Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!FSU.BITNET!VAXPOST From: VAXPOST@FSU.BITNET (Testing Vax Bitnet Connection) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Unexpected status code returned by VMS MAIL \%X007E10A2\ Message-ID: <8801062319.AA28875@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: 6 Jan 88 23:20:11 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: world Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 441 X-Unparsable-Date: 6-JAN-1988 17:27:00.52 --------------- A copy of your rejected mail message follows --------------- Received: by CANADA01 (Mailer X1.24) id 0338; Wed, 06 Jan 88 17:09:55 EDT Date: Wed, 6 Jan 88 11:43:27 PST Reply-To: Info-Atari16@Score.Stanford.edu Sender: INFO-A16@CANADA01 From: Info-Atari16@Score.Stanford.EDU Subject: Info-Atari16 Digest V88 #7 To: PETCHER@GW.SCRI.FSU.EDU, DUBRAVK@FSU Info-Atari16 Digest Wednesday, January 6, 1988 Volume 88 : Issue 7 This weeks Editor: Bill Westfield Today's Topics: How advertising helps already-owners ST Drive Change? Re: Reasons for buying a computer (was Colorburst) Re: How advertising helps already-owners Reasons for buying a computer (was Colorburst) Atari ST motherboards big arrays in MW C eproms burners Help Re: Multi-tasking? A nightmare... Re: Multi-tasking? A nightmare... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 Dec 87 14:13:13 GMT From: denbeste@bbn.com (Steven Den Beste) Subject: How advertising helps already-owners To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Michael Vederman (uace0@uhnix2.UUCP) asks: > Okay, how can you change Atari's image? Does it matter? Sure, > more advertisements would be nice, but what benefit do we, the curreniet > owners of STs derive from that? The rationale goes as follows: If the advertising is effective, more ST's will be sold, and the installed base will get bigger. This will attract more third party software vendors, who will write more software for the system, which means a better and wider availability of software for those who already owned the machine when the advertising began. Clear? -- Steven C. Den Beste, Bolt Beranek & Newman, Cambridge MA denbeste@bbn.com(ARPA/CSNET/UUCP) harvard!bbn.com!denbeste(UUCP) I don't think BBN cares what I think about this stuff. And that's probably just as well. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Dec 87 02:36:03 GMT From: portal!cup.portal.com!BigDiamond@uunet.uu.net Subject: ST Drive Change? To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Does anyone know if you can take out the single-sided drive in the SF354 drive and slip in a double-sided drive without any problems? Thanks in advance.............................Hank (BigDiamond@cup.portal.com) ------------------------------ Date: 27 Dec 87 10:45:49 GMT From: pepper!cmcmanis@sun.com (Chuck McManis) Subject: Re: Reasons for buying a computer (was Colorburst) To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <5834@jhunix.UUCP> ins_anmy@jhunix.UUCP (Norman Yarvin) writes: :>In article <36598@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes a lot :>of good suggestions about buying a computer. I can't understand this though: :> :>>* Don't buy a computer to learn programming. If you ever want to program :>> a computer you own, learn programming *first*. Then you will know when :>> the programming environment a computer offers is usable. :> :>How is someone going to learn programming without a computer? Granted, :>Usenet people must have access to at least one. But the world at large does :>not. Don't tell me you are going to just sit there and read a book; very :>few have that much willpower. And even if someone did, would he/she learn :>anything about which computer to buy? Very little, probably. I suggest that if you want to learn programming you take a class at a community college or through some other program where they provide the computer. The reason being that the things that make a computer easy to program, and the programs that make a computer useful may be a disjoint set. Have you ever programmed on a ZX81? Not much fun. Or maybe you buy a commodore 64 to learn programming, and then find out that you really want to program in C and no one makes a C compiler for it. Maybe COBOL is your idea of fun, that wipes out the Atari and Amiga right there. But the biggest danger is that you may discover you can't program, or hate to program and now you have this essentially worthless computer (remember the condition was that you bought it to learn programming). I know a lot of people who have bought computers, the ones that took a programming class were a lot happier. You learn a lot about computers when you take a programming class. It gives you an edge, I heard about a guy that bought a computer to program on that had only a line oriented editor because the salesman had convinced him that editors that supported editing on a "hard copy" terminal were more powerful than screen editors. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Dec 87 07:40:47 GMT From: lakesys!rich@csd1.milw.wisc.edu (Rich Dankert) Subject: Re: How advertising helps already-owners To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <5600@cc5.bbn.COM> denbeste@bbn.COM (Steven Den Beste) writes: > >The rationale goes as follows: > >If the advertising is effective, more ST's will be sold, and the installed base >will get bigger. This will attract more third party software vendors, who will >write more software for the system, which means a better and wider availability >of software for those who already owned the machine when the advertising began. > >Clear? > >-- >Steven C. Den Beste, Bolt Beranek & Newman, Cambridge MA >denbeste@bbn.com(ARPA/CSNET/UUCP) harvard!bbn.com!denbeste(UUCP) > I don't think BBN cares what I think about this stuff. > And that's probably just as well. I can see your rational to a point, though I believe that your over looking one main point. Atari is looking to get away from the GAME MACHINE image. I think that this is an excellent idea. BUT,Right now, I hear more people talking to other's to look at the machine and they refuse to look past the Game Machine Image that is still attached to the name. Increasing the user base is a great idea, but remember that most that do check out the system, are pretty new to computer's for the most part.They really don't know whats out there for third party software, and when they do, they see alot of games made for the machine. They also see alot of owner's talking about the neat games that they have, but when it comes to what application software is available, well thats where were short. Sure games are fun, and show off the power of the machine, but all this power has to be put to better use! What I am getting at is third party software parties like Word Perfect Corp., Monogram, and other's to get their software over to the ST and do it right! I'm not really all that choked up about the third party software houses that simply port their stuff over, and it runs like it would on a PC. I would like to see software that really flys, and takes full advantage of the machine. To date their are but a handfull of such programs and for the most part these companies have not seen fit to back up their product with the supprt that is really needed. Word Perfect has been the real exception. Lets face it. Atari owner's *know what the machine is capable of, and with this knowledge, the demand the software to work correctly, and if it does not, the CO. should make a revision. This is not the case for the most part. Sure there are alot of packages out there that do perform quite well, but still don't make full use of the power that is available. Two markets that suffer quite a bit are the Business and Educational areas. These have been been improving, but were a long way off to where we should be, and where Atari would like it to be (my opinion of course). I for one, like the idea of Atari buying Federated, and the work being done with the Abaq box. Excellent ways to increase performence, but it still has to be sold to the general public. Business in particular. Ways for getting the point across. I would start getting more software out that would 'DO THE JOB' and have my name placed on it (Atari name). Of course the software would have to work to perfection as advertised. Who else better than Atari to make a software product that does the job? They designed the machine, and know it better than anyone else. The software that they have produced, has been outstanding, and proves that fact. (Lets not get into Atari Basic though!) along with the machine, offer software that would help intice the MS-DOS brainwashed people to see the Atari as a viable alternative. Case in point. We bought DAK easy accounting from DAK for our business. The program was written in basic, then compiled. Thats not the real problem. The program was really un-supported. The bugs were not fixed, and when the CO. had to face the fact, they come up with deciding not to support the product, and then comming out with version two, state that there is no market for business software for the machine, thus not making the version two available for the ST. Then you get the software emulator, and version two, and the program runs so slow, that for all intence and purposes, is really not usable. Especially when you seen version one (buggy as it is) run as fast as it did, would make anyone cry. If Atari produced this product, the purchaser's would know that the product would be supported, and any bugs (if any) would be corrected. I stand in the wings that Atari should produce some productivity software for the machine. What they have produced is great, but what is really missing is the business and educational software to act as a magnet to draw more to the power of this fabulous machine. -rich UUCP: {Ihnp4,uwvax}!uwmcsd1!lakesys!rich Discalimer: The words,ideas,and expressions are my own, and not nessasarily always correct, but they are mine, and can be yours too, if you want them! ------------------------------ Date: 27 Dec 87 03:18:54 GMT From: aplcen!jhunix!ins_anmy@mimsy.umd.edu (Norman Yarvin) Subject: Reasons for buying a computer (was Colorburst) To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu In article <36598@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes a lot of good suggestions about buying a computer. I can't understand this though: >* Don't buy a computer to learn programming. If you ever want to program > a computer you own, learn programming *first*. Then you will know when > the programming environment a computer offers is usable. How is someone going to learn programming without a computer? Granted, Usenet people must have access to at least one. But the world at large does not. Don't tell me you are going to just sit there and read a book; very few have that much willpower. And even if someone did, would he/she learn anything about which computer to buy? Very little, probably. Norman Yarvin (seismo!umcp-cs : ihnp4!whuxcc : allegra!hopkins) !jhunix!ins_anmy "I can't really represent the size of the sun, but this should give you a good idea." ------------------------------ Date: 27 Dec 87 02:15:08 GMT From: oliveb!olivej!dragon@ames.arpa (Give me a quarter or I'll touch you) Subject: Atari ST motherboards To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Does anyone know if the deal where one sends in their Atari 520ST to Atari and gets a new one back is still good? I remember the price as being around $95 or so. What are the catches to this? Can it be done through a dealer or only through Atari? Thanks for any information! --Dean ---- Dean Brunette {ucbvax,etc.}!hplabs!oliveb!olivej!dragon {ucbvax,etc.}!hplabs!oliveb!dragon-oatc!dean Olivetti Advanced Technology Center _____ _____ __:__ _____ 20300 Stevens Creek Blvd. : : _____: : : ------------------------------ Date: 26 Dec 87 04:24:08 GMT From: dayton!ems!nis!stag!trb@rutgers.edu ( Todd Burkey ) Subject: big arrays in MW C To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Hi, Does anyone know if MWC will safely handle large arrays now? I know that I had problems in the early versions with HDSCAN's arrays in that I had to keep the total amount of data in a particular array less than 32K bytes. Now when I compile tests (i.e. a char[10000][12]), I get a message like: strict: size of array overflows size_t which doesn't make sense, since size_t is a long if I remember correctly. Somewhat confusing (and frustrating now that my manual is out of phase with the newer version of the compiler that I got recently.) What I really want to do is fold my Unix version of HDSCAN back into the ST version, and preferably with MW C. If it looks like it will be too much of a mess, I will probably wait for the new version of Megamax, since that sounds somewhat promising as well. (Yes, the Unix version is done...I am mailing the source code to comp.sources.misc next week. Supports both BSD and SYSV flavors of Unix). -Thanks, Todd Burkey trb@stag.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: 27 Dec 87 19:50:10 GMT From: kap%psueclb.BITNET@psuvm.bitnet Subject: eproms burners To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu hi I hate to interupt this fasinating discussion on multi-tasking but I need to find an eprom burner to use with the ST. I thought hippo made one but I can't find any information. Does anyone have or used one with the ST, any comments. thanks jim, on a friends account ------------------------------ Date: 28 Dec 87 03:56:52 GMT From: pasteur!cory.Berkeley.EDU!dle@cad.Berkeley.EDU (Duy Le) Subject: Help To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu Hi, I want to create a folder with autocopy but don't know how. Would someone please tell me how to? Thanks Duy ------------------------------ Date: 27 Dec 87 14:56:19 GMT From: ucsdhub!jack!crash!pnet01!haitex@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu (Wade Bickel) Subject: Re: Multi-tasking? A nightmare... To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu I still have not heard one counter argument against the value that multi-tasking has as a tool for the programmer to use to write better programs. Perhaps the user does not see this as multi-tasking, but benfits from it none the less. After all, this is a powerful tool and we programmers can use it to make what would otherwise be a difficult task an easy one. This this translates to less expensive or more feature full programs. I have never said that multi-tasking was "essential". However, it is a VERY powerfull and usefull tool for both the software developer and the user alike. And you need not use it if it is too much for you. As far as this OS/9 buisness goes, if it were being distributed free then it might mean something, but from what's been said it will be held by only a small fraction of the ST users due to its price. Thus programmers will not be able to consider the bulk of the ST market when depending on OS/9, and will not be likely to do so. So much easier when its included with the basic system! Thanks, Happy New Year, Wade. UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!haitex ARPA: crash!pnet01!haitex@nosc.mil INET: haitex@pnet01.CTS.COM ------------------------------ Date: 28 Dec 87 07:40:26 GMT From: mtune!codas!killer!elg@rutgers.edu (Eric Green) Subject: Re: Multi-tasking? A nightmare... To: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu in article <3256@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu>, davidli@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu (Dave Meile) says: > People want computers (when they want them at all) to DO SOMETHING for > them. In the majority of cases with the Atari ST and the Amiga, that > "something" has been: > > writing stuff > filing stuff > retrieving stuff that's been filed > playing games > programming all of the above > > Most of those who read these forums fall under the "programming" category. > Of course, for programmers, multitasking can be a delight. For the person > who is writing a term paper on the microcomputer, why bother? If you have > access to two programs (ala Multifinder or perhaps through a "desk > accessory" [IBM PCs have desk accessories too, folks]) you already have > as much power as you're ever liable to need in most environments. Let's face it, even a Timex Sinclair with 16K of RAM can do all of the above (just a bit slow and limited). A boat-anchor CP/M system can also do all of the above, and would be cheaper (nowadays) besides. But I sure the hell don't like to use one after I've used BSD4.2 & other OS's that take advantage of multitasking. For example, take the term paper. I'm using an 8-bit single-tasking system right now. I set it to printing. Then I go away for 20 minutes while my NX-10 bangs away in near letter quality mode (more "near" than "letter", but that's the breaks!). That irritates me. Greatly. There's a couple of things I could do here: Use my RAM-disk and jam a software interrupt-driven spooler on my LST: device (multitasking!), go out and buy a 512K print spooler (multitasking again, although in this case with a dedicated processor), or any other number of things. All of which are multitasking. All of which are a kludge, and would be unnecessary if real multitasking was available. I remember my first computer. 5K of RAM, 16K of ROM, I was in hawg heaven, a computer all my own, to hack in 6502 assembly language on. I lusted for 16K, because with 16K, you can do anything, right? 64K? forget it, 64K was for rich folks with $2,000 to buy the latest CP/M boat-anchor (so-called because of its size and weight, in this case :-). Disk drives? Why would anybody want disk drives? I can load and save just fine with my cassette recorder! Then I moved up to a 64K machine with a disk drive. Wow. Big time now. I'll never take that 5K machine out of the closet again (even tho I expanded it to 16K). After all, it's just an obsolete toy now, right? and 64K... I can do ANYTHING! Wow, what power. Why would I want one of them fancy dandy 68000 machines, 'specially when they all cost $5,000 for 256K of RAM, and I can do everything they can, on my li'l min-anchor? I mean, I can process words, I can write programs, I can play games... they do all that, right? There's 2 points I wish to make: 1) Some features added to the computer make it more productive and easier to use (compare cassette deck to floppy drive to hard drive!). 2) Most of us are notoriously short on foresight, like I was when I thought that 64K and a floppy drive was the epitomy of computing (after all, I can do everything you can, right? I can process words, play games, etc.?). While you may not see the use of multitasking, I bet you're as foresighted now as I was 10 years ago when I thought that 16K of RAM was big-time for a microcomputer. -- Eric Lee Green elg@usl.CSNET Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 {cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg Lafayette, LA 70509 "There's someone in my head, but it's not me...." -PF ------------------------------ End of Info-Atari16 Digest ************************** -------