mjp@spice.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Portuesi) (08/05/86)
Keywords: From: sjl@amdahl.UUCP (Steve Langdon) Subject: Application availablity on Mac, Atari ST, and Amiga Date: 3 Aug 86 09:22:39 GMT Followup-To: net.micro Keywords: Mac Atari Amiga Applications Interface > About 9 months ago I posted an article explaining my views on the importance > of a consistent user interface on a single user micro. I still feel that > this is a critical issue, but now it is time to ask if high quality > applications for the Atari ST and Amiga are available. Both machines have > been around for a while and it is reasonable to expect good software. I expected at least some good software for both machines to appear by now. I'm an Amiga fan, but I read the Atari group too. While they may have more software support than the Amiga does at present, none of it is worth writing home about. I am amazed at the amount of lackluster software available for both machines. > To attempt to organize the discussion I will suggest some categories, and > provide a summary of what is available for the Mac. > Word Processing I won't even attempt to contest this one. Word processing software on the Amiga is non-existent. The MicroEmacs/proff combination may work well for us software hackers, but as far as mere mortals (users) go, it is totally unusable. I have a set of ideas and some specifications for a next-generation word processor I would like to implement on the Amiga, but such restrictions as resources and time (I'm a college student, I don't have my own machine, I'm poor, and I have classes to take) get in the way. > Spreadsheets I don't know too much about good spreadsheets for the Amiga...certainly there are none that will make Lotus run for cover. VIP Planner claims to be a Lotus workalike, but if it doesn't have a windowing interface, it doesn't rightfully deserve to be called "good Amiga software." Does anybody that owns VIP Planner care to comment? > Communications I currently use Dave Wecker's vt100 program for good terminal emulation, and the newest Kermit for 9600 baud operation. Both programs could stand a little improvement in the features area, but for $0, they're all right by me. I have already posted my specifications for the "perfect communications program" on the net...I think such software is the type of program the Amiga deserves to run. Networking hardware/software does not exist, and the Amiga cannot hope to be a success in the business (and even the academic) world without good LAN capability. > Database I know of no database software for the Amiga comparable to DBaseIII or its PC competition. Someone correct me if anything besides simple file managers now exist for the Amiga. > Development Systems The Amiga world has Lattice and Manx. The Atari world has the DRI compiler, MegaMax C, the OSS Pascal package, and a few others I overlooked here. More comments about developing software appear below. > Graphics Deluxe Paint is a very powerful paint program (comparable at least to Macpaint). Does anyone have Aegis Draw? It looks to me like a reasonable program for producing technical illustrations. At least it supports multiple layers. > Multifunction [blowtorch on] Personally, I think multifunction software is a crock of sh*t. I have used Symphony extensively on the AT, and I've come to the conclusion that a 300+K program that tries to solve the world's problems is the wrong way to go. The programs are big, slow, and take weeks to learn. It is next to impossible to document or *maintain* applications created under a multifunction program. I tried to create a personnel database in Symphony for the company I worked for. After weeks of phone calls to Lotus to learn how to do complex operations not adequately docmented in the manual, and learning that some important things I needed to do just could not be done, I introduced it to the personnel director. It was a disaster, simply because all the extraneous junk that Symphony did made it impossible for her (a user, not a programmer) to learn to use or maintain. I got daily phone calls requesting help since Symphony did some crazy brain-damaged thing that only an expert at the program could solve. She eventually went to a dedicated database manager for her work. It was both more powerful and was easier to use. Multifunction packages are a jack-of-all-trades and a master of none. I am glad none of this software exists for the Amiga, and the companies who put out such trash (Ashton-Tate, Lotus) aren't porting this stuff to the Amiga. They're simply a crutch in an environment that lacks multitasking, and five dedicated packages running simultaneously on the Amiga will blow even the best multifunction software away. The problem is when we will see those five dedicated packages. [blowtorch off] > DeskTop Publishing > The Mac owns the low end of this market, are there any Atari or > Amiga packages? No. This is another area where software developers could make a killing if they produced something of good quality. Start with a PostScript driver for the Amiga, and work from there. > It remains vital to me that I can transfer data (including graphics) > between the applications I use. Another key feature is the > relatively uniform support for printed output. By this I mean I can > use either a dot matrix printer or a LaserWriter in either portrait or > landscape mode from any application. > I read too many items about applications that only run in certain > environments on the Atari ST and Amiga for my taste. I also do not > see any indications that application-independent text-and-graphics > cut-and-paste exists except on the Mac. The Amiga provides a generic prt: device that users set from preferences and is device-independent to application programs. It also has a clipboard device and a universal file transfer format (IFF) that developers have at their disposal. There is no reason why software cannot exchange and output information in a uniform manner. All it takes is a little agreement among software developers, who should realize that if they got together and supported standards for the machine, they would benefit from increased hardware and software sales. To a large degree, software developers already have these standards...they should also apply to the user interface as well (e.g. the right button should always activate the menu bar, etc.) I agree that the level of support for these machines is not what it should be. The Amiga has all the resources necessary to provide an environment that is friendly and as flexible as that found on the Mac. I also believe that it should be able to offer better performance (Opening MacWrite from a RamDisk takes over 10 seconds before you can do anything useful, like type) than the Mac with its applications, especially graphics-intensive ones. But I think it will be a while yet before we see any of this software. Both the Amiga and the ST were released before they were ready. In Atari's case, it was to try to get the jump on Commodore, establish their machine, and squelch their competition. In Commodore's case, they announced their machine with beta-level software to avoid going out of business. Neither Atari nor C-A have produced a bug-free, stable environment to develop and use applications. In Atari's case, they put their OS in ROMS without ever bothering to fix the bugs that exist. Kudos goes to the folks at C-A for listening to bug reports and fixing them, but the bugs that exist in the system make it impossible for anyone but developers to use the machine for anything non-trivial. It is less than fun to have the machine crash when you have three tasks (one of them a terminal program) going on at once. In my opinion, this instability in system software is a big reason why wondrous packages don't exist for the Amiga. I'm sure that having hundreds of software developers find those bugs and report them has speeded C-A's effort many times over anything they could have done in-house, so maybe the tradeoff was worth it. Time will tell.-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Mike Portuesi | | Carnegie-Mellon University Computer Science Department | | | | ARPA: mjp@spice.cs.cmu.edu (preferred), mp1u@td.cc.cmu.edu | | UUCP: {harvard | seismo | ucbvax | decwrl}!spice.cs.cmu.edu!mjp | | | | "Little things remind me of you...Cheap cologne and that damn song too!" | | --The Flirts, "Jukebox" | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
robinson@shadow.Berkeley.EDU (Michael Robinson) (08/07/86)
In article <1049@spice.cs.cmu.edu> mjp@spice.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Portuesi) writes: >Networking hardware/software does not exist, and the Amiga cannot >hope to be a success in the business (and even the academic) world >without good LAN capability. For what it's worth, I have seen a flyer from an apparently reputable company advertizing not only a cheapernet (Ethernet, but with cheaper cable. Totally compatible with the real thing) board for the Amiga, but Internet protocol software (telnet, ftp, etc.) and Sun NFS drivers as well. I think that this would qualify as adequate networking support. I would like to see a Macintosh even try to use a Sun fileserver. (Yes, I am aware of the possibility that it's all vaporware, but even so, it indicates that people out there are thinking in the right direction, and we should expect such things Real Soon Now.) >| Mike Portuesi >| ARPA: mjp@spice.cs.cmu.edu (preferred), mp1u@td.cc.cmu.edu >| UUCP: {harvard | seismo | ucbvax | decwrl}!spice.cs.cmu.edu!mjp ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Disclaimer: UNIX is a trademark of Bell Laboratories Some assembly required All Thebans are liars The Surgeon General has determined that smoking is hazardous to your health I was holding it for a friend "This has been another helpful hint for living from the commitee's almanac." Mike "programmer with a screwdriver" Robinson USENET: ucbvax!ernie!robinson ARPA: robinson@ernie.berkeley.edu