Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!demillo From: demillo@uwmacc.UUCP (Rob DeMillo) Newsgroups: net.micro.atari8,net.micro.atari16 Subject: Re: Ataris At Work Message-ID: <423@uwmacc.UUCP> Date: Mon, 27-Oct-86 13:32:23 EST Article-I.D.: uwmacc.423 Posted: Mon Oct 27 13:32:23 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 27-Oct-86 22:30:37 EST References: <1128@tekigm2.UUCP> <405@uwmacc.UUCP> <1142@tekigm2.UUCP> Reply-To: demillo@uwmacc.UUCP (Rob DeMillo) Organization: UWisconsin-Madison Academic Comp Center Lines: 144 Xref: mnetor net.micro.atari8:520 net.micro.atari16:2770 In article <1142@tekigm2.UUCP> wrd@tekigm2.UUCP (Bill Dippert) writes: >In article <405@uwmacc.UUCP>, oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicarious Oyster) writes: >> In article <1128@tekigm2.UUCP> wrd@tekigm2.UUCP (Bill Dippert) writes: >> >From the sounds of recent messages, I am not the only one who would rather be >> >using an Atari at work rather then an IBM. Whether a ST or a XE/XL is, I >> >think, a moot point. >> >> I don't think it's such a moot point. >> >> >> As a workstation, the 8-bit Atari lacks one thing that is essential: 80 >> characters per line. Unless things have changed since I bought an 8-bit >> Atari, you still need to get "a special card." Color is nice (I don't like >> doing without it), but that's just icing on the cake for a workstation. >You have two choices here: one buy the new XEP80 80 column adapter device or >two, buy software that allows 80/132 wide screens (with horizontal scrolling). You just destroyed your original argument: that IBM's were bad things because you had to buy add-ons all the time, and that you didn't have to do that for Atari 8 bit machines... >> But what about the capabilities as a microcomputer, you ask? Well, the >> IBM has the 8-bit beat here, too. Say you want to hook a standard printer >> up to your 1200XL; what do you do? Call mail-order place after mail-order >> place, trying to find somebody who knows what kind of cable you need; then >> pay $59.95, only to discover that the 1200XL is different somehow than the >> rest of Atari's 8-bit machines, so you have to go through the whole cycle >> again. >While I was no getting into modems, I will admit that you need an 850 interface >for almost anything, be it modem or printer. (Or another 850 >equivalent--except that Atari is providing an RS232 port on the new XEP80 for >printer or whatever. And how many companies do you think make/support serial (RS232) printers as opposed to Centronix style parallel printers...? >And trying to find cables to connect a IBM into anything >as simple as a Epson printer can be just as much a pain. I have an easier time >locating Atari cables then IBM cables unless I go to mailorder. Are you serious? The Centronix parallel cable with a DB25 connector has got to be *the* most common cabling connection available... >> And speaking of software, the IBM has just about every micro I know about >> beat cold in both public domain software and commercial software, in both >> quality and quantity. That may be only because of the perceived usage of >> the respective machines, but frankly, I would not even *think* of trying >> to market a serious program for the 8-bit Atari, if only because of what >> I know about the, um, "habits" of local Atari users with regard to software >> piracy. >I think that there is as much public domain software out there for the Atari 8 >bitter as there is for IBM. ...um, again, I ask: are you serious? Atari 8 bits may have a lot of software, but nowhere near the about IBM PC/XTs do. There is a book published that lists useable PD software for the IBM, sources, and where to find it. It is 1210 pages of very, very tiny print... > And the software that you buy at the dealer (read: >commercial software) is a heck of a lot cheaper for Atari then IBM. Although >they are getting closer! Well, that's true. IBM software has always been *way* out of line, because IBM knows there are a lot of niave people (and business people) who will, and have been, pay for it. >> There's a guy who gets pissed when, for example, Analog states >> that there isn't much Atari software because of piracy, but who has a >I agree that piracy is deplorable, but I doubt that anyone does not have some >pirated software. ...excuse me? > My feeling is that if it is still available at the dealer, >then you should pay for it. (Dealer being anything from your local computer >store, to mailorder, to the publisher of the software). But, and this is a big >but, if it no longer is available anywhere legitimately, then I will used a >socalled "pirated" copy. Yea, and if I want out-of-print books, I usually rip them off from the library, rather than looking for them in used book stores... > This generally applies to games, as they seem to be >the most pirated software. I don't think that I have ever seen real useful >software pirated (ala Syncalc, SynFile, etc.), these are currently available >and are reasonably priced so there is no incentive to pirate them. Or am I >being undully naive? You are undully niave... > >At anyrate, getting back to my original discussion: I have purchased AW+, >SynCalc, SynFile, SynGraph, etc. and they would suit my "business" needs just >as well as the software I have at work for my IBM-XT. Maybe I don't have quite >the memory available, but it is adequate for what I need. There is even a form >of CAD available now for the XE (albeit somewhat crude). So I say that the >XL/XE series are just as useful in business as the ST (unless you really need >the .5 -- 1 Meg of memory). [And the 130XE can be pumped up to 1 MEG if you >need it!] Give me a break! So, try writing/using something where machine precision counts...it should be, for instance, relatively easy for an 8-bit computer to miss connecting the lines of a triangle, because the calculation had a huge precision error in it. Or, in large business applications, how much of a spread sheet do you think you could fit into 64K or 128K? The real world has more uses for a computer than balancing checkbooks... > >> Short digression: Owners of 8-bit machines can take that as snobbery >> if they wish (somebody always does, regardless of how tactfully it's >> expressed), but it's a plain and simple fact that the 8-bit microprocessor >> is nowhere near the present state of the art in cheap microcomputing. >> For some uses, the 8-bit micros can perform as well as the owner of the >> machine wants or expects it too; however, I personally could not tolerate >> using most of today's 8-bit offerings for the kind of things I do, both >> here at the office and while "playing" at home. >Not snobbery, but your only advantage is memory and possible IBM >compatibility. ...sigh... Don't get me wrong, but I have both an IBM XT and an Atari ST. The ST is superior to the XT (even though I have the XT "suped-up") in almost every way, shape and form. But if you believe that any 8 bit machine is every bit as useable as a 16 bit machine, you must not use the machine for anything more than hobby computing... ...and if that sounds snobbish, I apologize...but I think, per chance, that it is true... -- --- Rob DeMillo Madison Academic Computer Center usenet: {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,topaz,decvax}!uwvax!uwmacc!demillo ARPA: demillo@unix.macc.wisc.edu (now isn't that easier?) ---------------------------------------- "I am not so sure what you want me for! 'War Games' Either your machine is a - Crosby, Stills and Nash fool, or me..."