[comp.sys.atari.st] Software costs

silvert@cs.dal.ca (Bill Silvert) (05/05/89)

In article <102@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU> cs163aeo@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU (Professor I.R. Gumby) writes:
>That's why when I bought my first IBM
>clone a year ago over an Atari ST.  The programming languages and
>utilities for an IBM are easier and less expensive than that for the
>ST, so rather than take a compatability risk with an ST and PC
>Ditto, I chose an IBM XT clone and later upgraded it to an AT
>clone.  Now that Atari has the software I want (and now at the price
>I want with Borland entering the ST market) and eventually the
>networking hardware (if it's not out already, I am looking into
>buying one.

Is this an April Fool's joke, or is this guy serious?  I work with both
my own two ST's and with PC clones, and I use the ST for developing
stuff to run on the PC sometimes.  There are a few cheaper PC items, but
in general the ST stuff is far cheaper.  For example, I have two
versions of VIP Professional (one GEM-oriented, one looks like Lotus)
for half the cost of Lotus 1-2-3.  My AbSoft Fortran compiler for the ST
cost 1/3 of Microsoft's compiler, and is a lot more compact.  TDI
Modula-2 is down to about the same cost as Topspeed, and I believe that
there is a cheaper one out.  XPRO for $35 beats any MS-DOS Prolog,
including Turbo.  Word Perfect is cheaper for the ST, although not so
well supported.  dBMAN is a lot cheaper than dBASE, etc., etc.

The only major exception seems to be in the area of C compilers, where
Borland, Zortech, and others have a price war going, and C++ hasn't
shown its head yet.  There aren't any decent expert system shells for
the ST that I know about either.  There are factors that depend on the
size of the market that enter in, of course.

From a programming point of view, MS-DOS is hard!!!  All that
segmentation crap, graphics at the lowest level, and so on.  Give me GEM
any time!

-- 
Bill Silvert, Habitat Ecology Division.
Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, NS, Canada B2Y 4A2
	UUCP: ...!{uunet,watmath}!dalcs!biomel!bill
	Internet: biomel@cs.dal.CA	BITNET: bs%dalcs@dalac.BITNET

gl8f@bessel.acc.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (05/06/89)

In article <3263@cs.dal.ca> bill@biomel.UUCP, biomel@cs.dal.CA writes:
[ discussing software prices ]
>
>The only major exception seems to be in the area of C compilers, 

Another item to note is that the ST has 3 working public-domain C compilers.
I'd hate to think of writing an MS-DOS C compiler that supported all of
the memory models, with libraries. And has anyone priced a development
environment for GEM or Windows on the PC recently? Doesn't Microsoft
charge an arm and a leg and more for a Windows Development Kit?

------
Greg Lindahl                |
gl8f@virginia.{edu,bitnet}  |   Veraj Programistoj ne uzas PASCAL-on

sirkm@ssyx.ucsc.edu (Greg Anderson) (05/06/89)

In article <3263@cs.dal.ca> bill@biomel.UUCP, biomel@cs.dal.CA writes:
>From a programming point of view, MS-DOS is hard!!!  All that
>segmentation crap, graphics at the lowest level, and so on.  Give me GEM
>any time!

MS-DOS versus GEM?  I am reminded of the question "When you die, would you
rather be eaten by a lion or trampled in a stampede?"

The correct answer, of course, is "no".     :)


     ___\    /___               Greg Anderson              ___\    /___ 
     \   \  /   /         Social Sciences Computing        \   \  /   /
      \  /\/\  /    University of California, Santa Cruz    \  /\/\  /
       \/    \/              sirkm@ssyx.ucsc.edu             \/    \/

crewman@bucsb.UUCP (JJS) (05/10/89)

In article <3263@cs.dal.ca> bill@biomel.UUCP, biomel@cs.dal.CA writes:
>
>From a programming point of view, MS-DOS is hard!!!  All that
>segmentation crap, graphics at the lowest level, and so on.  Give me GEM
>any time!
>

Nothing against the ST (I have one!), but with a decent PC C compiler
(Microsoft or Turbo) and a graphics library such as MetaWINDOW, a programmer
can virtually forget about Intel/MSDOS difficulties.  Most C compilers
will give you Unix-like file control under MSDOS, and MetaWINDOW, I must say
seems to be more comprehensive than VDI.  And if you've got to have windows,
GEM is available for the PC, as well as Microsoft Windows, whose applications
are truly multitasking.

Ooops, I forgot.  By the time you shell out for the Microsoft Windows Software
Development Kit (and the Microsoft C Compiler), ease of programming will be
the least of your problems :-)

So ST/GEM still remains the best value.  But we all knew that.

		-- JJS