knudsen@ihwpt.UUCP (mike knudsen) (10/17/86)
Well, we've been flamed by Amiga and Atari-ST users, but now the IBMers are joining in. Well, I'll admit that PClones are superior in most ways to Cocos, tho in BASIC a Coco can outrun a straight PC (4.7 MHz 8088). Also you can buy better graphics hardware for a PC, but WHOSE? Leading Edge and AT&T have built-in graphics comparable to a Hercules card in a PC, but NONE of these are compatible-- leads to much gnashing when choosing software. Coco graphics are limited, but at least we all know what the standards are. Likewise the OS9 C compiler -- it has some minor quirks, but I get the impression that every MSDOS C has at least one major flaw in it. For an existing Coco owner, the Coco-III is a great upgrade path for reasons of compatibility and re-use of peripherals. Even starting fresh, a Coco-III system is a lot of bang for the buck. Not everyone wants to spend PClone prices on a home computer. If I did serious business on mine, I'd think differently, but I still might stay with Cocos because I know what software is around and how to use it. Finally, Radio Shack may still sell that little alcohol breath analyzer with the red, green, and yellow LEDs. I suggest that people who post overly negative articles (or positive -- 'nuff cheerleading in the Rainbow already) use this gadget and if it sez "don't drive", then don't post. Not that I'd eat Spam while sober .... mike k -- Mike J Knudsen ...ihnp4!ihwpt!knudsen Bell Labs (AT&T) (312)-979-4132 (work) Nobody pays for my opinions, which are mine alone. "A mind is a terrible thing to waste, but the pay is good."