XPost: comp.sys.cbm, rec.games.video.classic   
   From: wildstar128@hotmail.com   
      
    wrote in message   
   news:1194663119.975499.68410@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...   
   > On Nov 9, 6:10 pm, "Wildstar"  wrote:   
   >> It isn't a matter of *blind* following.   
   >   
   > In your case, it sure is b/c you feel Jack was absolutely justified in   
   > everything that he did - good or bad.  "He's got nothing to atone   
   > for....".  Sorry, but if anyone does in this conversation, it's him.   
   > He left more of a wake of destruction than Exxon's Valdez.   
      
   > As far as Jack's business ethics are concerned, they sucked, for lack   
   > of a better term.  I have a stack of memos from angry developers,   
   > detailing how he refused to pay them for work they did on Lynx and   
   > Jaguar games.  It's certainly not like he didn't have the money - even   
   > with the millions Atari received in patent infringement from Sega   
   > (thanks to Nolan Bushnell's foresight), he STILL refused to pay   
   > people.   
   >   
   > And since we're talking about your man, let's review his track record   
   > at Atari:   
   >   
   > He abandons the video game market when he had the perfect machine   
   > (7800) to be competitive in it, in order to release business computers   
   > (the STs).  What possible advantage there was in buying a video game   
   > company in order to turn it into another Commodore, we'll never know   
   > (another question to ask him tomorrow...).  No sooner does Atari win   
   > over a new batch of retailers in a new marketplace that he decides he   
   > wants in on the now-hot video game market -- the reason being, here   
   > was a perfect opportunity to dump all that old Atari/Warner   
   > inventory.  The (now 3 years old) 7800, the XEGS (essentially a 1979   
   > 400/800 computer in disguise), and the (now prehistoric) VCS/2600 are   
   > released with a smattering of new titles, and dozens of old ones --   
   > all of which are virtually ignored by 3rd-party software developers   
   > (except those sub-contracted by Atari).  In yet another bizarro move,   
   > Atari pretty much leaves all the U.S. ST dealers (and 100k or so   
   > owners) at the altar and decides to push the ST in Europe.  No big   
   > loss there, b/c the only thing the STs (and TTs) were really good for   
   > was its MIDI feature, and the Amiga (the true successor to the   
   > 400/800, and another missed opportunity by Atari/Tramiel) was the   
   > superior machine overall.  Most of Atari's R&D efforts at this point   
   > are spent on developing multiple versions of the ST hardware (more   
   > colors, better sound, laptops, etc.), the craptastic Portfolio (which   
   > would have been completely forgotten about had it not appeared in a   
   > popular movie), and the unreleased 16-bit Panther video game system.   
   > Atari then buys a GameBoy killer from Epyx (the Handy) but once again   
   > Jack's too late to the party as the far inferior GameBoy rolls right   
   > over the Lynx (lack of major marketing and 3rd-party support doesn't   
   > help).  When Atari/Tramiel finally develops and releases its first   
   > video game system, the Jaguar, it's cartridge-based and under-powered   
   > (most of the so-called "64-bit" games look like something the 16-bit   
   > Panther would have been capable of).  Again, lack of support and   
   > software kill an otherwise potential success. See a pattern here? LOL   
   >   
   > To sum it up, I'm willing to bet the vast majority of Atari fans these   
   > days are those who still actively use Atari products from the Bushnell/   
   > Warner era.  The web presence / fan base for the ST/TT/Lynx/Jaguar   
   > machines these days is all but nonexistent.   
   >   
   > And you sit there and wonder why Atarians don't love and worship   
   > Tramiel as you obviously do?   
      
   Oki, I'll explain very short. Jack Tramiel did not like game consoles. He   
   bought Atari to fight Commodore in the computer market that Atari had a   
   competing computer system. I'll explain Jack's lack of passion for game   
   consoles. It didn't too well at Commodore. Remember Ultimax.   
      
   Jack was a businessman who raised Commodore as a business machines company.   
   He was businessman who wanted to sell products that had a "practical use".   
   Jack wasn't a great businessman for game console company but a computer   
   company. In the case of Atari, it had a very interesting position as a   
   computer and console company. In fact, Atari did alright with the computers   
   until late 80s.   
      
   As for atonement, oh well. Maybe for Atari folks, he isn't as liked.   
   Actually, they utterly sucked ass under his sons. Remember, Jack was not   
   that passionate about running Atari. He bought Atari so his sons would take   
   charge of it. Before leaving Commodore, Jack Tramiel was wanting to leave   
   Commodore to his sons. Jack Tramiel wanted to establish Atari to have a   
   steady foot in both computer and consoles. Ok, Atari has always had a steady   
   foot in console/arcade. He wanted Atari to also be in the computer industry   
   as well. So when his sons took charge, they have a company with a foothold   
   in both industries.   
      
   Jack was already wanting to retire to begin in 1984. Atari was dead in 1984   
   and in fact gave it another 10 years. Jack put his money in to buy it and   
   literally ressurrect it and bring it back in full swing to be able to   
   compete with Mac and Amiga and then Windows 1.0/2.0/MS-DOS computers. Not a   
   bad feat in 12-18 months.   
      
   I'm not saying he was perfect but for fuck sake. Who cares, now. Atari is   
   alive again - sort of in a way. Maybe not in the mainstream console industry   
   other than games but hey, they can still do it again but maybe later. Jack   
   Tramiel didn't run Atari like he did Commodore because it was not the same   
   for him and pretty much since 1989 - his sons were more in charge of it than   
   he was. He was, if anything, kept it alive as much as he has while his sons   
   SUCKED.   
      
   Remember, Jack did not want to take on the role and level of aggressiveness   
   over the operations of the company as he did with Commodore. He was   
   semi-retired since 1989 with periodic taking the helm to fix up mistakes his   
   sons made.   
      
   At Commodore, he made all the decisions and did the aggressive marketing   
   decisions. At Atari, his sons were in charge of that and they sucked. Sadly,   
   though. I blame the problems at Atari more on his sons then Jack. Jack made   
   the mistake of putting his sons in charge of Atari and he didn't keep the   
   aggressive role at Atari as he had at Commodore.   
      
      
   In fact, if you did your numbers right - the Atari ST was outselling the   
   Amiga in the 85-88/89 era.   
      
   Even underpricing Commodore Amiga line.   
      
   Jack had more aggressive control of Atari during that period.   
      
   It was the last 5 years that things sucked.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)