe - you will have inumerable _new_ avenues open to you should you actually get one and USE it. The real kicker that I think a lot of us are having the most heartache with is the fact that the Falcon wasn't built specifically with _us_ (the serious Atari-users) in mind. The Falcon is seriously aimed at a new market that is a bit more diverse (and not as micro-defined) than the one the ST/STe is currently serving. If Atari does everything correctly, the Falcon will get out there, do it inexpensively, and do it well. I can't see that it is a _power-user's_ new playtoy, and I get the impression from official Atari releases that they don't view it as such either. I'd seriously question whether Atari would survive if they built a computer just for _us_ (with all the spec's that have been listed in this RT from day one - heck, I wouldn't even be able to afford _that_ computer)...there is a huge potential user-base out there (people who don't own computers outnumber the people who do), and I believe the Falcon is aimed there. The Falcon is an excellent opportunity for Atari to get out there, be recognized, and build on a good thing. Good luck, Atari, I'm in your corner on this'n. Of course, as always, IMEO. ;) Best regards, Wally ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 43 Sat Oct 17, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 00:54 EDT J.Richter: No, the 486 has it's roots from the 8088 like a Formula One Car got its roots from the Model T... NOT! The Formula 1 car would have to be using hand crank starting, lever steering, and 2 speed transmission, if it were to be as 'direct' a descendant of the Model T as the '486 is from the 8088. Please look into the facts before accusing me of not doing so. You've haven't claimed to have _ever_ programmed a 680x0 _or_ an 80x86, so your claims so far are not substantiated. Also, the ease of programming in Windows vs. GEM has no bearing on the power or usefullness of any CPU. (Somebody somewhere sometime had to write the "C" compiler for, and Libraries for, each operating system. I bet you the guy writing the compiler for the '486 would have given his reproductive organs to have been programming a 68040... it's _THAT_ superior. Ron @ Atari Explorer: If "PC Compatability" were the issue motivating the design of the PDS on the Falcon030, it was implemented wrong. For the same engineering costs, the Falcon030 could have had "PC Compatable" expansion slots, which would have provided a much more lucrative appeal to those desiring to use their Falcon030 as a PC, since all those PC cards would be useable in the Falcon030 (There's a lot of them as you pointed out). Since the PC emulators for the ST(e) are going to require re-engineering to fit the connectors/dimensions of the F030, it would not save the 3rd party developers any money because they have to redesign anyways. If the 68000 bus in the F030 had the same physical size and shape of the 68000 in my ST and an ST emulator would simply "plug and play", then I would say the idea was 100% sound. As it was stated here, the bus is not the size or shape of the 68000, so these toys won't just plug in and work. The developers have to redesign anyways, so why not let them redesign for a 68030 bus? ______________________ \hunderbird ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 44 Sat Oct 17, 1992 D.WALTER7 [Doug Walter] at 01:41 EDT Joey, Sheldon & Soul Manager, Well said! Thank you for voicing something reasonable & positive here. A much nicer tune than this funeral dirge for the yet-to-be-born thats been playing here lately.. Geez people, its pretty simple. If ya don't like it, don't buy it - Someone else will. Doug7 ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 45 Sat Oct 17, 1992 D.SHORR at 01:47 EDT Do the production Falcons have the same metal shielding found in the 1040STe case? On some of the Macs you just pop open the hood and you're in. Dave ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 46 Sat Oct 17, 1992 J.RICHTER [J.RICHTER] at 03:45 EDT ThunderBird... Gee... the Falcon030 is a putt-putt?.. you mean the 486 15mips clones that cost slightly more than the Falcon.. and with larger Hard Drives higher resolutions with FASTER video might just REALLY blow the socks off the Falcon.. naaaaaa ... wana race your 640x480x256 color Video in the Falcon against the 486 Super VGA at work? ... any bets? Video chip-sets for Local Bus video (The new rage for LOW-END PC's) has come a LONG way in the last year... BUT I will still buy a Falcon because of its HUGE potential for a REAL usefull computer for the HOME! Think about it... A DSP video phone!!! ... TRUE color games!! and PageStream to boot!!!!!!!!!! and DOS is H O R R I B L E ! ! ! and when the FASTER Falcons hit the road..... I have a Mega4 with an AWSOME Monochrome monitor... its only 8MHZ.. This SPEED thing is out of control!!! a guy with a 486' DOS 5.0 is still pi__ed off when he has to do some MEMEORY MANAGing... He just gets p__ssed off a little faster thats all... The Falcon030 is THREE times faster than my FAVORITE computer... The Falcon030 has a 1.44meg flopply The Falcon030 has CD Quality SOUND The Falcon030 has an integral DSP for TOMMORROWS home applications The Falcon030 with Warp9 software WITHOUT ANY hardware upgrades is all most of us will ever need.. and a Math Chip will add more Speed for critical drawing apps than most ATARIANS have ever seen!! The Falcon's DSP has TWICE the hardware of a NeXt Computer. The Falcon030 can emulate a $1500 Midi instrument in SOFTWARE!! can your PC clone do this? In closing.. I truly believe most of us tend to over-rate speed in leu of REAL WORLD needed features!! ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 47 Sat Oct 17, 1992 S.WINICK at 08:35 EDT Jim (Allen), I completely agree that the Falcon's success hinges on Atari's ability to successfully merchandise it in the new market they're targeting it at. And I also agree that I would personally like to see maximum expandability in any new machine. I can imagine the incredible possibilities if hardware gurus like yourself had a plethora of all sorts of expansion slots to work with. We have to keep in mind though that the Falcon030 is Atari's entry machine that will hopefully represent the start of a whole new family of Atari computers for the 90's. They're probably counting on the fact that the majority of sales will most likely be in the entry level or mid-level categories. Although most enthusiasts express the wish for all sorts of expansion capabilities and built in features, the fact of the matter is that the large majority are simply unable or unwilling to pay the extra cost for them. The number of consumers who are actually willing to pay for those performance features is relatively small compared to the volume sales that base model systems can offer. Atari desperately needs to get those volume sales on any new platform to encourage new development. Hopefully, by the time they get to the high end versions of the new family, they'll include all those features that are high on our wish list as well as yours. Sheldon (Computer STudio - Asheville, NC) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 48 Sat Oct 17, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 10:44 EDT J. Richter: You're really hitting below the belt. You've sunk to new lows of slander with this smear campaign of Bushesque proportions. I really take offense to your unsubstantiated accusations that I support the PC platform. When you make statements like "Can your PC clone do this?", you set me up as a proponent of the PC platform. I am shocked that you would use a misleading statement like this. I hate the PC platform, I hate using it, I hate Windoze, I hate DOS, I am repulsed by them. Period. I have stated that I would pay MORE money for a system to get one that was as UN-PClike as possible. I can only conclude that you made the sudden change to this tactic because you could no longer defend your position on the inferiority of the Intel architecture issue, which is understandable, given the side you chose to take. Remember: The Falcon030, whatever shortcomings it eventually has, is _STILL_ a superior machine to any DOS machine, past, present, and future, in terms of hardware, Operating System, and ethics. DOS machines (in many circles) are affectionately referred to as the "Restricted Personal Freedom" machines. They symbolically represent the terrors of the Reagan-Bush era, and "Tinkle Down" economics. It is time for a change. _________________________ \hunderbird ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 49 Sat Oct 17, 1992 SAM-RAPP [<>] at 12:08 EDT Is it at all possible that the "crippled" expansion slot will make it easier to do 386sx emulation than would the full 68030 slot? After all 90 percent of intended Falcon purchasers will want to put in IBM emulation and not a 68040. Hmmmmmmm. ------------> Sam ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 50 Sat Oct 17, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 13:02 EDT I like the design of the motherboard and case on the TT/MSTE. It is easy to get to the TOS, harddrive, host adapter, Ajax, dip switches and the SIMMS. The ONLY complaint I have is NO fan for the harddrive bay. It's a nice design. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 51 Sat Oct 17, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 15:24 EDT Actually the statistics say that 3 times as many users will want a PC emulator than will want an accelerator, but both %'s are less than 5% of the installed base. Of course that low a figure may have more to do with the soldering and hassles involved on previous machines rather than what customers actually desire. Doing the "little" bus made it easy....actually no work at all...to port the current 386sx board Vortex has to the Falcon. BUT. Not using the full 030 bus does PRECLUDE a full 386DX or 486 equipped unit...unless you were to vastly slow down such a unit, making a 386sx more sensible anyway. Whereby, using the 030 bus wouldn't make a 386sx much more difficult...3 extra chips needed...and would allow a 386DX or 486 to be constructed _and_ provide appropriate performance in PC mode. A full 030 bus wouldn't have precluded an snap in accelerator board either. Sounds like two birds with one stone my way, and one window with one stone the Atari way ;-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 52 Sat Oct 17, 1992 S.DANUSER [Soul Manager] at 16:21 EDT Atari might do well to emulate the Amiga's design in regards to PC compatibility with future Falcons, i.e. to provide standard slots for PC cards that are usable when a bridge-board type emulator is plugged in to the machine. With one or two PC slots available, users could get a cheap VGA card and maybe a sound card and plug them in, allowing them to run IBM software almost the same as a PC. Of course, if Atari could get around this by using their own graphics and sound hardware in PC emulation, so much the better. But as the hardware contingent has pointed out, this would be a mighty difficult trick. PC emulation is, whether we like it or not, an issue of some importance to the first-time buyer (Atari's real target). The rumored cheap 386SX emulator board addresses this fact. Personally, I'd like one just so I can run Ultima VII, and that's about it. By the way, I spent a couple hours playing with an Amiga 4000 the other day, and I must say that it is an _impressive_ machine. It's graphics are fast and flexible, and as for speed it completely blows away a 486DX with localbus video. Redraws in Pagestream with a color image were instantaneous, as was font rescaling. It's sound capabilities don't measure up to the Falcon, but an upgrade is in the works. What's more, a mid-line Amiga may show up before we see a Falcon in the States. Please, Atari, hurry up and get those birdies into everybody's hands... Soul Manager ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 53 Sat Oct 17, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 17:21 EDT Jim Allen: Okay, so we found out that a 32 Bit clone emulator is impossible using the PDS connector. I take it that it means 32 bit graphics cards are out too. What about them? Perhaps it might be possible to make a 32 bit graphics card using the RAM expansion connector? How about an accelerator using the RAM connector? By the way, modifying a Surface Mount Multilayer Board (such as installing a socket for the CPU) is difficult (at best) even with the specialized equipment needed ($$$) for this type of work. Might I remind everyone that putting the 68030 in a socket at the point of manufacture would CURE any criticisms of the Falcon030. I suggest that everyone who wants an expandable Falcon030 simply state that they want Atari to include the CPU socket. Even if you have to pay extra to have it, it's a heck of a lot cheaper than retrofitting one in your computer. All it would probably take is one word from someone "at the top" to include the socket. No messy rework, no engineering costs, no hassles. Just a word, and a PO to the socket supplier. Simple. ___________________________ \hunderbird 'Just say "YES" to a 68030 socket!' ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 54 Sat Oct 17, 1992 LEXICOR2 [Ringo] at 17:38 EDT Thunderbird I agree with you. If I could not get an ATARI, I would first get a MAC or Amiga but not a PC clone. Ringo ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 55 Sat Oct 17, 1992 M.ALLEN14 [Mike Allen] at 19:38 EDT Steve Johnson, in re the tt case. I was puzzled about the case until I got my MSTe. The FUNCTIONALITY of the case is wonderful. I too thought it looked silly, but being able to access everything that a user needs to access with the removal on one captive screw is good engineering. I think it was Frank Lloyd Wright who said "Form follows function." It is a very functional case. The ram options, I believe (I'm sure Jim Allen will correct me if I'm wrong ) have to do with the 32 bit busses. If you are using those busses, 1, 4 and 14 (actually 16) megs are all that the cpu can handle within the ST compatable max. (I hope Jim chimes in. I'm sure he can explain this much better than I can.) Mike Allen ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 56 Sat Oct 17, 1992 A.FASOLDT [Al Fasoldt] at 21:49 EDT Steve, I think the TT case is one of the nicest industrial designs I have ever seen. Whoops! Make that, "ever owned." Maybe spending money on something makes it look different to you... But it sure looks better than the dumb PC next to it in my home computer center. (I'd call it my family room, but there's no room for my family in it any more!) Al ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 57 Sat Oct 17, 1992 B.AEIN [B Man] at 22:41 EDT Thanks for backing me up Jim. I sure hope you can find a way to accelerate Falci's. I sure hope that the production machines load Tos off ROM instead of disk, which took at least 1-2 min to load. SAM is great, it allows the user to tag sounds to windows opening and closing, alert boxs ect. True color break out is truley a JOKE and I sincerly hope that it does not ship with the Falcon Unless there is some real work put in to it. Maybe you should have a 15 bit picture as the blocks instead of those unimpressive blocks. Also the ball should NOT bogg down when the mouse is moved!!!! The Falcon is nice, but it ain't no speed demon...Yet right Jim? Bman ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 58 Sat Oct 17, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 23:17 EDT The memory sizes come from the fact there is a 32bit wide memory bus, and only a few sizes of ram chips on the market. The typical setup is: For 1Meg total.....8 256Kx4 drams...this is 32bits wide and holds 1Meg For 4Meg total.....8 1MEGx4 drams...this is 32bits wide and holds 4Megs For 16Meg total...32 1MEGx4 drams...this is 32bits wide and holds 16Megs total. But, only 14Megs of it are accessible. I would assume the 1Meg memory board would be the same as the 4Meg board, with 8 chips on it, either 256Kx4 or 1MEGx4 in size...same pinouts, same size, easy for Atari to build. The 16Meg (14 usable) would have 32 chips on it. I'd doubt they'd bother to add the code in the ram sizing routines in the OS to find other than 1 or 4 or 14, there's just no point. You can't put the SMD 68030 chip into a socket. A socket does exist but is for emulators (68030 SW development tools) and costs $150+ just for the socket. Complex intricate mechanical things cost alot more than electronics do. An adapter does exist that takes the place of the SMD 68030, and costs only a little more than the chip, and this adapter can be soldered into the place the 68030 used to occupy, then an addon board can be plugged onto this adapter. No big deal, in fact this is what's needed for the Mac ClassicII, so we'll see Mac people doing this before long. So the mechanical hurdle has been jumped...making it really silly to have been put up in the first place, it's a nuisance for users not a barrier to expansion. Whether there are electronic barriers built into the design that preclude enhancement is yet to be seen. I've asked repeatedly and gotten no answers to whether the blitter places its address on the 68030 bus during its operations. Also no coherent answer to whether the 68030 to memory accesses are 32bit or not. It's tought to get a straight answer as the only people that actually know are unaccessible to developers. Perhaps if enough users asked Atari to make the answers to those questions available, they would. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 59 Sat Oct 17, 1992 JOHN.KING.T [JOHN KING T] at 23:18 EDT The MEGA STe/TT case is very similar to the to an old PC called a MindSet. This machine is on permanent display in the Musesum of Mondern Art(MOMA). I, too, like the EuroDesign of this machine. JKT ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 60 Sat Oct 17, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 23:47 EDT Jim Allen: Does the BLiTTER in the STe place it's addresses on the 68000 bus? If it doesn't, chances are the Falcon030 BLiTTER does not either. Seeing how your accelerator designs have become so intricate and complex, did you ever think of building complete Atari motherboards with ultra fast clock speeds? Or has the price of the custom chips from Atari put it beyond economical feasability? Why, I bet you could design a Falcon Clone which fits in one of the many hundreds of available separate keyboard or tower cases. All we'd need is to buy ROMS from Atari, (or get someone to write new ROMS). ;-) ____________________ \hunderbird ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 61 Sun Oct 18, 1992 LEXICOR2 [Ringo] at 00:13 EDT King, Me too! That is the EuroDesign case. Ringo ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 62 Sun Oct 18, 1992 J.RICHTER [J.RICHTER] at 01:28 EDT ThunderBird.. It's nice to see you still have an open mind!! gosh the truth must hurt.. ... I appreciate your blind enthusiasm, non the less ... I will buy my Falcon for my reasons you buy your falcon for yours... Jerry Richter ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 63 Sun Oct 18, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 01:45 EDT D.ENGEL - "expansion protection scheme"... I like that. It's probably an accurate description too. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 64 Sun Oct 18, 1992 A.FASOLDT [Al Fasoldt] at 09:28 EDT Mike, It wasn't Wright. But I'll be darned if I know who it was. Al ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 65 Sun Oct 18, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 09:42 EDT J.Richter: Feigning ignorance will not make you make you look any better than you did while feigning knowlege. Nor, will your insults and smear tactics distract from the fact that you were wrong. Changing the subject without responding to a direct rebuttal only enforces this. I don't know why you've taken it upon yourself for many months to dispute everything I say (even if I quote known facts). It's been fun watching you defend defenseless arguments, but I'm sure other people are getting annoyed with your petty squabbles. Please either remain silent and end your baseless attacks, or answer the POINTS presented. Do neither, and you will force me to use satire again. I've been attacked by those who refuse to accept reality, and I must say you've presented the most well developed lucid counterpoints which have ever been used against the truth...NOT. ________________________ \hunderbird 'cause the truth hurts those who wish to hurt the truth. (They know who they are). ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 66 Sun Oct 18, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 12:22 EDT The blitter in ST/STE machines always put its address on the bus. The disk DMA circuit didn't, and that was one of the hurdles that made an ST accelerator more expensive than a Mac or Amiga accelerator. Now that the blitter does all disk activity in the Falcon the issue becomes a simple one, either it does or it doesn't do the right thing. I am still awaiting an answer from Atari, you people may now await this answer with me. We will both see just how forthcoming Atari is. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 67 Sun Oct 18, 1992 D.GLISH [DAVE GLISH] at 12:46 EDT Could the fact that Atari was trying to keep the Falcon relatively compatable with the ST line have anything to do with the decision to go with a 68000 slot instead of a full 68030 slot. Maybe that was one way to keep the two machines compatable. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 68 Sun Oct 18, 1992 S.WINICK at 16:18 EDT Al, Frank Lloyd Wright may not have been the first to say it, but the expression "Form Follows Function" is generally credited to him and his concepts of architectural design. Sheldon Winick (Architect <-- my other hat! ;-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 69 Sun Oct 18, 1992 REALM [Joey] at 17:17 EDT I'm getting tired of both of you... I mean that in a nice way.:-) You really should take it to the other topic... of coarse that probable wouldn't leave much here.:-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 70 Sun Oct 18, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 17:18 EDT Jim, What about 16 1MEGx4 chips? Wouldn't that get you 8 meg? or 16 256Kx4 chips which would give you 2 meg? I know that Atari may have only provided code for the 3 configs but, maybe it could be patched. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 71 Sun Oct 18, 1992 M.EVERHART2 [MIDIMIKE] at 17:25 EDT As someone who uses an Atari because I like it at home and an IBM because I have to at work, I will buy a IBM clone if the Falcon does not have a $3-400 386sx 25mHz emulator. The compatibility issue has gone too far. Actually though, an alternative comes to mind - if Atari programmers include compatible file types, like word perfect, DB, lotus, I could simply transfer my work by disk (hint to Calligrapher programmers in particular). ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 72 Sun Oct 18, 1992 J.RICHTER [J.RICHTER] at 18:28 EDT Thunderbird.. What facts? ... How pompus can you get! .. You mean if I state that the 486-33 is a faster processing engine than any 68030.. period. and because YOU don't believe it (against ALL known criteria) that makes it ignorant in YOUR eyes.. hmmmmm Yes, the memory addressing scheme may not be what the Motorola is .. but it hardly matters as the overall 486 speed is DOUBLE that of the '030. Yes the 68040 is slightly better in some areas and slightly weaker in others... but this discussion is Falcon030 ... No such 040 device here!!! All the Technical gurus here have said that the Falcon is NO SPEED DEMON.. but the 486SX and 486DX systems I have used ARE SPEED DEMONS.. hmmm Its like Jim Allen said.. The Falcon is a Sound and Video Wonder!!! and that is what I will buy it for! and it will be a PLEASURE not to suffer the DOS nightmare... It's speed will suffice..... OK.. this is an argument that will not be won here! some folks just seem to KNOW-IT-ALL so whats the sense... Back to Falcon and only Falcon talk.... Jerry Richter ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 73 Sun Oct 18, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 18:29 EDT The one good thing about a 386sx board is that when running Windows, with appropriate drivers to support the Atari hardware, you'll finally be able to get real VGA graphics under emulation, something you can't do under Dos alone...due to lack of actual PC VGA hardware. Given the price of 386sx clones...whole computers...it must be an inexpensize board to attract users, or the user has to have a lack of space on the desktop ;-) The OS only knows about 1, 4, and 14 so forget about the 2 and 8Meg configurations. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 74 Sun Oct 18, 1992 D.SHORR at 18:36 EDT Maybe a 16bit data path was another way to make the Falcon as STe-compatible as possible. The fact that no one at Atari has answered Jim Allen's questions in this topic makes me think this is another 'compatibility measure' along with the 'PDS'. Hopefully the future Falcons will be able to sacrifice compatibility for SPEED:)! Dave ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 76 Sun Oct 18, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 20:35 EDT J.Richter: What "what facts?"???!!? How obtuse can you get! I mean if I state that the permafrost on Mars contains no molecules of life (against ALL known criteria), not only would I be parroting conclusions drawn by people who have never been to Mars, but I would also leave my own judgement in question because I didn't state whether I had visited any of our neighboring planets myself. Now we go back to 1st grade math: We start with a '486-33 (Which you claim is a faster processing engine than ANY 68030 and specifically quote a figure of "DOUBLE" the speed of the '030). (Writer's note: please highlight the word "ANY" in the previous sentence in 100 foot high italics) I happen to have personally seen a 68030 running at significantly MORE than 1/2 the speed of a '486. It, by the way, was NOT running at a mere 33 Mhz. It's okay to say things like "In my humble opinion, the Earth is flat.", or "My feeling is that a 68030 is easier to program than a 80486". But when you cite specific figures and make vague comparisons such as: "It is a well known fact that used underpants boiled in spoiled milk is 76.0912345 times better tasting than ANY other food in the universe.", well, then you leave yourself open to all sorts of challenges by facts. By the way, your "facts" are slightly out of order in one OTHER key area: All of the Technical Gurus here HAVE NOT said the Falcon is "NO SPEED DEMON". I can name one Technical Guru which has stated that the Falcon030 will be just as fast as a comparable '486. Feel free to download the messages and check, I happen to _know_ my facts. __________________________ \hunderbird 'cause the truth has a way of rearing it's ugly head at the worst possible times... (like when you're trying to invent it). ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 77 Sun Oct 18, 1992 M.BAFFONI [Juxtaposer] at 21:09 EDT Hi all, I realize that I am joining this topic rather late, but I'm a bit confused. According to the posts here, the PDS in the Falcon is crippled and doesn't support all of the pin-outs of the '030. However, during the Glendale Atari show, I specifically asked about this and Bill Rhebok's tech (I forget his name) assured me that the PDS has "all of the pins of the '030 ... 32bit addressing, 32bit data ... which will permit the development of 386DX and 486 emulator cards ... even accelerator cards that put the '030 to sleep." (this is not an exact quote as I didn't have a recorder with me, however there were several in the audience so their owners could probably give you exact quotations). Note: they did not even have the usual slick line about how the Falcon specs aren't set in stone, might change, etc. They said these _are_ the Falcon specs (except for the TOS that was shipping with them - they said they were trying to get MultiTOS finished so that they could include that instead of TOS4.0). So does this amount to Atari having specifically lied about the specifications of the Falcon, or is it only developer pre-mass market machines that are crippled in this manner? (a very confused) -MikeB ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 78 Sun Oct 18, 1992 C.KLIMUSHYN [-Chuck-] at 21:38 EDT Jim Allen, Just curious, how does using Windows get around the previous memory address problems of doing VGA emulation?, that's wild!! Soul Manager, We both will have to forget playing Ultima7 unless some miracle can be pulled off for full DX chip emulation. Computer Gaming World recommended having a 486 machine for the darn game. People with full 386DX machines running at 20/25 mhz were having fits at how slooooooooooooooow the game was running on their machines! Best Regards, -Chuck- p.s. I know there's such a thing as a 386sx 33mhz chip by AMD, I wonder if anyone's planning on using it in an emulation board.....? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 79 Sun Oct 18, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 22:57 EDT The neat thing about Windows...and one reason why it seems slower than Dos when you use it...is that the SW is all written to go through the driver SW to get to the HW. So you can write a Windows video drive for the Falcons video, even off loading the work to the blitter!!!, and all the Windows SW will be able to make use of this video HW. In the Dos world, most of the VGA SW goes straight to the PC specific video HW, in order to get the speed up, and this means that the SW is written to directly diddle VGA chip registers, etc, etc...which a PC emulator on the ST or Falcon doesn't have. Ditto for serial ports, and HDrives, etc, all that is required is a good Windows driver and presto...heck even a sound driver that uses the DSP ;-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 80 Sun Oct 18, 1992 FIFTHCRUSADE at 23:02 EDT Jim Allen, Why don't you ask your questions in the Developers's Roundtable? Or, better yet, actually CALL Atari and talk to someone who knows the answer. John Townsend and Dan McNamee (sorry if that's wrong) are about the only Atari people who would be reading this topic anyway, and they aren't hardware people (wouldn't know the answer). They're also probably very busy all the time at Atari, and don't have time to go find out what you want. Just a suggestion, Ben White 5th Crusade Software ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 81 Sun Oct 18, 1992 LEXICOR2 [Ringo] at 23:07 EDT First was the ST next the TT now the Falcon compared against the PCs. Well Ok. GET an IBM 486 machine with lots of cards, graphics, sounds, multimedia stuff and compare it to the Falcon030. If the IBM multimedia design is so much better than the Falcon, go and buy one! Get the PC multimedia hardware go and spend your money and enjoy!!! Maybe the Falcon is not for you? Later. Ringo ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 82 Sun Oct 18, 1992 B.GRIER at 23:57 EDT Ringo: Well said!! Everyone else: While it may upset you to find out the FALCON is a lowly 16Mhz 68030, if you already own a ST you will be plesantly suprised by it's performance, even if it is a 16 Mhz accellerated ST. I have not used a Falcon but I have used plenty of 68030 systems at work. The best thing you can do would be to get a math co-processor, IF THE SOFTWARE YOU INTEND TO USE SUPPORTS IT. Also choose your resolution carefully. Because of Atari's method of implementing video memory you pay a price in speed every time you increase the number of bits/pixel. About ninety messages ago, one week, I posted some impressions I had of my TT. They were accurate impressions the TT just did not seem all that faster than my accelerated mono ST. My TT was 2meg of memory and 80meg hd. But once I realized that the system trying to draw four times as much, 1bit/pixel vs 4bits/pixel, I could understand the problem. Adding Warp 9 cured this malise. When I want super-fast redraws I switch to ST-High, when I want just darn fast redraws I use TT medium. My TT now has 4 meg of TT-Ram, and it does make a difference. But a TT with only ST-Ram should be comparable to a Falcon. Yes I know that the 32Mhz clock makes a difference, but even with the caches enabled that should only be a 10%-20% difference, in favor of the TT. Brian ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 83 Mon Oct 19, 1992 B.GRIER at 00:09 EDT Ringo: Will Lexicor be releasing a version of Prism render that takes advantage of the DSP? Has anyone had any thoughts on what Atari should send to Jerry Pournelle with regards to Software or Hardware. From the resounding lack of response the last time I posted that question I may be able to assume that no one cares if the Falcon is reviewed by Pournelle. It is truly amazing to read the enormous amount of pissing and mouning going own about this machine. Well I'll crawl back under my rock for another week and view a few more pictures from the GIF's Galore disk from Walnut Creek. Just wish I had true colour instead to the TT's 4096 colors. Ringo: Get some of your pictures up onto Usenet and get Walnut Creek to include them on their next GIF disk, a little FREE ADVERTISING never hurt. Brian, WS1S Bell Northern Research Research Triangle Park, NC ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 84 Mon Oct 19, 1992 E.KRIMEN [Ed Krimen] at 00:16 EDT >D.ENGEL - "expansion protection scheme"... I like that. It's >probably an accurate description too. Steve, I hate to say it, but lets just hope something like that doesn't appear on the product flyer. ;^) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 85 Mon Oct 19, 1992 E.WELLS at 00:41 EDT All this talk about a lowly 16 mhz 030, the new MAC peformas only have lowly 16mhz 030's, and they cost more than a falcon for half the capabilities. if you want more than 16 mhz you need to get the model 600 which is something like twice the price of a falcon and it still only displays 256 colors and doesn't have nearly the sound capabilities. I've used the model 400 and found it to CRAWL... But, you can add a card to emulate old apple II software...WOW! EHW ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 86 Mon Oct 19, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 01:33 EDT S.WINICK - One of the main things that worries me is that if later Falcon's DO have even more features like higher-resolution graphics (say up to 1024x768x256 or higher like where IBM video cards are moving up to), a huge base of low-end machines with lesser features may drive developers to produce mainly software that runs on ALL machines, thus not utilising the higher-end machines' features. I think ALL Falcon machines should have the same basic features with the only differences being speed, expandability, and aesthetics (case design, etc.). M.ALLEN14 - I'm not arguing that the MSTE/TT case isn't FUNCTIONAL. It's just plain ugly! The only FUNCTIONAL thing I don't like is having the mouse/joystick ports on opposite ends of the keyboard. I'd rather those ports be on the CPU case, but if they had to be on the keyboard, I'd rather they were both on the back or right side of it. Where're all the Atari people? Busy??? I HOPE so! Someone on Usenet claims that Falcon's ARE shipping in Germany and that dealers in England should have them within the next week if not already. Also, there's some overly excited individual here (on GEnie) who says that a NeXT representative has, in fact, stated that NeXTStep IS being ported to the Atari Falcon. Anyone at Atari care to comment on this? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 87 Mon Oct 19, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 10:24 EDT Ben, that route has been taken, and nothing resulted from it. Atari seems to only answer truely squeaky wheels, so I am squeaking. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 88 Mon Oct 19, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 21:17 EDT If the software is properly written, then it will work on the higher resolutions. I would like to see higher resolutions on a next generation Falcon. Atari has always been behind the other platforms when it comes to graphics. It's time they catch up or pass them. They seems to have blown them out of the water with sound, now do that for graphics. Also, in the next version of the Falcon, how about adding an IDE connector out the back of the machine. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 89 Mon Oct 19, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 22:07 EDT Wayne Watson: Why not a IDE connector or two INSIDE a tower case Falcon? An SCSI connector in there too would be nice. Frankly, I'm tired of having 6 boxes cabled together on my computer desk. I hardly have room to move my mouse anymore. With the new sound hardware of the Falcon030, I'm going to be adding MORE stuff to my desk to utilize it, and so putting some stuff in a tower on the floor would be the most popular route. Jim Allen: Do you have a Falcon030 yet? Sometimes you sound like you've got one taken apart and know more about it than the rest of us. Sometimes you sound like you're only trying to confirm rumors. The reason I ask this is because of the gentleman from Atari who reportedly claimed at Glendale that the PDS was a REAL PDS, and you said it wasn't. Where do we really stand here? Do you know for a fact that the PDS is not? From what Juxtaposer said, it sounds like the PDS is exactly what you want. I can't see why they would tell something so incorrect. Is there any chance that the PDS contains the 68000 simulator as well as the 68030 signals as well? '486 DX can't be done without the '030 hardware, so if they're so concerned with IBMulation, you'd think they would go with the '030. Who can answer this? _____________________ \hunderbird ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 90 Mon Oct 19, 1992 M.ALLEN14 [Mike Allen] at 22:51 EDT Steve Johnson, well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder! The case kinda grows on you and I really love the keyboard. Useful function keys for a change. I disagree about the joystick ports. I think they are perfect if you have multi- player games. Keeps folks from getting bunched up. On the other hand I still don't understand why the keyboard cable comes out of the right side of the keyboard when it plugs into the left side of the computer. Mike Allen ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 91 Mon Oct 19, 1992 B.DETTERICH at 22:53 EDT Might as well ask it here. What do we all think of the 68060 announcement? So maybe it was predictable as soon as ole Fuji hit the streets with the mongo hot 16MHz -030 ... tsk, tsk ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 92 Mon Oct 19, 1992 WALLY.W [ _Wally_ ] at 23:14 EDT Howdy, Heck, if you take my mega-wopperamalgamated, autorotative, super-bifilated, proton jubilating inter-cooled super-conducting 8068030586/500 w/6.02 x 10^24 GFLOPS chip and put it in an STe, it will blow a Cray [sp?] off the face of the planet...then again, we weren't talking about that, were we? I forget now... The Falcon is the Falcon, is the Falcon. Wally ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 93 Tue Oct 20, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 00:25 EDT J.ALLEN27 - So we CAN have VGA (640x480x256) graphics with a Falcon '386 board? What's the difference using Windows? A Windows driver just tells all the programs running what the resolution is or something rather than programs trying to 'look' at the hardware itself? Would you be able to run VGA DOS programs from Windows or only VGA Windows programs? Also, would you know what the best graphics such a board would be capable of just running DOS? M.BAFFONI - I've also heard Bill Rehbock (and/or other Atari emps) say that '386DX and '486 emulator boards would also be possible using the PDS. I wish Bill or some other Atari tech people could answer all these PDS concerns. B.GRIER - I'd guess that Atari will be sending at least a 4/65 model Falcon030 to Jerry...MAYBE a 14/65 model. Jerry's supposed to be getting SOMETHING in mid-November, though, from what he's said. E.KRIMEN - Well, "expansion protection scheme" isn't on the Falcon030 brochure transcription that I have. However, the brochure DOES have a few incorrect/misleading things in it, such as: "For video, the Atari Falcon030 doesn't just offer Super VGA graphics, but also true color 16-bit modes (up to 640x480 resolution and up to 65,536 on-screen colors)." -- That makes it sound like there's a VGA 16-bit true color mode. and "For digital recording, the Atari Falcon030 handles 8 discrete tracks at a time, without add-on boards or issues of compatibility." -- That sounds like you can record 8 simultaneous tracks of audio without any extra hardware. The whole brochure sounds pretty good on the whole, but it would be better to see a real brochure with pictures and such. D.ENGEL & J.RICHTER - Could you PLEASE take your arguing either to GEmail or the "Atari systems vs. Other systems" topic? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 94 Tue Oct 20, 1992 SAM-RAPP [<>] at 01:07 EDT Steve ----------------> If an application is written "properly", it should run in ANY resolution that the user chooses. Including any future resolutions that may be included in future models. This does come at a cost of speed, but it is the underlying beauty of using a system such as the Atari. The operating system can handle all the nitty gritty and leave the programmer to write beautiful transportable code..... ------------------------------------------- NeXT Step for the Falcon? I read that over in the SFRT too. It would be a good thing, but I think Falcon (in it's current incarnation) would be too slow in comparison with a NeXT, or NeXT Step '486. ---------------------------------------- Speaking of NeXT, Atari listen up!!! I think you would do well to emulate NeXT by providing development documentation and tools to all purchasers of Falcon. Put it all on a CD ROM and make it available at a low cost to any and all that want it (approx $50). This is a good way to get an expanding software base and get average people and students to start writing more stuff. --------------------------------------------------- ----------------> Sam ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 95 Tue Oct 20, 1992 B.KING8 [Brien King] at 01:33 EDT Steve - I really doubt that it would do that. I personaly would rather require a MINIMUM resolution and if they had beter then I would use it. If not resolution, a MINIMUM number of colors on screen at a time. If my software works in 640x480x256 there should be no reason why it wouldn't work in 1024x768x256. If the sytem doesn't meet the minimum (640x480x256) then I put up a message saying "Hey I need more pixles and Colors!!" and then exit gracfully. If the application can run a lesser resolution there should be no reason it couldn't run in a higher resolution (Except Games maybe). Brien King ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 96 Tue Oct 20, 1992 REALM [Joey] at 02:01 EDT I have a TT and a lot of the important software works fine at higher resolutions. Some of it even supports resolutions I don't have. I've also had good luck running software on a Matrix card at 1024x768x256 colors, sucks up a lot of memory but it works. There is software available that already supports these resolutions. Not all of it's expensive either. In my opinion (based on what I have already)... Anything over 640x480x256 is a waste on anything other then DTP (includes editing pictures related to publishing). Anything over television resolution and color is a waste for Video Production in a home system. A 1024x768x16 would be a good resolution to have added to the Falcons big brother along with the 1280x960x2 mono mode. Both are well suited for CADD, Spreadsheeting and Word processing. Plus there practical for just about everything else but games. Anything over that is overkill and should be placed in the 3rd party Graphics Card area. I suggest instead of asking for better graphics from Atari you should tell them why you need better graphics and why the added cost will be justified. When they ask you why you need 16million colors you better have a better answer then Steno.:-) Lets be practical about what we need and get away from these spec sheets. Unless you just want to buy a 50mhz machine with 600meg hard drive, 17" monitor and 14 megs of RAM just to get started? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 97 Tue Oct 20, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 02:05 EDT B.DETTERICH - The only thing I heard today, computer industry-wise, is that John Scully (CEO of Apple Computer) is a Republican supporting Bill Clinton for President. What exactly was the 68060 announcement and what was that about Fuji? Feel free to take this over to another, maybe more appropriate topic, if you wish. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 98 Tue Oct 20, 1992 S.NOAH [Stu] at 02:53 EDT J@Fast Tech, As an owner of the original PC ditto software I have come to believe that just about anything is possible. It's too bad that Avant Gard didn't just stick with the software emulator, if anyone could have done a tidy job of emulating VGA hardware in software I'm sure that they could. P.S. If you got burned by the PC ditto II fiasco please don't be upset by my previous message, but the software emulator is kind of a novelty. Stu ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 99 Tue Oct 20, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 10:37 EDT I do not have a Falcon, but have been "inside" a production unit. As for the items I've been harping on, they've been discussed in public by Atari at the various unveilings...I would have been yeling months earlier if it weren't for the non-disclosure devs are under. I don't need any rumors confirmed, I am aware first hand of the unpleasentnesses. Sure, a SW PCDitto could mimick VGA, but it's slower than an AT is, the HW 386sx units are quite fast but can't do or even emulate Dos VGA. WINDOWS applications running on a Falcon can do VGA trhough the Windows driver, but Dos applications running under Windows CANNOT, as they still go directly to the PC video hardware. Just because it's running under Windows doesn't mean the SW was altered to stop doing bad things. But Windows SW which operates only through the windows OS routines would be immune to the wackiness of the HW. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 100 Tue Oct 20, 1992 K.HULET at 20:11 EDT Mike Allen Al Fasoldt and especially Sheldon Winick according to Familiar Quotations........ " Form ever follows function" is from Louis Henry Sullivan, one of Wright's mentors, I think. Sheldon, please call as soon as the Falcons land! Ken Hulet ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 101 Tue Oct 20, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 20:14 EDT A tower Falcon would be great. Since the IDE (not sure about Atari's) can access 2 drives, the case should have at least 3 drive bays. Of course, with a tower case, you will have 3.5" (or 5.25") drive bays so it would open up a larger range of IDE drives. A 5.25" 210meg IDE drive only cost about $450.00. The upgrade/addon possibilities of a tower Falcon would be a lot better than the MSTE/TT case and tower cases are cheap at high volume. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 102 Tue Oct 20, 1992 B.STOREY [Billy B.] at 21:26 EDT There is something that I feel is being overlooked in the discussion re how Falcon030 SHOULD have been designed vs how it WAS designed. The computer industry is probably the fastest moving industry in the world, as far as new and improved technology is concerned. I feel it is quite probable that when the Falcon was planned, many of the advances we are discussing were not yet invented. Another point is: I haven't yet seen an Atari computer which did not have several improved versions following closely on the heels of one another. It is possible that a version of the 030 sold this time next year will have many of these overlooked improvements in them. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 103 Tue Oct 20, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 22:45 EDT Jim Allen: I'm really confused as to why people would be told one thing about the Falcon, and developers say that it is not true. I don't understand. _____________________ \hunderbird What other surprises are in store for us? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 106 Wed Oct 21, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 00:58 EDT SAM-RAPP - Okay, well I guess only things like games and other non-GEM software (software that uses raster graphics and not virtual workstations or polygon graphics/etc.) may be affected. I still just think the Falcon030's graphics fall somewhat short of what's pretty much EXPECTED nowadays (and for the next few years) as far as higher resolutions are concerned. I just don't call the Falcon030's graphics really near "state-of-the-art." I would EXPECT a 24-bit palette, also. One reason being that it would offer grey scale in up to 256 levels in 8-bit graphics modes. I hope nobody gets me wrong here, as I AM quite impressed with the Falcon030 as is -- just a lot more so in the audio and DSP areas than in the graphics area. I have to admit that I'll also be somewhat cynical about the F030 until I actually SEE one in action for myself. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 108 Wed Oct 21, 1992 SAM-RAPP [<>] at 01:02 EDT Thunderbird ---------------> According to Atari's Falcon030 developers documentation, the falcon includes a "68000 direct microprocessor interface." Further, "signals such as UDS, LDS, AS, and DTACK have been synthesized from the 68030 equivilents." Also, "The expansion bus has 16-bit data and 24-bit address lines." That is where things stand at the moment............... -------------------> Sam ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 109 Wed Oct 21, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 01:55 EDT I've just heard that dealers may not even be getting their 'demo' Falcon030 unit (or maybe just UNIT!) until just before Christmas and that 'for sale' units won't be shipped until at least January. Is this so? Also, Atari Advantage (I think) reported that the Falcon030's been delayed because they changed from the metal shielding to a metal flake spray shielding on the inside of the casing, which also means that Atari has to re-submit the Falcon030 to the FCC for Class B certification. What's going on? Also, even in Germany, dealers HAVE 'demo model' Falcon030's, but apparently not even THEY know when shipments of machines are coming. I hope THIS will keep me from taking Sam Tramiel at all seriously again the next time he says ANYTHING, no matter HOW sincere it may sound! Unless, of course, this is all B.S. and Falcon030's are LITERALLY on their way right this second. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 110 Wed Oct 21, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 03:36 EDT Who cares who supports who. I never understood why they seem to have to mention so and so supports me. It's as if they are saying that just because a certain person or press or whatever supports them, then I should also. People should vote for the person they feel is right for them, not who supports them. Anyway, I heard a rumor and maybe someone can state whether it is true or not. Is it true that the Falcon030 does really have 3D icons, buttons, sliders, etc.? Atari claims that it does but, someone says that it doesn't really. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 111 Wed Oct 21, 1992 REALM [Joey] at 06:04 EDT Don't count on Atari for anything... just buy whats available, use it and never look to the future. If their here tomorrow thats a bonus but if not your machine still works and you'll have the same amount of support you do now. I wouldn't kill any brain cells waiting for this thing. That would be my advice based on years of experience. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 112 Wed Oct 21, 1992 S.NOAH [Stu] at 10:29 EDT J@Fast Tech, 1) What about DOS programs running within a Window under windows ? If I am correct in this case Windows is itself actually emulating the VGA display hardware in software. 2) Would it be reasonable to do the greater portion of the emulator in hardware and the VGA display portion in software ala P.C. Ditto V.1 ? 3) Just hypothetically, how fast would a fully software based emulator run on the Falcon ? (PC Ditto ran a norton SI of .3 times the speed of an XT, and my 25Mhz 386sx runs an SI of 23.5 times an XT). ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 114 Wed Oct 21, 1992 SAM-RAPP [<>] at 19:39 EDT Steve -------> Thats just it. Atari is nudging developers to start using all the proper OS bells and whistles. All games SHOULD be written to run in windows. All APPLICATIONS should use virtual workstations. If they don't I'm afraid they _probably_ won't run under MultiTos. If all applications were written in a manner that lets the OS handle the nitty gritty of the individals system then maybe Atari would not have to bend over backwards to ensure backwards compatibility. Maybe then they could make the quantum leap forward in technology that a lot of people expect them to make. I also think the Falcon is fantastic as is. I plan to wait until first quarter '93 to buy one even though I have the money to do it now. My "Dream Falcon System": 68040 at 32 Mhz Full Falcon030 compatibility Tower case with at least 4 bays (floppy, HD, Syquest, CD ROM) up to 32 Meg RAM on board. a couple of VME slots Well thats a good start!!! :^> -------------------> Sam ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 115 Wed Oct 21, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 22:08 EDT Dos programs are Dos programs, they talk directly to the VGA hardware, there is NOTHING you can do about that, when run in a window under Windows, it has its memory and IO accesses manipukated by Windows, but there is no way to block access to the VGA chip if the SW talks to it. Running Windows and Windows applications, you could have a very good PC emulation with full video support, etc....but only under those circumstances. That's why the current Dos emulators have video limitations. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 116 Thu Oct 22, 1992 M.HEMBRUCH [Mattias] at 00:28 EDT W. Watson: > The falcon should have been designed so that all you would have to >do is pop in a new clock and 030 and have 32+ mhz... Yes, the SST & Turbo-030's (in alphabetical order) are nice that way.. Not having seen any specs on it myself, I can't really comment, but my feeling is that there would have to be many more components changed than just an 030 & oscillator... And they would have had to do auto-sensing of speed in order to run other things properly, etc.. I don't care if the 030 is not expandable, I just want an 040 that is (or a faster 030)... Jim Allen: > Folks who need MAXIMUM power, speed & expandability should invest > in an original MegaST w/ T030 & video board... Sure, I wouldn't mind, but who's to say my 4 year old MegaST, which I will have to buy used, will last another year?? I realize electrical components usually outlast their useful life, but my old ST died on me.. I bought a dealer demo 1040fm for cheap, hoping it would last a couple of years. I don't doubt that the T030 (or the SST for that matter) would run faster than a TT. BUT, if you don't own a MegaST, the TT is a better buy.. a used mega 4 ST runs $500 (at least I haven't seen any for less). A new TT runs $1600 w/ 4 megs (this is a recent dealer price). I understand a T030 runs $999 for the low-end model, $1800 for high end (these prices I got from Atari user when the T030 was announced - haven't heard anything more about prices - they may well be somewhat less). So, mega 4 + T030 is $1500, a new TT w/ 4 megs is $1600. So, TT has better video, better sound, more colors. Are there any good video boards for $100? I haven't heard of any. And again, there is the issue of reliability. I've heard some mega4's had problems running GCR, moniterm & SST at once. Not all of them (then it would be the designer's fault), just a few.. How do I know I'm not getting a lemon?? .. Seems like Atari should be producing & selling mega4's and letting people customize them any way they want.. I know if I could buy a NEW mega4 ST I would... Mattias - needing a Mac soon, but wanting to buy an Atari... ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 118 Thu Oct 22, 1992 MAG.SOFTWARE at 03:26 EDT Well, Iv'e just scanned/read through the previous 117 messages and am astonished that not one person from Atari has left a single word to respond to all the questions, complaints, etc. regarding the Falcon030. Atari has come out with (or hopfully soon, God willing) with an excellent machine that has the potential to blow everything else right out of the water. Unfortunately it's the same old wish-wash all over again. Let's just admit it, Atari screwed up some things again. Users complain or gently give Atari a nudge towards what they would prefer to see while Atari turns a deaf ear. As I have noticed, the _only_ people Atari pays some attention to are the larger developers. Users are, or seem to be, totally ignored. Listen up Atari!! _WE_ feed you your bread and butter. Not every single penny has to be "pinched". Drop few for a _FULL_ Direct Processor Slot. Respond to your customers with direct answers -- no dodging the gun. Atari has insisted on placing the Falcon in a 1040 STe style case to save money. Everyone and their grandmother make PC style cases that could be aquired a minimal cost. Jim Allen: You have honest complaints about the Falcon and I agree with you whole heartedly, but hey, it's Atari! Don't expect too much. :) Jeff ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 119 Thu Oct 22, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 04:12 EDT J.ALLEN27 - Some DOS programs have drivers for different video cards, though, so perhaps a new driver for the Falcon's video hardware can be written for some DOS programs' use. Yes? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 120 Thu Oct 22, 1992 FIFTHCRUSADE at 04:15 EDT Gee, if I were someone at Atari, I wouldn't be too eager to respond to all this endless complaining. I'd expect, if I did respond, to be rudely barked at by lots of people. I personally try to avoid those sorts of situations. I don't blame the people at Atari for not responding at all. (And just to ward off the inevitable misunderstanding, no, I don't work for Atari.) Also, knock off the political comments everyone. You see, if one person posts something, then other people respond. Then other people respond to them. After a while I start posting. Very soon after that chaos engulfs the topic. People get mad they're paying to read non-Falcon posts in the Falcon topic. Sysops are called. Message moves are demanded. Time passes. Anarchy is rampant. The messages get moved. All is again quiet. This CAN be avoided. Just don't put partisan comments in your posts. PLEASE. Ben White 5th Crusade Software PS. [White in 2016]. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 122 Thu Oct 22, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 10:24 EDT Definitely, some Dos programs had the disipline to go through a driver rather than straight to the HW, so for instance an Autocad driver, or a PC Dynacadd driver would allow those Dos apps to run on the Falcon. Mattias, used MegaST units average $350, a Turbo030 is $1495, an ISAC is $299, and a good 17"-19" monitor is $1,000...total: $3,144 for a unit with HiRes color that runs 2-3 TIMES faster than the TT. That same amount would buy you an 8Meg TT with 19" HiRes mono, at todays super sale prices. Color+Speed == Mono+PuttPutt.....NOT ;-) There are 200,000-300,000 MegaST computers in the world, and they are in my opinion the best Atari ever made. The smartest thing Atari could do is stuff the Falcon functionality into the same form factor...w/32bit expansion connector...they'd be back on top of the market in Germany, rather than watching the German market evaporate as it is now. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 123 Thu Oct 22, 1992 JCOMMS at 10:38 EDT J.EIDSVOOG1: Isn't it normally an uninformed political discussion? Man, am I out of it! Things have changed _that_ much in twelve weeks? (grin) Okay, folks ... I must admit, I'm again confused. Direct processor expansion bus? For what? To control the Schnoilog HDTV video frame-grabber that's going to be the breakthrough product that puts a Falcon in every video post- production facility in the world? To permit absolutely-perfect, Phoenix-BIOS- compatible 486/33 Windows LocalBus emulation, for all of the twelve to fifteen people who haven't figured out that a good 486/33/DX/8/80/non-interlaced system costs $1,700 through an 800-number in Computer Shopper? Games have to be written to run under MultiTOS? Who says? And who in their right minds would think that any game more ambitious than Reversi could be written to run under ANY operating system? Look, guys. Accept reality. They've developed, and are apparently prepared to deliver a reasonably-powerful, consumer-priced computer, with features that are intrinsically useful for putting over "pretty" applications. With a few, reasonably-priced add-ons, you might consider making the thing the cornerstone of a really nifty home music studio, or a somewhat-more-clumsy-but-still- effective home video processing rig. Or, you might write really nifty games for it that completely IGNORE everything except the processor, RAM, and the DSP. The DSP is the groovy component, and everything on the DSP is (or so I'm told) wide open. So, in sum, with a Falcon, you have a medium-speed CIS processor, plenty of RAM, a fairly groovy DMA subsystem, a few free clock interrupts, sorta-kinda-okay video, the usual cast of ports, a nifty joystick, MIDI, and the DSP, plus some other candy, like a usable GUI. For cheap. So why are you beating on these guys? Think consumer product. Think applications. Realize that it takes a secretary with an IQ of 112 (low average) something like 20 hours to configure IBM WordPerfect to run with a TI Microlaser printer. The fundamental problems of personal computing have not been solved. Solve them with your brilliant applications, on this more-or-less-okay hardware. It really _is_ more or less okay. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 125 Thu Oct 22, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 20:34 EDT Yea, Atari dropped in and told us of this great machine and then left. Where is Bob? I don't think they want to answer anything here because then they would have to tell the truth. I will not believe anything those at the top say until I see it actually happen. Didn't Sam say that the dealers would be getting machines by October and then turn around and we find out that it was a bunch of crap. This whole thing reminds me of the things Bush has been saying about Clinton. They are wishy washy. They say one thing and do something else and then say the didn't say it and on and on and on. They blew it again. Look, all we want is someone to be honest and straight foward with us and not give us the run around or lies or to just totally ignore the user base. Atari is too busy kissing the European butt to worry about us US nobody people. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 126 Thu Oct 22, 1992 C.KLIMUSHYN [-Chuck-] at 22:47 EDT You folks poo-pooing DOS emulation just don't understand....there's an exquisite, WICKED gratification that comes with running IBM programs on an Atari! :) What's even sweeter is that since their floppies and HD's are formatted the same way as ours, you can also do DOS file maintenance in GEM. A couple of my Clonehead friends flipped when they saw me copying and deleting DOS files from the GEM desktop!! :):) Best Regards, -Chuck- ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 127 Thu Oct 22, 1992 R.MARTIN22 [NETWORK 23] at 23:34 EDT Wayne: I saw a Falcon last week and it did have 3D icons. They don't look like much in ST Med rez, but they're really nice in 640x480. Live And Direct [12:19 AM-22/Oct/92], Rod Martin, Network 23/ST Connection ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 128 Fri Oct 23, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 00:20 EDT The new 3D look and spiffy active color icons are really really neat. I really look forward to the new GEM being made available to the whole product line. The nice thing about having an STE or TEC board now is that you can just slap a new generation OS in when Atari makes it available. Ditto for TurboXXX's as well of course ;-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 129 Fri Oct 23, 1992 B.GRIER at 00:47 EDT Well things have certainly been a lot quieter here this week!! I to would like to see the developers kit available on CD-Rom, it would give me a use other than this GIF Galore disk from Walnut Creek. Two weeks ago I asked if the developers kit for the Falcon was available to all, for a nominal fee, and have received no reply here. Guess I'll have to call Gail. But it sure would be nice if I got an answer here, save me a call and Gail a couple hundred calls. Still no one has said what they think Atari should provide in the way of software to Jerry Pournelle. Guess no one here cares if the Falcon gets a good review. :^( I'll through my two cents in : Dyna-Cad, WordPerfect, PageStream, Lexicor's Phase IV software, Notator, LDW Power, and Pure C. Now let's here from others I know you have a program that you feel makes the Atari platform shine. Now's your chance to let Atari know. Brian, WS1S ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 130 Fri Oct 23, 1992 Z-NET at 01:37 EDT Where is Atari, you ask? Working late every night to get ready for COMDEX in less than a month. Bob is also at the Houston Atari show this weekend, against the better judgement of some in the company who feel that COMDEX matters more. If Bob (or others at Atari) find a way to get 40 hours our of a single day, they'll have a few minutes left for their family... but probably still not enough left for being online. The 3-D screen stuff is only in the true color modes. "Old" screen resolutions look the same as before. The Atari si NOT like a PC; you can't speed up the clock and slap a CPU that can handle it in and make the thing run faster. Video is interlaced in with CPU instructions; speed up the CPU and the video (and other processes) won't operate at all. That's why you need Jim or Dave to design a real accellerator... to sort things out, give the motherboard the attention it needs at the speeds it was designed to get it, and then do the blazing away on stuff meant only for the CPU. John Nagy ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 131 Fri Oct 23, 1992 D.A.BRUMLEVE [kidprgs] at 02:07 EDT Bill Rehbock has posted repeatedly that Falcon docs are indeed available. I believe the price was $80. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 132 Fri Oct 23, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 03:07 EDT J.ALLEN27 - Maybe Atari (or SOMEONE) could release information to IBM developers on how to write drivers for the Falcon's video hardware, so that their programs can be used fully on a Falcon IBM emulator. With COMDEX just a few weeks away, I'm sure Bill and Bob are REALLY too busy to check-in here. And since COMDEX is supposed to be the BIG intro for the F030 (and it's rumored they'll show off a 'Falcon040' prototype there as well, though maybe only in private), I think they're justified in not being here. Atari better hurry up with their Falcon machines, though, as Commodore has apparently just announced the Amiga 1200, which is sort of a 68020-based A600 (though with a longer case to include a keypad) w/ a 32-bit bus and the same AGA chipset found in the A4000 for only around 399 Pounds w/o a hard drive, from what I've heard. I don't know if this is entirely true, though. Oh! Someone might want to tell Bob (or Sam or whoever it was) to re-check into COMPUTER CHRONICLES. One of them said after the BCS show that the program was apparently no longer, but I've seen two new shows for this season (CC's 10th anniversary) already. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 133 Fri Oct 23, 1992 S.WINICK at 09:35 EDT JCOMMS, A very rational and realistic view of the Falcon. Those folks trying to compare Atari's new mass-market product with a high end professional graphic workstation aren't making a fair comparison. But keeping the system in proper perspective, it definitely has the potential of delivering a high percentage of those multi-media features to the typical consumer at a mere fraction of the cost of a true professional system. And..... if properly merchandised, that should sell very well indeed. The Falcon is giant step forward for Atari's entry level 1040-style machine. What the Atari platform desperately needs right now is volume sales, not mere bragging rights about having the best or most state of the art features. Hopefully, Atari will be able to provide us with a well rounded family of systems to suit every possible consumer need and desire. Currently, the 1040STe and Falcon are aimed at one end of the spectrum, and the high end TT030 at the other. New models are always in the planning stages, and if history is any indication, I'm sure we'll continue to see a consistent and rational evolution of the entire Atari platform. Sheldon (Computer STudio - Asheville, NC) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 134 Fri Oct 23, 1992 S.WINICK at 09:35 EDT Wayne, OK... here's some honest and straight forward information -- the kind I regularly give my customers: Until any system actually begins appearing on dealer shelves, it is still a prototype and for all practical purposes, simply does not exist as far as dealers and consumers are concerned. That applies to not only Atari, but to all computer manufacturers. Preliminary delivery dates spoken about by manufacturers (all manufacturers, not just Atari) when new models are first introduced in prototype form, should be taken with a grain of salt. There are many variables in the equation between first showings and actual delivery that nobody has complete control over. Anyone in the market for a new computer system must select from currently available models. Every manufacturer always has something new in the planning stages, and no sooner than that new model is released, you can be certain that there will be yet another 'new' model ready to take its place in the lineup of 'new' systems. The Atari platform, like other systems which have survived the test of time in this volatile industry, are constantly in a state of evolution. There will always be something newer, faster, more powerful and feature packed waiting to be introduced. Enjoy what you have and what's available. When future systems arrive, we'll be able to enjoy them as well (until they too are replaced by yet another generation ;-). Sheldon (Computer STudio - Asheville, NC) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 135 Fri Oct 23, 1992 D.SHORR at 22:05 EDT Anyone interested in learning more about Digital Signal Processing should grab the November issue of Byte. The issue has a number of articles all about DSP's. Unfortunately no mention was made of the Falcon, the first 'affordable' computer with a DSP as standard equipment:(. Dave ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 136 Fri Oct 23, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 22:08 EDT Brien, It doesn't do any good to say anything to Atari. They just don't listen. I am sure they have already discussed it with Jerry anyway. Atari will never listen to anything the US market has to say. Atari should hire Jim or Dave (George) to do the hardware design then. Maybe then we would get something we could pop a faster CPU into. That's right, how could I have forgotten? If you want answers from Bob Brodie, you have to get onto Atari-Net. :-( That seems to be Atari's NEW information service of choice now. I hope it won't be long until they replace the TT with the Falcon040. Maybe that system will be a little better designed. Sheldon, I ALWAYS take EVERYTHING Atari says with a grain of salt. I ain't about to waste my money on a TT, when pretty soon it will be obsolete like the Mega will be when the Falcon030 arrives. The TT is too much of a pain in the butt to mess with. Reminds me of those PCs. Fiddle with this bit and fiddle with that bit and do this and do that just to get something to work right. No Thank You. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 137 Fri Oct 23, 1992 POTECHIN [Nathan @ DMC] at 22:46 EDT Brian ... You might simply leave B.REHBOCK some email right here on GEnie as an alternative. He does come online regularly I believe. Good post Sheldon. Wayne ... Atari has EXCELLENT computers. They always have! That has not been the problem or the cause of the current state of the market. The Falcon 030 is an excellent unit that should do real well if positioned correctly. The computer itself offers great value and we all wish Atari much success with it. Bob is on GEnie as much as possible. ALl Atari employees are doing multiple jobs and working ridiculous hours. John Townsend posts regularly, as does Dan. Even Bill appears now and then. :-) I throughly enjoy using my TT. I will happily replace it with the next generation Falcon 040 whenever but until then, it is a good computer that certainly does everything I ask of it. I also use Jim's board in my Mega ST4. Yup, I liked that Atari computer too, especially running 8 megabytes at 50 MHz on the 68030. :-) Nathan @ DMC Publishing ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 138 Fri Oct 23, 1992 A.FASOLDT [Al Fasoldt] at 23:37 EDT Thanks, Ken. For a while, this forum was following function, too, but it was a nice detour to get a reminder of Louis Sullivan's influence. Wayne, The Falcons I saw at WAACE had 3D icons and buttons. I was not impressed with the 3D effect. Al ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 139 Sat Oct 24, 1992 WALLY.W [ _Wally_ ] at 00:01 EDT Howdy, Wayne - So, not only are we not going to believe anything an Atari-person says, but we are demanding that they show up and say something that we won't believe... If I were John T. or Bill R. I'd IGN PER this Topic in a heartbeat. I have a hard time understanding how the need for _facts_ can make some people so acetic. I've got the feeling that some of people here don't have any idea what they are talking about, and have turned this into a major rumour-mill. I'll be more than happy to wait for the Atari reps for facts. Wally ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 140 Sat Oct 24, 1992 B.DETTERICH at 00:10 EDT Steve Johnson(10): First, the comment re "Fuji" referred to Atari Corp. (gee). You can figure out whether that was a "dig" or not. (tsk). 68060 is the next member of the 680x0 family, whose existence has been (formally?) announced by Motorola or someone close. The -040 executes roughly 1 instruction per 1.5 (+or-) clocks. The -060 keeps the Harvard architecture (look it up), and, with proper compiler can optimize certain combinations of instructions (e.g. load/store combo being about 80% of instruction execution). The RISC machines do this in spades. Motorola's attention to building a well thought out instruction set is the reason for the 680x0 ease of programming, and, combined with the fully and linearly addressable memory, the reason why it always outperforms its Intel contemporaries ... but of course you already know all this since you bought an Atari ... right?? All kidding aside, (oh, Intel has done similar, albeit late things with its newest (P5??) this is good news, and may be the reason that MOT stock took a nice uptick this last week. Gee, does this mean Atari may skip the -040 and ... me thinks NEVERHACHI!!! ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 141 Sat Oct 24, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 00:24 EDT Ayari doesn't need to hire me to do HW design, they have good HW people. They need to hire gee-whiz visionary types to decide WHAT to build, that is where they are seriously lacking. The Falcon is spiffy, excellently designed and layed out, it's the guy who told the HW designers to put a bent 68000 bus in rather than a full 68030 bus who needs to be replaced. This has been a problem for 7 years, continual taking of the wrong fork in the strategic decision chain ;-) It's simple. You have decided you want to put a connector in. You can: A) Put a connector in that has the broadest, most far reaching uses. OR B) Put in some subset of what you could have, and settle for the lower potential the machine could have had. Either choice could be arranged to cost EXACTLY as much, so cost is not a factor. The choice was made to pick B so they would not have addons for the bottom end machine that might get in the way of sales of some higher end machine in the future. They were affectively "locking in" the users need to buy the FalconII (or what ever), and the Falcon buyers pay the price by paying for a machine that has less potential than it would have if the "strategist's" weren't so short sighted. It's a poor practice, even Apple has ceased to do it, time for Atari to knock it off. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 142 Sat Oct 24, 1992 REALM [Joey] at 00:33 EDT The TT was obsolete the day it was released... pretty much like every electronic device. By time the R&D is finished new chips are being released. However if a company continues trying to stay current they'd be just like people waiting for the next system. They'd never release a product and you'd never buy it. The TT's still better suited for several tasks over the Falcon, not to mention you can buy IT.:-) There are several graphic cards available with graphics far better then the Falcons. Plus it's now expandable via SIMMs to 32/64/128/256 MEGS of RAM and various configurations. It won't be truely obsolete until a Falcon 040 is selling in a Tower or TT case. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 143 Sat Oct 24, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 04:06 EDT J.ALLEN27 - re: msg#141 I couldn't agree with you more whole-heartedly! There IS a difference between 'crippling' and 'cost-saving' but the 68000 bus for the PDS is DEFINITELY the former, or as appropriately named before, an "expansion protection scheme." I also agree with you that Atari has top-notch (some of the 'toppest'! ) hardware designers as I've always heard compliments about the ST's hardware design (INCLUDING compliments directly from IBM R&D personnel). And I'm sure we're ALL aware of the corny decisions made at the corporate level! ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 144 Sat Oct 24, 1992 C.OINES1 [Chazz] at 09:12 EDT I don't know, Jim... everything _I_ want from the Falcon is already included. To me, it's not at all crippled. Note to all: RAM prices have doubled in the last week. Washington's stiffing us all again, and that's BEFORE Clinton moves in... I'm voting the Libby ticket again. I'm sick of this crap. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 145 Sat Oct 24, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 10:14 EDT Sheldon: Your points are well taken, but in all honesty, I feel that to keep the Falcon030 in truly proper perspective, we must scrutinize the cost-cutting measures applied to the Falcon030 with some degree of suspicion. If you listen to what Atari says, the Falcon030 is a really nifty multimedia computer which fills 98% of anyone's needs. On the other hand, if you listen to what they _don't_ say, you can really give yourself a scare. Here is a scenario (this is PURE SPECULATION, so nobody take this out of context as fact, please). Atari says: "Processor Direct Slot for '486 boards" Atari doesn't say: "68000 slot included because the Falcon030 only has a 16 bit data bus of the 68030. A 32 bit '486 is possible, but extra circuitry is needed to interface it to the 16 bit bus, which will cut the '486 speed in half." Atari says: "Overlay bit and video port for Genlocking." Atari doesn't say: "You need an extra box at unknown cost to really do genlocking. Box price and availability are unknown." Atari says: "8 Channel 16 bit audio record/playback via DMA." Atari doesn't say: "You may only use 2 channels of Audio out of the box on a Falcon030. You _must_ use the universally panned mini jacks for your audio input/output, because the standard RCA style jacks are not included. You can spend another heap of cash if you want professional quality jacks and the other 6 channels." Who knows what other "features" have been included in the "features" which Atari has put into the Falcon030. As Jim Allen said, the Falcon030 seems to be designed to prohibit expansion into the realms of future machines. If that isn't 'crippling' then what is the Falcon030? "Physically Challenged"??? Once again I must state that these scenarios are all unconfirmed because I do not have a Falcon, and nobody in the know at Atari seems willing to answer any direct questions people (even developers) have. It is just really depressing to see Atari drop out of sight when there are serious questions being asked. They're right here when they announce (and brag about) the thing, they eat up all of the praise and complements. But when questions arise, hello? hello? hello? Everyone: It seems to me that whomever said the "Computer Chronicles" show was cancelled must be incorrect. I just saw another NEW episode 1/2 an hour ago. The person who said it was cancelled must have had their local PBS station drop the show, and they misunderstood this as a cancellation. Anyways, this weeks show featured speech technologies on the PC. One highlight of the show had a speech recognition board for the PC, including an (unspecified) DSP, with software, for $999. Another highlight of the show was a Windows sound board which gave speech recognition and "CD Quality" sound to windows applications, for the incredibly low-low price of just $279. This board is incorporated into the motherboard of 2 models of Compaq Deskpro computers. Granted these kludgy addons do not have the same potential as the Falcon030's equivalent systems, and are expensive in comparison, but as we have seen proven time and time again in the PC world that PC users don't care how cobbled together their systems are. As long as the salesman says that it's the best on the planet, they will pay good money to have it. ________________________ \hunderbird 'cause even a 'crippled' Falcon030 is better than a PC clone. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 146 Sat Oct 24, 1992 POTECHIN [Nathan @ DMC] at 10:40 EDT Thunderbird ... I remember buying a brand new automobile (back before I was a starving Atari developer) :-) and going over the "OPTIONS". This is fairly common practise and can certainly affect the overall cost of the car in question in a dramatic fashion. Anyway, the reason that I mention it was that I actually bought a large Olds and I remember bursting out laughing when the salesman asked if I wanted a 3 speed manual transmission on the sterring wheel or automatic. Now I've driven a stick shift half of my life but not on the steering wheel and not on an Olds so I laughed. I thought he was joking. Nope. It seemed that the absolete 3 speed stick shift on the steering wheel came standard with the car and that an automatic transmission was an additional $500.00. I came very close to ordering the 3 speed just to make the car company actually produce one. My point is, Atari didn't invent marketing and advertising or the English language and I still remember the immortal words of a professor of mine back in University that taught me CAVEAT EMPTOR! :-) All that said, I still believe that the Falcon 030 offers GREAT value and is an excellent computer, for many applications. Nathan @ DMC Publishing ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 147 Sat Oct 24, 1992 J.BUDIL [Jonathan] at 12:11 EDT I'm not sure I would say all computers are obsolete when they are released; to me, obsolescence means that you can no longer do the work that you need to on it, and you can't find support for it anywhere at all. I guess this is just a word-choice quibble. I _would_ freely admit that all computers aren't state of the art by the time they're released, however. --Jonathan Budil ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 148 Sat Oct 24, 1992 J.ROY18 [Jonathan] at 13:05 EDT If you get one of the stereo headphone jack to RCA cable convertors, will it still sound as good as just having RCA jacks in the first place? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 150 Sat Oct 24, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 14:27 EDT I really do hope Atari makes it big with the Falcon. It would be great to see the company that makes one of the best computers become a success once again. It's just I don't believe the company has changed one bit. I know that the reps are probably busy and I do appreciate the ones that do post here (especially Towns) and I do not hold them responsible for anything as I know they are doing this on their own time. I just wished they could get someone on here every now and then to answer some of the hardware questions. I am talking about not believing what Sam and the top brass says. Sam has said some things and then not come through with those. I am gald to here that the desktop DOES have so called 3D buttons and such. Does anyone know if they have added Submenus to TOS? Thunderbird, Atari says the Flacon has all these grphics modes but, what will it take to be able to switch on the fly so to speak if you hook it up to the right Multi- Sync monitor? I imagine it will also take a 3rd party developer to make one and at what cost? ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 151 Sat Oct 24, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 15:22 EDT Nathan... "Three on the Tree"??? Had to be quite a while ago, I would suspect. I don't recall column shifts in much anything but trucks since the 70's. Actually, the very point you make has a lot to do with the way the bottom fell out of the American auto industry. Nowadays, people expect a lot more out of what they buy. To be specific, American auto options have been streamlined into groups or packages and limited in such a way as to reduce cost and complexity for manufacturing. They also offer 'one price' deals on cars which are equipped in certain useful ways. You've seen the escort ads which feature all models at one price. It works so well that you'll be seeing a similar deal on the Thunderbird in '93. It makes sense to bundle things in ways which make choices easier, keeps quality up, and complexity down. Atari might do well to think of marketing the Falcon030 in such a way. To bundle together a "Video Package" and a "Music Package" and a "Multimedia Package" etc. etc. and include EVERYTHING needed to get started (not "genlock with a 3rd party genlock box", or "8 channels with an yet to be designed 3rd party box"). All I can say is that people I've tried to sway towards a falcon are _very_ leery of the cost of these items, and to make matters worse, you have to delve deep into the specs to discover that you have to add these 'options' to the Falcon030 since the press releases tend to imply that these features come out of the box included. Jonathan: I'm sure that most audiophiles will admit that the stereo headphone jack has adequate sound for the average consumer. However, it is a major nuisance to have to buy _another_ 'adapter' to get up an running (All my stereo components have RCA jacks, and no mini headphone jacks). Also, the contact area of the mini jacks is small, and this could easily effect performance over time due to oxidation, etc. Mini jacks are not as sturdy as RCA jacks, so you'll likely find yourself accidentally removing them just by moving your computer (this is exaserbated by the fact that you'll have a clunky adapter connecting it to hefty RCA cables, making it even easier to pull the mini jack out accidentally). While these points may matter little to the typical consumer, they can make the system look rather unattractive to the serious professional. I think that Atari has underestimated the influence that professionals have on sales to John Q. Public. I know that when I buy something new and expensive, I _always_ consult a professional in the field. I think a lot of people do. Of course if Atari would announce the Falcon030 Pro or the FalconII or the Falcon040 or whatever it's called. Then I'm sure that the consumer qualities of the F030 will be better put into perspective. ______________________ \hunderbird ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 152 Sat Oct 24, 1992 Z-NET at 15:37 EDT The kind of jack for the sound has as much to do with the "sound" as the shape of the pot has to do with the taste of the coffee. The tiny jack used on the Falcon will "sound" exactly the same as as that coming from a studio-type XLR connector. The difference is only in the sturdiness of the connection and the connector. The tiny jack can be damaged if handled roughly. The small contact area is more prone (not "prone", MORE prone) to getting a bad (noisey) connection than a pro connector. But they'll "sound" the same. And an XLR, last time I installed one in the MSU radio recording studios (28 channels), was about $4 each, fully discounted. A headphone type is about 30 cents. Do the math and tell me which you want to put in 100,000 units... when, for 95% of the users, the "toy" headphone connection will be all they even have connectors for? Oh, the XLR's are MONO, so put a PAIR in it...$8. Sure, RCA pairs are cheaper, and work better (marginally) than headphone, but then look at the market: many, many third party speaker add-ons use the tiny headphone jack standard. They'll be what the overwelming number of Falcon owners will be using. And the new TOS DOES have popup menu support-called hierarchial menus. You chose a drop item, and new items appear for choice next to it. The programmer has them supported, but will probably remember that using them will make those items unusable by older machine owners. So expect it ONLY on functions that are EXCLUSIVE to the new line. John Nagy ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 153 Sat Oct 24, 1992 LEXICOR2 [Ringo] at 16:41 EDT Thunderbird. That is why Lexicor along with John R. is working on a Genlock for the Falcon and if anyone had a chance to see Lees presentation at Glendale he was using a Genlock on the Mega ST. The quality of the image were wonderful, so viewers hot to see how GOOD JR GenLocks realy are. But you are correct the Falcon does not come with a Genlock device only with video out for genlocking. Ringo ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 155 Sat Oct 24, 1992 REALM [Joey] at 18:00 EDT Jonathan, You got me on that one! Obsolete isn't the best word but you know what I mean.:-) On the phones plug... Most the Keyboards I've seen have 1/4" phone jacks. My S-50 has all 1/4" phone jacks across the back. Most the amplified little speakers you buy come with small sterio plugs for pluging into Walkmans and such. I had to buy an adaptor to hook my Sony speakers to the TT's standard RCA jacks. Since the system is aimed at the first time buyer it would make more sense to have a standard audio plug. Not to mention putting 16 or 8 plugs across the back for each channel would be a waste of space on a home computer. I imagine some cheap box can be attached to the DSP direct port to bring out all 8 channels. Most normal users don't need more then sterio anyway. How many people have 8 channel sterios at home or want to buy $400 worth of mini speakers to have an 8 channel key click?:-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 156 Sat Oct 24, 1992 J.ROY18 [Jonathan] at 20:04 EDT John Nagy, About the sub-menus and such... There is a development tool called PopUp that lets you make GEM menus that have sub-menus in them... You move the mouse to the edge of the choice (Like in Jukebox) and a new menu opens up... No RSC file is needed it, as it's all internal to the program. :) A nifty programmer would include this for the older systems, and use the "real" system calls for Falcon owners. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 157 Sat Oct 24, 1992 G.WELLS3 [Metalhead] at 23:16 EDT That "overly excited individual" is right here. It seems that NeXT is at least strongly considering the idea of porting NeXT STep over to the Falcon, but the report also says that Atari had no comment on it... <---===The /\/\etal]-[ead===---> ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 158 Sat Oct 24, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 23:21 EDT Z-NET The only thing I own with a mini headphone jack on it is a Lynx. My CD player has RCA jacks, my Laserdisk player has RCA jacks, my Cassette deck has RCA jacks, my VCR has RCA jacks, my Amplifier has RCA jacks, my Tuner has RCA jacks, even my TV has RCA jacks. Show me a piece of audio/video recording equipment that uses those mini headphone jacks for input/output, and I'll show you a MINORITY. These jacks are mainly used for PORTABLE audio gear. Since the Falcon030 is not a portable computer, and is supposed to be interfaced with it's users recording gear for "multimedia", the lack of the STANDARD RCA type jacks is a serious gaffe. It would be like putting a MacIntosh Serial connector on the Falcon030 because 'lots of Mac owners might switch to the Falcon030 and might want to use their MacIntosh peripherals with it'. Sure, a few people have those little walkman speakers, but how many of them have RECORDING equipment (for doing multimedia videos and such) which has these flimsy connectors on the input side!?!??? Also, RCA type connectors can be had for the same price as the mini phone jacks... they do not have to be manufactured to the same tolerances bacause they are larger and sturdier. Why do you think I put them on the Tweety Board? Ringo: Can you tell us a ballpark figure on how much the "Inexpensive 3rd party addon to do genlocking" which you are working on will cost? What are it's capabilities? Can it scale video in a window? Just curious ;-) Realm: You wouldn't have 8 pairs of jacks across the back of your Falcon030 anyways, since there seems to only exist inside the A/D and D/A chips to do 1 stereo channel. It comes with the 'capability' to do 8 channels (whatever that means). So, the most you'd have is 2 pairs of RCA jacks. 1 each left and right for input and output. This is all most people will ever use. But it would have been nice if they could hook it up to their home system without having to resort to embarassing adapter cables (which only add to the cost of the system, not lower it). ___________________________ \hunderbird Glossary: RCA Jack: 1) Standard audio interface jack used in home audio systems, Atari STe and TT computers. 2) Sturdy inexpensive audio jack. 3) Device used to interface audio signals to readily available high quality cables. Mini Headphone Jack: 1) Small jack used for portable audio systems. 2) Somewhat flimsy audio jack often used for audio output, very seldom used for audio input. 3) Device used to interface audio signals on hard to locate cables. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 159 Sun Oct 25, 1992 REALM [Joey] at 01:40 EDT Thunderbird, Most peoplewill just use the jack for external speakers. Anyone doing professional level stuff will have an adaptor already. You also don't need an adaptor really you can just buy a cable with mini on one end RCA on the other if you need it that bad. Thats if Atari doesn't include one. I know they include a cheap RCA cord with the current Sterio Computers. Personally, I found the RCA jacks annoying when I bought the Mini speakers. It's not that big of a deal either way. I would guess the Falcon already sends 4 channels out each side since the ST sends 3 out the single Mono line. Going by the ST I would think 8 channels means, 8 voices or 8 sounds simultaniously. On a keyboard 8 voices would mean you could 8 keys down at once and the 9th one would turn off the first key pressed. My keyboard is 16 voice, 4 channels and all 4 channels come out the back as A-D in 1/4" jacks. I don't think Atari is using the term a channel in the same manner though since the ST is 3 channels/voices. I may be totally wrong though.:-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 160 Sun Oct 25, 1992 C.TOWNSLEY [CHARLIE] at 01:58 EDT Wayne, when I saw a Falcon it was hooked up to an old SC1224. All it took to 'switch on the fly' as you put it was clicking on the menu bar. All resolutions are available on either monitor with the exception that the VGA monitor cannot do True colour in the 640 x 480 mode. Charlie/sysop jr. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 161 Sun Oct 25, 1992 R.MARTIN22 [NETWORK 23] at 01:58 EDT J.ROY18 Any additional cables, adapters, jacks will introduce more and more interference. While the drop in signal quality may not be noticible to consumers like most of us, it's bad news for someone wanting to use the ports for professional applications. WAYNE: By Submenus, do you mean Popups? If so, there are popups in the resolution dialog box. Live And Direct [3:57 PM-24/Oct/92], Rod Martin, Network 23/ST Connection ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 162 Sun Oct 25, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 07:56 EST When I say submenus, I mean like on the Mac and all. When you select a drop down menu, and move the mouse over an item and a submenu pops up beside it. File ---------------- | Load Picture |--------------- | |IMG file | | |Degas PI? | | |Degas PC? | Something similiar to this. It is hard to draw in ASCII. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 163 Sun Oct 25, 1992 J.NESS [Jim] at 09:52 EST Wayne - Yes, there are now sub-menus in TOS. But, the software has to take advantage of the new capability, and most software will prefer to be backward compatible with old TOS versions. -JN ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 164 Sun Oct 25, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 10:04 EST Joey: You are correct. Most people will in fact use their external speakers with the Falcon030. The point of contention here is how many people will opt to use their mini walkman type speakers with it, or how many people will connect it up to their audio/video system. I feel that most people will NOT use those walkman type speakers with their Falcon030 because they are designed to be portable, and hence they either run off battery power, require external amplification, or (in some cases) have no amplification at all (and lack volume). There ARE some AC powered units around, but they are not very popular with the type of people who only own portable stereos (who like their stuff dirt cheap). Since non amplified units lack any amplification, I'd suspect that their usefulness would be limited. Battery operated units would quickly become despised because a typical 'session' at a computer can often last longer than the life of a fresh set of batteries. I contend that MOST people have RCA jacks on their audio systems, and that far fewer have the mini jacks than you assert. Virtually ALL consumer grade audio equipment has RCA jacks EXCLUSIVELY, so your contention that only 'professionals' need RCA jacks is misleading. RCA jacks are the standard, not the exception. The only reason I can see of omitting them is to save space on the motherboard. After thinking about it a bit, I conclude that Atari should have included BOTH types of jacks on their machine. The RCA jacks would be there for people to hook up to their A/V systems, and the mini jack would be available so you could plug in a set of headphones. (The mini jack would be placed on the front or the side of the machine for easy access). Also, from what Atari says, "The Falcon030 has 8 channel stereo sound". What this seems to mean (from the rumor mill, and reading between Atari's lines) that you only have Analog-Digital converters to record 1 (one) stereo channel at a time, and to play back 1 (one) stereo channel at a time. Apparently, the DMA (memory accessing) circuitry is set up to allow 8 channels of each, but you have to supply your own a/d and d/a converters to do it. Extrapolating from a message stating that you could buy a Falcon030 and a box to do 8 channels at a cost of $300 per channel for the whole shebang, you'll quickly find that additional channels will run in the $100 apiece range. I had asked before whether the 8 channels might just all be internal, and there were only 2 outputs (where the channels would ALL be mixed together and come out of, like the 3 channels on the mono line of the ST) and didn't get any type of answer whatsoever from Atari. Therefore I must conclude that the rumors are indeed true, and you must pay much more for more channels. The problem relates back to months before the Falcon030 came out, and the folks at Atari were scolding people posting here because they were repeating rumors about amazing capabilities of the Falcon030. They were annoyed because people were exaggerating the abilities of the bird, and they thought that the users would be let down in a big way if they had their expectations raised by the rumors. When the machine actually comes out, they purposely write their press releases such that they directly imply that the Falcon030 comes with certain capabilities out of the box, which require additional addons. In my opinion, this is the same as spreading rumors that are not true, but stating them as facts. This is even worse than the rumors which people were taken to task for months ago. Just ask yourself: How many messages have I seen wondering how the 'overlay mode' is used. How many clarifications for the built in genlocking have been requested. How come neither of us really knows how many channels of sound the thing comes with. We need a reputable source to provide us with a detailed spec sheet on the Falcon030. Is anyone up to the challenge? ______________________________ \hunderbird ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 165 Sun Oct 25, 1992 B.WILLIS3 [Bill] at 11:49 EST Considering that pro-quality stereo A/D/A converters cost more than the Falcon's suggested list price; it's a pretty safe bet that most pros will use outboard converters. (Not all converters sound alike, by the way. You do get what you pay for.) I don't think the connector question is such a big deal. RCAs might be easier to hook up to the average system, but once you've got it hooked up, there isn't much difference. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 166 Sun Oct 25, 1992 EXPLORER at 12:07 EST The information I've seen (Falcon030 Preliminary Developers Doc's) indicates all *analog* audio I/O passes through the 16 bit stereo CODEC. The "multi- channel" sound capability is *digital *and transferred via the DSP communications channels. I take this to mean Falcon will take advantage of the DSP capabilities to provide multi-channel sound. The focus would be as a digital audio sub-system that can be connected to external DACs, ADCs and S/PDIF components. You don't have to worry about noisy mini-phono plugs with digital audio :-) Eight track digital data transfers take place through the DSP serial I/O data transfer channels. 96 bits can be transferred per sample. (8 tracks of 16 bit data) Sample rates include: 50KHz, 44.1KHz (CD), 48KHz (DAT) and 62.5KHz. The digital audio data can be routed to memory via DMA, to the stereo CODEC or back around the DSP port. I presume the DSP would normaly be used to mix the 8 channels before sending the data back out the analog audio channels. Sounds pretty cool to me... Ron @ Atari Explorer ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 167 Sun Oct 25, 1992 T.FERREIRA at 15:55 EST Here is an idea for Atari. Anyone see the new Apple MAC DUO?? Nice system that has a desktop dock for the laptop powerbook. Its either a desktop or laptop when you pull out the powerbook. Well, Atari could make something similar with a dock for the future STBOOK. Call it the "GEMini"!! It is a GEM system so the name would be appropriate. Also, GEMINI in the horoscope world means 1 person with 2 different personalities. Well the Atari could be 1 system with two personalities; one desktop and the other a laptop. Any thoughts on this. Go for it Atari.. Make it a 040, GEMini040. Tom Ferreira ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 168 Sun Oct 25, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 16:14 EST Commodore dropped the price of the Amiga3000 to $1,499. Sounds like someone was listening when the Falcon was announced ;-) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 169 Sun Oct 25, 1992 B.AEIN [B Man] at 16:22 EST Jhon Nagy, As far as the output for a Falcon you are correct about the differences between XLR's and Mini jacks. BUT, for input, Mini jack is most impracticale! The impedence is all wrong. If I recall the impedence is 200 Ohms for the Falcon, it would make more sense to make it a 10KOhm input so people could use line level from an CD, tape, or whatever. O well. Bman ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 170 Sun Oct 25, 1992 WALLY.W [ _Wally_ ] at 17:28 EST Howdy, If you want to see an _EXCELLENT_ implementation of submenus for the ST/STE just download FASTBASE.LZH in the RT Library. In addition to the submenus, it is a fine program. Wally ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 171 Sun Oct 25, 1992 SOLOPOLYFONY [SoloPolyfony] at 19:00 EST Thunderbird: Are you familiar with the SoundBlaster audio board on the PC? One of the most popular boards out there. Guess what? It's got mini-plug sockets for the headphone/walkman-type speakers, the line out for connecting it to a stereo system, and the microphone in. Nobody complains about the connectors, they just buy the board. People buying the SB are the same type of people that the Falcon is aimed at: HOME USERS. Not professional musicians/artists/multi-media types. I agree that if Atari doesn't put both types of jacks on the F040, if and when, they're making a mistake, but for the market that the F030 is aimed at, what they've got will be just fine. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 172 Sun Oct 25, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 20:55 EST SoloPolyfony: I am indeed familiar with SoundBlaster audio board on the PC. If I had a PC with awesome 1-bit monophonic sound, and along came the soundblaster (no matter how poorly it stacks up against even the STe) I wouldn't complain even if it had pigtails or 300Ohm screw terminals on it. _Anything_ is better than "blip blip chirp boop". How about the (so called) SoundBlaster PRO? What's it got for connections? All I can say is that a lot of people are polluting the environment unnecessarily with their discarded batteries needed to power those silly portable speakers. And for what? Radio Hacks top of the line model has a measley 3.5 Watts per channel. My good friend plays in a fairly popular local rock group, his home system consists of these awesome "planar" speakers which are only about 3/8" thick, and a rack mount amp which has 600 watts per channel. I planned to digitally record some of their music with the Falcon030, and play it back on his system for the band using the DSP to 'play' with the sound for them. I had hoped to convince them to invest in the Falcon030 for use in recording and editing their CD, but I'm afraid that they will not be impressed with the 1/8" phone jack and the myriad of adapters I'll need to connect it up. It would be a loss of a great opportunity to put Atari computers back in the public eye (like onstage for everyone to see). I hope the F040 (or the rumored redesigned F030) has RCA jacks of the proper impedance to connect to real amps and not toy speakers with batteries not included. ____________________________ \hunderbird But this is supposed to be the entry level machine, so we can hope the later models have more for the power users. I'm just anxious to see the upscale models. I don't want to have to wait 12 months for them to debut. My Gold Card is ready NOW. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 173 Sun Oct 25, 1992 EXPLORER at 22:18 EST Tom -- GEMini040 -- I like it! -- Ron @ Atari Explorer ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 174 Mon Oct 26, 1992 R.WATSON15 [Wayne Watson] at 00:27 EST Listen, you can BUY CONNECTORS with the MINI on one end and RCA on the other. The plugs DO NOT MAKE any difference in quality. There will not have to be a mirad of connectors/adapters to hook it up. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 175 Mon Oct 26, 1992 Z-NET at 00:28 EST T-Bird... you are again describing moderately upscale use of the Audio of the Falcon. That's at the point where you really would want the syncro in/out and multichannel box anyway. The mini jacks for mini users. the maxi box is for professional manipulation. Though I agree RCA jacks would not have cost much at all and would have been nice, I've been inside the Falcon and can vouch for the lack of room for more I/O stuff. It would also appear the the mini jacks are a LOT easier to RF shield than the RCA's. Can't really tell, but for the extent they go to seal the RCA type RF jack. John ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 176 Mon Oct 26, 1992 M.POCHE [Mick] at 02:30 EST Just got home from the HACE Atari Safari in Houston. This is the first such show I've been to, and I really enjoyed it. While not a big show, it was well attended. Got to see the Codeheads, DC, Neal Symms, ICD's Link, and best of all, the Falcon! Bob Brodie brought along a "final production" unit (albeit a German keyboard model), and showed the Tina Turner demo, Direct to Disk software, and a nice slideshow. I was IMPRESSED! I didn't mind the color scheme of the case at all, but it appeared a bit taller than the 1040 case to me. The 3D buttons and icons look really nice too. After Bob addressed the crowd, he did a "Q&A" session. Well, I asked him if the Falcon's PDS addressed ALL of the pins of the '030, and he said YES. So, I'm inclined to believe him, as I honestly don't think he would lie in my face, especially with a crowd of witnesses. - Mick ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 177 Mon Oct 26, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 03:07 EST D.ENGEL - I've also been confused about the headphone/audio out minijack. It makes sense to have a connector that was the same as a portable CD player so that mini-speaker systems made for them could be used on the Falcon (I take it there's a headphone amp inside), but I think quite a lot of people will have wanted RCA jacks instead (or both RCA jacks AND a stereo headphone 1/8" minijack). If _I_ had been involved in the designing, I seriously wouldn't have even CONSIDERED taking the RCA outputs out, regardless of whether or not a headphone output was put on it (i.e. the headphone output would've been an ADDITION TO and not a REPLACEMENT FOR stereo RCA outputs). J.ALLEN27 - Not only that, but Commodore will THROW IN a CDTV w/ an A3000 purchase. Then again, they have to distribute CDTV's SOMEHOW. Some music people have been wondering how useful the Falcon would be for digital recording on its own. We know the Falcon can do 2-channel recording, but can it playback previously-sampled data while simultaneously recording 2 more channels? If it can't, it's kinda useless to a lot of people for serious digital recording purposes. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 178 Mon Oct 26, 1992 S.DANUSER [Soul Manager] at 04:27 EST I really can't believe the number of posts griping about the audio plug. Geez, don't you kids know that this is the kind of crap that shelved the STBook? Atari really does listen... I have a nice cord that has a mini plug on one end and RCA plugs on the other. No "adaptor." Just buy the stupid cable and forget it! We really need to present a more unified front behind the Falcon. It's a great _low end_ machine. As is, it will suit my humble needs almost perfectly. At some point I'll want to upgrade to a faster CPU, and I'm sure that by the time I do, a nice board will be available. Until then, the machine is fine as is. The graphics are right where I need them, the sound is miles ahead of everything else, and the DSP is a great addition. Add the new desktop to it, and I've got more than I could have asked for. As soon as I get 20 feet from a Falcon it's coming home with me (so don't haul me off to any shows, or I'll grab one and run). Without sounding like a cheerleader, let's get some positive feedback for a change. Go team! Soul Manager ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 179 Mon Oct 26, 1992 M.POCHE [Mick] at 04:52 EST Soul Manager - I totally agree. I've got a nice little pair of Sony amplified speakers hooked up to my Mega STE, and they sound fine, as I'm sure they will on the F030. And, I won't need any kind of adaptor, as I do now, since they have the mini stereo plug! Also, they run off of batteries (I use Ni-Cads, which won't end up in the local landfill for quite some time) or AC. They are just _waiting_ for CD quality sound! The graphics have to be seen to be believed. Sure looked photo-quality to me! This is a kick-butt machine right out of the box. It does more than I currently need, which means that it should still be meeting my needs as they grow in the future. Look, for approximately the same price I paid for my original 520fm, I'll be getting a machine that makes that old 520 look sickly by comparison. Trust me, when you see one, you'll want to take it home! I would've done just that Saturday, but Bob Brodie is a bit bigger than me. :) Guess I'll have to wait until they're in the stores though. Should be some time in January, but according to Bob B., they will be available in quantity by that time. The bottom line is, the Falcon is everything Atari's target market could want, and then some. - Mick ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 180 Mon Oct 26, 1992 FAIRWEATHER [David] at 10:15 EST I agree that the mini-plug controversy is just a tempest in a teapot. Sure I would have preferred RCA's but its no big deal. Much more worthy of discussion is WHEN WILL I BE ABLE TO BUY A FALCON? When Sam Tramiel held his GEnie conference he said US dealers would have a few by "late October." Well October is almost over and no Falcon. Then I started hearing "late November." Is this going to turn into another STBook debacle? I remember when Atari was saying the STBook would be available in "late October" 1991! ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 181 Mon Oct 26, 1992 DENNYA [Denny Atkin] at 13:45 EST Guys, a cable that goes from Mini-plug to RCA stereo is about $3 at Radio Shack. It's no big deal, really. January for the Falcon? It'll be available in Europe before Xmas, though, won't it? (Commodore UK announced the A1200 over there to ship in a couple of weeks, and if it's a one-machine Xmas season... That's what pretty much happened in the Lynx/Gameboy situation.) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 184 Mon Oct 26, 1992 J.ALLEN27 [FAST TECH] at 21:00 EST The Falcon does not use SIMMs, so the price is irrelevent. Add to that the fact the memory boards are assembled in Taiwan and sent here as an assembly, they are not subject to any tarrif. Also, the tarrif is on KOREAN drams only, not Japanese or European chips. The only reason there might be some minor rise in ram prices is due to the portion of buyers who were buying the Korean chips switching over to the other alternatives and raising the demand/supply ratio a bit. These wacko SIMM and ram price jumps are PURE GOUGING, the only people doubling SIMMs prices are folks trying to sucker uneducated buyers. Simply don't buy ram until the prices...and seelers...come back down to reality. I spoke to my distributor today who deals in Japanese chips, and he has no price rises to report. They sell to manufacturers who _are_ educated and aren't about to be fooled into paying double...so no price increase. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 185 Mon Oct 26, 1992 B.STOREY [Billy B.] at 21:12 EST The connector situation is just like every feature Atari has ever made: someone will be unhappy with it no matter what. Those who are unhappy will be able to change it to satisfy themselves. THAT is the beauty of Atari: it IS possible to make desired changes. If Atari added everything everyone wanted on it, how much would an Atari cost? And don't you just bet Atari TRIED to get the Falcons into the market for Christmas? If it were humanly possible, they would be falling off of shelves. There are ALWAYS production problems which delay the initial runs of any new product. Unfortunately, it seems the Falcons will not make it this year, but they are still trying. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 186 Mon Oct 26, 1992 SAM-RAPP [<>] at 21:33 EST Atari recomends that a 200K Ohm resistor be used in series on Each microphone input when connected to a 1v RMS "line level" signal such as a CD player, etc... Shouldn't be too hard to incorpoate that into a stereo mini -> rca jack adaptor. -----------> Sam ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 188 Mon Oct 26, 1992 T.MCCOMB [=Tom=] at 22:46 EST But it's not sensational unless it's 'up over 200%'. ANyway it all looks moot. From Jim Allens level headed investigation, only Korean RAM is affected and the resulting rise in RAM prices in general will be minor- if at all. Especially with respect to the Falcon- it's manufactured offshore, what's imported is a complete assembly, not a box of loose Korean RAM chips. -Tom McComb {10:43 pm} Monday, October 26, 1992 ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 191 Tue Oct 27, 1992 D.ENGEL [Thunderbird] at 21:53 EST Tempest in a Teapot? NOT! Anyone who thinks that the lack of RCA style connectors on the ST is swell and dandy can line up now, 'cause I'm taking orders for a new product. - - - - - - Product Announcement - - - - - - - Parents: are you sick and tired of wasting your hard earned cash on CD player repairs, which only seem to last until you plug it back into your 1/8" to RCA cable on your Falcon030? Are you tired of that impedance mismatching overload ruining your samples? Are you simply a fumble-fingers when it comes to soldering together wires and resistors and plugs with all those conductors and terminals to sort out? Have you woken up from the fantasy world where a simple cable from the local technology store can hook your falcon030 to anything? Well, your solution is here: The ____ ____ _ (tm) / __ ___ __ __ ___ / / \ /-- /\ / / / / /| / /| / /_ / / / / / / /--\ /__ /__ /__/ / |/ / |/ /__ /__ / /____ /__/ Yes, with the Falconnect CD (tm), just imagine the thrill of being able to finally sample from your CD, VCR, or Tape Player without creating smoke and high repair bills. With this "unnecessary" necessity, you too will be able to enjoy clear, saturationless amplification of your favorite sounds, without the annoying daily replacement of your Falcon030. Remember that's the Falconnect CD!!! All for the incredibly low-low price of just $39.95!!!!!! The Falconnect CD (tm) comes with a Lifetime Warrantee* and it makes a great gift!!! Beware of cheap immatations! Ask for it by name!! Coming before Christmas to a store near someone!!! *The Falconnect CD (tm) is Warranteed to be free of defects in material and workmanship for it's entire lifetime. If the Falconnect CD ever fails to last it's entire lifetime, it will be replaced for free. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 192 Wed Oct 28, 1992 S.JOHNSON10 [Steve] at 01:02 EST So is there anyone here who can verify FOR SURE whether the PDS is a 68000- compatible bus or a 68030-compatible bus? I trust Jim that it's probably crippled, but when Bob says that it has all the 68030 connections on it, I have to wonder a bit. Of course, Jim is a hardware guy and Bob isn't. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 193 Wed Oct 28, 1992 S.DANUSER [Soul Manager] at 04:36 EST Mr. Atkin, haven't I run into you somewhere before? Falcon to Amiga 1200 = Lynx to Gameboy? An interesting analogy. After all, the Lynx is miles ahead of the Gameboy in every technical aspect. The only place it falls short is... uh... numbers. Well, there are a lot of Lynx's out there now. And they are a well-supported machine. Not as many people own them as own a Gameboy, but I'd say that the Lynx owners are a lot better off. I do _so_ hope to have a Falcon before Christmas. If not, however, I think it will be worth the wait. And I think a lot of other people will think so, too. Soul Manager ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 194 Wed Oct 28, 1992 DOUG.W [ICD RT] at 07:55 EST Steve, Anyone who's seen the schematic for the PDS can verify which it is... Unfortunately, anyone who's seen the schematic is also under a non-disclosure agreement with Atari. --Doug ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 195 Wed Oct 28, 1992 B.WILLIS3 [Bill] at 18:36 EST Thunderbird, Who said anything about impedance mismatching? (Not a bad question, though. What is the impedance of the Falcon's audio input?) In any case, the type of connector doesn't have anything to do with that. (We need to know input sensitivity too. There's a big difference between mic level and what you get out of a Discman's headphone jack.) Anyway, assuming that impedance & level are matched properly, the standard "plug your walkman into your stereo" cable from Radio Shack will do the trick. No soldering, no barrel adaptors, just a cable. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 196 Wed Oct 28, 1992 WALLY.W [ _Wally_ ] at 21:42 EST Howdy, Is it just me, or do Richter and Thunderbird need some valium? I remember having a Brittany Spaniel like that when I was a kid. _Some_ of the people here have the Falcon killed already, and it isn't even _here_...talk about media-hype, this makes me sick. Listening to all this _stuff_, it's amazing that Atari ever announces anything on GEnie. Jeez, what a warm welcome they get. My STe has RCA jacks on the back, and I had to Gerry-rig a mini-stereo jack/RCA jack adapter together for my little Sony speakers. I hardly need to hear something like Llamatron at 150 watts per channel from my stereo, and that bell/keybeep at 150 watts per channel is mind-shattering. Guess you could call this the "flipside" of the picture. From the stats I've seen, the Falcon is a more-than-able machine, and after I get a TT030 I will be replacing my 1040STe with a Falcon030. I'm suitably impressed already, and all I've heard are specs and reports...imagine, all this in a "low end" machine. It's pretty incredible. Wally ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 197 Wed Oct 28, 1992 TOWNS [John@Atari] at 23:33 EDT Thanks for your opinion, Wally. It is refreshing to see people who are willing to wait and give the machine a chance. I think you will really like what you will see.. -- John Townsend, Atari Corp. ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 199 Thu Oct 29, 1992 J.ROY18 [Jonathan] at 00:16 EST Wayne, The mac-like drop down menus already exist on the ST.. There is a program called "PopUp" to create the menus in C code you compile in. JukeBox has that type of popup menu. (Don't think he used that PopUp program though, he just did it manually.) PopUp also allows descriptions of the current menu bar entry to be listed on the top status line of the screen in the empty space not used by the GEM drop down menu.. I wish more programmers used it. :( ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 200 Thu Oct 29, 1992 J.ROY18 [Jonathan] at 00:19 EST I just hope we see it soon. :) I have three friends with Falcon's on order, and I want to play with them NOW. :) ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 201 Thu Oct 29, 1992 LYRE at 00:29 EST For the record, I am definitely an uninformed potential purchaser. I know nothing of DSP's and barely understand the concept of them clock speeds and all of that other techno-magic jargon. Uninformed. Yes. Ignorant. No. So, in the intrests of providing the best support to Atari that we can, why don't we work under the following guidelines: 1) Discuss, don't harangue. 2) Be positive. Please realize that the last is possible no matter what you are saying. You can say "they crippled it" or you can say "I don't know why they did it, their must have been a reason for doing so. Maybe something is planned further down the line." I'm not asking you all to throw caution to the wind. I am asking you to be helpful in determining the WHO/WHAT/WHEN/WHERE/HOW questions instead of just saying it's no good. After all, until a Falcon is on your desk, and you've tested it with all of your current software, you can not realistically say it's a bad machine. You can only say you believe it's a bad machine. Meanwhile we've *ALL* been supporting and advertising and informing everyone we know into taking a better look at Atari. We're trying to break the "game machine" mold. But for some strange reason with this machine we're almost doing the exact reverse. We're instilling a "it's still a game machine" mentallity in anyone who is listening. So please, try to be fair. Thank you for reading this message. Lyre ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 202 Thu Oct 29, 1992 D.WALTER7 [Doug Walter] at 01:47 EST What LYRE said! People - a former boss of mine (a longtime and dedicated PCer & packet (networking) radio operator) just made comment to me about "the new Atari bird" that he was hearing about. He's been curious about its Amateur radio potential (DSP) and turned to the only source he could find. He heard about how it has had its "wings clipped"; about how its not very expandable; about how NEGATIVELY its being received by us "Atari fanatics". He read about how "lame" Atari Corp. is, and chuckled about the marketing wisdom of a $1300 "superb game machine." Now where would he hear such stuff? Cat 14, topic 20. Sigh, he never visits this RT, but this trip left such an impression that he could even quote a few by their handles. Can't wait to hear all this good news on the airwaves. Doug7 ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 203 Thu Oct 29, 1992 A.VALENT [Mike] at 07:37 EST Valent's Law: Opinion will expand to fill any information void. Valent's Proof: It certainly has in this topic! ------------ Category 14, Topic 20 Message 204 Thu Oct 29, 1992 JCOMMS at 10:42 EST Hmmm ... wait a second. I'm a loyal Atari fan, but I got a problem, here. Lost sales? Why? Because GEnie is providing Atari users with a forum for discussing products and applications? Give me a break. Not to beat a dead horse, but it does seem like normal business practice, here in the effete United States, for a company interested in selling relatively big-ticket consumer items to provide substantial customer- support via 800-number, as well as support a large cadre of well-informed and well-stocked dealers. This contact-muscle really _ought_ to be enough to offset the remarks, however hostile and/or prejudging, of a very small group of industry insiders, like ourselves. So please ... let's not get into self-censoring, shall we? Let's just try to be nice, and leave it at that. If you want an alternative world-view to play with, think about this: That a company whose resources are insufficient to mount anything approaching a conventional marketing and customer-relations program has nevertheless managed to create a machine that, when all is said and done, is no "worse-designed" than any market-leading product. Falcon is probably marginally "cooler" than a PowerBook. That Atari can challenge Apple at ANY engineering level is truly counterintuitive: it's like saying that Joe's Garage, in Westminster, Georgia, designed and launched a space-shuttle competitive with NASA's. And it's a testament to what individual inspiration, genius, and energy can accomplish in the complete absence of normal infrastructure support. Pretty ballsy of Atari folks to pull it off, no? Heroic, in fact. ------------