[net.micro] Amiga vs. ST

bryan@ihnet.UUCP (b. k. delaney) (07/31/85)

I hate to dampen the Amiga fire, but the Amiga is a doomed machine.
How can I say this before 1 Amiga is sold?  Simple, this is history
repeating it self, all over again.  Remember the Comodore C-64 and
the Atari 800?  It was obvious to anybody, who seriously looked at
BOTH machines, that the 800 was a better computer.  But the Atari
cost twice as much.  Guess which one, really sold.  Want more proof?
Looked what happened last December, Atari sells 1/2 million 800XLs
at 89.95 while C-64 sales down 90%, and most people thought C-64
sales down due to "soft market", how come Atari sold 1/2 million,
price/performance.  Enough history here is today:

Amiga 256k 1 internal floppy	$1295.00	"better machine"
Atari ST-260 1 internal floppy	$ 499.00	"1/2 the price"

Need I say more ?

				ihnet!bryan
				Bryan K. DeLaney
				AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville IL
				

eric@topaz.ARPA (Eric Lavitsky) (08/02/85)

>From bryan@ihnet.UUCP (b. k. delaney) Wed Jul 31 08:45:21 1985
>Subject: Amiga vs. ST

>I hate to dampen the Amiga fire, but the Amiga is a doomed machine.
>How can I say this before 1 Amiga is sold?  Simple, this is history
>repeating it self, all over again.  Remember the Comodore C-64 and
>the Atari 800?  It was obvious to anybody, who seriously looked at
>BOTH machines, that the 800 was a better computer.  But the Atari
>cost twice as much.  Guess which one, really sold.  Want more proof?

It was obvious to who? - most certainly to Atari owners it was. I had
seen an 800 before I bought my C64 and as far as I was concerned, the
*only* thing the 800 had over the C64 was Star Raiders. My C64 had
better sound, more memory to deal with and equal graphics (maybe not
in color flexibility.) 

>Looked what happened last December, Atari sells 1/2 million 800XLs
>at 89.95 while C-64 sales down 90%, and most people thought C-64
>sales down due to "soft market", how come Atari sold 1/2 million,
>price/performance.  Enough history here is today:

>Amiga 256k 1 internal floppy	$1295.00	"better machine"
>Atari ST-260 1 internal floppy	$ 499.00	"1/2 the price"

>Need I say more ?

Yes. I don't care much about last December. Atari desperately sold
out as many machines as it could. Jack Tramiel needed the instant cash
to fund the ST. I'm sure Atari didn't turn a real profit on those 
machines. The ST-260 doesn't even exist and the regular ST is having
problems. 

Amiga 512K, 1 880K internal floppy	$1500
Atari 512K ST, 1 400(?)K floppy		~ 700

And the Amiga at least has a Basic (Microsofts best effort to date -
Atari has expressed doubts as to whether they will ever market one),
true multi-tasking and much more color flexibility than the ST. It's
sound also beats the ST by a large margin and it is more easily
expandable (up to 8.5 Meg of Ram total). There are already LISP, LOGO,
Pascal, C compilers available for the Amiga - what has the ST got?
The ST will never be able to preform the same as the Amiga. I'm willing 
to pay double to not be left in a hole in a year when I want to expand
my machine. I can't guarantee the Amiga will sell - that remains to be 
seen. I don't believe anyone should judge it prematurely - you must see
it first. Put it next to an ST or a Macintosh, then re-read the machine's
specifications and decide if it is the machine for you and to grow with
you.

Eric
-- 

ARPA:	LAVITSKY@RUTGERS
UUCP:	...{harvard,seismo,ut-sally,sri-iu,ihnp4}!topaz!eric
SNAIL:	16 Oak St., Flr 2
	New Brunswick, NJ  08903

tucker@ccvaxa.UUCP (08/02/85)

    Its obvious that the hardware in the Amiga is far better than the
Atari ST series (not the other way around).  Too bad it costs a hell of
a lot more than the Atari will.  Since the machines are so similar, that
will really hurt the Amiga.  Someone at Comm. better get their head out
of the sand and look at whats going on if they expect them to sell.

Tim Tucker
..ucbvax!ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!tucker

hull@hao.UUCP (Howard Hull) (08/04/85)

> I hate to dampen the Amiga fire, but the Amiga is a doomed machine.
> How can I say this before 1 Amiga is sold?  Simple, this is history
> repeating it self, all over again.
Oh yeah.  And why aren't there more Pterodactyls down by the pond?
> Remember the Comodore C-64 and the Atari 800?  It was obvious to anybody,
> who seriously looked at BOTH machines, that the 800 was a better computer.
> But the Atari cost twice as much.  Guess which one, really sold. 
Precisely the point.  There are a lot of Atari 800, Comode C-64, & RS COCO
owners out there who are ready to place their 8-bit nibble juggler over the
nearest waste basket, let go of it, and let it take any old world-line it
pleases just to get their hands on a machine with a 68k, an accessable bus, a
set of coproc chips to handle the hard mundanities, a flexible window/keyboard
environment to snuggle up to the soft stuff, and a choice of TV or hirez
monitor color graphics to keep track of what's goin' on.  The only crock is
"only one internal disk drive".
> Want more proof?
I'll listen.
> Looked what happened last December, Atari sells 1/2 million 800XLs
> at 89.95 while C-64 sales down 90%, and most people thought C-64
> sales down due to "soft market", how come Atari sold 1/2 million,
> price/performance. 
Because they are (until September 15th anyway) still the guys with the
closest approximation to the desired performance/price.
> Enough history here is today:
Ok, poke your bet, man.  I'm going for the Amiga, and I've talked to a bunch
of others who see it that way, too.
> 
> Amiga 256k 1 internal floppy		$1295.00	"better machine"
> Atari ST-260 1 internal floppy	$ 499.00	"1/2 the price"
> 
> Need I say more ?
No, just go buy yourself an att7300 next year when they're down to $3000.
> 				ihnet!bryan
> 				Bryan K. DeLaney
> 				AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville IL
								     Howard Hull
        {ucbvax!hplabs | allegra!nbires | harpo!seismo } !hao!hull

michaelk@azure.UUCP (Mike Kersenbrock) (08/04/85)

> I hate to dampen the Amiga fire, but the Amiga is a doomed machine.
> How can I say this before 1 Amiga is sold?  Simple, this is history
> repeating it self, all over again.  Remember the Comodore C-64 and
> the Atari 800?  It was obvious to anybody, who seriously looked at
> BOTH machines, that the 800 was a better computer.  But the Atari
> cost twice as much.  Guess which one, really sold.  Want more proof?
> Looked what happened last December, Atari sells 1/2 million 800XLs
> at 89.95 while C-64 sales down 90%, and most people thought C-64
> sales down due to "soft market", how come Atari sold 1/2 million,
> price/performance.  Enough history here is today:
> 
> Amiga 256k 1 internal floppy	$1295.00	"better machine"
> Atari ST-260 1 internal floppy	$ 499.00	"1/2 the price"
> 
> Need I say more ?
> 
> 				ihnet!bryan
> 				Bryan K. DeLaney
> 				AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville IL
> 				

So how do you explain the IBM (PC/XT/AT)?

Maybe IBM will buy Commodore, and put the IBM sticker on it & call them 
entry-level workstations. Voila!

Mike Kersenbrock
Tektronix Software Development Products
Aloha, Oregon


P.S. - Note that if Atari sells twice as many 520ST's as Commodore sells
Amigas,  then Commodore will still be the bigger company in terms of
revenues.  Assuming margins are proportional, Commodore is still
the winner insofar as owners are concerned.

P.P.S.- The battle will probably won in terms of software, and just
how much momentum can be gotten "up front".  Also, the Amiga is an
"open architecture machine" which allows Commodore and add-on builders
to make money for each other (like the IBM PC).  Is the Atari 520ST
open?  Note: the Mac isn't.

horton@fortune.UUCP (Randy Horton) (08/05/85)

>> I hate to dampen the Amiga fire, but the Amiga is a doomed machine.
>> How can I say this before 1 Amiga is sold?  Simple, this is history
>> repeating it self, all over again.
>Oh yeah.  And why aren't there more Pterodactyls down by the pond?
>> Remember the Comodore C-64 and the Atari 800?  It was obvious to anybody,
>> who seriously looked at BOTH machines, that the 800 was a better computer.
As long as they didn't care about sound and couldn't read a spec sheet.
>> But the Atari cost twice as much.  Guess which one, really sold.
That's right, the C64 has outsold ALL personal computers in units sold.
.
.
.
>> Enough history here is today:
>>
>> Amiga 256k 1 internal floppy          $1295.00        "better machine"
>> Atari ST-260 1 internal floppy        $ 499.00        "1/2 the price"
.
.
.
Just as the C-64/Atari/Apple ][ have a different market than the IBM PC-AT,
the Amiga has a different market than the Atari ST.  Comparing the Atari ST
to the Amiga is like comparing a Timex to a PC-AT.  I think that the Atari ST
sounds like a fine machine, and a good value for the money, but it is just not
in the same league as the Amiga.  I am not trying to start any arguments,
just pointing out that there are a variety of machines with a variety of
capabilities, with a variety of prices, for a variety of people.  Every
machine has it's pros and cons.  I hope that the Atari ST and the Amiga both
do well.  It is the MAC that will really suffer as a result of these two
machines.  As usual, Apple will be selling less machine for more money.
-- 
              +---------------------------------------------+
              |   allegra\   Randy Horton @ Fortune Systems |
              |   cbosgd  \                                 |
              |   dual     >!fortune!ranhome!randy          |
              |   ihnp4   /                                 |
              |   nsc    /   Clever disclaimer goes here    |
              +---------------------------------------------+

nather@utastro.UUCP (Ed Nather) (08/06/85)

> Maybe IBM will buy Commodore, and put the IBM sticker on it & call them 
> entry-level workstations. Voila!
> 
> Mike Kersenbrock

Gosh.  Didn't they use up all their stickers on the PC Jr. and the
PC Portable?  Somehow, for those, voila never came.

-- 
Ed Nather
Astronomy Dept, U of Texas @ Austin
{allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather
nather%utastro.UTEXAS@ut-sally.ARPA

chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) (08/08/85)

In article <402@azure.UUCP> michaelk@azure.UUCP (Mike Kersenbrock) writes:
>
>So how do you explain the IBM (PC/XT/AT)?


Simple. IBM has a lock on the office market. Many offices won't buy
anything that doesn't have IBM's name on it (living in the unix world
biases your perceptions. In the 'real' world, all the money spent on Unix
boxes is barely pocket change to IBM...). That creates a strong demand for
IBM compatible stuff for people who want to be able to read data but don't
want to spend money for the name, and strong demand in the home office
market as well since a businessman wants to be able to take his stuff home
and work on it... Its amazing what you can do with a product with a
questionable price/performance ration if you're IBM... 

If you want to look at exactly how powerful the name of IBM is in the
office marketplace, look at the PCjr. Without the political power of the
IBM name in purchasing offices, the machine flopped, because it couldn't
compete in an open market. The real advantage IBM has is that its market
ISN'T open...
-- 
:From the carousel of the autumn carnival:        Chuq Von Rospach
{cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui   nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

Your fifteen minutes are up. Please step aside!

speaker@gymble.UUCP (Speaker to Animals) (08/16/85)

In article <900001@ccvaxa> tucker@ccvaxa.UUCP writes:
>
>     Its obvious that the hardware in the Amiga is far better than the
> Atari ST series (not the other way around).  Too bad it costs a hell of
> a lot more than the Atari will.  Since the machines are so similar, that
> will really hurt the Amiga.  Someone at Comm. better get their head out
> of the sand and look at whats going on if they expect them to sell.
> 
> Tim Tucker
> ..ucbvax!ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!tucker


Hey from what I've seen the Amiga has some pretty sophisticated shit in it.
Lots of specialized hardware and software to back it up too.  A lot really
for the $1300 base price.  Once the thing starts selling in quantity you'll
see the price come down too.

What bothers me is software.  I hope Commadore doesn't try to market this thing
as a toy game playing computer.  It really can be much more than that if they
try.  Can this thing ever be sold as a business machine?  A friend of mine
at TRW tells me that there are people over there actually looking at this thing
for use as a deliverable system.  And one of those people wants it for his own
home system... and HE'S a Macintosh fanatic!

Third-party vendors had better do better with Amiga than with Mac if it's
going to fly though.
-- 
seismo!gymble!speaker					- Speaker

"Earth is a great funhouse without the fun."
                -- Jeff Berner