[comp.sys.ibm.pc] Amstrad PC1512 CONFUSION - HELP!!!

Usenet_area_"Cs.I.Pc"@watmath.waterloo.edu (01/08/88)

From Usenet: codas!novavax!augusta!bs
From: bs@augusta.UUCP (Burch Seymour)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Amstrad PC1512 CONFUSION - HELP!!!
Keywords: compatable
Message-ID: <832@augusta.UUCP>
Date: 8 Jan 88 13:57:52 GMT
Organization: Gould CSD, Fort Lauderdale, FL
Lines: 22

I've been thinking of getting an Amstrad PC 1512 and had corresponded with
a person on the net who has one. His information is VERY different from
the recent postings. Now I'm confused. Here's some of the comments I
got from him:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1512 comes with either mono or color (woops) colour monitor - the mono
version being able to display colours as shades. Both have CGA (colour
graphics adapter) compatability and are completely IBM compatible.

Overall, the Amstrads are about as compatible as clones get. Even the most
hardware specific programs seems to run, and there are no problems with
the major applications (1-2-3, Wordstar etc.). Programs such as Side-kick 
and Flight Simulator work without any problems.

Hence you can easily drive a Tandon 20Mb Hardcard - like the one I use.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

So either the early units had problems that were fixed or one of these
folks is mistaken. Anyone else who owns or uses one care to take a side
here?

-bs-

--- via UGate v1.6
 * Origin: watmath (221/163)

bs@augusta.UUCP (Burch Seymour) (01/08/88)

I've been thinking of getting an Amstrad PC 1512 and had corresponded with
a person on the net who has one. His information is VERY different from
the recent postings. Now I'm confused. Here's some of the comments I
got from him:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1512 comes with either mono or color (woops) colour monitor - the mono
version being able to display colours as shades. Both have CGA (colour
graphics adapter) compatability and are completely IBM compatible.

Overall, the Amstrads are about as compatible as clones get. Even the most
hardware specific programs seems to run, and there are no problems with
the major applications (1-2-3, Wordstar etc.). Programs such as Side-kick 
and Flight Simulator work without any problems.

Hence you can easily drive a Tandon 20Mb Hardcard - like the one I use.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

So either the early units had problems that were fixed or one of these
folks is mistaken. Anyone else who owns or uses one care to take a side
here?

-bs-

med@druhi.ATT.COM (DrapalME) (01/12/88)

In article <832@augusta.UUCP>, bs@augusta.UUCP (Burch Seymour) writes:
> I've been thinking of getting an Amstrad PC 1512 and had corresponded with
> a person on the net who has one. His information is VERY different from
> the recent postings. Now I'm confused. Here's some of the comments I
> got from him:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The 1512 comes with either mono or color (woops) colour monitor - the mono
> version being able to display colours as shades. Both have CGA (colour
> graphics adapter) compatability and are completely IBM compatible.
> 
> Overall, the Amstrads are about as compatible as clones get. Even the most
> hardware specific programs seems to run, and there are no problems with
> the major applications (1-2-3, Wordstar etc.). Programs such as Side-kick 
> and Flight Simulator work without any problems.
> 
> Hence you can easily drive a Tandon 20Mb Hardcard - like the one I use.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> So either the early units had problems that were fixed or one of these
> folks is mistaken. Anyone else who owns or uses one care to take a side
> here?
> 
> -bs-

	Well, I am know a new owner of an Amstrad PC1512DD.  I've been
posting information regarding the machine since I've been looking at it,
and have also seen the differing opinions here - seems that maybe the
machine is different on the other side of the "big lake".  Postings from
Europe seem to consistently indicate problems with compatability, but
articles that I've read in PC World, as well as hands-on experience seem
to indicate that these rumors are unfounded here in the US.

	First off, someone mentioned that the PC slots and/or machine itself
was not "hardware compatable".  I proposed using an off-the-shelf hard disk
and controller instead of purchasing the Amstrad version which uses "1.5
slots".  Well, this weekend I tried two different hard drives and two different
controllers *with NO compatability problems whatsoever*.  Simply installed
the controllers, drives, ran fdisk then formatted the drives.  They function
flawlessly!

	Secondly, someone mentioned that there were some "graphics
incompatabilities".  I took this with a grain of salt, since most articles,
including the one in PC World, indicate that the Amstrad is the most compatable
PC they've tested in a long time.  In fact, PC World tried it with some
program (midnight pinball something-or-other) which they claimed was very
graphics dependent, and that they were surprised that it worked perfectly.
Though I can't claim that I've tested everything, the Amstrad PC graphics
seem to be very compatable (I've tried a few games, and they run fine).

	So far, I've been very happy with the machine, and for the small
price tag it is a very good XT clone.  I'm a little concerned about the
full-time turbo, but other than that I have no complaints (well, just one
itsy-bitsy gripe - the height of the case will not accomodate taller than
average controller cards, one of the hard drive cards is about half an inch
too tall to replace the slot cover).

	If you have any more questions, or hear any more rumors that I could
attempt to dispell, please feel free to send them to me.

					Myron Drapal
					AT&T Denver
					..!ihnp4!druhi!med

mrh@camcon.uucp (Mark Hughes) (01/18/88)

in article <2562@druhi.ATT.COM>, med@druhi.ATT.COM (DrapalME) says:
> ...and have also seen the differing opinions here - seems that maybe the
> machine is different on the other side of the "big lake".  Postings from
> Europe seem to consistently indicate problems with compatability, but
> articles that I've read in PC World, as well as hands-on experience seem
> to indicate that these rumors are unfounded here in the US.

No, I think we just seem to have more people over here that are happy to
propagate rumours and third hand gossip when they simply are unaware of
the facts.

(I have both a very early UK PC1512 and the current PC1640 and can only
say that they are as compatible as the reports indicate that the USA
"versions" are - I doubt that there is any significant difference in
the machines regardless of your position w.r.t. the pond.)

Its a shame that a company that has done so much for the UK micro 
market as Amstrad should suffer so much blatently incorrect bad 
publicity. When they do step out of line, they do (deservedly)
get hammered, but they also seem to get a lot of unjustified
bad press. 

THE AMSTRAD PC1512/1640 ARE GOOD VALUE AND ABOVE ALL HIGHLY 
COMPATIBLE CLONES.

(PS. I was the chap that the originator of the "CONFUSION
posting", Burch Seymour corresponded with. Hope your mind is
now at rest once more Burch!)
-- 
-------------------  UUCP:    mrh@camcon.uucp  / ..uunet!mcvax!ukc!camcon!mrh
|   Mark Hughes   |  Telex:   265871 ref:MAG70076
|(Compware . CCL) |  BT Gold: 72:MAG70076
-------------------  Teleph:  Cambridge (UK) (0)223-358855

jeroen@cogpsi.UUCP (Jeroen Raaymakers) (01/22/88)

In article <2562@druhi.ATT.COM> med@druhi.ATT.COM (DrapalME) writes:
>	Secondly, someone mentioned that there were some "graphics
>incompatabilities".  I took this with a grain of salt, since most articles,
>including the one in PC World, indicate that the Amstrad is the most compatable
>PC they've tested in a long time.  In fact, PC World tried it with some
>program (midnight pinball something-or-other) which they claimed was very
>graphics dependent, and that they were surprised that it worked perfectly.
>Though I can't claim that I've tested everything, the Amstrad PC graphics
>seem to be very compatable (I've tried a few games, and they run fine).
>
>
I have been using the PC1512 for about 10 months now and haven't had many 
problems. However, of all the programs that I tried, there were a couple that
did not work properly. Two of these were: 'Night Mission Pinball' and
'Pitstop II'. In both cases there is a distinct problem with the graphics. 
(The programs do not crash but the display is not what is should be). 
I assume that the former program is the one referred to in that article. 
Hence, I was a bit amazed to read this. There are several possibilities:
1.  I am using the Schneider PC1512 (the brand name under which the Amstrad
    computers are being sold in Germany and the Netherlands). There could 
    be a small difference between the two versions (unlikely).
2.  The program referred to in the article (midnight pinball) is not the 
    same as Night Mission Pinball. Does anyone have info on this? Has 
    anyone else tried these programs on a PC1512?
3.  There is something wrong with the hardware of my machine that causes
    the problem. Suggestions?

I would be very interested to hear of anyone that has experience with
these programs on a PC1512. Please e-mail to the address below. If the
responses shed some new light on the issue of the graphics compatibility,
I will summarize to the net.

===========================================================================
Jeroen G.W. Raaijmakers
TNO Institute for Perception
P.O. Box 23
3769 ZG Soesterberg
The Netherlands
e-mail: tnosoes!cogpsi!jeroen@mcvax.uucp
     or tnosoes!cogpsi!jeroen@mcvax.cwi.nl

===========================================================================

ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn) (01/22/88)

In article <2562@druhi.ATT.COM> med@druhi.ATT.COM (DrapalME) writes:
>> [after quoting ALL of a previous posting - EDIT PLEASE ]
> Well, I am know a new owner of an Amstrad PC1512DD...
> ...I have no complaints (well, just one
>itsy-bitsy gripe - the height of the case will not accomodate taller than
>average controller cards, one of the hard drive cards is about half an inch
>too tall to replace the slot cover).

Quoi?  Either the machine accepts XT height compatible cards or it does not!
Is the card you tried an 8-bit but AT height card?  You shouldn't expect it
to accept AT height cards.

Ray Dunn.  ..philabs!micomvax!ray