Info-Atari16 Digest         Fri,  5 Jul 91       Volume 91 : Issue 376
 
Today's Topics:
                          1.44M formatting..
                             Amiga/Atari
                 Atari-to-Amiga Convert Info Source!
                            bug or virus ?
          How to install Multi-sync monitor onto Atari STe?
                       Lattice C Assembly Lang.
                    MEGA STE problems (Summarise)
                        Spectre/Atari formats
                         This week's program
                         TOS 1.4 question(s)
                             TT Monitors
                         what Atari DOES have
                           Y.T. on the move
 
Welcome to the Info-Atari16 Digest.  The configuration for the automatic
cross-posting to/from Usenet is getting closer, but still getting thrashed
out.  Please send notifications about broken digests or bogus messages
to Info-Atari16-Request@NAUCSE.CSE.NAU.EDU.
 
Please send requests for un/subscription and other administrivia to
Info-Atari16-Request, *NOT* Info-Atari16.  Requests that go to the list
instead of the moderators are likely to be lost or ignored.
 
If you want to unsubscribe, and you're receiving the digest indirectly
from someplace (usually a BITNET host) that redistributes it, please
contact the redistributor, not us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 18:41:52 GMT
From: noao!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!apple!netcomsv!yonder@arizona.edu
 (Christopher Russell)
Subject: 1.44M formatting..
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
I was thinking about trying to hookup this 1.44M drive that I have
here.  I have a few files that explain how it is done (basically
get 16Mhz to the WD1772).  Anyways, I was going to try it out, but
I don't have a 1.44M formatting program.  Is one available at
atari.archive, or could somebody mail me one?  Thanks...
 
--
Christopher L. Russell (yonderboy)  Phone: (408)378-9078 Campbell,CA
yonder@netcom.COM or clr40@amail.amdahl.com or chrisr@leland.stanford.edu
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 20:31:25 GMT
From: mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!isis.cs.du.edu!ykidron@uunet.uu.net (Yaron kidron)
Subject: Amiga/Atari
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
Hello there!
 
   I would like to comment over the latest issues posted in this news net. I
was really stunned after I've seen the total amount of gibberish non-sense
submitted by other computer users. I was so shocked, I started laughing at it.
 
   Let me introduce myself first. My name is Yaron Kidron, and am an Atari ST
user for the last 5 years. I bought my system way back in '86, and have been
using it until now. I am a free-lancer, and currently I am studying for my
first degree in computer science.
 
   I define myself as a computer user. Computers are my hobby, and my job too.
I like computers of any kind and brand. Anything that bleeps and processes it's
data digitally, would most likely be admired by me. I see no sense in claiming
that any computer is better then the other. This is a truly unforgettable and
childish way of thinking, resulting in some really abnoxious flame wars.
 
   In the last 9 years I programmed and used many computers. I started right
off with the Timex ZX81, then the Spectrum came along. After that, I met the
Atari 800XL and the Commodore 64. A year after, I happily programmed an IBM PC,
and later got in love with the Macintosh. Then, I bought my ST system, and
developed 68000 code, both on the Amiga, ST and the Mac. At present state, I am
working on a IIci and a 386 machine. They all served me great, and still I'd
like to use the older ones once in a while.
 
   A person which compares computers by specifics and raves the differences
around is not a computer enthusiast. He is a dimwit which I wouldn't like to
see using a computer. Computers is not his profession or hobby, and he would
more suitable to be a politician. Tom, that line was refered to you.
 
   Furthermore, A computer can not be compared to other computers. As I see it,
my computers are as dear to me as others pets. You can not compare a dog to a
cat, either financialy nor mentaly. A computer is a complex, non-linear
construction of electronics, software, and evidently, money. I can never do any
comparison of my 386 with my Casio fx82 calculator. There are things my 386
does better, but there are things my Casio can do better as well.
 
   Bringing us to the matter. Comparing non-linear concepts with a linear ( our
mind ) material is totally worthless. I programmed the Amiga, and I programmed
the ST. But I never said to myself: 'Oh look, that routine runs better on that
Commodore machine'. No way. I just done my job, and enjoyed both of the worlds.
Why fight? Why bring up such stupid text to a network? Why tire the computers
for such bullshit?
 
   The ST is a fine machine. It's great. So is the Amiga. I have many
complaints for Atari themselves, by not supporting their machine, but I have no
problems whatsoever with the machine itself. As a package, enclosed with a very
resonable price, the ST is a winner.
 
   In some occasions, people look at the spec sheets of computers and start
comparing. 'Oooh. That one is 25Mhz.... My ST is only 8!'; Gosh, I think to
myself, why don't they get satisfied with what they have, if that machine
serves them as much as they need it? I bought the 386 just because my ST didn't
fit with my job. I couldn't develop software for the Intel's on my ST, so I had
to buy a new machine. It wasn't because my 386 is 33 Mhz, and has better
graphics. It was because I needed a different tool. This document was processed
on my ST, since I like using it more for WP.
 
   Don't get me wrong though. Tom, the Amiga is a fine machine. I enjoyed using
it when I had to work on it. But still, the ST is just as fine. Coming to think
of it, my Timex Spectrum is better then both, when it comes to introduction of
computers. I have done my first programs on that baby, and it was easier to
program then both of these younger machines. Although that old bastard is way
too slow by todays standards, I'd recommend it to any young chap that wants to
get into computing.
 
   Peter, it seems that you have to learn a lot too. People did not invent
computers to make their users flame at each other. Certenly not on such public
places. I really don't think that it was wise of you to follow Tom's footsteps.
Try to enjoy the Amiga. It's a swell piece of electronics. Don't try to rave
about it around street corners, because I know people who would say it is a
piece of crap, compared to their Sparc Stations at work or PC's at home.
 
   Golly, I need to finish this message sometime, don't I? Well, as for the
last comments about Commodore's doings in the last months or so. Commodore is
doing very good, especially in Europe. It is mainly sold as a home computer,
and gradually replaces the ST in many homes. This might be sad news to many of
you, but I don't look at it that way. I am a computer lover. I like computers
in all shapes and forms. As long as my ST serves me, even if it will be the
last one on Earth, I would not try to compare it to others, and replace it.
 
   Finally, lets keep this stuff of the net. It's just a waste of money, and
dear, the life of precious computers around the world. Stop it. It looks like a
mud fight in the sewer. Tom, Peter, enjoy your machines. I'll enjoy mine too.
Behave yourself dudes, grow up. Or otherwise, steer clear from computer life.
It is not for you.
 
Yaron Kidron,
s2886663@techst2.technion.ac.il
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition  (Yaron Kidron): A biological organism that tends to attack digital
                            processing units. Avoid at all costs. His friends
                            call him THE weirdo.
 
Proposition (Yaron Kidron): That former definition was a printing error. Ignore
                            it.
 
Proposition proof:          Proof? Need a proof?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 14:15:46 GMT
From:
 noao!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu
 !utgpu!watserv1!watmath!lsuc!jimomura@arizona.edu (Jim Omura)
Subject: Atari-to-Amiga Convert Info Source!
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
     For quite a while now I've been moving postings from
'comp.binaries.atari.st' to local BBS's.  I seem to be the only
person in the Toronto area who has had access to that newsgroup.
Just yesterday the administrator for 'lsuc' (the node from which
I downloaded the 'binaries' group) decided he can no longer
afford to receive that group.  He also dropped 'comp.binaries.mac'
and 'comp.binaries.amiga' and a few others.  They are still
receiving 'comp.binaries.ibm.pc'.
 
     Now, a lot of the guys in this group have the mistaken
impression that "hundreds of messages means you have a healthy
newsgroup."  Well, that's not necessarily so.  I'm not going
to say that the current debate about the relative merits of
a discussion about Atari ST's and Amigas is necessarily stupid
or without value.  It isn't.  A lot of valuable information can be
spread around in such discussions.  But keep in mind that it has
taken up a *lot* of bandwidth recently.  Was it the direct cause
of our losing the 'binaries' groups?  I don't know for sure.
But without doubt, we have had more posted on that subject than
all the postings in both the Amiga and Atari 'binaries' groups
combined.  Assuming that this is a direct correlation, was it
a fair trade?  I'd say it wasn't.  As far as I'm concerned, we
lost some of the most valuable material available to Amiga and
Atari ST's for some rather trivial information that most of us can
find out, if we're interested, by going out and buying a couple
of manuals.
 
     Are there any good points to this?  Well, as far as I'm
concerned, I'll have more time now to do other things than unpacking
'binaries' postings and uploading them on the local BBS's.  I
haven't found much over the years that I felt was worth keeping
anyway.  If the 'sources' group was dropped, then I'd *really* be
upset, but we're still getting the 'sources' groups.  And mentioning
that, I think it's a good time to again ask for people to post
'sources' rather than 'binaries'.  But that's about all that I
can see as possibly being good about it.
 
     Anyway, thank you all for losing the 'binaries' groups for
us.  I'm sure the local Amiga and Mac users are also thrilled.
 
Question:  How many Atari and Amiga users does it take to change
           a light bulb?
 
Answer:  1 of each and somebody to carry the remains to a hospital
         after the manditory fight about who can do it better.
--
Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880
lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 16:35:12 GMT
From:
 noao!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!malgudi!caen!spool.m
 u.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!dearn!dmswwu1c!zvd007@arizona.edu (U.Kuehn)
Subject: bug or virus ?
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
In article <6146@uniol.UUCP>, Frank.Moehle@arbi.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de
(Frank Moehle) says:
>I can boot from my HD, open windows and so on.
>
>But sometimes, after leaving a program, IT happens :
>I return to desktop with NO open windows (I had some opened berfore entering
>the program). As I try to open a window, the alart-box "4 Windows already
>open, please close winsdows before opening new ones" (roughly translated)
>apears. WHY ????
>When I select "close.." or "close window" from the menue bar, my ST
>starts playing "dead man".
>
>Did I catch a virus (if so : how can I get rid of it)  or is this just
>a strage GEMDOS bug??????
 
I had sometimes the same problem, but it was gone when I removed the
desktop.inf and set up a new one, so I suppose it is a problem with this file
 
Ulrich Kuehn
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 21:05:32 GMT
From: fs7.ece.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!mc4c+@sei.cmu.edu (Mark
 Choi)
Subject: How to install Multi-sync monitor onto Atari STe?
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
Any multisync with the right sync rates are fine. Yes the 3d is nice,
but it is too much. LOOP technologies maked a ultrahires (1024x768) non-
interlaced analogue multicync for 
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 18:33:27 GMT
From:
 noao!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu
 !utgpu!watserv1!watmath!lsuc!jimomura@arizona.edu (Jim Omura)
Subject: Lattice C Assembly Lang.
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
1991/07/05
 
Problems:  Lattice C, version 5.06.02
 
     So far, the only major problem I've found with Lattice C
is that they don't give you enough information to fully use assembly
language.  In most "ordinary" C compilers this isn't a major
problem.  The Sozobon C compiler essentially lacks information
too, but I was able to use the Sozobon Compiler system to produce
samples of assembly language code and thus learn enough to
produce assembly language subroutines which were callable by
Sozobon C sources, freely intermixable at the linker level.
The reason it is possible with Sozobon C is because the compiler
compiles down to a normal text Assembly language source file.
 
     Lattice C doesn't do this.  The compiler compiles down to
a "compressed" intermediate file which cannot be analyzed by
normal text oriented tools.  So the lack of documentation in the
manuals becomes an almost absolute barrier against solving the
problem.  The only recourse seemed to be the OMD utility which
disassembles the ".o" files.  One would presume that it would
dissassemble back into a directly assemble-able source file,
but strangely, it doesn't.
 
     Having worked at it a bit, I think I've found out enough
from the OMD utility and the ASM assembler and CLINK linker to
go ahead and produce some assembly language subroutines.  But I
thought I'd share this experience with you a bit so you can better
judge the current state of the Lattice C compiler.
 
     The following is the sample "test.c" program I wrote:
---
#include <stdio.h>
 
int main(var1,var2,var3)
long var1;
short var2;
long var3;
{
        var1 = var1;
        var2 = var2;
        var3 = var3;
        return 0;
}
---
 
     This was compiled with the '-d' switch to produce an object
file that the source code could be referenced with the OMD
disassembler.  The following is the output of the OMD disassembler:
 
---
Lattice ATARI 680x0 Object Module Disassembler V5.06
Copyright = 1990 Lattice, Inc.  All Rights Reserved.
 
 
Lattice Object File Loader V1.00
68000 Instruction Set
 
EXTERNAL DEFINITIONS
 
_main 0000-00
 
SECTION 00 "test.c" 00000020 BYTES
;   0: #include <stdio.h>
;   1:
;   2: int main(var1,var2,var3)
;   3: long var1;
;   4: short var2;
;   5: long var3;
;   6: {
       | 0000  BFEC  0000-XX.2                CMPA.L    __base(A4),A7
       | 0004  6500  0000-XX.1                BCS.W     __xcovf
       | 0008  48E7 0700                      MOVEM.L   D5-D7,-(A7)
       | 000C  2E2F 0010                      MOVE.L    0010(A7),D7
       | 0010  3C2F 0016                      MOVE.W    0016(A7),D6
       | 0014  2A2F 0018                      MOVE.L    0018(A7),D5
;   7:  var1 = var1;
;   8:  var2 = var2;
;   9:  var3 = var3;
;  10:  return 0;
       | 0018  7000                           MOVEQ     #00,D0
;  11: }
       | 001A  4CDF 00E0                      MOVEM.L   (A7)+,D5-D7
       | 001E  4E75                           RTS
---
 
     The above output is *not* assemble-able.  After mucking around
with it a lot, I finally derived the following source code which
does NOT assemble down to an identical ".o" file, but after linking
DOES link down to an identical ".prg" file:
 
---
 SECTION "test.c"
 
 XREF __base  * This seems to be a standard address
 XREF __xcovf * This seems to be a function
 XDEF _main
 
_main CMPA.L    __base(A4),A7
 BCS.W     __xcovf
 MOVEM.L   D5-D7,-(A7)
 MOVE.L    $0010(A7),D7
 MOVE.W    $0016(A7),D6
 MOVE.L    $0018(A7),D5
 MOVEQ     #$00,D0
 MOVEM.L   (A7)+,D5-D7
 RTS
 
 END
---
 
     I'm, not going to detail all the differences, but I'll point
out that althought the manual emphasises use of a CSECT, no CSECT
was created by OMD, and though I found no information in the manual
about a SECTION, OMD refers to one.  But a SECTION does not seem
to correspond to a CSECT.
 
     At this time I'm only going to point out that I could not
figure out a ".S" file that would assemble down to an identical
".O" file, and that the output of OMD seems to supply enough
information to figure out what you need to know -- given time
and effort.  But I bought the Lattice compiler specifically so that
I would NOT have to spend such time and effort "hacking" solutions
to such fairly common problems.  I've mentioned the problem to
the distributor when I returned my disks for upgrade and no
reply has been given so far.  As I've said, I seem to have solved
the problem.  I'll be writing some assembly language routines over
the next week.
--
Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880
lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 14:54:14 GMT
From:
 noao!asuvax!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!ira.uk
 a.de!fauern!forwiss.uni-passau.de!eva.fmi.uni-passau.de!iws9060@arizona.edu
 (Thorsten Guenther)
Subject: MEGA STE problems (Summarise)
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
In article <CMM.0.90.2.678649609.larserio@kvart.ifi.uio.no> larserio@ifi.uio.no
 writes:
>- Static/noise on DMA sound and MIXed standard ST sound.
>- Sync-problems when using Spectrum512 pictures (vertical bars).
>- Vertical flickering bars on monochrome (most at 8 MHz).
>- Right edge of monochrome screen "flips" over to left edge
>  when changing screen adress/resolution in mono-mode.
 
I have a normal STE and the "flipping" happens on it, too. I just used a PD
colour emulator and .... it looks terrible. AND - a friend of mine owns a
Speed Board (Turbo 16) that is built into his STE, wonder what happens?
Yes, it happens on his machine, too.
 
                                        Thorsten Guenther
                                        aka Weregoose
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 21:10:15 GMT
From: fs7.ece.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!mc4c+@sei.cmu.edu (Mark
 Choi)
Subject: Spectre/Atari formats
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
> Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.atari.st: 21-Jun-91 Re: Spectre/Atari
> formats Mickey Boyd@nu.cs.fsu.ed (1104)
 
 
> I posted something along this line, and was told that there are several
> utilities available for the mac that allow it to read/write IBM format
> disks (which of course work on the ST).  I seem to remember that at least
> one of these packages is PD or shareware.
 
But you need 3.0 of the spectre software.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 22:34:55 GMT
From:
 noao!asuvax!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!apple!equinox!mammoth!takem_b@arizona.e
 du (Brian Takemoto)
Subject: This week's program
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
In article <1991Jul4.220348.16999@infonode.ingr.com> krzywdzi@infonode.ingr.com
 (Andrew S Krzywdzinski) writes:
>In article <1991Jul2.225414.24475@menudo.uh.edu> uace0@menudo.uh.edu (ATARI
 Computer Enthusiasts) writes:
>>DC Homey will home the mouse cursor to the center of the screen.  Just press
>><ALTERNATE>+<CONTROL>+<LEFT SHIFT>+<H> at any time.
>>
>>- mike vederman / Double Click Software
>
>What's the purpose of this program ? Is hitting 4 keys at the same time
>so much easier than moving your mouse by 1 inch ?
>I'm in the fog.
>
>-andrew krzywdzinski
 
I've had a couple occasions where I had a dialog box appear in a TOS program
without the mouse present and had to play hunt and peck for the Non-Default
buttons.  I also lose the mouse FREQUENTLY when calling up DTerm (or other
programs) from within my (TOS) bbs software.  Trying to center an invisible
mouse is not the funnest thing to do...  DC Homey definately makes MY life
easier.
 
THANK YOU DC SOFTWARE!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
takem_b@mammoth.unr.edu    (or ?)    ucbvax.berkley.edu!mammoth.unr.edu!takem_b
#include <signature.h>  /* unfriendly control codes with ascii self portrate */
Anything that can go wrona@x3%se  Pnews:  segmentation violation.  core dumped.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 4 Jul 91 02:15:14 GMT
From: fernwood!uupsi!rodan.acs.syr.edu!ggreenbe@decwrl.dec.com (Gerald
 Greenberg)
Subject: TOS 1.4 question(s)
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
OK, I don't think I've ever seen a discussion of this before,
but it may have taken long ago when tos1.4 was new on the
scene.  I just installed the new(er) tos on an old 520 with
2.5 meg.  I had put it off for a long time, and don't feel
like I missed anything...I finally went ahead with it, though,
in anticipation of Autoswitch-overscan (although everyone I
have spoken with strongly encouraged me to do it in any case
for the pure benefits).  Well, I was under the impression that
one of the benefits was speed...so, just to satisfy my
curiousity, I ran QuickIndex before and after the
installation.  Much to my surprise, not every one of the
benchmarks increased!  And some decreased!  Here are the
results:
CPU memory, register, divide, and shifts all stayed the same
at 99%.
64K read stayed the same at 3863
*****GEMDOS increased from 397 to 503
-----Tos text decreased from 225% to 212%
-----string decreased from 1262% to 1255%
-----scroll decreased from 180% to 133%
*****GEM Dialog redraw increased from 210% to 242%
 
Everything is the same (except that I got rid of fatspeed
after I put 1.4 in)...I'm running QuickST, which is why the
numbers are high, but I imagine other auto folder programs and
accs probably affect the speed too.
 
Can somebody explain why more of the numbers get worse than
get better?
Thanks,
Gerry
ggreenbe@rodan.acs.syr.edu
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 5 Jul 91 16:09:53 GMT
From:
 noao!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu
 !ira.uka.de!fauern!faui43.informatik.uni-erlangen.de!csbrod@arizona.edu (Claus
 Brod)
Subject: TT Monitors
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
CCC_BALL@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de (Joerg Ballschmiter) writes:
 
>Is the TTM 194 a color or a monochrome monitor?
 
Monochrome, 19". 1280x960, 72 Hz.
 
>What monitor would you recommand me?
 
The TTM195 (successor to the TTM194).
 
>Is the 1248*800 resolution monochrome or color?
 
There is no such resolution at all. The TT's maximum resolution is
1280x960 monochrome.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Claus Brod, Am Felsenkeller 2,                  Things. Take. Time.
D-8772 Marktheidenfeld, Germany                 (Piet Hein)
csbrod@medusa.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
Claus_Brod@wue.maus.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 5 Jul 91 03:14:18 GMT
From:
 europa.asd.contel.com!wlbr!lonex.radc.af.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!dsacg3.dsac.
 dla.mil!desc.dla.mil!wright!desire.wright.edu!cse0507@uunet.uu.net
Subject: Y.T. on the move
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
This is one of MY feral massages to the fears of the Atari ST community.
I am very, very sorry.  That is, I have had to get rid of my ST and
leave this community.  Note that I have been unhoppy with Apple, and I could
not afford to place two computers on my desk, and the ST had to go.
 
[*** lots of stuff deleted ***]
 
So far, a rather sad story, yes?  _I'm_ cryin'.  My ST is gonna go, too.
I don't have room for two computers either, so my ST is going to get
shoved aside.  What is the new machine?  A TT, of course.  :-)
  Geez, gimme a break from sob stories.
                                        BS
 
------------------------------
 
End of Info-Atari16 Digest
******************************
