Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!ucla-se!babbage!plinio From: plinio@babbage.seas.ucla.edu (Plinio Barbeito) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Glendale Conference Impressions Message-ID: <2623@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> Date: 1 May 91 04:39:54 GMT References: <2610@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> <12733@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> Sender: news@SEAS.UCLA.EDU Organization: SEASnet, University of California, Los Angeles Lines: 72 In article <12733@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> kiki@uhunix1.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Jack W. Wine) writes: >First of all, thanks for the interesting report! No prob. >>plinio@curtiss.seas.ucla.edu (Plinio Barbeito/) writes: > >This is surprising because I thought that someone posted an article stating >that the ATW was no longer in production. If the ATW is still alive and will >be H1-based, won't the principle market be research-oriented institutions? As a matter of fact, that's exactly what Brodie mentioned -- that it was intended mainly for people that were going to write their own software anyway. Institutional or Corporate Research. This was the case with Eastman-Kodak. They bought the ATW hardware for a specific purpose and then said "get out of our way!" (software wise). I don't know whether the ATW is in production or not. Probably doesn't matter, because the demand seems to be for only a very few units. >This is really puzzling news! If Atari built a factory in Israel, it can't >possibly be dedicated to only floppy controller chip production. I may be Sorry to have implied that. I don't know if it will be dedicated to that sole purpose. That's all that Bob mentioned about it, though. >Atari might be better off ordering 10,000 or so SCSI floppies and offering them I agree, WD and plants in Israel may go away (Scud? :-) ), but SCSI is here to stay (well, at least SCSI-2 is). However, I think that if the 20.8M 3.5" drives read 720K and 1.44 Meg floppies, Atari should skip the whole lot and offer that instead. If, as you mention, everyone had this standardized quasi-harddisk capability, new software writers wouldn't be pressed to fit everything into a few disks, lowering development time and keeping the cost of good software low. It would raise the cost of small software, until the 21M floppies come down in price, but it would simplify backups without requiring the purchase of a tape drive. Would I go so far as to say, skip the 20.8's and go on to Syquest? I can't stick those things in a shirt pocket, or in a folder, for that matter. IMHO, 5.25" is a step backwards. Also, I haven't seen a Syquest mechanism for less than $585; to add $500 to entry-level machines is really pushing the startup cost. To add $300 and kill two birds with one stone (720K compatibility + real storage) seems the better solution. >It seems like a short-term and expensive decision, because many people believe >the benefits of the SCSI intelligence would cause manufacturers to leave out the >floppy controller chip in future systems. I think Atari has an (unfounded?) fear of disk incompatibility with the current base of software. True, the last thing they need is for the software base to be shrinking. If they maintain the same controller for 720K-2.8M, they probably think it will be easier to solve any compatibility problems. Yes, it seems like building a new plant is more of a risk than using a (possibly?) incompatible 20.8M drive. However, if EC turns into "Fortress Europe", and Atari is caught without a more local plant by 1992, they could see their primary market disappear... Also, does selling duty-free to Europe mean they can get around the 15% Value Added Tax (ouch)? >I noticed the Atari logo on some ads from dealers that previously sold >Amiga and IBM compatibles. It seems that Atari is laying the foundations >for a strong and lasting resurgence. Thanks for the good news! For the most part, it looks like they are making more of the "right" decisions. -- ----- ---- --- -- ------ ---- --- -- - - - plinio@seas.ucla.edu I speak for myself, not for my employer. I am a bad ventriloquist, anyway.