AAW151%URIACC.BITNET@brownvm.brown.edu (Andy Patrizio) (10/14/90)
The other day I was visiting my former place of employment, a computer dealersh
ip, and my old boss had some unpleasant news to show.
Because he was under non-disclosure, he ordered me to keep my mouth shut. So, I
will only say this; Apple finally got on the stick when it came to prices. Rem
ember the names "Macintosh Classic," "Macintosh SI" and "Macintosh LC." Well, y
ou'll know two of those names come Monday, the 15th, and it will NOT be good ne
ws for Commodore and Amiga owners everywhere.
Maybe the Mac Classic will be what it takes to light a fire under CBM, I dunno
. But it is one HELL of a deal.
Teasingly yours...
---
Andy Patrizio Bitnet: aaw151@uriacc.bitnet
B100C Ellery Internet: aaw151%uriacc.uri.edu@brownvm.brown.edu
URI Usenet: simon@sbs.bbs.com
Kingston, RI 02881 or... uunet!rayssd!idsvax!andypo @ idsvax.ids.com
(401) 782-2758
---
rip_off()
{
NeXT = (Amiga * steroids)^3 + $6000;
}
---a763@mindlink.UUCP (Scott Busse) (10/14/90)
You mean they got a new operating system for the Mac? Or they just changed the name of the same old thing, and made it cheaper :) * Scott Busse email: O O O_ _ ___ ..... * CIS 73040,2114 ||| /|\ /\ O/\_ / O )=| * USENET: l | | |\ / \ /\ _\ * a763@mindlink.UUCP May the frames be with you... \
dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com (Dennis Francis Heffernan) (10/14/90)
RE Apple prices I have seen the prices for the Mac Classic and the Mac LC. I forget where, and I forget the exact numbers, but I wasn't impressed. If price is the bottom line, you really can't beat an A500 with a stick. dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com ...uunet!tronsbox!dfrancis GEnie: D.HEFFERNAN1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I don't understand why you make such a big deal out of everything...haven't you learned; if it's not happenning to me it's not important?" -Murphy Brown
ragg0270@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Alan Gerber) (10/15/90)
OK. Here's what I saw on the news wire: Mac Classic $999. 9-in BW screen. 68000 processor. Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. Not a very complete discription, but that's all the story said.
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (10/15/90)
In article <1990Oct15.132313.24705@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ragg0270@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Alan Gerber) writes: >OK. Here's what I saw on the news wire: > >Mac Classic $999. 9-in BW screen. 68000 processor. > >Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. > >Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. > Everyone, before you start saying that these prices suck they are list price, not educational. -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu *Iraq += *Kuwait; NumCountries--; and by popular demand... free(Kuwait);
rrd@hpfcso.HP.COM (Ray Depew) (10/16/90)
> Mac Classic
Can you say "excess inventory"? I knew you could.
Don't be fooled. Mac Classic isn't like Coke Classic. Coke Classic was
brought back by popular demand, after the Mfr. discontinued it and everyone
clamored to have it back. (Pepsi was all set to come out with a "Coke
Classic clone" -- well, read the book "The Other Guy Blinked: How Pepsi
Won The Cola Wars.")
Anyway: The Mac Classic isn't much more than a dressed-up original Mac.
(Which original Mac? I don't remember.) It had so many system limitations
that nobody was sad to see it get replaced by all the later models. It's
obsolete and underpowered by today's standards, and isn't really worth the
money, when $1500 (or even $1000!) will buy you so much more.
Chances are that Apple is sitting on several million $$ of old inventory and
needs a good way to get rid of it. Do you remember when the Amiga was
introduced, and there were stacks of C64's sitting in the center aisle of
K-mart?
Don't be fooled. Your Amiga is still worth what you paid for it.
Ray
rrd@hpfitst1.hp.comavenger@wpi.WPI.EDU (Samuel Joseph Pullara) (10/16/90)
In article <1990Oct15.132313.24705@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ragg0270@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Alan Gerber) writes: >OK. Here's what I saw on the news wire: > >Mac Classic $999. 9-in BW screen. 68000 processor. > >Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. > >Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. > > >Not a very complete discription, but that's all the story said. I thought that the announcement was going to hurt the Amiga market... At those prices I don't think they will sway anyone that has decided to buy an Amiga already and very few that have not yet made a decision. -- /------------------------------------------------------------------------\ | Sam Pullara, Undergraduate Physics Worcester Polytechnic Institute | | avenger@wpi.wpi.edu (c) 1990 Avenger Publications | |______________-All my opinions were expressed or implied.-______________|
rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (10/16/90)
In article <1990Oct15.132313.24705@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ragg0270@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Alan Gerber) writes: >OK. Here's what I saw on the news wire: > >Mac Classic $999. 9-in BW screen. 68000 processor. Street Price around $700. Nothing to say here, A500 is still better. (except that it doesnt have a built in SCSI port) But Im guessing that after you buy 3 or 4 Mac Software packages you'll have already surpassed the price of the classic. >Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Are you sure? From what I read, the microbytes newswire said 'It comes with QuickDraw routines built into Rom.' This doesn't mean it has a 24bit color board, only that it has the software to use the color card. Also, the A3000 clearly beats this. (you have to buy a keyboard) and its only a 68020. >Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. ^^^^^^^^ I just read that WITH the monitor and keyboard, the total STREET price will be $3600. Also, its only 20mhz, and its a 40meg HD I beleive. (I could be wrong) Anyway it only has ONE expansion slot. Apple was quoted as saying 'normal Mac users only need 1 slot, they usually only own a video card.' This is nothing to worry about, the A3000 easily beats the IIsi for price and performance. -- "NeXTs are useless... Mac's are irrelevent.. IBM's are futile. Amiga's,however, are quite nice!" -Capt Jeal-Luc Amiga | Flames to /dev/null Ray Cromwell rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu | // AMIGA! \\ "Your software will adapt to service ours!"| \X/ AMIGA! \X/
oleg@crash.cts.com (Oleg Rovner) (10/16/90)
In article <1990Oct15.150005.4396@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >In article <1990Oct15.132313.24705@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ragg0270@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Alan Gerber) writes: >>OK. Here's what I saw on the news wire: >> >>Mac Classic $999. 9-in BW screen. 68000 processor. >> >>Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. >> >>Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. >> > Everyone, before you start saying that these prices suck >they are list price, not educational. > -- Ethan > >Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu > >*Iraq += *Kuwait; >NumCountries--; > >and by popular demand... > >free(Kuwait); Ahh, go ahead and say that they suck. The prices that I have on a flier I got from the UCSD bookstore listing MSRPs for Mac products and comparing them to Intel systems (gee, no Amiga comparisons) are as follows: McClassic $1,499.00 SE/30 $3,498.00 MacLC (with an '020 :-) $3,098.00 (with built in sampler at 22KHz or 11KHz, mono sound, 1 CPU slot (gee, for only another grand you'll be able to get an '030 :-), 8bits/pixel at 512x384, 4bits/pixel at 640x480, unnamed "expansion options" available for graphics) MacIIsi ('030 @ 20 MHz) $5,097.00 (built in sound sampler 22/11 KHz, stereo output, 8bits/pixel at 640x480, 4bits/pixel at 640x870, 1 NuBus OR CPU slot). I saw the mahines today, played around with them for an hour or so, and they are NOT impressive. Mac Classic is your basic repackaged Mac Plus, LC has an '020 in it (@ 16 MHz), IIsi is nice, but the pricing is Apple to the core (BTW the bookstore folks said that Mac Classics won't be available until next Monday due to a bug in the OS on the units they received; and that students should expect some discounts, but not "big huge ones"). OR ***************************************************************************** I don't see how the refresh rate can be slow on a 16 or 25 MHz 68030 CPU. Sure, the CPU takes on a big burden, but it's a fast CPU. The 8 MHz Amiga does great color animation and game-play - I would think a 16 or 25 MHz 68030 color Mac would at least be its equal, don't you? --a MacIIseries owner on c.s.mac.games --
S36666WB%ETSUACAD.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu (Brian Wright) (10/16/90)
On 15 Oct 90 13:23:13 GMT you said: >OK. Here's what I saw on the news wire: > >Mac Classic $999. 9-in BW screen. 68000 processor. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Ya know, this sounds like what the original Mac was supposed to be priced before Apple marketing got ahold of it. Maybe they are trying to make up for lost time. Just think about this for a minute. $999 for a B/W 68000 computer and $600-700 for a Color Amiga 500 w/ a 68000. Hmmmm. I doubt that software prices on the Mac will drop significantly because of the Classic or the LC. >Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. How about 16 mhz Amiga 3000 w/ 68030, 2 megs and 50M HD for $3000 also? >Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. Ok. So Amiga doesn't have a configuration like this. But the 25 mhz with 2 megs and a 50 meg HD is probably around that price or lower. > >Not a very complete discription, but that's all the story said. BTW, do any of the above Mac systems have a math coprocessor? Or Slots? Do they have SuperDrives? How expandable are they? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ======================================================================= ||NeXT- (nekst) N. The only PC to have sold less than 10,000 units and || || not be considered a flop. || ||------------------------------------------/ /------------------------|| ||---Brian Wright | / / || ||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga || ||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! || =======================================================================
WHE46@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) (10/16/90)
The new MACs are definately trouble for Commodore. The original
MAC II was trouble for Commodore, and it cost over three times more than a
similar Amiga system. The new MAC LC brings the same capbilities as the
MAC II for less than the price of a similar Amiga system. It is the
Amiga that is the more expensive one now, and unless something drastic
is done soon, the Amiga is in big trouble. Commodore did not exactly
succeed against the MAC II when it cost more than the Amiga. Commodore
will NOT succeed against the MAC II now that it costs less.
This situation reminds me of the John Deer commercials in which a
bunch of company employees are touting the capabilities of John Deer
tractors, with the executive asking "What are we going to do about it?"
In this case, Commodore is the one looking at all that the MAC IISI and
MAC LC can do, and asking "What are we going to do about it?" I
don't know what Commodore is going to do about it. Like the pathetic
company in the commercial, Commodore is in a rut that I don't think
they will EVER emerge from. They now find themselves producing systems
with weaker graphics than any other system in the industry, at higher
prices than most of these other systems. What is Commodore going to
do about it? Like the pathetic company, they will probably try some
hacks to improve their products, like non-standard video hardware with
clunky new OS hacks to attempt to get it to work with a few programs.
This won't stand up well, though, against the MAC which has totally
standardized, superior video, with an OS that has had device-independent
video from day one. "What are we going to do about it?" Go out of
business, I guess.
-MB-rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (10/16/90)
In article <33589@nigel.ee.udel.edu> WHE46@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > > The new MACs are definately trouble for Commodore. The original >MAC II was trouble for Commodore, and it cost over three times more than a >similar Amiga system. The new MAC LC brings the same capbilities as the >MAC II for less than the price of a similar Amiga system. It is the >Amiga that is the more expensive one now, and unless something drastic >is done soon, the Amiga is in big trouble. Commodore did not exactly >succeed against the MAC II when it cost more than the Amiga. Commodore >will NOT succeed against the MAC II now that it costs less. [blah blah, more defeatist junk deleted] Marc, the Mac was NEVER trouble for Commodore when compared with Power vs Price. The Amiga always comes out on top. What the Mac has that the Amiga doesn't is advertising. Apple is so good at brain washing, that even you, an Amiga owner, is convinced that the Macs are the best thing since sliced bread. Why don't you step away from the advertising, and price, and just LOOK at those systems hardware wise. The Classic is nothing more than an old repackaged Mac. This is simular to what Commodore did with the C64C (new case, lower price, same old hardware.) The LC is nothing more than a slow enhancement to the classic, with color. And the SI is just the price the IIci should have had all along. Only Apple can get away with selling 40mhz 68030 systems for $7000 (Mac IIfx). These new Macs are just a symbol that the idiots at Apple finally realized that you can't overprice computers by 3 times the hardware base cost. Marc, here are some suggestions for you. 1) Find out the price and specs of the Amiga 3000-25/50 2) Find out all the specs on the IIsi and what it costs with monitor and keyboard. 3) compute the average amiga software price. 4) compute the average mac software price. Now plot these on a Power vs Price scale. What you will find, is what everyone new all along. The Amiga is still the better buy. Whether a computer can display 256 colors out of 16million or not, does not determine its success. > -MB- -- "NeXTs are useless... Mac's are irrelevent.. IBM's are futile. Amiga's,however, are quite nice!" -Capt Jeal-Luc Amiga | Flames to /dev/null Ray Cromwell rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu | // AMIGA! \\ "Your software will adapt to service ours!"| \X/ AMIGA! \X/
cwpjr@cbnewse.att.com (clyde.w.jr.phillips) (10/16/90)
In article <271809a8-2f3e.1comp.sys.amiga-1@tronsbox.xei.com>, dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com (Dennis Francis Heffernan) writes: > I have seen the prices for the Mac Classic and the Mac LC. I forget > where, and I forget the exact numbers, but I wasn't impressed. > If price is the bottom line, you really can't beat an A500 with a > stick. Especially a JOYSTICK!
cwpjr@cbnewse.att.com (clyde.w.jr.phillips) (10/16/90)
In article <9010020@hpfcso.HP.COM>, rrd@hpfcso.HP.COM (Ray Depew) writes: > > Mac Classic > > Can you say "excess inventory"? I knew you could. > > Don't be fooled. Mac Classic isn't like Coke Classic. Coke Classic was I agree! This is all repackaging & marketing hype. Wish we could advertize as well as IBM/APPLE. > > Anyway: The Mac Classic isn't much more than a dressed-up original Mac. > (Which original Mac? I don't remember.) It had so many system limitations > that nobody was sad to see it get replaced by all the later models. It's > obsolete and underpowered by today's standards, and isn't really worth the > money, when $1500 (or even $1000!) will buy you so much more. > > Chances are that Apple is sitting on several million $$ of old inventory and > needs a good way to get rid of it. Do you remember when the Amiga was > introduced, and there were stacks of C64's sitting in the center aisle of > K-mart? > > Don't be fooled. Your Amiga is still worth what you paid for it. And just like PCjr too many will buy these things and abandon them... Too bad they don't cost c-64 prices. The mac classic will be the worst, It probably will dog the expensive programs what with max expandability of 4mb and no better than a 68k & OS 6.02... Even Hypercrap will kill it!
rwm@atronx.UUCP (Russell McOrmond) (10/16/90)
In a message posted on 16 Oct 90 07:47:40 GMT,
WHE46@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) wrote:
MB>video from day one. "What are we going to do about it?" Go out of
MB>business, I guess.
MB>
MB> -MB-
Question: If you hate the Amiga so much, and believe that the Mac is better
'FOR YOU', then please buy a Mac, and get out of this newsgroup so the rest
of us can go about OUR buisiness. All you have said is Opinion, and opinion
that I can tell you that I myself totally dis-agree with.
A MAC 'should be' half the price of an Amiga with comparable Hardware. WHY?
Operating system, in my mind, is half of a computer -- I've programmed a MAC -
It is TOO restricting, and does not provide the tools that I need.
I guess I'm not your Regular Amiga user, though. I am right now sitting
here on my Amiga 3000, on a 1084 Monitor (Ya, I'm in 640*256 resolution because
I have no need for more), and still don't know if the A3000 generates audio
as I've never plugged my sterio into it. I'm a programmer, and I do a lot of
work with Networking utilities (Hold and Forward networks like UUCP/Fidonet).
For what *I* do, the Amiga is the best that I can get.
(P.S. Do you know anything about what DMA is, do you know what CHIP Vs FAST
bus means as far as speed? Have you looked into the Zoro III specs? Do you
ALWAYS just look at the surface, and have no concepts of what is going on
inside?)
Commodore may be 'in trouble' with the new machines. It only proves one
thing though:
It's not the capabilities of the machine that sell a computer, but a
salesman that sells a computer.
Commodore does not have to upgrade their machines. They have to upgrade their
marketing strategies.
---
Opinions expressed in this message are my Own. My Employer does not even
know what these networks ARE.
Russell McOrmond rwm@atronx.UUCP {fts1,alzabo}!atronx!rwm
FidoNet 1:163/109 Net Support: (613) 230-2282
Amiga-Fidonet Support 1:1/109R38@psuvm.psu.edu (Marc Rifkin) (10/17/90)
In article <11393@life.ai.mit.edu>, rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) says: > Marc, the Mac was NEVER trouble for Commodore when compared with >Power vs Price. The Amiga always comes out on top. What the Mac has >that the Amiga doesn't is advertising. Apple is so good at brain >washing, that even you, an Amiga owner, is convinced that >the Macs are the best thing since sliced bread. Why don't you step >away from the advertising, and price, and just LOOK at those systems >hardware wise. The Classic is nothing more than an old repackaged Mac. ADVERTISING is the key. The Amiga has always been a better designed system than the Mac, still is and probably will be. I have yet to see a Mac do true multitasking (AND all the features that come with multi- taksing), do REAL TIME 30fps COLOR animation (ahem.. MacroMind??), and the list goes on... But all of those facts mean NOTHING unless people are made aware of them and how important they are to those people's lives. I'm glad I made the right choice, and I do everthing possible to make others do so to. And I don't have to use PRICE as a weapon! I don't have to tell people that the Amiga costs three cents to sell them, all I do is run DPaint or the like and they get hooked. Marc Rifkin ... Artist/Adventurer r38@psuvm
pab@po.CWRU.Edu (Pete Babic) (10/17/90)
In a previous article, rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) says: > >>Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Are you sure? From what I read, the microbytes newswire said >'It comes with QuickDraw routines built into Rom.' This doesn't mean >it has a 24bit color board, only that it has the software to use the >color card. I'm pretty sure the new color Macs come with 8 bit color. We have a color Mac ci in our office with 8 bit color which doesn't look any better than a normal high-res amiga color image. Not to mention that the Mac does not come close to an Amiga in animation capabilites. Also, I've seen many Amiga HAM pictures that look better than an 8 bit color Mac. > Also, the A3000 clearly beats this. (you have to buy a keyboard) >and its only a 68020. >>Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. > ^^^^^^^^ > >I just read that WITH the monitor and keyboard, the total STREET >price will be $3600. Also, its only 20mhz, and its a 40meg HD I beleive. >(I could be wrong) You're right, the 80meg HD Mac Si lists for 4,569 (with 5 meg of RAM). > Anyway it only has ONE expansion slot. Apple was quoted as saying >'normal Mac users only need 1 slot, they usually only own a video >card.' Adding to this the Mac LC does not come with any NuBus slots, only a 68020 expansion slot. The Mac Si comes with one expansion slot that's adaptable as either a NuBus or a 68030 slot. Note that you have to buy a Nubus adapter or a 68030 adapter to use this slot. It's useless until you buy the adapter card. The NuBus card goes for $249 dollars and the 68030 slot adapter goes for $199. Just another example of how Apple marketing screws you up the A*S. Also the Mac LC does NOT come standard with a IIe emulator. Its an add on card (taking up the only slot) that's due out in Jan. Price TBA. > This is nothing to worry about, the A3000 easily beats the IIsi >for price and performance. > > >-- >"NeXTs are useless... Mac's are irrelevent.. IBM's are futile. Amiga's,however, >are quite nice!" -Capt Jeal-Luc Amiga | Flames to /dev/null >Ray Cromwell rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu | // AMIGA! \\ >"Your software will adapt to service ours!"| \X/ AMIGA! \X/ > -- /// Pete Babic - pab@po.cwru.edu | /// /\ Integrated Library Systems | \\\ /// /--\MIGA Case Western Reserve University | \\\/// The future is here now!
pab@po.CWRU.Edu (Pete Babic) (10/17/90)
In a previous article, WHE46@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) says: > > The new MACs are definately trouble for Commodore. The original >MAC II was trouble for Commodore, and it cost over three times more than a >similar Amiga system. The new MAC LC brings the same capbilities as the >MAC II for less than the price of a similar Amiga system. It is the >Amiga that is the more expensive one now, and unless something drastic >is done soon, the Amiga is in big trouble. Commodore did not exactly >succeed against the MAC II when it cost more than the Amiga. Commodore >will NOT succeed against the MAC II now that it costs less. > > This situation reminds me of the John Deer commercials in which a >bunch of company employees are touting the capabilities of John Deer >tractors, with the executive asking "What are we going to do about it?" >In this case, Commodore is the one looking at all that the MAC IISI and >MAC LC can do, and asking "What are we going to do about it?" I >don't know what Commodore is going to do about it. Like the pathetic >company in the commercial, Commodore is in a rut that I don't think >they will EVER emerge from. They now find themselves producing systems >with weaker graphics than any other system in the industry, at higher >prices than most of these other systems. What is Commodore going to >do about it? Like the pathetic company, they will probably try some >hacks to improve their products, like non-standard video hardware with >clunky new OS hacks to attempt to get it to work with a few programs. >This won't stand up well, though, against the MAC which has totally >standardized, superior video, with an OS that has had device-independent >video from day one. "What are we going to do about it?" Go out of >business, I guess. > > -MB- > Hey Marc, look at message 46679. Or better yet go buy youself a Mac and start reading comp.sys.mac. I use a Mac at work and I KNOW what the limitations of a Mac are. I may have to use a Mac at work, but I spent my money on an Amiga. When I upgrade it will be to a more powerfull Amiga because IMHO I think its a more powerful and more INTERESTING machine. The new Mac prices are less overpriced than before, but the Amiga still is a better value Compare a B&W 8mhz. Mac Classic to a Color 8mhz A500 with multitasking, superior graphics animation, superior memory expansion, lack of third party afordable printers for the Mac, etc., etc. Similar comparisons can be made between the A3000 and the Mac si. Especially the very poor expandability on the Mac si. An Amiga is still a good value. I would buy another one even if they were more expensive than a Mac because an Amiga is a more capable machine. -- /// Pete Babic - pab@po.cwru.edu | /// /\ Integrated Library Systems | \\\ /// /--\MIGA Case Western Reserve University | \\\/// The future is here now!
hcmutt@hpcll31.HP.COM (Harry Muttart) (10/17/90)
Well they are list prices, but monitors and (for the IIsi) keyboards are extra! I've always been mystified about the way that Apple unbundles machines (ONLY $800 for Apple IIgs (monitor, disks, keyboard, enough memory extra $$)). Still it does close up the $$ issue somewhat for the naive buyer on the computer showroom floor...
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (10/17/90)
In article <11393@life.ai.mit.edu> rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >Whether a computer can display 256 colors out of 16million or not, does >not determine its success. Woah, now. It is also not completely irrelevant. It *will* determine the success of a computer within certain niches. In responding to a closed mind, please do not also close yours -- see a following post.... David Navas navas@sim.berkeley.edu "Excuse my ignorance, but I've been run over by my train of thought." -me
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/17/90)
In <33589@nigel.ee.udel.edu> WHE46@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > The new MACs are definately trouble for Commodore. The original ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Yeah, imagine all the time they're going to waste reading you're posts. -Tom Marc, you need to learn to relax. -- tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites" tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -me
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (10/17/90)
In article <33589@nigel.ee.udel.edu> WHE46@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > The new MACs are definately trouble for Commodore. Demonstrably so: - The new Macs caused another slew of -MB- postings on comp.sys.amiga - Some Commodore employees read comp.sys.amiga - You can figure out the implications >The original MAC II was trouble for Commodore, Probably not as much trouble for Commodore as it was for Apple... > -MB- Well, one good thing. After all these rantings, we'll FINALLY be rid of Mark! See, the argument goes like this. Mark would logically be calling himself a fool if he didn't run out and buy one of the Mac toys. If he does so, he'll be over on comp.sys.mac* annoying Mac devotees. If not, he'll be a self admitted fool hanging around comp.sys.amiga, unable to "show" himself in public. So either way, he must be gone. Next lesson: The useful application of logic to US Politics -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy Standing on the shoulders of giants leaves me cold -REM
S36666WB%ETSUACAD.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu (Brian Wright) (10/17/90)
On 16 Oct 90 07:47:40 GMT you said: > > The new MACs are definately trouble for Commodore. The original ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I doubt that. >MAC II was trouble for Commodore, and it cost over three times more than a Hmmm. I don't think so. I bought my Amiga in '88 around the time the Mac II was introduced. I called a Mac dealer to get a price on the Mac II and the salesman told me, "It's $6000." I was floored. I just couldn't believe a CPU alone could cost that much. I then went to my local Amiga dealer and again was floored. This time by the capabilities v. price. I bought one. People buy Macs and IBMs (mainly) because, "Every person I know has one." or "Because I want to run <insert favorite program name here>." I don't think I have every heard anyone say, "I bought my Mac because it's powerful." That isn't meant to slam the Mac. It's meant as an observation. >similar Amiga system. The new MAC LC brings the same capbilities as the >MAC II for less than the price of a similar Amiga system. It is the >Amiga that is the more expensive one now, and unless something drastic >is done soon, the Amiga is in big trouble. Commodore did not exactly >succeed against the MAC II when it cost more than the Amiga. Commodore >will NOT succeed against the MAC II now that it costs less. Commodore didn't succeed not because of price, rather because the lack of advertising. Apple, on the other hand, is able to produce lots of advertising. Remember, Apple was originally started by Jobs and others. Jobs now has clout in the Computer market. This is one reason people are so willing to invest in a NeXT. Although that isn't to say the NeXT isn't a good machine, it just lacks software to make it usable at the moment. > This situation reminds me of the John Deer commercials in which a >bunch of company employees are touting the capabilities of John Deer >tractors, with the executive asking "What are we going to do about it?" >In this case, Commodore is the one looking at all that the MAC IISI and >MAC LC can do, and asking "What are we going to do about it?" I >don't know what Commodore is going to do about it. Like the pathetic >company in the commercial, Commodore is in a rut that I don't think >they will EVER emerge from. They now find themselves producing systems >with weaker graphics than any other system in the industry, at higher Well, I wouldn't exactly say that. 4096 colors is still more colors than any standard computer comes with even if it is HAM. Although that is the total palette. You will get better transititions with 8*24 cards, but not the colors on the screen at once. So it's still a trade off. More colors with less palette or less colors with more palette. Either way you still have limitations. >prices than most of these other systems. What is Commodore going to >do about it? Like the pathetic company, they will probably try some >hacks to improve their products, like non-standard video hardware with >clunky new OS hacks to attempt to get it to work with a few programs. >This won't stand up well, though, against the MAC which has totally >standardized, superior video, with an OS that has had device-independent ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It isn't superior it's just different. It has as many limitations by the way that they work it as Amiga does with its system. And the system isn't standardized. If you want more than 8*24 you have to go buy an additional card and drivers for that card. What is the chance that the next MAC user will have such a card? Not to mention that MOST people who own Macs own SEs which are B/W anyway. Amiga started color and still is. >video from day one. "What are we going to do about it?" Go out of >business, I guess. Yes, I guess you can go out of the business. These comments aren't productive. Constructive critisizm is but you have gone beyond that. Here are some of my observations of the Amiga. > > -MB- First, you have to think about what you have said and then compare it to reality. The cold hard facts are as follows: 1) Commodore has managed to sell 2 million Amigas despite ANY other system which includes the Mac, the NeXT (definitely more competative than a Mac), and IBM. It is hardly worth saying that these low cost Macs will be the end of Amiga. 2) The Amiga is CLEARLY the choice for a multimedia machine. The MAC's display system is just TOO non-standard to output good enough NTSC images without premium price. For that matter the same can be said about the IBM too. 3) Software on the Amiga is clearly lower priced than on just about any other system which includes the Mac. 4) The MAC still can't multitask using MAC's OS. 5) The MAC still can't page-flip or do real-time animation with the fluidity that Amiga can. What you don't seem to realize about the Amiga; if you start adding bitplanes to increase colors and the amount of displayable colors, you will no longer be able to page-flip and move those images with all the fluidity that is now available. Also the older Amigas will not be able to upgrade to such a video system (1000 or 500). The 2000 might possibly be able to. The 3000 will have no trouble. What it will probably come to is that you will be required to purchase another NEW Amiga to get such a beast as you want. Also the 68000 based Amiga probably doesn't have enough power to move more than about 8 bitplanes (if it can move that now). That was the whole idea behind HAM. A low cost 12 bitplane solution and still allow moveable graphics. Because of the way the Amiga's graphics system is designed it will be hard for Commodore to break that mold. There are noticable advantages to Amiga's graphics system, while, at the same time, there are disadvantages. The same can be said for about every graphics system on the market including Mac's, NeXT's and IBM's. I can't seem to understand why you bought an Amiga, when all you really wanted was a Mac. If all you are interested in is 8*24 graphics why don't you go buy yourself a Mac IIcx. How about an IBM with a Targa or Vista card. Or why not just go to ILM and buy PIXAR. Then you'll probably nitpick that to death too. I can hear it now. "But I wanted 256 million colors, not 32 million", said in a whiny voice, "and look at that resolution it's just too low". (or however many colors PIXAR is currently able to produce.) :-) And the one thing that everyone has been overlooking. A Mac is a Mac is a Mac. It has always been and will always be. It hasn't changed any by the lowering of the prices. It's the same computer it has always been. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ======================================================================= ||NeXT- (nekst) N. The only PC to have sold less than 10,000 units and || || not be considered a flop. || ||------------------------------------------/ /------------------------|| ||---Brian Wright | / / || ||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga || ||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! || =======================================================================
hamish@waikato.ac.nz (10/17/90)
In article <1990Oct15.132313.24705@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, ragg0270@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Alan Gerber) writes: > OK. Here's what I saw on the news wire: > Heres a few more bits from the apple blurb I got yesterday. (Isn't it wonderful being the first in the world!) > Mac Classic $999. 9-in BW screen. 68000 processor. > Equivalent to Mac SE. Ugly as sin with a curved front, 1 ADB port 1Meg RAM, External disk port, 2 serial ports, sound output port. Can have internal 40Meg HD. Available yesterday (16 Oct) > Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. > The low cost colour machine. 2 Meg RAM std. 16Mhz 68020 256 colours, expandable to 32,000. No maths processor, no slots without optional expansion board. No MMU? Doesn't mention A/UX Released yesterday (16 Oct). Available January 1991 > Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. > 20Mhz with 68882. Available yesterday. > > Not a very complete discription, but that's all the story said. Over here the price for a IIsi (the only one that would even compare to a 3000) at education prices is more than the retail for a 3000 (@25Mhz). The classic is dearer than the 500 still, and is only b/w. There are only 7 m/c's left in the stable now, and they are... Classic SE/30 Portable LC IIsi IIci IIfx All others are deleted, at least according to this pamphlet. -- ============================================================================== | Hamish Marson | Internet hamish@waikato.ac.nz | | Computer Support Person | Phone (071)562889 xt 8181 | | Computer Science Department | Amiga 3000 for ME! | | University of Waikato | | ============================================================================== |Disclaimer: Anything said in this message is the personal opinion of the | | finger hitting the keyboard & doesn't represent my employers | | opinion in any way. (ie we probably don't agree) | ==============================================================================
bard@jessica.stanford.edu (David Hopper) (10/17/90)
In article <33589@nigel.ee.udel.edu> WHE46@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > > The new MACs are definately trouble for Commodore. Perhaps. Judging by 8 months of your articles, however, you are *no* market analyst. Just sit back and see what happens. >The original >MAC II was trouble for Commodore, and it cost over three times more than a >similar Amiga system. This did not stop Commodore from selling 2 million machines, Marc. The first million sold in a shorter amount of time than the first million Macs did. >...It is the >Amiga that is the more expensive one now, and unless something drastic >is done soon, the Amiga is in big trouble. Commodore did not exactly >succeed against the MAC II when it cost more than the Amiga. Commodore >will NOT succeed against the MAC II now that it costs less. Hm. You've got some pretty gross generalizations here, Marc. The new machines are in no way similar to a Mac II. They will have an entirely different market. Institutions probably will not want them due to their unexpandibility. Individuals may or may not want them, depending on how much exposure the Amiga gets in turn. It is the better machine, hardware- wise. More expansion and *FASTER* at the comparable price. Software is getting there. I find the Amiga community (and we should NEVER overlook this) much more supportive than the Mac community, at least locally and on the net. > > This situation reminds me of the John Deer commercials in which a >bunch of company employees are touting the capabilities of John Deer >tractors, blah, blah, blah... Ah, yes. Indeed. Completely analogous, that. >... What is Commodore going to >do about it? Like the pathetic company, they will probably try some >hacks to improve their products, like non-standard video hardware with >clunky new OS hacks to attempt to get it to work with a few programs. >This won't stand up well, though, against the MAC which has totally >standardized, superior video, with an OS that has had device-independent >video from day one. "What are we going to do about it?" Go out of >business, I guess. I don't think that's true at all. The folks at Commodore know damn well what they are doing, and they've been pretty busy of late. They certainly aren't standing around scratching their collective heads. Marc, you can bet credits to navybeans that NO ONE at Commodore is going to listen to your advice if you couch it in sniveling, contemptuous language. You clearly are not delivering anything constructive in your posts. Sociologically, you are a textbook case; it may be fun to do a study on you. > > -MB- I hope your maniacal need for attention has been, in part at least, satisfied by this posting. Dave Hopper | /// Yesterday, CS. | Academic Info Resources | /// Today, Anthropology. | Mac & UNIX Consultant bard@jessica. | \\\/// | "Somebody get me a job Stanford.EDU | \XX/ Tomorrow... bleeding ulcers. | with a computer I LIKE"
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (10/17/90)
ragg0270@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Alan Gerber) writes: >OK. Here's what I saw on the news wire: >Mac Classic $999. 9-in BW screen. 68000 processor. >Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. >Mac IIsi. $3,769. 68030 processor. 2 Meg RAM. 80 Meg HD. About the only one that comes close to competing with the Amiga is the last one, the Mac IIsi at $3769. It seems comparable to the list price of the 16Mhz Amiga 3000. And it has about the same features. The hard drive is larger though (But is it SCSI?). What kind of graphics resolution and colors do you get with it? Does it include the monitor? The Mac Classic is a joke. Who wants to pay $1000 for an old B&W Mac? It's sounds like it's basically a renamed Mac +. The 500 beats it hands down. They should be selling the Classic for about $400. I can't comment too much on the Mac LC, because I don't remember what the list price of the Amiga 2500/20 is for comparison. Can you still buy a 68020 based Amiga? Most people would probably just go ahead and buy a 2500/30 or a 3000 nowadays. -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
erick@CSUFresno.EDU (Eric Keisler) (10/17/90)
In article <33385@nigel.ee.udel.edu> AAW151%URIACC.BITNET@brownvm.brown.edu (Andy Patrizio) writes: > ... Apple finally got on the stick when it came to prices. Remember >the names "Macintosh Classic," "Macintosh SI" and "Macintosh LC." >... it will NOT be good news for Commodore and Amiga owners everywhere. > Shheeeesh! Are some of us Amiga folks insecure or what? Everytime a new computer is annouced, some Amiga folks start freaking out. The new Macs? SO WHAT? I saw info on these systems weeks ago. The hardware struck me as a massive effort in production cost reduction, cleverly represented as "NEW! IMPROVED!". That is, with the new Apple products, one tends to 'pay a price' for the lower cost (e.g.: expandability). Look, the Amiga has survived in a market filled with all sorts of popular low cost computers. It will continue to. > Maybe the Mac Classic will be what it takes to light a fire under CBM >. But it is one HELL of a deal. Well, from my experience, CBM *is* fired up - have been for a while now. > >Teasingly yours... > > >--- >Andy Patrizio Bitnet: aaw151@uriacc.bitnet >B100C Ellery Internet: aaw151%uriacc.uri.edu@brownvm.brown.edu >URI Usenet: simon@sbs.bbs.com >Kingston, RI 02881 or... uunet!rayssd!idsvax!andypo @ idsvax.ids.com >(401) 782-2758 Eric Keisler CSU Fresno erick@zimmer.ucs.csufresno.edu
rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (10/18/90)
In article <28856@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: > >In article <11393@life.ai.mit.edu> rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >>Whether a computer can display 256 colors out of 16million or not, does >>not determine its success. > >Woah, now. It is also not completely irrelevant. It *will* determine the >success of a computer within certain niches. In responding to a closed mind, >please do not also close yours -- see a following post.... My statement means 'just because a computer has color does not mean it will be an overall success instantly.' Certainly its a factor, but don't you think other factors come into play like CPU SPEED, Memory, Price, Disk Storage, Software Quality, Interface, Environment, support, documentation. Color is only one of these. Not everyone needs color. I myself am quite happy with my monochrome (2 color) Shell. If I was into video, I'm sure I'd own a 33mhz A2000 with Turbosilver, Deluxe Paint, cando etc. But I don't. I'm a programmer, and all I need in my 2 color screen, multitasking, good tools, and my fast scrolling configurable editor. (I chose DME) Marc has been touting color as the ONLY attribute that makes the Macs sell. (256 icons, 16millions, and other bells and whistles.) >David Navas navas@sim.berkeley.edu >"Excuse my ignorance, but I've been run over by my train of thought." -me -- "NeXTs are useless... Mac's are irrelevent.. IBM's are futile. Amiga's,however, are quite nice!" -Capt Jeal-Luc Amiga | Flames to /dev/null Ray Cromwell rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu | // AMIGA! \\ "Your software will adapt to service ours!"| \X/ AMIGA! \X/
seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (10/18/90)
In-Reply-To: message from es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
The Mac Classic is a no-issue...the Mac LC I can see giving the A2000 some
hurt, because of the '020 and HD. Problem is, it doesn't come with a
math-chip...an A2000 with a MidgetRacer would burn this box because it can't
use 32bit memory (it's a 16bit machine) unless it maybe uses the PDS. You
also can't upgrade the video...it's locked into 512 x 384 x 8bits and a few
higher-res 16color and mono modes. It also has NO general purpose peripheral
slots.
The Mac][si, which is $3800 for 2MB and a FOURTY meg HD, has either one NuBus
OR one PDS slot (will take SE/30 boards). An '882 is an option, not standard,
so even an A3000-16 would wax it. I don't see too much appeal for this one.
Pricewise or performance wise...oh, you can't use an '881 or 32bit memory in
the MacLC, regardless of the PDS slot. Maybe an accellerator card or two will
come out for it, but then all advantage over an A2000 dwindles.
Anyone see the real market for Apple's new "consumer" products?
Sean
PS> on the Mac][si, there is a 5MB/80MB HD configuration for $4600, and
a keyboard is sold separately..."you mean you want WHEELS on this car?"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .SIG v2.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc | B^) VISION GRAPHICS B^)
ARPA: !crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc@nosc.mil | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com | Dual A3000 based, custom
Help keep the | computer graphics,
RealWorld: Sean Cunningham competition // | animation, presentation,
Voice: (512) 994-1602 under \X/ | simulation, accident-
| scene re-creation, and
...better life through creative computing... | recreation...(whew!)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<md41@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Marcus Dolengo) (10/18/90)
In article <9010020@hpfcso.HP.COM> rrd@hpfcso.HP.COM (Ray Depew) writes: >> Mac Classic > >Can you say "excess inventory"? I knew you could. > >Don't be fooled. Mac Classic isn't like Coke Classic. Coke Classic was >brought back by popular demand, after the Mfr. discontinued it and everyone >clamored to have it back. (Pepsi was all set to come out with a "Coke >Classic clone" -- well, read the book "The Other Guy Blinked: How Pepsi >Won The Cola Wars.") >Anyway: The Mac Classic isn't much more than a dressed-up original Mac. >(Which original Mac? I don't remember.) It had so many system limitations >that nobody was sad to see it get replaced by all the later models. It's >obsolete and underpowered by today's standards, and isn't really worth the >money, when $1500 (or even $1000!) will buy you so much more. > >Chances are that Apple is sitting on several million $$ of old inventory and >needs a good way to get rid of it. Do you remember when the Amiga was >introduced, and there were stacks of C64's sitting in the center aisle of >K-mart? > >Don't be fooled. Your Amiga is still worth what you paid for it. > >Ray >rrd@hpfitst1.hp.com would the mac classic be similar to the PS/1? underpowered and overpriced obsolete tech? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o o | This Space For Rent Amiga!! // << md41@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu >> | \\ // /> <\ | \X/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coming soon to a .sig near you- Quotes!
bleys@tronsbox.xei.com (Bill Cavanaugh) (10/18/90)
This is insane. One of the biggest names at Commodore-Amiga is, once again, making a nonsensical attack on one of the people who's demonstrating a concern for the product above and beyond the call of duty. What Mr. Barrett was >very clearly< saying was that the Macs do things the Amiga doesn't do, and that Apple is demonstrably better at showing people their strengths than Commie is. Attacking someone personally, rather than refuting their arguments, is a tactic that's been used to good effect by politicians, but you still LOSE points for it in debating societies. /**************************************************************** * All of the above copyright by the below. * * Bill Cavanaugh uunet!tronsbox!bleys * * "A language is a dialect with an army and a navy." * ****************************************************************/
S36666WB%ETSUACAD.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu (Brian Wright) (10/18/90)
On 17 Oct 90 20:16:08 GMT you said: >In-Reply-To: message from es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu > > >The Mac Classic is a no-issue...the Mac LC I can see giving the A2000 some >hurt, because of the '020 and HD. Problem is, it doesn't come with a >math-chip...an A2000 with a MidgetRacer would burn this box because it can't >use 32bit memory (it's a 16bit machine) unless it maybe uses the PDS. You >also can't upgrade the video...it's locked into 512 x 384 x 8bits and a few >higher-res 16color and mono modes. It also has NO general purpose peripheral >slots. Yes you can upgrade the video. You can add an LC 512k VRAM SIMM and have more colors and more grey shades. The machine is also 32 bit architecture, not 16 bit. I have a spec sheet sitting in front of me. It also has an 020 direct slot whatever that is). No NuBus slots though. The LC can handle up to 17 megs (wherever it goes). Unless the spec sheet is wrong, it is a 32 bit machine. > >The Mac][si, which is $3800 for 2MB and a FOURTY meg HD, has either one NuBus >OR one PDS slot (will take SE/30 boards). An '882 is an option, not standard, >so even an A3000-16 would wax it. I don't see too much appeal for this one. >Pricewise or performance wise...oh, you can't use an '881 or 32bit memory in >the MacLC, regardless of the PDS slot. Maybe an accellerator card or two will >come out for it, but then all advantage over an A2000 dwindles. > >Anyone see the real market for Apple's new "consumer" products? > >Sean > >PS> on the Mac][si, there is a 5MB/80MB HD configuration for $4600, and > a keyboard is sold separately..."you mean you want WHEELS on this car?" > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ======================================================================= ||NeXT- (nekst) N. The only PC to have sold less than 10,000 units and || || not be considered a flop. || ||------------------------------------------/ /------------------------|| ||---Brian Wright | / / || ||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga || ||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! || =======================================================================
db@cs.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry) (10/19/90)
In article <11393@life.ai.mit.edu> rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) wrote: >>Whether a computer can display 256 colors out of 16million or not, does >>not determine its success. Then why is almost every PC now available in the UK sold with a super-VGA board as standard? Quite possibly the people who buy the machines don't need that capability, but they do seem to like it. In article <28856@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU replied: >Woah, now. It is also not completely irrelevant. It *will* determine the >success of a computer within certain niches. An example niche: Games. It would be really ironic if better games became a reason for buying a PC instead of an Amiga. Obviously many games benefit from the Amiga's animation facilities. But adventure-style games show still pictures. I've seen some quite impressive 256 colour super VGA pictures in games. There are even some flight simulators that claim to use 256 colour VGA, although I haven't seen them and I suspect that this claim is bogus. In the short term, it seems to me that the low-end amigas need revamping with the ECS, including the de-interlacer and a multi-sync socket. Games that use 640x512 resolution would keep the Amiga ahead in that field, even with only 16 colours. It sounds like Commodore are working on longer term solutions, which is good. Obviously the Amiga is the machine of choice for video and animation, and for a general cheap programming environment. But it would be nice if it held its own in other fields as well. I don't intend offence to anyone by the above. Please correct my mistakes. Dave. -- Dave Berry, LFCS, Edinburgh Uni. db%lfcs.ed.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk "Dumping 33546240 bytes to dev 0x70e0100, offset 124968. Don't cycle power ..."
jeh@sisd.kodak.com (Ed Hanway) (10/19/90)
WHE46@ccvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > >Commodore will NOT succeed... Thank you, Marc, not only for sharing your brilliant insight with the Amiga community, but also for repeatedly harping on about the same thing, time after time after time after time... Obviously we must have been too stupid to understand you the first time, so please keep hammering your points home, especially in messages like your last one. You know, the ones which consist of 100% complaining, 0% originality. And don't let trivial things like factual errors or erroneous conclusions slow you down, either. Just ignore anyone short-sighted enough to question your judgement and continue to blather, er, post the same thing again!
seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (10/19/90)
In-Reply-To: message from rrd@hpfcso.HP.COM Also of note, Apple is discontinuing a large portion of their product line with the introduction of the new fruit boxes. Under the ax are: ...Mac Plus ...Mac SE ...Mac ][cx ...Mac ][x Also, SE/30s will nolonger be available in floppy-only configurations. Sean >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .SIG v2.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc | B^) VISION GRAPHICS B^) ARPA: !crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc@nosc.mil | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com | Dual A3000 based, custom Help keep the | computer graphics, RealWorld: Sean Cunningham competition // | animation, presentation, Voice: (512) 994-1602 under \X/ | simulation, accident- | scene re-creation, and ...better life through creative computing... | recreation...(whew!) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
cpca@iceman.jcu.oz (C Adams) (10/19/90)
In article <703@skye.cs.ed.ac.uk>, db@cs.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry) writes: > In article <11393@life.ai.mit.edu> rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) wrote: > Obviously many games benefit from the Amiga's animation facilities. > But adventure-style games show still pictures. I've seen some quite > impressive 256 colour super VGA pictures in games. There are even some > flight simulators that claim to use 256 colour VGA, although I > haven't seen them and I suspect that this claim is bogus. It isn't... > In the short term, it seems to me that the low-end amigas need > revamping with the ECS, including the de-interlacer and a multi-sync > socket. Games that use 640x512 resolution would keep the Amiga > ahead in that field, even with only 16 colours. It sounds like ECS wouldn't be enough. Games would find it hard to use 640*512 in 16 colours as the blitter would be locked out for the entire display. Totally new chips are needed. Nowdays in CMOS it should be possible to put Paula+Denise+SuperAgnus into 1 chip, and add features ADD increase the clock speed. Banked Chip RAM would be great too, with a controller determining who has priority access to a CHIP bank the same way Agnus does for the Chip bus at the moment. Ideally it would allow several accesses to chip memory at once. This is how a CRAY works, so can you imagine the hype C= could use if they could put it on a home computer, and it really wouldn't cost that much. > Dave Berry, LFCS, Edinburgh Uni. db%lfcs.ed.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk ******************************************************************** Colin Adams Life's funny but I don't laugh Email Address - cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au ********************************************************************
don@brahms.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd) (10/21/90)
In article <3395@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >ragg0270@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Alan Gerber) writes: >>Mac LC $3,098. 68020 processor. 2 Meg RAM. Hard Disk. Color capabilities. > >I can't comment too much on the Mac LC, because I don't remember what the list >price of the Amiga 2500/20 is for comparison. Can you still buy a 68020 based >Amiga? Most people would probably just go ahead and buy a 2500/30 or a 3000 >nowadays. > Well, the 2500/20 isn't even sold any more... but ANY '020-based Ami with 32-bit RAM will drastically outrun the LC... reason being the LC is an '020 machine only by virtue of having an '020: the rest of the machine is 16-bit. 16-bit bus (yes, I know, you'll also get this on any Ami short of the 3000) and 16-bit memory, apparently with no allowance for adding 32-bit RAM. Not to mention the fact that the only way to add a math coprocessor to any of these machines is to put it on a card plugged into your single expansion slot; then you have to go out over the expansion bus to get to it, running into all the usual NuBus bottlenecks along the way (something like 5 MHz tops?). -- Gibberish .sig for sale or lease. is spoken Contact don@brahms.udel.edu for more information. here. DISCLAIMER: It's all YOUR fault.
ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu (Doug) (10/21/90)
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >I can't comment too much on the Mac LC, because I don't remember what the list >price of the Amiga 2500/20 is for comparison. Can you still buy a 68020 based >Amiga? Most people would probably just go ahead and buy a 2500/30 or a 3000 >nowadays. >-- >John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email How about the Amiga2750? A 32-bit path machine with a 68030/25. What was the list price on this again? I actually know someone with this machine. He said it came with os2.0. Figure this one in the price war and see where it lies - I wish there was more information on it out. -- ---------------------------------//------------------------------------- Doug Dyer Clemson University // Check Is In The Mail (HeeHeeHaaHaa) ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu \\ // AMIGA3000 -----------------------------\X/----------------------------------------
u-lchaff%peruvian.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Lynn Chaffin) (10/23/90)
I read somewhere that the Mac LC uses a 16bit bus, seems silly sense the 68020 is a 32bit chip. Lynn Chaffin u-lchaff@peruvian.utah.edu