Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!decwrl!ucbvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!att!cbnewsh!wolf
From: wolf@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.wolf)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Time for a New Computer: Should it be an Atari ST?
Message-ID: <1990Jul26.035541.3708@cbnewsh.att.com>
Date: 26 Jul 90 03:55:41 GMT
References: <1990Jul24.151655.29463@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <3149@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 66

In article <3149@syma.sussex.ac.uk> grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Graham Thomas) writes:
...[deleted stuff]...
>
>What worries me more is that I got only one offsite reply to a previous
>query about problems with our Mega/HD/Laser systems.  (Thanks, Robin of
>Galadriel.)  Either there are fewer knowledgeable people around than I
>thought, or (more likely) our problems are just too weird.

I have noticed what might be a third possibility: fewer people seem to
be posting to this newsgroup than in the past.  I've been following this
newsgroup off and on for the last 4 years (ever since I bought my 1040ST
in 1986.)  Back then, it seemed that there were never less than 50 new
messages each time I logged in (on a daily basis)...there were usually
quite a few more messages in c.s.a.s than there were in the Amiga
newsgroup (admittedly, a contributing factor being frequent posts by
Amiga users preaching the virtues of the Amiga vs. the vices of the ST :-)

These days, there is more traffic in the Amiga group (and even more
in comp.windows.x :-) than there is here.  What's more, there tend to
be more technical "discussions" (ie. question-answer posts) in other
newsgroups.

So what's my point?  I don't know.  There seems to be a relationship
between the success of a product and the number of postings in the
newsgroup relating to that product.  I do not think Atari Corp. is in
trouble (what do you expect me to say - I own lots of Atari shares ;-(
but I do think that the ST line is closing in on obsolescence.  What
is going to keep Atari alive, in the near future, are continuing sales
in Europe and Lynx/Portfolio/whatever else Atari sells here in the US.

In the long term...I don't know.  Atari had a great chance to be a big
player when it initially developed (well, Perihelion, I guess) the
Abaq/ATW/Transputer.  The machine, for which I had seen some initial
specs in 1987(?) was great for its time.  Had Atari managed to market/produce
this machine on a grand scale, I believe Atari could have broken into
the very lucrative workstation market.  Now, it is 1990 and we're waiting
for the TT to appear - a machine that is in EVERY WAY inferior to the
1987 ATW (from the specs I've seen on the net.)  Not only that, some would
argue that the TT is in some ways inferior to any ole' '386 clone with
Super VGA and large capacity hard-disk......but I don't BLAME Atari
for having chosen the path they did.  It is always easy to look at a
situation in retrospect and say "you should've done this and this and this..."
I'm sure Atari Corp. (or at least the Tramiels) had their reasons.  If
personal greed or short-term profits were among them, even that would be
excusable - after all, we live in a capitalist society.

On a different subject....
Personally, I'm a Sun Sparcstation convert.  Can't afford one (yet), but
if I had $10,000, that would be the machine to get.  No PCs provide as much
hardware _and_ software (operating system and development tools) for the
money ('486s and the Mac IIfx don't even come close)...and for a bonus,
you get a product that is supported not only by a reputable company
but by nearly every major university in the country :-)


Well, I've rambled on for long enough.  12:30 is close at hand and I don't
want to miss Dave's Top 10 :-)

Tom


-- 
+-------------------------------------+ "Stupid" questions are better than
| Tom Wolf      | (201) 949-2079      | no questions at all. No answer is
| Bell Labs, NJ | wolf@spanky.att.com | better than a stupid one.
+-------------------------------------+