News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by bregma on Saturday June 22, 2024 @07:31AM (#40758222)
I chose an ST because the Amiga was too expensive, the Mac didn't have colour and was very very expensive, and the PC was a wretched business-use-only text-only waste of desk space.

I had a 1040 STe. I rigged up a hard drive (the Atari ST had what was effectively a SCSI bus built in, it just needed a small adaptor board to adjust some signals). Installed MiNT (a multitasking operating system extension) and the GNU tools and was in developer heaven.

The ST was responsible for the desktop publishing revolution with a very affordable laser printer peripheral (although I couldn't afford one, it cost almost as much as a basic Macintosh). It was also a leading light in the music industry: I had a copy of Cubase v1.0 (a DAW), which was available only on the ST with its built-in MIDI out and MIDI through ports.

Unfortunately the company was run by the Tramiel family so it didn't really stand a chance. Then a couple of hears ago a derecho destroyed the drive shed where I kept all my old computers and I lost my ST. No more Time Bandits.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by TacticalCoder on Saturday June 22, 2024 @08:08AM (#40758475)
Music I agree but...

> The ST was responsible for the desktop publishing revolution with a very affordable laser printer peripheral (although I couldn't afford one, it cost almost as much as a basic Macintosh).

I actually worked in the DTP industry. I did both write and typeset books.

Everything professional and semi-professional was made on Macintosh. You'd enter a bookstore and easily 99%+ of the books and magazines were typeset on Mac.

I don't remember the Atari ST as having a particularly good of influential font story neither.

I mean: yup, I was typeseting my Dungeons & Dragons character sheets on my Amiga. Doesn't mean it was a revolution.

The DTP revolution was the Macintosh.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by ofrzeta on Saturday June 22, 2024 @08:24AM (#40758599)
I don't say you are wrong but there was a DTP story on the ST with Calamus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calamus_(DTP) (maybe more popular in Europe than in the US)
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by squarefoot on Saturday June 22, 2024 @10:10AM (#40759268)
The Amiga also had some good DTP software (PageStream, Pro Page, ...) but Commodore not wanting to invest a dime in anything beyond the strictly necessary for a gaming machine (no hi res monitor included, no high bitrate audio, no MIDI interface, no stock harddisk, heck... not even a built in RTC chip! ...etc.) pretty much condemned it to fail although lots of software for other uses beside gaming was already there. The MIDI interface alone would have cost cents to Commodore to add; I built mine using parts salvaged from surplus boards, but parts were cheap and as there was demand I also made some money building and selling them as I did with parallel port audio samplers. Amiga users weren't just gamers or scene developers/musicians; many of them were professionals wanting more from their machine, but Commodore simply didn't care, and when PCs and consoles filled the gap they tanked.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by ChainOfFools on Saturday June 22, 2024 @11:53AM (#40759924)
I used to be (and still am) one of the biggest Amiga fans anyone is likely to encounter, but I have to concede that the Amiga's graphics architecture was ergonomically terrible for the vast majority of dtp work. Most people found working in the only native resolution really suitable for dtp, interlaced 640x400, to be intolerable to look at for even mildly extended periods of time. Things were even worse in europe, with the lower 50/25ihz vertical scan rates. The non-interlaced modes otoh had too low of a vertical resolution and the pixels were far too oversquare or rectangular to render many fonts accurately.

It took far too long to come up with effective solutions for this, and the ones that did exist, like the A2024 grayscale square-ish megapixel pixel display, noninterlaced, were too late and had too many compromises.

The Amiga had an uphill battle against the head start mac enjoyed ( and seemed, to the casual observer, rather naturally suited to with its crisp black and white display) in DTP to begin with, and without a native laser printing, a good scanning solution, enforcdd UI consistency through quickdraw and most of all adobe, there was never a reasonable chance that it would seriously challenge Apple in that market.

The unsuitability of a very visibly interlaced display to fine detail black and white layout work insured it would never be tolerated by people who had to work with such tools 8 hours a day.

Totally agree about the absence of a pennies per unit midi port as being a damnable error on Commodore's part; likely one of the main reasons the non-pc market was fatally fragmented three ways instead of a possibly manageable two, and gifting the ST (which was in all other respects an admirable me-too effort at best), a lifeline by which wedge itself into the nascent multimedia production market, which really would have been better off entirely associated with one or two platforms rather than two/three.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by cmrdporcupine on Saturday June 22, 2024 @02:27PM (#40761058)
Another the reason the non-68k market was so fragmented was because of the internal politics and coup against Tramiel inside Commodore.

Atari Corp only existed (and produced a 68k) because of his departure. Along with some key engineers. The Atari ST is in large part Shiraz Shivji's design, after coming over from Commodore where he worked on various things including the C64 and one of the ill-fated "business" computers that CBM was making.

I'm not sure what Commodore would look like if the Tramiels had stayed, though. It may have imploded in other ways. And Commodore under him really didn't seem to get software/platforms/compatibility.

Also the ST didn't get placement inside studios just because of the MIDI ports. It was also because it was a) $cheap$ b) completely reliable solid timing [no multitasking helps there] c) had a fairly Mac-like GUI d) the top-notch paper white 640x400 (pretty good resolution for the time) monochrome monitor & mode.

It also wouldn't have done well in studios if it weren't for the German software scene and the development of Steinberg's Cubase and e-Magic's Notator. The ST was popular in Germany. Most of the really good software came out of there (see also Calamus DTP)

Gluing a MIDI port into the Amiga wouldn't necessarily had brought that set of happenstances to the Amiga.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by j45 on Sunday June 23, 2024 @03:05PM (#40769757)
Calamus was light years (maybe even decades) ahead of anything else.

It was pretty feature complete, so much so that it could probably be used today as-is.

People who used it likely felt a drop off, even to something like Pagemaker, etc.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by cmrdporcupine on Saturday June 22, 2024 @08:25AM (#40758605)
It's true the ST had almost no presence in that market. The Tramiels I think wanted to get in there and really shake it up, but they made some mis-steps.

GDOS (part of GEM with proportional fonts etc) not shipping with the original machine was a huge mistake for one.

Still Calamus + the cheap Atari laser printer was a pretty amazing piece of DTP kid for the people who got it.

That and it was simple to just turn your ST into a Macintosh. But with higher resolution and slightly higher clock speed.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by bregma on Sunday June 23, 2024 @08:27AM (#40766942)
The profesional publishing revolution was on the Macintosh. I worked in that industry and I experienced it. The Apple LaserWriter was a proofer the size of a washing machine and cost more than a diamond engagement ring and it probably hung off a Mac II running A/UX and acting as a (Appletalk) network spooler. That's not the stuff of a desktop revolution.

The desktop publishing revolution came when average Joe Schmoe could whip off a (almost) professional-looking typeset zine on his home desktop computer. That was An Atari ST, and Atari SLM, and Calamus.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by wslh on Saturday June 22, 2024 @08:01AM (#40758421)
My father, who currently doesn't know how to send a message via WhatsApp, was very presient (businesswise) in the 80s and had two Macs with a printer, and one 1040 STs with another printer on his printing shops.

Just now, after your comment, I realized how weird was to have a 1040 ST in a printing shop instead of only Macs. He was also lucky on having a few people deciding on the technical and cost side.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by Max-q on Saturday June 22, 2024 @09:04AM (#40758856)
The trio Amiga, ST and Macintosh all had music software, DTP and graphics, but I think they ruled one craft each:

The ST became the king of MIDI.

The Amiga was the queen of gfx and video.

Machintosh created and ruled the DTP revolution.

Still, they had so much in common. If the three companies had made one OS and all standardized on the Amiga chipset, they could have won over the IBM PC.

Of course, back then, they didn't know how the PC would crush them all, at that time the three thought they were each others biggest competitors.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by snek_case on Saturday June 22, 2024 @10:20AM (#40759328)
It's kind of insane that the Amiga didn't do better, given it had much better graphics and sound than the PC at the time. It effectively had some simple accelerated 2D graphics. It feels like a wasted opportunity.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by ChainOfFools on Saturday June 22, 2024 @11:39AM (#40759825)
And probably the biggest "like living in the future" advantage out of all, true preemptive multitasking. However with the major Achilles heel of no memory protection; message passing done through pointer exchange was wonderful for insanely fast lightweight contact switching but terrible for system stability.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by beagle3 on Saturday June 22, 2024 @04:21PM (#40761855)
It’s not like anything with a comparable price had memory protection - windows at the time was equally unstable and lacking protection, and it didn’t even have preemptive multitasking.

The later Amigas (3000 for sure, don’t remember about 2000) did have the memory protection, used e.g. by Enforcer.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by icedchai on Saturday June 22, 2024 @09:29PM (#40763864)
"Enforcer" did not provide full memory protection. It only protected the lower page of memory (which were used as lookup tables by the OS, example: address 4 which was the Amiga "Exec" base address), in addition to some unmapped areas of memory.

It definitely helped, but it did not prevent processes from writing all over each other like on a modern operating system.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by wkat4242 on Saturday June 22, 2024 @07:52PM (#40763330)
It had preemptive multitasking when consumer windows was still stuck on cooperative technologies. Where one misbehaving application could crash the whole system.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by the_af on Monday June 24, 2024 @09:33AM (#40775872)
There is an interesting "History of the Amiga" article in Ars Technica [1], and the sense I got is that the Amiga didn't win out for non-technical reasons.

It was, hands down, the best hardware/software combo out there. If I remember the article correctly, the Amiga failed for other reasons. Bad marketing, bad Commodore management decisions, etc.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/series/history-of-the-amiga/

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by 1oooqooq on Saturday June 22, 2024 @12:03PM (#40760001)
this article actually explain it.

they didn't understand magazine article sold machines. so simple.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by sixothree on Saturday June 22, 2024 @10:51AM (#40759509)
It was literally a matter of expansion and upgradability. People saw it as a “micro” with vendor lock in.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by weebull on Saturday June 22, 2024 @12:59PM (#40760420)
Those 3 68000 based machines did ok against the PC until the 486 arrived. At that point all Motorola had was the 68030, and it wasn't enough progression. If the processor line had had more legs, then maybe Commodore and Atari could've remained competitive. I think they both did 68030 based machines, but it was too small a step.

Then it became a battle of operating systems.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by icedchai on Saturday June 22, 2024 @02:27PM (#40761056)
It wasn't just the 486. It was SVGA and SoundBlaster cards making the Amiga and Atari multi-media capabilities mostly irrelevant. The 486 also made 386 machines very cheap, which obviously worsened the problem.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by beagle3 on Saturday June 22, 2024 @04:26PM (#40761908)
Indeed, but it was just enough. In 1995, the PC was finally starting to move from 8-bit to 16-bit sound.

The Amiga was capable of 14-bit stereo sound in 1985. It required a trick that only became popular around 1990, but the hardware was capable on day 1.

Of note, the C64 was capabale of 8-bit sound on day 1 in 1981, but this was only discovered (by Linus Akesson IIRC) around 2010.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by rbanffy on Saturday June 22, 2024 @04:29PM (#40761928)
Even EGA was good enough for most people - and it was non-interlaced at 60Hz, much better than what Amigas could do back then. When VGA came out, it became clear the Amigas couldn't keep up with the ecosystem around the PC.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by vardump on Saturday June 22, 2024 @04:57PM (#40762156)
Amiga could do 384x240 (64 colors or 4096 color HAM) and 768x240 16 colors 60 Hz without any interlacing.

Much, much better than EGA.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by DerekL on Sunday June 23, 2024 @02:59AM (#40765304)
The original chip set (OCS), which debuted with the Amiga 1000 in 1985, could display 320 by 200 in four colors, or 640 by 400 in 16 colors, and the colors selected from a gamut of 4096. This is non-interlaced in 60 Hz. A PAL display would have higher vertical resolution in 50 Hz.

It could go up to 16 colors in high res or 32 in low res, but this could slow down other operations.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by ChainOfFools on Sunday June 23, 2024 @07:19AM (#40766571)
Any resolution with 400 pixel vertical scan on the Amiga was interlaced, no exceptions until too many years after the first OCS and ECS chipsets released.

and when the solutions did come they were burdoned by kludges necessary so as not to break backwards compatibility - and especially not to complicate life for the killer app of the platform at the non-gaming level, the video toaster, which was very tightly integrated with the Amigas interlaced video system.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by vardump on Monday June 24, 2024 @05:07AM (#40773864)
ECS and AGA could do non-interlaced 400 line scanning.

ECS could do non-interlaced 640x480 (+overscan) with 4 colors. In the documentation, 35 nanosecond pixels.

AGA same, but with 256 (or 262144 HAM) colors.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by icedchai on Monday June 24, 2024 @06:27PM (#40781735)
Almost nobody had a monitor that supported those modes.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by ChainOfFools on Tuesday June 25, 2024 @01:21PM (#40791053)
Exactly what I was thinking of with respect to kludges necessary for backwards compatibility.

I think Commodore made one monitor that supported a bi-modal scan rate, and it was something like twice as expensive as the the regular Amiga monitor range. I also recall a somewhat exotic NEC 17" flat-face CRT monitor that was completely out of the question pricewise for almost anybody except institutions, that also could do it by virtue of having a continuously variable sync clock from 15 khz up to 45 or so.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by vardump on Tuesday June 25, 2024 @07:00PM (#40794673)
People certainly had VGA monitors back then!

The problem is not VGA 31 kHz modes, but old 15 kHz ones.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by icedchai on Wednesday June 26, 2024 @08:25AM (#40799174)
Yes, I had one on my A3000 (which has a deinterlacer / scan doubler built in, so the old modes weren't a problem.)

Most Amiga modes are 15 khz. The average person with an A500 or A1200 would have a 1084S and get zero value out of the new modes.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by j45 on Sunday June 23, 2024 @03:04PM (#40769753)
Except, Calamus on the ST seemed to be light years ahead of anything else out there.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by 1oooqooq on Saturday June 22, 2024 @12:00PM (#40759974)
that's funny to read being from outside the usa.

the pc were the best thing one could get that was not a commodore or a bootlegged import chiclet keyboard from the uk.

the amigas were considered just expensive game machines. the apples were an extremely expensive status symbol, and the you felt like a fool because there was no compatible peripheral anywhere.

and the Ataris were unheard of.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by deaddodo on Saturday June 22, 2024 @01:16PM (#40760538)
> that's funny to read being from outside the usa.

Idk where outside the USA you are, but the IBM PC easily had the easiest time taking over the USA. Amiga and Atari were considered hobbyist computers while Macintosh constantly battled DOS until slowly fading to irrelevancy between Windows 3.1 and Windows 95, not regaining real steam until Mac OS X 10.2-10.4.

The TI series was very common on the super low-end/hobbyist end, and Sinclair/Coco/Dendy/Timex/etc derivatives had negligible marketshare.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by rbanffy on Saturday June 22, 2024 @04:36PM (#40761974)
Different places offered vastly different experiences.

In Brazil we had mostly Sinclair, Apple II and TRS-80 (Model III and CoCo) clones and compatibles. PC clones were very expensive and only appeared later - and only became popular through smugglers, about the same time MSX 1.0 was introduced. I believe there was only one MSX 2 machine that was actually sold. Brands like Atari, Commodore and Apple were extremely rare. This was all because the military dictatorship reasoned, somewhat correctly, that in order to grow an indigenous industry, it'd need to prevent imports of small computers and heavily tax other segments.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by jecel on Sunday June 23, 2024 @08:55AM (#40767135)
Some more details about Brazil - all imports were banned at the time to deal with the external debt crises. What was special about micro and mini computers was that foreign companies were forbidden from making them locally and selling them (like the did with cars, electronic goods and many other products). So clones dominated the market completely.

The Sinclair and TRS-80 clones arrived in 1981, the Apple II in 1982 and the PC XT in 1983 (at the absurd cost of US$15K for a configuration that would be US$5K in the US. This dropped to around US$3K by late 1984 for a configuration of similar price as the US, so not the "many times more expensive" that most people remember). There were very few TRS Color Computer clones, a single Sinclair Spectrum and the single Macintosh clone was not never authorized (every computer launch had to be approved by the government). The two MSX officially arrived in 1985 but sales actually started in 1986. The PC AT clones only started selling in 1987 and 386 machines in 1989 - these were the longest delays of all. An even longer delay was in PC graphics, which were stuck at CGA from 1983 all the way to 1992 (with imports allowed there was a jump to VGA+Multisync).

With the exception of the Spectrum and Mac clones by companies that had invested heavily in their predecessors, nobody tried to copy machines with custom chips, so no Ataris, Commodore 64s, Amigas, etc. The Commodore Pet would have been easy to clone, but there was no preexisting market of contraband machines due to the awkwardness of lugging the built-in monitor.

After the reserved policy ended in 1991 a company called PCI do Amazonas brought the Amiga to Brazil and was officially still making the A1200 months after Commodore itself had shut down. So we did get one of the three 68000 machines, even if very late.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by 1oooqooq on Sunday June 23, 2024 @04:37PM (#40770422)
those are the "official" model list and figures.

almost everyone and most companies bought grey market "imports from Paraguay". which were 1.5~3x the usa price for pc.

also there were two prominent cpu fabs (churning 8080 and 68k) that the usa managed to close, further digging there interval market into cheap clone territory with that joke that was the apple ii clone announcement in a fountain.

Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by deaddodo on Sunday June 23, 2024 @11:05AM (#40767987)
I wasn't arguing any other experiences. The person I responded to offered a perspective on the US computer scene that was inaccurate. I was simply correcting that perspective.
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by cycomanic on Saturday June 22, 2024 @04:46PM (#40762062)
Atari and Amiga were equally popular in Germany and much more common than PCs when I grew up. The major difference was that Amigas were much more common for gaming and Ataris were largely work machines (music and DTP). In my experience both were actually much more common in Europe than in the US where Macs and IBM PCs were more common (I did an exchange year and didn't see one Amiga or Atari)
Re:Atari 520ST Review in Creative Computing – By Paul Lefebvre by LargoLasskhyfv on Monday June 24, 2024 @07:51AM (#40774915)
Confirm. Got myself an AtariST 520STM with 124SM, that small BW 11inch thingy. Upgraded the RAM by self soldering. The PCs at the time were either much more expensive, or cheap clone trash with many compromises. And in general rather 'unsexy'. That thing lasted until somewhere in the mid-nineties, when I got weak and got a 486DX 25Mhz with 4MB RAM, some HDD, and a 15" Multisync when VOBIS advertised them for only 5000,- Deutschmarks. Which seemed indeed cheap, because anything comparable from the likes of IBM, Compaq, Zenith was between 15.000 to 20.000 at the time. Seemed because 4MB wasn't good enough for early BSD and Linux, so upgrade to 8MB. Oh, the sockets for L2-Cache on the mainboard and Tag-Ram were empty, another 'upgrade', at least no soldering necessary. Came with some cheap Trident SVGA with only 256KB Video Ram. Diamond Speedstar24 with Tseng ET4000 and 2MB please! And a 17" NEC Multisync while I'm at it. Sigh!

That still felt like a downgrade from that Atari ST in many aspects. Usability? DOS? Early Windows? Unix clones? UGH!

Sure, it had some oomph, but the ride wasn't smooth.