[net.micro.amiga] Re : Commodore and ST debate

ditzel@ssc-bee.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) (12/24/85)

Several Points of Comparison in the Amiga vs ST Debate

>1) The official Atari price of the ST system that has received so much 
> praise in this mailing list is actually $1798 (799 for the monochrome
>version, plus 999 for the color version). Each version will do things
that the other will not, and it is usually the composite of these
>functions that is represented as the overall capability of the ST.
>Atari has not to my knowledge offered to sell the monitors other than
>as part of a package deal. (I personally tend to favor the monochrome
>version - it seems to be best for the things the ST does the best.)

shear nonsense. if i desired a color atari monitor it could be had.
the current problem is the high demand for STs. 
some dealers have also unbundled the atari package.

>2) 
.....
>     With the ST, there is a choice between optimized color graphics
>and optimized text that must be made at purchase time. The standard
>Amiga monitor is reported to do a good job for both graphics and text,
>and other monitors (including cheap monochrome monitors) can be used

???this is pretty interesting given the observations on the net regarding
Atari versus Commodore monitors. My own observation is that the showfloor
mode for the Amiga really doesn't do the machine justice. Text on BOTH
machines with their respective color monitors is no worse/better.
And yes you are probably right Amiga would probably be better off with
a cheap monochrome monitor for text.

>3) It is to be expected that one would find a point in time in which 
>there is more software commercially available for the ST than for the
>Amiga, since the ST is several months ahead in its development and
>marketing.

I agree with this.  Tho' i should mention that at
a local Atari dealer in Seattle, a fellow who had bought an Amiga
traded it in for an 520ST. A straight trade. The store is using it
as a point of comparison for shoppers. The guy claimed that he could
get absolutely no software for it.  Naturally the dealer was more
than willing to take it off his hands.  

>4) Commodore/Amiga has been fairly open and honest about the internal
>structure and functioning of their machine, while by comparison 
>Atari has been relatively secretive (specific examples furnished upon 
>request). 
more nonsense.
From all the various postings in this net group...Commodore hasn't 
exactly been a source of openness. Re: Developer's kits.. (are you
a REAL developer).  I got my ST development kit from Atari...it comes
with software and  hardware schematics and phone numbers to call 
if i need help. They
are currently working on a comprehensive software/hardware manual with
lots of examples.

sounds really closed and dishonest to me. Why don't you get your facts
straight. 

>5) I have not heard much about ST expandability in terms of processors,
>more memory, etc. The Amiga was designed with such expandability in

Various people are working on 32 bit coprocessors...etc

>6) Most of the Dhrystone benchmarks run on the Amiga (showing slightly
>slower execution than the ST) have been run with the processor using
>(i am curious what drystones you looked at ... )
>the same memory as the specialized chips. With an expanded memory
>space (which could be desired for its own sake) performance should be
>enhanced, especially for graphics-intensive applications. A faster
>processor (the 68020) should give a greater increase in performance.
>What should really give floating point performance a boost is the
>addition of a good floating point processor chip (of which the 68881
>is a logical choice for the 68000 family). I expect a 68881 to be
>available for the Amiga long before the ST gets one (if ever).

i agree faster processors would probably boost performance.  Though
it is interesting that when the ST out-performs the Amiga you are
so willing to go the route of "Yeah ...out in the future.... Amiga
will do such and such better"...the future may hold nothing but
chapter 11 for both companies...so i would value the moment more.