that's right), GFA Basic, ST Basic (after all, it IS free), NEW SWA*:(xthat
should be: new ST BASIC (after all, it will PROBABLY be free), etc.
.ACE STL> Do you plan on supporting the 80 col card with any programs? You
have always cocome up with the best products.
.D.F.Scott> I wasn't thinking it was MetaComCo's. News to me.
.Bill W.> Ace: If not the best, at least the best value. Atari has
admitted that Metacomco is doing the new one...presumably a ... rework of
AmigaBasic.
.<Mat*Rat> Ready to move on? Ok, MATTYKID Go Ahead.
MATTYKID> What is the Action! graphics disk? A bunch of INCLUDE files?
.Mike F,Mark R> A.G. disk is actually 2 (countem two) disks...one that is
for really pretty text manipulation etc...one for multicolor sprites and
images. The latter includes a shape (icon, sprite, whatever) editor. enuf
said?
.Bill W.> Mike F (I think) will do the Action stuff.
MATTYKID> So there basically Procedures to add to your programs? Stuff I
could write myself?
.Mike F,Mark R> Yes, there are includes for you to use, and you ARE
weelcome to try and write em yourself, but I hope that you consider you
time worth more than that! you know that every user's group in the country
will carry that.
.Bill W.> And the back side of each has instructions on upgrading 800XL to
68000 cpu. Just joking, of course. But the point about how much your time
is worth is important: If you like "paying" yourself 50 cents an hour, go
ahead and do it.
.Michael Curry> Now, really, bill. you do know how to do that! the only
problem is that you have to load all programs at 300 baud cassette!
.Mike F,Mark R> Bill!!!
MATTYKID> Is that how much you pay your programmers?
.Michael Curry> less.
MATTYKID> Too bad.
.Mike F,Mark R> less than we're worth, but everyone does that!
.Bill W.> Mattykid: point is that for $20 you get programs that would take
even... an experienced programmer AT LEAST 40 hours... to write...more
like 100 hours. Okay?
.Mike F,Mark R> HOnestly though, outside writers will get a better shake
going through OSS than through almost any other outlet.
MATTYKID> Okay.
.Bill W.> By the way, those other guys are drinking beer at home, ... so
their answers are bound to be saner than mine.
.Michael Curry> we are drinking coffee, not beer. and eating popcorn..
.Mike F,Mark R> ga matt
.<Mat*Rat> Shall we move on?
.Bill W.> Hear, hear! We pay good royalties! I just saw on msgs that...
Dan Moore (SynCalc, etc., etc.) averages only 10,000 bucks (average) per
pgm.
.<Mat*Rat> Before we continue: Please limit your follow up questions to
ONE. After that please wait your turn again..... we've got a lot of
people on the "request stack" here. GO AHEAD JERRYCHAM, thanks for your
patience!
JERRYCHAM> Do you plan to support the 80 col card?(i.e. a new Action!
editor or patched word processor)
.Bill W.> I think we have to give a big fat maybe to that one...depends on
how much time we have available. And, of course, it depends on how the
80-col card is accepted by Atari owners. ga
JERRYCHAM> Are there any floating point procedures... avail for Action!?
.Bill W.> sure...part of Action ToolKit...plus Ihave seen other versions...
floating around on BBS's, etc. (ours work) ga
.Mike F,Mark R> Yes, on ACTION! ToolKit #1. yes yes
JERRYCHAM> Thank you ga
.<Mat*Rat> OK, go ahead BPT1.
BPT1> NO COMMENT, QUESTIONS ANSWERED
.<Mat*Rat> Ok, thanks BPT1. Go ahead JOEPIERCE!
.J. Pierce> Is there any plan for a "PERSONAL C" for the ST sometime in
the near to distant future?
.Mike F,Mark R> Don't write off the proposition, but don't hold your
breath, either. We're just not sure right now.
.J. Pierce> Well you know how I will vote, I want it.
.Bill W.> Truthfully, I would like a C _or_ Pascal interpreter,
myself...but either . of those is still a "wait and see" also...sigh. ga
.J. Pierce> the section of brain cells allocated for grammer is used for
other purposes by programmers. A pascal interpreter would be nice also....
Thanks for the answers.
.<Mat*Rat> Go ahead SHOE!
.Bill W.> Not by Mike Fitch: he's an English Major.
.ACE STL> How do you plan on marketing the Bareware?
.Mike F,Mark R> Right now we're selling direct, but we will be offering
through other, as yet unmentionable, sources. Since it is so new an idea
we are still in the process of setting up dist. channels....ok?
.<Mat*Rat> When will they HIT the MARKET?
.<Mat*Rat> GA JSK
JSK> Anything new for Pascal...new release...Toolkit...etc..when?
.Mike F,Mark R> We have more than one toolkit planned for Personal Pascal
but we cannot yet commit to a release date or to definite contents, as most
of our resources are tied up completing Personal Prolog and other products.
Some ideas are: GEMDOS toolkit,
.Michael Curry> new release for pascal: End of year? can you clarify,
mark? also, we are hoping to make pascal *lots* faster/friendlier, and
make some enhancements.
.<Mat*Rat> GA?
.Mike F,Mark R> We're have serious line noise problems here! Bear with us.
.Bill W.> A comment: Pascal is and will be a MAIN product for OSS...expect
heavy support... and improvements...they will take a while, but they are
coming! ga
.Michael Curry> Yes.. P. Pascal is IT right now. most products will
center around that for a while
.<Mat*Rat> GO Ahead, DFSCOTT!
.D.F.Scott> Evening, gentlemen. Besides the obvious problem... of getting
around the graphics monstrosity that is GEM... why wouldn't it be feasible
to port over a programming language based upon Action! over to the ST.
.Mike F,Mark R> Of course it's possible. Almost any language can be
implemented on any reasonable processor. But how many ACTION-type
languages would we sell? ... If every owner of ACTION! on the 8-bitters
bought an ST version, we wouldn't sell as many as we've sold Pascals so
far. Now to MY (i.e., personal) objections. ACTION! as it is currently
implemented has SERIOUS deficiencies compared to languages such as C or
Pascal.... including structures/record handling... floating point, 32-bit
integers, etc. We ask ourselves WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT ACTION! ON THE
ST???? ga
.D.F.Scott> It seems to be a mainstay amongst the current base.
.Bill W.> I have to interject something here: Mark mentions
deficiencies.... but ACTION still is the price/performance leader on the
8-bitters... he is commenting on deficiencies vs. competitors on more
advanced... machines. Like it or else, the 6502 has a limited capability,
and ACTION... pretty much pushes the limits of that ability. It can often
generate... machine language as good as you can get "by hand". Okay? Its
missing power becomes more evident as you move up in CPU power.
.D.F.Scott> I just can't see why a LANGUAGE would be limited to one CPU.
.Michael Curry> first you need to understand the language as compared to
others. most people confuse C and pascal as a language with the particular
implementation. Just because Pascal and C are slow, that
.Mike F,Mark R> ACTION! is limited to one CPU simply because it was
designed especially for THAT CPU: it's strengths and weaknesses
Bill W.> D.F: Well, it probably wasn't planned that way, but it was
DESIGNED to ... take advantage of some of the peculiarities of the 6502.
big grin! You sure got that one answered a lot of ways!
.Michael Curry> doesnt mean that they HAVE TO BE THAT WAY!!!
Implementation as opposed to language!!!
.Bill W.> BUT it costs lots of $$$$$ to produce more efficient compilers,
etc... and truthfully, the RamDisks, etc., of the ST and others ...
compensate well enough that it may not be worth doing.
.Mike F,Mark R> ga
.<Mat*Rat> GA CFJ.
.<Chas Johnson> Writer's Tool has always been my favorite 8-bit word
processor.... aside from its inability to print to a disk file and a few
other minor quibbles. Will there be any more WT updates? Also, any plans
for an ST word processor? ga
.Mike F,Mark R> we'd rather do a decent desktop publishing system, as we
have a special interest in that area. Wd pro's abound, but no one has come
up with a decent d.p. system for the ST yet.
.Bill W.> (he really MEANS "NO ONE"...not even in MacIntosh market!)
.<Chas Johnson> What about Writer's Tool? Any more development for it?
.Mike F,Mark R> thinking...
.Bill W.> We have a version of Writer's Tool in house which answers
virtually all your objections, but it is an early Alpha Test version and it
is VERY VERY buggy in some areas. When will we release it? Maybe
never...depends. on author fixing bugs, etc. This is a candid enough
answer that I ... will take flak from the others here at OSS, but sorry,
we can't give a better answer.
.Mike F,Mark R> depends on 80 col card, for one thing!!! and demand If it
sells, perhaps we'll be the first with a REAL 80-col W.P.
.Bill W.> Oh, yes, most definitely! If the author can do the 80-col
version, and if 80-col sales are good, then sure! It will come and be best
on market....but that is a lot of "if"s. Okay?
.<Mat*Rat> GO JERRYCHAM
JERRYCHAM> What do you see in the future for the 8-bits?(rejuvination or
demise?) A loaded question!
.Bill W.> I think we will see a "holding pattern". Truth to tell, as the
16-bitters get cheaper and cheaper, the reasons to buy an 8-bitter get
fewer and fewer. The only REAL reason becomes ... compatibility with
existing software. I have hundreds of 8-bit pgms I would... hate to get
rid of...You, too I presume... but what abotut NEW buyers? Many people
ask me what computer to buy. My answer always has been... and always will
be: Find a iece of software which will do what you want and THEN buy the
hardware to run it. Doing otherwise is silly. But I still like my 1200XL.
ga
.Michael Curry> one overriding concern when buying a computer, is the
AMOUNT of available software for a machine. If you look at the price of a
full-blown commodore 128 with monitor, drive, etc, you will see that it is
WAY over the price of a 520 ST
JERRYCHAM> Thanks for an honest answer and great products. Yes, for some
of us, the investment is too great.
.Bill W.> okay...somebody ask a tough question!!! Enough of these
namby-pamby opinions... from us rampant extroverts!
.<Mat*Rat> GA SIOV!
SIOV> I hate to ask, but is there anything new on the Action! tutorial?
Hows that?
.Bill W.> sorry...the guys who were doing it apparently gave it up...sigh...
SIOV> for sure?
.Mike F,Mark R> Well, WE programmers and TQ people would like to see one,
but if the fates are against it (as appears from our mkt reports)
.D.F.Scott> You guys need an author?
.Bill W.> however, Keith Ledbetter _MAY_ (repeat _MAY_) do something to
help ...all of us (and I do mean ALL of us) out.
.Bill W.> D.F: Sure...50 cents an hour, remember. (joke joke)
.Michael Curry> yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
.D.F.Scott> .75 and I'll consider it.
.<Mat*Rat> Are you saying Action sales are picking up?
.Mike F,Mark R> We can't get all the interested authors in line!
.Bill W.> Mat*Rat: No, but surprisingly, thery are not dropping, either!
There is ... still hope.
.Michael Curry> How many 8-bit computers are out there anyway.
.Bill W.> Mike Curry asked how many 8-bits out there...he meant how many
had Atari SOLD...total, I presume. Answer is somewnhere between 1.2 and
1.5 million.
.<Mat*Rat> Yes the Polls here indicate that 90% ST Owners kept the old
8bits.
SIOV> Hoping for an 8_bit emulator?
.<Dave*Star> I'd heard it's somewhere between 1-2 million
JERRYCHAM> That's what we're answering haha
.D.F.Scott> The prospectus implies 8-bit sales are good recently.
.Bill W.> Yet, on only 150,000 ST ses, we have sold about as many Personal
Pascals... as we have sold ACTION in over 3 years! Hate to say it, but
8-bit owners just don't write programs, mostly.
.D.F.Scott> That's a convincing figure.
.Michael Curry> think about it. so much for an ST version of ACTION!
.D.F.Scott> I think I've been had on that one.
.<Mat*Rat> Shall we move on?
.Bill W.> D.F.: not on purpose...it is a sad but true fact.
.<Mat*Rat> GA MATTYKID
.Bill W.> Like I said, let's get physical...errrr...technical.
MATTYKID> Is the 3.5" dos full-featured (like Spartados), or just another
DOS.SYS, DUP.SYS?
.Bill W.> Please explain what you mean by "full featured"...what in SPARTA
makes it that... to you? No guarantee of answer, since some is Atari
proprietary, but I'll listen.
.Mike F,Mark R> Good point, Bill. At last count, there were at least 20
zillion vers. of Sparta, each to fix some new and bizzarre bug!
MATTYKID> Sparta supports sub-dirs, many ramdisks, lots of utilities ,etc.
.<Mat*Rat> FYI: Current version of Sparta is 3.2d (and has remained
"current" for over 4 months).
.Bill W.> I think I can say this new DOS is a reasonable compromise...very
open architecture. Hmmm...how come I have 3.3 in my desk? Anyway, yes on
subdirectories...can't comment on other features.
MATTYKID> I wouldn't even consider buying a 3.5 drive unless the Dos is as
good as Sparta.
.Bill W.> depends on what you mean by "good"...it will be better for
beginners, have most SpartaDOS features, etc., etc....but w.t.h....stick
with Sparta if you... want...I like it, too. !
MATTYKID> ga
.<Mat*Rat> i.e. Sparta will run fine on a 3.5 disk?
MATTYKID> no way
.Mike F,Mark R> An interjection: having handled numerious Tq's regarding
Sparta (which we dont even produce), I think you can lay your worries about
this new DOS to rest!
/SEND MATTYKID How do you know? ICD's assured me that it will.
.Bill W.> Sparta should run fine with the 3.5" drive. Almost surely as
well as with the US Doubler.
MATTYKID> I was told that a new version was needed for 3.5's
.<Mat*Rat> GA?
.Bill W.> Please! It is an Atari product, not an OSS product. Thanks.
.<Mat*Rat> GA SHOE
.ACE STL> What kind of royalties can be expected by potential bareware
authors?
.Mike F,Mark R> If you send us a request for BareWare info, yoou'll get all
that info (and more). However, I'll give a hint: royalties are sliding
between 7 and 15 %, with added bonuses for high sales. (I.E. we want to
draw quality as well as quantity products) P.S. Sliding is based on the
"finality" and quality of the prod., a the time we receive it from the
author. So get on the Ball....
.Michael Curry> We are looking for authors, so don't be shy! tell a
friend! any kind of software as long as it is good stuff and well written.
royalties decrease as OSS in house involvement increases. we
.<Mat*Rat> Games, Utilities, Toolkits? Any preference?
.Bill W.> Percentage of GROSS that is, not NET as with some companies. And
Mike Curry will even overlook the "well written" if you pay him under the
table. (joke)
.Michael Curry> are looking for stuff that is as finished as possible! We
even have some game submissions. Really, send for info, and spread the
news around! we aren't advertising right now, so we need your help in
getting good software.
.Bill W.> I think they are trying to say "vote early, vote often." Or
something like that. But we will be!!!!! !!!!!! You wait! ga
.ACE STL> thanks
.<Mat*Rat> GA Joepierce
.J. Pierce> Most of the more popular development systems these days
(Turbpo Pascal, Quickbasic, etc..) sport the immediate compiling
environment (include Action in that) Can we expect that in Personal Pascal
( A compile/link in ram)?
.Mike F,Mark R> We're hoping that we'll have in-memory compile&link...
however, we do have a more difficult time of it than... turbo (sic)
pascal, since they just include the entire 18K runtime library. Our answer
will have to be: It's very high on our wish list, but we can't promise a
release date.
.Bill W.> (In other words, Turbo doesn't actually do any "LINK" phase.)
.J. Pierce> right, ga
.<Mat*Rat> GA DFSCOTT
.D.F.Scott> Thanks, Mat. With all the new revisions to the ST hardware...
...in store for next year... ...how does OSS intend to support the new
GDOS, GEMDOS, ...and new ROMs in such packages as Pascal and Prolog? GA.
.Mike F,Mark R> thinking... please wait... I'm not sure what you mean
about the "new" GEMDOS... About GDOS, Pascal already "supports" it. We
have several programs which run under GDOS, including a few commercial
packages from outside firms. ... However, the question of "supporting"
GDOS is still mired since Atari has told us using various fonts, etc., may
be rather words, !@#@$%^&@##$ -- those words, you understand) Pascal does
and WILL support GDOS! Now, what new GEMDOS were you talking about? ga
.D.F.Scott> I've been told by Atari sources that GEMDOS is being
"debugged." This will require new ROMs besides the blitter ROMs.
.Michael Curry> hooray!
.Mike F,Mark R> It sure needs to be! (although we have changed to using
different calls because certain unnamed command processors didn't work
properly with I/O redirection because of THEIR bugs!!!!)
.Bill W.> Why should that affect us? We use legit calls, as far as we
know.
.D.F.Scott> Well, the old ways to get around bugs might not work, I
thought.
.<Mat*Rat> GA JERRYCHAM
JERRYCHAM> Any possibility of a GEM like dos for the 8-bits; A La GEOS for
the nautical computer?...
.Michael Curry> pray that it won't happen! what a waste of memory!
.Bill W.> no comment. All things are possible if cash is available. You
got the cash?
.Mike F,Mark R> We're available
.Michael Curry> I see no need for it. you want to waste 10 k of memory on
that?
.<Mat*Rat> What about something like the MWINDOWS, a utility in a recent...
ANALOG, where Text windows are used? Slick utility.
JERRYCHAM> @ 50 cents an hour?
.Bill W.> seriously, we don't know of a GOOD one available. Mat: ehhh...I
can take it or leave t... it does NOT give redraw msgs, and that is fatal
in a general environment. ga
.<Mat*Rat> GA STARWALKER
JERRYCHAM> How about code optimizer for Action ...
JERRYCHAM> Reduce code size improve speed like for DBase
.Michael Curry> define that... the code size produced by action is awful
small now...
.Mike F,Mark R> Most of the optimizations can be done at the code (or even
design level), if you know the tricks.
.Bill W.> If so, we don't know of any GOOD way to optimize it... would
cost lots and lots of $$$ to write even a fair one. Amen...ACTION is a
language of tricks! (NOT a nasty comment.)
.<Dave*Star> Okay. I use Writer's Tool, and love it... But whenever I
boot the program, I get a "data frame error" every time I try to read or
write to a data disk... unless I tap my reset key (not hard enough to
coldstart, mind you) first.
.Bill W.> ????? Data Frame error iicates that your data disk is a
different .... density than your drive is set for...reason hitting RESET
works... is becuz that forces DOS to re-size all the dives. dives=drives.
.<Dave*Star> I generally use my backup, tho the same thing happens when I
use the original.
.Mike F,Mark R> Is this a backup copy, or are you using diff. DOS?
.Michael Curry> what kind of drives?
.Bill W.> Use the "I" command from the "D"isk menu...you can force Writer's
Tool... to either single or double density. This assumes you are using
one of our DOS's...what DOS _do_ you use. What kind of drives? Some
drives do NO change to the booted density automatically!
.<Dave*Star> I format my data disks for double density, and I'm 98% certain
that my backup of the pgm disk is DD as well. I use an Indus GT drive,
with the supplied DOS XL 2.35
.Bill W.> Hmmm...should work then...Well, anyway...just use the "I" command
from the
.<Dave*Star> I was under the impression, from my drive's manual, that the Indus did.
.Bill W.> "D"isk menu.. "I" will ask you whether you want to initialize or
change density...just change density.
.<Dave*Star> Okay, I'll try it next time. Thanks. Next?
.Bill W.> Indus driv DOES change automatically, but you MUST tell DOS th
density has changes...else they get out of sync...hence DAA FRAME...okay?
ga
.<Mat*Rat> The DRIVE knows when you change densities, but the DOS
doesn't... always.
.<Mat*Rat> GA MATRAT - ohh, that's me.
.<Mat*Rat> Do you forsee OSS ever creating program CARTRIDGES for the ST?
.Bill W.> As I said before, ANYTHING is possible. But it would take the
right program... to make it worth while. I have a couple of... ideas
along that line, but I think they would surprise ou. (They are NOT
languages.) Mat? More?
.<Mat*Rat> Ok, follow up on GDOS. .<Mat*Rat> I've heard that when you
initialize a printer driver.... it eats 200K of RAM, for dot matrix
printers. There's a great excuse to go to cart based software for some
applications? Say desktop publishing for example? Hint?
.Mike F,Mark R> I think we lost a line what takes up 200K
.Bill W.> Mat: he lost part of that...just a second
.<Mat*Rat> A GDOS printer driver! It builds a raster image of the printers
page in RAM.
.Bill W.> Drivers for dot matrix printers under GDOS supposedly use
200KB... he is asking about cartridge software in that situation.
.Michael Curry> they do! I am a witness!
.Mike F,Mark R> Remember that many of the reasons to go cart-based on the
ST as compared to the 8-bit have disappeared... The disks are 8 times
faster (floppies), there are hard disks availabled, etc. I can't really
comment on GDOS drivers since we don't use GDOS that much, yet. We at OSS
are not counting out cart-based software but it is EXPENSIVE to
produce!!!!!!!!!!!!
.Bill W.> Mat: wait until their laser printer comes out! 1Meg image in
RAM! At least!
.<Mat*Rat> There are lots of people out there with Expensive Epsons...
they aren't going to be buying laser printers just to free up... 200K of
ram.
.Bill W.> Still, the worry is, what about all the RAM being used up by
GDOS? I think the... answer is that Atari is TRYING to push users into
MINIMUM of 1 MEG machines. Mat: you misunderstood...it will take MORE RAM
to support the ... laser printer...about 1 meg versus 200KB!!!! You will
have to have a 2Meg machine to use laser printer.
.<Mat*Rat> Atari isn't writing GDOS, DRI is. Why blame them for GDOS.
.Mike F,Mark R> If you can guarantee us 20,000 copies sold withing the
first year, I could guarantee we would produce a cart at the end of the
year... I really don't know why a "printer driver" should take up 200K--
sounds like poor design (but we ARE talking about GEM from DRI!).
.<Mat*Rat> What if you have IMAGE WRITER? That laster printer has its
own... CPU, RAM, and programming language. Rite? (High level version of
Epson escape codes.)
.Bill W.> One more in same vein: even on a 520, and even with 200KB gone
for a printer... driver, there should be plenty of room left over for a
decent desktop publishing sytem.
.<Mat*Rat> Case in point: Degas Elite uses GDOS for fonts.... but if it
installed a GDOS printer driver you'd not be able to run it on a 520ST.
.Mike F,Mark R> Not all laser printers have their own language built in.
In fact, the "Apple LaserWriter" is very unique in having such
Bill W.> What can we say? You are asking us to predict both Atari and DRI
moves...we do NOT have crystal balls.
.<Mat*Rat> OK, shall we move on now? Getting late.
.Bill W.> Anyway: let's face it...DRI is taking the quick and dirty way
out. Memory is cheap and they are treating it that way. By all means. GA
.D.F.Scott> DRI thinks they're writing for a System 36.
.<Mat*Rat> I understand. GO AHEAD SHOE. (Righto DFS.)
.Bill W.> To be fair, I think Atari is encouraging them...I think Atari...
sees 2MB as a minimum machine in (say) 1988.
.ACE STL> We would like to extend an invitation to our Atarifest in '87
.Bill W.> In St. Louis? When and where? Don't say here, if you don't
want to... send info to Mark Taketa at this office.
.<Mat*Rat> And I can remember when a 16K machine was a BIG one!
.ACE STL> Mat has not gotten the date yet
.<Mat*Rat> Right. Atari has contacted yours truly, and ACT St. Louis...
to host an AtariFest.
.Bill W.> Okay...but remember Mark Taketa's name...he schedules shows, etc.
.<Mat*Rat> We're waiting on more info. 6 months away, at least. GA
JERRYCHAM
JERRYCHAM> Where can I get info on DOSXL batch file processing?
.Bill W.> In the manual? Seriously, what do you need to know?
.<Mat*Rat> Yes Jerry, that is in the DOS XL manual!
.Bill W.> Something beyond the stuff in the manual? Conditionals
(non-existant)? etc.?
JERRYCHAM> How to,what limits; My manual from indus had a lot of occlusions
.<Mat*Rat> Or did you want technical info, on how to write your own...
utilities that process batch commands?
.<Mike F,Mark R> aha, Indus!
.Bill W.> AHA!!!! Another INDUS gotcha person! Two answers: get new
manual from Indus or get new manual from us. Third answer: give the whole
stuff up and get Sparta DOS Fourth answer: wait for new Atari DOS.
.<Mat*Rat> INDUS is GONE.
.<Mike F,Mark R> Call us during business hrs about getting OUR DOS XL
manual.
JERRYCHAM> Is Indus still around?
.D.F.Scott> Indus was done in.
.<Mat*Rat> No, INDUS is out of business!
.Bill W.> INDUS is NOT gone...they just changed names, etc., after
bankruptcy... something like MPP...they are now called "Future Systems"
.<Mike F,Mark R> Yes, as Future Systems somewhere in soCal (Chatsworth)
.D.F.Scott> You're serious?? News to me.
.Bill W.> Sure, they have been at all 3 west coast AtariFests.
JERRYCHAM> ga
.<Mat*Rat> OK, CFJ is last question. GA CFJ.
.Bill W.> We have Future's phone number if you call during business hours. ga
.<Chas Johnson> I'd give my hard disk drive for an ST version of MAC/65.... (well, maybe not <grin>) but the question is..... anything like that in the works? (Pretty please???) ga
.Bill W.> same answer as many others: all things MAY come to he who waits
and/or pays.
.D.F.Scott> I can wait and pay both.
.<Mike F,Mark R> convince others to do the same!
.Bill W.> The M65 author _wants_ to do it, but $$$ mean a lot to him right
now.
.<Chas Johnson> I'll pay big money for it right now!
.<Mat*Rat> Bill: Have you seen AssemPro from Abacus? It's a step in...
the right direction.
.Bill W.> Hehehehehe...M&M have the right answer! Is it a _macro_
assembler? Is debugger screen independent of GEM screen? I consider those
MINIMUM qualifications.
.<Mat*Rat> Yes a MACRO assembler, ask CFJ about debugger.
.<Chas Johnson> Yes to both questions, Bill.
.Bill W.> (I hav e not seen it) Hmmm...so why should we try to better it?
or could we?
.<Chas Johnson> But it's quirky. I still want MAC/68K.
.<Mat*Rat> Get it. It is very good overall. Closest to the Mac/68K we
want.
.D.F.Scott> Because you're OSS.
.<Chas Johnson> I'm not as impressed with it as Matt is. (I guess.)
.Bill W.> hehehehe...well, maybe Steve can use it to write Mac68K...but
don't hold your breath waiting for it. (grin)
.<Mike F,Mark R> specify quirky, please
.Bill W.> yes, please! What is wrong!
.<Chas Johnson> Assembler chokes on TABs..... Search/replace is clumsy in
the editor....
.Bill W.> urk! terrible. Editor is not GEM-based?
.<Chas Johnson> Editor is GEM-based. Fast for GEM, but still short of
EMACS. And the assembler doesn't seem much faster than AS68.
.Bill W.> define slow: typical 500 line assembly takes how long?
.<Mat*Rat> Chas, have you assembled from/to RAM, with verify off? It is
MUCH faster in AS68 in my opinion.
.Bill W.> Mat:shame on you...."assembled"...not compiled. (grin)
.<Mike F,Mark R> Anything is faster than as68!
.Bill W.> mac/65 is faster than as68!
.<Chas Johnson> Assembling with AS68 to Ramdisk and Assempro to RAM.....
overal, it's pretty slow at assembly too (in my opinion). a 500-line
program took about the same time.
.Bill W.> then it is too slow!
.<Mat*Rat> Chas, when you assembled with AssemPro, did you do it with...
it printing at the top of the screen...... the current line in the ASM
process? If you turn that off, it's a lot quicker.
.<Chas Johnson> Didn't know you could turn it off.
.<Mat*Rat> Yes, one of the options under the assembling menu.
.Bill W.> hehehehe looks like only us diehards are left.
.<Mat*Rat> OK, any more questions before a final wrapup?
.Bill W.> I am ready to take a couple of TOUGH tech questions before giving
up... no more "When are you coming out with ACTION for ... the CYBER?"
.D.F.Scott> I'm thinking...
.Bill W.> actually, should have said "ACTION for the BURROUGHS" becuz
Clinton did his work with BCPL on the BURROUGHS... and ACTION (like C) is
a derivative of BCPL, he claims. predecessor to C...still used
...MetaComco writes ALL their software in it... including their Pascal,
Fortran, and (what else) Amiga BASIC and ... presumably ST BASIC.
.<Mat*Rat> What the heck is BCPL please?
.<Mike F,Mark R> a precursor to "C"
.<Mat*Rat> Bill: any "speculation" on why Amiga dropped their ...
original MetaComCO BASIC and went with MicroSoft...... while Atari is
going with MetaComCO? It doesn't seem to bode well, if they've been
dropped once.
.Bill W.> Yes. Because Amiga BASIC was slooooowwwwww compared to
MicroSoft. Not significantly faster than ST BASIC. In fact... BASIC XE
beat the MetaComco Amiga BASIC on a few benchmarks! Political reasons,
also, I am sure...e.g., which would you rather have... for publicity
reasons? Truthfully? Yes. But it is too soon to tell. Atari told
Metacomco to take the first version they tried to foist on Atari and shove
it. That is one... reason it is slow coming...they have had to do major
surgery, I think
.<Mat*Rat> So, do you think we will be disappointed again? Like we were
with ST BASIC? If it's that bad, it needs a scrap and rewrite. You think
we'll ever see the Micro Soft, Macintosh version, for the ST?
.D.F.Scott> I heard Atari and Microsoft had a falling out.
.Bill W.> I dunno why they zapped it, though..speed or features? Not until
one of two things happens: (1) Atari sells at least 500,000 machines...
or (2) Atari pays at least $500,000 to Microsoft to do it. line noise ,
again, huh? Several fallings out. But "Microsoft Write" (chpy version...
of Microsoft "word") is first sign of some sort of reconciliation.
.D.F.Scott> I heard of one since Write.
.Bill W.> one what?
.D.F.Scott> One dispute, or difference of opinion, over marketing Write.
.Bill W.> wouldn't be surprised...Atari wants to sell everything for less
than it costs the
.<Mat*Rat> MS doesn't want their NAME on it, right?
.Bill W.> software houses to publish it...hard to earn a living that way.
I dunno...truthfuylly, I don't give a ... "WRITE" isn't all that
great...it is as good as, but not much better than, any of the other ST
WP's.
.D.F.Scott> Microsoft's PR told me they would dump the ST as a prospect.
Right, Mat.
.Bill W.> Besides, once MicroSoft decides the ST is a viable market, OSS
will probably have to pack its bags for a smaller market.
.<Mat*Rat> Ouch.
.Bill W.> Yes. A lot. I do NOT know how Atari is seeking to address this
problem. They don't tell me. I am afraid to ask. They are very
confident, though, so maybe they know something we don't. Side comment:
Did you know they are selling 2600 game machines into China (Red) at the
rate of hundreds of thousands a year? hmmm.....what about computers????
.<Mat*Rat> You know Atari, Power without the price, or profits, or service,
or warranty, or technical support, etc...
.D.F.Scott> I think it said that in the prospectus, come to think of it.
.Bill W.> (That is PURE speculation! Guessing! No basis ...just for fun!)
.D.F.Scott> "Far East Sales," it was called.
.Bill W.> hehehe...tried to hide it, didn't they?
.D.F.Scott> Next thing they need is an American TV to plug it into.
.<Mat*Rat> Nope, they get those from GoldStar in Koreea!
.<Mat*Rat> Looks like the questions are about exhausted.
.Bill W.> naturally...look at the hour.
.<Mike F,Mark R> as are the participants
.D.F.Scott> Won't 8-bit software have to be transported over... in mass
quanities to 3 1/2?
.Bill W.> One would presume so, D.F., but what if machine is for new
market?
.<Mike F,Mark R> IF the masses demand it!
.<Mat*Rat> Before the CO totally dies, I'd like to thank the men from...
OSS for joining this CO!!!! And my thanks to all the users who joined in,
and their.... adherance to the rules of the CO.
.D.F.Scott> I've had a blast tonight myself.
.Bill W.> (Thanks, Matt...been interesting...especially learning about
TeleGoof)
.<Mat*Rat> OK. ANY LAST quickie question or comment before we close
this... thing down?
.ACE STL> Thanks to all from St. Louis
.<Mat*Rat> Gnite ACE STL. Thanks for dropping in guys.
.<Mat*Rat> Seriously guys, Look at AssemPro, abacus, and Publishing...
Partner, Softlogik, before developing your own versions.
.Bill W.> I'm gonna take advantage of Mat's time an d look at what's here.
.Bill W.> Mat: we ALWAYS look at competitors.
.<Chas Johnson> (I know you guys could beat Assempro!) <-- voice from bleachers
.<Mat*Rat> (But it would take a lot of work!)
.D.F.Scott> I second the motion--voice from far above bleachers.
.<Mat*Rat> Only us sysop types and special guests left. Shall we go?
.D.F.Scott> Go forth.
.<Mat*Rat> Blasphemy, how dare you say FORTH to my ST!
.Bill W.> No, no, no, no...not FORTH! Go Pascal!
.<Mike F,Mark R> its always later than you think. Goodnight John-boy
.D.F.Scott> Goodbye, Bill, and thank you very much!
