=========================================================================
 
INFO-ATARI16 Digest         Tue, 26 Dec 89       Volume 89 : Issue  860
 
Today's Topics:
                        Chaos Strikes Back....
                 C question (Just a thought of mine)
                        LHARC source and UNIX
                    Loneliness in the Atari World?
                     Unexpandable megas (2 msgs)
                    Usenet messages on CIS, GEnie
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Date: 26 Dec 89 06:16:06 GMT
From: crash!pnet01!johnb@nosc.mil  (John Bunch)
Subject: Chaos Strikes Back....
Message-ID: <984@crash.cts.com>
 
I got Chaos strikes back.  I want to make a backup of it as I do with
all my software and it took a lot of work.  I was finally able to do it
with the Discovery Cartridge and flux spacing.   Well enough of that, the
game itself is incredible..  I like it alot, although it is a lot harder
then DM is..  I haven't finished DM yet, so I think I will before I start
playing Chaos Strikes Back fulltime.. ;-)
 
John.
 
 
UUCP: ?hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc?!crash!pnet01!johnb
ARPA: crash!pnet01!johnb@nosc.mil
INET: johnb@pnet01.cts.com
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Mar, 26 D?c 89 12:54:29 FRA
From: 2546R%FRESTP11.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Subject: C question (Just a thought of mine)
 
Date: 26 D?cembre 1989, 12:44:53 FRA
From: 2546R    at FRESTP11
To:   info-atari16 at wsmr-simtel20.army.mil
 
Lately there has been much discussion about how to have a character
string constant in a C program. Many C experts have debated on this.
 
Well, should I presume it is another evidence of the so-called "high
portability of the C programming language" and of its "high time saving
efficiency" ? ;-) ....
 
It is just another unsecurity of C.
 
J.M.M.
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jean Marie de Montarby   2546R@FRESTP11 (Earn/Bitnet/Netnorth)  |
                                                                |
Croire en l'avenir et aux techniques nouvelles                  |
Avoir le souci constant de l'utilisateur                        |
Pour mieux construire le lendemain des autres                   |
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 26 Dec 89 04:46:25 GMT
From: maytag!water!ljdickey@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu  (L.J.Dickey)
Subject: LHARC source and UNIX
Message-ID: <2873@water.waterloo.edu>
 
In article <51989@ccicpg.UUCP> paulm@ccicpg.UUCP (Paul Moreau ) writes:
>Well it seems that the LHARC is going to take over the atari archiving
>world.
 
Don't jump to conclusions Paul.  This does not seem too likely to me.
I tried that program on a file that was posted a couple of months ago.
It was a disaster.
 
 >           I for one use a UNIX system for posting and recieving news
 > and binaries.   I uudecode, and unarc on the unix system and examine
 > the stuff before going through the expense of going home,
 > making a ... call to work and download the stuff.
 
I agree and sympathize with the writer here.  I do much the same thing.
 
However, I would insist that a program be significantly better before
we switch to it.  It takes a lot of effort to bring a large body of
users on line to the use of new software.  Readers may recall that
I asked about ZOO and whether or not it was really better.  I am convinced.
It does offer significant improvement over ARC, and now use both ZOO
(and ARC) on three systems.
 
Now, I ask, can anyone speak up for LHARC ?  Is it really any better
than ARC ?   I can testify that it is harder to use!  I doubt if
it is better than ZOO.  If I am right about this, perhaps we should
just let it lie in peace.
 
 
--
    L. J. Dickey, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Waterloo.
        ljdickey@water.UWaterloo.ca     ljdickey@water.BITNET
        ljdickey@water.UUCP             ..!uunet!watmath!water!ljdickey
        ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 23 Dec 89 23:00:49 GMT
From: xanth!austin@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Jason C Austin)
Subject: Loneliness in the Atari World?
Message-ID: <10809@xanth.cs.odu.edu>
 
In article <21566@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> cr1@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Chris Roth)
 writes:
>The thing I want to know about Atari, that NOBODY has been able to
>explain to me so far, is why it seems to be ignoring the US?  WHY dont
>we have good advertising?  Why dont we have good support?  WHY can't
>the few dealers we have out there seem to get the products in any
>reasonable length of time?  What is the problem?  The ST is a great
>machine, and  I am happy I have one, but I am angry at the way the ST
>users are treated.  Any questions/comments?
>From: cr1@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Christopher Roth)
>Path: beach.cis.ufl.edu!cr1
 
        I think the reason is just simple economics from Atari's point
of view.  The ST has had a much better selling rate in the European
market; therefore, the demand for additional hardware and software is
higher.  Logically, Atari is going to spend most of its advertising
and distrubution dollars where the demand is.  This is unfortunate for
US ST owners, but the company needs to do what it can to survive.
 
                                -Jason(austin@cs.odu.edu)
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 26 Dec 89 08:45:40 GMT
From: pacbell!sactoh0!mfolivo@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Mark F. Newton)
Subject: Unexpandable megas
Message-ID: <2334@sactoh0.UUCP>
 
Gee whiz...
 
All this bashing (will it ever end? Do they have this on
c.s.amiga??)
 
Let's see, business can change a design anytime they want, due to a
number of reasons, like perhaps a better design, less expensive to
make, etc. So what if Atari uses two separate board designs? Who
care? Why waste our time (and money) crying about the little
things?
 
SIMMs? Maybe again, Atari has gotten better pricing on memory chips
with SIMMS rather than DRAMS.
 
**WHO CARES???** Why are you crying about why someone uses a
particular type of memory chip? Does it *really, really* matter
that my 4 Megabytes are DRAMS, and an STE uses 1Mb in SIMMs???
 
Sore ja da-cha,
Shinobu
 
--
Sakura-mento, CA
 
mmsac!sactoh0!mfolivo   mfolivo@sactoh0
pacbell!sactoh0!mfolivo   (they're worth a try...)
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 26 Dec 89 08:36:42 GMT
From: pacbell!sactoh0!mfolivo@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Mark F. Newton)
Subject: Unexpandable megas
Message-ID: <2333@sactoh0.UUCP>
 
With all the discussion (to me, whining) about how "easy" it is to
expand IBM memory as opposed to the Mega, (blah blah blah), I have
one thing to say.
 
Why do you need megabytes upon megabytes of memory, if you use a
computer in a home environment? Do you really need 93 Terabytes to
do word processing?
 
I have a Mega 4, and for home purposes, it is sufficient. And even
for small business use, 4Mb is certainly enough to drive laser
printers.
 
Do some people really know how much memory 4Mb is? Most small
businesses get by with 640k, maybe even 1Mb (which most IBMs only
use less than 640k in their programs). I mean, 4000kb is not
enough?
 
About not being able to expand the Mega 2, has someone from Atari
responded to my posting about the 2Mb expansion kit from Atari?
To reiterate, I once worked at an Atari dealer, and we had a couple
of these 2Mb expansion boards that plugged into the expansion bus.
Since I had a Mega 4, you couldn't plug it in, but we never sold
one to any Mega 2 owners. With all this talk about more memory, is
this expansion board still available from Atari?
 
For home use, and small business use 4Mb is certainly enough. And
if you *really* need more capacity, then the TT is for you.
(Although you need to go to Europe to get one)
 
Mata ne da-cha,
Shinobu
 
--
Sakura-mento, CA
 
mmsac!sactoh0!mfolivo   mfolivo@sactoh0
pacbell!sactoh0!mfolivo   (they're worth a try...)
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 25 Dec 89 15:51:29 GMT
From:
 agate!bionet!uwm.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!attcan!lsuc!jimomura
 @ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Jim Omura)
Subject: Usenet messages on CIS, GEnie
Message-ID: <1989Dec25.105130.23070@lsuc.on.ca>
 
In article <2327@sactoh0.UUCP> mfolivo@sactoh0.UUCP (Mark F. Newton) writes:
>Hmm. Alot of traffic on comp.sys.atari.st screaming, pleading,
>apologizing, etc, about the posting of Usenet articles on GEnie.
>
>From what I have read, a majority of the posters disliked the idea
>very strongly, that Usenet messages appear on a pay service, that
>is, a one-way link- Usenet on GEnie, but nothing from GEnie to
>Usenet.
 
     This is a long standing problem and we've been wrestling with
it on BIX.  If I can blow our horn a bit, at least on BIX we *care*
about how people feel about moving messages from Usenet to BIX.
I've shared messages from 'rec.arts.anime' with some specific people
on BIX, but I've only made general postings of things on special
occasions and usually with specific approval by authors.  You people
must realize that there are specific *commercial* Usenet nodes
around, don't you?  Actually, I've long felt that it was improper to
post *anything* on the Net which was not FULLY PUBLIC DOMAIN.  This
has nothing to do with legality, but simply a recognition that the
Net exists because the NODES PAY FOR IT.  Since every node contributes
effectively to everyone else on the Net, how can you justify stopping
anyone on the net from making the fullest possible usage of anything
that you post to it?  If you've been following 'comp.os.os9' you'll
know that *every* program I have posted to Usenet which was my own
work over the years has been declared fully public domain.  Nor do
I restrict any other postings I make which are my own work (not that
most people care about whether I declare my opinion messages as
public domain or not :-).
 
     Despite this, we have specific permission on BIX to carry
the 'risks' stuff, thanks to the Net moderator.  Furthermore, we
are acting as a network node for the Citadel network under the efforts
of Jefferson Software.
 
     So that's my stand:  1.  I have not been porting to BIX from Usenet
en masse for the BIX public, 2.  I do not feel people are right to
complain about the practice of using these messages on the commercial
systems.
 
     But this leaves me with a problem:  If people are doing this on
Compuserve and Genie, then BIX may be at a competitive disadvantge
because I've been the "good guy".  So maybe I should change my practice
and start posting a digest of 'rec.arts.anime' on BIX?  I don't know.
How do you people feel about this?
 
Cheers! -- Jim O.
>
>I understand that someone in rec.arts.anime compiles messages
>(edited? unknown.) and uploads it to CompuServe's Japanimation
>forum's downloads section, as "Usenet Digests". Now, as I
>understand it, noone there has said anything about it. So the users
>in r.a.a. apparently does't mind that their messages have to be
>"paid for" and downloaded from CIS.
>
>When I was on CIS, I used to see the files, but due to the size of
>them (usually around 32k) I never dloaded them. (read: $$$) But
>when I found out there was a local public access to Usenet, I
>switched and use this system exclusively.
>
>Now the users in r.a.a. apparently feel that the availability of
>anime information should be passed around, and it is my impression
>that c.s.a.st users do not want Usenet appearing on any pay
>service.
>
>Oyasuminasai da-cha,
>Shinobu
>
>
>--
>Sakura-mento, CA
>
>mmsac!sactoh0!mfolivo   mfolivo@sactoh0
>pacbell!sactoh0!mfolivo   (they're worth a try...)
 
 
--
Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880
lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
 
------------------------------
 
End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V89 Issue #860
*****************************************
