"AtariManiac" wrote in message:
>>> The answer is no, for several reasons. First is the
>>> cartridge incompatibility. The only carts that will
>>> physically fit into the 7800 slot besides the 7800
>>> carts are the 2600 carts.
>> Okay thanks, that's handy to know.
>>> Second is the system incompatibility. All XE
>>> systems were, in actuality, a full fledged
>>> computer. They all have 64K of RAM, except for
>>> the 130XE, which has 128K of RAM. The 7800 only
>>> has 4K.
>> Just goes to show how some Amstrad [magazine] (which has
>> nothing to do with Atari) be so wrong about judging the
>> Atari 7800 as a console version of the Atari XE. Well it
>> might be? Apart from the RAM, do you know how the
>> other hardware differ's between the Atari XE & 7800?
Sorry, I was referning toward the Amstrad magazine, they were responcible for talking about consoles (in their consoles issue)
when the Amstrad GX-4000 console came out (the same time as
the CPC Pluses!).
> Well, I know that the 7800 has the exact same
> sound chip that the 2600 VCS did, the TIA. That
> caused a problem for game programmers. They
> were limited to 2600 quality audio. Even so,
> they came up with a neat little answer. They
> took the POKEY sound chip (the exact same chip
> in the XL/XE line of computers) and put it on the
> circuit board in the cartridge, right along with the
> game, in one neat little package.
Heh!
> The weird thing is that the sound chips are also
> responsible for handling user input (keyboard
> and controllers) in all the systems.
Oh dear!
> As for video, it had it's own little chip, code
> named "Maria". Resolution up to 320X200. Almost
> identical to the GTIA in the Atari computers
> (original 400/800 Atari's had a CTIA). The GTIA
> can do 320X192. Both could handle 256 Colors
> on screen at once.
> The GTIA sported very powerful (for the time)
> sprite control, called Player/Missile graphics.
> The GTIA was controlled by ANTIC, the
> dedicated video controler. Older systems used
> the main CPU to control the GTIA. By adding
> the ANTIC to the XL/XE, it frees up valuable
> processor run time.
>> The 7800 would be using the 4k of memory for the
>> things it needs to store, say various details of the game
>> as well as the score & going back to the cartridge for
>> further instructions, theorically I cannot be absolutely
>> sure about it though.
>> But if the layout of the cartridge were different, then
>> I agree that would make them incompatable.
>>> Also, there is a possibility that I could be wrong
>>> here, but I just glanced through the OS ROM source
>>> code for the 7800, and from what I see, it looks to
>>> be totally incompatible with anything aside from
>>> 2600 games.
>> I've also got some of the older Atari cartridges from
>> the earlier Atari VCS which work on my Atari 7800,
>> those cartridges themselves have what appears to be
>> a little door protecting the printed Circuit board.
> Wasn't the VCS just renamed the 2600? I think it was.
The VCS I'm referning to, was the earlier version which
came out in the late '70s (I think), my little 2600 is a
just a much slimmer version of that VCS (so yeah same
system, new box).
>>> The difference in memory between the XE/XL
>>> computers and the 7800 doesn't mean that a
>>> 7800 couldn't run the exact same game for the
>>> XL/XE systems if it were coded to the 7800's
>>> OS, because carts are all, basically, ROM flash
>>> memory. It just needs the RAM for video/display,
>>> and any values that might need to be stored (like
>>> how many/much lives/ammo/fuel/points you have.
>> Yeah, basically what I concluded above!
> A bit familiar with assembly, are you?
I don't exactly go around writing assembly programs,
but yeah I do dabble into it for some of my
programming!
>>> There are 4 different XE machines. The 65XE,
>>> 130XE, XE Game Machine (just a slightly disguised
>>> 65XE with the Missile Command game built in, a
>>> detacheable keyboard, and no parallel port), and
>>> another model, that you could only find in Eastern
>>> Europe, called the 800XE. It is identical in every
>>> way to the 65XE.
>> The 130XE if I correctly read was the last of the
>> Atari XEs, which was soon to be replaced with the
>> Atari STs. Sounds like somthing of a pity. I've been
>> somewhat shocked towards the way Atari have
>> treated their systems.
> You do realize that the company changed hands several
> times during that period, right? Every time a new
> system rolled out was almost directly related to every
> time the company was bought/sold.
No I didn't realise that. I wasn't very good doing that
particularly when what they should have done was to
support their machines (sorry, but I don't know anything
about companies & how they work, maybe it was all
too difficult to get the support in the first place, but at
least I was trying to support them!).
Well, it's not as if I have anything against the systems
they made, I quite like the Atari systems, but nothing
done to support them. Was there any other 3rd party
software companies which made 7800 software. The
only game I remember seeing was a flight game for
the 7800 written by Activision, but that's about all.
I remember sometime around 1991-92 when Activision
announced that they would not be continuning any more
Amstrad games after a certain game, so I guess the
fate of the 7800 was also effected by this (since they
wanted to go a produce 16bit games).
[snipped everything else]
> Did you know that Nintendo, here in the US,
> anyway, was initially afraid of competing with the
> video game giant that was Atari? They actually
> approached Atari with the design of the Famicom
> (which was already popular in Japan) and tried to
> market the system to the US under Atari's name.
Fraid not. I'm don't really have a lot of knowledge
about these companies (apart from what I've gone
through). I cannot remember if I recall correctly
or not, but I thought I heard there was some
incident between Nintendo & Atari back when the
NES came out towards the Mario games & Donkey
Kong games being releasd on the NES.
> They figured if they had Atari's name on the box
> that they wouldn't get squashed by them. According
> to Michele Ebertin, former manager of Atari's
> Consumer Electronics Division, the marketing dept.
> didn't like the design of the NES controller and
> thought it'd be a humongous flop, and promptly
> said no.
There a funny bunch that Atari mob! ;-)
> Thusly, Nintendo went out on a limb and launched
> the system in a country where they were all but
> unheard of. The rest is history.
Oh dear!
All I remember flopping out on was a controller
which was in the shape of a hand (which you put your hand
in or something). Nintendo thought it might of been cool, but
they do get some funny ideas!
> Please forgive the screwed up format of my reply, I'm
> still figuring out how the quote option works.
> Not used to anything besides usenet...
Heh! I'm generally only one here to sticks to newsgroup
guidelines & post it that way (also uses less memory).
To this post back to HTML I think you'll have to enable the
HTML in this post & Enable the BBCode in this post!
(Which mean's unclicking the boxes under this message!).
Cheers.
