g.greene@cooper.UUCP (Glenn Greene ) (05/14/87)
I am looking for opinions from Amiga and Atari 1040ST owners as to which computer is better. I am especially interested in the animation,graphics and MIDI music areas. I would like to know if the animation programs for the Amiga work as well as they are advertised to and if there are any animation programs for the ST. Also are there any Lotus 123 comparable spreadsheets available for either machine and if so how good are they. I would also like to hear about Macintosh interfaces for both machines and whether there are any other interfaces available and if so how good they are. IN GENERAL I WOULD LIKE THE PROS AND CONS OF BOTH MACHINES FROM AN EXPERIENCED USERS POINT OF VIEW CONCERNING GRAPHICS,SOFTWARE, ANIMATION ,BUSINESS APPLICATIONS,PROGRAMMING AND COMPUTER BASED MUSIC SYSTEMS.
hadeishi@husc7.HARVARD.EDU (Mitsuharu Hadeishi) (05/21/87)
In article <943@cooper.UUCP> g.greene@cooper.UUCP (Glenn Greene ) writes: >I am looking for opinions from Amiga and Atari 1040ST owners >as to which computer is better. Glenn Greene, computer terrorist! Seriously, Glenn, we've had a lot of Amiga vs. ST battles on the net and although you may be quite serious in your query, we really don't need more intigations to violence. Please reply via email, everyone. Peace to you all. -Mitsu
kagle@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Jonathan C. Kagle) (05/21/87)
In article <943@cooper.UUCP> g.greene@cooper.UUCP (Glenn Greene ) writes: >I am looking for opinions from Amiga and Atari 1040ST owners >as to which computer is better. ... Oh no! Not again!!! Everyone, please use mail, not rn, to reply to his request. -Jonathan
richard@pnet02.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (05/22/87)
The atari is cheaper, and has a slightly better MIDI interface. (they provide
the
connector :-> ). The amiga has better hardware graphics support. I have used
an amiga 1-2-3 clone on the amiga (vip pro something or other) and in my
limited experiencd with it, it works. They are both nice machines, before
a friend told me about the amiga 21/3 years ago, i was GOING to buy an atari.
The bottom line is, the atari is cheaper and does less, the amiga costs more
and does more. It all depends how much money you have :->
UUCP: {akgua!crash, hplabs!hp-sdd!crash}!gryphon!pnet02!richard
INET: richard@pnet02.CTS.COMbakken@tahoma.ARPA (Dave Bakken) (05/22/87)
In article <943@cooper.UUCP>, g.greene@cooper.UUCP (Glenn Greene ) writes: > IN GENERAL I WOULD LIKE THE PROS AND CONS OF BOTH MACHINES FROM AN > EXPERIENCED USERS POINT OF VIEW CONCERNING GRAPHICS,SOFTWARE, > ANIMATION ,BUSINESS APPLICATIONS,PROGRAMMING AND COMPUTER > BASED MUSIC SYSTEMS. > I bought my Amiga in December of '85, and I chose it over the Atari because it was (and still is) the only PC to offer true multitasking. I wasn't even too interested in the sound and graphics, but am glad I got the Amiga on that count, too. The user interface is great. And, as a series of articles discussed a few months ago, the Amiga is the best hacking machine out there today. The programmer's interface to graphics, devices, multitasking, etc. is at a very high level and is (relatively) easy to use, freeing the programmer to do the work he or she really wants to do. To get a feel for the high level you can program at, find the Byte article from about 6 months ago that compared programming on the Amiga vs. the Mac. I forget what the example was but on the Mac you had to do a lot more work. Also, the Commodore technical folks read the net and respond to questions as often as possible. That is a big help, and I understand the Atari folks are not accessible in that way. Dave Bakken Boeing Commercial Airplane Company Flight Simulation Lab uw-beaver!ssc-vax!shuksan!tahoma!bakken (206) 237-5890 My views are my own, not my employer's. Don't let them deter you from buying the 747 you've been saving hard for.
jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (05/23/87)
There are quite a few animation packages on the market for both
the Atari ST and Amigas, but one of the most outstanding from a technological
viewpoint is Aegis Animator, which is available on both. I run Animator
on the ST and depending on how you use the program, you can run the output
file on both computers. My freinds have run my own ST output files on
Amigas without problems. Animator calculates movements over time and
draws the frames according to the parameters you set. It's fairly easy
to use and is the easiest way to obtain complex movement animation with
simple 2 dimensional objects. It supports some 3D animation as well, but
the 3D usage.
Tom Hudson has done some pretty interesting things with Delta files
lately and Jim Kent (author of Animator) has found a way to convert Animator
output to Delta format. Delta format is only used on the ST right now.
It makes for extremely fast, smooth animation, but requires much more memory
than Animator for storage and for adequate length animation.
Ironically, what is likely the most flexible animation package on
the ST I've seen is Flicker, which is written by Jim Kent, the author of
Animator. I've had the opportunity to beta test this program and it's
probably the finest medium res graphics program out for the ST even aside
from the animation capabilities. Actually, I should qualify my statement:
Flicker as I'm using it is *NOT* available yet for public usage. There
is an early version of Flicker in this or next month's STart magazine.
What I'm using is a much farther developed program than that version,
however, even the version in STart comes with most of the important
capabilities. In fact, I've posted demo files to BIX which were made
aside from compression, with only the abilities which the STart version
has. That is to say, the only thing I used in Flicker which isn't in
the STart version is the ability to compress the files to take up less
disk space. The latest 'player' program Jim has posted to BIX will play
both the compressed files I've posted and the uncompressed files which
the STart version creates. Distribution of the latest version of Flicker
has not been finalized as far as I know, so I can't say when the public
will see it. For the time being, I suggest a combination of Degas Elite,
(or Neochrome, or both) with Flicker, to produce flip book style animation
on the ST. There may be other good combinations on the ST or on the
Amiga, but I don't expect to see better on the current ST hardware.
Having said that, I should also say that the current version of Flicker
is a memory glutton compared to Animator. That's because each frame is
sitting in its own memory (32K per frame). Keeping in mind that animation
of this type requires at the very least about 8 frames per second, a bit
of math will show you that the 1040ST is really minimal and the 4 Meg.
systems coming later will be much more comfortable. It will also tell you
that it takes a *lot* of work to produce good animation on this type of
system.
--
Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880
ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomuraewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) (05/23/87)
In article <943@cooper.UUCP> g.greene@cooper.UUCP (Glenn Greene ) writes: >I am looking for opinions from Amiga and Atari 1040ST owners >as to which computer is better. [ ... ] > PRIVATE E-MAIL! PRIVATE E-MAIL! OH, **GOD**, PLEASE, PRIVATE E-MAIL! Schwab
sullivan@EDN-VAX.DCA.MIL (Pat Sullivan) (06/07/89)
No doubt this question has been asked before but I beg your indulgence. I want to buy a "first" system which will serve the needs of a family whose ages range from 3 to 78. We are all into video and musical things, some more seriously than others. In addition, we need some business applications and maybe some technical things, though bringing work home is not a primary objective for this system. My 3-year old and I both need it for games. And we don't want to lay a lot of money out. At this point, I'm down to two finalists: Amiga and Atari ST. They appear to be very similar in capability and design intent. Amiga seems to do a few more things than Atari ST, while Atari ST seems to enjoy a slight price advantage, at least when comparing 1 meg systems. Is there any reason why this isn't a coin toss? I could well be overlooking something. Thanks for any and all advice and information. Please reply directly to me as I am not on this list. Thanks again, -Pat Sullivan Reston, VA.
uggbrand@sunybcs.uucp (G. Brandon Brooks) (06/07/89)
In article <8906062002.AA09843@EDN-VAX.DCA.MIL> sullivan@EDN-VAX.DCA.MIL (Pat Sullivan) writes: > > > >No doubt this question has been asked before but I beg your Many, many times..... >indulgence. I want to buy a "first" system which will serve the >needs of a family whose ages range from 3 to 78. We are all into >video and musical things, some more seriously than others. In The Amiga is by far the better computer for video applications with all the genlocking devices (for connecting TV/VCR video to the computer) and all the great video software. However, the Atari ST rules the music end with all the wonderful MIDI software along with its built-in MIDI port. >addition, we need some business applications and maybe some Both computers can be made IBM and Macintosh compatible for about the same prices. >technical things, though bringing work home is not a primary >objective for this system. My 3-year old and I both need it for >games. And we don't want to lay a lot of money out. > >At this point, I'm down to two finalists: Amiga and Atari ST. >They appear to be very similar in capability and design intent. >Amiga seems to do a few more things than Atari ST, while Atari ST >seems to enjoy a slight price advantage, at least when comparing >1 meg systems. Is there any reason why this isn't a coin toss? >I could well be overlooking something. Thanks for any and all advice >and information. The Amiga was originally, in 1983, made to be a high-end game machine, which later, since the video game market fell apart, was turned into a home computer. The Amiga has better resolution, more colors, sprites (quickly moving characters), a blitter chip, better internal STEREO sound, and all of which make it a better game machine if that is what you are looking for. The Atari ST shines in its MIDI capabilities and its ability to emulate other computers. If you are looking for a games computer this is NOT the way to go. It may not be that the computer is awful at making games, but just the software people don't seem to be trying. Take a look at the games on each system and see for yourself. Amiga games seem to have more 'playability' (more fun) than the Atari ST games which sometimes seem blocky and/or slow and/or have annoying interfaces. > >Please reply directly to me as I am not on this list. I'll try that too. > >Thanks again, >-Pat Sullivan > Reston, VA. -Brandon!
jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) (06/08/89)
Every month the Amiga newsgroup posts an article titled:
"Introduction to comp.sys.amiga". It has a list of commonly asked
questions, including "Atari vs Amiga, what should I buy".
I bring this up in this newsgroup because the posting is nonjudgemental.
It avoids the "my computer is better than your computer" tirade by simply
listing some of the options and differences, and basically says "the
decision is up to you". I recommend that Atari ST owners look at that
one article, just so you can be informed as to what the competition is
doing.
Please, no "religous" flames; I'm just trying to be helpful.
--
Joe Smith (408)922-6220 | SMTP: JMS@F74.TYMNET.COM or jms@tymix.tymnet.com
McDonnell Douglas FSCO | UUCP: ...!{ames,pyramid}!oliveb!tymix!tardis!jms
PO Box 49019, MS-D21 | PDP-10 support: My car's license plate is "POPJ P,"
San Jose, CA 95161-9019 | narrator.device: "I didn't say that, my Amiga did!"jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) (06/10/89)
Two people have asked that I post the message in comp.sys.amiga that compares the two machines. Here is an extract of that article. If anyone has comments about this, I can forward them to Edwin. >From: ehoogerbeets@rose.waterloo.edu (Edwin Hoogerbeets) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Introduction to comp.sys.amiga Message-ID: <14247@watdragon.waterloo.edu> Date: 3 Jun 89 00:13:08 GMT Expires: 3 Jul 89 20:37:25 GMT Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu Reply-To: ehoogerbeets@rose.waterloo.edu (Edwin Hoogerbeets) Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario This is an introductory posting to comp.sys.amiga. If you are a new reader of this group or even if you just want Amiga/Usenet information, please read the following articles. [Many topics deleted.] ,BUY Which machine to buy? (500 or 2000 Amiga, Atari, Mac?) uunet!Sun.COM!cmcmanis (Chuck McManis) geoffs@smoke.UUCP AmigaIan@cup.portal.com.UUCP >From: uunet!Sun.COM!cmcmanis (Chuck McManis) Subject: a comparison of PC's... which one to buy This posting is an effort on my part to demonstrate why these arguments are pointless. I try to show that the Amiga 500 and the 1040 ST are essentially the same design with different compromises. When all is said and done they are the same computer. You as a reader look at the two machines, look at the way the designers compromised, and pick the one that *you* like better. Also be aware that your choice is only the better choice from your perspective, others will disagree and they are also correct from *their* perspective. Take the following comments from Peter as an example : In article <11767@cup.portal.com> (Peter Ted Szymonik) writes: > ...I'd say Atari will have no > problem reaching the million mark next year if it hasn't already > done so! ... Given the "magicalness" of a million machines (see the PS/2, Apple Mac announcements when they broke a million) it is clear that Atari (or Commodore for that matter) will be shouting to everyone that can read (especially developers) to let them in on the good news. Witness Commodore's hyper sensitivity as they get closer to that number. > Also, I'm sure that a good chunk of those Amiga sales > were the 500 which was probably bought primarily as a game machine > while the majority of STs out there are 1040's which have much > greater utility. This is an especially wonderful example of why debating machine merits is a waste of time. Here is a guy who obviously is very proud of his computer ownership attempting to slander the "competition" with absolutely no facts at all. If he understood the Amiga computer line he would realize that the Amiga 500 *is* the Atari 1040 ST competition. Line up the features side by side and even a third grader could tell you they were the same machine, to wit : 1040 ST Amiga 500 ---------- ---------- Processor 68000 68000 "Main" Memory 1 Meg 1 Meg (with A501 clock/ram card) Screen Resolution 320 X 200 350 X 200 various #'s of 640 X 200 700 X 200 colors. 640 X 480 700 X 440 Disk Drive 720K 880K Serial Port Yes Yes Parallel Port Yes Yes MIDI Port Yes No DMA Port Yes No Expansion Bus No Yes Hard Disk Available Yes Yes Memory Expansion Avail Yes Yes Max Memory 4 MB 9 Mb Blitter No* Yes Audio Yes Yes ----- * Blitter optional according to some things I have seen And the astute readers will note that a.) Prices are different, b.) Implementations are different, and c.) Neither machine is the "better" machine to everyone. In terms of hardware capabilities they offer the same functions. The question you ask are "What are the decisions the designers made?" Take MIDI for example. The Amiga does not have a MIDI port, the designers did not decide to include one. It is easy to turn the Amiga serial port into a MIDI port but it will cost you the user extra cash. *You* decide which decision is better for *you*. Same thing with a hard disk. Atari builds in a DMA port that makes connecting a SCSI device easier, Commodore provides and expansion bus that you can connect a hard disk controller to. Here the Atari designer may have said "Well, either we offer a hard disk interface or an expansion interface, which will it be? Gee most of our users will just want a hard disk so lets offer that." Whereas the Amiga designer might have said "Lets offer an expansion port so that other things beside a hard disk can be easily connected here." The Atari decision makes for cheaper hard disks, the Commodore decision makes for greater flexibility. Which do *you* prefer? *You* decide and that makes that machine best for you. When one evaluates both machines you will notice that the Commodore decisions tended to flexibility even when it raised the cost, whereas Atari's leaned toward keeping the price down at the cost of flexibility. None of these decisions make one computer "better" than the other, they just make the computers different. Of course none of this means anything to someone who's ego is tied up in the computer they own. That type of person will get just as hyper about whether or not a BMW is better than a Mercedes or a Ford is better than a Mercury. The important point to remember is that when you read an article from someone who really likes their computer and thinks anyone who doesn't like their computer obviously has a learning disability, you have to understand that they are *correct*. This is how they think from *their* perspective. There is no need to point out how their perspective disagrees strongly with *your* perspective. That is because both of your perspectives will disagree with everyone elses perspective. The end result is a couple of thousand articles describing the authors perspective and views. If you could condense them into a single survey message you might et the Signal to Noise ratio up above .5 but I doubt it. Well thats *my* perspective, -- --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. ---------------- >From: geoffs@smoke.UUCP Subject: Re: Atari vs. Amiga: what to buy? ATARI VS. AMIGA: WHAT TO BUY? * the bottom line is -- whatever you like best. * but here are some thoughts: WORK/SCHOOL OS features: ======================== What kind of environment are you using at work/school? It is Likely Multi-tasking. (VAX VMS, UNIX, ?) - (AMIGA & ST) If VMS, I don't know of any VMS look-alikes for either machine. there is a PD editor (TVX) that can be configured to look like the VMS EDT editor I think... I know it can be made to look like VI and emacs/jove/uemacs... (unix). - (AMIGA) If unix at work,... unix editor PD look-a-likes "vi" and "emacs" are available. (They are also available on the ST). - (ST) If unix at work, then note that an ST version of MINIX has gone to Prentice Hall for distribution (out in Sept? - check comp.os.minix on when). You are familiar with MINIX? It is Version 7 unix look alike muli-tasking OS, comes with compiler and unix-behaving tools. - (AMIGA) As you know the Amiga has multi-tasking built in, so it you can handle a different interface from the one at work, but are used to multi-tasking, you are already set. - (ST) UNIX? Today *now* there is a nice PD shell on the ST (gulam) that looks a lot like the unix shell with many of the commands. The editor is emacs-like, and you can pause the editor, escape to the shell, compile a program, then bring the editor back to the fore ground (via "fg" a-la unix). Not multi-tasking. Context switching, but it is the unix look and feel. - Note: Amiga and ST can run MSDOS stuff with appropriate add-on's. ST cam also run MAC stuff with appropriate add-on's. MIDI: ===== The ST came with midi's built in and this has generated a lot of ST midi software. Buy a copy of STart magazine. There are always adds in that artist-oriented magazine for music editors, and multiple other midi programs. I do not know what midi stuff is available on the AMIGA. I think there is a large library of midi software on the PC market. You may wish to look here too... Final suggestions: 1. Get several machine specific magazines on both computers. Try to stay away from those published by the machine manufacture; they tend to be censored and over-hyped: "See how great we are!!!!!!!!". 2. Please try before you buy. - you may hate the feel of the keyboard. *BOTH* good computers, you probably can't go wrong what ever you choose. To be fair, I do not own an Amiga. I own 2 Commodors (the VIC-20 & C64) am the happy owner of 1 Atari (the ST). I will not suggest either computer over the other. That is a personal preference. A choice only you can make. My experience with both companys is about the same. They are probably on a par with the rest of the retail computer industry. -- ---> geoffs@brl.arpa -- ---------------- >From: AmigaIan@cup.portal.com.UUCP Subject: Re: 500 or 2000 ? >My next question is this: >should I buy an amiga 500 or an amiga 2000? >Can someone give me the pro's and con's of the two machines? Ok, let me give it a try, The 2000 comes with 512K more than the 500 but I have seen 512K expansion for the 500 priced under $150. You can have IBM compatibility with the 2000 but not with the 500. The 2000 costs more $$$ but it is a little less expensive to expand. The 2000 is bigger than the 500. If you expand with the 500 you need alot of space. The 500 is about $700 cheaper if you get a 1 meg 500. The 2000 is now selling for $1499. The 500 is now selling for $649. Did I miss anything? I believe those are all the diffrences. Hope I made things easier rather than harder. Ian_Matthew_Smith@cup.portal.com -- Joe Smith (408)922-6220 | SMTP: JMS@F74.TYMNET.COM or jms@tymix.tymnet.com McDonnell Douglas FSCO | UUCP: ...!{ames,pyramid}!oliveb!tymix!tardis!jms PO Box 49019, MS-D21 | PDP-10 support: My car's license plate is "POPJ P," San Jose, CA 95161-9019 | narrator.device: "I didn't say that, my Amiga did!"
david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) (07/25/89)
I suggest that you look at the software as well as the computer itself. Consider Calamus and DynaCadd on the ST, and compare them to whatever is available on the Amiga. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0R
mitchell@janus.uucp (Evan Mitchell) (07/28/89)
In article <89072707200427@masnet.uucp> david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) writes: >I suggest that you look at the software as well as the computer itself. >Consider Calamus and DynaCadd on the ST, and compare them to whatever is >available on the Amiga. >--- > * Via ProDoor 3.0R This is true. However, consider Professional Page (full Postscript color seperations (4096 soon to be 16 mil)) and X-Cad. And remember you can run both of them at the same time, and you can add an '030 to your system (A2000 without hacking) and a math co-processor (68882) and lots of good NTSC compatible video software available, and... Don't kid yourself, this isn't an easy choice. I chose to go with the company with the least amount of vaporware... -Evan _______________________________________________________________________________ | Evan Jay Mitchell EECS/ERL Industrial Liaison Program | | mitchell@janus.berkeley.edu University of California at Berkeley | | Phone: (415) 643-6687 | | "Think, it ain't illegal...yet!" - George Clinton | |_____________________________________________________________________________|
bbs@medsys.UUCP (BBS login) (07/30/89)
david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) writes: >I suggest that you look at the software as well as the computer itself. >Consider Calamus and DynaCadd on the ST, and compare them to whatever is >available on the Amiga. >--- > * Via ProDoor 3.0R Hope you're not trying to get one of those stupid wars started up again... But, I think Professional Pages DIRECT 4-color separated outputs to a Postscript Color Laser Printer look quite nice! Scalable fonts, and clip art to boot. Don't know much about Cad, but X-Cad, and Ultra Cad look pretty good too. I've seen Calamus on an ST, and don't think it holds a candle to Pro Page on an Amiga. Just an opinioin...
david.megginson@canremote.uucp (DAVID MEGGINSON) (08/01/89)
I don't see any point in arguing relative merits of the machines. I have a lot of respect for both the ST and the Amiga, but like any intelligent person, I'd trade both for a Sun or NeXT if I could afford it. As for Calamus, I don't know your program, so I can't argue relative merits. As a DTP and Typesetting program, though, Calamus has several features which I've never heard of in another DTP program: - It uses the same outline fonts on the screen and printer. That means that if you look at the screen at 375% magnification, you will see a pixel-by-pixel representation of what will come out on a 300 dpi laser printer. These outline fonts are, of course, Compugraphic (there are cheapie fonts available) - Each character contains its own kerning information. That means that 'To', for example, will always kern correctly, even if the characters are in different fonts and/or point sizes. It is almost never necessary to kern manually, except for special effects. - Every single function or sub-function can be assigned to a function key or alt-key sequence. As a result, Calamus can be made practically mouse-less for speed with an experienced operator - There are also control-key macros for text, rulers and style - You can rotate text at any angle from 0 - 360 degrees, by a tenth of a degree. You can also print text at any raster from 0-100% by tenths of a percent. Since screen and printer fonts are outlined, you may use any point size by tenths of a point. - You can search and replace any combination of style, size and font. For example, you could make every string of underlined Swiss into the same point size, outlined, Times (I'm not using the right names here). - The program contains a separate text editing window, which is a lot like a photo-typesetting program (remember the control-key macros for font, size, style, text, etc) - It is amazingly fast printing, since it uses its own page-description language (yes, it does interface to Linotronic, and is three to ten times as fast as driving an image-setter with Postscript) There's a lot more, but this message is long enough. --- * Via ProDoor 3.01R