11 replies to this topic

[machf]

Just wondering if this was familiar to anybody elsewhere... it was basically a clone of the Atari XC12. I believe the same company made clones of the Commodore Datasette, too.
I've never seen it mentioned in any A8 FAQ or anything, but they were well known around here... here are a couple scans showing the XC12 and the XG12 next to each other. Except for the logo and labels, they are virtually identical.

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

[Mathy]

Hallo Marco Antonio

As far as I can remember the Datamark recorder was sold (in versions of all kinds of computers??) way before the XC12 appeared. I guess Atari just payed Datamark so Atari could sell an even cheaper datarecorder then they already had. Both the Datamark and the XC12 where sold overhere in the Netherlands. Not sure if there was a Datamark version for the Atari sold under the Datamark name.

Greetings

Mathy

[carmel_andrews]

Were they anything to do with Phonemark (I remember having a phonemark clone of a 1010)

[machf]

Hi Mathy

Yes, it's a possibility, I remember seeing the Datamark in other guises too. Too bad neither the XC12 nor the XG12 have any production dates on their labels.

There were also some GE cassette recorders with swappable cables for use with different computers, I bought a couple of those cables some years ago when I found them among other stuff a guy was selling downtown. Those only used 4 wires, while the 410 uses 5, and the XC12/XG12 use 6. I don't remember the model number of that one, though, but it was well known back then, I'm sure.

[machf]

carmel_andrews, on Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:37 PM, said:

Were they anything to do with Phonemark (I remember having a phonemark clone of a 1010)

Hmmm, maybe they did... a quick search for "Phonemark" led me to this page, the Phonemark model shown there looks a lot like the Datamark and XC12. There's a much better picture here.

[charliecron]

machf, on Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:49 PM, said:

Hi Mathy

Yes, it's a possibility, I remember seeing the Datamark in other guises too. Too bad neither the XC12 nor the XG12 have any production dates on their labels.

There were also some GE cassette recorders with swappable cables for use with different computers, I bought a couple of those cables some years ago when I found them among other stuff a guy was selling downtown. Those only used 4 wires, while the 410 uses 5, and the XC12/XG12 use 6. I don't remember the model number of that one, though, but it was well known back then, I'm sure.

I have a GE Compu-Mate for the Atari, The model number is 3-5148A. Nice little recorder, could never test it though since I don't have the cable! Battery operated even, or could use a power supply. Theres a little switch on the bottom, Atari or "All other computers".

Charlie

[machf]

Well, this is what they look like. I only bought them for the SIO connectors, if you want, maybe I could send them to you in exchange for a regular SIO cable, or just SIO connectors (from a broken cable).

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[carmel_andrews]

machf, on Wed Jul 9, 2008 12:04 AM, said:

carmel_andrews, on Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:37 PM, said:

Were they anything to do with Phonemark (I remember having a phonemark clone of a 1010)

Hmmm, maybe they did... a quick search for "Phonemark" led me to this page, the Phonemark model shown there looks a lot like the Datamark and XC12. There's a much better picture here.

Ah, thanks Machf....That does bring a tear to the eye (and bring back memories)

Your not the same Marco Checa that did all those Card Games for the A8 (I have some in emulator format)

[spookt]

machf, on Wed Jul 9, 2008 12:04 AM, said:

carmel_andrews, on Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:37 PM, said:

Were they anything to do with Phonemark (I remember having a phonemark clone of a 1010)

Hmmm, maybe they did... a quick search for "Phonemark" led me to this page, the Phonemark model shown there looks a lot like the Datamark and XC12. There's a much better picture here.

The Phonemark model was pretty common in the UK in the "Dixons Pack" days. I saw them long before the XC12. I remember seeing my friends and thinking I was lucky to have got 1010's in my bundles. I always thought it was pretty poor compared to the 1010 and then the 'new' XC12 came out and guess what ... it's a grey Phonemark with an Atari brand!

I have a couple of XC11s which seem to be a bit rarer than XC12s but never seen a Datamark in the UK.

[Sikor]

carmel_andrews, on Wed Jul 9, 2008 12:37 AM, said:

Were they anything to do with Phonemark (I remember having a phonemark clone of a 1010)

Look here: http://atariki.krap....dex.php/PM4401A - but in this article is XC12 clone...

Edited by Sikor, Wed Jul 9, 2008 4:08 AM.

[spookt]

Sikor, on Wed Jul 9, 2008 11:07 AM, said:

carmel_andrews, on Wed Jul 9, 2008 12:37 AM, said:

Were they anything to do with Phonemark (I remember having a phonemark clone of a 1010)

Look here: http://atariki.krap....dex.php/PM4401A - but in this article is XC12 clone...

I always thought that the Phonemark was around before the XC12. It was out during the XL era in the UK. I thought that the XC11 and XC12 were introduced to complement the XE line. I had always assumed that Atari dropped the XC11 for whatever reason (cost?) and got Phonemark to rebrand their unit as the XC12. I'd agree that it was't a 1010 clone though.

[machf]

carmel_andrews, on Wed Jul 9, 2008 3:27 AM, said:

Ah, thanks Machf....That does bring a tear to the eye (and bring back memories)

Your not the same Marco Checa that did all those Card Games for the A8 (I have some in emulator format)

Sure. I have another card game that I didn't finish, I think. And an unfinished roulette game I abandoned when I found one that looked almost 100% as what I was attempting to do... and the ideas for several other card games. Reading about the Retro Challenge the other day, I've been thinking of completing the unfinished one and maybe a couple more.

BTW, there's one Crazy Eights game (Ochos Locos) which I didn't really create, it's just a fixed version of one published in Antic (I don't remember now what I had to fix, only that back then I experienced some sort of errors with the program typed from the original listing). The description I included when I first uploaded it to the UMich archives back then explained that, but lately I've seen it elsewhere without that description - I don't want anybody to think I'm trying to steal the credit for that one.