========================================================================= INFO-ATARI16 Digest Fri, 20 Apr 90 Volume 90 : Issue 464 Today's Topics: Atari ST Software Looking for a Graphics Standard beyond ANSI VDI Message for os9paul@gkcl.ists.ca One world, One CPU, One OS QuickST on the STart Disk TOS 1.4 info ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 19 Apr 90 21:51:27 GMT From: news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!attcan!ncrcan!hcr!jonathan@rutgers.edu (Jonathan Fischer) Subject: Atari ST Software Message-ID: <1990Apr19.215127.15376@hcr.uucp> ***************** ATARI ST Software for sale ****************** All prices are reasonable. So reasonable, in fact, that you feel an irresistable urge to take the whole lot... Everything's below 1/2 of the current list price, I'm pretty sure. (Some things _well_ below). Also, I still have the receipts and/or registration #'s for the non-game programs (WordPerfect, dBMAN, etc.), so you can continue to get updates. SHIPPING INCLUDED. CDN U.S. WordPerfect (I actually paid $175, *sigh*)... $50 $42 dBMAN 3.0 (dBase III clone).................. $35 $29 CAD 3D 2.0 - incredibly fun program.......... $30 $25 Cyber Control (= BASIC for CAD 3D)........... $30 $25 Video Titling for CAD 3D..................... $10 $8 Mark Williams C Compiler 3.0, PLUS: Cdb source level debugger, and Resource Construction pgm.... $75 $63 MT C-shell (multitasking environment)........ $20 $17 VSH (Visual shell for MT C-shell)............ $20 $17 MAPLE (symbolic math pkg from Waterloo) (requires hard drive) WORTH $495......... (Best offer) Dungeon Master *** with maps and spells ***.. $16 $13 Chaos Stikes Back ** with maps and spells **. $14 $12 Gauntlet II.................................. $16 $13 Stunt Car Racer.............................. $15 $13 Populous..................................... $16 $13 Boulder Dash Construction Set................ $10 $8 ALSO, the following books: ST Internals (Abacus)........................ $10 $8 ST Gem Programming (Abacus).................. $10 $8 Gem Programmer's Guide (Sybex)............... $10 $8 68000, '010, '020 Programming (Sybex)........ $13 $11 All 4 books -------------> $35 $29 Reply via email, or at the following address: Jonathan Fischer 2350 Dundas St. W., #1807 Toronto, ON, CANADA M6P 4B1 (416) 534-1314 -- Jonathan Fischer HCR Corp Toronto, Ontario, Canada ------------------------------ Date: 14 Apr 90 11:07:23 GMT From: ecsgate!ecsvax!dukeac!tcamp@mcnc.org (Ted A. Campbell) Subject: Looking for a Graphics Standard beyond ANSI VDI Message-ID: <1854@dukeac.UUCP> Looking for a Graphics Standard: I have been developing for some time a project called "Space Flight Simulator." Up to this point I have been utilizing ANSI-standard VDI graphics routines because (a) an implemenation of the ANSI VDI standard exists on the Unix micro I have (AT&T Unix PC) and (b) I thought that it might be possible to port the routines over to other computers for which there are ANSI VDI implementations, such as the Atari STs. I have written my own implementation of (some of) the ANSI VDI routines for PC-type computers, utilizing Microsoft's QuickC. The ANSI VDI standard does have some shortcomings, however. At least as implemented on my machines, (a) it does not allow me to write to a buffer (from which I can blit portions of the buffer to the screen), and (b) its mouse functions (vrq_locator() and vsm_locator()) do not allow me to poll the mouse to see if a button has been pressed: vrq_locator() waits until a button has been pressed, and vsm_locator() (actually shuts down my Unix PC but) is only supposed to give the current mouse coordinates with no information about buttons pushed. Moreover, (c) I'd like to try the program running on a workstation, possibly with X or MGR. This leads me to question whether I should try to re-port the graphics routines to another standard. But there are problems here, too. (a) It can be argued that X is an emerging standard, but of course I don't need the whole panoply of X (servers, clients, etc.) -- all I really need is routines for graphics manipulation (lines, points, fonts, etc.) and mouse handling. (b) A similar problem would exist with MGR, although it has the advantage (to me at least) of having been ported to the Unix PC. In either case (c) I suspect that I would have to rewrite a graphics library for PC style computers based on either X or MGR. So -- is there a limited set of X or MGR graphics/mouse routines that could be implemented on PCs, allowing me also an easy way to port my application to other computers, especially workstations? I'd like very much to hear from you on this. Ted A. Campbell tcamp@numen.bacchus.org tcamp@dukeac.ac.duke.edu ------------------------------ Date: 19 Apr 90 23:41:13 GMT From: prism!vovut@cs.orst.edu Subject: Message for os9paul@gkcl.ists.ca Message-ID: <17768@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> Paul, I tried to e-mail a message, but it came right back. Anyway, thank you very much for the info on the SONY drive. vovut@prism.cs.orst.edu ------------------------------ Date: 20 Apr 90 14:24:51 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!rodan!jfbruno@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (John F. Bruno) Subject: One world, One CPU, One OS Message-ID: <3063@rodan.acs.syr.edu> In article <4652@hub.UUCP> 6600raft@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Michael Wise) writes: >In article <1990Apr13.160323.3616@wam.umd.edu> dmb@wam.umd.edu (David M. Baggett) writes: > >>In article <93.26244db9@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu writes: >>> What does Apple have to lose by liscensing the Mac OS to >>>Commodore and Atari? > >I remember when it seemed like the Apple ][ line had the PC market about >locked up until IBM came out with the PC. The main difference in courses >of action IBM has taken in comparison to Apple is that IBM has provided >the opportunity for clones, vastly incresing their "standard." One just >has to think back to the days of Franklin Computer to see Apple's >course of action which contunues today. Do you really think that IBM "provided the opportunity for clones"? Their main reasons for being successful are that they: 1) Provided card slots in the PC so 3rd party manufacturers could release cards to compensate for an inferior machine. 2) They have an infinite supply of $$$ and a large following of people that shout "Now we have a standard!" every time they release something, even if it uses technology 10-15 years old. > >If Apple were to license their OS to Commodore, Atari, or whoever, I >don't think their sales would really lessen, but that overall demand >for the Mac-OS would increase across the board, including demand for >the Macintosh. But I bet they would charge so much for the licensing that Amiga and ST prices would skyrocket to the level of Macintosh pricing. Overall demand for the OS would increase because there wouldn't be any more competition! >When other MS-Dos machines emerged, sales of IBMs >didn't drop through the floor, conversely, they have remained strong. Didn't they stop making PCs after the market was flooded with clones? >I believe Apple has the reputation to insure that their sales would >continue to be strong. Furthermore, a little more competition in the >Mac-OS industry certainly couldn't hurt. True, more competition wouldn't hurt, but I don't consider licensing out the Mac OS as competition, the only difference between the machines would be the box they come in. >========================================================================= >| Internet: 6600raft@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu | All opinions stated are mine.| >| BITNET: 6600raft@UCSBUXA.BITNET | **Save The Earth** | >========================================================================= ---jb (jfbruno@rodan.acs.syr.edu) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Apr 90 11:00:32 EDT From: Bob Stewart Subject: QuickST on the STart Disk Message-ID: <9004201800.AA18499@xap> I'm typing this via Flash to my Unix system, with QuickST from the May STart disk running. It leaves cursor blobs all over the place and often doesn't put the cursor where it belongs. Yucky. I'd feel bad about distributing software that doesn't work any better than that. On the other hand, there is an interesting mixed motivation. If it works too well will I want to buy the upgrade. But if it doesn't work very well, I have the same question. Now I'm curious to see the response of the co-author... Bob ----------- Bob Stewart (rlstewart@eng.xyplex.com) Xyplex, Boxborough, Massachusetts (508) 264-9900 ------------------------------ Date: 19 Apr 90 20:59:59 GMT From: chinet!saj@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Stephen Jacobs) Subject: TOS 1.4 info Message-ID: <1990Apr19.205959.2109@chinet.chi.il.us> A question was asked about having multiple links to a file on the ST. This was hashed out recently for the PC in another newsgroup. It isn't handled very well (remember that the filesystems are the same). The central problem is that changes aren't handled automatically (deleting one name, for instance, marks the clusters as available in the FAT even if the file still has another link). Anybody wanna do a filesystem? Steve J. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 APR 90 10:28:03 GMT From: CSTMCS%cr83.staffordshire-polytechnic.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK Message-ID: <000011A6_00118588.009357B15A5F7660$8_1@UK.AC.STAFPOL.CR83> subscribe ------------------------------ End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V90 Issue #464 *****************************************