So, I've collected computers for 20+ years. I have many Atari (and Commodore, Apple, etc.) computers.

The Atari 800XL was arguably the best Atari 8 bit made. I have two of them and they certainly are great computers.

But I've always wanted the original 800. Well, I finally got one the other day.

The shipper didn't package the computer very well and over 20 keys were broken off during shipment.
Fortunately, it survived.

Anyway, I have to respect the engineering that went into this. I love the Commodore 64, but let's be honest. The C64 is a computer with great chips inside a cheap case. The 800 was engineered for combat! lol

I love the plug-in memory expansion. I love the TWO cartridge ports and the FOUR joystick ports.

I'm using composite at the moment but I plan on building an S-Video cable for it.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.

Nice! I only recently learnt that the Atari 8 bit machines have quite a sensible OS built in. I'd imagined they were minimal.

Yeah, it is. The 800 and 400 computers have four slots for memory expansion that use large, thin cartridges. I have four of them. Three of them are 16K RAM (48K) and the fourth is a 10K "ROM" cartridge that also says "OS" on it. It's not as expandable as the Apple II (what is?) but I bet some clever engineers could make some nice enhancements for those ports.

And let's not forget that steel block in the middle that's at least 1/4" thick. I'll try to get some more pics up soon.

So, it's 1979 and Atari 800's are rolling off the assembly line with all that, S-Video support, GREAT sound chip and 128 colors. It's a shame, really. Atari could have been so much more.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.

AIUI, the situation at the time (in the US) was that RF shielding was felt to be necessary if TV output was provided, so the Atari chassis is made of metal to do two jobs at once. A little later the FCC caught up with the realities of consumer computers and the rules became more relaxed. But even so, the BBC Micro version made for USA had extra shielding which increased costs. As it turned out, very few were sold so a lot were shipped back to UK and refitted for the domestic market.

Yep. I've learned that as well. I imagine it was upsetting to Atari at the time because that mammoth steel block was probably very expensive relatively speaking. It adds quite a bit of weight to it. But I actually like it. It's a pain to take the 800 apart compared to other computers.

But it's hard to beat steel.

Later on companies just started using aluminum coated paper for RF shielding. Half the time I just take it out anyway.

BTW, early on Apple was able to bypass that law by not including RF output! The user had to buy a separate RF modulator and install it themselves if they wanted to use a conventional TV.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.

I admired the original 800 back in the early 80s for its obvious abilities and tank-like chassis, but I couldn't scrounge up enough money to get one. Besides, my built-in desk in my bedroom (thanks, dad) was already completely crowded with my Apple ][+ and C=64 (each with one disk drive), multi-purposed 13-inch Sony color TV/monitor and Epson MX-80 with Graftrax.

I had to install my own RF modulator in the Apple ][+, and it was an unusual one that output on UHF channel 34 (IIRC). The C=64 came up on VHF channel 4.

Have fun with that neat bit of kit!

Mike B.

I was in the same situation. My grandmother bought my first computer for $100 - $200 or so. Can't remember. But it was a TI 994/a. It was when TI was pulling out of the computer market and they became really cheap. Later, my mom bought me a C64 setup.

At the time, I didn't even KNOW Atari made computers! To me, Atari was the 2600 and 5200 and that's it. No internet, no magazines and a poor mountain community shielded me from such things. LOL.

The school had two Apple II's. One for our classroom and one for the office.

Times sure have changed.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.

Yes, please.

I wonder if maybe the details got skewed a bit here. Both the modulator and the wiring of the computer itself are capable of emissions that might run afoul of regulations. Although Apple sidestepped the modulator issue, that doesn't remedy the question of emissions from other wiring of the computer. Isn't it true that foil and and other shielding is still present?

_________________
In 1988 my 65C02 got six new registers and 44 new full-speed instructions!
https://laughtonelectronics.com/Arcana/ ... mmary.html

(I think not being connected directly to a TV meant that less strict rules were in play. Perhaps because it was office equipment, not home equipment??)

I'm not sure on that one. I have several Apple IIe's but those were later models. After they relaxed some of the RF shielding laws/rules. The RF boxes inside them have a metal can over them IIRC.

The original Apple II and II+ were different. Especially the II (not +).

BTW, the II and II+ fetch very high prices on eBay. Which is why I don't own one of those.



My guess is that if you use a "computer monitor" and not a "TV" then the regulation was more relaxed. But I have no idea if that is true or not.

Especially since the monitors were basically TV's without the tuners.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.

Some more pics.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.

Nice!

Less-strict rules may have a bearing, but probably the main question has to do with who inherits the headache! Sounds like Apple did a hands-off -- leaving the matter to the folks who manufacture the RF modulator.

I expect this same dynamic explains why so many devices nowadays are powered by wall warts. It's easier to provide a power supply that someone else has jumped through hoops for than it is to jump through those hoops yourself.

_________________
In 1988 my 65C02 got six new registers and 44 new full-speed instructions!
https://laughtonelectronics.com/Arcana/ ... mmary.html

That's a good point. When I crack open my really old computers and game consoles, many of them have the PSU built in. Very large caps, etc.

Makes sense.

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.

My ][+ had basically no shielding, and caused quite a bit of interference. I used it much more than the 64, especially for class work, because it had a better keyboard and decent graphics support from BASIC. It also talked to the Epson a bit less awkwardly, and its disk drive was much faster. The 64 was fun for messing around and experimenting, but when things got serious, the ][+ was my go-to.

Mike B.

That's a very common stance. The C64 became a games machine despite being so much more. But you couldn't beat the Apple for "serious" work.

You don't still have that ][+ do you?

_________________
Cat; the other white meat.