aer@alice.UucP (y) (09/21/85)
I have gone into the wilderness of computer stores and seen the Amiga.
I'm no electrical engineer, so I can give a more "userly" reaction to
the Amiga, if you feel it's worth anything.
But first, the store had no one with Amiga experience, no manuals, and
the only software was the kickstart disk and the demo disk. No mouse either,
so I was stuck in the VERY MS-DOS like commandline interpreter.
Damn, how the commandline interpreter worked like an IBM or workalike.
Same dumb, hard to use command structure, albeit with several corrections,
like DOS commands available from within the unreasonably slow ABasiC.
It was preliminary software, so I expect Basic to speed up *muchlike.*
640x200 text is nothing special at all. And the way it was done, it looked
like a plain old (in colorboard mode) IBM PC. They should be able to
do better than that. This is surely no replacement for the Macintosh. The
hardware seems better, but no one has yet outdone Apple's famed Quickdraw
software.
As for interlaced (400 pixel vertical resolution) graphics (on the Amiga
monitor) ...well... trash it. It looked as if we were looking at the otherwise
amazing digitized 640x400 mandrill through a filter of bubbly ginger ale.
The flicker was badawfulyuckterrible. I hope that was only the monitor in
bad shape. I hope. Anyone able to reply to that?
Could someone post a complete list of:
1) What software (like user-oriented, not development systems) is available, especially word processors and the like?
2) Compatible hardware, especially printers?
(Post on the net-- it's general interest.)
Nothing but thanks in advance,
d. Rosenberg
----------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Rosenberg @ Murray Hill ATT/BTL /\ uucp: ...!ihnp4!alice!aer
"My opinions are my own." (Please send mail TO DAN)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pwd@pid.UUCP (Philip W. Dalrymple) (09/26/85)
In article <4353@alice.UUCP> aer@alice.UucP (y) writes: > >As for interlaced (400 pixel vertical resolution) graphics (on the Amiga >monitor) ...well... trash it. It looked as if we were looking at the otherwise >amazing digitized 640x400 mandrill through a filter of bubbly ginger ale. >The flicker was badawfulyuckterrible. I hope that was only the monitor in >bad shape. I hope. Anyone able to reply to that? > I saw the Amiga in the the offices of Amiga here in Atlanta Including a MacPaint like program (the one the person demoing had a real handle on) the software looked to me to be faster than MacPaint (but this was nether a side by side demo nor do the packages have the same "commands" [BTW what are the things you do with a mouse]). The monitor looked very good to me for a $3000 system . > > -- Philip Dalrymple akgua!pid!pwd 404/429-8266 (voice)