Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Forums
« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Illustrated page of what an 16 bit can do..  (Read 3793 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline freqmaxTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2006
  • Posts: 2179
    • Show only replies by freqmax
Illustrated page of what an 16 bit can do..
« on: May 09, 2009, 11:22:48 PM »
I just stumbled onto this when reading about VME bus. Suprised to find the claim that Atari TT030 and Atari MEGA STE used VME bus.

It's a list of what you can do with Atari STe:
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/gtello/ste_e.htm

So is there any similar good Amiga page? ;)
Might lure unsuspecting people to start with Amiga :-D
Logged
 

Offline save2600

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 3261
  • Country: us
    • Show only replies by save2600
Re: Short
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2009, 12:32:20 AM »
Kind of a neat site. Surprising to see all the different doo-dads for the STE and especially cool people out there still monkeying around with 'em. But boy... reminded me how ugly the GEM/Desktop is  ;-)  
Logged
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show only replies by Karlos
Re: Illustrated page of what an 16 bit can do..
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2009, 11:46:57 AM »
Just click your way through the hardware section of the gallery here. There are dozens of pimped out machines :-)
Logged
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show only replies by Karlos
Re: Illustrated page of what an 16 bit can do..
« Reply #3 on: May 10, 2009, 11:54:02 AM »
Although back in the day I wouldn't touch one, I actually wouldn't mind getting a Falcon these days. Especially with one of those tasty 100MHz 68060 boards.
Logged
int p; // A
 

Offline shoggoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Dec 2004
  • Posts: 223
    • Show only replies by shoggoth
Re: Short
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2009, 02:22:15 PM »
Quote

save2600 wrote:
Kind of a neat site. Surprising to see all the different doo-dads for the STE and especially cool people out there still monkeying around with 'em. But boy... reminded me how ugly the GEM/Desktop is  ;-)  


Workbench 1.3 isn't exactly pretty either :) A modern Atari desktop look pretty ok, even though it's still a bit square-ish:
http://hem.passagen.se/shoggoth/stuff/snap_000.gif
http://hem.passagen.se/shoggoth/stuff/snap_001.gif
Logged
 

Offline countzero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2005
  • Posts: 1938
    • Show only replies by countzero
    • http://blog.coze.org
Re: Short
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2009, 02:30:25 PM »
I thought TT30 was not 16 bit ? (TT meaning thirtytwo/thirtytwo ?)

also, workbench 1.3 is leagues ahead of what Gem has to offer ... come on guys ...
Logged
I believe in mt. Fuji
 

Offline shoggoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Dec 2004
  • Posts: 223
    • Show only replies by shoggoth
Re: Short
« Reply #6 on: May 10, 2009, 03:20:26 PM »
Quote

countzero wrote:
I thought TT30 was not 16 bit ? (TT meaning thirtytwo/thirtytwo ?)

also, workbench 1.3 is leagues ahead of what Gem has to offer ... come on guys ...


Nah, come on. Workbench 1.3 is cool in it's own right, but unless you're comparing it to an equally old version of GEM I'd say you're gravely mistaken, since the OS evolved quite a lot since those days. Or do you have any particular facts about this matter?
Logged
 

Offline countzero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2005
  • Posts: 1938
    • Show only replies by countzero
    • http://blog.coze.org
Re: Short
« Reply #7 on: May 10, 2009, 03:26:16 PM »
of course I'm comparing it to an equally old version of GEM.
erm how about multitasking for starters ?
annoying 8.3 filename limitation ?
no ram disk ? etc ...
but one should also keep in mind that kickstart 1.3 takes 256 Kb space in ROM and wb 1.3 is loaded on top of it from floppy.
while GEM is totally loaded from a 192 ? kb ROM if I'm not mistaken.
so it's no wonder workbench is much more feature rich from TOS/GEM combination.
Logged
I believe in mt. Fuji
 

Offline shoggoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Dec 2004
  • Posts: 223
    • Show only replies by shoggoth
Re: Short
« Reply #8 on: May 10, 2009, 04:02:22 PM »
Quote

countzero wrote:
of course I'm comparing it to an equally old version of GEM.
erm how about multitasking for starters ?
annoying 8.3 filename limitation ?
no ram disk ? etc ...
but one should also keep in mind that kickstart 1.3 takes 256 Kb space in ROM and wb 1.3 is loaded on top of it from floppy.
while GEM is totally loaded from a 192 ? kb ROM if I'm not mistaken.
so it's no wonder workbench is much more feature rich from TOS/GEM combination.


Well then it's a fair comparison. My point was only that someone mentioned how ugly the old GEM desktop was, and I mentioned that it evolved quite a lot since those days. Then you made your post, giving the impression that you compared apples and oranges - which you now say you didn't so no worries :-)


Logged
 

Offline save2600

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 3261
  • Country: us
    • Show only replies by save2600
Re: Short
« Reply #9 on: May 10, 2009, 04:11:18 PM »
Yeah, that was me who said GEM was ugly. Latest TOS/GEM I ever ran was Rainbow (1.4) and it sucked. I have seen later pics of GEM, but don't you need the Falcon or TT's to run it? And starting with what version of TOS came a better looking GEM? IMO - the more modern looking GEM closely resembles the olden MacOS look. Square & blocky as you had mentioned.

BTW: I've only ever owned Atari ST computers for the blink of an eye before selling. Did they have any kind of CLI to speak of? AtariDos or something similar? Workbench 1.3 is spartan too. Crippled almost, from a functional desktop point of view. No wonder Dopus was as popular as it was. If it wasn't for the CLI, 1.3 would be highly aggravating to use! lol

 
Logged
 

Offline shoggoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Dec 2004
  • Posts: 223
    • Show only replies by shoggoth
Re: Short
« Reply #10 on: May 10, 2009, 04:22:15 PM »
Quote

save2600 wrote:
Yeah, that was me who said GEM was ugly. Latest TOS/GEM I ever ran was Rainbow (1.4) and it sucked. I have seen later pics of GEM, but don't you need the Falcon or TT's to run it? And starting with what version of TOS came a better looking GEM? IMO - the more modern looking GEM closely resembles the olden MacOS look. Square & blocky as you had mentioned.


Well, I guess it's like later incarnations of AmigaOS - the system requirements are slightly higher than a "stock" ST if you want a pleasant experience. I'm using 060 machines myself, but afaik it's fluid on TTs as well, and even less if running a less demanding screen mode (since these machines suffer from poor chipram bandwidth just like the Amiga).

Quote
BTW: I've only ever owned Atari ST computers for the blink of an eye before selling. Did they have any kind of CLI to speak of? AtariDos or something similar? Workbench 1.3 is spartan too. Crippled almost, from a functional desktop point of view. No wonder Dopus was as popular as it was. If it wasn't for the CLI, 1.3 would be highly aggravating to use! lol  


Bash? :)

Back in the days, I don't think there were any official CLIs, which is odd because the system was designed with such stuff in mind. There were lots free 3rd party CLIs, naturally.
Logged
 

Offline Einstein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Dec 2004
  • Posts: 402
    • Show only replies by Einstein
Re: Short
« Reply #11 on: May 11, 2009, 01:00:22 PM »
Quote

shoggoth wrote:

Bash? :)


I just might. :evilgrin:
Logged
I have spoken !
 
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »