Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zazen!uwvax!daffy!cat23.cs.wisc.edu!carter From: carter@cat23.cs.wisc.edu (Gregory Carter) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Atari Mortis Keywords: history, cheerleading, admonitions Message-ID: <1991May18.024738.571@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> Date: 18 May 91 02:47:38 GMT References: <9105141732.AA19207@cwns10.INS.CWRU.Edu> <4528@bnr-rsc.UUCP> Sender: news@daffy.cs.wisc.edu (The News) Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept Lines: 129 In article <4528@bnr-rsc.UUCP> Net writes: >In article , mg20+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Paul Greelish) writes: >|> ... Atari may not go bankrupt, >|> but it'll take a miracle for it to get back anything like the market >|> share it once had. >|> >|> I remember the golden years. I was twelve years old when I got my 48K >|> Atari 800 and tape drive. I was seventeen when I got my 1040ST. >|> Atari used to have good products at great prices. No more. >|> >In the past dozen or so years, (yah, I know, it's not really the same >company), Atari seems to have had fits of brilliance followed by... nothing. > >When the VCS came out, it was a great innovation. A CARTRIDGE based video >game, an unlimited number of games in the same machine. The 400/800 was >another bold stroke. It had sound and graphics as good as it got in the >home computer arena. Then, Atari twiddled it's corporate thumbs and sat on >it's Warner-Owned corporate butt and coasted into the Great Video Crash of >the early eighties. They relied on their older technology far too long, and >it nearly killed them. (The 600XL and 800XL were cheaper versions of the >tank-like 400/800. I think the 1200XL had an extra function key. :-( >But I still cherish my full-colour spec sheet for the 1450XLD! ) > >Atari crashed, was bought out, and in an astonishingly short time, had >announced the Atari ST. (In 130 and 520 flavours, I think) This time, the >computer was positioned differently. The ST was a lean, mean computing >machine. (Tm) The other upstart, Amiga, had more bells and whistles, but >cost a lot more. IBMs had credibility, but cost a lot more. The >'Jackintosh' had virtually everything the Mac had, and lots more, for much >less money. The 'game machine' company was playing in the big leagues again. > >Then Atari followed the example of the pre-Tramiel Atari, and did diddly. >The Mega ST got an onboard clock, a blitter, and a detached keyboard. Yay. > >MacIntosh got bigger and faster. Amiga got faster and lots of third party >add-ons. Most importantly, IBMs and clones got MUCH faster, and MUCH cheaper. > >As Apple introduced 68020/30 Macs at 16, then 20, then 25Mhz, where was Atari? >As 8088s gave way to 80286s, then 80386s. what were they doing? >When did the 68020 Amiga come out? Where were the competing STs? > >Atari was spending it's time and energy building clones and transputers. >The flagship machine was allowed to stagnate at 8Mhz and 4MB. Capable, sure. >But not very glamourous, or inspirational. Why should a third-party >developer work on a machine that the manufacturer doesn't seem to want to >support anymore? Why would a neophyte user buy a computer with no real >upgrade path? It's my feeling that even OFFERING a top-of-the-line machine >increases a companies ability to sell the LOW-end ones. (As the car companies >say: Race on Sunday - Sell on Monday) (But what about the transputer, you >ask. Surely that was a high end machine! But how many people have actually >SEEN one?) > >Now, perhaps, the situation is changing. Atari seems to have dumped the >clones, and the lethargy of the past few years. A TOS upgrade eventually made >it out the door. They FINALLY produced a 16Mhz ST, and the semi-33Mhz TT. >The 1280x960 monochrome looks as good to me today as the 640x400 did in 1985. >(Which was fantastic for the time) With Unix on the way, the TT may find >itself back in the pack in terms of technology. (Most certainly not ahead of >it, unfortunately. Why a stupid 720k drive?) The Lynx is an amazing little >beast, too. > >It seems to me that PRICE is more of a problem now. At the low end, I can >get a 1040STE/mono/no HD (since the price cut) for just a little less than >I can get a 286-12/mono/40MB HD clone. (Alternately, the 1040 is about half >of what a Mac classic with no HD is.) > >At the high end, a 386-33/SVGA/100MB HD clone is considerably less than what >Atari wants for a TT with 50MB HD and no monitor. Products like Windows >largely hide the brain-deadness of the DOS machines, too. Games are even >playable. > >Atari may find itself confined to dangerous niche markets, unless it can >produce another POWER WITHOUT THE PRICE trump card. It has to offer benefits >that outweigh the risks people take buying an offstream machine. > >How about a TT040? If NeXt can do it for $5K, Atari should be able to do >it for considerably less. Even better, a cheaper TT030. (Which I want) > >Some creative marketing would be nice. Bundle in a bunch of first-rate >programs, in packages like they've had in Europe for years. Cuts piracy, >helps the software companies, and gives the consumer a better deal. >Package a Lynx with the MegaSTE and TT. (Isn't the most money made from >the software?) Go for the throat. Give'm both barrels. > >Atari has at least one more kick at the cat. (Just remember, I won't buy >any Atari that doesn't have a cartridge port!) > >Geez, what a tirade. Hope nobody minded... >-- >***************************************************************************** >Scott Miller, in the bowels of Bell-Northern Research Voice:(613) 763-2992 > P.O. Box 3511, Station C >.signature USES DISCLAIMER; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Y 4H7 >***************************************************************************** I tend to agree! I think you hit the nail on the head. But I have a slightly different view. I think Atari will survive if they gradually enable their machines to run MAC software at least more easily, so Dave doesn't have to work so hard :). The MEGA STE with the LAN ports for AppleTalk sure helps I can tell everyone right now. They only reason why I bought an atari was: 1) Turbo C 2.0 (I have several personal projects going) 2) Mac Emulation (Which takes care of the serious side of computing) Thats its. I HATE ST application software, except for Turbo C, probably the most ingenious piece of software I have seen for the ST. GEM, God, did anybody preview what kind of REAL DOG MULTI-GEM is? Atari I HOPE will look elsewhere, you people REALLY don't want this, I would take a UNIX command line over MULTI GEM! Hopefully atari will be realistic and go the UNIX/MOTIF route. GEM is brain dead, it never will amount to anything. I wish I could reclaim my ROM space IMMEDIATELY. THANK GOD for Dave Small. I would kiss his hiney if he was here, as I finally managed to pick up a Spectre GCR. All praise Gadgets by Small. Now Dave, I WANT a 68030/040 option for my VME equipped MEGA STE!!! I also want it less than $1000 please. --Gregory