stefan@sherlock.cs.concordia.ca (BUCHHOLZ stefan) (03/27/90)
>Iowa State just opened up a fancy new MAC lab, and I have been using >one of their ][cx systems since it opened. I am very impressed with this >system. Our University just opened a new Multimedia lab. We have 12 3-meg Amiga2000HD's along with a bridgeboard, audio/video digitizers, framegrabbers, genlocks, a "9-monitor" video wall, etc... it's pretty nice. We have purchased cross-Dos, and Mac-To-Dos. The entire lab INCLUDING SOFTWARE ($3000.00 worth), cost less than 10 Color Mac IIcx's. You talk about looking great: Us comp. Scie.'ers all know that esthetics is the last thing you look for in a personal workstation. BUT, I do realize that in order to catch people's attention, you need a sleek style, and make things friendly and easy to use. Every Terminal has a name and a VERY clean interface (a la Cando) complete with a suggestion box. People who walk into the lab become instantly interested, and most become addicted to the place. More because of its functionality than the flashy graphics/sound interface. Our Mac lab has 15 terminals, less than 5 of these are used at any given moment. > The multitasking is much better than I had been told [I have >been fed a lot of bull about MAC multitasking from fellow Amiga users] >the system is very easy-to-use, and the graphics just plain look GREAT. The multitasking?? OH, you must mean the wonderful DA's. yes they ARE useful. If only one could do anything at the same time as anything else, not just DA's, now that would be something...and useful too! > Let's face it: the Amiga, the way it currently is, is in desperately >in need of a total facelift. The Amiga looks kludgy, feels kludgy, and >just plain IS kludgy. Everything about the Amiga looks and feels >kludgy. The Amiga suffers from too much UNIX-itis kludginess, and far >too little professionalism. The Amiga's interlaced graphics is alo >a sore spot. Without a flicker-fixer, the Amiga's graphics are >about as pleasing to the eye as a kick in the face is pleasing to >the head. Yikes. Are you on drugs? Seriously man, the flicker CAN be avoided. It is there for video purposes. Also 16 colors in hi-res is ok for WYSIWYG DTP, not black and white. A vanilla Amiga will scroll text smoother and faster than any Mac. I'd be curious to hear what system has traumatised you. >On the other hand, the MAC looks professional, feels professional, >and is professional to the bone. Everything is professional, from the >screen..[nice graphics descriptions deleted] I agree, but given $10 000 to spend on a system, I'd get the 2500/30 and a Honda CRX. So would most people who had clear views of computers. For Chrissakes, the Amiga EMULATES a Mac: what does that mean, no, don't flame, think about it!! (So does an Atari ST (?!)). I have faith in Commodore's software/hardware engineers to design add-ons for my 2 year-old machine (why wouldn't I?). >Although the ][cx, in spite of its speed, does not have near the >animation capbility of the Amiga, I have found that 95% of operations >use static graphics, anyway. Which operations? it depends what kind of work you are doing. GVP has just announced the 40Mhz 030 for the Amiga BTW, which I can drop nicely into my 2 year old Amiga (Gee, Amax'll really fly!!! :^) ). This is why those $150 SuperVGA cards >for the IBM [with 1024x768x256-color graphics -- my upstairs neighbor >did recently pick up one of these for $150], which can take up to >half a second to re-draw the screen, are still very popular. The >MAC's ability to display 256 colors out of 16 Million makes its >graphics look all the more professional. Look look look. The screen is not your output medium 90% of the time. Why do you think an equivalently priced Mac can do color work if its B/W? Because what's on screen has little to do with the output. OC I agree that a new graphics standard needs to be set, but I personally can wait. After all, I bought this box mainly for its OS and not for its colors. But the funny thing is that I AM preppy, and DO drink Perrier, hmmm...that MUST mean something. >There are also other areas which the Amiga can't even touch. This can be claimed for any machine. >Such as built-in networking on ALL MAC models [very, very important >in an environment such as a lab or classroom. This is one of the >many reasons why Apple sells 10 million times more computers to >schools and colleges than Commodore]. Agreed. However Amiganet is out ( from Montreal BTW). It is full IEEE ETHERNET compliant, and works on A500 as well as A2xxx's. I agree that this has been a big problem, but hey, the wait is over... >It has been said that an Amiga can run MAC software, but a MAC >can't run Amiga software. This is true, but I don't see why any >MAC user would want to run Amiga software. There is much more >MAC software available than Amiga software. Our entire software library has cost us $3000.00. We have LOTS of S/W (I would estimate around 60 titles, and we can afford to. Mac software is atleast twice the price of Amiga soft. > There is very little >scientific available for the Amiga, and tons available for the >MAC. Networking software for the Amiga is virtually nonexistant, >and so on. If Mathematica was available for the Amiga, I would >purchase it, but it isn't available for the Amiga. I can see >why. Most software developers that spend money on the Amiga lose >money on it. This is why so many Amiga developers have gone under >recently. I agree with all that. It's a smaller market. BUT: Luckily for Commodore, the Amiga's hardware is superior to that of the Mac's. The software side of it has been slow to catch up, but I am very pleased with the 1.3-ARP combo and look forward to seeing the new generation of stable and powerful software which is finally realizing the hardware's true potential. Titles which come to mind are Cando, DVIII, DPIII, DigiPaintIII, DigiViewIII, Propage 1.3, ADvantage, most of which support Arexx, ALL multitask (OC), and are ALL are about half the price of packages on the Mac. >Lately, it has been my opinion that what ails the Amiga is Commodore's >total lack of direction with it until recently. I am beginning to see that >this is not entirely the case. What fails the Amiga is the Amiga itself. hey, I don't know why, but I feel like getting VERY VERY drunk. Hmm, could someone else clear the air here? I'm not an Amiga salesman, I preach the Mac/IBM gospel to some people also...after all, I DO have Amax and a bridgeboard...MORAL: For todays prices, Given x amount of pennies, and the knowledge, most people would get an Amiga (from my experience). Stefy LePew (chug chug chug...hic!) ******************************************************************************* Stefan Buchholz * Concordia University Computer Science * a.k.a Stefy LePew stefan@doyle.cs.concordia.ca >> MITE AVsita Multimedia lab system support << *******************************************************************************
barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) (03/28/90)
In article <2028@clyde.concordia.ca> stefan@sherlock.CS.Concordia.CA (BUCHHOLZ stefan) writes: >>On the other hand, the MAC looks professional, feels professional,.... >I agree, but given $10 000 to spend on a system, I'd get the 2500/30 and >a Honda CRX. Hee hee hee! What a GREAT way to state it!! Very well put. Dan //////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | Dan Barrett, Department of Computer Science Johns Hopkins University | | INTERNET: barrett@cs.jhu.edu | | | COMPUSERVE: >internet:barrett@cs.jhu.edu | UUCP: barrett@jhunix.UUCP | \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////
seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (03/29/90)
In-Reply-To: message from stefan@sherlock.cs.concordia.ca I liked the flame, but I'm more interested in something else you mentioned...custom CanDo interfaces. I was just thinking about what it'd be like to do something like a WB replacement interface with CanDo, something with maybe the 3-Dimensional look of Motif. Would this be possible, to an extent? I don't have CanDo yet, I have Ultracard (I hate it), but I've played around with CanDo, trying to make it crash...it wouldn't! I figure, people are making some bucks on "stackware" over on the Mac front...maybe the Amiga needs some of this action too. Sean //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc | ARPA: !crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc@nosc.mil | " I drank what? " INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com | -Socrates | RealWorld: Sean Cunningham | Voice: (512) 994-1602 | | Call C.B.A.U.G. BBS (512) 883-8351 w/SkyPix | B^) VISION GRAPHICS B^) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\