Wake-up and Smell the Coffee- The Toast is Already Burned Atari, IBM, and The Real World In the age of the new 68030 Atari TT and Mega STE, and the coming SST 68030 turbo upgrades from Gadgets by Small for various Atari's, it's easy to overlook the revolutionary aspects of the ST, which is only now beginning to be emulated in the IBM world. Giving credit where it's due, here's a quick overview of the latest, greatest IBM world from the standpoint of a "yesterday's" technology, my old ST. The Mega 4 on which I'm typing is placed barely a foot away from an IBM 386, 33 MHZ, with 64K cache and 4 megs of RAM. This DOS machine was recently purchased by my friend, who is an Atari and Amiga user as well, for the purpose of video game development and testing. Which brings up the first issue: Atari, the GAMES machine? One of the first criticisms of Atari, and the stigma that has kept it from blossoming in the public's eye (aside from Atari Corporation's apparent fear of the U.S. market), is that Atari is first and foremost, a games machine. The Fact: My friend is a devoted player and more recently, developer of computer games. New to this arena (signed his contract with a computer games publisher in August, 1991), he tells me of what he has learned in researching the computer games market: If you are a developer of computer game software, you'll be wise to develop it first for IBM, well noted to have the largest base of computer GAMES machines and players in the world. Period. More than a ten to one margin. "Ah!" you'll say, "There is no comparison! A ten to one margin over Atari in the U.S. would only total only a small fraction of the total IBM user base in this country!" Not quite... The fact of the matter is that the bulk of the IBM user base consists of antiquated machines that cannot do justice to the advanced games (such as the ones continually being played at my side). No way... Games playing (of this complex, new software) requires at least a 386 computer, like the one mentioned above, with expensive sound boards and the like to be tolerable in terms of playability. That is, of course, if anything above two color vector "stick figure" graphics is what you want on your Super VGA monitor. So, the question is raised, "How many high-speed 386's are out there? 486's?" "A LOT more than there are ST's!" you'll scream. Okay. What difference does a fast 386 make in word processing, still one of the primary uses of computers? Take the drive-intensive programs like Word Perfect. The difference a 386 makes in many such programs is insignificant, even meaningless next to the average speed of the end user. No sum gain. Now, what difference does a high speed 80386 and math coprocessor make in number crunching? Throw in the works, high power machine, coprocessor, etc. and a highly complex spreadsheet on an IBM. The job: Create from scratch a spreadsheet 985K in file size with more than 1000 calculation cells with the average calculation requiring, say, 75 characters to define with at least 4 data cells called upon for manipulation and 5 levels of parentheses. Throw the same complexity at an Atari running, say, LDW Power. "Oh, but you can't! LDW doesn't compare to Lotus Release X..." Ah, but it does. Look at the facts: POINT 1: The average IBM Lotus user accesses only a fraction of the program's power. Average user for average user, the spreadsheets will almost certainly sport the same complexity and use of functions (most overlap anyway: that's why files from an Atari work on the IBM and vice versa). POINT 2: Make the computers STOCK, with no routines whatsoever to call upon 'extended memory.' In this case, only the Atari can do the work in the first place, because the IBM is lost in the quagmire of the DOS 640K limit! On to the job-- O.K., it's 9 a.m., and the work has got to be turned in fast! In a toe-to-toe free-for-all, under this comparison, both users (IBM and Atari) will go to lunch at the same time, despite the Atari user's lack of math coprocessor. The painful truth: The 'mammoth' speed difference might amount to a 1000% comparative increase in recalculation speed on the IBM over the Atari, but recalculation speed only accounts for, perhaps, 2% or less of the time of a spreadsheet session. Even in a very complex spreadsheet, the 'miserable' Atari is going to do the recalculation in a few seconds. The IBM may do the same job in a quarter second, but this falls under the heading "so what?" The time-intensive activities in MOST computer work amounts to THINKING time, DATA ENTRY time, and, of course, relative TYPING SPEED. I wouldn't have dreamt of whipping this discussion up were it not for the fact that I'm an ace-typist. Fast and few misteaks. And for this reason, I'd make a bet with anyone any day that a wicked fast typist with a strong working knowledge of a given program will always make mincemeat out of anyone - regardless of machine make or speed. What about that 985K spreadsheet file? I've got several... and any IBM user would tell you, many programs just don't access memory past 640K... and after loading the program, how much overhead is left to load a file? Now, are you going to compare IBM hard drive caching or paging to ST RAM? Remember, no matter how big and expensive and fast the IBM, it is, in the end, a 640K machine that needs significant coaxing to go beyond 640K, and even that does not ALWAYS guarantee the user access past the 640K barrier! Now, try to think of a way, aside from making HUGE ramdisks or something, to PREVENT and Atari, like a Mega 4, from accessing every bit of RAM up to the full computer memory... Asking the wizard of a programmer working with my friend on his game about the 640K barrier, he merely replies, "the new DOS helps a bit." "A bit." (And enough beating of the dead horse!) A Heartwarming Tale: A member of my family has worked at Abbott Laboratories (always in the top half of the Fortune 500) for over 20 years. This company routinely spends millions of dollars on every sort of computer imagineable, from mainframes to Macs to IBM 386 portables (and then some). The stories they tell about IBM woes (try using Windows 3 on a network, chuckle-chuckle!) never fail to warm my heart, restore my faith in my 'ugly duckling' Atari, and keep the grin on my face. Admissions: I work principally in monochrome. But I do like the Super VGA color and quality on the IBM (clone) screen not even arm's length from my keyboard. The color in those games can be breathtaking. But the DOS prompt and silly blinking cursor (Do you know the names of the six directories you're about to laboriously type out trying to access that deeply buried file? How's your typing accuracy? Is it one or two backslashes? And when you realize it's on E: rather than C:?) Yes, you can access the DOS shell, but on a stock system, you are going to be fudging around, regardless of your skill. And face it, DOS is ugly, and even with the shell, too close to the command line to call it 'user friendly.' So you add the high power stuff. You get Windows 3. Okay! A graphic interface! It boots up and that VERY PROFESSIONAL, BEAUTIFULLY EXECUTED Windows desktop comes up! I do like the 'pretty' interface of Windows 3. All the applications have a nice look, in terms of buttons and window borders. But is it intuitive? Not by a huge stretch of the imagination. So you add THE NORTON DESKTOP!!!! With the 33MHZ 386 IBM at my side, booting all the way to the Norton Desktop for Windows takes 59 seconds (it's actually closer to 60, but let's be forgiving). My Mega, with TOS 1.4, booting off a Megafile 44 Syquest drive (notably slower than the IBM internal hard disk), and loading DC Shower with its ARC, LZH, ZIP, and ZOO viewer/extractors, plus its PIC and TXT viewers, plus loading DCLITOFF, DC_BHELP, FPPRNT, LGSELECT, my TOS patches, plus loading the accessories CARDFILE, DCPICK, MAXIFILE, STENO, AND TURBOMONO, PLUS autoloading NEODESK 3, boots in 24 seconds flat (actually 28.92 seconds). That's a 35 second savings, enough to say that all that speed in the cached 386 will never catch up in an average day. Not unless the machine is turned on to do something like high grade fractal generation or 16 million color renderings... No, for the average user, doing average things, the ST would save time over the IBM. Especially if the user needs to quickly check and decompress a ZIP'd file or preview a few text files or pictures from the desktop or inside any program. Talking common turkey, the Norton Desktop is very much like the Neodesk environment, only that Norton is MEGABYTES in size versus Neodesk's paltry 140K. And try as you will, on the spur of the moment, you're not gonna type a note on the Norton Desktop. What's a desktop for, anyway? Just ask Neodesk. In using Windows and the Norton desktop, you get the feeling that a whole lot of people obsessed themselves with trying to find a way to make something very primitive and oppressive into something user friendly. The key word is TRYING. Somewhere along the line they missed getting a KISS across: ( K_eep I_t S_imple, S_tupid! ) Windows, for sure, needs a BIG manual, and MUCH getting used to, if not TRAINING on the outside. (Ever NOT seen Windows classes?) The Norton Desktop is relatively pleasurable by comparison, and somewhat obvious to an Atari user, but the obtuse and somewhat confused array of buttons and controls in the windowed environment (shared by Windows and Norton alike) has much (SPEED!!!!!!!!) to be desired! Click to close, and worry about the multiple ("I just want the window CLOSED, thank you!!") options presented. Again, for the average user... Just count the mouse clicks (oh, you mean the mouse that came in the original box with the computer, or that add-on option needing a software driver because it is alien to your system?). The 386 at my side has only one mouse, but so far has gone through two mouse drivers, and in no uncertain terms, the mouse is still CLUNKY! Unsmooth, and with TWO mostly unused buttons out of three. It is a continual grin to watch the poor mouse support being reflected in various game designs, which, although laden with on screen selector buttons, sometimes (often) loses the mouse pointer ENTIRELY. To this clone, and, I suspect, many IBM's like it, mousing around is not a fun business. Still, now you've spent your big bucks, have that nifty IBM running, got Windows up. Let's run that software... WHAT DO YOU MEAN I NEED THE WINDOWS VERSION????!!!!! Don't fret, a reasonable publisher will upgrade your old software for a small fee, and a week or so later.... THE CHALLENGE: Windows 3 is the be-all, end-all of graphic interfaces, right? If so, take a computer neophyte and teach him how to use it in five minutes. You won't be able to do it even with an experienced computer user. That's why the manual is HUNDREDS of pages, and still cryptic to the average user. Now, do the same thing, but teach Neodesk to someone. Five minutes should just about do it... at least enough to make most functions intuitive. THE JOKE OF IT ALL... In the Atari world, we have Neodesk, Maxifile, Steno, D.C. Shower, Cardfile. If an IBM'er only knew... ...that a desk accessory didn't necessarily have to load off a hard drive, delaying its availability. ...that nearly any graphics file can be viewed within any application prior to its selection and/or use in the program. ...that 'extended memory' is not the software-patched exception, but the high-headroom norm... ...that he could decompress any .ARC, .LZH, or .ZIP file from within ANY program for use IN the program or otherwise... ...that a path name would almost NEVER have to be typed... ...that notes can be typed directly on the desktop. No need to load up a memo page. Unless you want to. This document is an ST Memo Page from Steno... ...that any disk drive can be opened, viewed, and files manipulated in EVERY way, instantly on the desktop itself or from within any program. ...that all programs written for his computer took advantage of a windowed environment for the last six years. ...that if his floppy disks burned, and hard drive smoked, that his computer will still boot as a full-function window-based computer. ...that his programs, oft-used folders and files could be right there, on the desktop awaiting his use, no matter how far they were buried in directories. ...that, a good friend could teach him the ins and outs of his windowed environment within five minutes, and that computer class and wading knee deep in manuals would never be necessary... ...that the sophistication he can enjoy is matched by a truly user friendly system. ...that any file could be found, no matter where it was, in seconds, from within any program or the desktop. I hear chanting in the ranks: "OH, SHUT UP! Atari doesn't have any software that's worth a %^#@$%!" Okay, without listing the endless gammut of power/feature inferior IBM software, name the important titles to the average user, and also consider the power vs. ease of operation, user friendliness, etc., and also, of course, PRICE. Where A < B means 'B is greater than A' A >= B means 'A is greater than or equal to B' etc., etc., etc. let's compare.... SYSTEM POWER PRICE SYSTEM APPLICATION ----------------------------------------------------------------------- IBM <=> <=> ATARI FOR ----------------------------------------------------------------------- PageMaker PC = > PageStream Desktop Publishing Word Perfect >= > Word Perfect Word Processing Lotus = > LDW Spreadsheets DPaint >= > DPaint Color Drawing / Art Touchup = = Touchup Monochrome Art SuperBase = > SuperBase Data Base DBase >= > DbMan Data Base Windows 3 <= > Neodesk Windows environment Norton Utils <= > MaxiFile File Management Cake Walk ? ? Creator/Notator MIDI ? Cubase MIDI ? Hybrid Arts MIDI (Madonna and Fleetwood Mac, and Queen, and... all use Atari) MORE.... SYSTEM POWER PRICE SYSTEM APPLICATION ----------------------------------------------------------------------- IBM <=> <=> ATARI FOR ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Macintosh Emulation ??? < ? Spectre GCR Mac Emulation (with all products from Gadgets by Small, the ST is probably the FASTEST Mac in the world!!!) ** other considerations ** Disk Handling IBM 1.44 HD > Atari 2DD (stock drives, HD is available on Atari from outside sources. IBM disk read < Atari (which can read all 2DD IBM, all Atari, and all Mac (including Mac Hard Drives). GCR cartridge needed. Memory Handling stock IBM Stock Atari 640K Ram < 520K - 4 meg RAM (no software (no software patches) patches) Now, remember, we're talking AVERAGE USER, not aficionado... A Last, Little Note And a Smattering of Understatement ----------------------------------- It's a wonder how anything can get done using such an antiquated computer system like the Atari. I've just finished my second month three thousand miles from my home finishing up some feature films for our production / distribution company called Mutual General Pictures. We've only been around for 25 years, so we don't really know what we're doing. On my pathetic, lowly ST, I seem to remember screenwriting (and having to 'do' lunch with actor-types), budgeting (to the penny), doing title lists, desktop publish the titles for use in actually movies themselves, organizing the various shoots, making demo cassette labels -- whatever it took to make it happen in what amounts to a paperless office. When I do print, I often print in PostScript, but I do not need a PostScript printer (too big and too delicate to tote mine cross-country). Instead, I use a portable Canon Bubblejet, even when printing EPS files and real Type 1 (not Ultrascript) fonts without bitmaps. That's because I use PageStream, not PageMaker (ALONE, without strap on programs like ATM)... At our Beverly Hills office, the boss put in a 486 superduper IBM multiuser system. THEY got the BIG, office model Canon Bubblejet. Yet, with all their users and terminals and "high-end" software, they can not begin to match the ST and PageStream. Not on a Bubblejet. Not without spending EXTRA money on software to print with the same fonts (EXACTLY) that I use in PageStream. Sometimes, another party gives me IBM disks with things I need, so I tell them to bring it on a 2DD. Then I use them. Including full color/full gray scale images, etc. I keep track of all our crew members, production equipment and prop sources in an electronic rollodex that also dials without the need to touch the phone 'till the party answers. I'm used to 100% WYSIWYG, and like it that way. My spreadsheets approach 1 meg with over 2500 calculation fields. Many of the formulae are 40-90 characters across with 5 or more levels of nested parentheses. Gosh, I can take one luxurious sip of Diet Pepsi waiting for that recalculation to occur. Two, if I'm fidgety... And on the bottom line, currently, our company has five features being readied for delivery to the world market. Granted, they are mainly low budget action films for foreign distribution -- but in low budget, one person must 'wear' many 'hats.' If only my Atari could keep up. Almost forgot. It did... AND WE'VE BEEN COMPARING THE LATEST IBM OFFERINGS WITH VERY EARLY, '6 YEARS OUTMODED' ST TECHNOLOGY! It's almost to say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it... See you at the Festivals! (Film Festivals, that is...)