rick1@sbcs.UUCP (Guest account) (01/06/86)
Say, toy stores everywhere are going to be carrying a new spiffy neato toy computer from atari. Its called the 520 ST or something. Can't wait till my local K-Mart gets them (for about three hundred dollars). Maybe I'll get a few of them and give them away to small children I know. Hope there aren't any toxic easily swallowable parts! Wasn't atari supposedly getting into the *real* computer market or was that some other company? Too bad about all the poor folks who payed full price (and defended their action so eloquently on the net). Gee I guess it was management that was responsible for Commodore getting the reputation of building toys. After all, now that the former management of commodore has moved to atari, behold, the reputation moved with them. And looky! Commodore is now building the machine of the 80's. Boo Hoo.
freed@aum.UUCP (Erik Freed) (01/08/86)
> Say, toy stores everywhere are going to be carrying a new spiffy neato > toy computer from atari. Its called the 520 ST or something. Can't wait > till my local K-Mart gets them (for about three hundred dollars). Maybe > I'll get a few of them and give them away to small children I know. Hope > there aren't any toxic easily swallowable parts! Wasn't atari supposedly > getting into the *real* computer market or was that some other company? > Too bad about all the poor folks who payed full price (and defended their > action so eloquently on the net). > > Gee I guess it was management that was responsible for Commodore getting > the reputation of building toys. After all, now that the former management > of commodore has moved to atari, behold, the reputation moved with them. > And looky! Commodore is now building the machine of the 80's. Boo Hoo. I just do not understand why people feel so strongly that they have to put down a little personal computer like the 520 ST. I am absolutely incredulous that the USENET with articles on the most ethereal / complex topics imaginable in the computer world, should also play host to these inappropriate emotional outbursts. Would someone fill me in as to what specifically about the Atari is so hideous (except that the price just dropped) I am planning on buying one and want to avoid the horror of paying less for a product of the DEVIL. (yes you heard right) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik James Freed Aurora Systems San Francisco, CA {dual,ptsfa}!aum!freed
rtb@ihlpm.UUCP (Todd) (01/09/86)
> Say, toy stores everywhere are going to be carrying a new spiffy neato > toy computer from atari. Its called the 520 ST or something. Can't wait > till my local K-Mart gets them (for about three hundred dollars). Maybe > I'll get a few of them and give them away to small children I know. Hope > there aren't any toxic easily swallowable parts! Wasn't atari supposedly > getting into the *real* computer market or was that some other company? Fine, when I stop in at K-mart to buy my toy Sony TV and my toy Frigidaire freezer I will pick up my toy computer too. > Too bad about all the poor folks who payed full price (and defended their > action so eloquently on the net). Who payed full price, I didn't. The unbundled prices I've seen announced aren't any cheaper than you could get if you shopped around before. The only difference is that now you can buy the computer, screen, and disk drive separately. The announced prices are: Color monitor $400, Disk Drive $200, Computer $400. A complete system (color) will still retail for $1000. I payed $925 for the same system and I have a friend who payed $825 mail order.
turner@imagen.UUCP (D'arc Angel) (01/09/86)
> Say, toy stores everywhere are going to be carrying a new spiffy neato > toy computer from atari. Its called the 520 ST or something. Can't wait > till my local K-Mart gets them (for about three hundred dollars). Maybe > I'll get a few of them and give them away to small children I know. Hope > there aren't any toxic easily swallowable parts! Wasn't atari supposedly > getting into the *real* computer market or was that some other company? > Too bad about all the poor folks who payed full price (and defended their > action so eloquently on the net). > > Gee I guess it was management that was responsible for Commodore getting > the reputation of building toys. After all, now that the former management > of commodore has moved to atari, behold, the reputation moved with them. > And looky! Commodore is now building the machine of the 80's. Boo Hoo. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\ lineater,\~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ perhaps if they could stop just building them and start shipping them ??? (thats a joke dont flame me!) seriously this is all so much BS what counts is the quality and quantity of the software available for the machines (amiga and ST) and i think the jury is still out on that. though it is treason i think both machines are excellant for different reasons -- god bless Lily St. Cyr -Rocky Horror Picture Show Name: James Turner Mail: Imagen Corp. 2650 San Tomas Expressway, P.O. Box 58101 Santa Clara, CA 95052-9400 AT&T: (408) 986-9400 UUCP: ...{decvax,ucbvax}!decwrl!imagen!turner CompuServe: 76327,1575
waynekn@tekig5.UUCP (Wayne Knapp) (01/10/86)
> Say, toy stores everywhere are going to be carrying a new spiffy neato > toy computer from atari. Its called the 520 ST or something. Can't wait > till my local K-Mart gets them (for about three hundred dollars). Maybe > I'll get a few of them and give them away to small children I know. Hope > there aren't any toxic easily swallowable parts! Wasn't atari supposedly > getting into the *real* computer market or was that some other company? > Too bad about all the poor folks who payed full price (and defended their > action so eloquently on the net). > I OWN BOTH THE ST AND AMIGA. ( so no only one computer flames ) I'm sure you must be joking and for your sake I hope it is false. If the 520st sold for $300 the Amiga would be almost worthless. So many people would buy 520's that a huge support market would spring up around it. The Amiga maket would be stunted to say the least. Really the Amiga is nice, but it can compete against a $300 st. Wayne Knapp
mendoza@aero.ARPA (Lee Mendoza) (01/10/86)
In article <37@sbcs.UUCP> rick1@sbcs.UUCP (Guest account) writes: >Too bad about all the poor folks who payed full price (and defended their >action so eloquently on the net). > Gee, $300 for the computer, $300 for the disk drive, $400 for a color monitor sounds like just about $1000 to me. (Guess you Amiga folk must use the "new" math. :-) ----- standard disclaimers apply...
Felton.PA@Xerox.ARPA (01/11/86)
From: Felton.PA@Xerox.ARPA > Say, toy stores everywhere are going to be carrying a new spiffy neato > toy computer from atari. > Too bad about all the poor folks who payed full price (and defended their > action so eloquently on the net). First off. You don't know what you are talking about. The $1000 systems which people are buying in computer stores includes a disk drive and monitor. The retail store price for the 520 ST is the same as the computer store price. Secondly. If you are going to sell a computer at a low price then you are going to have to do a large volume (just like any other product). If you want to pay huge margins when you buy a computer then go ahead. You can feel really proud of your self, because you bought it at a computer store. John
cs195@sdcsvax.UUCP (EECS 195) (01/13/86)
> I OWN BOTH THE ST AND AMIGA. ( so no only one computer flames ) > > I'm sure you must be joking and for your sake I hope it is false. If > the 520st sold for $300 the Amiga would be almost worthless. So many people > would buy 520's that a huge support market would spring up around it. The > Amiga market would be stunted to say the least. Really the Amiga is nice, > but it can compete against a $300 st. > > Wayne Knapp You just don't understand, do you. You can LOWER the price of a machine and have your sales go DOWN. Markets are partially defined by price. If you were to lower the price of the ST significantly, it would no longer compete in the same market as the amiga (not that it does now). This is all textbook marketing. Companies that don't get into price wars will stay around alot longer. Remember, a computer is not a commodity. Software, service, support the manufacture's financial situation, and advertising are far more important than price, particularly to businesses. (the amiga *is* a business machine and would lose that market if it's price was lowered too much.) Most people don't understand market positioning. They think that "you get what you pay for". And if machine A costs more, it must be better. As long as the amiga keeps a unique market position, it will have NO problem, regardless of what Atari or Apple does. Roger Bly "Life is short, standing in line just makes it seem longer." - An old lady I met once
dave@ur-helheim.UUCP (David F. Carlson) (01/15/86)
In article <955@caip.RUTGERS.EDU> Felton.PA@Xerox.ARPA writes: >From: Felton.PA@Xerox.ARPA > > > >> Say, toy stores everywhere are going to be carrying a new spiffy >neato >> toy computer from atari. Sorry to netters who have posted this or read it..but subsequent to the announcement that Atari would be mass marketing 520ST was the announcement of the 1040ST. Although details of how the packaging would differ, the machine appears to be upward compatable with the 520ST but with *1MEG of RAM*. Thus, taking the historical landmark of being the first off-the-shelf micro to have a minimum configuration of 1MEG. Not bad for a toy. (And then there's apple with a 68000 and 128k of RAM--talk about useless toys.) Now--pardoning my posting--could we discuss Amiga here and the sour grapes about other machines to /dev/null. Yours for better computing, -- "The Faster I Go the Behinder I Get" --Lewis Carroll Dave Carlson {allegra,seismo,decvax}!rochester!ur-valhalla!dave
boomsma@ark.UUCP (Raoul Boomsma) (01/15/86)
In article <1302@sdcsvax.UUCP> cs195@sdcsvax.UUCP (EECS 195) writes: > >Companies that don't get into price wars will stay around alot longer. >Remember, a computer is not a commodity. Software, service, support >the manufacture's financial situation, and advertising are far more >important than price, particularly to businesses. >(the amiga *is* a business machine and would lose that market if it's >price was lowered too much.) > >Most people don't understand market positioning. They think that "you >get what you pay for". And if machine A costs more, it must be better. >As long as the amiga keeps a unique market position, it will have NO >problem, regardless of what Atari or Apple does. > This is a really interesting theory. This guy says that as long as the prices of the Atari and other companies are kept low, the Amiga keeps a unique market position, which the others cannot threat. So the only thing Atari has to do, is to raise the price of their ST, to start the competition with the Amiga. This is the most ridiculous marketing theory I ever heard. Of course, the Amiga is more a business machine than the Atari, but do you really think business people would buy a computer because of it's higher price? If you think so, Commodore must have terrible fears for Apple, 'cause the price of the Mac is about twice as high as the Amiga and is even much more developed as a business machine. I think you must read some more books about 'Price and Quality' and 'Customers Behavior' before saying such heavy statements. -- Raoul Boomsma Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam ...!mcvax!boomsma@ark.UUCP
preece@ccvaxa.UUCP (01/16/86)
> (the amiga *is* a business machine and would lose that market if it's > price was lowered too much.) /* Written 6:51 pm Jan 12, 1986 by > cs195@sdcsvax.UUCP in ccvaxa:net.micro.amiga */ ---------- I'm sure the Amiga people will be glad to know they have that market to lose. A "business machine" is defined by the people who buy it and the people who write software for it. A machine marketed to business is defined by the people who build and market it. So far, NONE of those criteria mark the Amiga as a business machine. The amrketing is not business oriented, the machine's features are not those previously recognized as desired by the business community, the software available for it is not business software, and the people buying it (from the admittedly limited public information about who's buying it) are not business people. The ONLY thing about it that fits into the business computer market is its price. Maybe business buyers will be fooled, but I doubt it. I think the Amiga is a pretty nifty machine, with a lot of potential. Calling it a business machine is ludicrous. -- scott preece gould/csd - urbana uucp: ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece arpa: preece@gswd-vms
mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) (01/18/86)
I don't think anyone has ever indicated that anyone would buy the Amiga because it has a higher price than the ST, just that people who are going to spend $2000 for a computer will not even consider the ST, or any other less expensive computer. On the other hand, those who want to buy a $400 computer won't buy a $2000 Amiga or a $1500 Mac or a $1000 Apple II. Consider this: you own a business and are going to spend $3000-$6000 for a personal computer. The Amiga with 80MB of hard disk and 8.5MB RAM costs about the same as an AT, but there is quite a difference in the quality of the two standards (state of the art relative...). This large Amiga is a real impressive standard, and Amiga is making a standard. Atari's ST seems to be a follower of existing standards (Mac, Gem...), not the trendsetter for the next generation of computers. Not a single posting has convinced me that the Amiga will end up sitting on a shelf in my closet somewhere any faster than the ST - as a matter of fact, it seems like the ST will find the shelf years (literally years) before the Amiga will. Amiga (and Commodore) was not at the CES show in Las Vegas, and most of the 3rd party people there had ST stuff. It may seem like a bad indicator for the Amiga, but IBM wasn't there either. Sales figures for November show that the Amiga sold 4% of the computer market and the Mac 7% (I wish I had figures for the ST). The Palo Alto Times reported recently that the ST was outselling the Amiga locally anywhere from 2-1 to 5-1 (but the Amiga isn'y going to disappear). However, the C128 outsold everything 5-1 during the same time. Other news of note: Nintendo sold 250,000 stand alone video game machines (similar to the Atari 5200) over Christmas in a test market several east coast cities (talk about things running in circles). Also, the Aztec 'C' compiler should become the compiler of choice, but there is one problem that I have heard about with it - ints are 16 bits. A simple typedef should solve the problem, but it is somewhat unfortunate. I think we all can expect some real exciting things from Commodore and Amiga in the future. The Amiga lacks a product that differentiates it from all the other computers around. The Mac is a fine desktop publisher, and for that reason alone (my opinion) it might be worth the price. THe Amiga does not do all the fancy stuff yet, but there is little doubt in my mind that someone will do a MacWrite style program (how about Microsoft Word for the Amiga). The Amiga can do everything the Mac or ST or PC can do, given a little software. The other's can only do everything the Amiga can by adding HARDWARE. can by adding HARDWARE. While other manufacturers are adding hardware to provide color (color monitors, graphics boards), speech (votrax), and music (MIDI), Amiga owners will be adding hardware like STEREO AUDIO DIGITIZERS and FRAME GRABBERS. Facts are facts: the Amiga, when it matures, will be light years ahead of all its competition, technologically, and folks like IBM, Apple, and Atari will take at least 2 years to catch up to what the Amiga is now. I do not mean any of what I said above to be criticism of any of the other machines. Rather, I tried to present facts and details of the Amiga (and used other computers for comparison). I don't think I need to defend my purchase of the Amiga to anyone but myself (and I don't have a single regret), and I don't think that ST owners need to defend theirs. Amiga vs. ST is a silly debate, since neither threatens the other in the marketplace, and the similarities between the two only consists of WINDOWS, the MOUSE, and the 68000. Beyond these features, the two machines are very different. I don't think that the Amiga is a better machine (I also don't think that the ST is a better machine), although it is (ST is too...) much better than the IBM PC standard and the hardware is better than the Mac (software is a different story). I do think the Amiga is the most advanced technology you can buy for under $5000, but the ST is damn good, too (at even the same price as the Amiga). I was tempted to stop writing things to post to the newsgroup, because I am pretty much a novice, and a few people have posted public requests that I not write. However, from the E-Mail I get, Mac people want to be ignorant of the technology that is burying the Mac (don't post stuff to net.mac...), and Atari and Amiga folks LIKE MY STUFF (3 to 1). I think this indicates that net.micro.amiga means more to some people than just a place to get free software (a real selfish attitude in my opinion). My feelings are that the ST vs. Amiga type debates are of interest to a lot of people (look at all the responses), and to a few they are a bore. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO READ ALL OF net.micro.amiga, USE THE DAMN 'N' key and skip the stuff you don't want to read. Or send me nasty E-MAIL - if I get enough, I WILL STOP. P.S. I would like to see more graphics oriented discussions posted to the newsgroup. Has anyone used the ROM Kernel Graphics and Animation routines yet? A neat program to post would be a "sprite" or Blitter Object editor with animation. Something like IconEd, except that by sequencing through a set of patterns over time, animations can be produced. I know quite a bit about graphics and animation and sounds, from doing several C64, ColecoVision, VCS, and Coin-op games, and I am willing to share my expertise. However, I won't have time to do a whole lot of programming on my Amiga for a few weeks, so I won't be able to investigate these routines myself. However, if someone needs some assistance, send me E-MAIL, or post questions to the net. If I can't answer the questions, a lot of guys at Amiga will probably jump at the chance to help. The area of graphics and animation seems to be the one area that noone has done any major work (Mandelbrots is neat, but it did not use any of the gels, etc.). Multi-tasking via the Exec routines would be nice, too.
tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) (01/21/86)
In article <355@3comvax.UUCP> mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) writes: > >I don't think anyone has ever indicated that anyone would buy the Amiga >because it has a higher price than the ST, just that people who are >going to spend $2000 for a computer will not even consider the ST, or >any other less expensive computer. Do you have any evidence for this? I have never known anyone to put a lower limit on what they are willing to spend, just an upper limit. > On the other hand, those who want to >buy a $400 computer won't buy a $2000 Amiga or a $1500 Mac or a $1000 >Apple II. > Probably they are looking for a $400 computer because they can't afford more. >DIGITIZERS and FRAME GRABBERS. Facts are facts: the Amiga, when it >matures, will be light years ahead of all its competition, technologically, >and folks like IBM, Apple, and Atari will take at least 2 years to catch >up to what the Amiga is now. > I am willing to believe this about Atari, but I would not be so quick to count Apple and IBM out. They both have enough money to do quite a bit of research and development of new products. Sure, IBM has been conservative in the small computer market as far as what they sell, but I wouldn't be too surprised to find out they have a Mac like or Amiga like machine already developed, just in case it looks like the market would be big enough for them. So you might have to subtract some from that 2 years. >I not write. However, from the E-Mail I get, Mac people want to be >ignorant of the technology that is burying the Mac (don't post stuff to >net.mac...), and Atari and Amiga folks LIKE MY STUFF (3 to 1). I think Oh hell, why don't we just get rid of all these stupid newsgroups and post everything to net.general? Look, the reason people on net.micro.mac don't want to see a lot of Amiga discussion ( or ST discussion ) in net.micro.mac is that that is not what that newgroup is for! We come over here to see the Amiga stuff, and we go to net.micro.atari for the ST stuff. How would you like it if mod.computers.sun was diverted into net.amiga ( since a Sun is "better" than an Amiga )? -- Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim
mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) (01/22/86)
IBM and Atari and Apple do not have Jay Miner, I rest my case. IBM or Apple might be able to do a quick and dirty imitation of the Amiga at a huge cost, but they won't until they feel the pressure of large Amiga quantities in their market. If you have $2000 to spend, ae you going to shop at K-Mart or a computer store? You might educate yourself first, then go to the Computer store (why do I have the feeling I will see flames about this?) As long as Amiga and the ST are so wide apart in price, they will not compete with eachother - but together they might destroy the Mac. By the way, (no offense intended) it seems to me that the people who ae so pro ST like to exercise the left half of their brains while the pro Amiga people exercise the right half. To the left-half people, monochrome text in high resolution is appealing. To the right-half people, high-resolution color, speech, audio, etc. is appealing. To each his own, but as a right brainer, I have a monochrome hi-res (640x400) AT&T PC to satisfy my left brain, and an Amiga, Commodore 64, and Atari 800 to satisfy my right. mike schwartz (sorry for the typos, this keyboard sux) [left-brain = scientific uses, right-brain = artistic/creative uses]
keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) (01/23/86)
In article <26600016@ccvaxa> preece@ccvaxa.UUCP writes: >I think the Amiga is a pretty nifty machine, with a lot of >potential. Calling it a business machine is ludicrous. >-- >scott preece Ok, has anyone figured out an appropriate name for it? What about the Mac or Atari? I've got it, how about 'specialty computers'. Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa
hamilton@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU (01/23/86)
>>because it has a higher price than the ST, just that people who are >>going to spend $2000 for a computer will not even consider the ST, or >>any other less expensive computer. > >Do you have any evidence for this? I have never known anyone to put >a lower limit on what they are willing to spend, just an upper limit. speaking for myself, i do it all the time. for example, if i need tools, i'll go to (eg) Sears and pay extra for Craftsman or somesuch, instead of buying a $19.95 wonderwrench from the likes of Ronco. several of the grocery stores in my area have extensive "generic" product sections, but i don't usually use them much. in short, i tend to suspect deals that look "to good to be true". note that i'm NOT commenting on the ST per se, only the consumer psychology. wayne hamilton U of Il and US Army Corps of Engineers CERL UUCP: {ihnp4,pur-ee,convex}!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!hamilton ARPA: hamilton@uiucuxc.cso.uiuc.edu CSNET: hamilton%uiucuxc@uiuc.csnet USMail: Box 476, Urbana, IL 61801 Phone: (217)333-8703
tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) (01/24/86)
In article <374@3comvax.UUCP> mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) writes: > >IBM and Atari and Apple do not have Jay Miner, I rest my case. IBM or Apple >might be able to do a quick and dirty imitation of the Amiga at a huge >cost, but they won't until they feel the pressure of large Amiga quantities >in their market. > Are you claiming Jay Miner is the only competent engineer in the computer biz? If so, I think you are resting more than your case! :-) I was not suggesting that IBM or Apple would do a quick and dirty Amiga imitation if the Amiga starts to hurt their sales. I was suggesting that they already are working on machines that are as state of the art as Amiga. Take the case of IBM. They ( at least this is what I have heard, it may be totally wrong ) spend lots of money on keeping up with the leading edge of technology. For example, IBM did one of the very early RISC machines, yet it was only this week that they announced a RISC based product. Similarly, it is almost certain that they already have all the technology to do an Amiga class machine. To actually market such a machine would not be a quick and dirty job, it would simply be a matter of putting some stuff they already have in one box and selling it. Heck, even Mattel was close to having an Amiga type computer before they got out of computers ( the machine that would have come after the Intellevision III was going to be 68k based, and have graphics and sound capabilities similar to those of the Amiga ). >If you have $2000 to spend, ae you going to shop at K-Mart or a computer >store? You might educate yourself first, then go to the Computer store >(why do I have the feeling I will see flames about this?) > I would allocated about $100 of the $2000 to go to the local magazine shop, and get a lot of computer magazines. If I found a machine that met my needs, and sold for a lot less than the other machines that meet my needs, I would start to look for it. It might not occur to me to go to K-Mart and look for it, so I might end up purchasing the expensive machine from a computer store. But if I became aware of the K-Mart machine, I would go and buy it there. I see no reason to become stupid just because I have $1900 in my pocket :-). -- Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim
tomp@amiga.UUCP (01/24/86)
In article <374@3comvax.UUCP> mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) writes: >If you have $2000 to spend, ae you going to shop at K-Mart or a computer >store? You might educate yourself first, then go to the Computer store >(why do I have the feeling I will see flames about this?) You have a feeling you will see flames about this because this type of remark is irrational, fitting somewhere between political and religous. Even as a [obviously biased] Commodore-Amiga employee, I wince when I see this kind of fuel-to-the-[pointless-carnage]-fire remark. You have contributed alot of good rational info to this newsgroup. It's beneath your dignity to get religous in this group. Keep up the GOOD work. tomp.
ugjohna@sunybcs.UUCP (John Arrasjid) (01/29/86)
<355@3comvax.UUCP> <279@ism780c.UUCP> <374@3comvax.UUCP> Sender: John Arrasjid Reply-To: ugjohna@sunybcs.BITNET Distribution: net Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science In article <374@3comvax.UUCP> mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) writes: >By the way, (no offense intended) it seems to me that the people who ae >so pro ST like to exercise the left half of their brains while the pro >Amiga people exercise the right half. To the left-half people, monochrome >text in high resolution is appealing. To the right-half people, high-resolution >color, speech, audio, etc. is appealing. To each his own, but as a right >brainer, I have a monochrome hi-res (640x400) AT&T PC to satisfy my left >brain, and an Amiga, Commodore 64, and Atari 800 to satisfy my right. What????? Who says that the st doesn't have hi-res color?? 640 x 200 in hi res with 512 colors isn't?? The IBM does 320 by 200 with 16 colors. No speech synthesis??? If an Atari 8bit machine and a commodore 64 machine can do speech synthesis through software with a program called SAM, then who is to say the ST won't be able to do it yet. Besides, I think the speech synthesis on the Amiga sounds alot like that produced by SAM (maybe that company created the software for the amiga's sound synth.). No audio??? Well, granted it only has 3 voices but if you listen to the music produced by the programs Barraticus and Sundog, you'll realize that the quality is fantastic!! Besides, a professional musician wouldn't, I assume, hook his computer to a microphone to play music!!! They'd use a midi interface (built in on the ST and extra cost on the Amiga). Now...... I have been in all the computer stores in the Buffalo and Erie county computer stores. I have seen a total of 5 different Amiga programs: 4 games by Electronic Arts, and one graphics program. I have seen no less than 90 commercial ST programs on dealers shelves. For the benefit of ST users, I would like to list them here: Business: VIP Professional, How to write Business Letters, How to write your own Will, Letter Processor, Typesetter ST, Haba Write, Hippo Simple, Chat, ST-Talk, Antic Color Sprite Editor, Degas (graphics arts), Final Word, a midi program (can't remember the name), Hippo Rolodex, Hippo Checkbook Balancer. Languages: Hippo C, Modula-2, OSS Personal Pascal, Michtron Forth, Dragon Group Forth. Operating Systems: TOS (GEM), OS-9 68K, BOS, Micro C shell. Utilities: Michtron Ramdisk, Michtron Printer Spooler, Michtron BBS, Hippo Ramdisk, Hippo Spooler, Micronomist Disk Analyser. Entertainment: Mom and Me, Murray and Me, Barraticus, Sundog, Infocom line of Interactive fiction, Kings Quest II, Ultima II, Hippo Jokes and Quotes, Crimson Manor, Perry Mason, Mudpies, Hex, Alien Adventure Hacker, Borrowed Time, Hippo Almanac. Educational: Typing Tutor, Winnie The Pooh in the 100 acre wood, Mathbusters - Homework Helper, Word Forth (crosswords), Maps and Legends (Antic), Cartographer. (not to mention that Spinnaker plans on releasing its complete line of educational software) Public Domain Software: ----------------------- Printer Spooler, Ramdisk, Assembler, pop up calculator, Megaroids, Dragon Forth Demo Disk (working subset of Forth), Degas Graphics Slide show, Neo Chrome slide show, Breakout in TOS, etc... etc... These are actual programs that I have seen on the shelf!! Most of them I have already seen demonstrated. The software programs are in the same price range as most 8 bit computer software --> $25 to $40. I have seen a list of close to 400 programs that are supposed to be available, but I cannot vouch as to their availability. I'll post a list of new software every few weeks or so to keep people up to date. John Arrasjid SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science BITNET: ugjohna@sunybcs
tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) (01/30/86)
In article <148600038@uiucuxc> hamilton@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU writes: >> >>Do you have any evidence for this? I have never known anyone to put >>a lower limit on what they are willing to spend, just an upper limit. > > speaking for myself, i do it all the time. for example, if i need >tools, i'll go to (eg) Sears and pay extra for Craftsman or somesuch, >instead of buying a $19.95 wonderwrench from the likes of Ronco. several It sounds like you are putting a lower limit on *quality*, not *price*. This is what I think most consumers who are considering a major purchase will do, and an Amiga is a major purchase. One should be suspicous of a deal that seems too good to be true, but if the product turns out to be good, then I think a low price will help, not hurt. -- Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim