s8825698@mqcomp.mqcc.mq.OZ (Daniel Bielik) (07/25/90)
Has anyone noticed how most new, revolutionary computers (and some not-so-revolutionary ones) get scores of pages of technical data and performance information written about them in BYTE magazine, yet the MAY, 1990 edition with the AMIGA3000 as the cover story has 3 pages of information regarding this new machine. I am really surprised, considering way back in 1985 BYTE had a magnificent coverage of the Amiga1000 (then just the Amiga) and the way that it throws accolades at boring old IBM compatibles (no they haven't yet exhausted ways of using this ancient technology). Why only 3 pages? Can someone from BYTE possibly answer this for me? Or possibly is there a better review coming up in future editions of BYTE, in which case I would ask the question "Why did BYTE make this minimal story their Cover Story?". Danny Bielik. 3RD year Computing student Macquarie University Sydney, Australia.
donb@bushido.uucp (Donald Burnett) (07/30/90)
In article <334@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> s8825698@mqcomp (Daniel Bielik) writes: >Has anyone noticed how most new, revolutionary computers (and some >not-so-revolutionary ones) get scores of pages of technical data and >performance information written about them in BYTE magazine, yet the MAY, 1990 >edition with the AMIGA3000 as the cover story has 3 pages of information >regarding this new machine. > >I am really surprised, considering way back in 1985 BYTE had a magnificent >coverage of the Amiga1000 (then just the Amiga) and the way that it throws >accolades at boring old IBM compatibles (no they haven't yet exhausted ways >of using this ancient technology). Why only 3 pages? Can someone from BYTE >possibly answer this for me? > >Or possibly is there a better review coming up in future editions of BYTE, in >which case I would ask the question "Why did BYTE make this minimal story their >Cover Story?". > >Danny Bielik. >3RD year Computing student >Macquarie University >Sydney, Australia. Personally, calling it a MAINSTREAM computer on the cover was good enough for me :-) Thanks, donb
seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (08/02/90)
In-Reply-To: message from donb@bushido.uucp Also, if you go back to the month before the A3000 article, and look at the ][fx review, it didn't have any more pages really. This maybe a nit-pick, but the ][fx article didn't get printed on the spine :`) Sean //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc | ARPA: !crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc@nosc.mil | " Fanatics have their INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com | dreams, wherewith they | weave a paradise for RealWorld: Sean Cunningham | a sect. " Voice: (512) 994-1602 PLINK: ce3k* | -Keats | Call C.B.A.U.G. BBS (512) 883-8351 w/SkyPix | B^) VISION GRAPHICS B^) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
rar@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) (08/02/90)
In article <1990Jul30.165229.718@bushido.uucp> donb@bushido.uucp (Donald Burnett) writes: >In article <334@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> s8825698@mqcomp (Daniel Bielik) writes: >>Has anyone noticed how most new, revolutionary computers (and some >>not-so-revolutionary ones) get scores of pages of technical data and >>performance information written about them in BYTE magazine, No, not the brand-new ones. >> yet the MAY, 1990 >>edition with the AMIGA3000 as the cover story has 3 pages of information >>regarding this new machine. I'll have to check what few recent issues of Byte that I have around to see, but the pattern that Byte has unfortunatley fallen into seems to be this: If a "new, revolutionary" computer comes around, they'll do a story on it before it actually hits the market. Since Byte said that they don't review products before they hit the market, they do a short, "First Impression" of it. When the product finally hits the market, it's old news now, compared to some other new product, which they also do a first impression of, and they never get around to doing an actual, long, fully researched, useful, good old-fashioned review of the product. The only machines Byte seems to review are those that they didn't do a "First Impression" of, so it often seems to turn out that they only review the somewhat uninteresting products (or those that slipped on the market without their notice). What would be nice is if one of you people out there who has a 3000 and is a good writer would write up a FULL review, including such things as some specs of the Zorro III Bus, and would port the IBM PC & Macintosh benchmarks to the Amiga and run them. The review should also tell some of the features of AmigaOS 2.0. It should include some nice pictures of the 3000's high-res displays, to show how the new workbench looks. Of course, it should not be done in a "my computer is better than yours" tone. The review should be meant to inform (and to impress), not to annoy. Don't forget to mention the quality of the built-in speech (it HAS been improved, right?!?), and the built-in sound capabilities. Oh, and while that person is at it, someone else should write an article to Byte showing expressly how and why the Amiga blows away other machines (of comparable price) as far as multimedia goes. >>Or possibly is there a better review coming up in future editions of BYTE, in >>which case I would ask the question "Why did BYTE make this minimal story their >>Cover Story?". I don't think we can count on the Byte staff itself to come up with a review of the 3000. Jerry Pournelle (sp?) doesn't even mention it in his columns anymore; he did for a few issues. If we want a review of the 3000 in Byte, we'll have to write it, and it will have to be useful and interesting to non-Amigans, as well as being unbiased. Maybe Commodore can send Jerry an Amiga 3000? ( 1/2 :-) ) Maybe Commodore can send ME an Amiga 3000?!?! I'd love to write a review, but my 2000 is 1000 miles away ... (maybe there's a song in that!) :-) >>Danny Bielik. >>3RD year Computing student >>Macquarie University >>Sydney, Australia. Rodney Ricks. Nth year Computing student Morehouse College, by way of Georgia Tech AT&T Summer Intern USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way, ... :-) :-) -- "We may have come over here in different ships, but we're all in the same boat now." -- Jesse Jackson // \\ // Rodney Ricks, Morehouse College \/
nfs1675@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil ( Michael S Figg) (08/02/90)
In article <1990Jul30.165229.718@bushido.uucp>, donb@bushido.uucp (Donald Burnett) writes: > > . . . . , yet the MAY, 1990 > >edition with the AMIGA3000 as the cover story has 3 pages of information > >regarding this new machine. > > Personally, calling it a MAINSTREAM computer on the cover was good enough > for me :-) > > Thanks, > donb Call me old fashion, but isn't it more significant what the machine can do than how many pages it gets in BYTE. Besides if coverage in Byte was that important, The Amiga would probably be long dead by now, and most of us would be using Mac's. ---Mike, Just my 2 cents. -- A man said to the Universe "Sir, I exist!" | Michael Figg DSAC-FSD "However," replied the Universe, | DLA Systems Automation Center "The fact has not created in me a | Columbus, Ohio sense of obligation."- Stephen Crane | mfigg@dsac.dla.mil CIS: 73777,360
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (08/03/90)
In <2342@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil>, nfs1675@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil ( Michael S Figg) writes: > >Call me old fashion, but isn't it more significant what the machine can do >than how many pages it gets in BYTE. Yes it is, though you couldn't prove it by the results of the folks who make up the pages of Byte. Seems their criteria is that the more it can do, the better the technology, the worse the coverage. > Besides if coverage in Byte was that >important, The Amiga would probably be long dead by now, and most of us >would be using Mac's. Don't look now, but 'most of us' are not using Amigas, depending a lot, of course, on your definition of 'us'. Some of that situation is due to the popular magazines and their near total ignorance of anything outside the wonderful world of Microsoft and IBM and their imitators. -larry -- Sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
aduncan@rhea.trl.oz.au (Allan Duncan) (08/03/90)
From article <32464@auc.UUCP>, by rar@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks): ... > I don't think we can count on the Byte staff itself to come up with a > review of the 3000. Jerry Pournelle (sp?) doesn't even mention it in his > columns anymore; he did for a few issues. If we want a review of the > 3000 in Byte, we'll have to write it, and it will have to be useful and > interesting to non-Amigans, as well as being unbiased. > > Maybe Commodore can send Jerry an Amiga 3000? ( 1/2 :-) ) NO NO NO! If it Gurus once he will condemn it immediately. PC's only "lock up" and let _you_ reboot rather than try and do some recovery on the other tasks that you had running - much simpler for novelists to handle. Allan Duncan ACSnet a.duncan@trl.oz (03) 541 6708 ARPA a.duncan%trl.oz.au@uunet.uu.net UUCP {uunet,hplabs,ukc}!munnari!trl.oz.au!a.duncan Telecom Research Labs, PO Box 249, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia.
donb@bushido.uucp (Donald Burnett) (09/06/90)
Hey guys I wouldn't count out Byte yet.. In a recent article on AREXX for OS/2 (or is that 1/2Rexx ;-) they dedicate more than 3/4 of a page to Amiga AREXX... I think they are on track. After all they are at least mentioning it when they have too :-) -- **************************************************************** ********* donb@bushido.uucp ****** ********* "My Opinions are my own, not anyone else's ****** ********* Organizational Affiliations ****** ********* CreativEdge Systems, the Multimedia Solution ****** ********* The Computer Shoppe, Ypsilanti-Ann Arbor, MI's ****** ********* Commodore-Amiga Education Dealer ******