Talk:Atari 8-bit computers/Archive 1

message: Forgot to add summary of my edit. The 1200XL did not have a built-in BASIC like the subsequently released 600XL and 800XL did, so I deleted the reference to a buggy BASIC as being a problem of the 1200XL. However, the 1200XL did feature a new OS which was different enough from the OS of the 400/800 such that many programs (mostly games as I recall) were not compatible. To address the problem, Atari released an OS patch called "The Translator", which loaded what was essentially the same OS as the 400/800. --4.7.239.195 28 January 2004
: The translator disk loaded the older OS ver.B or OS ver.A on the XL/XE computers.  Atari only released it on disk, no cassette version was planned or released. The problem with compatiblity was too many illegal calls and jumps were made by the offending programs. Alas, some of Atari's programs did that as well. --Pelladon 03:55, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit summary re XL models

message: The article does not mention anything about the expansions of the 800XL. I have two Atari 800XLs sitting here. They can be expanded with an MIO (essentially a Active RAM drive that plugs into the wall socket and stays powered). The MIO allows you to boot from memory and even load games and software onto it. I could have my Atari booted and running a game before my screen warmed up. The MIO expanded the RS232 port so that you could hook up to 3 floppy drives stacked, a modem and a printer to it. A guy at HACE Atari computer club in Houston, Texas ran a BBS off of his Atari for YEARS on end. I have the BBS software for it as well, but I never ran it. Called BBS Express. --Kim Nevelsteen 21:34, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget the 130XE expansion. Wish I had more info on it. Both 800XL and 130XE had expansion cards made but very few came out.--Pelladon 03:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just added info about the Parallel Bus Interface (PBI). Feel free to add, develop, etc. Pelladon 07:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  800XL expansion 

message: BTW, the article mentions that the 65XE was the first XE. In the UK the 65XE didn't come out till the end of 1987, long after the 130XE. Was the reference a typo, or did the XE come out earlier elsewhere?
If Atari *announced* the 65XE in 1985, perhaps this could be rephrased.
Fourohfour 15:29, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The same was true here in Canada as well. I assume they had intended the 130 to replace all models, and then introduced the 65 to hit some sweet spot in the market. Maury 12:12, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are no objections in the next couple of days, I will change this so that it no longer implies that the 65XE was the first. If anyone thinks otherwise, can you please provide some evidence? Thank you. Fourohfour 13:14, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The first XE

message: The joystick ports on the Atari were definitely NOT serial I/O ports. Although enterprising developers used them for this purpose, one could just as easily modulate the monitor port to the same end. I have removed this comment.
Maury 12:10, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The 6520 PIA was designed with 2 8-bit bidirectional I/O ports. The Atari allow some access to control the 6520 PIA. The PIA was specifically designed to control peripheral devices through its I/O ports (in the Atari, joystick ports). People found uses for it such as a inexpensive printer port connection, robotics control, home security system control, etc.  And NO, you could not modulate the monitor port as it was a analog output only. --Pelladon 07:44, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joystick ports 

message: Third party readers: do you believe the section on the price was was out of place for this article? Maury 16:28, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote

message: I think the article might read better if the technical parts, notably the chip sections, were removed to a separate section. But I can't figure out if it should be above or below the History section. If it's above then we can simply refer to chips by name in the History section, making it smaller and easier to read. However that also has the side effect of making the history, which I think is the fun part to read, get pushed down the page.
Comments?
Maury 12:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The chips already have their own pages. The chip descriptions are just summaries.  You can't describe the Atari 8-bits without describing the chips. That's like saying we'll leave the technical description of calculus out so we can discuss the history, which is not the main focus. --Pelladon 15:58, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No no, I mean quite the opposite. I'm proposing adding a small section with each of the summaries, along with an overall description of the machine as a whole, all placed in a "Description" major section. Right now there is no real description of the machines, just bits and pieces through the history section. Maury 18:52, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate out "description" section? 

message: It states "the GTIA had just enough time to read out a line before the processor wanted access again." This is not true, all bus access by ANTIC/GTIA is done when the CPU is halted. Commodore and Apple computers fetched video data and did refresh during the unused portion of the cycle but Atari didn't. Otherwise they wouldn't have been able to get away with using 200ns DRAM. --DamageX
:That's right. Atari ran the CPU at 1.79Mhz and used cycle-stealing DMA. The Apple II ran the 6502 at 1Mhz and used transparent DMA. Mirror Vax 20:32, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  a paragraph on the 6502