Is the Atari TT030 able to run most ST software? I've read that since it uses a very different version of TOS that it has trouble with most ST games and software. I know it doesn't have a Blitter chip so it can't run anything written for a STE, but what about plain old ST games and software?
Also, does anyone know if the Atari 7800 Development software will run on a TT030?
Tempest
0
Atari TT030 Compatibility Issues
Started by Tempest, Mar 31 2002 7:56 PM
14 replies to this topic
#1 OFFLINE
Tempest
-
-
- 19,864 posts
One Winged Moderator
- Screaming at Fate
- Location:Elysium
Posted Sun Mar 31, 2002 7:56 PM
#2 OFFLINE
Curt Vendel
-
-
- 4,243 posts
River Patroller
- Location:Carmel, New York
Posted Sun Mar 31, 2002 9:35 PM
Hi Matt,
The TT030 has been known not to run all Atari game related software, but its a damned good system. STE based software out there is specific for the STE, same with Falcon030 software, some of the packages released were specific to those ST's.
Yes, the 7800 Dev software runs fine on the TT030, I have it on my system and it runs perfectly.
The TT's were originally intended to run Atari's Unix V System 4 operating system to go head to head with Sun and HP in the Unix market, but Atari changed its strategy and adjusted the system to be TOS compatible. If you can get a TT030 with an Ajax floppy controller it will read/write 1.44mb floppies. Some TT's that were returned for service had their VME controller chips removed and were downgraded to 16mhz due to hardware issue's early on.
If you pick up a nice 19" monitor from B&C or Best you can take advantage of its hi-res mode or look on the web, there is a new VME graphics card with built-in ethernet port on it, the drivers for the ethernet port haven't been written yet, but the 24bit color graphics card can do 1024X768 (or higher I think...) the price is a bit heafty: $249, but worth it if you use a replacement desktop like Jinnee with MiNT and then you can use Calamus, CAB and other really great software and you find yourself with a great alternative system to a normal PeeCee....
Here's some more info: http://www.atari-his...bits/tt030.html
Curt
The TT030 has been known not to run all Atari game related software, but its a damned good system. STE based software out there is specific for the STE, same with Falcon030 software, some of the packages released were specific to those ST's.
Yes, the 7800 Dev software runs fine on the TT030, I have it on my system and it runs perfectly.
The TT's were originally intended to run Atari's Unix V System 4 operating system to go head to head with Sun and HP in the Unix market, but Atari changed its strategy and adjusted the system to be TOS compatible. If you can get a TT030 with an Ajax floppy controller it will read/write 1.44mb floppies. Some TT's that were returned for service had their VME controller chips removed and were downgraded to 16mhz due to hardware issue's early on.
If you pick up a nice 19" monitor from B&C or Best you can take advantage of its hi-res mode or look on the web, there is a new VME graphics card with built-in ethernet port on it, the drivers for the ethernet port haven't been written yet, but the 24bit color graphics card can do 1024X768 (or higher I think...) the price is a bit heafty: $249, but worth it if you use a replacement desktop like Jinnee with MiNT and then you can use Calamus, CAB and other really great software and you find yourself with a great alternative system to a normal PeeCee....
Here's some more info: http://www.atari-his...bits/tt030.html
Curt
#3 OFFLINE
Albert
-
-
- 27,238 posts
Quadrunner
- Location:NGC 224
Posted Sun Mar 31, 2002 9:52 PM
I remember when these puppies came out, but they were so expensive at the time and I was so poor that there was no way in hell I could even think about getting one. Matt's interest in the TT has resparked my interest in them. I'm not really intersted in running games on one, so I'm not as concerned about backwards compatibility with the ST line. However, it would be pretty cool to get Linux up and running on it, and if they write some drivers for the Ethernet port on that graphics card, that would be a pretty cool OS to run on it.
But with a max of 26MB of RAM, I don't know how many apps you'd be able to run simultaneously. And forget about running Mozilla. I've never seen one of these in person, is the keyboard as good as the ones on the Mega ST (which I do have)? Are you going to bring one of these to PhillyClassic so I can drool?
..Al
But with a max of 26MB of RAM, I don't know how many apps you'd be able to run simultaneously. And forget about running Mozilla. I've never seen one of these in person, is the keyboard as good as the ones on the Mega ST (which I do have)? Are you going to bring one of these to PhillyClassic so I can drool?
..Al
#4 OFFLINE
Curt Vendel
-
-
- 4,243 posts
River Patroller
- Location:Carmel, New York
Posted Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:33 AM
Albert...
Actually I prefer the Mega ST keyboard, the TT keyboard keys have a smooth finish and I don't care for the feel of them, also the function keys are a little stiff to push down on, the Mega keyboard just has a nicer feel to it... too bad it doesn't come in TT off-white.
I have Atari Unix running on it and I've messed around with NetBSD a bit which runs well on it, I wish too it could take more memory, its nice box for sure. I wish Atari had made the Falcon in the same case design from the get-go or used a variation of the Mega ST "pizza box" I never liked the the all in one 1040ST cases.
Curt
Actually I prefer the Mega ST keyboard, the TT keyboard keys have a smooth finish and I don't care for the feel of them, also the function keys are a little stiff to push down on, the Mega keyboard just has a nicer feel to it... too bad it doesn't come in TT off-white.
I have Atari Unix running on it and I've messed around with NetBSD a bit which runs well on it, I wish too it could take more memory, its nice box for sure. I wish Atari had made the Falcon in the same case design from the get-go or used a variation of the Mega ST "pizza box" I never liked the the all in one 1040ST cases.
Curt
#5 OFFLINE
Tempest
-
-
- 19,864 posts
One Winged Moderator
- Screaming at Fate
- Location:Elysium
Posted Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:53 AM
Is it actually possible to add a Blitter chip to the TT030 or does it not have a Blitter location on the board? I'm curious as to why Atari decided to leave it out?
Atari Unix huh? Is it any good?
Tempest
Atari Unix huh? Is it any good?
Tempest
#6 OFFLINE
Gaiyan
-
-
- 25 posts
Space Invader
- Location:North Bay, Ontario, Canada
Posted Tue Apr 2, 2002 12:13 AM
Why waste a high-end Atari for Linux where you could use a cheap peecee for it? I use an Atari for Atari stuff.
Joshua.
Joshua.
#7 OFFLINE
Tempest
-
-
- 19,864 posts
One Winged Moderator
- Screaming at Fate
- Location:Elysium
Posted Tue Apr 2, 2002 12:41 AM
Yeah but this is Atari Unix. Its gotta be good because its Atari right? Right?
Tempest
Tempest
#8 OFFLINE
Albert
-
-
- 27,238 posts
Quadrunner
- Location:NGC 224
Posted Mon Apr 1, 2002 5:12 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Tempest:
Yeah but this is Atari Unix. Its gotta be good because its Atari right? Right?
Atari's System V Unix and Linux are pretty different beasts, although they may be similar in outward appearances. I'd personally rather run Linux, as you'd have a much larger variety of software to run on it. That Atari Unix is pretty ancient by now.
And Lord Gaiyan, you're right, you can run Linux very well on a cheap PC, but it would be cool to see it running on an Atari TT030. I'd probably mostly use such a beast for ST/TT software, but booting into Linux would be fun.
..Al
#9 OFFLINE
Tempest
-
-
- 19,864 posts
One Winged Moderator
- Screaming at Fate
- Location:Elysium
Posted Mon Apr 1, 2002 6:12 PM
Was there much TT software? I haven't seen any mention of software really.
Tempest
Tempest
#10 OFFLINE
rdemming
-
-
- 743 posts
Dragonstomper
- Location:The Netherlands, Amstelveen
Posted Tue Apr 2, 2002 12:57 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Tempest:
Is it actually possible to add a Blitter chip to the TT030 or does it not have a Blitter location on the board? I'm curious as to why Atari decided to leave it out?
Tempest
The problem with Atari Blitter chips is that they can't run in parallel with the 680x0 cpu. Thus if the blitter is working, the 680x0 is halted. On the fast 68030 processor, blitter emulation is actually faster than the blitter itself.
On the Falcon they increase the blitter frequency to 16 MHz but even then, a piece of optimized 68030 code is faster than the blitter.
Adding a blitter to a TT would only be interesting if the blitter and cpu could run in parallel which is not possible.
Robert
#11 OFFLINE
Tempest
-
-
- 19,864 posts
One Winged Moderator
- Screaming at Fate
- Location:Elysium
Posted Tue Apr 2, 2002 7:05 AM
Intersting. I think that answered my question. Thanks.
Tempest
Tempest
#12 OFFLINE
Albert
-
-
- 27,238 posts
Quadrunner
- Location:NGC 224
Posted Thu Apr 4, 2002 12:57 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert:
The problem with Atari Blitter chips is that they can't run in parallel with the 680x0 cpu. Thus if the blitter is working, the 680x0 is halted. On the fast 68030 processor, blitter emulation is actually faster than the blitter itself.
Interesting, I didn't know this. I'm not familiar with how the Blitter chip is actually programmed--would it be possible to emulate one in software on the TT030 to support programs that expect the Blitter chip to be present?
..Al
#13 OFFLINE
rdemming
-
-
- 743 posts
Dragonstomper
- Location:The Netherlands, Amstelveen
Posted Thu Apr 4, 2002 8:47 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Albert:
Interesting, I didn't know this. I'm not familiar with how the Blitter chip is actually programmed--would it be possible to emulate one in software on the TT030 to support programs that expect the Blitter chip to be present?
..Al
That is already being done if you use OS calls instead of accessing the blitter directly. The GUI drawing functions in TOS (1.04 or higher I think (Blitter TOS)) automatically use the blitter when present. If not present it uses software.
Robert
#14 OFFLINE
Albert
-
-
- 27,238 posts
Quadrunner
- Location:NGC 224
Posted Fri Apr 5, 2002 12:01 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert:
That is already being done if you use OS calls instead of accessing the blitter directly. The GUI drawing functions in TOS (1.04 or higher I think (Blitter TOS)) automatically use the blitter when present. If not present it uses software.
I can see TOS automatically taking advantage of the Blitter if it's present, but what about games and demos? Do most of them bypass the TOS drawing routines to access the Blitter directly? Is there even a way for these programs to check for the presence of the Blitter and adjust their behavior accordingly? What happens when a program assumes the Blitter is available and tries to use it? Do they just crash? Bomb?
..Al
#15 OFFLINE
rdemming
-
-
- 743 posts
Dragonstomper
- Location:The Netherlands, Amstelveen
Posted Fri Apr 5, 2002 12:39 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Albert:
I can see TOS automatically taking advantage of the Blitter if it's present, but what about games and demos? Do most of them bypass the TOS drawing routines to access the Blitter directly? Is there even a way for these programs to check for the presence of the Blitter and adjust their behavior accordingly? What happens when a program assumes the Blitter is available and tries to use it? Do they just crash? Bomb?
..Al
Most games and demos bypass TOS completely to have total control over the hardware.
You can indeed check for the presense of a blitter. But there are only a handfull of games that use the blitter when available (Some Thalion and Eclipse games like Wings of Death. Don't know any others).
STE only games and demos might use the blitter since an STE always has one but I doubt they will run on a TT even when it had a blitter.
If a program accesses the blitter directly (bypassing TOS) and there isn't one, the program will crash.
I think in theory it might be possible to intercept the address error vector and pass the blitter access to software emulation (comparable to FP coprocessor emulation).
Robert
[ 04-05-2002: Message edited by: Robert ]
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
