fiddler%concertina@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) (06/08/88)
Just thought you all might be interested in an article in the current MacWeek (I don't pay for it, they just send it. I like the pretty pictures...) Datelined Austin, TX: ****************************************************************** Byte by Byte Corp is bringing its cutting-edge animation technology to the Macintosh and working hard to convince Apple to come along for the ride. The Austin, Texas, company announced plans to port its popular Sculpt-Animate 3D software program [there are other kinds?] for the Commodore Amiga to the Macintosh II. ... "We're hoping it does get ported over to the Macintosh because it would give the program a lot of credibility," said Eric Rosenthal, general manager of audio-visual systems engineering at ABC Television in New York. ... The Mac version, priced "somewhere around $1,000" and scheduled for release in the fourth quarter, will expand on [the features supported in the Amiga version], the company promises. ... "We feel that we can save 75 percent of the time and money spent on post-production work by using this program," Rosenthal said. "But so far it doesn't run on a machine we can trust." ********************************************************************* I'm not even going to ask if anyone has any comments. :}
dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) (06/10/88)
In article <7451@swan.ulowell.edu>, page@swan.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) writes: > Eric Rosenthal, GM of audio-visual systems engineering at ABC Television: > >But so far it doesn't run on a machine we can trust. > > No need to flame Rosenthal. Facts are facts. When the Amiga OS can > protect programs from scribbling over each other, it will be a > trustworthy machine. Until then, only hackers, desperados and > masochists will use it. > > ..Bob > -- > Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept. page@swan.ulowell.edu ulowell!page What the hell are you talking about? We are comparing the MAC II running in Macintosh mode to the Amiga. You think the MAC II is any more stable? Hah! A runaway process will still stomp the machine on the MAC II just like it does on the Amiga. Same for IBMs. It should be obvious that these people wouldn't understand multi-tasking or process protection if it walked up and bit them. What they can understand is: 'business machine. duh. Apple, IBM duh.' While the Amiga is powerful it still isn't a business machine and its questionable if it ever will be an accepted business machine. These jokers want machines with comforting labels on the front. Well I don't know if I'm a hacker, a desperado, or a masochist but I certainly have no trouble classifing you. I will try to display more more maturity than you seem to possess and keep it to myself. Fact is, if your processes are well behaved process protection is irrelevant. When I'm not testing applications I wrote I rarely have any problems with processes scribbling on each other. This is not to say that I wouldn't like to have process protection just that it isn't really a requirement any more than it has been for Apple and IBM. David Albrecht
daves@hpcilzb.HP.COM (Dave Scroggins) (06/10/88)
> >No need to flame Rosenthal. Facts are facts. When the Amiga OS can ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >protect programs from scribbling over each other, it will be a ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Gee Bob -- I've never had a problem with my AMIGA programs "scribbling over each other"!!! Maybe I'm just extra careful huh???? :-) Somehow the choice of seeing my amination in B & W or spending a whole bunch of $$$$$$$$$ to get a color MacIf#*&$ (why CAN'T I type that??) doesn't thrill me much. I'll keep my AMIGA thanks. Maybe Mr. Rosenthal should try an AMIGA test drive for a couple of weeks. >trustworthy machine. Until then, only hackers, desperados and >masochists will use it. What ?? Just plain folks won't usethe AMIGA???? Dave S.
dale@boing.UUCP (Dale Luck) (06/11/88)
In article <2030074@hpcilzb.HP.COM> daves@hpcilzb.HP.COM (Dave Scroggins) writes: >> >>No need to flame Rosenthal. Facts are facts. When the Amiga OS can I think Mr. Rosenthal was refering to hardware irregularities. The fact that it is not just a plug and play machine, like some other higher priced boxes. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>protect programs from scribbling over each other, it will be a >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Maybe Mr. Rosenthal should try an AMIGA test drive for a couple of >weeks. > I've spoken with Mr. Rosenthal, he owns an amiga already, he love's it but as for a machine to bet his business on, it takes more the fancy technology. It takes a reliable piece of iron and good customer support, both of which commodore has left a bit to be desired. -- Dale Luck Boing, Inc. Although I do contract work for Amiga-LosGatos, my opinions probably don't represent those of Commodore or its management or it's engineers, but I think the world would be a better place if they did.
sdl@linus.UUCP (Steven D. Litvintchouk) (06/13/88)
In article <170@kesmai.COM> dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) writes: > In article <7451@swan.ulowell.edu>, page@swan.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) writes: > What the hell are you talking about? We are comparing the MAC II running > in Macintosh mode to the Amiga. You think the MAC II is any more stable? > Hah! A runaway process will still stomp the machine on the MAC II just > like it does on the Amiga. In fact, you can trash the Mac/MultiFinder even with "well-behaved" processes! The following incident happened to me two weeks ago, with the Mac SE running MultiFinder I have at work: I was running MacTerminal and TrafficWatch (a utility to monitor Appletalk net activity) simultaneously under Multifinder. As it turns out, both applications access the same two Mac serial ports. (No one warned me about this.) The result: I totally trashed "Parameter RAM (PRAM)", causing the Mac to go completely crazy (it wouldn't stop beeping at me). Since PRAM apparently gets its power from the battery, even turning off the Mac didn't fix the problem! There is a "back door" which Mac programmers know about to zap the PRAM, but since I'm not a Mac programmer, I was stymied until I called the vendor of TrafficWatch (Farallon), who helped me rebuild PRAM. They also told me that checking whether two Mac applications access the same ports under Multifinder is extremely difficult. I have owned an Amiga since February 1986, and I have never had it fail so spectacularly on me. I think all the people who continually flame AmigaDOS ("no resource tracking," etc.) should try living with MultiFinder on a Mac for a while. Steven Litvintchouk MITRE Corporation Burlington Road Bedford, MA 01730 Fone: (617)271-7753 ARPA: sdl@mitre-bedford.arpa UUCP: ...{cbosgd,decvax,genrad,ll-xn,mit-eddie,philabs,utzoo}!linus!sdl "Those who will be able to conquer software will be able to conquer the world." -- Tadahiro Sekimoto, president, NEC Corp.
daves@hpcilzb.HP.COM (Dave Scroggins) (06/14/88)
Dale, I'm going to be nice and not flame to hard for being quoted out of context. Pay attention Dale. >>>No need to flame Rosenthal. Facts are facts. When the Amiga OS can > >I think Mr. Rosenthal was refering to hardware irregularities. The fact ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Not according to the posting I read. The article I quoted made a remark about the AMIGA OS (Operating System). The OS is not hardware. >that it is not just a plug and play machine, like some other higher >priced boxes. > >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>protect programs from scribbling over each other, it will be a >>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> Here is the part that really upsets me Dale. You included the part I quoted from another posting, but DIDN'T include my comment on this statement. You know the part I'm talking about don't you?? The part where I say that I don't have the "scribbling" problem. Dale, without this part the next statement is nonsequitur. So, in the future quote people in context or don't do it at all. Be sure it's PAINFULLY obvious what an individual says and what he quotes. OK?? >>Maybe Mr. Rosenthal should try an AMIGA test drive for a couple of >>weeks. >> > >Dale Luck Boing, Inc. Thanks for listening. Further discussion by E-mail please. Dave S.