buchanan@utcsri.UUCP (01/01/70)
In article <3712@well.UUCP> ufo@well.UUCP (Ollie North) writes: >> If the public thinks the Amiga is better, than let me ask you this. >>WHY IS ATARI ST'S BEATING AMIGA??? If your answer is because the public isn't > > There is no way that you are going to convince me that you're computer >is better than mine, and there is no way that I am going to convince you >that mine in better than yours. So next time you feel like defending youre >computer, do ya think you could do it in MAIL. I've been watching this war for a while so here I go. What both sides are saying is not My computer is better than yours, but rather 'The intelect that made the choice to buy my computer is higher than yours, SO THERE NYA NYA' *** Flame on!! If you want to show your intelligence Please do so with a constructive comment. Share a program that makes your computer more usefull to us. But Don't act like a child. We will all agree that our choice is the best, BUT we do not have to fight like children to show it. Flame off!!! *** -- John W. Buchanan Dynamic Graphics Project Computer Systems Research Institute (416) 978-6619 University of Toronto buchanan@toronto.CSNET {allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!buchanan
jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (01/01/70)
A lot has been said about the superiority of the Amiga graphics, and it's quite true, but just lately I've been seeing demonstrations of Spectrum 512 for the Atari-ST. The surprise is that a Spectrum 512 file is displayed with 512 colors at once on almost any Atari ST (some very early machines need a slight chip update) at 320 * 200 pixels. It's quite spectacular. It's still not as good as an Amiga, because you can't have a background task (something like 80% of the processor time is eaten by the display routine which uses interrupts to display the various colors), so there's no way you're going to use this for fast animated graphics like the Juggler, but it's interesting that it could produce still pictures of this nature. Cheers! -- Jim O. -- Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880 ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
czei@osupyr.UUCP (Michael S Czeiszperger) (01/01/70)
In article <1949@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> engst@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Adam C. Engst) writes: >In article <435@sugar.UUCP> karl@sugar.UUCP (Karl Lehenbauer) writes: > >I happen to like the ST for a number of reasons, one of which is >price. I would probably like an Amiga for a similarly cheap price, but >there aren't any dealers in Ithaca who even sell the Amiga, much less at a >discount like our ST dealer. My other major reason for liking the ST is >that I need to use a number of different computers at work, including the That kind of talk should be confined to comp.sys.st :-) :-0 :-) Michael S. Czeiszperger | Disclaimer: "Sorry, I'm all out of pith" Sound Synthesis Studios | Snail: Room 406 Baker Phone: (614) College of the Arts Computer Lab | 1971 Neil Avenue 292- The Ohio State University | Columbus, OH 43210 0895 UUCP : {decvax,ucbvax}!cbosgd!osupyr!czei
grr@cbmvax.UUCP (George Robbins) (01/01/70)
In article <1949@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> engst@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Adam C. Engst) writes: > > I'm really curious about something. A number of people who rave about > how wonderful the Amiga is particularly when compared to the ST also seem to > have an ST. This is strange enough - most people decide on one type of > computer, buy it, and then defend it. Yet these people are buying two > expensive computers, using one solely and letting the other "languish in the > closet." Defending a computer is a strange concept. Most people buy a computer with the intention of using it, either as an end in itself or for some more or less specific set of purposes. Depending on the user's perspective they may find either the Amiga or the ST currently unsuited to their purposes, or may conclude that some features of the machine obstruct its utility. The result is often a machine set off in the corner and a blast of steam. As for these offers of computers from disgruntled people, some are less than completely serious, others are unsure of your sincerity. I have a perfectly nice TI99/4A system collecting dust in my computer room that I once made the same kind of offer on, but when somebody tried to take me up on it, I found that despite the fact that the thing was completely worthless, especially next to the unix system next to it, I wasn't psychologically ready to accept defeat and give it away. Rationally this is silly, but anyone who drops the money for one of these things, excpept perhaps a simple commercial transaction, ends up making a strong, more or less irrational, emotional commitiment to the machine, reinforced by the labor required to get the upper hand on the thing. As usual, this is just another request for tolerance and patience in the olde computer wars. You can be happy with what you choose or unhappy as pleases you, but no need to get worked up about it. To an outsider, it probably looks like an Oldmobile owner and a Buick owner trying to argue that their car is innately better than the other, with occaisional agreement that both are probably infinitly better than the same model Chevy. -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing arpa: cbmvax!grr@seismo.css.GOV Commodore, Engineering Department fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)
jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) (07/13/87)
A while ago I sent the following request to the amiga and atari groups: | - COST: How much can I expect to spend on the system, color monitor, 20 meg | disk and 1 meg main memory? How much for the C software and editor? | - SPEED: What's the speed of the compiler? Relative measures (e.g. twice the | speed of an 8088-based PC) and absolute measures (e.g. 500 lines per | minute) are of interest. | - GRAPHICS: Speed and ease-of-programming. | - OVERALL IMPRESSIONS: What do you particularly like and dislike? Thanks to Karl Rowley, John M. Olsen, Keith Hedger, Ali Ozer, Avery Shealey, Jonathan Nagy, and Bryce Nesbitt for your responses. | The second biggest lie in recorded history is "I'll post a summary to | the net", but I really will if enough people respond. And so I will: Many responses were in the form "I prefer X because of Y" (e.g. X = "Amiga", Y = "multitasking"). The clear favorite was the Amiga. Reasons most often cited were more sophisticated hardware support for graphics and multitasking (a big favorite). The Amiga seems to be more expandable. According to Ali Ozer: | If you want to expand above 1 Meg [on the Atari 1040ST], | you need to start kludging things, and you can't go above 4 even with the | biggest hacks. The A2000 is 68020 compatible, and you can one day easily | plug in a 68020/68881 board for increased performance. (Such boards do | exist; CSA makes one for the A1000, for instance.) 1040ST can't be | upgraded to the 68020; the 24-bit address pointer is engraved in their OS. For my purposes, I need as much memory as I can get my hands on, so I'm happy to hear that the Amiga can support up to 9 meg. According to a local dealer of Ataris and Amigas, the Amiga A2000 will be available at the end of this month while the new Ataris (with 2-4 meg) won't be available for a while longer. I've heard that both new machines are already available in Europe. As far as C development goes, the preferences seem to be Mark Williams C for the Atari, and Manx Aztec (or is the Aztec Manx?) for the Amiga. The Amiga also has Lattice C, but based on my own experience with Lattice for the IBM PC, I'd be reluctant to try them again. Especially since the Amiga product seems to have so many similarities to the IBM PC product (based on a quick reading of the documentation). Amiga's C compiler is produced by Lattice. I've heard various estimates of when the Manx symbolic debugger will be available. They range from "next release - this summer" to "next year". I have no idea what to believe on this topic. Hard disks are available but the Amiga dealer here said that there was some room for improvement in quality. According to respondents, prices for the Amiga disks are slightly higher than for the Atari. The Amiga prices I've heard are about $1000 for a 20 meg drive. Several people said that the Amiga is more expensive but worth it. The dealer here has a trade-in plan: A1000 + $1000 = A2000. While it seems that the A1000 will meet my requirements, it's nice to know I can move up without losing my investment. One person commented on documentation, saying that the Amiga did better. So it's an Amiga for me. I'm looking at this as a machine for the next couple of years until 68020-class machines come down in price. Given that there are *already* some impressive 68020 boxes for the Amiga, it's possible that I can use the machine for an even longer time. Anyone want a used IBM PC? Jack Orenstein
iarocci@eneevax.UUCP (John Iarocci) (07/14/87)
In article <17680@cca.CCA.COM> jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) writes: >According to Ali Ozer: > >| If you want to expand above 1 Meg [on the Atari 1040ST], >| you need to start kludging things, and you can't go above 4 even with the >| biggest hacks. The A2000 is 68020 compatible, and you can one day easily >| plug in a 68020/68881 board for increased performance. (Such boards do >| exist; CSA makes one for the A1000, for instance.) 1040ST can't be >| upgraded to the 68020; the 24-bit address pointer is engraved in their OS. > >For my purposes, I need as much memory as I can get my hands on... Jack, I think you've been somewhat misinformed by some obviously well- intentioned Amiga user. True, the existing Ataris (520ST & 1040ST) cannot easily be expanded beyond 4 megabytes, but the new Mega STs are reportedly expandable to 16 megabytes. So, if you REALLY need the memory, the CLEAR winner is ATARI. > >So it's an Amiga for me. I'm looking at this as a machine for the next >couple of years until 68020-class machines come down in price. Given that >there are *already* some impressive 68020 boxes for the Amiga, it's possible >that I can use the machine for an even longer time. Well, it looks like you've already made up your mind, but for the benefit of others who may not have, let me point out that the Mega STs are expandable (they have an expansion slot), and will supposedly have 68020 support in the form of a 68020 box which will connect to STs through the DMA port (I think Atari calls this the TT). So, if you look closely at what you get for your money, I think many people will find the decision a little less clear-cut than it would appear from your posting. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | John Iarocci 'Imagination is more important than knowledge.' | | - Albert Einstein | | 'He who has imagination without learning has wings and no feet.' | | - Joubert | | ARPA : iarocci@eneevax.umd.edu | | UUCP : [seismo,allegra,rlgvax]!umcp-cs!eneevax!iarocci | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ravi@mcnc.UUCP (Ravi Subrahmanyan) (07/14/87)
In article <17680@cca.CCA.COM> jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) writes: > >A while ago I sent the following request to the amiga and atari groups: It's definitely our fault for not having responded to this guy and all that (see most of the names he quoted?), but this is hysterical.. Isn't it amazing how people get carried away while talking about stuff they haven't the faintest idea about? (reminds me of an old Magic Sac debate here some months back). >According to Ali Ozer: > >| If you want to expand above 1 Meg [on the Atari 1040ST], >| you need to start kludging things, and you can't go above 4 even with the >| biggest hacks. Well, lessee, how does one kludge things? One walks or runs to a dealer, or calls mail order, shells out big bucks for a board (price varies with amount of memory plugged in, but its very reasonable. I know because I almost ought one), pops open the ST, pulls out the MMU, plugs the board into the socket, plugs back the MMU, and then of course the usual crossed fingers, black cats & lizards, chants etc. take over. Ali was right, you can't go over 4 meg, but a kludge? Another posting earlier said something about "obviously well intentioned <A-word> user".. I'm not saying he has to be this way, but Ali, objective as far as the ST goes? Best laugh I've had all month... > >prices for the Amiga disks are slightly higher than for the Atari. The Amiga >prices I've heard are about $1000 for a 20 meg drive. So the difference would be $300-400 for a 20Meg drive. And, as far as availability of the ST's versus 2000's goes, I myself wouldn't beleive either side till I see one in a store. Seriously though, while it does seem like you (Jack) want an Amiga, after $2000 for an A2000 and $2500 for a CSA (this was mentioned for the 68020/68881 expansions) with something more than the card-rack, we're getting up to the price range of the Mac II. At my school we get such a good educational discount that it almost seems worth it. Does anyone know if they're shipping yet?? -ravi
ali@rocky.STANFORD.EDU (Ali Ozer) (07/14/87)
In article <979@eneevax.UUCP> John Iarocci writes: >In article <17680@cca.CCA.COM> jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) writes: >>According to Ali Ozer: >>| If you want to expand above 1 Meg [on the Atari 1040ST], >>| you need to start kludging things, and you can't go above 4 even with the >>| biggest hacks. >Jack, I think you've been somewhat misinformed by some obviously well- >intentioned Amiga user. True, the existing Ataris (520ST & 1040ST) cannot >easily be expanded beyond 4 megabytes, but the new Mega STs are reportedly >expandable to 16 megabytes. [I don't want to start a religious war (they all say) but] Misinformed and well-intentioned? 8-) I should put that in my finger plan... I just said the 1040 could not be expanded beyond 4 Megs, and that's what you seem to say. About the Mega ST --- You say "reportedly" --- You mean here's a machine that was announced way before the A500 and A2000 and you don't even know how much memory it can address? I even bet most people don't know if they'll start shipping with blitters or not... In any case, with the 68020 additions to the Amiga (like the CSA stuff), the maximum amount of memory attachable to the Amiga grows as well --- For instance I just read in Amazing Computing that the CSA Turbo Amiga can accept upto 12 Megs of 32-bit memory internally alone. And this memory goes above 68000's maximum address of 00ffffff. So if you're concern is Mega ST's reported 16 Megs vs Amiga 2000's 9.5, then you should realize that the 68020 opens up a lot more possibilities. Of course the CSA Turbo Amiga (and the various memory boards for it) are currently costly, but other 68020/68881 boards will drive prices down, way down, I'm sure. Ali Ozer, ali@rocky.stanford.edu
bryce@COGSCI.BERKELEY.EDU (Bryce Nesbitt) (07/15/87)
[ Yes, followups should have been directed to talk.religion ] In article <979@> iarocci@eneevax.umd.edu.UUCP (John Iarocci) writes: >In article <17680@> jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) writes: >> >>| If you want to expand above 1 Meg [on the Atari 1040ST], >>| you need to start kludging things, and you can't go above 4 even with the >>| biggest hacks. [...] >>| >Jack, I think you've been somewhat misinformed by some obviously well- >intentioned Amiga user. True, the existing Ataris (520ST & 1040ST) cannot >easily be expanded beyond 4 megabytes, but the new Mega STs are reportedly > ^^^^^^^^^^ >expandable to 16 megabytes. So, if you REALLY need the memory, the CLEAR >winner is ATARI. Hold on! Lets drop back to real facts here. The 68000 processor brings 24 effective address lines out to the bus. 24 bits=16 Megabytes TOTAL. From there you go DOWN to add your ROM operating system, chip registers, etc. You can go UP with bank switching and other techniques, but that's NOT what we are talking about. The memory controller chip and other factors limit the 1040ST to just 4 megabytes. The Amiga has no arbitrary limit, but 10 Megabytes fits in real comfortably (you can go higher). The Mega STs will have a limit of 16 Megabytes MINUS a bunch of other factors, just like all the other machines. How you can USE the memory is the only real difference. >>So it's an Amiga for me. I'm looking at this as a machine for the next >>couple of years until 68020-class machines come down in price. Given that >>there are *already* some impressive 68020 boxes for the Amiga, it's possible >>that I can use the machine for an even longer time. > >>| [The] 1040ST can't be >>| upgraded to the 68020; the 24-bit address pointer is engraved in their OS. > >[The Mega STs] supposedly have 68020 support in the form of a 68020 box which >will connect to STs through the DMA port [...] There's a huge difference between having your computer BE a 68020 machine or have it TALK to a 68020 machine. My Atari 800 could TALK to a 68020 box via its (almost DMA) port. The first poster is correct that a non 68020 compatible type pointer is deeply engraved into the ST's operating system. It's possible, but not easy, or clean, to get rid of this restriction. Since the ancient V1.1 of the Amiga operating system there has been a check that will look for the presence of a 68020. If found the system will fiddle with the format of stack frames, enable the instruction cache (it powers on disabled), and set a global bit for all to see. Also starting with V1.1 the OS was sanitized for use with the 68020. Read comp.sys.mac to find out what scattered headaches and glitches the 68020 is bringing to Macintosh world, and Apple was far more prepared for the change than Atari. [ Napalm, meet your more potent brother, USENET flames... ] ----------------------------- |\ /| . Ack! (NAK, EOT, SOH) {o O} . ( " ) bryce@cogsci.berkeley.EDU -or- ucbvax!cogsci!bryce U "Success leads to stagnation; stagnation leads to failure."
ali@rocky.STANFORD.EDU (Ali Ozer) (07/15/87)
In article <2394@alvin.mcnc.UUCP> ravi@alvin.UUCP (Ravi Subrahmanyan) writes: >In article <17680@cca.CCA.COM> jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) writes: >>A while ago I sent the following request to the amiga and atari groups: > It's definitely our fault for not having responded to this guy >and all that (see most of the names he quoted?), but this is hysterical.. >Isn't it amazing how people get carried away while talking about stuff >they haven't the faintest idea about? >> >>According to Ali Ozer: >>| If you want to expand above 1 Meg [on the Atari 1040ST], >>| you need to start kludging things, and you can't go above 4 even with the >>| biggest hacks. > > Well, lessee, how does one kludge things? One walks or runs >to a dealer, or calls mail order, shells out big bucks for a board >(price varies with amount of memory plugged in, but its very >reasonable. I know because I almost ought one), pops open the ST, >pulls out the MMU, plugs the board into the socket, plugs back the >MMU, and then of course the usual crossed fingers, black cats & >lizards, chants etc. take over. Ali was right, you can't go >over 4 meg, but a kludge? I haven't got the faintest idea about things, but I was right about something. Must've been a lucky guess... Anyway, hmm, it's that easy to expand your 1040's memory, huh? I called four local and two mail order Atari ST dealers. Guess how many of them carried memory expansions for the 1040ST? *None*. These were all places that sold STs, mostly picked out of Atari ST magazines. Two of the places did not know about such an expansion. Another, Winner's Circle Systems, said they'd heard about the 4 Meg expansion to the 1040ST but they did not sell it because "they were not authorized to install them." Hmm. The other three had heard of memory expansions to the Ataris. When I pressed further, they either did not know anything else or it turned out to be the 512K expansion to the 520ST they were thinking about... The reason I said "kludge" is all the memory expansions to the 1040ST that I've ever heard of have been in the form of brave souls who open up their machines and solder in their own memory chips. If it's as easy as "pop open the ST, unplug the MMU (?), plug in the new board, and voila," then why don't more ST owners have 2 Meg machines? It's difficult to see how an average 1040 user can upgrade his/her machine to 2 or 4 Megs. As an Amiga user, on the other hand, I can go to The Computer Attic (5 minutes away) or either HT Electronics store (15 & 25 minutes away) and pick myself a 2 Meg expansion, come home, and install it without even "popping" the Amiga open. For less than $600. Or I can do it mail order, for about $450. So there. > Ali, objective as far as the ST goes? Best laugh I've had all month... Well I'm glad you were amused. >>prices for the Amiga disks are slightly higher than for the Atari. The Amiga >>prices I've heard are about $1000 for a 20 meg drive. > So the difference would be $300-400 for a 20Meg drive. And, Yes, hard disk prices for the Amiga are a bit higher. Supra 20 Megs is about $800 for the Amiga and $575 for the ST, mail order. >... $2000 for an A2000 and $2500 for a CSA (this was mentioned for the >68020/68881 expansions) with something more than the >card-rack, we're getting up to the price range of the Mac II. The $2500 is for the giant Turbo Amiga, which is a computer in itself that lives off of the Amiga. 68020/68881 cards for under $1000 will be available for the 2000, and even maybe for the 500. And the Mac II doesn't multitask. Ali Ozer, ali@rocky.stanford.edu
grr@cbmvax.UUCP (George Robbins) (07/15/87)
In article <979@eneevax.UUCP> iarocci@eneevax.umd.edu.UUCP (John Iarocci) writes: > In article <17680@cca.CCA.COM> jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) writes: > >According to Ali Ozer: > > > >| If you want to expand above 1 Meg [on the Atari 1040ST], > >| you need to start kludging things, and you can't go above 4 even with the > >| biggest hacks. The A2000 is 68020 compatible, and you can one day easily > >| plug in a 68020/68881 board for increased performance. (Such boards do > >| exist; CSA makes one for the A1000, for instance.) 1040ST can't be > >| upgraded to the 68020; the 24-bit address pointer is engraved in their OS. > > > >For my purposes, I need as much memory as I can get my hands on... > > Jack, I think you've been somewhat misinformed by some obviously well- > intentioned Amiga user. True, the existing Ataris (520ST & 1040ST) cannot > easily be expanded beyond 4 megabytes, but the new Mega STs are reportedly > expandable to 16 megabytes. So, if you REALLY need the memory, the CLEAR > winner is ATARI. No, the winner is still less than clear. Atari has said the Mega-ST has "16 MB Address Space", they've said nothing about how much memory will fit into this address space. As it happens, the Amiga has *always* had a 16 MB address space, however we long ago documented an allocation of 2MB (max) for video memory, 8MB of expansion bus auto-configured memory, and a goodly amount of "reserved" area. This capability has existed on *all* models. Now perhaps Atari will provide a way to have 16MB of memory, but they haven't said so... > >So it's an Amiga for me. I'm looking at this as a machine for the next > >couple of years until 68020-class machines come down in price. Given that > >there are *already* some impressive 68020 boxes for the Amiga, it's possible > >that I can use the machine for an even longer time. > > Well, it looks like you've already made up your mind, but for the benefit of > others who may not have, let me point out that the Mega STs are expandable > (they have an expansion slot), and will supposedly have 68020 support in the > form of a 68020 box which will connect to STs through the DMA port (I think > Atari calls this the TT). So, if you look closely at what you get for your > money, I think many people will find the decision a little less clear-cut > than it would appear from your posting. Well, maybe. Both parties have made noises about expansion and "'020 machines", but the fact is that the Amiga expansion market already exists, with a variety of boxes, modules and internal upgrades available. While an assortment of goodies will no doubt become available for the Mega-ST "expansion slot" in the future, current availability seems limited to a couple of hard-disk drives and some internal memory upgrades. There are rarely any clear winners in these feature wars. It is up to the potential customer to match both his feature requirements and and cost goals with what is available and make some personal judments about machine/software style and corporate personality and make up his own mind... -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing arpa: cbmvax!grr@seismo.css.GOV Commodore, Engineering Department fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)
ravi@mcnc.UUCP (Ravi Subrahmanyan) (07/15/87)
In article <421@rocky.STANFORD.EDU> ali@rocky.UUCP (Ali Ozer) writes: [ Called a bunch 4 dealers & 2 mail order places for the 4Meg expansion and couldn't find it; only Winners Circle had heard of it] I once mentioned during a discussion about the Magic Sac (with people from Winners Circle, actually), that just because they or their friends couldn't get Mac software to run on the Sac, it did not mean the Sac was no good; it simply meant it was being used by klutzes; because, others had used it very successfully. These 4meg expansion boards are advertised in ST magazines (I learnt about them there), have been reviewed, and are sold directly by the manufacturer in many cases. Our local dealer knows about them, and will install them if asked to do so. I don't think it means a damn that you couldn't find one; look, one thing that differentiates an ST user from say an <A-word> :-) user is that they read ST magazines, and __know where to find things for the ST__. Chek out some recent issue of STarT, you'll find the ads. The one from TechSpecialities was even in this newsgroup a while back. >The reason I said "kludge" is all the memory expansions to the 1040ST >that I've ever heard of have been in the form of brave souls who open >up their machines and solder in their own memory chips. Simply not true, at least around here. Granted, many people have done what Ali says (I have also - becaue all I could afford was $75 for the chips). Many friends have 520s expanded with boards; again, check ST mags for ads offering to do this. >If it's as easy >as "pop open the ST, unplug the MMU (?), plug in the new board, and >voila," then why don't more ST owners have 2 Meg machines? It's >difficult to see how an average 1040 user can upgrade his/her machine to >2 or 4 Megs. I think its simply because they have no use for more; there isn't much you can do with the ST right now that you especially need more than a meg for; note that some of the expansion boards normally are only populated with an extra meg or 1/2 meg, though you can go to 4 - (at least one board needs 1meg chips for that though). >As an Amiga user, on the other hand, I can go to >The Computer Attic (5 minutes away) or either HT Electronics store (15 & 25 >minutes away) and pick myself a 2 Meg expansion, come home, and install it >without even "popping" the Amiga open. For less than $600. Or I can do it >mail order, for about $450. So there. My my, we're happy now, aren't we.. I completely agree with you, but I was solely concerned with non-kludgy expansions for the ST. I don't have an amiga, and I don't care about expansions for it. >> Ali, objective as far as the ST goes? Best laugh I've had all month... >Well I'm glad you were amused. I'm glad you took it so well. Hey, maybe we could even get along, Ali? >And the Mac II doesn't multitask. True. -ravi
cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (07/15/87)
Well, I am not flaming here, but Atari does have a few things to account
for. I mean Simon Poole can get an Amiga 2000 but not a Mega ST, I've
seen Amiga 500's at stores all over the Bay area and yesterday I was looking
at a 68020/68881 plug in board for it ($895). So you spend $800 for the
1 Meg Amiga 500 and $895 for the '020 board. Add a $900 supra drive and
we are looking at $2600 for a pretty nice system that is available today.
Not to mention that Amiga owners can trade their 1000's + $1000 for a 2000. I
realize Atari gives you lower prices now rather than a tradein on a Mega
but, hey it looks like good P.R. There are advantages to both systems, at
the moment (snapshot of the month of July 1987) it would seem Commodore has
their new machines out, and Atari has the first Mac clone that has survived
on the open market.
--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.exodus@uop.UUCP (Freddy Kreuger) (07/16/87)
In article <419@rocky.STANFORD.EDU>, ali@rocky.STANFORD.EDU (Ali Ozer) writes: > instance I just read in Amazing Computing that the CSA Turbo Amiga can > accept upto 12 Megs of 32-bit memory internally alone. And this memory goes > above 68000's maximum address of 00ffffff. So if you're concern is Mega ST's > reported 16 Megs vs Amiga 2000's 9.5, then you should realize that the 68020 > opens up a lot more possibilities. Of course the CSA Turbo Amiga > (and the various memory boards for it) are currently costly, but other > 68020/68881 boards will drive prices down, way down, I'm sure. > > Ali Ozer, ali@rocky.stanford.edu Did you not take the time to read about the 68020 box for the STs? Just plug it in and let it rip? But then the Commodore 68020 can address more memory than the Atari 68020, right? Commodore must have talked Motorola into making a Commodore version that is better and an Atari version that is not, right? Use your head. If both machines have easily added on/in 68020 boxes/cards, what is the difference except price? As BYTE magazine has written, the Atari 1040ST (not to mention the new MEGAs) have the best price/performance ratio in the history of computing. The Amiga is as powerful and as pricey as the Mac, and no one in either the ST group or the Amiga group wants a MAC, right? So let's just settle on improving technology and helping each other. Write software on one machine then let somone with the other machine port it and everybody has equally powerful technology and software in their hands. I'm sure we're all happy that we don't have 8-bits anymore !! Greg Onufer
mgr@pixar.UUCP (Michael Griffin Russell) (07/17/87)
Please, guys, let's take it easy on the Amiga versus ST comparisons. It's getting a little too acid for my tastes. Amiga's OK, ST's OK, OK? I think it's fair to say the Amiga is a more well-established machine with easier to get memory upgrades and a more well educated dealership, but upgrades are certainly available for the ST as well. Distribution ain't great, granted, but there are several companies making good, solderfree mem upgrades for the ST. Let's recognize that Amiga and ST users have a lot in common and can benifit by cooperating. This throwing sticks and stones is destructive, pure and simple.
dclemans@mntgfx.MENTOR.COM (Dave Clemans) (07/17/87)
The ST has an architectural limitation of 15.5 megabytes. The other 1/2 megabyte of 68000 address space is taken up by rom's and I/O space. Existing ST's can easily be taken to 4 megabytes by using 1 megabit ram chips. With enough work you could take an existing system past 4 megabytes, but the amount of work needed would almost definitely be greater than the benefits you'd gain. However, if the expansion bus in the Mega-ST's was done correctly, it should be relatively simple to take one of these newer systems past 4 megabytes. dgc
atc@bnl.UUCP (atc@bnl) (07/18/87)
Mega ST = Vaporware; Poof! Poof! Poof! Poof!:-) ;-) :-) Never back something you can't touch.... ------- The invisible Snaf: atc@bnl
mitch@NRL-PPD.ARPA ("HORACE MITCHELL") (07/18/87)
Concerning the remarks about memory upgrades to a 1040ST:
I have a local dealer ( L&Y Electronics in Woodbridge, VA ) who
provides both a 4-Meg ($899) and a 2-Meg ($499) upgrade to a
1040ST. THIS IS NOT VAPORWARE. I have seen and used the 4-Meg
upgrade. It is not a kludge or a hobbyist's nightmare, but rather
nicely designed daughterboard fitting above the existing memory.
By the way, that is the installed price.
The moral here is NOT the superiority of one machine over
the other. It is the value of your local supplier/repairer. I
originally chose the ST over the Amiga, which was the correct choice
for me BECAUSE OF THE DEALER. I don't know of a friendly, innovative,
discount dealer of Amiga/Amiga software in my area. (That doesn't
mean there isn't one sq so leanford@crash.CTS.COM (Michael Ditto) (07/20/87)
In article <411@uop.UUCP> exodus@uop.UUCP (Freddy Kreuger) flames: >Did you not take the time to read about the 68020 box for the STs? Just >plug it in and let it rip? But then the Commodore 68020 can address more >memory than the Atari 68020, right? Commodore must have talked Motorola >into making a Commodore version that is better and an Atari version that >is not, right? Use your head. If both machines have easily added on/in >68020 boxes/cards, what is the difference except price? The difference is this: The Amiga's operating system and application programs can run on a 68020, the Atari's CAN NOT. You are talking about hooking up a second computer to the side of your first one, talking to it through your old keyboard/monitor, having it do all it's I/O through some bizarre (probably non-DMA) interface to the original CPU, and saying you have a 68020 in your machine. Either that, or you will have to dump the Atari OS and all the software for it; if so, what's the point of buying the ST? > As BYTE magazine >has written, the Atari 1040ST (not to mention the new MEGAs) have the best >price/performance ratio in the history of computing. First of all, "Byte Magazine" doesn't write things, it publishes articles written by individuals. The statement you give above, even if it is a quote, is a subjective statement and is the opinion of the person who wrote it, even if that person is an editor of a very respectable magazine. My primary use of all my computers is for software development and tele- communications. With my Amiga, I can download files, compile programs, and edit source files, all at once. Let's see, an Amiga 500 with 1Meg of ram costs $860 at a local computer store, what does it cost for three Atari ST's? My point is that these questions are subjective. I MIGHT even concede that the average person who buys an Atari ST or Amiga 500 class of computer will get a better bargain if they go with the ST. But **I** have more fun and am more productive with an Amiga. -- Michael "Ford" Ditto -=] Ford [=- P.O. Box 1721 ford@crash.CTS.COM Bonita, CA 92002 ford%oz@prep.mit.ai.edu
bugs@pnet02.CTS.COM (Jim Biggs) (07/21/87)
Will we ever see an Amiga with a 68020 and v-mem controller with a 32 bit bus?
I mean a bus that is not a cheat like the Mac II with it's UGH! mux'd address
lines and data lines (Motorla went to the expense of not mux'ing for speed!),
I'm talking a Amiga OUT of the BOX????
UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, ihnp4}!crash!gryphon!pnet02!bugs
INET: bugs@pnet02.CTS.COMkarl@sugar.UUCP (Karl Lehenbauer) (07/26/87)
> ... Write software on one machine then > let somone with the other machine port it and everybody has equally > powerful technology and software in their hands. ... Porting those cool Amiga programs to the ST will be kind of difficult, at least any programs that make use of digital audio, 640 X 400 X 16, 320 X 200 X 32, HAM graphics or multitasking. Sorry, the ST is not equally powerful, except in pure 68000 CPU cycles. Anybody want to buy mine? It's been languishing in the closet ever since the Amiga arrived.
engst@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Adam C. Engst) (08/05/87)
In article <435@sugar.UUCP> karl@sugar.UUCP (Karl Lehenbauer) writes: >Sorry, the ST is not >equally powerful, except in pure 68000 CPU cycles. Ah well, I'll suffer with such limits. :-) >Anybody want to buy >mine? It's been languishing in the closet ever since the Amiga arrived. Certainly I'd like to buy it, depending on what sort of a setup you have (ie, mono/color, second drive, 520/1040 etc.) It also depends on the price, though, since I'm a poor undergrad :-). I tried to email you personally, but the daemon bounced my mail. When replying (if replying), please use an arpanet style address if you can (ie. engst@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu as opposed to engst@tcgould.UUCP) because my mailer handles them better. Thanks for the offer! Adam Engst engst@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu pv9y@cornella.bitnet B7 Upson Hall Cornell University Computer Services Ithaca, NY 14853 505 Wyckoff Ave, #1 Ithaca, NY 14850 607-257-3073 (but email preferred)
grr@cbmvax.UUCP (George Robbins) (08/05/87)
In article <1025@gryphon.CTS.COM> bugs@pnet02.CTS.COM (Jim Biggs) writes: > Will we ever see an Amiga with a 68020 and v-mem controller with a 32 bit bus? > I mean a bus that is not a cheat like the Mac II with it's UGH! mux'd address > lines and data lines (Motorla went to the expense of not mux'ing for speed!), > I'm talking a Amiga OUT of the BOX???? Well, there's still an engineering department at Commodore, and as long as people are considerate enough to buy lots of A500's and A2000's the should be plenty of opportunity for us to design better and more powerful systems. -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing arpa: cbmvax!grr@seismo.css.GOV Commodore, Engineering Department fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)
Sheldon_Hijacker_Chang@cup.portal.com (08/06/87)
If the public thinks the Amiga is better, than let me ask you this.
WHY IS ATARI ST'S BEATING AMIGA??? If your answer is because the public isn't
willing to try Amiga's then I'd say it's a bunch of bull, since Atari has
had a hard time where ever I have seen it, and whenever I have spoken the
name Atari, people tell me, "Oh you own one of those toys??", and when I go to
places like Federated, the salesmen, go to the Amiga(which they beefed up with
stero speakers, hard drive, and extra memory) and say, let me show you this
computer which is so much better than that ST over there, and they are
comparing it to a 520. I have been to one of the nation's largest and best,
if not THE largest and best computer camp, Midwest Computer Camp, so why
don't they have any Amiga's??? They have ST's. SO LET ME ASK YOU WHY???
Of course every man has a right to their own opinion. Every man also has
the right to defend their opinion when it's attacked.
SHELDON CHANG
sun!cup.portal.com!sheldon.hijacker.changtrudel@topaz.rutgers.edu (Jonathan D.) (08/07/87)
In article <569@cup.portal.com> Sheldon_Hijacker_Chang@cup.portal.com writes: > If the public thinks the Amiga is better, than let me ask you this. >WHY IS ATARI ST'S BEATING AMIGA??? Even if Atari's is beatin' Amiga's, we Amiga types don't care. We're happy with our machines. Aside from that, at least our company president doesn't go around inflating sales figures to software manufacturers :-) I don't think that anyone who's been on the net for any stretch of time will tell you that they get tired of the 'which micro is best' flames. You will too, in time...I hope. Jon -- Sometimes a fish needs a bicycle...
harald@ccicpg.UUCP ( Harald Milne) (08/08/87)
Jeez, I listen to Amiga music while reading this net. What do you do? Wish for blitvaporware? Nonstandard multitasking? Promises of nothing to come? And I thought I had it so bad. Was Atari at SIGGRAPH? Was IBM? Atari ST was only produced to screw the Amiga. Nice try. Hope those yield numbers go up for your turd blitter. Then Atari can sell the machines promised since January. (Oh, I guess I should date this as 1987). Since Apple and IBM will have a multitasking OS RSN, Atari will be the only one without. Why would you want it? GOOD QUESTION. I'll just keep trucking along. BTW do you also own JUNK VHS!! -- UUCP: uunet!ccicpg!harald
ufo@well.UUCP (Mark James) (08/09/87)
In article <569@cup.portal.com> Sheldon_Hijacker_Chang@cup.portal.com writes: > > If the public thinks the Amiga is better, than let me ask you this. >WHY IS ATARI ST'S BEATING AMIGA??? If your answer is because the public isn't >willing to try Amiga's then I'd say it's a bunch of bull, since Atari has >had a hard time where ever I have seen it, and whenever I have spoken the >name Atari, people tell me, "Oh you own one of those toys??", and when I go to > > Of course every man has a right to their own opinion. Every man also has >the right to defend their opinion when it's attacked. True, every man has the right to defend their opinion when attacked, BUT DO IT IN MAIL PLEASE!!!! Some of us are very sick and tired of these little computer wars.. There is no way that you are going to convince me that you're computer is better than mine, and there is no way that I am going to convince you that mine in better than yours. So next time you feel like defending youre computer, do ya think you could do it in MAIL. Oh, one other thing, I take issue with your'e statement that the ST is "beating" the amiga. I just talked with a guy from CSS(A big distributor of ST's) who told me ST sales are way down.. Please reply in mail, Mark
engst@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Adam C. Engst) (08/10/87)
In article <435@sugar.UUCP> karl@sugar.UUCP (Karl Lehenbauer) writes: >Porting those cool Amiga programs to the ST will be kind of difficult, at >least any programs that make use of digital audio, 640 X 400 X 16, >320 X 200 X 32, HAM graphics or multitasking. Sorry, the ST is not >equally powerful, except in pure 68000 CPU cycles. Anybody want to buy >mine? It's been languishing in the closet ever since the Amiga arrived. I'm really curious about something. A number of people who rave about how wonderful the Amiga is particularly when compared to the ST also seem to have an ST. This is strange enough - most people decide on one type of computer, buy it, and then defend it. Yet these people are buying two expensive computers, using one solely and letting the other "languish in the closet." Maybe they have great expense accounts and can afford to have a perfectly usable computer gather dust in the closet but I would doubt it. Yet whenever I read one of these postings about how awful the ST is and how they never touch it because it's problems might be contagious to the Amiga and how it is relegate to shimming up that short leg on the picnic table I really wonder why they don't sell it and buy a new leg for the picnic table. I know they don't want to sell it because each time I write back, or attempt to anyway and post instead, I don't get any answers. Since Cornell is a big place and fairly easy to get mail into, I don't believe that they can claim mailer problems. Admittedly, I can't offer full retail price for their ST or extra drive or monitor, but why should they expect it when they say that the ST isn't worth the plastic that holds its electronics in place. I happen to like the ST for a number of reasons, one of which is price. I would probably like an Amiga for a similarly cheap price, but there aren't any dealers in Ithaca who even sell the Amiga, much less at a discount like our ST dealer. My other major reason for liking the ST is that I need to use a number of different computers at work, including the Mac, the IBM, and mainframes, and I've found that the ST is great for terminal emulation, runs a mean IBM-emulation with pc-DITTO, and has the Magic Sac available. I don't trash on the Amiga because I think it is a good machine, no better than the ST, no worse, but simply different. It simply wasn't right for my budget and needs, whereas the ST was and is. That's one reason why I resent these people trashing on the ST. The other is that I would like to add to my ST system now but I still have to watch my budget. I would like a second drive or even a hard drive (the Astra second floppy/hard drive looks nice!) and a mono monitor and a friend would like a second CPU so between us we could purchase an Amigan's useless ST (currently gathering dust or languishing or holding up the short leg on the picnic table) for a reduced price (heck, we'd even throw in a brick for the picnic table!) and give it a good home. I'd do it for a cat, why not a computer? Adam Engst If you wish to tell me that the ST was not the right computer for me to buy and wish to do so with either threats, curses, logical reasons, flames, or whatever, please email me and save the wars. If you wish to part with anything from your ST system, useless as it may be to you or otherwise, again, please email me and give an ST a good home. I'll bet there are others in position out there and we can start a Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Computers. I'll be a charter member since I just adopted a maimed VT100 with a geriatric 300 baud modem. They're easy to litter train and they don't take much power and they're very appreciative of being rescued. All they need is a little appreciation. :-) :-) :-) engst@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu pv9y@cornella.bitnet B7 Upson Hall Cornell University (work) Ithaca, NY 14853 505 Wyckoff Ave, #1 Ithaca, NY 14850 (home) 607-257-3073
schein@cbmvax.UUCP (Dan Schein MAGAZINES) (08/10/87)
In article <1778@ccicpg.UUCP> harald@ccicpg.UUCP ( Harald Milne) writes: > >trucking along. BTW do you also own JUNK VHS!! ^^^^ ^^^ Do I smell another "My dad can beat your dad" debate here? Boy do I hope not! > >-- >UUCP: uunet!ccicpg!harald -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Commodore Business Machines | | 1200 Wilson Drive uucp: {ihnp4|seismo|caip}!cbmvax!schein | | West Chester, PA 19380 arpa: cbmvax!schein@seismo.css.GOV | | (215) 431-9384 or schein@cbmvax.UUCP@{seismo|harvard} | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | All spelling mistakes are a result of my efforts to avoid education :-) | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Quote: Those who worked the hardest Gary Ward - Oklahoma State | | are the last to surrender baseball coach | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
cheung@vu-vlsi.UUCP (Wilson Cheung) (08/10/87)
> trucking along. BTW do you also own JUNK VHS!! > > -- > UUCP: uunet!ccicpg!harald What does BTW stand for? Wilson Cheung
rokicki@rocky.STANFORD.EDU (Tomas Rokicki) (08/11/87)
BTW? Big Thrashing Women, of course.
bpendlet@esunix.UUCP (Bob Pendleton) (08/11/87)
in article <569@cup.portal.com>, Sheldon_Hijacker_Chang@cup.portal.com says: > Xref: esunix comp.sys.amiga:6839 comp.sys.atari.st:4452 > XPortal-User-Id: 1.1001.1609 > > If the public thinks the Amiga is better, than let me ask you this. > WHY IS ATARI ST'S BEATING AMIGA??? > I have been to one of the nation's largest and best, > if not THE largest and best computer camp, Midwest Computer Camp, so why > don't they have any Amiga's??? They have ST's. SO LET ME ASK YOU WHY??? My best guess is cost. I don't suppose I really have to explain this, especially to someone who has been to computer camp, but the Atari ST models are very inexpensive compared to the Amiga 1000. The Amiga 500 may be inexpensive enough to overcome this handicap. In my own case I desperately wanted an Amiga. I had tested both machines, purchased and read some of the technical documentation for both machines, and interviewed users and sellers of both machines. I decided I wanted an Amiga. But, at the time, an Amiga cost just about twice what an ST 1040 cost. On that basis I decided to buy an ST. It wasn't what I wanted, but it was as close as I could get and stay within my budget. I was saved by the want adds. One sunday morning I was reading the want adds at about 6 a.m. ( my two month old baby didn't understand, or care about weekends ) and saw, not one, but two, adds for used Amiga 1000s, at a cost of $300 and $400 more than the cost of a 1040. I called quickly, one had already been sold, but I got the other one. I picked it up by 8 a.m. and was playing with it by 9 a.m. That was about a year and half ago, I'm still glad I bought an Amiga. By the way, I still read the want adds on sunday mornings, lots of 520s and 1040s for sale, maybe once every month or so I see an Amiga for sale. Amigas seem to be holding their value better than STs. > > SHELDON CHANG > sun!cup.portal.com!sheldon.hijacker.chang Bob Pendleton P.S I didn't realize they allowed humans at computer camp :-) -- Bob Pendleton @ Evans & Sutherland UUCP Address: {decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4,allegra}!decwrl!esunix!bpendlet Alternate: {ihnp4,seismo}!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!esunix!bpendlet I am solely responsible for what I say.
blevins@hpccc.HP.COM (David Blevins) (08/12/87)
First of all, BTW means "by the way." There's an interesting article in this month's Unix Review about how Usenet is being crushed by its very success, i.e. the sheer volume of mail that is bandied to and fro every day is dragging down the major notes machines such as seismo (not to mention their administrative people). The consequence of this is that a "connect fee" is being seriously considered for notes-type access. So why don't you people that insist on calling everybody elses' machines junk do it via email so that 1) the rest of us don't have to read it and 2) a little less traffic clogs up the worldwide unix network. Sometimes I think the Amigoids read comp.atari.st just so they can find an opportunity to get their digs in (and possibly vice versa). flames > /dev/null. You guys already have wasted enough of my time. dB hplabs!hpccc!blevins