rtb@ihlpm.UUCP (Todd) (12/12/85)
After reading a lot of articles about this years Comdex it is becoming more obvious that Atari has already won in the ST vs. Amiga wars. The main complaint about the ST was that there was no available software. There was plenty of software to be shown at the show. Commadore did not show up. After reading articles in many magazines about Commadore's financial woes, the speculation that they were too broke isn't hard to believe. Also, a lot of the touted software for the Amiga has yet to hit the shelves. Atari has sold more than 100,000 520STs and now that the software is available, distributors are again having a hard time keeping up with demand for 520STs. A few calls to Atari retailers, especially the mail order people can verify this. I predict that unless Commadore can do something really spectacular to turn this around that the Amiga will fade away by the middle of next year. A side note for ST fans: Atari is now marketing a 1 meg ST in Germany with a built in disk drive. Supposedly the ST is the #1 best seller in that country. R.T. Bradstrum
mwm@ucbopal.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer) (12/14/85)
In article <617@ihlpm.UUCP> rtb@ihlpm.UUCP (Todd) writes: > After reading a lot of articles about this years Comdex it is >becoming more obvious that Atari has already won in the ST vs. >Amiga wars. technically So Atari follows in IBM's footsteps, and succeeds with a technically inferior product :-). Seriously, I don't own either machine. I'm probably going to be buying one in the near future (january), and haven't decided which. However, I want a machine for twiddling LISP, which means (to me - I want to load the editor and MasterScope and the online help and ...) lotsa-memory. Say, 4 Meg or so. Atari doesn't seem to want to market a machine to do that. The Amiga is open, and there are 2Meg boards on the market. Of course, the plaintiff cries from people trying to twiddle the mouse from C doesn't help the ST any. And I'm going to ignore the prospects of Commodore going under. I'll pick the machine that best does what I want, then support the company that makes it. Final thought: I'd be suprised if the ST doesn't outsell the Amiga, by 2:1 or better. After all, I expect most people to look at them, see windows and two price tags (one roughly 1/2 the other), and buy the smaller price tag. <mike
kurt@fluke.UUCP (Kurt Guntheroth) (12/16/85)
On financial woes: It is true that Commodore posted a lose the last two quarters and is technically in default on some corporate bonds. However Commodore's stock, usually a good predictor of future performance is holding its value pretty well. Let us remember too that Atari is swimming in debt. If Atari does not have a very good Christmas indeed, it may disappear suddenly. Don't we remember all the cancelled 8-bit lines, the undelivered promises, the sweaty times at the start of this year, atari loyalists? On software availability: Lets see now. 520ST's became available in June and the software is now ready in December. Amiga's became available in September and the software is ready...in March? Well, some is available now, in December, which lets us all know where the relative priorities of software producers lie. I think it is easier to write programs for the Amiga and I think the designers think so too. I think good hardware design and good system software will beat early-to-market. I think no amount of partisanship by atari owners will keep the Amiga from becomming a success. I mean, look at the two newsgroups and you will see the future. .atari is full of articles doomsaying the amiga and .amiga is full of rich technical questions and hints. It is clear where the software brains are putting their efforts. Now, there are/were some bright people doing ST stuff too, and I think its place in the market is secure for awhile at least. But I don't tkink the Amiga is going away.
tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) (12/16/85)
There is certainly more software advertized for the Amiga in the L.A. area. It doesn't matter if the ST has more software at shows, if it isn't being sold! There are also more places advertizing themselves as Amiga dealers in the L.A. area. By the way, does anyone know what the Atari arcade game people have against DEC? I am refering to the game _Major Havoc_, where one fights against the Evil Vaxxxian Empire, from the planet of Maynard. -- Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim
dave@heurikon.UUCP (Dave Scidmore) (12/17/85)
> > > After reading a lot of articles about this years Comdex it is > becoming more obvious that Atari has already won in the ST vs. > Amiga wars. The main complaint about the ST was that there was > no available software. There was plenty of software to be shown > at the show. Who said there was a war? Both machines have a lot to contibute to the personal computer world. That aside, software at a show and software on the shelves are two vastly different things. I am certain that if Commodore had gone to the show they could have dug up at least two dozen software vendors to come to the show and display their wares, even if the software is not ready to ship. Electronic Arts, one of the biggest manufacturers of entertainment software, just last week started shipping Amiga software. To the best of my knowledge they are not even planning to produce on software for the ST. To claim that the software is here based on a few software vendors at a show is over-exagerating a little. Dave Scidmore
freed@aum.UUCP (Erik Freed) (12/17/85)
> So Atari follows in IBM's footsteps, and succeeds with a technically > inferior product :-). I still do not understand what people think technically superior is. Obviously if price is not part of technical achievment then I will take a Vme based Sun-3 anyday! It seems that the ST is very close technically and indeed for a lot of people better technically and at less than half the cost. If all you want is a 68000 and monochrome graphics the ST has far more going for it. This is a large market!! So if you want the animation and the built-in sound and you want to pay for it then do so... I would rather have the extra money to buy a synthesizer personally. (controllable from the *built-in* MIDI port) > Seriously, I don't own either machine. I'm probably going to be buying one > in the near future (january), and haven't decided which. However, I want a > machine for twiddling LISP, which means (to me - I want to load the editor > and MasterScope and the online help and ...) lotsa-memory. Say, 4 Meg or so. > Atari doesn't seem to want to market a machine to do that. The Amiga is > open, and there are 2Meg boards on the market. I believe that 2-meg memory expansion boards are in beta test for the ST. These require no soldering. The price is far less than the TECMAR bullshit. > Of course, the plaintiff cries from people trying to twiddle the mouse from > C doesn't help the ST any. I agree thhat the software enviroment so far is better but I will probably use OS-9 anyway and then they both will be identical > And I'm going to ignore the prospects of Commodore going under. I'll pick > the machine that best does what I want, then support the company that makes > it. ?????? > Final thought: I'd be suprised if the ST doesn't outsell the Amiga, by 2:1 > or better. After all, I expect most people to look at them, see windows and > two price tags (one roughly 1/2 the other), and buy the smaller price tag. This could be reasonably intelligent behavior if you aren't looking for some extraas that the Amiga has. I do not believe the majority of people really care about amimation and fancy built-in sound, or Bus-oriented expandability. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik James Freed Aurora Systems San Francisco, CA {dual,ptsfa}!aum!freed
jmellby%ti-eg.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA (12/17/85)
From: John_Mellby <jmellby%ti-eg.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA> Although someone said there was lots of Atari 520ST software out, I haven't seen any in the biggest local software chain (this is Babbages which is mainly games, utilities, educational software mostly under $100, with a few bigger programs, selling for a small discount under retail). On the other hand, Amiga software appeared in Babbages in the last week. EA's Deluxe Paint, a few other games by EA, Activision, and Infocom. The best laid plans of mice and men are held up in the legal department! John Mellby P.O.Box 801, Mail Station 8007 Texas Instruments McKinney Texas 75069 JMELLBY%TI-EG@CSNET-RELAY (214) 242-9641
srp@houligan.UUCP (S R Pietrowicz) (12/19/85)
>> After reading a lot of articles about this years Comdex it is >>becoming more obvious that Atari has already won in the ST vs. >>Amiga wars. >>Also, a lot of the touted software for the Amiga has yet to hit the shelves. Obvious to you maybe... I heard on the news that the Amiga is the #1 best seller this Christmas. Amazing, considering there is so little software out there now.....But it's there! I've seen several different software releases by EA and Activision. More coming in January. >>I predict that unless Commadore can do something really spectacular to >>turn this around that the Amiga will fade away by the middle of next >>year. Hmmmm......looking at Commodore's track record and comparing it to Atari's, MY prediction is that you're dead wrong. Atari's 400/800 were pretty good machines for their time...what SUCCESSFUL machines has Atari put out since then? >>A side note for ST fans: >>Atari is now marketing a 1 meg ST in Germany with a built in >>disk drive. Supposedly the ST is the #1 best seller in that >>country. >> R.T. Bradstrum A side note for PET fans: Commodore's PET (remember those?) was the best selling machine over in Europe when Apples and TRS-80s were all the rage over here. PET never got the kind of recognition it deserved over here. Being a success over there doesn't mean it will be a success here!!! (Has Commodore even released the Amiga to Germany?....Maybe they don't have anything else to buy but ST's.) Next time you want to say how great atari is, post it to net.micro.atari... we don't want to hear it. 'Nuff said! -- ------ S. R. Pietrowicz UUCP: ...!ihnp4!pur-ee!csd-gould!houligan!srp
freed@aum.UUCP (Erik Freed) (12/20/85)
> Lets see now. 520ST's became available in June and the software is now > ready in December. Amiga's became available in September and the software > is ready...in March? Well, some is available now, in December, which lets > us all know where the relative priorities of software producers lie. I > think it is easier to write programs for the Amiga and I think the designers > think so too. I think good hardware design and good system software will beat One reason that these comparisons are so silly is that the perspective of most of the people who write these "mine is superior articles" is limited. Atari early on targeted the European market and in the first year seemingly did not care a fig about the USA. However they have managed to capture the Europeans, and there is 10 times more software over there for the Atari than here for the Amiga. I like the Amiga, I really do (after all its just a computer), but these comparisons seem to all be Amiga people saying the Amiga is better and the atari people saying that they like their computers just fine. And the price!! (not to mention the faster benchmarks) > early-to-market. I think no amount of partisanship by atari owners will > keep the Amiga from becomming a success. I mean, look at the two newsgroups > and you will see the future. .atari is full of articles doomsaying the > amiga and .amiga is full of rich technical questions and hints. It is clear > where the software brains are putting their efforts. Now, there are/were > some bright people doing ST stuff too, and I think its place in the market > is secure for awhile at least. But I don't tkink the Amiga is going away. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik James Freed Aurora Systems San Francisco, CA {dual,ptsfa}!aum!freed
jons@islenet.UUCP (Jonathan Spangler) (12/21/85)
In article <2511@dragon.fluke.UUCP> kurt@fluke.UUCP (Kurt Guntheroth) writes: >On financial woes: > >It is true that Commodore posted a lose the last two quarters and is >technically in default on some corporate bonds. However Commodore's stock, >usually a good predictor of future performance is holding its value pretty >well. Let us remember too that Atari is swimming in debt. If Atari does Oh, come now, shall we resort to name-calling to achieve a logical end to this? Commodore is in serious financial trouble. Period. >On software availability: > >Lets see now. 520ST's became available in June and the software is now >ready in December. Uh, excuse me, but the Amiga was launched on July 23, 1985 -- >us all know where the relative priorities of software producers lie. I You know it's funny that you mention that now that Island Graphics has dropped the Amiga (which Commodore can't afford it seems). The thing I have seen of software availability is that there is *alot* of software available for the ST. Commodore admittedly has said that the software is lacking. Seems Comdex cleared up the issue of software -- for the ST anyway. >think it is easier to write programs for the Amiga and I think the designers >think so too. I think good hardware design and good system software will beat >early-to-market. I think no amount of partisanship by atari owners will It seems that if you think anymore, you may just overuse the word. Is there ever a time when you do more than *think*? Do you ever *do* anything? Hmmm... >... and I think its place in the market >is secure for awhile at least. But I don't tkink the Amiga is going away. There you go *thinking* again. Anyway, all flaming aside, I feel a sense of jealousy here. It seems that people here have to justify why they believe the Amiga is a better machine, because they can't believe that a machine like the 520ST exists. You know, it was interesting to read the article in Inforworld (12/2) on "Christmas Contenders". "Observers have noted some clear distinctions between the Amiga buyer and the Atari 520ST buyer. Although the ST is the less expensive computer, its typical buyer is a veteran computer user, according to Martin Bartholomey, owner of Home Computers Co... "We're winning the battle of the techies," says Sam Tramiel president of Atari..."Hackers are our first customers. They influence the market and tell their friends." On the other hand, the current Amiga buyer is likely to be a first-time computer buyer, says Ed Anderson, vice president of marketing of The Computer Factory..." The question then becomes: why do techies and experience computer users prefer the 520ST over the higher-priced Amiga? Hmmm. I probably planted a bomb. Oh well. Aloha, -- Jonathan Spangler {ihnp4,vortex,dual}!islenet!jons "On Thursday, the world came to an end."
zrm@gcc-milo.ARPA (Zigurd R. Mednieks) (12/23/85)
I have not yet seen any discussion of the relative merits of Amiga and ST software here. This is suprising, considering that software is one department where the ST takes a good drubbing from the Amiga. The ST's O.S. is derived, I think, from CPM68k. I never heard a nice word about that O.S. The Amiga's O.S. is derived from Tripos (sp?), which is a very nice, clean multi-tasking system. Let's see some flamage here! -Zigurd
ravi@eneevax.UUCP (Ravi Kulkarni) (12/24/85)
In article <235@houligan.UUCP> srp@houligan.UUCP (S R Pietrowicz) writes: >Next time you want to say how great atari is, post it to net.micro.atari... >we don't want to hear it. > >'Nuff said! I guess next you will be proposing that net.micro.amiga become a moderated newsgroup run by the folks at amiga. Interesting how you have chosen yourself as the spokesman for everybody who reads net.micro.amiga. -ravi -- ARPA: ravi@eneevax.umd.edu UUCP: [seismo,allegra]!umcp-cs!eneevax!ravi
eric@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Eric Lavitsky) (12/25/85)
Hi, Well, since you cross posted this, I feel obligated to followup. I do not care to further the Usenet Amiga/ST debate, I just want to correct some misonformation in Mr. Spangler's article: > >On software availability: > > > >Lets see now. 520ST's became available in June and the software is now > >ready in December. > > Uh, excuse me, but the Amiga was launched on July 23, 1985 -- Well, if you want to go this far, the ST was *launched* in January - it became available to the public in June. The Amiga became available to the public in October. > >us all know where the relative priorities of software producers lie. I > > You know it's funny that you mention that now that Island Graphics has > dropped the Amiga (which Commodore can't afford it seems). The thing I > have seen of software availability is that there is *alot* of software > available for the ST. Commodore admittedly has said that the software > is lacking. Seems Comdex cleared up the issue of software -- for the ST > anyway. > Island Graphics dropped completely out of the microcomputer market and went off to mini/mainframe land. It was a decision not necessarily made because of the Amiga. > >... and I think its place in the market > >is secure for awhile at least. But I don't tkink the Amiga is going away. > > There you go *thinking* again. Anyway, all flaming aside, I feel > a sense of jealousy here. It seems that people here have to justify > why they believe the Amiga is a better machine, because they can't > believe that a machine like the 520ST exists. > Well, if you're not jealous, why did you write this article defending the ST? > You know, it was interesting to read the article in Inforworld (12/2) on > "Christmas Contenders". > "Observers have noted some clear distinctions between > the Amiga buyer and the Atari 520ST buyer. Although > the ST is the less expensive computer, its typical > buyer is a veteran computer user, according to Martin > Bartholomey, owner of Home Computers Co... > > "We're winning the battle of the techies," says Sam Tramiel > president of Atari..."Hackers are our first customers. > They influence the market and tell their friends." > On the other hand, the current Amiga buyer is likely > to be a first-time computer buyer, says Ed Anderson, vice > president of marketing of The Computer Factory..." > > The question then becomes: why do techies and experience computer > users prefer the 520ST over the higher-priced Amiga? Hmmm. > > I probably planted a bomb. Oh well. > > Aloha, > > -- > Jonathan Spangler > {ihnp4,vortex,dual}!islenet!jons > "On Thursday, the world came to an end." > Wow, you read InfoWorld! - I hear it's a great magazine!... (ahem) Gossip is gossip - using comments from Jack Tramiel and the folks at InfoWorld is hardly unbiased concrete evidence. Talk to dealers yourself and you'll find most Amiga owners so far are hard core hackers (and yes, there are many first time users buying it because they want the leading edge of technology). The ST is a great machine for the price - I recognize it's existence (yes, in public!). There is some good software coming out for it (most from England I believe), and I hope it does well in it's market niche. Please don't compare it to the Amiga, the two are wholly different beasts, save for the fact that both have a 68000 and both can do some nice graphics (we are treading on thin lines here). I sincerely hope this is my last message posted to net.micro.atari - I hope everyone will start concentrating on making some really constructive contributions to their own newsgroups *soon* ! Eric -- ARPA: LAVITSKY@RUTGERS or LAVITSKY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU UUCP: ...{harvard,seismo,ut-sally,sri-iu,ihnp4}!topaz!eric BIX: lavitsky SNAIL: 16 Oak St., Flr 2 New Brunswick, NJ 08901
keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) (12/26/85)
In article <414@gcc-milo.ARPA> zrm@gcc-milo.UUCP (Zigurd R. Mednieks) writes: > >I have not yet seen any discussion of the relative merits of Amiga and ST >software here. This is suprising, considering that software is one department >where the ST takes a good drubbing from the Amiga. The ST's O.S. is derived, >I think, from CPM68k. I never heard a nice word about that O.S. The Amiga's >O.S. is derived from Tripos (sp?), which is a very nice, clean multi-tasking >system. > >Let's see some flamage here! > >-Zigurd One reason you probably have not heard too much about relative merits of the O.S.'s is that most of the people on the net may be programmers who may feel that this is irrelevant to the performance of the machine. Not to imply that the O.S.'s may have no effect on performance, but even if the O.S. is bad for a particular machine, you can always discard it in favor of something better (OS9 perhaps etc.), and it is the underlying hardware that is the important factor. The ST may not have a multi-tasking O.S. now, but that could change next rev. etc. In addition, you may have not heard too much about the ST's O.S. from the ST camp perhaps because they are aware that CP/M has never really been an O.S. but just a sophisticated loader. And, once your program gains control, CP/M does so little for you it might as well not even be there, especially as far as performance is concerned if you are not doing CP/M calls. Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa
mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) (12/27/85)
Some pretty nasty stuff here. Bu facts are facts: Atari was once a $2 Billion company, and a year later was sold to Tramiel for $75 Million, and the ASSUMPTION of a LOT of debts Atari had run up. Also, what do you expect software publishers with ST products (or Sam Tramiel) to say in InfoWorld? Flaming someone's statements is typical on this group it seems, but flaming the person himself is pretty low. Both machines have great technology for the money, it all boils down to how much money you want to spend, and how much you value things like more colors, better sounds, multi-tasking, or some of the other features that the Amiga has over the ST. The ST is a great machine for the money, which is something that some of us Amiga owners seem to ignore. Now lets be nice... (as he gets off his soapbox and falls flat on his face...) > In article <2511@dragon.fluke.UUCP> kurt@fluke.UUCP (Kurt Guntheroth) writes: > >On financial woes: > > > >It is true that Commodore posted a lose the last two quarters and is > >technically in default on some corporate bonds. However Commodore's stock, > >usually a good predictor of future performance is holding its value pretty > >well. Let us remember too that Atari is swimming in debt. If Atari does > > Oh, come now, shall we resort to name-calling to achieve a logical end > to this? Commodore is in serious financial trouble. Period. > > >On software availability: > > > >Lets see now. 520ST's became available in June and the software is now > >ready in December. > > Uh, excuse me, but the Amiga was launched on July 23, 1985 -- > > >us all know where the relative priorities of software producers lie. I > > You know it's funny that you mention that now that Island Graphics has > dropped the Amiga (which Commodore can't afford it seems). The thing I > have seen of software availability is that there is *alot* of software > available for the ST. Commodore admittedly has said that the software > is lacking. Seems Comdex cleared up the issue of software -- for the ST > anyway. > > >think it is easier to write programs for the Amiga and I think the designers > >think so too. I think good hardware design and good system software will beat > >early-to-market. I think no amount of partisanship by atari owners will > > It seems that if you think anymore, you may just overuse the word. Is > there ever a time when you do more than *think*? Do you ever *do* anything? > Hmmm... > > >... and I think its place in the market > >is secure for awhile at least. But I don't tkink the Amiga is going away. > > There you go *thinking* again. Anyway, all flaming aside, I feel > a sense of jealousy here. It seems that people here have to justify > why they believe the Amiga is a better machine, because they can't > believe that a machine like the 520ST exists. > > You know, it was interesting to read the article in Inforworld (12/2) on > "Christmas Contenders". > "Observers have noted some clear distinctions between > the Amiga buyer and the Atari 520ST buyer. Although > the ST is the less expensive computer, its typical > buyer is a veteran computer user, according to Martin > Bartholomey, owner of Home Computers Co... > > "We're winning the battle of the techies," says Sam Tramiel > president of Atari..."Hackers are our first customers. > They influence the market and tell their friends." > On the other hand, the current Amiga buyer is likely > to be a first-time computer buyer, says Ed Anderson, vice > president of marketing of The Computer Factory..." > > The question then becomes: why do techies and experience computer > users prefer the 520ST over the higher-priced Amiga? Hmmm. > > I probably planted a bomb. Oh well. > > Aloha, > > -- > Jonathan Spangler > {ihnp4,vortex,dual}!islenet!jons > "On Thursday, the world came to an end." *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) (12/28/85)
In article <4301@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> eric@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Eric Lavitsky) writes: >Wow, you read InfoWorld! - I hear it's a great magazine!... (ahem) The latest issue of InforWorld reviews the Amiga, and is a real detriment to the Amiga. Not only did the article contain several mistakes, but they reviewed version 1.0 of the workbench and kickstart, which we knew had bugs. Now, 1.1 has been out for a few weeks, and I have not really had a whole lot of trouble with the software crashing. My Amiga crashes all the time when I pass extra parameters to function calls, etc., but during normal use, system crashes are rare. InfoWorld also talked mostly about the 256K machine, which is like reviewing a 64K IBM PC. The Amiga is an 8+Megabyte of RAM machine, and those of us who own Amigas are just licking our chops waiting for the equivalent of an AST card. The Amiga with 8+ megabytes and the 68020 should be compared with the IBM AT and MicroVax. InfoWorld did review what they had available, but we who read net.micro.amiga and net.micro.atari seem to be better reporters of the state of the Amiga (and ST as well) than the "Professionals" at InfoWorld. I hope to see another review next week, since the new software is so much better. Also, InfoWorld did not mention any of the software packages that I saw several weeks ago at Computer Attic, when I bought my Amiga almost 3 weeks ago! Yes, they probably have some lead time, but to write TWO FULL PAGES about a machine that they couldn't even try any software out for, and then make statements like "As an aside, we forsee a flood of bad software written for the Amiga by programmers unaccustomed to multi-tasking programs..." is pretty stupid, if you ask me. They also put an "Editor's note:" at the bottom saying how they had a "lack of cooperation from Commodore." I wouldn't expect Commodore to cooperate with InfoWorld because of several degrading articles (John C. Dvorak, and others) about Commodore and Amiga. Also, the Amiga was given 2 terminals. Now to the defense of Infoworld, they did have some nice things to say about how Intuition was as friendly and easy to use as the MAC. Please note, this article is very comparable to Infoworld's, except turned around so that InfoWorld is the one getting roasted. InfoWorld did not even mention a single piece of software that we have all been seeing and hearing about since they were anounced and demonstrated at the June launch. Off the top of my head, I can think of Flight Simulator, the digitizer, perhaps 10 different Electronic Arts titles, Chang Labs (InfoWorld gave their IBM PC software good reviews) has some business-type software (I saw an accounting and general ledger package), or any of the other products demonstrated at the launch. Where was InfoWorld at the launch? Didn't they see anything then? Couldn't they call Chang Labs and ask for software for evaluation? Couldn't they do any investigation at all? Another quote: "Judging from the number of beta-test programs floating around, we can expect to get a chance to judge the software side of the Amiga system a lot sooner than we could when the Macintosh was first introduced." Well, in June, the Amiga had more software packages announced (with real live developers working on the stuff) than any other PC in history - including the Mac, IBM PC, Atari ST, Atari 800, Commodore 64, et al. I have been reading InfoWorld every week for a couple of years, and never noticed anything like this before. Typically their articles are real good. In the same issue as the Amiga review, they review Apple's new 20MB hard disk. It costs $1500 and is "two or three" times faster than the floppy disk (oh boy, now it only takes 1 minute to load a word processor instead of 3 minutes) and they (InfoWorld) gave it 3 (count 'em) terminals. Sounds kind of biased (just kind of) to me... Sorry to be so long winded... /mykes
dh@vax135.UUCP (David N. Horn) (12/31/85)
This is the second posting that I have seen that implies that the Amiga uses a 68020 (32-bit) CPU. I thought it used a 68000 (16-bit). Am I wrong? Dave Horn, AT&T Bell Labs.
mahar@fear.UUCP (mahar) (12/31/85)
In article <157@ism780c.UUCP>, tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) writes: > By the way, does anyone know what the Atari arcade game people have > against DEC? I am refering to the game _Major Havoc_, where one fights > against the Evil Vaxxxian Empire, from the planet of Maynard. Atari Coin-op people don't really have anything against DEC. One of the programmers on the Mojor Hovoc project added that one day when the 780 they were running on was exceptionally slow. The higher ups didn't know what Evil Vaxxion Empire ment so they left it in the game.
hes@ecsvax.UUCP (Henry Schaffer) (12/31/85)
> This is the second posting that I have seen that implies that the Amiga uses a > 68020 (32-bit) CPU. I thought it used a 68000 (16-bit). Am I wrong? > Dave Horn, AT&T Bell Labs. It's just people discussing what a wonderful machine this would be *IF* it had a 68020 and 8+Mb of RAM, and especially how much better this would be than today's ST. 1/2 :-) --henry schaffer