NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/comp/sys/atari/st/18972

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-27 | 6.0 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu!chu
From: [e-mail] (John C. Chu)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Can we all just get along? (long)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Dec 92 03:56:50 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: UB
Lines: 107
Nntp-Posting-Host: lictor.acsu.buffalo.edu

I was just wondering, is it possible for anyone to say something
positive about Atari without instantly being branded an Atari
Cheerleader (with his/her "Pollyannaish visions of Atari")? Also, is
it possible for anyone to say something critical of Atari without
being branding an Atari Nay-sayer?

The thing that strikes me as I read the threads is that the views all
seem to be so polarized and they all eventually degrade into personal
attacks. Judging from what I've read, it seems that people seem either
desparately ardent in their support of Atari, as if their sheer will
could bring Atari into profitability or adamant in their belief of
emminent failure.

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. For some reason which I
still haven't figured out, Atari is still in business. The only reason
mentioned that might make any sense is that for some other unexplained
reason, Atari seems to have this immense customer loyalty. If you
think about this, it makes absolutely no sense. Who in his or her
right mind would support and be loyal to a company for whom there is
little 3rd party support, which doesn't support its customers one bit,
and continually fails to deliver on its promises? Yet, there is a
small masochistic bunch (myself included, I'm doing this on a 4Meg
1040STe) that does.

This probably isn't the case in general, but for me, the net is the
reason why I'm still using an Atari (and why I replaced my ST with an
STe when I blew up my ST installing a memory upgrade. I don't think I
was properly grounded. Silly me...) If it weren't for the selfless
dedication of those who port TeX, gcc and the like (also especially
Eric Smith for writing MiNT and freely distributing it) I don't think
I would enjoy using my ST as much as I do. It fills the customer
support vacuum left by Atari.

Anyways, I'd like to think that those who critise Atari (usually
deservedly) do so because they think the computers are pretty decent
but the company is running itself to the ground. How close am I?
I'd also like to think that those who proudly proclaim themselves as
Atari Supporters feel that perhaps that this is The Big One. The
chance for Atari to succeed. (Personally though, it reminds me
trying to bring Tinkerbell back to life, "Now if everyone claps really
hard..." :-) )

My opinion is this:
If Falcon is Atari's attempt to target the mainstream, it will fail
miserably. Atari has little name credibility and its possible to get a
PC for the same price that will be more useful to the average user.
Yes, I read the a tech spec flame thread. It really doesn't matter
that a similarly equipped PC will cost more. That's not the way people
shop for computers (at least, I don't know any one that shops like
that). They look at existing packages rather than setting up their
own. I think software availability will be more important than DSP to
the average buyer. Also, no matter what its performance is relative to
a PC, it loses in the numbers game. Even if it calculates FFTs faster
than a 486DX/66 EISA PC clone (note: I'm not saying it does. I have no
idea how fast it would actually work), given most people's penchant
for comparing only CPU clock rates to judge computer speed, people are
going to think it's a slow machine.

If Falcon is Atari's attempt to target the music industry, then, well,
at least there is a chance. I'm not very up on the electronic music
industry but I know it was doing well in it at one point so the name
Atari might still mean something there (i.e., people don't laugh when
you mention it). Plus, Keyboard magazine gave it a favorable overview.
Then again, they also have the Apple IIGS a favorable overview when it
first came out. Still, this machine does seem to be somewhat tailored
towards those sort of applications (although that is not all it is
capable of).

Anyways, I think this is possibly Atari's last chance to Get It Right
in the computer business. If they play it right, they might actually
do fairly well. Given their track record, I have my doubts.
(I would love to see them do well though.)

So, I sit here with the realization that should Atari Corp. fall off
the face of the earth, the computers themselves will keep working and
the community, which could never depend on Atari Corp. anyways, will
go along just as it always has. The Atari community doesn't depend on
Atari as much as it does on Howard Chu, Eric Smith (yes, I know he's
working for them now), Dave Baggett and everyone else whose names I
can't think of right now, to keep it alive. To those guys, I don't
think you hear this as much as you should: Thank you very much for
keeping this platform interesting and viable.

I've finally gotten the chance to set up emacs and gcc on my STe and
if I ever find some time to do some programming that isn't
school-related, I hope I can follow in their footsteps. It's not a
platform that I would recommend to anyone, but I still feel that it's
a platform that deserves to live. Perhaps it's because for the time
being, I'm stuck here. (Even if I had the money, I really didn't like
my stint developing on PCs and for some reason I find Macs more
annoying than user-friendly. Maybe its because I've never had a chance
to use one for an extended period of time so that I could get used to
it.) However, as long as I'm stuck here I might as well enjoy it and
make it as useful as possible.

So, three cheers to those who keep Atari alive!!

Also, a cheer to BobR and the other Nay-Sayers who keep us in line by
not letting us get too rosy a picture of Atari.

Finally, a cheer to the Perpetual Optimists who keep BobR in line! :-)

(background music:"I'm Still Here" from _Follies_ Music and Lyrics by
Stephen Sondheim, Book by James Goldman)

                    john
                [e-mail]