NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/comp/sys/mac/misc/16383

Internet Message Format | 1992-09-11 | 5.5 KB

Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac.misc:16383 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:12507 comp.sys.amiga:255
Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!uknet!stl!robobar!ibmpcug!mantis!mathew
From: [e-mail] (mathew)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Atari Falcons $799...
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 9 Sep 92 11:36:38 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.
Lines: 103

[e-mail] writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (mathew) writes:
> > The ST Book does actually exist.  I've seen it for sale.  It just suffers
> > from the unfortunate problem of costing twice as much as a Powerbook 100 4/
> > for a machine with 1MB of RAM, 20MB hard disk and no floppy drive.  It look
> > ugly too.
>
> The ST Book also has the "unfortunate problem" of operating about 8 hours
> on a single quick charge of about 90 minutes.

Yes, but isn't that because it has no backlight?  Or did they change the
design and put the backlight in after all?

> It's also reassuring to musicians that the ST Book includes MIDI ports
> that actually work.  A $3000 Powerbook supposedly should solve problems
> not create them.

I'm talking about the PB100, not the 140 or 170.  I'm not overly impressed by
the 140 or 170.  Obviously Apple doesn't agree, though, as they've
discontinued the 100, the biggest-selling model.  Clearly they've learnt a
few foot-shooting manoeuvres from Atari after all.

> Compared to Apple's first attempt at a 68000 "portable", Atari did a
> better job at something weighing 1/4 as much.

If you want to look at Apple portable technology of two years ago, let's
compare it with Atari portable technology of two years ago.  The... er...
no, hang on, I'm sure they must have had something... er...

> > But Atari's problem isn't their hardware; it's their software.  I mean, the
> > are still unfixed bugs in TOS which they've known about since 1985.  It too
> > them years to produce any sort of OS upgrade at all (TOS 1.4), and then it
> > took another year before existing ST owners could buy it.
>
> Well if you paid a thousand more for the Mac OS, you should expect more
> out of it and Apple.  Yet System 7 was (very) timely wasn't it?

Who cares?  System 6 was better than TOS.

>                                                                Atari
> will be releasing MultiTOS along with the Falcon.  MultiTOS features
> preemptive multitasking and memory protection.  Features you should
> expect from Apple in their next timely OS upgrade?

The 68000 in the PB100 and ST Book won't support memory protection, so your
boasting on that score is somewhat irrelevant.

As to pre-emptive multi-tasking, most users don't know the difference between
that and co-operative multi-tasking.  In fact, most of them would be quite
happy with task switching and background printing.  Personally, I don't care
how the multi-tasking on my machine works, so long as it does.  And it does.

I care a lot more about Atari misfeatures that used to hit me every time I
used my ST.  Like the godawful eight letter filenames, the complete lack of
scalable fonts, no cut and paste between most applications, applications
which don't bother to support standard GEM .IMG files so I can't even import
my drawings, printer drivers which involve hand-editing text files to
install, that sort of thing.

You might say not all of that is Atari's fault, but Atari should have pushed
applications developers into implementing things properly by actually
providing proper developers' kits and documentation at a reasonable price.
I can walk into my nearest bookshop and buy Inside Mac.  I can't buy the
official Atari documentation.  Some things, like XBRA, weren't even
documented in the official developers' kit; you were expected to find them
out by... er...

> > Now the Falcon is coming out.  Reasonable hardware, but where's the operati
> > system?  8.3 letter filenames?  You must be kidding.
>
> Ask your brothers about MultiTOS.  You haven't kept up as you claimed.

Why not just tell me about it?  Have they replaced the old ST file system,
then?  None of the magazines mentioned it.

> "Reasonable" hardware?  Take a week or two and price a DSP board for
> the Mac.  Forget about priceing the other extras like NTSC video, IDE,
> MIDI, because that would be an unreasonable demand from me.

NTSC video?  Why the hell would I want NTSC video?  My TV is PAL, and frankly
I'd want something with more resolution than that.  If I want to do MIDI, I
can get software and the hardware for about #100.  If I wanted to do DSP
work, the Falcon would undoubtedly be a good buy.  But I don't.  I want to do
dull tasks like writing documents, drawing pictures, doing a few
spreadsheets, organizing things using Hypercard, that sort of stuff.  A DSP
would be nice, but I'm not crying over its absence.  30kHz 8 bit samples are
quite sufficient for my needs.  (Let's face it, that's comparable to the
original Fairlight CMI...)

What I do need is a decent file system, applications which behave in much the
same way as each other so I don't have to waste time reading manuals,
printers and stuff I can just plug in and use, rudimentary multi-tasking, a
backlit display, active and passive cut and paste between applications, and
preferably in a box that'll fit in a briefcase.  Battery life isn't a
problem for me, as when I settle down to work I usually do so near a mains
socket.  Maybe one day I'll start taking five hour train or plane journeys,
in which case maybe I'll buy a second battery pack.


mathew
--
Bush/Quayle in '92!
God Bless America!