Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.atari.8bit > #1317

Re: ATARI is crap!

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

In article <n8jd9f$lhc$1@news.albasani.net>, Ken Springer
<wordworks@greeleynet.com> wrote:
> On 1/30/16 2:02 PM, Your Name wrote:
> > In article <n8ijjh$6np$1@news.albasani.net>, Ken Springer
> > <wordworks@greeleynet.com> wrote:
> >> On 1/29/16 4:36 PM, Your Name wrote:
> >>> In article <n8gla1$9k2$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Adelbert Affenstaat <a@ff.e>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> "Harald Habenichts" <po@p.o> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> >>>> news:n73r5f$rj1$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The C64 has much better sound, much better graphics and there are more
> >>>>> and better games!
> >>>>
> >>>> The ATARI 800 only has crappy games, because the ATARI has crappy
> >>>> sprites, crappy colours and a mediocre sound chip.
> >>>>
> >>>> The C64 is MUCH better!
> >>>>
> >>>> The SID is great, the VIC is great, the C64 is great!
> >>>
> >>>   From memory, the early Atari models also had the same ridiculous
> >>> membrane "keyboard" as Sinclair's toys.
> >>
> >> IIRC, only the 400 had the membrane keyboard.  The 800 and later all had
> >> keyboards.
> >
> > That's why I said "early Atari models".   :-)
> 
> But, but, a 400 is only a model, not models!    LOL

Depends on how you look at it ... there was certainly more than one
Atari 400 ever made.  :-p

There were later "proper" keyboards released for the Atari 400, but
most were simply rubbish you clipped on top, so made no real difference
to the life expectancy of the membrane underneath (and in fact could
make it even worse).



> > That crappy "keyboard" is probably one of the reasons we bought the VIC
> > 20 instead.
> 
> I looked at the VIC 20, screen display was much better for the Atari 
> 400/800, so I went with the 800.

The quality of the screen display was partly governed by what you
plugged the computer into - plugging it into a crappy old B/W TV is
different to a then-modern-day colour TV.   :-)

Back to comp.sys.atari.8bit | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

ATARI is crap! "Harald Habenichts" <po@p.o> - 2016-01-12 22:28 +0100
  Re: ATARI is crap! Michael Glaser <michael.sean.glaser@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 21:14 -0800
    Re: ATARI is crap! Trevor <trevor.removethispart@holyoak.com> - 2016-01-22 12:40 -0700
  Re: ATARI is crap! CharlieChaplin <andiko@web.de> - 2016-01-25 10:32 -0800
  Re: ATARI is crap! "Adelbert Affenstaat" <a@ff.e> - 2016-01-29 22:24 +0100
    Re: ATARI is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-30 12:36 +1300
      Re: ATARI is crap! Ken Springer <wordworks@greeleynet.com> - 2016-01-30 08:08 -0700
        Re: ATARI is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-31 10:02 +1300
          Re: ATARI is crap! Ken Springer <wordworks@greeleynet.com> - 2016-01-30 15:26 -0700
            Re: ATARI is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-31 13:39 +1300
              Re: ATARI is crap! Ken Springer <wordworks@greeleynet.com> - 2016-01-30 18:06 -0700
                Re: ATARI is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-31 17:49 +1300
                Re: ATARI is crap! Ken Springer <wordworks@greeleynet.com> - 2016-01-30 22:17 -0700
                Re: ATARI is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-01-31 19:38 +1300
                Re: ATARI is crap! Ken Springer <wordworks@greeleynet.com> - 2016-01-31 07:35 -0700
                Re: ATARI is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-02-01 13:24 +1300
                Re: ATARI is crap! Ken Springer <wordworks@greeleynet.com> - 2016-01-31 19:45 -0700
                Re: ATARI is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-02-01 16:31 +1300
                Re: ATARI is crap! Clu <drclu@swbell.net> - 2016-02-05 10:49 -0600
                Re: ATARI is crap! Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-02-06 09:57 +1300
    Re: ATARI is crap! Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2016-01-31 21:56 +0100

csiph-web