tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Todd L. Masco) (04/01/91)
This flamage is getting extremely tiresome. The NeXT is a worthwhile machine for some purposes. It has its weaknesses. The Amiga is a worthwhile machine for some purposes. It has its weaknesses. Both have strengths and weaknesses that are of varying importance to each potential user -- and the two are really the cutting-edge low-end workstation models in existence right now. For example: in my house, we have a Sun3 routing SLIP to the internet, a NeXTStation and an Amiga. The Amiga and the NeXT are connected via a serial cable. I find the amiga to provide more usefulness per dollar than a NeXTStation would -- I like some of the buzzers and whistles, I really like the OS (I don't care about multi-/single- user), and I don't want to deal with a machine that has to always be on, generating noise and sucking power; One of my house mates (the one who has the NeXT) find the NeXT to be more useful to him: he wants a powerful multi-user MACH (BSDish) environment, and doesn't care about the noise (he shouldn't; there's a Sun2 next to it). Arguing about which computer is "better" is simply stupid. People have different needs, and there's no reason that the Amiga and the NeXT can't (gasp) coexist -- and I say this as a person with on-demand access to each [With maple on the Amiga (CMU has a site license), and Mathematica on the NeXT]. -- Todd Masco | tm2b@andrew.cmu.edu | "Tax the churches. CMU Physics | tm2b@andrew.BITNet | Tax the businesses owned by the churches."
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/01/91)
In article <UbxeaLm00WBw8WbE8T@andrew.cmu.edu> tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Todd L. Masco) writes:
This flamage is getting extremely tiresome.
This is comp.sys.amiga.advocacy is it not? What do you guys do here?
Didn't the Atari ST folks request this group so that you would leave
them alone? :-)
Both have strengths and weaknesses that are of varying importance
to each potential user -- and the two are really the cutting-edge
low-end workstation models in existence right now.
I find the amiga to provide more usefulness per dollar than a
NeXTStation would -- I like some of the buzzers and whistles, I really
like the OS (I don't care about multi-/single- user), and I don't want
to deal with a machine that has to always be on, generating noise and
sucking power; One of my house mates (the one who has the NeXT)
find the NeXT to be more useful to him: he wants a powerful multi-user
MACH (BSDish) environment, and doesn't care about the noise (he
shouldn't; there's a Sun2 next to it).
The usefulness of the NeXTstation is increasing fast. It's just a
matter of getting the software developed for the machine, and NeXT
does have some heavy hitters on their team. Lest we forget, the
machine is also fun. Interface Builder is great, the display looks
sharp, and the Cube has power! It's a programmers playground.
Arguing about which computer is "better" is simply stupid. People
have different needs, and there's no reason that the Amiga and the
NeXT can't (gasp) coexist -- and I say this as a person with on-demand
access to each [With maple on the Amiga (CMU has a site license), and
Mathematica on the NeXT].
I hope Commodore does well with the Amiga. They have a potentially
much larger audience because they have a low-cost machine in the A500.
They could easily sell 10,000,000 machines, if they would only get
their act together. But I'm placing my bets with NeXT for many
different reasons. One of which is the fact that they are going to
playing the marketing game, and they have one of the best machines
money can buy. A killer combo. I almost bought an A500 over
Christmas, but Montegomery(sp) Wards didn't have the 512K memory
expansion or a modem and I need to buy it all on credit(shameful).
The guy in the store couldn't tell me a thing about the machine. The
Amiga just sat their with a dozen other IBM compatibles(which the guy
could tell me a little about -- the pervasive feeling in the world is
you can't go wrong with MS DOS).
Arguing which computer is better isn't stupid, if done in the
appropriate places. Something can be learned if people are open
minded.
-Mikeyorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) (04/02/91)
Well all this Next Vs Amiga stuff IS SILLY. It;s not proving anything, I just have a few Q's about the Next. 1) What's the $$$$$ of one ot those Puppies? 2) What's this i hear about it being almost impossible to get one even IF ya had the $$$. (3 mo Backlog?) 3) Exactly what makes it soo cool? The only stuff i've seen about the NeXt is from an INFO mag. The main "Nifty" thin i i heard about was the DSP (Display Post Script) Monitor, (Just what everyone needs?), and a CD-Drive of some sort thae was to be REAL slow... What's new for it? I've seen about 12 of the machines, but they were all in a computer lab and it's not a "public" acess lab. Gee i don't remember seeing anyone using the lab either...... Well let's douse the flamage, and get some talk going. . -- yorkw@ecn.purdue.edu aka Willis F York aka Squid on IRC The only thing that Apple invented is the idea to borrow Xerox-invented ideas. (Hope THIS sig don't insult anyone!) :^)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/02/91)
In article <yorkw.670527864@stable.ecn.purdue.edu> yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) writes:
Well all this Next Vs Amiga stuff IS SILLY.
It;s not proving anything,
I just have a few Q's about the Next.
1) What's the $$$$$ of one ot those Puppies?
Retail: $4995 for NeXTstation -- edu: around $3250
$7995 for NeXTstation color -- edu: around $5500
2) What's this i hear about it being almost impossible to get one
even IF ya had the $$$. (3 mo Backlog?)
There was a backlog at first because there were 20,000 immediate
orders and Motorola didn't have enough chips produced.
3) Exactly what makes it soo cool?
Interface Builder.
DSP for CD quaility sound.
68040 for 15 mips and 2.5 MFLOPS of horsepower.
A 17" 92dpi greyscale monitor that looks really sharp.
There are only 2 bits for greyscale, but it does look good.
The color machines have 4096 colors, but they monitor itself costs
$2000 with an educational discount. Note the $5500 price includes
monitor.
Mathematica is free for educational users. The Objective C compiler,
C++ compiler and debugger are also free(they're derived from the GNU
stuff).
Display Postscript.
The only stuff i've seen about the NeXt is from an INFO mag.
The main "Nifty" thin i i heard about was the DSP (Display Post Script)
Monitor, (Just what everyone needs?), and a CD-Drive of some sort thae
was to be REAL slow... What's new for it?
The optical drives are no longer used. They were slow, but it was
nice having 233 MB on a single disk. I have two that I still use.
I've seen about 12 of the machines, but they were all in a computer lab
and it's not a "public" acess lab.
We have that problem here at Penns State. You should talk to someone
about getting an account. Play with the NeXT while you have the
opportunity(it's free).
Gee i don't remember seeing anyone using the lab either......
That's what happens when you make a computer hard to access. Put them
in a public lab where they average user can get to them and watch the
lines form.
Well let's douse the flamage, and get some talk going.
When is Amiga DOS 2.0 going to be released for the A500? I still
might get one.
-Mikejudge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/02/91)
> > 1) What's the $$$$$ of one ot those Puppies? > > Retail: $4995 for NeXTstation -- edu: around $3250 > $7995 for NeXTstation color -- edu: around $5500 > Yes, but in order to get a usable NeXTStation, it's something like $4200 with a 200megger, and about $5000 with a 400megger. The $3250 price is for the 105meg model, which just doesn't have enough space for the OS and all the applications. The full extended OS, which comes with the C compiler and a bunch of other neatstuff won't fit into the cheap model. Oh, these are educational prices I'm talking about. I hear for about 3K, one can get a SPARC IPC from SUN. Or one can geta 3000 and spend the xtra 1K to get the '040 board... rory
dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) (04/03/91)
In article <2o7G!rpe1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >Retail: $4995 for NeXTstation -- edu: around $3250 > $7995 for NeXTstation color -- edu: around $5500 >... > > 3) Exactly what makes it soo cool? > >Interface Builder. >DSP for CD quaility sound. Yeah...wait until you try to do some heavy disk activity while playing a score file on that DSP.... The DSP requires the *CPU* to feed it the sound data; it can't go get it on its own. >Mathematica is free for educational users. The Objective C compiler, >C++ compiler and debugger are also free(they're derived from the GNU >stuff). From recent news seen elsewhere, contract problems between NeXT and Wolfram Research (makers of Mathematica) have caused NeXT to pull Mathematica from the student deal. One of its most attractive offerings is now gone. The compilers and development kit are *NOT* (I repeat, *NOT*) in the super cheap base prices quoted above. They only come on the 300 MB hard disk-equipped models. Add about $1000 to $1500 for that. (I don't have my price sheet handy.) >The optical drives are no longer used. They were slow, but it was >nice having 233 MB on a single disk. I have two that I still use. "Slow" doesn't even begin to describe what heavy disk activity was like on those boxes. THank goodness they adopted a fast technology until the floptical has developed a bit more. I *am* impressed by the NeXT, but the base ed prices are a bit deceptive. If you want the development kit and the more arcane software, you have to pay a considerable amount more. --Daryl Biberdorf, dlb5404@{tamuts,rigel}.tamu.edu Texas A&M University
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/03/91)
In article <kucsZ1w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes:
Yes, but in order to get a usable NeXTStation, it's something like $4200
with a 200megger, and about $5000 with a 400megger. The $3250 price is
for the 105meg model, which just doesn't have enough space for the OS and
all the applications. The full extended OS, which comes with the C
compiler and a bunch of other neatstuff won't fit into the cheap model.
Oh, these are educational prices I'm talking about. I hear for about 3K,
one can get a SPARC IPC from SUN. Or one can geta 3000 and spend the
xtra 1K to get the '040 board...
The 105MB machines are usable, they just aren't ideal. You do get a
license for all of the software with the NeXT so you can get it from
someone else or buy it on floppies from NeXT. What do you do when you
run out of disk space on your Amiga hard drive? You put what you
don't need on floppies, of course. You have to do the same on the
NeXT. I wouldn't buy another computer just because everything that
NeXT gives you for free doesn't fit on the hard disk.
-Mike
BTW: The NeXTstation is faster than the SPARC IPC.melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/03/91)
In article <14026@helios.TAMU.EDU> dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes: Yeah...wait until you try to do some heavy disk activity while playing a score file on that DSP.... The DSP requires the *CPU* to feed it the sound data; it can't go get it on its own. Moral of the story: don't do heavy disk activity. The NeXT does have DMA, how heavy does it have to be? >Mathematica is free for educational users. The Objective C compiler, >C++ compiler and debugger are also free(they're derived from the GNU >stuff). From recent news seen elsewhere, contract problems between NeXT and Wolfram Research (makers of Mathematica) have caused NeXT to pull Mathematica from the student deal. One of its most attractive offerings is now gone. News to me. Hope your not right. The compilers and development kit are *NOT* (I repeat, *NOT*) in the super cheap base prices quoted above. They only come on the 300 MB hard disk-equipped models. Add about $1000 to $1500 for that. (I don't have my price sheet handy.) No, you can either buy the entire OS and Apps on floppy or get it from someone else. I repeat: YOU STILL CAN GET THE ENTIRE OS AND APPS EVEN IF YOU DON'T BUY A 400 MB MACHINES. >The optical drives are no longer used. They were slow, but it was >nice having 233 MB on a single disk. I have two that I still use. "Slow" doesn't even begin to describe what heavy disk activity was like on those boxes. THank goodness they adopted a fast technology until the floptical has developed a bit more. Huh. Are you talking about hard disk technology? Uh, that was available in the last generation of machines, of course. I *am* impressed by the NeXT, but the base ed prices are a bit deceptive. If you want the development kit and the more arcane software, you have to pay a considerable amount more. If you want to do (hard core) development buy a 105MB NeXTstation for $3250 then add 8 more megs of RAM(3rd party) and a 3rd party 660MB hard drive. -Mike
hychejw@infonode.ingr.com (Jeff W. Hyche) (04/03/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >-Mike >BTW: The NeXTstation is faster than the SPARC IPC. How many of you feel that someone here is trying to shove a NeXT down your trought? I think the next question to ask is who is gonna buy a NeXT and who is gonna buy an Amiga 3000. My next big purchase is going to be an Amiga 3000 for multimedia work. Now lets talk real uses, what can I do with an NeXTstation. If you can convince me that it is better than a A3000 I will buy it. -- // Jeff Hyche There can be only one! \\ // Usenet: hychejw@infonode.ingr.com \X/ Freenet: ap255@po.CWRU.Edu
davidc@contact.uucp (Ice Weasle) (04/03/91)
In article <gjbGu+lf1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <14026@helios.TAMU.EDU> dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes: > The compilers and development kit are *NOT* (I repeat, *NOT*) in the > super cheap base prices quoted above. They only come on the 300 MB > hard disk-equipped models. Add about $1000 to $1500 for that. (I don't > have my price sheet handy.) > >No, you can either buy the entire OS and Apps on floppy or get it from >someone else. I repeat: YOU STILL CAN GET THE ENTIRE OS AND APPS EVEN >IF YOU DON'T BUY A 400 MB MACHINES. Indeed... Once you purchase a unit, no matter WHICH model, you are entitled to the FULL Extended release, which is available on disk at a price for the disks alone... Now, since you've paid you're money, you can also pick up the extended release whereever you got your unit, or off someone you know... This isn't an issue, and shouldn't be used to badmouth the computer... > > I *am* impressed by the NeXT, but the base ed prices are a bit deceptive. > If you want the development kit and the more arcane software, you have > to pay a considerable amount more. > >If you want to do (hard core) development buy a 105MB NeXTstation for >$3250 then add 8 more megs of RAM(3rd party) and a 3rd party 660MB >hard drive. That's the best way to go... The colour really isn't worth it for most applications, IMHO... 4Meg SIMMS are dropping very nicely and you can fill your station to 20 Megs affordably. Once you have some memory in the computer, the system screams. Everyone SCSI-oriented should keep their eyes on Conner Peripherals... They're releasing a line of 3.5" SCSI drives that are affordable! eg. 200 Meg - $500~ u.s. / 500 Meg - $1100~ u.s. (suggested) -- Dave Carlton (davidc@ziebmef.mef.org!white.toronto.edu) "There's more than one way to skin a cat", Lydia thought, as she nailed the little paws to the dissection board... Richard Deming
swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (04/04/91)
In article <gjbGu+lf1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >In article <14026@helios.TAMU.EDU> dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes: > Yeah...wait until you try to do some heavy disk activity while playing > a score file on that DSP.... The DSP requires the *CPU* to feed it > the sound data; it can't go get it on its own. > >Moral of the story: don't do heavy disk activity. The NeXT does have >DMA, how heavy does it have to be? ;^) Spoken like a true zealot. ;^) Someone who loves his NeXT so much, no sacrifice is too great. If your application goes out to disk too much, why, throw it away! Obviously there is something wrong with your application! Because, as all NeXT zealots know, the NeXT is PERFECT!!!!!! There could never be a problem with the machine. IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT! _. --Steve ._||__ DISCLAIMER: Not flaming the NeXT; just mindless zealots Warren v\ *| -------------------------------------------------------- V {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.com --
rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) (04/04/91)
In article <14026@helios.TAMU.EDU>, dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes: > In article <2o7G!rpe1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > The compilers and development kit are *NOT* (I repeat, *NOT*) in the > super cheap base prices quoted above. They only come on the 300 MB > hard disk-equipped models. Add about $1000 to $1500 for that. (I don't > have my price sheet handy.) But they are available for free as soon as you get the disk space to put it on. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ryan 'Gozar' Collins Question for MAC Users: rlcollins@miavx1.BITNET |||| Power Without What IS the format of a rc1dsanu@miamiu.BITNET / || \ The Price!! MAC HFS floppy disk? R.COLLINS1 on GEnie ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/04/91)
In article <1991Apr3.112104.6657@infonode.ingr.com> hychejw@infonode.ingr.com (Jeff W. Hyche) writes: >BTW: The NeXTstation is faster than the SPARC IPC. How many of you feel that someone here is trying to shove a NeXT down your trought? Nah, just stating a fact. I think the next question to ask is who is gonna buy a NeXT and who is gonna buy an Amiga 3000. My next big purchase is going to be an Amiga 3000 for multimedia work. Now lets talk real uses, what can I do with an NeXTstation. If you can convince me that it is better than a A3000 I will buy it. Better than the A3000 for what? The A3000 is going to be better than a NeXTStation for video, and multimedia in general. You have to buy a Cube and the NeXTDimension Board for this, and that's going to cost you $10,000. But for a lot of the users do, the NeXT is better. DTP, spreadsheets, etc, and it has more horsepower in the 68040 to do these things. The DSP provides great sound, and the 17" monitor looks great and it's a boon to productivity. You can run X and an IBM PC in a window for compatibility. I haven't seen Amiga DOS 2.0, but 1.3 didn't look so hot. How do you drag a window part way off screen? More importantly, to the software average user, a lot of great software is becoming available. Think about this. If graphics power is so important, why does everyone by Macs and PCs? -Mike
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/04/91)
>In article <14026@helios.TAMU.EDU> dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes: > Yeah...wait until you try to do some heavy disk activity while playing > a score file on that DSP.... The DSP requires the *CPU* to feed it > the sound data; it can't go get it on its own. > >Moral of the story: don't do heavy disk activity. The NeXT does have >DMA, how heavy does it have to be? ;^) Spoken like a true zealot. ;^) Someone who loves his NeXT so much, no sacrifice is too great. If your application goes out to disk too much, why, throw it away! Obviously there is something wrong with your application! Because, as all NeXT zealots know, the NeXT is PERFECT!!!!!! There could never be a problem with the machine. IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT! You can play music and do a lot of disk activity on the NeXT. I'm not sure how much. I compiled GNU Smalltalk and played a song that lasted about a minute, and didn't have any problem. No, the NeXT isn't perfect. I want a faster machine that will do real time 32 bit color. It's just a matter of NeXT having the fewest tradeoffs of any machine on the market. In other words, it's the best deal out there. Amiga zealots know this, that's why they scream foul -- NeXT can't be making any money. -Mike
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (04/04/91)
In article <e0aG2veg1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >Better than the A3000 for what? The A3000 is going to be better than >a NeXTStation for video, and multimedia in general. You have to buy a >Cube and the NeXTDimension Board for this, and that's going to cost >you $10,000. But for a lot of the users do, the NeXT is better. DTP, >spreadsheets, etc, and it has more horsepower in the 68040 to do these I will grant you spreadsheets (that is if Improv is finally shipping), but the Amiga has very good DTP as well, and I've heard enormous complaints about the Mac Framemaker. As to the 040, you and I both know it'll be out for Amigas and Macs RSN. >things. The DSP provides great sound, and the 17" monitor looks great For those people who need the high-quality sound (that is better than 8-bit/28K/sec) they will probably have a MIDI setup and won't be using the computer for any sound production. The Amiga's sound is good enough for background effects (and for everything if we aren't talking truly professional quality). As well there are 2-3 16bit cards now on the Amiga market. >and it's a boon to productivity. You can run X and an IBM PC in a >window for compatibility. Gee, you can do that on an Amiga as well! What a coincidence. >I haven't seen Amiga DOS 2.0, but 1.3 >didn't look so hot. How do you drag a window part way off screen? You are right. 1.3 doesn't look so hot. 2.0 does. Under 2.0 you can tell it to make the screen any size up to 32Kx32K, depending on available chip ram, and your window can be on-screen and off screen into that extra space. >More importantly, to the software average user, a lot of great >software is becoming available. Think about this. If graphics power >is so important, why does everyone by Macs and PCs? > There is a lot of great software in the Amiga markets as well. Advantage is a good spreadsheet program. We now have SuperBase 4 which is a successful IBM world product, as well as dbMAN V which is a dBASE III+ compat. program with extensions. How does the NeXT software stack up? There is Improv. What else? >-Mike > > -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb A: None. It's a hardware problem.
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/04/91)
In article <1991Apr4.004937.10202@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: I will grant you spreadsheets (that is if Improv is finally shipping), but the Amiga has very good DTP as well, and I've heard enormous complaints about the Mac Framemaker. As to the 040, you and I both know it'll be out for Amigas and Macs RSN. Yes, Improv is shipping. We have it here. What don't Mac users like about FrameMaker? Too slow? Tell them to buy a NeXT and run it on there. >and it's a boon to productivity. You can run X and an IBM PC in a >window for compatibility. Gee, you can do that on an Amiga as well! What a coincidence. You can't run X in a window. Reboot that sucker. Seriously, I do think it is important to be able to support the environments simultanously. You are right. 1.3 doesn't look so hot. 2.0 does. Under 2.0 you can tell it to make the screen any size up to 32Kx32K, depending on available chip ram, and your window can be on-screen and off screen into that extra space. And 2.0 will be out soon for other computers besides the A3000? System 7.0 is comping out on May 13, and it looks slick. Does 2.0 support Adobe outline fonts? There is a lot of great software in the Amiga markets as well. Advantage is a good spreadsheet program. We now have SuperBase 4 which is a successful IBM world product, as well as dbMAN V which is a dBASE III+ compat. program with extensions. How does the NeXT software stack up? There is Improv. What else? FrameMaker, Create, TopDraw, Adobe Illustrator(May), Wingz, Who's Calling, Diagram, Word Perfect, WriteNow(free), Text Art, and Quark XPress(announce for 91) are some of the important pieces of NeXT software that I can think of. I guess the big ones are Adobe, FrameMaker, WP, Lotus, and Quark. These are important because Mac and IBM users can use the same software(some exist for only 1 computer) on the NeXT too. -Mike
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (04/04/91)
In article <umG&llg1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >In article <1991Apr4.004937.10202@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > > I will grant you spreadsheets (that is if Improv is > finally shipping), but the Amiga has very good DTP as well, and > I've heard enormous complaints about the Mac Framemaker. As to > the 040, you and I both know it'll be out for Amigas and Macs > RSN. > >Yes, Improv is shipping. We have it here. What don't Mac users like >about FrameMaker? Too slow? Tell them to buy a NeXT and run it on >there. > Sorry, that was a misthink. I should've said that I've heard tons of complaints about bugs in the NeXT framemaker. > >and it's a boon to productivity. You can run X and an IBM PC in a > >window for compatibility. > > Gee, you can do that on an Amiga as well! What a > coincidence. > >You can't run X in a window. Reboot that sucker. Seriously, I do >think it is important to be able to support the environments >simultanously. > Whelp, it is time for another BZZZZZZTT! Thanks for playing! GfxBase makes X-Windows for AmigaDOS. As well, there is supposedly a PD project in the works. > You are right. 1.3 doesn't look so hot. 2.0 does. Under > 2.0 you can tell it to make the screen any size up to 32Kx32K, > depending on available chip ram, and your window can be on-screen > and off screen into that extra space. > >And 2.0 will be out soon for other computers besides the A3000? >System 7.0 is comping out on May 13, and it looks slick. >Does 2.0 support Adobe outline fonts? > Yes, it will. I've heard rumors that it will be this April, and I believe them. I'm certain it'll be out before May 13. And no, 2.0 doesn't currently support Adobe fonts, but it is a well-known fact that Commodore has signed an agreement with AGFA-Compugraphic to support their outline technology in AmigaDOS itself. This is being actively worked on, but I don't expect to see it in the release. Besides, if I want either Adobe or Compugraphic I just load up my PageStream. > There is a lot of great software in the Amiga markets as > well. Advantage is a good spreadsheet program. We now have > SuperBase 4 which is a successful IBM world product, as well as > dbMAN V which is a dBASE III+ compat. program with extensions. > How does the NeXT software stack up? There is Improv. What else? > >FrameMaker, Create, TopDraw, Adobe Illustrator(May), Wingz, Who's >Calling, Diagram, Word Perfect, WriteNow(free), Text Art, and Quark >XPress(announce for 91) are some of the important pieces of NeXT >software that I can think of. I guess the big ones are Adobe, >FrameMaker, WP, Lotus, and Quark. These are important because Mac and >IBM users can use the same software(some exist for only 1 computer) on >the NeXT too. > So we both have some nice software. However the products I have mentioned will HAVE to be updated, because the companies have to support the Amiga market as they don't have another substantive one. Quark, Lotus, WP, Adobe and FrameMaker will all be watching their sales VERY carefully. Besides, it kinda makes sense that Adobe would support the NeXT, given that it uses Display Postscript! >-Mike -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb A: None. It's a hardware problem.
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/04/91)
In article <umG&llg1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >And 2.0 will be out soon for other computers besides the A3000? >System 7.0 is comping out on May 13, and it looks slick. >Does 2.0 support Adobe outline fonts? > > >-Mike I've 'heard' that AmaxIII will also support system 7. Also, a judge OKed the 386 clones since 386 was only an Intel designation and not a Trademark (or something like that) so 386's are going to get real cheap and C= or someone like Atonce will have a cheap 386 emulator available for Amiga.... ....so Mac system 7, 386/MS-Dos, UNIX, AmigaDos.... I'd say the Amiga 3000 will just about have it covered! (still won't have Improve though) :( And I think it is important that many of the current Amiga owners will have Amiga Unix available to them. The price of ram and hard-drives is dropping and it will not be a big step to upgrade. Amiga Unix already has a base... maybe a reletively large base before too long. And how delightful will it be to be the proud owner of a NeXT when NeXT goes belly-up year after NeXT? And I just don't like Steve Jobs. NCW
nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) (04/04/91)
In article <1991Apr3.112104.6657@infonode.ingr.com> hychejw@infonode.ingr.com (Jeff W. Hyche) writes: >melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > >>-Mike > >>BTW: The NeXTstation is faster than the SPARC IPC. > > How many of you feel that someone here is trying to shove a NeXT >down your trought? > > I think the next question to ask is who is gonna buy a NeXT and >who is gonna buy an Amiga 3000. > My next big purchase is going to be an Amiga 3000 for multimedia >work. Now lets talk real uses, what can I do with an NeXTstation. If >you can convince me that it is better than a A3000 I will buy it. >-- > // Jeff Hyche > There can be only one! \\ // Usenet: hychejw@infonode.ingr.com > \X/ Freenet: ap255@po.CWRU.Edu I think NeXT is a really good deal if you can get it for educational discount. I was just browsing at the campus computer store and saw the NeXT and its software catalog. There are many good programs available for NeXT - ex: three good spreadsheets as compared to none on the Amiga. I saw several desktop publishing type programs and also some structured drawing programs. They have several authoring softwares also. As for multimedia work, it doesn't come close to the A3000. They are just starting to get the color versions! But I don't doubt that the software will be there soon. All the major software people are supporting NeXT except Microsoft. I wish I can say the same for the A3000. By the way, I have an A3000 and an A1000 without the EHB since 1986.
jeremy@math.uic.edu (Jeremy Teitelbaum) (04/05/91)
Advocates of NeXT and Amiga seem to me to have a common characteristic: the willingness to take a chance on something different from the "industry standards." So why are these two camps bickering? Remember who the real enemies are: those users who insist on inferior technology at inflated prices because that's "standard," and those companies who rely more on their legal departments then their R&D departments to hold on to market share. How about re--directing some of the energy currently being spent on arguments about NeXT versus Amiga towards campaigning against look--and--feel lawsuits and repressive patent and copyright policies? In five years all of the current hardware--NeXT, Amiga, Sun, IBM, Apple--will be obsolete anyway. Jeremy Teitelbaum Math Dept. U. of Illinois -- Chicago Chicago, IL 60680 312-996-2371
dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (04/05/91)
In article <e0aG2veg1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <1991Apr3.112104.6657@infonode.ingr.com> hychejw@infonode.ingr.com (Jeff W. Hyche) writes: > > >BTW: The NeXTstation is faster than the SPARC IPC. > > How many of you feel that someone here is trying to shove a NeXT > down your trought? > >Nah, just stating a fact. > > I think the next question to ask is who is gonna buy a NeXT and > who is gonna buy an Amiga 3000. > My next big purchase is going to be an Amiga 3000 for multimedia > work. Now lets talk real uses, what can I do with an NeXTstation. If > you can convince me that it is better than a A3000 I will buy it. > > >Better than the A3000 for what? The A3000 is going to be better than >a NeXTStation for video, and multimedia in general. You have to buy a >Cube and the NeXTDimension Board for this, and that's going to cost >you $10,000. But for a lot of the users do, the NeXT is better. DTP, >spreadsheets, etc, and it has more horsepower in the 68040 to do these >things. The DSP provides great sound, and the 17" monitor looks great >and it's a boon to productivity. You can run X and an IBM PC in a >window for compatibility. I haven't seen Amiga DOS 2.0, but 1.3 >didn't look so hot. How do you drag a window part way off screen? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 3 years old (: Gently place one hand on the mouse (or for those of you who need to use two hands, feel free). Place the mouse pointer over the horizontal bar at the screen top. Gently depress the left mouse button with the appropriate finger...and HOLD ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, drag Drag DRAG the screen downwards nd watch the screen/window smoothly slide off the screen! David >More importantly, to the software average user, a lot of great >software is becoming available. Think about this. If graphics power >is so important, why does everyone by Macs and PCs? > >-Mike -- David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN -- Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/05/91)
In article <1991Apr4.185844.13741@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
Gently place one hand on the mouse (or for those of you who need to use
two hands, feel free). Place the mouse pointer over the horizontal bar
at the screen top. Gently depress the left mouse button with the
appropriate finger...and HOLD ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, drag Drag DRAG
the screen downwards nd watch the screen/window smoothly slide off the
screen!
I don't think that's what I was talking about. Try grabbing that
window and moving it left or right.
-Mikecs180sbg@sdcc5.ucsd.edu (04/05/91)
It used to be that Amiga owners can "look down" on almost anyone else, especially Atari owners. Now it is reversed, as the NeXT invades. Hmmmm, time has changed.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/05/91)
In article <e0aG2veg1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > But for a lot of the users do, the NeXT is better. DTP, > spreadsheets, etc, and it has more horsepower in the 68040 to do these > things. Yeh, but for those users the Macintrash is nearly as good, and it's a lot cheaper (especially since Apple just cut the prices from absolutely outrageous to merely scandalous). And as a UNIX Workstation the NeXT has competition from RISC machines (of course the same is true of the A3000UX, but you don't need to run UNIX on your A3000). -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/05/91)
In article <1991Apr4.004937.10202@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > You are right. 1.3 doesn't look so hot. 2.0 does. Under > 2.0 you can tell it to make the screen any size up to 32Kx32K, > depending on available chip ram, and your window can be on-screen > and off screen into that extra space. Of course you can do the same thing on 1.3, with several PD programs. It is *not* the same thing as the NeXT, Mac, X, etc do... and this ticks me off, too. There's no reason CBM couldn't have put real off-screen windows in 2.0 instead of this extended display area kludge. The techniques are the same as for obscured windows, and the memory use is way less. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu (04/05/91)
> I think NeXT is a really good deal if you can get it for educational > discount. I was just browsing at the campus computer store and saw > the NeXT and its software catalog. There are many good programs > available for NeXT - ex: three good spreadsheets as compared to none on the > Amiga. I saw several desktop publishing type programs and also some > structured drawing programs. They have several authoring softwares also. (rest deleted) I saw the NeXTStation and was very impressed; however, the price for the low-end model ($3500) is nowhere as attractive when you realize that it comes with a comparatively miniscule 105 MB hard drive, which gives you about 30 megs free. Of course, you could delete stuff... The reasonable NeXTStation with the enhanced OS and a 400 MB hard drive is (I think) $5500. $2000 is a LOT to pay for a bigger hard drive. They both come with a full 8 megs RAM, and the $1700 laser printer is a honey at 400 dpi, and it prints as fast as a Xerox machine. But as my local system administrator says, "I'll be interested in the NeXT when there are at least three different programs for each application--not before." He has a good point. Here at Connecticut College, a rather pricey school, Mac Classics are selling very well. LCs aren't moving at all, and I strongly doubt that there are very many students who are willing to cough up the bucks to buy a machine like the NeXT, as nice as it is, unless the student is just made of money and needs to have the hottest machine in his/her dorm. ---Rick Wrigley fhwri@conncoll.bitnet ~~~---second-hand smoke is THEFT---~~~
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/06/91)
In article <49886@nigel.ee.udel.edu> fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu writes:
I saw the NeXTStation and was very impressed; however, the price for the
low-end model ($3500) is nowhere as attractive when you realize that it
comes with a comparatively miniscule 105 MB hard drive, which gives you
about 30 megs free. Of course, you could delete stuff...
How much disk space do you have free when you buy a 40MB hard drive
after the system software is loaded onto it?
The reasonable NeXTStation with the enhanced OS and a 400 MB hard
drive is (I think) $5500. $2000 is a LOT to pay for a bigger hard drive.
They both come with a full 8 megs RAM, and the $1700 laser printer is a
honey at 400 dpi, and it prints as fast as a Xerox machine. But as my local
system administrator says, "I'll be interested in the NeXT when there are at
least three different programs for each application--not before."
Stupid reasoning. Very stupid! It's not the quantity it's the
quality of software. Tell him that he can get 3 of everything the
Apple IIe. The NeXT has Improv, which is 123 file compatible, and
Word Perfect 5.0, which is...guess. Adobe Illustrator will be released
in May, and Quark XPress sometime this year(they need a phone call--
tired of saying sometime this year). The question is will the NeXT,
in its present incarnation, meet your needs(and it doesn't meet
everyones, I concede), not does it have three of everything.
He has a good point. Here at Connecticut College, a rather pricey
school, Mac Classics are selling very well. LCs aren't moving at all, and I
strongly doubt that there are very many students who are willing to cough up
the bucks to buy a machine like the NeXT, as nice as it is, unless the
student is just made of money and needs to have the hottest machine in
his/her dorm.
True, NeXT isn't going to sell 1,000,000 machines a year with their
current pricing structure, but they know this. Their one factory can
only produce 100,000 machines a year. I'm just arguing that if you
are going to spend $3300 ($5000 retail) on a computer, then the NeXT
is (arguably) the best buy one can get for their money.
-Mikenavas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (04/06/91)
In article <3&8Ghkzh1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <49886@nigel.ee.udel.edu> fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu writes: >> 105 MB hard drive, which gives you > about 30 megs free. > >How much disk space do you have free when you buy a 40MB hard drive >after the system software is loaded onto it? Well, they're shipping 50meg Quantums, but to answer your question, think about what you just asked. The Amiga's system software comes on *three* *880k* disks. A little rounding (for those of us up all night :) ), tells me I'd have > 37megs left. A rather substantial difference as AmigaDos won't be paging madly to that drive either. So go buy yourself a 16Mhz A3000, add a 25Mhz 68040 board, add 6megs of RAM -- for educational pricing I get practically the *same* cost. I don't have retail pricing, but I bet it would allow for a decent monitor in that case... So for the price of a color monitor I get a color system. With slots, even. Like, excuse me, where's the price advantage? I get a more responsive system, more harddrive, and *way* more usage of my memory than you would -- and the difference in price depends on the monitor that I can buy. And I *can* buy a color monitor. Somebody's been passing around that thing folks have been smoking recently... >Stupid reasoning. Very stupid! It's not the quantity it's the >quality of software. Ah, redemption. :) Darn right it is -- and the NeXT has some very interesting software. >if you are going to spend $3300 ($5000 retail) on a computer, then the NeXT >is (arguably) the best buy one can get for their money. Not when I can get an '040 for a 16Mhz Amiga it isn't. Some other line of reasoning is going to have to be used. >-Mike ?TXeN David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu 2.0 :: "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus
pharr-matthew@cs.yale.edu (Matthew Pharr) (04/06/91)
In article <14026@helios.TAMU.EDU> dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes: > >From recent news seen elsewhere, contract problems between NeXT and >Wolfram Research (makers of Mathematica) have caused NeXT to pull >Mathematica from the student deal. One of its most attractive >offerings is now gone. > >The compilers and development kit are *NOT* (I repeat, *NOT*) in the >super cheap base prices quoted above. They only come on the 300 MB >hard disk-equipped models. Add about $1000 to $1500 for that. (I don't >have my price sheet handy.) > >I *am* impressed by the NeXT, but the base ed prices are a bit deceptive. >If you want the development kit and the more arcane software, you have >to pay a considerable amount more. > >--Daryl Biberdorf, dlb5404@{tamuts,rigel}.tamu.edu > Texas A&M University 1) Mathematica is still bundled with educational machines. 2) Everyone is licensed to use the extended software-they just don't put it all on all of the computers. People who want to develop on the 105 system either need to squeeze it all on or to get a third party hard disk. pharr@cs.yale.edu
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/06/91)
In article <3&8Ghkzh1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >True, NeXT isn't going to sell 1,000,000 machines a year with their >current pricing structure, but they know this. Their one factory can >only produce 100,000 machines a year. I'm just arguing that if you >are going to spend $3300 ($5000 retail) on a computer, then the NeXT >is (arguably) the best buy one can get for their money. > > >-Mike What will happen when Steve Jobs can no longer pay for software companies to port to NeXT. Will there be enough machines out there to make for a good software market? The single biggest complaint people have about Amiga is that you can't get software for it. What will it by like for NeXT? Snob appeal is a fine thing to market in sports cars or fashion, but you have a problem doing it with computers. NCW
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/06/91)
cs180sbg@sdcc5.ucsd.edu writes: > > It used to be that Amiga owners can "look down" on almost anyone > else, especially Atari owners. Now it is reversed, as the NeXT invades. > Hmmmm, time has changed. > I'd say sideways... Not down. Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone, unless your're one of the few sickos that enjoy it. I think we're dealing with more than 3 dimensions now. rory
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/06/91)
In article <1991Apr05.214640.25369@ariel.unm.edu> nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes:
What will happen when Steve Jobs can no longer pay for software companies to
port to NeXT. Will there be enough machines out there to make for a good
software market? The single biggest complaint people have about Amiga is that
you can't get software for it. What will it by like for NeXT?
Gloom and doom. Wonderful, and rather unimportant to this discussion.
Snob appeal is a fine thing to market in sports cars or fashion, but you have
a problem doing it with computers.
Grow up. I am debating the merits of the NeXT vs. the Amiga and Mac.
I'm not saying that I'm better than you because...
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/06/91)
In article <1991Apr5.122106.9034@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
Yeh, but for those users the Macintrash is nearly as good, and it's a lot
cheaper (especially since Apple just cut the prices from absolutely outrageous
to merely scandalous). And as a UNIX Workstation the NeXT has competition from
RISC machines (of course the same is true of the A3000UX, but you don't need
to run UNIX on your A3000).
The NeXT still fairs well in the price/performance area, but I do
think HP would question that.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/06/91)
In article <12502@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) writes: Well, they're shipping 50meg Quantums, but to answer your question, think about what you just asked. The Amiga's system software comes on *three* *880k* disks. A little rounding (for those of us up all night :) ), tells me I'd have > 37megs left. A rather substantial difference as AmigaDos won't be paging madly to that drive either. My point is that you are paying for a 50MB hard drive on your system while NeXT ships a 105MB drive while leaving you 30-40 free. There are some things like the Improv Demo that can be remove. The NeXTDeveloper demos can be moved to floppies. Actually, I wonder how much of this junk do you actually need. You can boot the NeXT off of a floppy(ies), but it's not advisable. So go buy yourself a 16Mhz A3000, add a 25Mhz 68040 board, add 6megs of RAM -- for educational pricing I get practically the *same* cost. I don't have retail pricing, but I bet it would allow for a decent monitor in that case... I don't think you can just drop a 25MHz 040 board in a 16MHz A3000 and expect to get the same performance as a system that was designed to run at 25MHz. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Like I have to ask. BTW, $3250 is the price to beat. So for the price of a color monitor I get a color system. With slots, even. Like, excuse me, where's the price advantage? I get a more responsive system, more harddrive, and *way* more usage of my memory than you would -- and the difference in price depends on the monitor that I can buy. And I *can* buy a color monitor. Color, the end all be all of computing. Believe it or not, most of the WORK people do on a computer can be done in B/W. The NeXT monochrome monitor costs $700 with the educational discount. Probably more than the Amiga color monitor. Care to guess why? >Stupid reasoning. Very stupid! It's not the quantity it's the >quality of software. Ah, redemption. :) Darn right it is -- and the NeXT has some very interesting software. >if you are going to spend $3300 ($5000 retail) on a computer, then the NeXT >is (arguably) the best buy one can get for their money. Not when I can get an '040 for a 16Mhz Amiga it isn't. Some other line of reasoning is going to have to be used. When they actually ship, let me know how much they cost and how they actually perform in the Amiga. -Mike
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/06/91)
In article <9x1G.&$h1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <1991Apr05.214640.25369@ariel.unm.edu> nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes: > > > What will happen when Steve Jobs can no longer pay for software companies to > port to NeXT. Will there be enough machines out there to make for a good > software market? The single biggest complaint people have about Amiga is that > you can't get software for it. What will it by like for NeXT? > >Gloom and doom. Wonderful, and rather unimportant to this discussion. > > Snob appeal is a fine thing to market in sports cars or fashion, but you have > a problem doing it with computers. > >Grow up. I am debating the merits of the NeXT vs. the Amiga and Mac. >I'm not saying that I'm better than you because... > >-Mike Don't get the wrong idea.... software support is a real part of the game. I'm not being critical of NeXT for having snob appeal ....I would like an expensive sports car myself someday.... its just that with computers, you're limited by the software that is available. That is what Mac users always throw up in Amiga user's faces: Amiga is nice but there is not very much software for it. I've heard several times that a better computer than Amiga is the Sinclair (?) but there is not any software for it. So gloom and doom is also part of the equation and is very important to the discussion. Maybe the prospect of the NeXT failure is simply something you are unwilling to consider in your evaluations; but the NeXT failure I believe is likely. More than anything else, it is what is keeping me away. I don't want to dump four or five or six thousand dollars into something only to see that it will be nearly totally useless in a couple of years! I don't care that it has mathmitca now or WP now or Lotus now. I beleive your unrstrained excitement and you blind faith in Steve Jobs or a black machine is what is childish. Maybe you could grow up just a little. Your childish behavior may cost a lot of people a lot of money. Let me ask you again. Do you believe that there will be enough NeXTs out there to support a healthy software market? NCW
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/06/91)
In article <1991Apr06.013637.28281@ariel.unm.edu> nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes:
Don't get the wrong idea.... software support is a real part of the game. I'm
not being critical of NeXT for having snob appeal ....I would like an expensive
sports car myself someday.... its just that with computers, you're limited by
the software that is available. That is what Mac users always throw up in Amiga
user's faces: Amiga is nice but there is not very much software for it. I've
heard several times that a better computer than Amiga is the Sinclair (?) but
there is not any software for it.
True, software is the most important thing. That is a major advantage
the NeXT has over the Amiga, except in video, of course.
So gloom and doom is also part of the equation and is very important to the
discussion. Maybe the prospect of the NeXT failure is simply something you
are unwilling to consider in your evaluations; but the NeXT failure I believe
is likely. More than anything else, it is what is keeping me away. I don't
want to dump four or five or six thousand dollars into something only to see
that it will be nearly totally useless in a couple of years! I don't care
that it has mathmitca now or WP now or Lotus now. I beleive your unrstrained
excitement and you blind faith in Steve Jobs or a black machine is what is
childish. Maybe you could grow up just a little. Your childish behavior
may cost a lot of people a lot of money.
How long do you plan to keep your current computer? I would say after
5 years, you will buy a new computer anyway. So what happens if NeXT
fails? You use Word Perfect on brand Y computer? Lotus on a PC?
Illustrator on a Mac. FrameMaker on a Sun? Wingz on every computer
in existance, except the Amiga. If you choose your software wisely,
you aren't locked into one computer company.
BTW, aren't there still people who use the TI/99.
Let me ask you again. Do you believe that there will be enough NeXTs out
there to support a healthy software market?
Yes. I think software companies will see NeXT as a major player in
next two or three years and they will port their wares to the NeXT so
that they can get a larger share of the market. Once a company gets
entrenched in a market, it's hard to get them out. examples: Lotus on
the PC, Excel on the Mac, WP on the PC, Word on the Mac. Many
companies stuck with Lotus during their tough years because it was too
much trouble to change. Same with A-T and dBase.
-Mikenwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/06/91)
In article <#54G+r2i1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > > Let me ask you again. Do you believe that there will be enough NeXTs out > there to support a healthy software market? > >Yes. I think software companies will see NeXT as a major player in >next two or three years and they will port their wares to the NeXT so >that they can get a larger share of the market. Once a company gets >entrenched in a market, it's hard to get them out. examples: Lotus on >the PC, Excel on the Mac, WP on the PC, Word on the Mac. Many >companies stuck with Lotus during their tough years because it was too >much trouble to change. Same with A-T and dBase. > >-Mike Lotus, WP, and Mathmatica won't cut it. With my Amiga, I can run ms-dos and Mac as well as Amiga-dos and UNIX. I may very well have my Amiga in five years. I don't think the computer market will change in the next five years like it has in the past five. There is this inertial aspect called available software. I think most people who knew about Amiga when it came out thought that soft- ware companies would all jump on the Amiga band wagon. But they didn't. They wrote for clunky old ms-dos, because, they said, there weren't enough Amigas sold. ...they were in the business to make money and there was money to be made with ms-dos. The simple fact that the average price for a NeXT (ed & list) is around $6,000 means that its market will be very restricted. There will never be droves of people marching to computer stores to lay down six thousand bucks for a computer. NeXT will never have the variety of software that is or will be available to ms-dos, Mac, and Amiga. The NeXT is nice ...I think anyone will give you that. I just don't believe the market for it is out there. There is a lot of hype for NeXT. Jobs and people in California know the power of advertising and image and hype and they have sunk a lot of money into hyping the NeXT and it may carry them so far. But I've have a wait and see attitude. There are a lot of things you can buy for $6,000. And on purely technical grounds, I am not convinced that NeXT really out performs Amiga. ...I wouldn't want a CPU time killer like Post Script on my monitor! NCW
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (04/06/91)
In article <f&1Gjg#h1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >I don't think you can just drop a 25MHz 040 board in a 16MHz A3000 and >expect to get the same performance as a system that was designed to >run at 25MHz. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Like I have to ask. If it's done correctly, you can. All of the system chips in the Bus architecture have a dual 25Mhz/16Mhz mode. So *IF* you could unsolder the 16Mhz 68030, you could plop in a 25Mhz 68030 and a crystal and have yourself a 25Mhz system. Any 68040 board can take over those clock signals. I leave it to your imagination for the rest. :) >BTW, $3250 is the price to beat. Okay, I hate to do this, but: $2000 bucks for a 16Mhz version. $1000 *retail* for a 68040 board. About $280 for 4megs in 1x4Meg chips. Like, figure it out... > So for the price of a color monitor I get a color system. With slots, even. > > Like, excuse me, where's the price advantage? I get a more responsive system, > more harddrive, and *way* more usage of my memory than you would -- and the > difference in price depends on the monitor that I can buy. And I *can* buy > a color monitor. > >Color, the end all be all of computing. Believe it or not, most of >[ranting about color removed] BUT, I get to choose, don't I? *AND* I get a more responsive system. *AND* I get slots. On an Amiga, I get to choose what I want (a color monitor) and what I don't want (Ethernet). Guess that's why I have an Amiga, not a NeXT... :) >When they actually ship, let me know how much they cost and how they >actually perform in the Amiga. Get back to me in two months -- like about the same time that I could have waited for that NeXT machine... -Dave David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu 2.0 :: "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus
torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) (04/06/91)
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes: >I don't think the computer market will change in the next five years >like it has in the past five. Au contraire, I think the PC market is going to change a LOT more in the next five years than it has in the past five. Consider, since 1986 (5 years ago), not a single significant new architecture has come to market - the IBM PC already existed, the Mac already existed, the Amiga and the Atari ST already existed. Sure there have been faster CPUs and faster buses introduced, but they still have the same old CPU families and same-design OSes. In the previous 5 years to that (1981-1986), all of these machines were introduced anew. In the next 5 years (91-96), we're going to see new RISC architectures from ARCA, pen-driven machines from Go et al, RS/6000 systems coming down into the PC market from IBM, RISC machines and new OSes from Apple etc... 86 - 91 was a relatively boring period in the short life of microcomputers; 91-96 is promising to be much more interesting. I'll be very surprised if software and hardware aren't radically different in 96 than they are today. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu "Dear Fascist Bully Boy, Give me some money, or else. Neil. P.S. May the seed of your loins be fruitful in the womb of your woman..."
sysop@tlvx.UUCP (SysOp) (04/06/91)
(Hmm, and I thought the NeXT "discussions" were gone. :-) In article <2o7G!rpe1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <yorkw.670527864@stable.ecn.purdue.edu> yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) writes: > > Well all this Next Vs Amiga stuff IS SILLY. > It;s not proving anything, ...and yet we post! > I just have a few Q's about the Next. > > 1) What's the $$$$$ of one ot those Puppies? > > Retail: $4995 for NeXTstation -- edu: around $3250 > $7995 for NeXTstation color -- edu: around $5500 I see a tiny problem here. I refuse to pay $5000 on up for a computer. :-) I would like to pay between $2000 and $3000, which means I could get a Amiga 3000 (at least 16Mhz) or a Clone with a 33MHz 386 & cache. AUGH! I just realized the $5000 isn't color. You want me to pay $7000 for a computer?! I NEED color. :-) [comments about cool features and other things deleted....] > > -Mike in an earlier post, (Michael D Mellinger) writes: [....] >As far as requirements go, if good software exists then the machine >fits the requirements. In the meantime, Mac and Amiga(PC owners are >oblivious to all changes) owners can say to themselves "NeXT won't be >in business in five years" so they won't feel so bad spending a lot >more money on a less powerful machine. Of course everyone said the How could I possibly spend more money? :-) With $5000 to work with, I'd start running out of things to get for a clone. Anyway, I wouldn't have the money to get a NeXT. Also, I get less machine for less money. :-) That's ok, I don't need an '040. An '030 (or 386 or similar) might be nice, but a line has to be drawn somewhere. This is why NeXT is in a different niche than Amiga. (Note that I'm not able to buy things with educational pricing, but then Amigas have educational pricing...) [...] > Gates). At least Amiga owners can say, "we still have the best games > in the business." Do you know Mike Shwartz? (Just kidding guys! :-) If all my Amiga was good for was games, I would have bought another machine a long time ago. > > -Mike in yet another post, (Michael D Mellinger) writes: [....] > In article <UbxeaLm00WBw8WbE8T@andrew.cmu.edu> tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Todd L. Masco) writes: > > This flamage is getting extremely tiresome. > > This is comp.sys.amiga.advocacy is it not? What do you guys do here? > Didn't the Atari ST folks request this group so that you would leave > them alone? :-) Oh, is that why? And all this time, I thought it was because of Marc Barrett! ;-) [lotsa stuff deleted....] > The guy in the store couldn't tell me a thing about the machine. The > Amiga just sat their with a dozen other IBM compatibles(which the guy > could tell me a little about -- the pervasive feeling in the world is > you can't go wrong with MS DOS). Well, if I ever get a clone, it'll be because I was dragged kicking and screaming. :-) With almost no Amiga support locally, and the MS-DOS shelves full, it can get a bit depressing for an Amiga owner here in Jax. [...] I'm seriously tempted to get a 33MHz 386. Please, someone explain why I shouldn't! :-) (Seriously, e-mail is fine, if you think this'll turn into a clone vs. Amiga war. :-) -- Gary Wolfe, SYSOP of the Temporal Vortex BBS // Amiga! ..uflorida!unf7!tlvx!sysop, unf7!tlvx!sysop@bikini.cis.ufl.edu \X/ Yeah!
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/07/91)
In article <1991Apr6.075425.18800@neon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes: >nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes: > >>I don't think the computer market will change in the next five years >>like it has in the past five. > > Au contraire, I think the PC market is going to change a LOT more in >the next five years than it has in the past five. Consider, since >1986 (5 years ago), not a single significant new architecture has come >to market - the IBM PC already existed, the Mac already existed, the >Amiga and the Atari ST already existed. Sure there have been faster >CPUs and faster buses introduced, but they still have the same old CPU >families and same-design OSes. > In the previous 5 years to that (1981-1986), all of these machines >were introduced anew. > In the next 5 years (91-96), we're going to see new RISC >architectures from ARCA, pen-driven machines from Go et al, RS/6000 >systems coming down into the PC market from IBM, RISC machines and new >OSes from Apple etc... > 86 - 91 was a relatively boring period in the short life of >microcomputers; 91-96 is promising to be much more interesting. I'll >be very surprised if software and hardware aren't radically different >in 96 than they are today. > > > > > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu >"Dear Fascist Bully Boy, Give me some money, or else. Neil. P.S. May >the seed of your loins be fruitful in the womb of your woman..." IBM just dropped OS/2 because of a lack on interest. NCW
torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) (04/07/91)
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes: >In article <1991Apr6.075425.18800@neon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes: >> Au contraire, I think the PC market is going to change a LOT more in >>the next five years than it has in the past five. Consider, since >IBM just dropped OS/2 because of a lack on interest. Ah, not quite. IBM seems to be spending $40 million to promote it this year. More likely, you mean Microsoft has "dropped" OS/2 [well at least gone with promoting Windows instead of OS/2]. But this will change with ARCA and OS/2 NT. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu "I didn't get where I am today without knowing a good deal when I see one, Reggie." "Yes, C.J."
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/07/91)
In article <1991Apr6.180951.1614@neon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes: >>IBM just dropped OS/2 because of a lack on interest. > > Ah, not quite. IBM seems to be spending $40 million to promote it >this year. More likely, you mean Microsoft has "dropped" OS/2 [well >at least gone with promoting Windows instead of OS/2]. > But this will change with ARCA and OS/2 NT. > > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu >"I didn't get where I am today without knowing a good deal when I see one, > Reggie." "Yes, C.J." Well, you may be more informed than I. But I first of all heard from a freind in the business that Windows was going to effectively kill OS/2 and then I read in some publication called Info (not .info) or something like that that OS/2 was being dropped and no longer supported due to the success Windows. I don't recall if it were specifically IBM or Microsoft who was dropping the support. My point was, however, that new and better doesn't spell success or change. Even IBM and/or Microsoft can't get people to buy what is good for them. NCW P.S. Evan, may the bluebird of happiness build its nest in your tree of manhood.
jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi (04/07/91)
In article <kucsZ1w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us>, judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: >> >> 1) What's the $$$$$ of one ot those Puppies? >> >> Retail: $4995 for NeXTstation -- edu: around $3250 >> $7995 for NeXTstation color -- edu: around $5500 >> > Yes, but in order to get a usable NeXTStation, it's something like $4200 > with a 200megger, and about $5000 with a 400megger. The $3250 price is > for the 105meg model, which just doesn't have enough space for the OS and > all the applications. The full extended OS, which comes with the C > compiler and a bunch of other neatstuff won't fit into the cheap model. If you were clever, you would buy the smallest NeXTstation configuration and a big third-party hard disk. I got NeXTstation with about 800MEG hard disk space for less than $5000. But I admit, that if you want to program the NeXT, you need more than 105MB and it raises the price. > Oh, these are educational prices I'm talking about. I hear for about 3K, > one can get a SPARC IPC from SUN. Or one can geta 3000 and spend the > xtra 1K to get the '040 board... Hmm. I'd prefer a NeXT to either of those machines. BTW, you would need a big hard disk with the SPARC IPC, as well. > > rory Jouni Alkio
jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi (04/07/91)
In article <14026@helios.TAMU.EDU>, dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes: > In article <2o7G!rpe1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> >>Retail: $4995 for NeXTstation -- edu: around $3250 >> $7995 for NeXTstation color -- edu: around $5500 >>... >> >> 3) Exactly what makes it soo cool? >> >>Interface Builder. >>DSP for CD quaility sound. > > Yeah...wait until you try to do some heavy disk activity while playing > a score file on that DSP.... The DSP requires the *CPU* to feed it > the sound data; it can't go get it on its own. Uhh? Quite a hopeless argument here. So, you think NeXT's would be better if they didn't have the DSP at all? > > --Daryl Biberdorf, dlb5404@{tamuts,rigel}.tamu.edu > Texas A&M University Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland
jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi (04/07/91)
In article <1991Apr5.122106.9034@sugar.hackercorp.com>, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > In article <e0aG2veg1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> But for a lot of the users do, the NeXT is better. DTP, >> spreadsheets, etc, and it has more horsepower in the 68040 to do these >> things. > > Yeh, but for those users the Macintrash is nearly as good, and it's a lot > cheaper (especially since Apple just cut the prices from absolutely outrageous > to merely scandalous). And as a UNIX Workstation the NeXT has competition from > RISC machines (of course the same is true of the A3000UX, but you don't need > to run UNIX on your A3000). > -- > Peter da Silva. `-_-' > <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. Hmm. Even the leading Mac-magazines "MacWorld" and "Mac User" have recently admitted in their articles than NeXT has much more competitive pricing than Apple... I guess you know better. Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland BTW, do you know many people who like to do DTP with a Mac Classic?
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/07/91)
In article <f&1Gjg#h1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > I don't think you can just drop a 25MHz 040 board in a 16MHz A3000 and > expect to get the same performance as a system that was designed to > run at 25MHz. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Like I have to ask. OK, you're wrong. The only things in the 16 MHz motherboard that differ from the 25 MHz motherboard are the clock setting and the 68030/68881. If you run a 25 MHz 68040 card you can override the clock and you don't need the 68030/68881. > BTW, $3250 is the price to beat. How about $500? As an applications platform, the Amiga 500 is pretty close, since it's not tossing CPU speed away on VM. Really, a stock NeXT is about as responsive as a Mac Classic, which the 500 has beat all hollow. Oh, sure, CPU intensive stuff will be faster on the NeXT. What CPU-intensive stuff do you get with the machine? -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/07/91)
In article <9x1G.&$h1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > Grow up. I am debating the merits of the NeXT vs. the Amiga and Mac. OK, the merits of the NeXT: 10. If you want to run a UNIX system, it's real easy to set up and has AUX and AMIX beat hollow. 9. Has two or three awesome applications, plus a lot of obscure vertical market stuff. 8. Steve Jobs has a great reputation. 7. Comes in a cool black anodised case. 6. Did I mention that it's one of the best integrated UNIX systems out there? 5. Cheap laser printer. 4. Cool sound effects, and you can play music if you don't mind not using the system while it's playing. 3. Microphone can be activated from the network, removing the need for expensive surveilance equipment. 2. Can emulate IBM-PC, slowly, if you need to do any actual work. And, the number one advantage of the NeXT: 1. Snob appeal of being able to afford the applications. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/07/91)
In article <1991Apr06.171913.22018@ariel.unm.edu> nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes:
IBM just dropped OS/2 because of a lack on interest.
Where did you read this? I heard that IBM was considering bundling
OS/2 with some of their machines.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/07/91)
In article <J6ByZ3w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes:
I'd say sideways... Not down. Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone,
unless your're one of the few sickos that enjoy it. I think we're
dealing with more than 3 dimensions now.
Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone because?peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/07/91)
In article <#54G+r2i1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > How long do you plan to keep your current computer? I find 10 years is a good number. I also try to do as well with cars, but I've had better luck with computers. I finally sold my CP/M box when I bought my Amiga 3000. My 5 year old Amiga 1000 is still in use, as is my 8 year old Atari 800 (actually, it's the second one: my brother in law is using the first one). > in existance, except the Amiga. If you choose your software wisely, > you aren't locked into one computer company. If you choose your software wisely, you're not locked into one brand of software. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/07/91)
In article <1991Apr6.075425.18800@neon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes: > Au contraire, I think the PC market is going to change a LOT more in > the next five years than it has in the past five. Consider, since > 1986 (5 years ago), not a single significant new architecture has come > to market You mean apart from the 80386 and the Acorn RISC machine? And the 80386 is really a new CPU that happens to have an 80286 tucked away in a corner. It has allowed all sorts of new things to get into the home market. > In the next 5 years (91-96), we're going to see new RISC > architectures from ARCA, pen-driven machines from Go et al, RS/6000 > systems coming down into the PC market from IBM, RISC machines and new > OSes from Apple etc... We'll see. RISC machines have been pretty cheap for a while, and PC clone manufacturers have started making SPARC boxes in the last year. What has this produced? -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/07/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <J6ByZ3w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithac > > > I'd say sideways... Not down. Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone, > unless your're one of the few sickos that enjoy it. I think we're > dealing with more than 3 dimensions now. > > Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone because? Standalone in the sense of a home computer. I'm really sure that the average dude is going to want UNIX at home for his computer. Or the average student. rory
mike@maths.tcd.ie (MIKE ROGERS) (04/08/91)
In article <1991Apr5.122457.9102@sugar.hackercorp.com>, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) wrote: >too. There's no reason CBM couldn't have put real off-screen windows in 2.0 >instead of this extended display area kludge. The techniques are the same Perhaps they've one eye out for Apple's outrageous claim (amongst others) vs. MS and HP to *own* the concept of off-screen windows. -- Mike Rogers,Box 6,Regent Hse,## Everyone should try to kill themselves once in a TCD,EIRE. <mike@maths.tcd.ie>## while, it gives you a whole new outlook on life. ###############################DON'T MISS TRINCON400 7th, 8th, 9th FEBRUARY 1992 And she wore Black Contact Lenses when you said you liked her eyes......Toasties
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/08/91)
In article <1991Apr7.035526.26356@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
3. Microphone can be activated from the network, removing the need
for expensive surveilance equipment.
Maybe this is why the CIA is rumored to have bought 200 of them :-).
And, the number one advantage of the NeXT:
1. Snob appeal of being able to afford the applications.
Snob. You're a snob for liking the NeXT? It's more like you're a snob
for saying. Yeah, I can do the same thing with a Mac. All I have to
do it spend $$$ to get a large display, $$$$ for an 040 upgrade, add a
DSP, spend $$$ to get Unix, and more $$$$ to get enough disk space and
RAM to actually use it, last but not least $$$ to get an ethernet
card.
Of course the Amiga still isn't taken seriously in the business world
so it doesn't matter how good the machine is or gets. I have the
Commodore Amiga Buyer's Guide to software & accessories(Volume 5) here
and Entertainment is by far the biggest section. What else should I
look at on the Amiga besides the Killing Game Show?
You call it snob appeal because NeXT produces a great machine that is
getting some serious business applications, I think it is a bit of
jealousy because Commdore has had a great machine out for 5 years, and
the Amiga still doesn't get much respect.
If you want an analogy for the the Amiga, it is the Rodney Dangerfield
of computers.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/08/91)
In article <1991Apr7.034535.26282@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
How about $500? As an applications platform, the Amiga 500 is pretty close,
since it's not tossing CPU speed away on VM. Really, a stock NeXT is about as
responsive as a Mac Classic, which the 500 has beat all hollow. Oh, sure, CPU
intensive stuff will be faster on the NeXT. What CPU-intensive stuff do you
get with the machine?
The Objective C compiler benefited from the 040 upgrade, as did
Display Postscript, as did Mathametica, as did just about everything
that you can think of.
Why do you say the NeXT isn't responsive? It's not that bad. Swapping
can make it seem less responsive at times, but that is something $400
will alleviate. A NeXT owner should at 8MB of RAM to his Christmas
list -- might only be $200 by then. You don't click and drag the
entire window on a Classic, you just move the outline.
As for virtual memory, are you saying that you hope the Amiga never
gets it? Is it better to just run out of memory?
-Mikegblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) (04/08/91)
From article <m&2Gfonj1@cs.psu.edu>, by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): > Snob. You're a snob for liking the NeXT? It's more like you're a snob > for saying. Yeah, I can do the same thing with a Mac. All I have to > do it spend $$$ to get a large display, $$$$ for an 040 upgrade, add a > DSP, spend $$$ to get Unix, and more $$$$ to get enough disk space and > RAM to actually use it, last but not least $$$ to get an ethernet > card. Okay, you've warranted a correction. You're an idiot for liking a next, a snob for buying one. Come on, it's not really all that expensive. As has been said before, if all you want is the 68040, don't get the 25mhz 3000, and save yourself a small bundle. Because with the 68040 in, they will be identical. And it's not too much for Ethernet... Besides, the price of the NeXT has dropped over time. These peripherals on the amiga are still rather new. Give us time, and we'll blow your butt off the face of the earth more than we already do... Prices just need to drop, and once PP starts announcing, they won't stop. > and Entertainment is by far the biggest section. What else should I > look at on the Amiga besides the Killing Game Show? Maybe a studio apartment with rubber walls? Come on, you know there is decent software for the Amiga, just nothing with the "name" of Ashton-Tate or Lotus on it. DBMan V is great, and unlike the next dumb idea, weve got more softs available. -- - gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu - | IBM's brain is on overload, and Apple Gregory Block | needs to be potty-trained. C= may not Toaster+Amiga=The One True DTV | be marketing geniuses, but theyre the ________________________________| best engineers I've seen... -Wubba
gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) (04/08/91)
From article <m23G3+nj1@cs.psu.edu>, by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): > The Objective C compiler benefited from the 040 upgrade, as did > Display Postscript, as did Mathametica, as did just about everything > that you can think of. And I suppose that's a NeXT phenomenon, huh? You think that other systems don't get faster, with an 040 upgrade, perhaps??? How much snappier does AmigaOS need to get??? We've got the fastest gui I've ever seen. Certainly faster than the Next, and faster than 6.0.5, and the betas I've seen of 7.0. > Why do you say the NeXT isn't responsive? It's not that bad. Swapping > can make it seem less responsive at times, but that is something $400 > will alleviate. A NeXT owner should at 8MB of RAM to his Christmas > list -- might only be $200 by then. You don't click and drag the > entire window on a Classic, you just move the outline. You don't seem to understand. Any other GUI that I've ever seen is faster than DP on the NeXT 040. It's sluggish. And when you use another gui, and then use yours, it feels sluggish. Like wet Limburger (You know, this is the first time I've ever put thought to spelling that??) cheese. It's not just window dragging, it's EVERYTHING. As a whole. And I suppose spending another 400 bucks on a 4000 dollar system is just a drop in the bucket... Just so the system runs at an acceptable pace. Argh, what logic. > > As for virtual memory, are you saying that you hope the Amiga never > gets it? Is it better to just run out of memory? > No, but then again, I never want the system to have to depend on it. I wish the NeXT could say the same. -- - gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu - | IBM's brain is on overload, and Apple Gregory Block | needs to be potty-trained. C= may not Toaster+Amiga=The One True DTV | be marketing geniuses, but theyre the ________________________________| best engineers I've seen... -Wubba
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/08/91)
In article <10833@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:
Okay, you've warranted a correction. You're an idiot for liking a
next, a snob for buying one. Come on, it's not really all that
expensive. As has been said before, if all you want is the 68040,
don't get the 25mhz 3000, and save yourself a small bundle. Because
with the 68040 in, they will be identical. And it's not too much for
Ethernet... Besides, the price of the NeXT has dropped over time.
These peripherals on the amiga are still rather new. Give us time,
and we'll blow your butt off the face of the earth more than we
already do... Prices just need to drop, and once PP starts
announcing, they won't stop.
You don't get any time!!!!!! We are talking here and now. Comparing
next years Amiga with last years NeXT isn't going to mean anything.
NeXT year we compare the 1992 Amiga with the 1992 NeXT.
Maybe a studio apartment with rubber walls? Come on, you know there
is decent software for the Amiga, just nothing with the "name" of
Ashton-Tate or Lotus on it. DBMan V is great, and unlike the next
dumb idea, weve got more softs available.
The Apple IIe has got lots more software too.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/08/91)
In article <10834@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:
And I suppose that's a NeXT phenomenon, huh? You think that other
systems don't get faster, with an 040 upgrade, perhaps??? How much
snappier does AmigaOS need to get??? We've got the fastest gui I've
ever seen. Certainly faster than the Next, and faster than 6.0.5, and
the betas I've seen of 7.0.
Hmmm. You might just be coming around. The Amiga interface doesn't
need to be any snappier(do need 2.0 ROMs on all machines), but now you
might want to add a little more functionality to the machine by adding
Adobe Fonts and Display Postscript. This might mean a little more to
people than the speed of the GUI. After a certain speed, the speed of
the GUI really doens't matter that much.
You don't seem to understand. Any other GUI that I've ever seen is
faster than DP on the NeXT 040. It's sluggish. And when you use
another gui, and then use yours, it feels sluggish. Like wet
Limburger (You know, this is the first time I've ever put thought to
spelling that??) cheese. It's not just window dragging, it's
EVERYTHING. As a whole. And I suppose spending another 400 bucks on
a 4000 dollar system is just a drop in the bucket... Just so the
system runs at an acceptable pace. Argh, what logic.
I'm typing on an 8MB NeXT right now, and the performance IS
ACCEPTABLE. But being the kind of guy that I am, I want more more
more...
No, but then again, I never want the system to have to depend on it.
I wish the NeXT could say the same.
Well, you are running out of computers that don't have virtual memory.
In a few years their won't be any left. By the way, all workstations
have virtual memory, are they "bad" in your book?
-Mikenwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/08/91)
In article <af4G&1qj1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > >I'm typing on an 8MB NeXT right now, and the performance IS >ACCEPTABLE. But being the kind of guy that I am, I want more more >more... > >-Mike You know Mike, they have therapy for that. You poor devil... I'll bet salesmen and other people like Steve Jobs are taking advantage of you all the time. Maybe you should get some help so you don't end up selling your body to afford a Cray! NCW
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/08/91)
In article <1991Apr07.232640.308@ariel.unm.edu> nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes:
You know Mike, they have therapy for that. You poor devil... I'll bet
salesmen and other people like Steve Jobs are taking advantage of you all
the time. Maybe you should get some help so you don't end up selling your
body to afford a Cray!
Yeah, you're right. I'm going to spend $5000 on Macintoy. Think that
will cure me? Spend more, get less.
-Mikenwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/08/91)
In article <kv6G?vuj1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <1991Apr07.232640.308@ariel.unm.edu> nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes: > > You know Mike, they have therapy for that. You poor devil... I'll bet > salesmen and other people like Steve Jobs are taking advantage of you all > the time. Maybe you should get some help so you don't end up selling your > body to afford a Cray! > >Yeah, you're right. I'm going to spend $5000 on Macintoy. Think that >will cure me? Spend more, get less. > >-Mike Did the NeXT cure you? Maybe it did. I guess I shouldn't criticize if NeXT just makes you happy! Gotta follow your bliss. NCW
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/08/91)
In article <af4G&1qj1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > Hmmm. You might just be coming around. The Amiga interface doesn't > need to be any snappier(do need 2.0 ROMs on all machines), but now you > might want to add a little more functionality to the machine by adding > Adobe Fonts and Display Postscript. This might mean a little more to ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ Screw Adobe. Compugraphic fonts are in our future... As for DP, I can get that functionality when I want it through PD utilities such as Post and many of the commercial DTP packages available for the Amiga. When I don't need it (FrEx, running a term.) I don't have to wait on it. I'm not saying that DP is a "Bad Thing." I just think they shouldn't have centered the GUI on it so much. It would have made more sense to have a window-type that was DP. You can get device-independant graphics with out it. > people than the speed of the GUI. After a certain speed, the speed of ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > the GUI really doens't matter that much. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > I'm typing on an 8MB NeXT right now, and the performance IS > ACCEPTABLE. But being the kind of guy that I am, I want more more ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > more... ^^^^ So, you've got an 040 box (which you keep reminding us is 15MIPS (meaningless indications of processor speed)) that still can't make it's GUI fast enough for you. You say acceptable, but you want more? Sheesh. I'm typing _this_ on a 7.14Mhz 68000 Amiga and the GUI is faster than the 040 NeXT (from personal experience). The only faster GUI I've seen (and I've seen a few) was the _same_ one running on an 030 Amiga. Remember, the 040 is nearly 3 times as fast as the 030, and approximately 20 times as fast as the 68000. > -Mike Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/08/91)
In article <RoB2Z3w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > > Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone because? Standalone in the sense of a home computer. I'm really sure that the average dude is going to want UNIX at home for his computer. Or the average student. Why does it matter what's under the hood? Anyway, the average student is going to buy an IBM or Mac because he doesn't know any better. More than likely, the student that buys the NeXT will be computer literate. -Mike
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/08/91)
In article <46833@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: So, you've got an 040 box (which you keep reminding us is 15MIPS (meaningless indications of processor speed)) that still can't make it's GUI fast enough for you. You say acceptable, but you want more? I said that they can't make a computer fast enough. I want real-time animation in a window, etc. Some applications aren't going to be improved that much by making a computer twice as fast. Some things are not yet attainable because computers aren't fast enough yet. Try to remember this NeXT time so that I don't have to explain it again. Sheesh. I'm typing _this_ on a 7.14Mhz 68000 Amiga and the GUI is faster than the 040 NeXT (from personal experience). The only faster GUI I've seen (and I've seen a few) was the _same_ one running on an 030 Amiga. Remember, the 040 is nearly 3 times as fast as the 030, and approximately 20 times as fast as the 68000. > -Mike How much does the faster GUI improve your productivity? Personally, I use the Unix shell and Emacs for a lot of my work. -Mike
johnhlee@CS.Cornell.EDU (John H. Lee) (04/09/91)
In article <mq5G9v6k1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: [...] >How much does the faster GUI improve your productivity? Personally, I >use the Unix shell and Emacs for a lot of my work. > >-Mike I use the Unix shell, vi, VMS DCL and LSE for almost all of my for-pay and school work. You can't tell me that I'm just as productive on a NeXT (that I'm forced to use for a class) as I am on a X Window workstation or my A2000. Almost everybody in my class (Practical Distributed O/S Systems) develops the solution to assignments on other computers (workstations) and then does the final execution on the NeXTs. When you're dealing with multiple windows for interacting processes, your edit session(s) windows, and your compile window, a slow GUI is a slow death. Just my personal opinion, of course. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DiskDoctor threatens the crew! Next time on AmigaDos: The Next Generation. John Lee Internet: johnhlee@cs.cornell.edu The above opinions of those of the user, and not of this machine.
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/09/91)
In article <mq5G9v6k1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >I said that they can't make a computer fast enough. I want real-time >animation in a window, etc. Some applications aren't going to be >improved that much by making a computer twice as fast. Some things >are not yet attainable because computers aren't fast enough yet. Try >to remember this NeXT time so that I don't have to explain it again. Please look up the definition of the word 'acceptable' before you use it again, then. BTW, with an 040 you should be able to pull off real-time animation in a window -- but of course you have the overhead of DP on the NeXT so you couldn't do it on _that_ platform. Damn shame... >How much does the faster GUI improve your productivity? Personally, I >use the Unix shell and Emacs for a lot of my work. I'd say it improves my productivity quite a hell of a lot, actually. I commonly have several windows open, and several screens too. Given the amount of flipping/moving of windows and screens I do it'd be a real pain in the ass if a bunch of CPU was getting eaten up by a slow GUI. When compiling you don't want half of the CPU used in printing out compiler status messages, do you? BTW, since you use the shell and Emacs so much I guess DP is just extra baggage, eh? It'd sure be nice if you could specify what windows were and weren't DP, wouldn't it? Forcing DP on the user was one of NeXT's many blunders. >-Mike Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
davidc@contact.uucp (Ice Weasle) (04/09/91)
--- [numerous stupid whining people that should know better] Isn't it interesting that it's mainly Amiga people who run around badmouthing other computers. Comparing is one thing, goose-stepping is another. I own an Amiga, and it's cute... The NeXT is okay too... But why bash another system? You probably already HAVE a computer and your happy with it, so enough is enough! This group is inundated with people who should know better, yet they act like virgin users afraid for the life of their computer... It's stupid. -- Dave Carlton (davidc@ziebmef.mef.org!white.toronto.edu) "There's more than one way to skin a cat", Lydia thought, as she nailed the little paws to the dissection board... Richard Deming
gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) (04/09/91)
From article <_44G+.pj1@cs.psu.edu>, by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): > > You don't get any time!!!!!! We are talking here and now. Comparing > next years Amiga with last years NeXT isn't going to mean anything. > NeXT year we compare the 1992 Amiga with the 1992 NeXT. Fine, we're comparing a soon-to-be-released 68040 board to an impossible-to-buy-due-to-backlogging NeXT. Even your own report says that. By the time that a person can go out and buy a next without living next door to the company, you'll be able to go to your local Amiga dealer and buy a 68040 card for a 3000/16. And get a better response time than a NeXT. > > The Apple IIe has got lots more software too. > Yes, and look at the wide acceptance it gets in school. Back when I was in High School, we used them for programming. That same school still does, offering many of them in classrooms. I don't see the time when a NeXT will be replacing an Apple II, even if they were the same price. Given the Apple II and the NeXT, I'd get the apple. Why? Because it's got software. Of course, that's not valid at all, because for the price of a NeXT, you could get a 10 mhz Apple II, and wow the education department at any school... But can you honestly say that this is education? No. Then again, you'll want to use an Apple II about as much as a NeXT. The apple II is slow and outdated, the Next is Slow and low on software... -- - gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu - | IBM's brain is on overload, and Apple Gregory Block | needs to be potty-trained. C= may not Toaster+Amiga=The One True DTV | be marketing geniuses, but theyre the ________________________________| best engineers I've seen... -Wubba
gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) (04/09/91)
From article <af4G&1qj1@cs.psu.edu>, by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): > > Hmmm. You might just be coming around. The Amiga interface doesn't > need to be any snappier(do need 2.0 ROMs on all machines), but now you > might want to add a little more functionality to the machine by adding > Adobe Fonts and Display Postscript. This might mean a little more to > people than the speed of the GUI. After a certain speed, the speed of > the GUI really doens't matter that much. I was referring to 1.3 being snappier than your NeXt. And I think 2.0 looks better than your NeXT. Yes, it's missing things. Okay, it's missing CompuGraphic scaled fonts. it's on its way. And VM is available. Okay. Fine. But on an EFFICIENT system, the GUI doesn't matter. The next is FAR from efficient, and you know it. It's intuitive, and nice-looking. But it's a kludge on the os, not an integrated part of the os. > I'm typing on an 8MB NeXT right now, and the performance IS > ACCEPTABLE. But being the kind of guy that I am, I want more more Well, than again, if I'm going to pay umteen dollars for a system, it had better be a HELL of a lot more than just "acceptable". Every user has the potential to be a "power user"., and it shouldn't cost more to be able to have that power. > > Well, you are running out of computers that don't have virtual memory. > In a few years their won't be any left. By the way, all workstations > have virtual memory, are they "bad" in your book? > What happens if you stop using VM on a NeXT? Can you? If so, try it, and see how far it gets you. And yes, all workstations have VM. How nifty. But of course, most REAL workstations are H-S Risc boxes... Not a portable toaster. And how many REAL workstations have PS as part of the display system? I grow weary of the NeXT debate... The NeXt is nice, but it has severe faults... And no, I'd rather NOT get into details, as I'm sure Peter has already shown you ten of them... And there will be more, as long as this debate rages on. Amiga owners have a 512k (at most) system that is loaded from a rom, not a multi-megabyte throat-cutting os that takes more cpu cycles than a raytracer... -- - gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu - | IBM's brain is on overload, and Apple Gregory Block | needs to be potty-trained. C= may not Toaster+Amiga=The One True DTV | be marketing geniuses, but theyre the ________________________________| best engineers I've seen... -Wubba
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/09/91)
> > Hmmm. You might just be coming around. The Amiga interface doesn't > need to be any snappier(do need 2.0 ROMs on all machines), but now you > might want to add a little more functionality to the machine by adding > Adobe Fonts and Display Postscript. This might mean a little more to > people than the speed of the GUI. After a certain speed, the speed of > the GUI really doens't matter that much. > Heck - I don't even OWN a printer - what the heck doI want DP for? So I can slow down my machine? Yeah- that's it, it's too fast for me, so I need something to slow it down. rory
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/09/91)
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes: > In article <af4G&1qj1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) wr > > > > > >I'm typing on an 8MB NeXT right now, and the performance IS > >ACCEPTABLE. But being the kind of guy that I am, I want more more > >more... > > > >-Mike > > You know Mike, they have therapy for that. You poor devil... I'll bet > salesmen and other people like Steve Jobs are taking advantage of you all > the time. Maybe you should get some help so you don't end up selling your > body to afford a Cray! > > > NCW > Ah, but a Cray doesn't have Display Postcript. rory
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/09/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <RoB2Z3w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithac > > > > > Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone because? > > Standalone in the sense of a home computer. I'm really sure that the > average dude is going to want UNIX at home for his computer. Or the > average student. > > Why does it matter what's under the hood? Anyway, the average student > is going to buy an IBM or Mac because he doesn't know any better. > More than likely, the student that buys the NeXT will be computer > literate. > > -Mike > Or the student that buys the Amiga. rory
dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) (04/09/91)
In article <29870@cs.yale.edu> pharr-matthew@cs.yale.edu (Matthew Pharr) writes: >In article <14026@helios.TAMU.EDU> dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes: >1) Mathematica is still bundled with educational machines. After talking with the local NeXT rep, I was able to confirm that Mathematica is still included with the student package. mea culpa. --Daryl Biberdorf, dlb5404@tamuts.tamu.edu Texas A&M University
elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM (Eric Lee Green) (04/09/91)
From article <af4G&1qj1@cs.psu.edu>, by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): > Hmmm. You might just be coming around. The Amiga interface doesn't > need to be any snappier(do need 2.0 ROMs on all machines), but now you > might want to add a little more functionality to the machine by adding > Adobe Fonts and Display Postscript. This might mean a little more to > people than the speed of the GUI. After a certain speed, the speed of > the GUI really doens't matter that much. AmigaDOS 2.0 will be released with scalable font technology. No Display Postscript, though. (Something similar to Display Postscript that wasn't so CPU-hungry might be nice for AmigaDOS 3.0, though, to finally get the window system hardware-independent). -- Eric Lee Green (318) 984-1820 P.O. Box 92191 Lafayette, LA 70509 elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM uunet!mjbtn!raider!elgamy!elg Looking for a job... tips, leads appreciated... inquire within...
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr8.183809.16056@cs.cornell.edu> johnhlee@CS.Cornell.EDU (John H. Lee) writes:
I use the Unix shell, vi, VMS DCL and LSE for almost all of my for-pay
and school work. You can't tell me that I'm just as productive on a NeXT
(that I'm forced to use for a class) as I am on a X Window workstation
or my A2000. Almost everybody in my class (Practical Distributed O/S
Systems) develops the solution to assignments on other computers
(workstations) and then does the final execution on the NeXTs.
Why do you even run your program on the NeXT if you develop it on
another system, and why would you be more productive on a X Window
workstation?
When you're dealing with multiple windows for interacting processes, your
edit session(s) windows, and your compile window, a slow GUI is a slow death.
I used Emacs so I really don't have multiple windows for development.
I bagged vi several years ago. I do have several shells opened up,
though, so I can log onto other machines. The slowness of the GUI is
attributed to swapping to disk, it isn't a reflection of Display
Postscript. If you lauch 5 different things and you run out of real
memory, there is no alternative except for the system to page.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/09/91)
In article <46867@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: Please look up the definition of the word 'acceptable' before you use it again, then. BTW, with an 040 you should be able to pull off real-time animation in a window -- but of course you have the overhead of DP on the NeXT so you couldn't do it on _that_ platform. Damn shame... The overhead to the GUI isn't because of DP. The slowness that you get, if you get it, is because of paging. Virtual Memory. Need I explain further? >How much does the faster GUI improve your productivity? Personally, I >use the Unix shell and Emacs for a lot of my work. I'd say it improves my productivity quite a hell of a lot, actually. I commonly have several windows open, and several screens too. Given the amount of flipping/moving of windows and screens I do it'd be a real pain in the ass if a bunch of CPU was getting eaten up by a slow GUI. When compiling you don't want half of the CPU used in printing out compiler status messages, do you? I some how doubt that if half of the CPU is spent printing out compiler error messages when you compile a program. BTW, since you use the shell and Emacs so much I guess DP is just extra baggage, eh? It'd sure be nice if you could specify what windows were and weren't DP, wouldn't it? Forcing DP on the user was one of NeXT's many blunders. When was the last time that you used a NeXT? The speed of Display Postscript isn't a problem, and it does allow for more functionality. >-Mike
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/09/91)
In article <10866@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:
wow the education department at any school... But can you honestly
say that this is education? No. Then again, you'll want to use an
Apple II about as much as a NeXT. The apple II is slow and outdated,
the Next is Slow and low on software...
--
The NeXT is slow compared to what? Improv runs fine, FrameMaker too,
and Word Perfect. I imagine that Adobe Illustrator will be fast too.
Now, I'm not sure how well the "Killing Game Show" will run.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/09/91)
In article <10867@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes: From article <af4G&1qj1@cs.psu.edu>, by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): I was referring to 1.3 being snappier than your NeXt. And I think 2.0 looks better than your NeXT. Yes, it's missing things. Okay, it's missing CompuGraphic scaled fonts. it's on its way. And VM is available. Okay. Fine. But on an EFFICIENT system, the GUI doesn't matter. The next is FAR from efficient, and you know it. It's intuitive, and nice-looking. But it's a kludge on the os, not an integrated part of the os. It's a kludge because it's not hard-wired into the OS, and it's a layered approach? What's wrong with that? That's how all workstations work. Well, than again, if I'm going to pay umteen dollars for a system, it had better be a HELL of a lot more than just "acceptable". Every user has the potential to be a "power user"., and it shouldn't cost more to be able to have that power. Yeah, and? The hangup isn't DP, as I have mentioned in the past few articles. > > Well, you are running out of computers that don't have virtual memory. > In a few years their won't be any left. By the way, all workstations > have virtual memory, are they "bad" in your book? > What happens if you stop using VM on a NeXT? Can you? If so, try it, and see how far it gets you. And yes, all workstations have VM. How nifty. But of course, most REAL workstations are H-S Risc boxes... Not a portable toaster. And how many REAL workstations have PS as part of the display system? Can you stopp using VM on a Sun, HP, SGI? It's a workstation for crying out loud. How about doing a little more research outside of the pc world. Sun has News which is based on PS, and I think DEC allows for the use of DP in some form. Do your own HW and find out. I grow weary of the NeXT debate... The NeXt is nice, but it has severe faults... And no, I'd rather NOT get into details, as I'm sure Peter has already shown you ten of them... And there will be more, as long as this debate rages on. Amiga owners have a 512k (at most) system that is loaded from a rom, not a multi-megabyte throat-cutting os that takes more cpu cycles than a raytracer... No machine is perfect, and there will always be faults. It would be nice if the Amiga users could do their HW and find them instead of screaming the standard lines of propaganda. -Mike
rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (04/09/91)
Michael, you keep saying Display Postscript isn't a problem, but in fact it is. Interpreted languages are usually on the order of 4-10 times slower than compiled languages. DP is reasonably complex, and given how large postscript descriptions of complex screens can get, I'd say that your 15mips DP interpreter would run at an effective 2-3 MIPS. (Probably slower than SoftPC) If Jobs was smart, he would have put an extra 68030 in the NeXT to offload the DP work. If an Amiga user adds an 040 card to the A3000, the onboard 030 will become availible for offloading i/o, etc. -- /~\_______________________________________________________________________/~\ |n| rjc@albert.ai.mit.edu Amiga, the computer for the creative mind. |n| |~| .-. .-. |~| |_|________________________________| |_| |________________________________|_|
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr8.222503.23643@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes:
Michael, you keep saying Display Postscript isn't a problem, but in fact
it is. Interpreted languages are usually on the order of 4-10 times slower
than compiled languages. DP is reasonably complex, and given how large
postscript descriptions of complex screens can get, I'd say that your 15mips
DP interpreter would run at an effective 2-3 MIPS. (Probably slower than
SoftPC) If Jobs was smart, he would have put an extra 68030 in the NeXT
to offload the DP work. If an Amiga user adds an 040 card to the A3000, the
onboard 030 will become availible for offloading i/o, etc.
I agree that a coprocessor would be nice, but that is more hardware
which adds to the cost. I'm surprised that there is so much hardware
in the NeXT now, considering how little hardware was in the original
Mac. Anyway, Display Postscript is not a bottleneck as far as I can
tell. Paging can bring things to a halt though.
Also, considering that Display Postscript uses floating point numbers,
I think something other than a 68030 would be more appropriate. After
all, the 68040 increases most floating point functions by 5-10 times
the speed of the 68882. NeXT is putting the i860 on the NeXT
Dimension board, but that's for people with bucks.
The advantages of Display Postscript outweigh the disadvantages in the
reduction in speed(IMHO). A better WYSIWYG will benefit DTP more than
the speed. Adobe Illustrator, for example, won't need a preview mode
on the NeXT as it does on the Mac. Serious animation is the only
thing that is hindered by DP, but people who do serious animation can
probably afford to spend $4000 on the i860, or better yet, a SGI. The
A3000 does have a nice niche market with the Toaster, but I'm not a
cable TV company.
Have you seen the NeXT? If not look at Scene, and the Fish and Eagle
movies if you get a chance to see one. Also, look at a game BoinkOut,
and BreakApp, two Breakout like games. You can definitely do some
animation on the NeXT, I'm just not sure how much.
-Mikecpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr7.034535.26282@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >> BTW, $3250 is the price to beat. > >How about $500? As an applications platform, the Amiga 500 is pretty close, >since it's not tossing CPU speed away on VM. Really, a stock NeXT is about as >responsive as a Mac Classic, which the 500 has beat all hollow. Oh, sure, CPU >intensive stuff will be faster on the NeXT. What CPU-intensive stuff do you >get with the machine? Surely you're not comparing the NeXT to an Amiga 500 ????? Get serious people. In Australia, for about $3500, all you can get is a 2000 with multisync, 50 megs HD, and 3 megs RAM. You can run slllowwwww productivity without flicker, but you still have interlaced screens a lot; you only get a poor 7 MHz 68000 which is years dated; a chip set that is pretty crud by 1991 standards and an OS without VM or any sort of memory protection (wouldn't matter really since you only get a 68000). If you want to get rid of flicker you have to pay $700 for a flicker fixer as the 2320 isn't available here and mightn't be for years. For the same price you could either get a good quality 386sx (super vga + windows + hard drive) or a cheaper clone with 25 MHz 386dx (with the lot too). Real cpu speed! (get xenix or some of the other multitasking os's and you can have a real os too). The point of all this is.... the 2000 needs a serious upgrade it is far too slow/poor graphics for anyone to consider it who doesn't have a special need for an Amiga (like I did). >Peter da Silva. `-_-' ><peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. -- Colin Adams Computer Science Department James Cook University Internet : cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au North Queensland 'And on the eight day, God created Manchester'
jonabbey@cs.utexas.edu (Jonathan David Abbey) (04/09/91)
In <1991Apr8.222503.23643@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: | Michael, you keep saying Display Postscript isn't a problem, but in fact |it is. Interpreted languages are usually on the order of 4-10 times slower |than compiled languages. DP is reasonably complex, and given how large |postscript descriptions of complex screens can get, I'd say that your 15mips |DP interpreter would run at an effective 2-3 MIPS. (Probably slower than |SoftPC) If Jobs was smart, he would have put an extra 68030 in the NeXT |to offload the DP work. If an Amiga user adds an 040 card to the A3000, the |onboard 030 will become availible for offloading i/o, etc. This is beginning to become annoying. Display PostScript need not at all be slow. Yes, Display PostScript is interpreted, but that doesn't imply that it need be slow. PostScript is a very simple language, involving only hashed token look-up and stack pushing/popping. The actual rendering functions could very well be in optimized '030 assembler for all I know. Display PostScript may actually even provide for a binary equivalent to common PostScript tokens, which could overcome much of the size bloat of regular PostScript. The only times in which DP would be so terribly complex would be those times that the Amiga rendering functions would be rather inadequate for the task. The benefits include a much higher level of device independence and an easier time at software development time. (Would you rather write a desktop publishing program for the Amiga or NeXT? Which would take longer? Which would have greater potentials for errors?) |-- |/~\_______________________________________________________________________/~\ ||n| rjc@albert.ai.mit.edu Amiga, the computer for the creative mind. |n| ||~| .-. .-. |~| ||_|________________________________| |_| |________________________________|_| -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan David Abbey \"Take your place on the great Mandela" P,P&M the university of texas at austin \ jonabbey@cs.utexas.edu "Love me, love computer science/math?/psychology? \ (512) 472-2052 my Amiga" -Me
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/09/91)
In article <295@atacama.cs.utexas.edu> jonabbey@cs.utexas.edu (Jonathan David Abbey) writes:
This is beginning to become annoying. Display PostScript need not at all
be slow. Yes, Display PostScript is interpreted, but that doesn't imply
that it need be slow. PostScript is a very simple language, involving only
hashed token look-up and stack pushing/popping. The actual rendering
functions could very well be in optimized '030 assembler for all I know.
Display PostScript may actually even provide for a binary equivalent to
common PostScript tokens, which could overcome much of the size bloat of
regular PostScript. The only times in which DP would be so terribly complex
would be those times that the Amiga rendering functions would be rather
inadequate for the task. The benefits include a much higher level of device
independence and an easier time at software development time. (Would you
rather write a desktop publishing program for the Amiga or NeXT? Which
would take longer? Which would have greater potentials for errors?)
There is in fact a binary form for Display Postscript. The program
pswrap is a preprocessor that converts Postscript to this form. Also,
Postscript can be generate in Objective C by using C function
equivalents to Postscript operators. For example,
PSsetgray(0);
PSmoveto(50, 50);
PSrlineto(100, 100);
PSstroke();
The binary form in probably more efficient, but this works for a lot
of the programming that I do.
-Mikejalkio@cc.helsinki.fi (04/09/91)
In article <RoB2Z3w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us>, judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >> >> In article <J6ByZ3w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithac >> >> >> I'd say sideways... Not down. Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone, >> unless your're one of the few sickos that enjoy it. I think we're >> dealing with more than 3 dimensions now. >> >> Mach is a lousy OS for a standalone because? > > Standalone in the sense of a home computer. I'm really sure that the > average dude is going to want UNIX at home for his computer. Or the --- > average student. > > rory I guess you meant isn't. Well, in that case: I think that just about everyone enjoys having good multi-tasking, virtual memory and other goodies Unix (or Mach) provides. And an average dude might not even buy a NeXT. A cheap Mac Classic or something like that is O.K. for most people. But in a computer with 15 mips it would seem stupid to have some simple operating system (Atari TT is a good example, even if it isn't near 15 mips). Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland
jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi (04/09/91)
In article <46833@ut-emx.uucp>, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: > In article <af4G&1qj1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> Hmmm. You might just be coming around. The Amiga interface doesn't >> need to be any snappier(do need 2.0 ROMs on all machines), but now you >> might want to add a little more functionality to the machine by adding >> Adobe Fonts and Display Postscript. This might mean a little more to > ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ > Screw Adobe. Compugraphic fonts are in our future... > > As for DP, I can get that functionality when I want it through PD utilities > such as Post and many of the commercial DTP packages available for the Amiga. > When I don't need it (FrEx, running a term.) I don't have to wait on it. > > I'm not saying that DP is a "Bad Thing." I just think they shouldn't have > centered the GUI on it so much. It would have made more sense to have a > window-type that was DP. You can get device-independant graphics with out it. Well, I think it is quite nicely consistent that _everything_ you draw on the screen on a NeXT is done with Postscript. I hate add-ons and gludges. I want everything to be clear. >> people than the speed of the GUI. After a certain speed, the speed of > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> the GUI really doens't matter that much. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> I'm typing on an 8MB NeXT right now, and the performance IS >> ACCEPTABLE. But being the kind of guy that I am, I want more more > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> more... > ^^^^ > > So, you've got an 040 box (which you keep reminding us is 15MIPS (meaningless > indications of processor speed)) that still can't make it's GUI fast enough > for you. You say acceptable, but you want more? > > Sheesh. I'm typing _this_ on a 7.14Mhz 68000 Amiga and the GUI is faster than > the 040 NeXT (from personal experience). The only faster GUI I've seen (and > I've seen a few) was the _same_ one running on an 030 Amiga. Remember, the > 040 is nearly 3 times as fast as the 030, and approximately 20 times as fast > as the 68000. > >> -Mike > > Greg Hmm. Let me add my opinion about the NeXT GUI speed: The interface was too slow with 68030 and _8 MB memory_. With 68040 and 8 MB or 68030 and 16 MB the speed is just fine (I am not a robot - I can't press 10 buttons in one second). With 68040 and 16 MB the speed should be more than enough. Personally, I am ready to trade the overfast responsivity for more flexibility and nifty features. And when you do nuber-crunching, the speed is as it was with a simpler GUI. About display postscript: Well, it can't be very slow since you can even do fast _continuos_ scrolling in NeXT windows. And when you move the windows, the _whole thing_ moves, as you might know. Do you think the NeXT engineers are so dumb that they took the effort to make these kinds of things just to find that it will make the GUI too slow (and leave it that way on purpose)? BTW, have you seen Motif or some other Unix GUI on the Amiga? I am sure that it won't be near as fast as the Amiga's native GUI. And they don't even use display postscript. (I've seen X-windows on a MAC IIfx with A/UX and it sure wasn't very fast - I think Motif on top of that would be even slower.) If you think that super-responsiveness is more important than usable responsivity and more functionality, why don't you just give up using GUIs and go back to the plain command line prompt interfaces? Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland
rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr9.004657.26302@marlin.jcu.edu.au> cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) writes: >In article <1991Apr7.034535.26282@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >>> BTW, $3250 is the price to beat. >> >>How about $500? As an applications platform, the Amiga 500 is pretty close, >>since it's not tossing CPU speed away on VM. Really, a stock NeXT is about as >>responsive as a Mac Classic, which the 500 has beat all hollow. Oh, sure, CPU >>intensive stuff will be faster on the NeXT. What CPU-intensive stuff do you >>get with the machine? > >Surely you're not comparing the NeXT to an Amiga 500 ????? Get serious people. Atleast the 500 has 1 expansion slot. >In Australia, for about $3500, all you can get is a 2000 with multisync, 50 >megs HD, and 3 megs RAM. You can run slllowwwww productivity without flicker, >but you still have interlaced screens a lot; you only get a poor 7 MHz 68000 >which is years dated; a chip set that is pretty crud by 1991 standards and >an OS without VM or any sort of memory protection (wouldn't matter really since >you only get a 68000). If you want to get rid of flicker you have to pay $700 >for a flicker fixer as the 2320 isn't available here and mightn't be for years. Hmm, those prices are highway robbery! Perhaps you can smuggle an a3000 order from the US. For $3500 you can get an A3000-25/105. (A3000, 5megs ram, 105 mb HD). The A3000 already has a deinterlacer. You get an HD transfer rate that would blow the socks off that 386sx, and a 1950 monitor ($399). This is educational pricing of course. Add $500 and you can get the A3000UX which gives you that VM and Memory protection you want. (and all the other bulkyness of Unix). I wouldn't call the Amiga chip set crude or crud, they get the job done. Most of the graphic cards today use existing chip designs from 1985 just like the Amiga. They take a few OEM'ed chips from various companies, put them on a board, and voila, they declare a new graphics innovation. There are new custom VLSI chips being made everyyear (XGA, C-Cube, etc) but I see old technology being reused just as much as the Amiga. Why? Because it's cheap, and proven to work. Good examples are PS/2, the Mac Classic, and the old computer systems being used on space probes. You won't see NASA or the DoD using 68040's in their new projects anytime soon, but I bet alot of equipment still uses old 6502s and z80's. >For the same price you could either get a good quality 386sx (super vga + >windows + hard drive) or a cheaper clone with 25 MHz 386dx (with the lot too). >Real cpu speed! (get xenix or some of the other multitasking os's and you can >have a real os too). The point of all this is.... the 2000 needs a serious >upgrade it is far too slow/poor graphics for anyone to consider it who doesn't >have a special need for an Amiga (like I did). The A2000 has been upgraded. There's the A2500, and the A3000. >>Peter da Silva. `-_-' >><peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. > > >-- >Colin Adams >Computer Science Department James Cook University >Internet : cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au North Queensland >'And on the eight day, God created Manchester' -- /~\_______________________________________________________________________/~\ |n| rjc@albert.ai.mit.edu Amiga, the computer for the creative mind. |n| |~| .-. .-. |~| |_|________________________________| |_| |________________________________|_|
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/09/91)
In article <5*1G-jlk1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > >The advantages of Display Postscript outweigh the disadvantages in the >reduction in speed(IMHO). A better WYSIWYG will benefit DTP more than >the speed. Adobe Illustrator, for example, won't need a preview mode >on the NeXT as it does on the Mac. Serious animation is the only >thing that is hindered by DP, but people who do serious animation can >probably afford to spend $4000 on the i860, or better yet, a SGI. The >A3000 does have a nice niche market with the Toaster, but I'm not a >cable TV company. > >-Mike No, it won't just be animation that will be competing for CPU time. Any time you multitask, run things in the background, or do anything demanding on the system you are going to be slowed down by Display Postscript. I am a structural engineer. What advantage will DP be to me? If I want to run any of those structural programs that take hours to run and want to work on something else in the meantime, I will be slowed down by DP. I don't want it. I'd never have any use for. It is stupid and frivolous. It was a stupid looking gleam in Steve Jobs' eye. Giving you programs like Adobe Illustrator, what in the hell else is DP good for? ...besides making grandma go "wow"? Really Micheal... you stretch things too far and it starts to get boring. NCW
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/09/91)
In article <l_cGbshk1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <1991Apr8.183809.16056@cs.cornell.edu> johnhlee@CS.Cornell.EDU (John H. Lee) writes: > > I use the Unix shell, vi, VMS DCL and LSE for almost all of my for-pay > and school work. You can't tell me that I'm just as productive on a NeXT > (that I'm forced to use for a class) as I am on a X Window workstation ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^ ^^^^^ > or my A2000. Almost everybody in my class (Practical Distributed O/S > Systems) develops the solution to assignments on other computers > (workstations) and then does the final execution on the NeXTs. > >Why do you even run your program on the NeXT if you develop it on >another system, and why would you be more productive on a X Window >workstation? I dunno, Mike. Why do you think he runs it on the NeXT? >I used Emacs so I really don't have multiple windows for development. >I bagged vi several years ago. I do have several shells opened up, >though, so I can log onto other machines. The slowness of the GUI is >attributed to swapping to disk, it isn't a reflection of Display >Postscript. If you lauch 5 different things and you run out of real >memory, there is no alternative except for the system to page. For a NeXT developer you need to learn a bit more about Unix. NeXTStep is a pig. Check into how much memory you are using just after getting the system up and running. Along with the non-microkernel Mach you've got a big memory demand there. BTW, I have a 640x440 2 bitplane Workbench with 5 windows open and a separate 640x200 3 bitplane screen open. I have 26 tasks (things from filesystems to this particular window of DNet, the terminal package I use) running. Altogther I'm using 1.3 megabytes of memory, including resident commands and my RAM Disk. Even with the Aquarium archive database program searching for a particular program (that's what's on the other screen) there is no percieved loss of speed. Once again, this is a 7.14Mhz 68K machine... >-Mike Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/09/91)
In article <r#cG#.hk1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >The overhead to the GUI isn't because of DP. The slowness that you >get, if you get it, is because of paging. Virtual Memory. Need I >explain further? I am well aware of how virtual memory works. However, NeXTStep is a major memory pig. If it had been better implemented there wouldn't _be_ as much swapping done. Of course, in order to do real time work you'd still have to be running a minimum of software, but that's Unix. That's one reason the NeXT is so ill-suited to video work. Of course, Stevie doesn't want you to think that. >I some how doubt that if half of the CPU is spent printing out >compiler error messages when you compile a program. Half was an exaggeration. However, I can guarantee to you that much less of my CPU is used by the GUI than the compiler than yours. Jobs' bright idea of devoting so much CPU to the GUI has crippled his machine. >When was the last time that you used a NeXT? The speed of Display >Postscript isn't a problem, and it does allow for more functionality. I can tell you the exact date, as a matter of fact. I stopped by our campus store after my first calc. test this semester. I played with one of the B&W 8MB/105MB boxes. It was admittedly faster than the old 030 NeXT that used to be there (when it was running). However, it wasn't any faster than my machine, and I'm sure you know what processor I have and what speed it's running by now. :) We have a NeXT on the net here. It doesn't get used much, but I logged into it the other day. It's pretty fast -- about even with one of the SPARC 1's we have here. The 1+'s (which I normally use) are a bit faster, though. I haven't dug out the benchmark code, yet. This is all perceived speed to the user. When you don't have to deal directly with NeXTStep it's a decent machine. > >-Mike Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/09/91)
In article <6hdG18ik1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >No machine is perfect, and there will always be faults. It would be >nice if the Amiga users could do their HW and find them instead of >screaming the standard lines of propaganda. Look. You've got a lot of nerve saying that in an Amiga newsgroup. You know, I'm not generally one to apply stereotypes, but you're the epitome of a NeXTite that knows more of the marketroid trash that has been published about the NeXT than about the machine and it's OS. Before you go telling Amiga users to do their homework, do some of your own. I have been finding it increasingly hard to believe that you are a NeXT developer. I don't call myself a Macintosh developer, but I wrote 5 assembly programs on it for a class a few semesters back... >-Mike Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/09/91)
In article <5*1G-jlk1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >The advantages of Display Postscript outweigh the disadvantages in the >reduction in speed(IMHO). A better WYSIWYG will benefit DTP more than >the speed. Adobe Illustrator, for example, won't need a preview mode >on the NeXT as it does on the Mac. Serious animation is the only >thing that is hindered by DP, but people who do serious animation can >probably afford to spend $4000 on the i860, or better yet, a SGI. The >A3000 does have a nice niche market with the Toaster, but I'm not a >cable TV company. Now you've gone and made the famous misstatement: "Those do X can afford the extra cost." Serious animators have been using the Amiga for 5 years. Now there are high resolution 24 bit boards available. There are even 32 bit boards currently in FCC (24 bits of color + 8 of alpha). $4000 for a board with 12 bit color and 4 bits alpha (correct me if I'm wrong) is outrageous, even with an i860 on board. >-Mike Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
tinyguy@cs.mcgill.ca (Yeo-Hoon BAE) (04/09/91)
In article <mq5G9v6k1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >How much does the faster GUI improve your productivity? Personally, I >use the Unix shell and Emacs for a lot of my work. > >-Mike I use both 040 NeXT and 000 Amiga, at least 4 hours a day, and YES, faster GUI definately makes difference to the productivity. It is annoying when I have full of ideas in my brain and when I pull down the dock to make some more room, the disk spins for 10-20 seconds.... -TG
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr7.172928.18737@maths.tcd.ie> mike@maths.tcd.ie (MIKE ROGERS) writes: > Perhaps they've one eye out for Apple's outrageous claim (amongst > others) vs. MS and HP to *own* the concept of off-screen windows. They'll have to take that up with MIT, AT&T, Xerox, et al. I'm more concerned with the AT&T backing-store patent, 'cos that's where intuition's design came from. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/09/91)
In article <RoB2Z3w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > Standalone in the sense of a home computer. I'm really sure that the > average dude is going to want UNIX at home for his computer. Or the > average student. Now you're getting positively reactionary. Why do you bother with the Amiga, then? After all, the average dude doesn't need multitasking. Mach is a fine operating system... the problem with the NeXT is the bait-and-switch marketing. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr6.201135.5867@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > Hmm. Even the leading Mac-magazines "MacWorld" and "Mac User" have > recently admitted in their articles than NeXT has much more competitive > pricing than Apple... I guess you know better. That's possibly true of you run down a feature list and compare Apple's top of the line to Jobs' entry level box. > BTW, do you know many people who like to do DTP with a Mac Classic? The DTP industry was created on the Mac Classic. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr6.194520.5865@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > > Yeah...wait until you try to do some heavy disk activity while playing > > a score file on that DSP.... The DSP requires the *CPU* to feed it > > the sound data; it can't go get it on its own. > Uhh? Quite a hopeless argument here. So, you think NeXT's would be > better if they didn't have the DSP at all? No, they would be better if they had an operating system with the context switch and interrupt service times to support the DSP. The Amiga can play scores with no jerks and hesitations while doing heavy disk activity, or even while doing heavy CPU-dependent activity like ray-tracing... even on a 68000. Mach is not real-time, yet. There is work on a real-time Mach in progress, but I'm not holding my breath: real-time and virtual memory don't care for each other, and Mach is built on VM. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/09/91)
In article <m23G3+nj1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > As for virtual memory, are you saying that you hope the Amiga never > gets it? Not as standard. As an add-on tool that I can apply when I want and can turn off when I need to, yes. > Is it better to just run out of memory? No, but it's a trade-off. Virtual memory hurts real-time response badly. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/09/91)
In article <af4G&1qj1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > After a certain speed, the speed of > the GUI really doens't matter that much. Ah yes, but the NeXT isn't there yet. Particularly for program startup: it's got the X disease, also known as "click and wait". You click on a program then wait several seconds for it to open a window. > Well, you are running out of computers that don't have virtual memory. > In a few years their won't be any left. Sure there will. Nobody is going to be running real-time stuff like MIDI processing on a VM system. DEC has been trying to sell VMS for real-time for a decade, and the best they can do is add a dedicated real-time computer on the bus to do the real-time work. It's got its own RAM and everything, and a non-virtual O/S. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/09/91)
In article <mq5G9v6k1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > How much does the faster GUI improve your productivity? When I'm juggling eggs, the X click-and-wait mode really screws with my head. In fact, when I get to where I'm really spinning on a project I don't use X: I leave it off and switch between the alternate consoles. Can I do that on a NeXT? -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/09/91)
I'd also like to note that there is a faster display postscript: it's called NeWS and is available on Sun workstations... and System VR4. I don't know if CBM has ported it to the A3000UX... from what I heard they're running an older X right now... but it's certainly in the queue. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
bard@jessica.stanford.edu (David Hopper) (04/10/91)
In article <5*1G-jlk1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >Have you seen the NeXT? Do you want to be turned off completely by it? Then... >...look at Scene, and the Fish and Eagle >movies if you get a chance to see one. Also, look at a game BoinkOut, >and BreakApp, two Breakout like games. You can definitely do some >animation on the NeXT, I'm just not sure how much. Sorry. I'm about to become a NeXT rep here on campus, so I've had to keep my mouth shut during this conflagration. But this comment made me giggle like a rabid tapir. Even on an '040 NeXT, animation is absolutely pathetic. The Amiga's blitter does a good deal better, to be sure. >-Mike Dave Hopper | /// Anthro Creep | Academic Info Resources, Stanford |__ /// . . | Macincrap/UNIX Consultant bard@jessica. |\\\/// Ia! Ia! | -- Just remember: love is life, and Stanford.EDU | \XX/ Shub-Niggurath! | hate is living death. :Black Sabbath
johnhlee@CS.Cornell.EDU (John H. Lee) (04/10/91)
In article <l_cGbshk1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >Why do you even run your program on the NeXT if you develop it on >another system, and why would you be more productive on a X Window >workstation? I am required by the class to do so. The work must have been executed on a NeXT. I do not know why. Why am I more productive on an X Window workstation? I just find myself concentrating more on the problem rather than operating the GUI. >I used Emacs so I really don't have multiple windows for development. >I bagged vi several years ago. I do have several shells opened up, >though, so I can log onto other machines. The slowness of the GUI is >attributed to swapping to disk, it isn't a reflection of Display >Postscript. If you lauch 5 different things and you run out of real >memory, there is no alternative except for the system to page. I never said it was a reflection of Display Postscript. Personally, I like the concept and the power of the model. However I found the execution of the idea left much to be desired. I am well aware of the limitations of the NeXT system and although the GUI's slowness may be partly due to VM, it is still slow. I launch "5 different things" as a matter of course when doing my work. If the system is affected by it, then the system is not entirely suitable for me. vi is my preference because I cannot stand Emacs' command structure and miss all the little things vi offers. But what does vi vs. Emacs have to do with the NeXT GUI? I believe your question was that why anyone who uses virtual terminals would be bothered by the speed of a GUI. Believe me, many of us are. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DiskDoctor threatens the crew! Next time on AmigaDos: The Next Generation. John Lee Internet: johnhlee@cs.cornell.edu The above opinions of those of the user, and not of this machine.
johnhlee@CS.Cornell.EDU (John H. Lee) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.131134.23439@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <mq5G9v6k1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> How much does the faster GUI improve your productivity? >When I'm juggling eggs, the X click-and-wait mode really screws with my head. >In fact, when I get to where I'm really spinning on a project I don't use X: >I leave it off and switch between the alternate consoles. > >Can I do that on a NeXT? Switch your Window Manager, Peter. What are you using currently, MWM? Other Window Managers like TWM can move the keyboard input-focus to the window that contains the current mouse pointer. I believe it can also do auto-raise if you desire. The X Window System pretty much lets you choose your GUI style. No, the NeXT can't do that. What in the world am I doing in this newsgroup? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DiskDoctor threatens the crew! Next time on AmigaDos: The Next Generation. John Lee Internet: johnhlee@cs.cornell.edu The above opinions of those of the user, and not of this machine.
mike@maths.tcd.ie (MIKE ROGERS) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.014258.5903@cc.helsinki.fi>, jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi wrote: >thing_ moves, as you might know. Do you think the NeXT engineers are so >dumb that they took the effort to make these kinds of things just to >find that it will make the GUI too slow (and leave it that way on I don't know. Based on track record, there seems to be something about Jobs that forces engineers (soft and hard) to do silly things. Finder is one thing that comes to mind. Virtual Slots is another. And what about no offloading onto coprocessors on original Macs (they've still not fixed that with MacOS on fx'es). I think DPS is another booby. -- Mike Rogers,Box 6,Regent Hse,## Everyone should try to kill themselves once in a TCD,EIRE. <mike@maths.tcd.ie>## while, it gives you a whole new outlook on life. ###############################DON'T MISS TRINCON400 7th, 8th, 9th FEBRUARY 1992 And she wore Black Contact Lenses when you said you liked her eyes......Toasties
dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.004657.26302@marlin.jcu.edu.au> cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) writes: >In article <1991Apr7.034535.26282@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > >In Australia, for about $3500, all you can get is a 2000 with multisync, 50 >megs HD, and 3 megs RAM. You can run slllowwwww productivity without flicker, >but you still have interlaced screens a lot; you only get a poor 7 MHz 68000 >which is years dated; a chip set that is pretty crud by 1991 standards and >an OS without VM or any sort of memory protection (wouldn't matter really since >you only get a 68000). If you want to get rid of flicker you have to pay $700 >for a flicker fixer as the 2320 isn't available here and mightn't be for years. It's amazing how many people insist that a flicker fixer costs so much, and that flicker is such a problem. I use interlace modes all the time for all of my work on my a500, and I have a flicker fixer that is really cheap. It cost about $250, and came with a free RGB monitor! There is a special advanced high-tech space-age circuit redirection system built into my monitor, which many of you probably have. It is called CONTRAST. How does it work? Turn the little knob on the monitor that says 'contrast' under it (mine is between the 'brightness' and the 'color' knobs). And watch the flicker disappear! Cheap and easy! Works with TV sets, too! "But now I can't see the screen as well," said the Amiga user. "Dim the lights in the room," responded the flicker-fixer. > > >-- >Colin Adams >Computer Science Department James Cook University >Internet : cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au North Queensland >'And on the eight day, God created Manchester' -- David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN Tomas Arce Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :) Un ragazzo di Casalbordino, Italia.
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.131439.23507@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
I'd also like to note that there is a faster display postscript: it's called
NeWS and is available on Sun workstations... and System VR4. I don't know if
CBM has ported it to the A3000UX... from what I heard they're running an older
X right now... but it's certainly in the queue.
Why do you say News is faster than Display Postscript? It might be,
but I'd like hear a source.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/10/91)
In article <46905@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes:
Look. You've got a lot of nerve saying that in an Amiga newsgroup.
You know, I'm not generally one to apply stereotypes, but you're the epitome
of a NeXTite that knows more of the marketroid trash that has been published
about the NeXT than about the machine and it's OS. Before you go telling
Amiga users to do their homework, do some of your own. I have been finding it
increasingly hard to believe that you are a NeXT developer. I don't call
myself a Macintosh developer, but I wrote 5 assembly programs on it for a
class a few semesters back...
I'm not a NeXT developer, I'm a graduate student in computer science.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/10/91)
In article <46906@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: Serious animators have been using the Amiga for 5 years. Now there are high resolution 24 bit boards available. There are even 32 bit boards currently in FCC (24 bits of color + 8 of alpha). $4000 for a board with 12 bit color and 4 bits alpha (correct me if I'm wrong) is outrageous, even with an i860 on board. >-Mike You're wrong. The NeXT Dimension board is 24 bit color with 8 alpha channels. -Mike
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.094136.23767@cs.mcgill.ca> tinyguy@cs.mcgill.ca (Yeo-Hoon BAE) writes:
I use both 040 NeXT and 000 Amiga, at least 4 hours a day, and
YES, faster GUI definately makes difference to the productivity.
It is annoying when I have full of ideas in my brain and when I
pull down the dock to make some more room, the disk spins for
10-20 seconds....
I noticed that too. This is of course attributable to paging and not
Display Postscript. This doesn't always happen, of course.
Fortunately, it's not something you need to do all of the time. But
if it was, it would be swapped in so it would be instaneous the next
time, assuming that it didn't get paged out again.
-Mikegblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) (04/10/91)
From article <!78Gjb8l1@cs.psu.edu>, by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): > You're wrong. The NeXT Dimension board is 24 bit color with 8 alpha channels. > Yes, which is only usable on the CUBE, which is about 8000 dollars, or more... The 12 bit color with 4 alpha channel is the color slab, a likewise joke. NeXT dumb statement... -- - gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu - | IBM's brain is on overload, and Apple Gregory Block | needs to be potty-trained. C= may not Toaster+Amiga=The One True DTV | be marketing geniuses, but theyre the ________________________________| best engineers I've seen... -Wubba
cs326ag@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Loren J. Rittle) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.125149.22939@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <1991Apr7.172928.18737@maths.tcd.ie> mike@maths.tcd.ie (MIKE ROGERS) writes: >> Perhaps they've one eye out for Apple's outrageous claim (amongst >> others) vs. MS and HP to *own* the concept of off-screen windows. > >They'll have to take that up with MIT, AT&T, Xerox, et al. I'm more concerned >with the AT&T backing-store patent, 'cos that's where intuition's design >came from. Peter, I'm starting to think that Commodore must have already licensed said technology. Why? Because AT&T is going after X, but there are, most likely, more machines running intuition... :-) >-- >Peter da Silva. `-_-' ><peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. Loren J. Rittle -- ``The Amiga continues to amaze me--if I had not been told that this video was created using the Amiga and Toaster, I would not have believed it. Even Allen said, `I think I know how he did most of the effects.' '' - Jim Lange Loren J. Rittle l-rittle@uiuc.edu
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/10/91)
In article <10902@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:
Yes, which is only usable on the CUBE, which is about 8000 dollars, or more...
Of course. I was just correcting an incorrect statement made by an Amiga user.
The 12 bit color with 4 alpha channel is the color slab, a likewise joke.
Hey, 4096 colors looks pretty impressive :-).
And on a million pixel display, to boot.
-Mikejudge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/10/91)
davidc@contact.uucp (Ice Weasle) writes: > --- > [numerous stupid whining people that should know better] > > Isn't it interesting that it's mainly Amiga people who run around > badmouthing other computers. Comparing is one thing, goose-stepping > is another. I own an Amiga, and it's cute... The NeXT is okay too... > But why bash another system? You probably already HAVE a computer and > your happy with it, so enough is enough! This group is inundated with > people who should know better, yet they act like virgin users afraid > for the life of their computer... It's stupid. > -- > Dave Carlton (davidc@ziebmef.mef.org!white.toronto.edu) > "There's more than one way to skin a cat", Lydia thought, as she > nailed the little paws to the dissection board... Richard Deming Then quit reading the posts - you think anyone takes anything here seriously? Oh, yes, they do, that's what's really amusing... rory
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (04/10/91)
In article <&5aGlabl1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <10902@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes: > > > Yes, which is only usable on the CUBE, which is about 8000 dollars, or more... > >Of course. I was just correcting an incorrect statement made by an Amiga user. > > The 12 bit color with 4 alpha channel is the color slab, a likewise joke. > >Hey, 4096 colors looks pretty impressive :-). >And on a million pixel display, to boot. > >-Mike I must be missing something here. The 040 is about three times faster than the 030, right? And the color NeXT is 12 bits as opposed to 2 bits on the old NeXTs, or six times the bit planes. So, the color NeXT is twice as slow with the graphics/GUI as the original NeXT, right? Truthfully I don't know what an alpha channel is. Is it basically an overlay screen? -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb A: None. It's a hardware problem.
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.014258.5903@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: >In article <46833@ut-emx.uucp>, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: >> >> I'm not saying that DP is a "Bad Thing." I just think they shouldn't have >> centered the GUI on it so much. It would have made more sense to have a >> window-type that was DP. You can get device-independant graphics with out it. > >Well, I think it is quite nicely consistent that _everything_ you draw >on the screen on a NeXT is done with Postscript. I hate add-ons and >gludges. I want everything to be clear. It wouldn't be an add-on kluge. It would be a window type. You could have window types like raw text, DP, simple image graphics, and whatever else you can think of. You could then use the correctly-suited window type for your app. Certainly Emacs and your compiler don't need to be churning out PostScript. They would be more suited to a raw text window type. I'm just saying that DP _has_ it's place, but making it a required part of the display is just wasting CPU. >Hmm. Let me add my opinion about the NeXT GUI speed: > >The interface was too slow with 68030 and _8 MB memory_. With 68040 and >8 MB or 68030 and 16 MB the speed is just fine (I am not a robot - I >can't press 10 buttons in one second). With 68040 and 16 MB the speed >should be more than enough. Personally, I am ready to trade the overfast >responsivity for more flexibility and nifty features. And when you do >nuber-crunching, the speed is as it was with a simpler GUI. Don't you see that it's kind of outrageous (even on a Unix box) to require so much memory before you get a decent response out of the GUI? Sure, it's "just fine" with 8MB... until you start running something else and NeXTStep gets swapped out. I'm not defending X Windows either. They're both memory pigs. >If you think that super-responsiveness is more important than usable >responsivity and more functionality, why don't you just give up using >GUIs and go back to the plain command line prompt interfaces? Why? Because I've got a fast and functional GUI! If it was slow or a big memory hog I wouldn't run it. That's the primary reason we still develop under MS-DOS at work. Windows is a torturesome environment to program under. Swapswapswapswapswapswap.... > Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/10/91)
In article <46969@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes:
Don't you see that it's kind of outrageous (even on a Unix box) to require so
much memory before you get a decent response out of the GUI? Sure, it's "just
fine" with 8MB... until you start running something else and NeXTStep gets
swapped out. I'm not defending X Windows either. They're both memory pigs.
Memory is cheap. It's now less than $200 for 4MB, and prices are
still dropping. It's almost like complaining that someone is wasting
paper clips. Who cares?
-Mikenavas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (04/10/91)
In article <> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: >melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> More than likely, the student that buys the NeXT will be computer >> literate. > >Or the student that buys the Amiga. People, people. The computer literate person is the one who collects *all* the facts on what it is that he wants to do, and then buys the machine best able to do it. And that might mean (blasphemy!) an 8086XT clone. David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu 2.0 :: "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.131439.23507@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >NeWS and is available on Sun workstations... and System VR4. I don't know if Well, if it's the same NeWS on Silicon Graphics Machines -- it looks nice, but has a huge number of race condition problems. David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu 2.0 :: "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (04/10/91)
In article <> elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM (Eric Lee Green) writes: >AmigaDOS 2.0 will be released with scalable font technology. No Display *Has* been released :) I'm running it right now -- on my A3000. It's an expensive way to get an upgrade to your operating system -- but she do-run-run. Yeah! It's not outline font technology yet, however. David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu 2.0 :: "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr10.005729.22997@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes:
I must be missing something here. The 040 is about three
times faster than the 030, right? And the color NeXT is 12 bits
as opposed to 2 bits on the old NeXTs, or six times the bit
planes. So, the color NeXT is twice as slow with the graphics/GUI
as the original NeXT, right?
Truthfully I don't know what an alpha channel is. Is it
basically an overlay screen?
It allows for transparancy so you can see through objects.
The NeXT OS 2.0 sped up the NeXT Postscript Display too. I can't say
by how much, but there was a noticable difference on the Cube before
we upgraded to the 040 and after we installed 2.0. I'm not sure how
fast the NeXTstation color is but it is definitely slower than the
NeXTstation mono. A lot of the problems that people attribute to
Display Postscript are in fact due to paging. You can do animation on
the NeXTstation color, but I'm not exactly sure how much on this
either since I haven't scrutinized a color machine .
-Mikenavas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (04/10/91)
And now for that sequel I promised you a bit back... :) In article <> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >Memory is cheap. It's now less than $200 for 4MB, and prices are >still dropping. It's almost like complaining that someone is wasting >paper clips. Who cares? Oh, the joys of living in the modern throw-away society. #define JOKE_MODE I have a friend who collects paper clips for his Mac. Wanna gues what he does with them :) #undefine JOKE_MODE I mind, and very much so. Not just the 4MB -- I mind the paper clips too. I'd rather not have my backyard littered with your trash, thank you. But that argument's for another newsgroup. Look, Mike, let's take an extreme example: Let's say I write an algorithm O(n) time which performs in 60K. Let's say somebody else writes an algorithm O(n) time which performs in 2megabytes. Wanna guess, regardless of the complexity of the two algorithms -- both order-n, you see -- which will finish first? Every time? This is a real-world example. My partner and I each wrote fill routines that performed exactly as described -- his was slower, every time. And this was on an SG-machine with 12megs and 300meg local harddrive, no sloucher!! When the number of polygons rises to 1200 or so, there is a definite slowdown! This is precisely the reason that adding more memory to the NeXT is not doing the job right. While I'm sure it will improve Next's performance, it is not solving the original problem -- the Operating System is too big. As an example of a tight operating system , consider the following: GeoWorks Ensemble is a multitasking, virtual memory operating system containing device independence and scalable outline font technology. It runs on a 640K 8086 machine. It may not be the best example, it is certainly not the only example -- but I helped code some of it, so I know it. :) [I no longer work for the company, for anyone that wonders.] The NeXT is a nice machine, with some interesting UI concepts, but let's not get carred away with the marketroid-stuff and call it America's next Apple Pie, okay? Every system can stand to learn from everyone else's, and NeXT needs to visit a dietician (sp?). NeXT == Not eXtremely Tempting. [Sorry, getting tired of that capitalization] > >-Mike -Dave David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu 2.0 :: "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus
rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr10.005729.22997@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >In article <&5aGlabl1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> >>In article <10902@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes: >> >> >> Yes, which is only usable on the CUBE, which is about 8000 dollars, or more... >> >>Of course. I was just correcting an incorrect statement made by an Amiga user. >> >> The 12 bit color with 4 alpha channel is the color slab, a likewise joke. >> >>Hey, 4096 colors looks pretty impressive :-). >>And on a million pixel display, to boot. >> >>-Mike > > I must be missing something here. The 040 is about three >times faster than the 030, right? And the color NeXT is 12 bits >as opposed to 2 bits on the old NeXTs, or six times the bit >planes. So, the color NeXT is twice as slow with the graphics/GUI >as the original NeXT, right? Assuming the NeXT uses the CPU to do it's rendering which it probably does unless the color NeXT's have a blitter. > Truthfully I don't know what an alpha channel is. Is it >basically an overlay screen? From what I understand, alpha channel is transparency. I'm not used to it in a 2d sense, but in a high end z-buffered graphics system, Alpha channel specifies how much color to borrow from the pixel underneath. So if you have a blue sphere behind a red sphere, an alpha channel value of 128 (with 8 bits of alpha) specifies a 50% blending (im guessing here. I don't know how the real implementation of alpha works). So in theory, 50% of the color of the blue pixels would "show thru" the red's causing the red sphere to be partially transparent. Pretty neat for speeding up 3d rendering without using dithering. I have no idea of how alpha works in a 2d system with no Z buffer. I guess it changes into 'anti-aliasing blending' from neighboring 4x4 pixels. Talk aabout expensive displays. I've heard about frame buffers out there that have 24 bits color, 8 bits alpha, 32 bits z buffering, 1 bit overlay, 2 bits of control, and even gamma correction. All this totals more than 64 bitplanes. I heard SUN even developed displays in excess of 100 bits per pixel! > -- Ethan > >Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb >A: None. It's a hardware problem. -- /~\_______________________________________________________________________/~\ |n| rjc@albert.ai.mit.edu Amiga, the computer for the creative mind. |n| |~| .-. .-. |~| |_|________________________________| |_| |________________________________|_|
bard@jessica.stanford.edu (David Hopper) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr10.035203.3854@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: > From what I understand, alpha channel is transparency. I'm not used to >it in a 2d sense, but in a high end z-buffered graphics system, Alpha >channel specifies how much color to borrow from the pixel underneath. >So if you have a blue sphere behind a red sphere, an alpha channel >value of 128 (with 8 bits of alpha) specifies a 50% blending (im guessing >here. I don't know how the real implementation of alpha works). So >in theory, 50% of the color of the blue pixels would "show thru" the red's >causing the red sphere to be partially transparent. The Alpha channel also holds heirarchical information (i.e. which pixels are above/below each other)-- using this with transparency, you can get great effects like when you move an object behind a picture of a car, for instance, you can see the object through the window; dimmed, as it would be in real life. >|n| rjc@albert.ai.mit.edu Amiga, the computer for the creative mind. |n| Dave Hopper | /// Anthro Creep | Academic Info Resources, Stanford |__ /// . . | Macincrap/UNIX Consultant bard@jessica. |\\\/// Ia! Ia! | -- Just remember: love is life, and Stanford.EDU | \XX/ Shub-Niggurath! | hate is living death. :Black Sabbath
griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) (04/10/91)
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >then? After all, the average dude doesn't need multitasking. Mach is a fine ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ??? Really, Peter... >Peter da Silva. `-_-' ><peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. -- Dan Griffin griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu
nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) (04/10/91)
In article <25dG$=hk1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <10866@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes: > > wow the education department at any school... But can you honestly > say that this is education? No. Then again, you'll want to use an > Apple II about as much as a NeXT. The apple II is slow and outdated, > the Next is Slow and low on software... > -- NeXT is not as slow as what most of the people here are saying. In fact, it's quite fast. Some of the productivity softwares on it are pretty nice. > >The NeXT is slow compared to what? Improv runs fine, FrameMaker too, >and Word Perfect. I imagine that Adobe Illustrator will be fast too. >Now, I'm not sure how well the "Killing Game Show" will run. > >-Mike
nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) (04/10/91)
In article <472@tlvx.UUCP> sysop@tlvx.UUCP (SysOp) writes: >(Hmm, and I thought the NeXT "discussions" were gone. :-) > >In article <2o7G!rpe1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >> The guy in the store couldn't tell me a thing about the machine. The >> Amiga just sat their with a dozen other IBM compatibles(which the guy >> could tell me a little about -- the pervasive feeling in the world is >> you can't go wrong with MS DOS). > >Well, if I ever get a clone, it'll be because I was dragged kicking and >screaming. :-) With almost no Amiga support locally, and the MS-DOS >shelves full, it can get a bit depressing for an Amiga owner here in Jax. > >[...] > >I'm seriously tempted to get a 33MHz 386. Please, someone explain why >I shouldn't! :-) (Seriously, e-mail is fine, if you think this'll turn >into a clone vs. Amiga war. :-) >-- By the way, you can get an 33MhZ 486 with Super VGA and 105 Meg for around $3000 to $4000. The new windows stuffs that are coming out are awsome. Page Maker 4.0 running on 1024 * 768 with 256 colors is really fast on the 486.
jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.130150.23167@sugar.hackercorp.com>, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > In article <1991Apr6.194520.5865@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: >> > Yeah...wait until you try to do some heavy disk activity while playing >> > a score file on that DSP.... The DSP requires the *CPU* to feed it >> > the sound data; it can't go get it on its own. > >> Uhh? Quite a hopeless argument here. So, you think NeXT's would be >> better if they didn't have the DSP at all? > > No, they would be better if they had an operating system with the context switch > and interrupt service times to support the DSP. The Amiga can play scores with > no jerks and hesitations while doing heavy disk activity, or even while doing > heavy CPU-dependent activity like ray-tracing... even on a 68000. Strange. I have heard several people saying that they _can_ play very complicated songs (like Mozart's symphonies) simultaneously with heavy-duty number crunching applications without any problems on the NeXT. I have also tried it myself, and playing songs with the DSP didn't seem to affect the performance noticeably. > -- > Peter da Silva. `-_-' > <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland
ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.212636.8200@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> cs326ag@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Loren J. Rittle) writes: >In article <1991Apr9.125149.22939@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >>They'll have to take that up with MIT, AT&T, Xerox, et al. I'm more concerned >>with the AT&T backing-store patent, 'cos that's where intuition's design >>came from. > >Peter, > I'm starting to think that Commodore must have already licensed >said technology. Why? Because AT&T is going after X, but there >are, most likely, more machines running intuition... :-) First, if AT&T *had* sent one of their nasty letters to Commodore, would we necessarily know about it? Second, perhaps AT&T can't confirm that SMART_REFRESH windows infringe, because they can't see the source code for Layers. Anybody can look at the sources for X. Third, I think they realize that there would be no reward for persuing the Amiga. The total dollar amount generated by X sales, even though it is a smaller number of units, even though X is derived from free MIT sources, is probably much higher than the number of dollars generated by Amiga sales (and I do mean including hardware). -- First comes the logo: C H E C K P O I N T T E C H N O L O G I E S / / ckp@grebyn.com \\ / / Then, the disclaimer: All expressed opinions are, indeed, opinions. \ / o Now for the witty part: I'm pink, therefore, I'm spam! \/
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (04/10/91)
In article <d41G_cjl1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >You can do animation on >the NeXTstation color, but I'm not exactly sure how much on this >either since I haven't scrutinized a color machine . > >-Mike Look, I like the NeXT too. I think there are some really great ideas behind it, and I'd rather use one than a Mac or an IBM. But PLEASE, are you SERIOUS? Your militancy should only go just so far! You are going to animate a 12 bit-plane screen under display postscript? You'd have to only animate a tiny portion of the screen to get anything real. Also, when you say animate, most of the people in the Amiga newsgroups are used to 15fps+ framerates. -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb A: None. It's a hardware problem.
bpv9073@sjfc.UUCP (Brett VanSprewenburg) (04/11/91)
In article <6hdG18ik1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >No machine is perfect, and there will always be faults. It would be >nice if the Amiga users could do their HW and find them instead of >screaming the standard lines of propaganda. > >-Mike Oh my God, I couldn't resist. Amiga users doing their HW before screaming standard lines of propaganda? (This is going to be like stepping on ants) Propaganda? You've got to be kidding. On this side of the fence (Amiga) we face more propaganda from other computer users (assuming themselves literate and 'informed') about how the Amiga is dying, only a game machine, never compete, unsupported, lousy software....and on and on. Try out this sometime, mention the Amiga in one of your computer related discussions with someone else and watch the propaganda flow. Like: "Yeah, I've heard about that machines, so-and-so says [insert propaganda here]" Call me crazy, but I end up refuting the most ABSURD accusations to people around here when they find out I have an Amiga. Unreal the things people come up with. "Yeah, and from what I understand Commodore's going under." So, in summary, we (Amiga users) more often get the short end of the propaganda stick then probably any other computing crowd. Please, feel perfectly free to correct me on this. ;-) ==Brett
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/11/91)
In article <1991Apr10.165806.22821@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes:
Look, I like the NeXT too. I think there are some really
great ideas behind it, and I'd rather use one than a Mac or an
IBM. But PLEASE, are you SERIOUS? Your militancy should only go
just so far! You are going to animate a 12 bit-plane screen under
display postscript? You'd have to only animate a tiny portion of
the screen to get anything real.
Also, when you say animate, most of the people in the
Amiga newsgroups are used to 15fps+ framerates.
Yes, I think you can do 15fps+ on the NeXTstation color -- not the
entire screen of course -- have a million pixels there. I'll look
into it. Better yet, why don't you post to comp.sys.next asking about
the animation capabilites of the NeXTstation color?
-Mikedavewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) (04/11/91)
In article <nj3G8w0h1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> at the screen top. Gently depress the left mouse button with the >> appropriate finger...and HOLD ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, drag Drag DRAG >> the screen downwards nd watch the screen/window smoothly slide off the >> screen! > >I don't think that's what I was talking about. Try grabbing that >window and moving it left or right. Under 2.0 you CAN drag screens left and right. And of course you could always drag windows left and right. I don't know what all this fuss is about. I have been able to put my windows artially off the screen, and I don't use any of the "extended screen" settings (my WorkBench doesn't have to scroll around or page a half a screen at a time). Dave
stevew@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Steven L Wootton) (04/11/91)
In article <12628@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: >As an example of a tight operating system , consider the following: >GeoWorks Ensemble is a multitasking, virtual memory operating system >containing device independence and scalable outline font technology. >It runs on a 640K 8086 machine. And no marketing, no Major Label software, and no developer support. Hey, if I wanted an Amiga, I would have bought one. I'm sorry. I'll go set fire to myself now. :-) Steve Wootton stevew@ecn.purdue.edu stevew@pur-ee.uucp stevew%ecn.purdue.edu@purccvm.bitnet
vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solanoy) (04/12/91)
davidc@contact.uucp (Ice Weasle) writes: > --- > [numerous stupid whining people that should know better] > > Isn't it interesting that it's mainly Amiga people who run around > badmouthing other computers. Comparing is one thing, goose-stepping > is another. I own an Amiga, and it's cute... The NeXT is okay too... > But why bash another system? You probably already HAVE a computer and > your happy with it, so enough is enough! This group is inundated with > people who should know better, yet they act like virgin users afraid > for the life of their computer... It's stupid. > -- > Dave Carlton (davidc@ziebmef.mef.org!white.toronto.edu) > "There's more than one way to skin a cat", Lydia thought, as she > nailed the little paws to the dissection board... Richard Deming I don't know about the others, but I don't bad mouth other computers. Each computer has it's own little niche if fills, and each task may require different computers... I personally like the concepts that NeXT has incorporated into their systems... The NeXT is sort of in the same position the Amiga was when it was first introduced... the "that's nice" mentality seems to be there... as it was with the Amiga. Victor
mike@maths.tcd.ie (MIKE ROGERS) (04/12/91)
In article <1991Apr9.125149.22939@sugar.hackercorp.com>, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) wrote: >They'll have to take that up with MIT, AT&T, Xerox, et al. I'm more concerned >with the AT&T backing-store patent, 'cos that's where intuition's design I reckon AT&T would settle for a fee, on the offchance that they push their patent verification through. Apple, on the other hand, would restrict everyone to tiled, on screen sliderless (round?) windows; compulsarily. -- Mike Rogers,Box 6,Regent Hse,## Everyone should try to kill themselves once in a TCD,EIRE. <mike@maths.tcd.ie>## while, it gives you a whole new outlook on life. ###############################DON'T MISS TRINCON400 7th, 8th, 9th FEBRUARY 1992 And she wore Black Contact Lenses when you said you liked her eyes......Toasties
elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM (Eric Lee Green) (04/12/91)
From article <2802BAE5.23085@orion.oac.uci.edu>, by nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen): > By the way, you can get an 33MhZ 486 with Super VGA and 105 Meg for around > $3000 to $4000. The new windows stuffs that are coming out are awsome. > Page Maker 4.0 running on 1024 * 768 with 256 colors is really fast on the > 486. Of course, you forget to mention that the I/O subsystem is seriously slower on those computers than it is on the Amiga. -- Eric Lee Green (318) 984-1820 P.O. Box 92191 Lafayette, LA 70509 elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM uunet!mjbtn!raider!elgamy!elg Looking for a job... tips, leads appreciated... inquire within...
dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (04/12/91)
In article <y7dGywgl1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <46969@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: > > Don't you see that it's kind of outrageous (even on a Unix box) to require so > much memory before you get a decent response out of the GUI? Sure, it's "just > fine" with 8MB... until you start running something else and NeXTStep gets > swapped out. I'm not defending X Windows either. They're both memory pigs. > >Memory is cheap. It's now less than $200 for 4MB, and prices are >still dropping. It's almost like complaining that someone is wasting >paper clips. Who cares? > >-Mike I'll tell you who cares. I just got Microsoft Word today. It takes up 680k on the disk, just for the application file (Macintosh). Meanwhile, I have two other outstanding word processors (Pro Write and excellence!) each of which COMBINED do not take up that much (Amiga)! I really get mad when I find out that a program requires 4 megs to run, when it is nothing more than a weak destop publisher, which competes with 300k or less Amiga DTPs. I can boot a bare bones system of 512k and only use up about 50k for the system, which leaves over 460k to run any software I want to. I hear that the current Mac OS requires at least 1 meg or more, and that Windows 3.0 requires 2 megs. And to think AmigaDOS requires .05 megs.... So when do we see some real programming? :) Just look at Berksoft's GEOS Ensemble for the PC. It will run on anything, plus it allows multitasking or single tasking. And all Microsoft can come up with is Mr Elephant, Windows 3.0. -- David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN Tomas Arce Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :) Un ragazzo di Casalbordino, Italia.
dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (04/12/91)
In article <2802B127.21121@orion.oac.uci.edu> nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) writes: >In article <25dG$=hk1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> >>In article <10866@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes: >> >> wow the education department at any school... But can you honestly >> say that this is education? No. Then again, you'll want to use an >> Apple II about as much as a NeXT. The apple II is slow and outdated, >> the Next is Slow and low on software... >> -- > >NeXT is not as slow as what most of the people here are saying. In fact, >it's quite fast. Is the next more similar to a UNIX workstation, an IBM, a Mac, or an Amiga? Does it multitask/singletask? Does it use command line interfaces? If it is anything like how the Mac works, I wouldn't be surprised if it is painfully slow. For example, to show how slow a Mac can be, lod up your favorite Mac program. Then say, "Oh, I forgot to format my disk." Then exit the Mac program, format the disk, re-enter the application, etc. Or try to load an application and then decide you want to cancel, but can't until it is already loaded....more waiting. Or try to connect a Mac to an Amiga running AMAX, and use the same Z-modem terminals on each system (I just did this today with ZTerm.85). Notice what happens when you open a DA...stops sending. Try selecting a menu option, or even the title bar of a window...stops sending. And when Moire, the screen blanker comes on, watch the CPS steadily drop down and down... I don't car as much about how long it takes to crunch numbers...I can walk away and read a book. But not between disk loads and screen updates!!! >Some of the productivity softwares on it are pretty nice. > >> >>The NeXT is slow compared to what? Improv runs fine, FrameMaker too, >>and Word Perfect. I imagine that Adobe Illustrator will be fast too. >>Now, I'm not sure how well the "Killing Game Show" will run. >> >>-Mike -- David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN Tomas Arce Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :) Un ragazzo di Casalbordino, Italia.
hill@evax.arl.utexas.edu (Adam Hill) (04/12/91)
In article <12628@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: > >As an example of a tight operating system , consider the following: >GeoWorks Ensemble is a multitasking, virtual memory operating system >containing device independence and scalable outline font technology. >It runs on a 640K 8086 machine. > And let me say it runs DA*N WELLL on a 8086. We put that puppie on a 8086 with a 20M HD and CGA. IT WAS AMAZING. The day of assembly language IS NOT dead -- GeoWorks is proof. GeoWorks does have it's faults (Like no apps.) But as an example of what CAN BE done it is great. (Hey - Mike Schwartz could use this in the Lemming Flame War :-) ) ( I now return you to the silly NeXT war......) >David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu -- adam hill -- hill@evax.uta.edu ASOCC - University of Texas at UTA I programmed for three days Make Up Your Own Mind.. AMIGA! And heard no human voices. Amiga... Multimedia NOW! But the hard disk sang. - TZoP Born To Run SVR4
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/12/91)
In article <1991Apr12.043922.23901@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
I'll tell you who cares. I just got Microsoft Word today. It takes
up 680k on the disk, just for the application file (Macintosh). Meanwhile,
I have two other outstanding word processors (Pro Write and excellence!)
each of which COMBINED do not take up that much (Amiga)!
Which is the better word processor?
I really get mad when I find out that a program requires 4 megs to run,
when it is nothing more than a weak destop publisher, which competes with
300k or less Amiga DTPs.
I somehow doubt that the most feature laden DTP packages are available
on the Amiga.
I can boot a bare bones system of 512k and only use up about 50k for
the system, which leaves over 460k to run any software I want to. I hear
that the current Mac OS requires at least 1 meg or more, and that
Windows 3.0 requires 2 megs. And to think AmigaDOS requires .05 megs....
Well, then you any problem convincing people to buy an Amiga.
So when do we see some real programming? :)
Just look at Berksoft's GEOS Ensemble for the PC. It will run on anything,
plus it allows multitasking or single tasking. And all Microsoft can come
up with is Mr Elephant, Windows 3.0.
Everyone knows Windows 3.0 is a joke. But IBM'ers will do what ever
it takes to get a Macinstosh w/o actually buying a Macintosh.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/12/91)
In article <1991Apr12.045200.25169@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
Is the next more similar to a UNIX workstation, an IBM, a Mac, or an
Amiga? Does it multitask/singletask? Does it use command line interfaces?
You can use a Unix CLI or a Mac like GUI.
If it is anything like how the Mac works, I wouldn't be surprised if it
is painfully slow. For example, to show how slow a Mac can be, lod up
your favorite Mac program. Then say, "Oh, I forgot to format my disk."
Then exit the Mac program, format the disk, re-enter the application, etc.
I thought that you whenever you inserted a disk on the Mac that wasn't
formatted, the Mac would prompt you to format the disk.
Are you using the Mac on an Appletalk network? That is the reason it
takes so long to load a program. Apple ships Appletalk with their
machines for free so people use it. IBM on the other hand doesn't
ship anything so you buy must buy something, and that something is
Token Ring. Ask your school to put Ethernet cards in the Mac and you
will see a big improvement.
Or try to load an application and then decide you want to cancel, but
can't until it is already loaded....more waiting.
Or try to connect a Mac to an Amiga running AMAX, and use the same Z-modem
terminals on each system (I just did this today with ZTerm.85). Notice what
happens when you open a DA...stops sending. Try selecting a menu option,
or even the title bar of a window...stops sending. And when Moire, the
screen blanker comes on, watch the CPS steadily drop down and down...
I don't car as much about how long it takes to crunch numbers...I can
walk away and read a book. But not between disk loads and screen updates!!!
-Mikedtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (04/13/91)
In article <1991Apr11.050337.19836@en.ecn.purdue.edu> stevew@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Steven L Wootton) writes: >In article <12628@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: > >>As an example of a tight operating system , consider the following: >>GeoWorks Ensemble is a multitasking, virtual memory operating system >>containing device independence and scalable outline font technology. >>It runs on a 640K 8086 machine. > >And no marketing, no Major Label software, and no developer support. Good point! It would be an even better point, but I think Berksoft is a slightly smaller company than Microsoft (or is it just me). There are some computers, such as portables and XT clones, that want to ship a windowing system with the computer. I have a feeling that they chose the Berksoft system as opposed to Windows 3.0... They do have marketing (I saw an ad once). They have already integrated some applications which are far better when used together, and they eventually will have developer support. I have a feeling that there are more XT's than 486's out there... > >Hey, if I wanted an Amiga, I would have bought one. > >I'm sorry. I'll go set fire to myself now. :-) > >Steve Wootton >stevew@ecn.purdue.edu >stevew@pur-ee.uucp >stevew%ecn.purdue.edu@purccvm.bitnet -- David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN Tomas Arce Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :) Un ragazzo di Casalbordino, Italia.
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/13/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <1991Apr12.043922.23901@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunys > > > I'll tell you who cares. I just got Microsoft Word today. It takes > up 680k on the disk, just for the application file (Macintosh). Meanwhile, > I have two other outstanding word processors (Pro Write and excellence!) > each of which COMBINED do not take up that much (Amiga)! > > Which is the better word processor? > Between Excellence 2.0 and MS-Word? Neither, depends on your tastes. I like Excellence better, especially against the Windows Word. It's a harder call against the Mac. Besides, if I happen to want to use Word for the Mac - I'll just run it under Amax. You know what? I actually saw an Amiga store that had TEX the other day! Wow! Too bad I had no money. Or a printer - oh well.... rory
dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (04/13/91)
In article <x21G#eln1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <1991Apr12.045200.25169@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: > > Is the next more similar to a UNIX workstation, an IBM, a Mac, or an > Amiga? Does it multitask/singletask? Does it use command line interfaces? > >You can use a Unix CLI or a Mac like GUI. Okay, so I assume you know a little or a lot about the Next because you answered my question(s). Does it multitask or single task? Is it more like a Mac, an IBM, or an Amiga and/or HP UNIX workstation? I want to know! I hear that System 7 on the Mac is supposed to multitask....I doubt it though. > > If it is anything like how the Mac works, I wouldn't be surprised if it > is painfully slow. For example, to show how slow a Mac can be, lod up > your favorite Mac program. Then say, "Oh, I forgot to format my disk." > Then exit the Mac program, format the disk, re-enter the application, etc. > >I thought that you whenever you inserted a disk on the Mac that wasn't >formatted, the Mac would prompt you to format the disk. Let me explain. I have one internal and one external drive. When I was using just one drive (I borrowed my roomate's drive recently), I would want to format a disk. I insert it in the drive. After about 5 seconds, it decides it is a bad disk, and asks me to insert my system disk. It then opens a prompt to format the disk...but my SYSTEM disk is in the drive! ALL attempts at ejecting, reinserting the bad disk, and even formatting the system disk have been utter failures. And it takes a long time. It is impossibly painful to use a mac without a huge hard drive. Also, when using one floppy, try inserting a new disk and opening a window for that disk. Then eject it and insert another new disk. Then, without ejecting any disks, try to move the first window. A prompt comes up asking you to insert a disk. WHY? The Mac can't even move a window without a disk swap? I only have a 40 meg hard drive, and only 10 megs is go8ing for the Mac, which I already think is too much. I feel bad that I have to share my hard drive like this, but alas... > >Are you using the Mac on an Appletalk network? That is the reason it No, I am not using it on a network. I do however have two of them right here in my dorm room (along with two Amigas). >takes so long to load a program. Apple ships Appletalk with their >machines for free so people use it. IBM on the other hand doesn't >ship anything so you buy must buy something, and that something is >Token Ring. Ask your school to put Ethernet cards in the Mac and you >will see a big improvement. > >-Mike And all this talk about memory protection....just use a RAD drive (I know you all have it). Or even better, run WB 2.0. It GURUS less and kills tasks instead. Or get SetTask, which lets you kill or freeze tasks! -- David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN Tomas Arce Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :) Un ragazzo di Casalbordino, Italia.
jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Shekhel) (04/14/91)
johnhlee@cs.cornell.edu (John H. Lee) writes: > >Switch your Window Manager, Peter. What are you using currently, MWM? Other >Window Managers like TWM can move the keyboard input-focus to the window that >contains the current mouse pointer. > You can do this with MWM, too. Just set the mwm:keyboardFocusPolicy property to "pointer" in the .Xdefaults file. -- +-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+ | JERRY J. SHEKHEL | POLYGEN CORPORATION | When I was young, I had to walk | | Drummers do it... | Waltham, MA USA | to school and back every day -- | | ... In rhythm! | (617) 890-2175 | 20 miles, uphill both ways. | +-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+ | ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry | | jerry@polygen.com | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/14/91)
In article <1991Apr13.155008.28917@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: Okay, so I assume you know a little or a lot about the Next because you answered my question(s). Does it multitask or single task? Is it more like a Mac, an IBM, or an Amiga and/or HP UNIX workstation? I want to know! I hear that System 7 on the Mac is supposed to multitask....I doubt it though. The NeXT, and all Unix machines, have preemptive multitasking like the Amiga does. The Mac has cooperative multitasking which is a little different. I'm not going to debate which is better. In many cases they both work fine. Let me explain. I have one internal and one external drive. When I was using just one drive (I borrowed my roomate's drive recently), I would want to format a disk. I insert it in the drive. After about 5 seconds, it decides it is a bad disk, and asks me to insert my system disk. It then opens a prompt to format the disk...but my SYSTEM disk is in the drive! ALL attempts at ejecting, reinserting the bad disk, and even formatting the system disk have been utter failures. And it takes a long time. It is impossibly painful to use a mac without a huge hard drive. Apple ships all of their new machines with 40MB hard drives. They know that it is painful. Also, when using one floppy, try inserting a new disk and opening a window for that disk. Then eject it and insert another new disk. Then, without ejecting any disks, try to move the first window. A prompt comes up asking you to insert a disk. WHY? The Mac can't even move a window without a disk swap? I only have a 40 meg hard drive, and only 10 megs is go8ing for the Mac, which I already think is too much. I feel bad that I have to share my hard drive like this, but alas... The Mac is probably saving the window state and the position of the window for the floppy, so it needs the floppy inserted to save this information. > >Are you using the Mac on an Appletalk network? That is the reason it No, I am not using it on a network. I do however have two of them right here in my dorm room (along with two Amigas). I have found the Mac to be quite fast when loading programs from a hard drive. And all this talk about memory protection....just use a RAD drive (I know you all have it). Or even better, run WB 2.0. It GURUS less and kills tasks instead. Or get SetTask, which lets you kill or freeze tasks! What is a RAD drive? And you can only run WB 2.0 on the A3000. -Mike
mpierce@ewu.UUCP (Mathew Pierce) (04/15/91)
In article <$8cG!_ko1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <1991Apr13.155008.28917@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: > [stuff deleted for brevity] > > And all this talk about memory protection....just use a RAD drive (I know > you all have it). Or even better, run WB 2.0. It GURUS less and kills > tasks instead. Or get SetTask, which lets you kill or freeze tasks! > > What is a RAD drive? And you can only run WB 2.0 on the A3000. > RAD drive is a chunk of memory set up as a ramdom access drive (RAD). The one included with AmigaDos uses a static size, but will survive reboots and system crashes. I use the ASDG RAD which dynamically allocates and deallocates memory as it needs it, and also survives the harshest crashes that I have been able to produce. You can configure your startup-sequence to initially boot from the HD, and perform all warm-boots from the RAD, whch saves much time. I have mine configured to hold my C-compiler, all includes and libs, and my editor. That way when I do something really screwy, the system is back up in less than 30 seconds, and at the place that I left off before the crash! And WB2.0 can run on any Amiga with ZKick, but it's only shipped commercially on the A3000. Just wait a little longer, it'll soon be out for >A3000 officially. > -Mike
mpierce@ewu.UUCP (Mathew Pierce) (04/15/91)
In article <1525@ewu.UUCP>, mpierce@ewu.UUCP (Mathew Pierce) writes: > In article <$8cG!_ko1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > > > In article <1991Apr13.155008.28917@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: > And WB2.0 can run on any Amiga with ZKick, but it's only shipped commercially > on the A3000. Just wait a little longer, it'll soon be out for >A3000 ^^^^^^ I of course meant <A3000 > officially. > > -Mike > >
jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Shekhel) (04/15/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > So when do we see some real programming? :) > > Just look at Berksoft's GEOS Ensemble for the PC. It will run on anything, > plus it allows multitasking or single tasking. And all Microsoft can come > up with is Mr Elephant, Windows 3.0. > >Everyone knows Windows 3.0 is a joke. > Everyone knows Windows 3 is a joke? You must have ESP to know what's on everyone's mind. Next time, please speak for yourself. If you were at all informed, you'd know that Windows has to do a lot more than PC-GEOS. For example, it has to support DOS applications, it has to manage extended and expanded memory, and there is much more. I agree that GEOS may have better overall design, but the fact that it runs in the contiguous 640K memory space and doesn't have to support DOS applications REALLY simplifies things for it -- and limits it. I don't care if every application written for GEOS must be written in assembly language -- if it takes off, sooner or later, someone like Lotus will run out of memory under 640K. And from there, there's no way to go with GEOS, except to extend GEOS itself with more sophisticated memory management. Then we'll see how much smaller it will be than Windows. > >But IBM'ers will do what ever >it takes to get a Macinstosh w/o actually buying a Macintosh. > My, aren't we pretending to be the All-Knowing today! By the way, we have the latest beta of MacOS 7.0 in-house. It looks nice, and I'd say it's pretty close to Windows in terms of functionality. And guess what -- when I pull down "About This Macintosh", the reported memory usage for the system software is 2100K! So you tell me: who's Mr. Elephant here? > >-Mike > -- +-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+ | JERRY J. SHEKHEL | POLYGEN CORPORATION | When I was young, I had to walk | | Drummers do it... | Waltham, MA USA | to school and back every day -- | | ... In rhythm! | (617) 890-2175 | 20 miles, uphill both ways. | +-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+ | ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry | | jerry@polygen.com | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
dtiberio@libserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (04/15/91)
In article <$8cG!_ko1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <1991Apr13.155008.28917@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: > >What is a RAD drive? And you can only run WB 2.0 on the A3000. > > >-Mike A RAD drive is just like a ram drive, but when the computer is reset it still remembers everything in memory. Second, did you say in an earlier post that you had an a3000 and that the windows were slow, yet you also think that the a3000 only runs WB 2.0? Actually, an a3000 runs WB 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and 2.0. Unless you have some strange a3000... MY a3000 runs WB 2.0, 1.3, and Macintosh. However, I use the a500 to run Macintosh because I have room on my hard drive there. And since it is an IDE drive, and I don't have an a3000 IDE controller, the mac partition will stay in the a500. Back to the RAD drive, try this from the shell: mount rad: That was easy. -- David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN Tomas Arce Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :) Un ragazzo di Casalbordino, Italia.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr10.133943.5922@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > Strange. I have heard several people saying that they _can_ play very > complicated songs (like Mozart's symphonies) simultaneously with > heavy-duty number crunching applications without any problems on the > NeXT. I have also tried it myself, and playing songs with the DSP didn't > seem to affect the performance noticeably. OK, now add some MIDI inputs, say for clocking, ... -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr10.045723.29208@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) writes: > peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > >then? After all, the average dude doesn't need multitasking. Mach is a fine > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > ??? Really, Peter... Sure. The average computerphobe wants a toaster. The Mac is a toaster, and until Apple decided to litigate instead of innovating I used to recommend the things. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr13.155008.28917@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: > Okay, so I assume you know a little or a lot about the Next because you > answered my question(s). Does it multitask or single task? Is it more like > a Mac, an IBM, or an Amiga and/or HP UNIX workstation? I want to know! I > hear that System 7 on the Mac is supposed to multitask....I doubt it though. The NeXT *is* a UNIX workstation. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ed Krimen) (04/17/91)
In article <1046@stewart.UUCP> jerry@stewart.UUCP (Jerry Shekhel) writes: >melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> plus it allows multitasking or single tasking. And all Microsoft can come >> up with is Mr Elephant, Windows 3.0. >> >>Everyone knows Windows 3.0 is a joke. >> > >Everyone knows Windows 3 is a joke? You must have ESP to know what's >on everyone's mind. Next time, please speak for yourself. If you were >at all informed, you'd know that Windows has to do a lot more than PC-GEOS. All right. Everyone but you knows Windows 3.0 is a joke. ;^) >> >>But IBM'ers will do what ever >>it takes to get a Macinstosh w/o actually buying a Macintosh. >> > >My, aren't we pretending to be the All-Knowing today! By the way, we have >the latest beta of MacOS 7.0 in-house. It looks nice, and I'd say it's >pretty close to Windows in terms of functionality.... ...and speed. Comp.sys.mac.system says it's slow. > And guess what -- when >I pull down "About This Macintosh", the reported memory usage for the >system software is 2100K! Oh boy. That just gives me goose bumps all over. :^) > >> >>-Mike >> >-- >+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+ >| JERRY J. SHEKHEL | POLYGEN CORPORATION | When I was young, I had to walk | >| Drummers do it... | Waltham, MA USA | to school and back every day -- | >| ... In rhythm! | (617) 890-2175 | 20 miles, uphill both ways. | >+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+ >| ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry | >| jerry@polygen.com | >+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ -- Ed Krimen ............................................... ||| Video Production Major, California State University, Chico ||| INTERNET: ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu FREENET: al661 / | \ SysOp, Fuji BBS: 916-894-1261 FIDONET: 1:119/4.0
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/17/91)
In article <1046@stewart.UUCP> jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Shekhel) writes: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > So when do we see some real programming? :) > > Just look at Berksoft's GEOS Ensemble for the PC. It will run on anything, > plus it allows multitasking or single tasking. And all Microsoft can come > up with is Mr Elephant, Windows 3.0. > >Everyone knows Windows 3.0 is a joke. > Everyone knows Windows 3 is a joke? You must have ESP to know what's on everyone's mind. Next time, please speak for yourself. If you were at all informed, you'd know that Windows has to do a lot more than PC-GEOS. For example, it has to support DOS applications, it has to manage extended and expanded memory, and there is much more. I agree that GEOS may have better overall design, but the fact that it runs in the contiguous 640K memory space and doesn't have to support DOS applications REALLY simplifies things for it -- and limits it. I don't care if every application written for GEOS must be written in assembly language -- if it takes off, sooner or later, someone like Lotus will run out of memory under 640K. And from there, there's no way to go with GEOS, except to extend GEOS itself with more sophisticated memory management. Then we'll see how much smaller it will be than Windows. The only thing that I said was the last line. "Everyone knows Windows 3.0 is a joke." The rest is from one elses posting, thank you. > >But IBM'ers will do what ever >it takes to get a Macinstosh w/o actually buying a Macintosh. > My, aren't we pretending to be the All-Knowing today! By the way, we have the latest beta of MacOS 7.0 in-house. It looks nice, and I'd say it's pretty close to Windows in terms of functionality. And guess what -- when I pull down "About This Macintosh", the reported memory usage for the system software is 2100K! So you tell me: who's Mr. Elephant here? Think Windows will ever get a real File Manager? And what functionality does Windows 3.0 have that System 7.0 doesn't? I repeat Windows is a joke. Microsoft is make a lot of money of stupid PC users who should own a Mac. The smart ones should own a NeXT(ok, I concede a little...or perhaps an Amiga 3000) -Mike
dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (04/18/91)
In article <1991Apr16.010601.21737@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <1991Apr10.133943.5922@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: >> Strange. I have heard several people saying that they _can_ play very >> complicated songs (like Mozart's symphonies) simultaneously with >> heavy-duty number crunching applications without any problems on the >> NeXT. I have also tried it myself, and playing songs with the DSP didn't >> seem to affect the performance noticeably. > >OK, now add some MIDI inputs, say for clocking, ... >-- >Peter da Silva. `-_-' ><peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. How would a midi port help out? I keep on hearing that the nExt was designed with some special sound ports. When I met Leo Schwab, we were talking strictly about the CDTV and how he helped with some software. He mentioned that CDTV has a MIDI port, but I am still not sure if he said that by mistake. Even if it does have a midi port, is there any known amiga software to support it? -- David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN Tomas Arce Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :) Un ragazzo di Casalbordino, Italia.
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/18/91)
> I pull down "About This Macintosh", the reported memory usage for the > system software is 2100K! So you tell me: who's Mr. Elephant here? > > > Is that actual RAM usage, or how much space the OS takes up on the disk? rory
alec_vondjidis@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Alec Vondjidis) (04/18/91)
>Think Windows will ever get a real File Manager? And what >functionality does Windows 3.0 have that System 7.0 doesn't? I repeat >Windows is a joke. Microsoft is make a lot of money of stupid PC >users who should own a Mac. The smart ones should own a NeXT(ok, I >concede a little...or perhaps an Amiga 3000) > >-Mike I own a computer that I like, enjoy doing my job on, and can afford. I might like a faster IBM, or a nicer Amiga, (not really a UNIX workstation, that would mean I would have to learn a bunch of new stuff just to do what I can do without it), or a whatever other computer I chose to use. I don't presume to tell people what they *should* use; I might offer them an opinion as to what they might enjoy using. I might inform people that I think Windows 3.0 is slow; but if it works for them I am not gona call them *stupid*. You obviously think you can do both. In that case then, I think I might call you an ass**** and tell you to FOAD. Then again, we all know you think I am *STUPID* enough to go spend $4,000 or so for a GUI; Gee, I'll take my $80 software emulation--slow as it may be. ___ ___ /\ | | | GEnie: P.VONDJIDIS1 /__\ | |-- | Usenet: alec_vondjidis@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca / \ |___ |___ |___
sysop@tlvx.UUCP (SysOp) (04/18/91)
In article <8=G24ln1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <1991Apr12.043922.23901@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: [about WP's deleted....] > when it is nothing more than a weak destop publisher, which competes with > 300k or less Amiga DTPs. > > I somehow doubt that the most feature laden DTP packages are available > on the Amiga. Does this mean you've tried them and you don't think Amiga DTP programs are up to the task, or that you assume that they aren't? (You know what happens when you assume ... ;-) PageStream looks like it has a lot of features, not that I've used a lot of DTP programs; I've spent enough time so that I could do things on PageStream that I did on a clone DTP, and couldn't tell the difference in functionality (for the most part). I honestly couldn't tell you which one had more features, except that I couldn't remember being able to rotate objects on the clone DTP the way I can in PS. Also, .info magazine is done with the Gold Disk DTP program Professional Page; how many more features does it need? ;-) > > I can boot a bare bones system of 512k and only use up about 50k for > the system, which leaves over 460k to run any software I want to. I hear > that the current Mac OS requires at least 1 meg or more, and that > Windows 3.0 requires 2 megs. And to think AmigaDOS requires .05 megs.... > > Well, then you any problem convincing people to buy an Amiga. Well with people believing that you don't have software that's full-featured, it makes it hard to convince them that you have a capable machine. 1/2 ;-) I'm having trouble convincing myself that I should buy a clone. I'd like to upgrade, but I am happy with my Amiga for most things. (Actually, I've done fine with just an Amiga. BTW, I have no need for business programs on my Amiga; a "personal" level is more appropriate for most people, anyway. The lack of the names Lotus or Ashton-Tate don't mean anything to me, and I'm a paying customer, so I feel that I count. :-) BUT, if you need the functionality of dBASE though, it has been mentioned that there's an Amiga package that does the same thing. But again, it doesn't have the big name, so it probably doesn't count, eh? :-/ ) > > So when do we see some real programming? :) > > Just look at Berksoft's GEOS Ensemble for the PC. It will run on anything, > plus it allows multitasking or single tasking. And all Microsoft can come > up with is Mr Elephant, Windows 3.0. > > Everyone knows Windows 3.0 is a joke. But IBM'ers will do what ever > it takes to get a Macinstosh w/o actually buying a Macintosh. Is this good or bad? I dunno. :-) > > -Mike -- Gary Wolfe, SYSOP of the Temporal Vortex BBS // Amiga! ..uflorida!unf7!tlvx!sysop, unf7!tlvx!sysop@bikini.cis.ufl.edu \X/ Yeah!
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/18/91)
In article <1046@stewart.UUCP> jerry@stewart.UUCP (Jerry Shekhel) writes: > someone like Lotus will run out of memory under 640K. And from there, there's > no way to go with GEOS, except to extend GEOS itself with more sophisticated > memory management. Then we'll see how much smaller it will be than Windows. Nah, it can use less sophisticated memory management in 386 mode: it won't have to spend all its time juggling segment pointers. One program ... one segment. Windows' biggest problem isn't memory management... it's the DOS emulation. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/18/91)
In article <1991Apr17.180211.15262@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: > How would a midi port help out? I keep on hearing that the nExt was > designed with some special sound ports. The point is that MIDI is a 31kb serial interface, and handling MIDI in is something that puts the pressure on context switch times and the like. > When I met Leo Schwab, we were talking strictly about the CDTV and how > he helped with some software. He mentioned that CDTV has a MIDI port, but > I am still not sure if he said that by mistake. Even if it does have a midi > port, is there any known amiga software to support it? Yes, from Deluxe Music on all real Amiga music software has supported MIDI. MIDI is a 31kb serial interface, and every Amiga comes with one of those. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (04/18/91)
In article <cigk11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: >Is that actual RAM usage, or how much space the OS takes up on the disk? It is actual RAM usage, BUT System 7.0 doesn't necessarily take up 2 meg, although it will probably take the better part of 1.5. You have to remember that a file server and outline font engine are in there as well. A disk cache is also required with a default of 128k. System 7.0 is noticeable slower than previous versions. The beta version I have of System 7.0b4 takes up most of 8 DSDD floppies.
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/20/91)
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) writes: > In article <cigk11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithac > >Is that actual RAM usage, or how much space the OS takes up on the disk? > > It is actual RAM usage, BUT System 7.0 doesn't necessarily take up 2 meg, > although it will probably take the better part of 1.5. You have to remember > that a file server and outline font engine are in there as well. A disk cach > is also required with a default of 128k. System 7.0 is noticeable slower tha > previous versions. > > The beta version I have of System 7.0b4 takes up most of 8 DSDD floppies. I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It suretook them long enough to release it? rory
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/20/91)
In article <ZB0N11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes:
I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It
suretook them long enough to release it?
And how long has it taken Commdore to go from 1.3 to 2.0, which still
isn't available on any computer except the A3000?
-MikeMBS110@psuvm.psu.edu (04/20/91)
In article <wb2G61xt1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) says: > >In article <ZB0N11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> >judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > > I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It > suretook them long enough to release it? > >And how long has it taken Commdore to go from 1.3 to 2.0, which still >isn't available on any computer except the A3000? Oh, picky, picky. :) They took ^2 years because they were busy getting it RIGHT, that's why. And, looking at the result, they GOT it right. 2.0 is faster, looks way better, and vastly expands the Amiga's functionality. All this with only a 512K ROM chip and a single 3-1/2" floppy. And need I remind you that it STILL multitasks beautifully in one half megabyte of memory? Compare that to the bloated System 7 (8 disks, 4 MB RAM required, and it's SLOWER than System 6??). I will GLADLY wait for something that works rather than something bloated and inefficient rushed out the door. ...If you can call two years "rushing," that is. Oh, yes. During that long wait for V 2.0, Commodore was ALSO busy getting every last bug out of the system. Nice of them, huh? / Mark "Remixed for Common Household Appliances" Sachs - MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu \ | DISCLAIMER: It's NOT MY FAULT. Kei and Yuri || // || | forced me to say it. || \X/ AMIGA || \========= "Oh, I'm just a NO-OP in the instruction set of Life..." ==========/
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/20/91)
> I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It > suretook them long enough to release it? > > And how long has it taken Commdore to go from 1.3 to 2.0, which still > isn't available on any computer except the A3000? > > -Mike That wasn't my question. But 2.0 is faster,more efficient, and generally nicer. They took a long time, but they didn't make a slower OS. Read my questions and don't go popping off... rory
xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) (04/20/91)
In article <91110.010457MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>, MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu writes: >In article <wb2G61xt1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) >says: >> >>In article <ZB0N11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> >>judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: >> >> I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It >> suretook them long enough to release it? >> >>And how long has it taken Commdore to go from 1.3 to 2.0, which still >>isn't available on any computer except the A3000? > >Oh, picky, picky. :) They took ^2 years because they were busy getting it >RIGHT, that's why. And, looking at the result, they GOT it right. 2.0 is >faster, looks way better, and vastly expands the Amiga's functionality. >All this with only a 512K ROM chip and a single 3-1/2" floppy. And need >I remind you that it STILL multitasks beautifully in one half megabyte >of memory? > >Compare that to the bloated System 7 (8 disks, 4 MB RAM required, and it's >SLOWER than System 6??). I will GLADLY wait for something that works rather >than something bloated and inefficient rushed out the door. ...If you can >call two years "rushing," that is. You pay dearly for the convenience of being able to use your O.S. with 512K of RAM and a single floppy drive on the Amiga, too. Three of the most important features of MC OS 7.0 are virtual memory, memory protection, and sophisticated structured/outlined fonts. These features are totally non-existant in Amiga OS 2.0. > >Oh, yes. During that long wait for V 2.0, Commodore was ALSO busy getting >every last bug out of the system. Nice of them, huh? > >/ Mark "Remixed for Common Household Appliances" Sachs - MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu \ >| DISCLAIMER: It's NOT MY FAULT. Kei and Yuri || // || >| forced me to say it. || \X/ AMIGA || >\========= "Oh, I'm just a NO-OP in the instruction set of Life..." ==========/ ---------------------------------------------------------- / Marc Barrett -MB- | BITNET: XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET / / ISU COM S Student | Internet: XGR39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU / ----------------------------------------------------------
don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd) (04/20/91)
In article <wb2G61xt1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <ZB0N11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > > I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It > suretook them long enough to release it? > >And how long has it taken Commdore to go from 1.3 to 2.0, which still >isn't available on any computer except the A3000? > Less time than it's taken Apple to get System 7.0 working; Commodore hasn't made several official announcements of its availability "next month", or whenever, only to push that date back shortly afterwards. Someone I know who has dealings with both Apple and Commodore on a regular basis told me that for Apple to consider an OS upgrade releasable, they require it to be compatible with 65% of existing software. Commodore sets its requirements up around 90-95%. I have a feeling there'll be a lot of unhappy Mac users who upgrade as soon as it's released & find that their most important application die. -- Gibberish May the Publications Editor, AmigaNetwork is spoken fork() be Amiga Student On-Campus Consultant, U of D here. with you. DISCLAIMER: It's all YOUR fault.
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/21/91)
In article <91110.010457MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
Oh, picky, picky. :) They took ^2 years because they were busy getting it
RIGHT, that's why. And, looking at the result, they GOT it right. 2.0 is
faster, looks way better, and vastly expands the Amiga's functionality.
All this with only a 512K ROM chip and a single 3-1/2" floppy. And need
I remind you that it STILL multitasks beautifully in one half megabyte
of memory?
So, you're saying that it has all of the functionality of System 7.0?
Compare that to the bloated System 7 (8 disks, 4 MB RAM required, and it's
SLOWER than System 6??). I will GLADLY wait for something that works rather
than something bloated and inefficient rushed out the door. ...If you can
call two years "rushing," that is.
System 7.0 only requires 2MB of RAM. How much slower is System 7.0?
Anyway, the machine people should buy is the NeXTstation or
NeXTstation color. There awesome beasts!
Oh, yes. During that long wait for V 2.0, Commodore was ALSO busy getting
every last bug out of the system. Nice of them, huh?
Apple can say the same thing, and they probably will on May 13. When
is Commodore's official release date for 2.0 for the rest of the Amiga
family? DOS 5.0 is set for a June release. Even stupid Microsoft is
on schedule.
-Mikemelling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/21/91)
In article <1991Apr20.144115.25537@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes:
You pay dearly for the convenience of being able to use your O.S.
with 512K of RAM and a single floppy drive on the Amiga, too. Three of
the most important features of MC OS 7.0 are virtual memory, memory
protection, and sophisticated structured/outlined fonts. These features
are totally non-existant in Amiga OS 2.0.
There is no memory protection included in System 7.0.
-Mikerjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (04/21/91)
In article <1991Apr20.144115.25537@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu writes: >In article <91110.010457MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>, MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu writes: >>Compare that to the bloated System 7 (8 disks, 4 MB RAM required, and it's >>SLOWER than System 6??). I will GLADLY wait for something that works rather >>than something bloated and inefficient rushed out the door. ...If you can >>call two years "rushing," that is. > > You pay dearly for the convenience of being able to use your O.S. >with 512K of RAM and a single floppy drive on the Amiga, too. Three of >the most important features of MC OS 7.0 are virtual memory, memory >protection, and sophisticated structured/outlined fonts. These features >are totally non-existant in Amiga OS 2.0. Funny, I didn't hear 7.0 had memory protection. It uses Multifinder. I imagine Virtual Memory would be slow on a Mac due to their slow HD interfaces. CG fonts will be coming to Amiga OS soon, however, ADOS 2.0 is a much more polished product. System 7 seems to be as bloated and slow as OS/2 from Microsoft. A usuable Mac+System 7 starts to make the NeXT look good. -- / INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu * // The opinions expressed here do not \ | INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net | \X/ in any way reflect the views of my self.| \ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023 * /
blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) (04/21/91)
> Less time than it's taken Apple to get System 7.0 working; Commodore hasn't >made several official announcements of its availability "next month", or >whenever, only to push that date back shortly afterwards. Apple has NEVER made an official announcement about availability before five weeks ago when May 13 was annouced as the launch date for 7.0. You have been misinformed. > Someone I know who has dealings with both Apple and Commodore on a >regular basis told me that for Apple to consider an OS upgrade releasable, >they require it to be compatible with 65% of existing software. Commodore >sets its requirements up around 90-95%. I have a feeling there'll be a lot >of unhappy Mac users who upgrade as soon as it's released & find that their >most important application die. > I can't say what Apple percentage standard is, but I still haven't found an application that ran under 6.0.7 that doesn't run under my 7.0 beta copy. That's 100%, not 65%. If Apple really was shooting for 65% they should have released it last year. They probably would have still broke 70% ;-). Apple has definately done 7.0 right. There is so much functionality added, I can't imagine someone not upgrading. It is truly the best OS I've seen (for a power user, or a casual user), that includes NeXT and Amiga 2.0 beta.
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/21/91)
In article <10904@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) writes:
I can't say what Apple percentage standard is, but I still haven't found an
application that ran under 6.0.7 that doesn't run under my 7.0 beta copy.
That's 100%, not 65%. If Apple really was shooting for 65% they should have
released it last year. They probably would have still broke 70% ;-). Apple
has definately done 7.0 right. There is so much functionality added, I can't
imagine someone not upgrading. It is truly the best OS I've seen (for a
power user, or a casual user), that includes NeXT and Amiga 2.0 beta.
Yeah, the NeXT has the best OS that I've ever seen!
I mean the Amiga has the best OS that I've ever seen!
I mean OS/2 is the best OS that I've ever seen!
Statements like these aren't worth shit!! If people would be so kind
as to post why they feel that their OS is so hot, maybe we can discuss
something.
Care to give it a go Mr. System 7.0?
-Mikeblissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) (04/21/91)
>Yeah, the NeXT has the best OS that I've ever seen! >I mean the Amiga has the best OS that I've ever seen! >I mean OS/2 is the best OS that I've ever seen! > >Statements like these aren't worth shit!! If people would be so kind >as to post why they feel that their OS is so hot, maybe we can discuss >something. > >Care to give it a go Mr. System 7.0? OK. System 7.0 Amiga outline font technology standard bitmaps or application dependent True type or postscript supported outline fonts by every application. inter-application communication copy/paste isn't even standard for (provides live links between docs all apps and no IAC, not even on from any vendor's apps) the horizon. baloon help manager provides help screens are app specific thus easy, standard way to add help the user must learn how to access facilities to an application help screens in each program file sharing at OS level standard file sharing is possible cheaply allows you to publish files to through a pd program as well as any user that you want to access it commericial apps, but it is not standard and does not come with the OS. And no amiga networking is as simple as Personal Appleshare in 7.0. OS level file location facilities PD and commercial file searching utilities available AppleScript and event manager sends no protocal for doing this exists messages between apps to perform or will exist in 2.0 a variety of functions sound manager standard 2:1 or 3:1 ??? compression of digitized sound communication toolbox managages vendors must write their own code serial, appletalk, ethernet to manage these This is not all-inclusive but includes most of the new features. Anyone more knowledgeable on Amiga OS 2.0 feel free to correct my amiga comments.
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/21/91)
In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) writes:
This is not all-inclusive but includes most of the new features. Anyone
more knowledgeable on Amiga OS 2.0 feel free to correct my amiga comments.
Uh, some of us are more interested in how System 7.0 compares to the
NeXT OS. And could you leave out the ballon help? I found it to be
quite annoying.
-Mikerjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (04/21/91)
In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Corey) writes: >>Care to give it a go Mr. System 7.0? > >OK. > >System 7.0 Amiga > >outline font technology standard bitmaps or application dependent >True type or postscript supported outline fonts >by every application. (will be CG fonts soon) >inter-application communication copy/paste isn't even standard for >(provides live links between docs all apps and no IAC, not even on >from any vendor's apps) the horizon. Sorry but the Amiga wins hands down Copy/paste from CON windows is here. Arexx blows away IAC. standard. Also, clipboard cut Arexx is STANDARD. and paste has been standard Also, Arexx is supported by for a long time, however LOTS of Apps. How many Mac not many Amiga apps use it. App's use IAC at this moment? >baloon help manager provides help screens are app specific thus >easy, standard way to add help the user must learn how to access >facilities to an application help screens in each program 2.0 has a standard way of help. Press the help key over a menu item/gadte and you get a 'MENUHELP' message sent to your app. It's not great, but they are working on it. >file sharing at OS level standard file sharing is possible cheaply >allows you to publish files to through a pd program as well as >any user that you want to access it commericial apps, but it is not > standard and does not come with the OS. > And no amiga networking is as simple > as Personal Appleshare in 7.0. There is a standard, it's called SANA. >OS level file location facilities PD and commercial file searching > utilities available Sorry, but the search and which commands have been around since AmigaDOS 1.3.2. Try again. >AppleScript and event manager sends no protocal for doing this exists >messages between apps to perform or will exist in 2.0 >a variety of functions BZZZZZT! Thanks for playing. AmigaOS has had the abilities to send messages to apps since day one, and Arexx (a fully complete and easy to learn language) is part of AmigaDOS and has been around since 1987. For instance, you can send messages from a term program to a paint program to save a pic, and then have the term upload it,etc. >sound manager standard 2:1 or 3:1 ??? >compression of digitized sound audio.device, SMUS and IFF 8SVX standard for 2:1 compression. >communication toolbox managages vendors must write their own code >serial, appletalk, ethernet to manage these Preferences (it's lame, but it's standard) > >This is not all-inclusive but includes most of the new features. Anyone >more knowledgeable on Amiga OS 2.0 feel free to correct my amiga comments. To the Amiga's side, let's add Commodities Exchange, a standardized way to manage the input streams on the Amiga so screen blankers, input enhancers, and INIT style stuff isn't load order dependent. Let's also mention the Amiga's built in speech, which has been improved. Seriously, Apple's inter-process communication falls far short of Arexx on the Amiga, and 7.0's slowness and memory hogging makes it look like a turtle compared the AmigaOS. On top of that, Apple still hasn't standardized a method for resident/pure code sharing has it? For instance, I can make a C compiler resident on the Amiga and have 2-3 compiles going at once without using hardly any extra memory except stack and heap storage. Multifinder still requires memory 'partitioning' doesn't it? -- / INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu * // The opinions expressed here do not \ | INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net | \X/ in any way reflect the views of my self.| \ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023 * /
rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (04/21/91)
In article <.=2Gtyju1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) writes: > > This is not all-inclusive but includes most of the new features. Anyone > more knowledgeable on Amiga OS 2.0 feel free to correct my amiga comments. > >Uh, some of us are more interested in how System 7.0 compares to the >NeXT OS. And could you leave out the ballon help? I found it to be >quite annoying. > >-Mike I'd take Any UNIX OS over System 7.0 simply because I have the option of using a command shell,and the GUI isn't shoved in my face. UNIX(BSD style Man pages) provide the best help I've ever seen. I learned to program Unix simply by man-ing functions. Emacs style Tex-info help is even better. -- / INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu * // The opinions expressed here do not \ | INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net | \X/ in any way reflect the views of my self.| \ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023 * /
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (04/21/91)
In article <ZB0N11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: >I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It >suretook them long enough to release it? I suppose that depends on what is being improved. In the case of System 7.0, a whole LOT of features are being added. Outline fonts take a non-zero amount of time to render. Yeah, it took a lot of time to get out (still taking, but looks like it will make it out on May 13th still.) They added file server capabilities, outline fonts, interapplication communications and other neat stuff. 7.0 is a HUGE amount of code to debug.
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (04/21/91)
In article <91110.010457MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu writes: >Compare that to the bloated System 7 (8 disks, 4 MB RAM required, and it's >SLOWER than System 6??). I will GLADLY wait for something that works rather >than something bloated and inefficient rushed out the door. ...If you can >call two years "rushing," that is. System 7.0 doesn't require 4 meg of RAM. Also, the beta testing 7.0 is going through isn't anything to sneeze at. Efficiency is a relative thing. I'll be happy to have peer-to-peer file service on my network. Be ABLE to do something slowly is at times better than NOT being able to do something very quickly.
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (04/21/91)
In article <10904@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Corey) writes: >I can't say what Apple percentage standard is, but I still haven't found an >application that ran under 6.0.7 that doesn't run under my 7.0 beta copy. Have you turned 32 bit mode on? Lots of stuff isn't 32 bit clean. >That's 100%, not 65%. If Apple really was shooting for 65% they should have >released it last year. They probably would have still broke 70% ;-). Apple >has definately done 7.0 right. There is so much functionality added, I can't Apple doesn't have to have 90% compatibility because on May 13 you'll see hundreds of upgrades for 7.0-ready applications. If I were Commodore, I'd be more careful with my developers too. Apple can afford to make its developers "come along", except for Microsoft. >imagine someone not upgrading. It is truly the best OS I've seen (for a >power user, or a casual user), that includes NeXT and Amiga 2.0 beta. I'll tell you one thing, I'll be running 7.0 for months before my users get it, and many home users don't need to upgrade their OS until they upgrade their apps. In fact, they shouldn't.
xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) (04/21/91)
In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) writes: >inter-application communication copy/paste isn't even standard for >(provides live links between docs all apps and no IAC, not even on >from any vendor's apps) the horizon. Inter-Process Communication has been available (though in a non- standardized fashion) on the Amiga since Day 1. With AmigaOS 2.0, Inter-Process Communication has been standardized with the advent of ARexx, an interpreted language that was ported to the Amiga directly from IBM mainframes. ARexx is VERY powerful, though with AmigaOS2.0 is is limited to 'power users'. I do wish Commodore would design some kind of icon- oriented ARexx script builder (somewhat like AmigaVision) that would allow novice users to make use of ARexx. My other beef with AmigaOS 2.0 is that ARexx was not really built into the OS, but merely included with it. I would like to see ARexx more heavily integrated into the OS, replacing the AmigaDOS script langauge. I do agree with your other comments, though. Even with outline fonts, AmigaOS will not have font technology that is even half as sophisticated as that of the MAC System 7.0. >sound manager standard 2:1 or 3:1 ??? >compression of digitized sound One thing that I wish Commodore had included with AmigaOS2.0 is a preferences utility to change the system SetBeep() to a digitized sound, a la MAC System 6.0. Does anyone know if preferences on AmigaOS2.0 has been modified to allow third-party preferences utilities to be added, like on the MAC? If so, this is one utility that I would definately like to see someone write. ---------------------------------------------------------- / Marc Barrett -MB- | BITNET: XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET / / ISU COM S Student | Internet: XGR39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU / ----------------------------------------------------------
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/21/91)
xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > In article <91110.010457MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>, MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu writes: > >In article <wb2G61xt1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) > >says: > >> > >>In article <ZB0N11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> > >>judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > >> > >> I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It > >> suretook them long enough to release it? > >> > >>And how long has it taken Commdore to go from 1.3 to 2.0, which still > >>isn't available on any computer except the A3000? > > > >Oh, picky, picky. :) They took ^2 years because they were busy getting it > >RIGHT, that's why. And, looking at the result, they GOT it right. 2.0 is > >faster, looks way better, and vastly expands the Amiga's functionality. > >All this with only a 512K ROM chip and a single 3-1/2" floppy. And need > >I remind you that it STILL multitasks beautifully in one half megabyte > >of memory? > > > >Compare that to the bloated System 7 (8 disks, 4 MB RAM required, and it's > >SLOWER than System 6??). I will GLADLY wait for something that works rather > >than something bloated and inefficient rushed out the door. ...If you can > >call two years "rushing," that is. > > You pay dearly for the convenience of being able to use your O.S. > with 512K of RAM and a single floppy drive on the Amiga, too. Three of > the most important features of MC OS 7.0 are virtual memory, memory > protection, and sophisticated structured/outlined fonts. These features > are totally non-existant in Amiga OS 2.0. > > > > >Oh, yes. During that long wait for V 2.0, Commodore was ALSO busy getting > >every last bug out of the system. Nice of them, huh? > > > >/ Mark "Remixed for Common Household Appliances" Sachs - MBS110@psuvm.psu.ed > >| DISCLAIMER: It's NOT MY FAULT. Kei and Yuri || // > >| forced me to say it. || \X/ AMIGA > >\========= "Oh, I'm just a NO-OP in the instruction set of Life..." ======== > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > / Marc Barrett -MB- | BITNET: XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET / > / ISU COM S Student | Internet: XGR39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU / > ---------------------------------------------------------- And multi-tasking is non-existant in 7.0. Which is more imporatnt? rory
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/21/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) > > This is not all-inclusive but includes most of the new features. Anyone > more knowledgeable on Amiga OS 2.0 feel free to correct my amiga comments. > > Uh, some of us are more interested in how System 7.0 compares to the > NeXT OS. And could you leave out the ballon help? I found it to be > quite annoying. > > -Mike Which I'm sure has it's place in another newsgroup. Get a life. Read the title of this newsgroup. It has AMIGA in it. Does it say NeXT? Can you read? rory
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/21/91)
In article <ZB0N11w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? You've been spoiled by the Amiga, where new releases of the O/S have been enhancements and bug-fixes. Other PC operating systems use new releases to kludge in stuff that's been on the Amiga from the beginning, and basically consiste of a new O/S plus life-support stuff to emulate the old O/S so people don't have to buy new software to go with the new O/S. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/21/91)
A few you missed... things in 7.0 that we've been doing for years. In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Corey) writes: > System 7.0 Amiga > inter-application communication copy/paste isn't even standard for > (provides live links between docs all apps and no IAC, not even on > from any vendor's apps) the horizon. In fact, the AMiga has had dynamic inter-application communication for years, using AREXX. The hooks (message passing) have been there from the start: try starting up Soundscape Pro Midi Studio and Deluxe Music together some time. > file sharing at OS level standard file sharing is possible cheaply > allows you to publish files to through a pd program as well as > any user that you want to access it commericial apps, but it is not > standard and does not come with the OS. > And no amiga networking is as simple > as Personal Appleshare in 7.0. A standard file format, IFF, has existed from the beginning. > OS level file location facilities PD and commercial file searching > utilities available I'm not sure what you mean by this, but "search file" has been part of the operating system from the beginning. > AppleScript and event manager sends no protocal for doing this exists > messages between apps to perform or will exist in 2.0 > a variety of functions This is ludicrous. AREXX has existed for years. > sound manager standard 2:1 or 3:1 ??? > compression of digitized sound Fibbonacci delta encoding is the standard compression format, and gives 2:1 with fast playback. > communication toolbox managages vendors must write their own code > serial, appletalk, ethernet to manage these Not at all. The file system is the manager. > This is not all-inclusive but includes most of the new features. Anyone > more knowledgeable on Amiga OS 2.0 feel free to correct my amiga comments. How about someone more knowledgable of AmigaOS 1.0, let alone 1.2 or 1.3? -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
martin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Martin Hunt) (04/22/91)
In article <bpcG2?cu1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >... >Apple can say the same thing, and they probably will on May 13. When >is Commodore's official release date for 2.0 for the rest of the Amiga >family? DOS 5.0 is set for a June release. Even stupid Microsoft is >on schedule. > >-Mike It's easy to be on schedule when all you have to do is improve MSDOS. I could do that with a random number generator :^) Martin Hunt Commodore-Amiga martin@cbmvax.commodore.com "Windows 3.0 is hot because it's really fun. It has brought some excitement back into the PC industry" - Microsoft I wonder who took the excitement out in the first place?
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (04/22/91)
In article <1991Apr20.144115.25537@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu writes: > > You pay dearly for the convenience of being able to use your O.S. >with 512K of RAM and a single floppy drive on the Amiga, too. Three of >the most important features of MC OS 7.0 are virtual memory, memory >protection, and sophisticated structured/outlined fonts. These features >are totally non-existant in Amiga OS 2.0. But can you get these features on a Mac with one floppy drive without HD? I fear NOT. But when equipped with a HD, also Amiga can provide at least two of these features: the outline Compugraphic fonts are 'round the corner (I already could test them, really nice), and VM is available as a HD controller utility for the Evolution. To compare the other way: Can a Mac multitask with OS 7.0 on a one-floppy/ no-HD system and/or within only 512 KB RAM??? -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (04/22/91)
In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Corey) writes: > > Mac System 7.0 Amiga > >outline font technology standard bitmaps or application dependent >True type or postscript supported outline fonts >by every application. Compugraphic fonts round the corner as part of the OS >inter-application communication copy/paste isn't even standard for >(provides live links between docs all apps and no IAC, not even on >from any vendor's apps) the horizon. Feasible by AREXX *TODAY*, AREXX being part of 2.0 package. Perhaps not as elegant, though. >file sharing at OS level standard file sharing is possible cheaply >allows you to publish files to through a pd program as well as >any user that you want to access it commericial apps, but it is not > standard and does not come with the OS. > And no amiga networking is as simple > as Personal Appleshare in 7.0. As far as I understand the topic, file sharing was an Amiga feature from day one. OS support for record locking perhaps coming. >OS level file location facilities PD and commercial file searching > utilities available The Shell command SEARCH does this. >AppleScript and event manager sends no protocal for doing this exists >messages between apps to perform or will exist in 2.0 >a variety of functions You have the powerfull message system of Amiga exec on low level plus high level version in AREXX. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
kutem@rtsg.mot.com (Jon Kutemeier) (04/22/91)
> <10904@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <lm1Gzthu1@cs.psu.edu> > <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <.=2Gtyju1@cs.psu.edu> Distribution: >>>>> Regarding Re: NeXT/Amiga Flamage: Get a life.; melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) adds: Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) writes: This is not all-inclusive but includes most of the new features. Anyone more knowledgeable on Amiga OS 2.0 feel free to correct my amiga comments. Michael> Uh, some of us are more interested in how System 7.0 compares to the Michael> NeXT OS. And could you leave out the ballon help? I found it to be Michael> quite annoying. Michael> -Mike Then take it to the Apple group or the Next group. If Amiga readers want to read it, then they'll read it in the other groups!! -- Jon Kutemeier_________________________________________________________________ ----------------Software Engineer /XX\/XX\ phone:(708) 632-5433 Motorola Inc. Radio Telephone Systems Group ///\XX/\\\ fax: (708) 632-4430 1501 W. Shure Drive, Arlington Heights, IL 60004 uucp: !uunet!motcid!kutemj
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/22/91)
In article <.=2Gtyju1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <10906@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) writes: > > This is not all-inclusive but includes most of the new features. Anyone > more knowledgeable on Amiga OS 2.0 feel free to correct my amiga comments. > >Uh, some of us are more interested in how System 7.0 compares to the >NeXT OS. And could you leave out the ballon help? I found it to be >quite annoying. > >-Mike Uh, some of us are in the WRONG newsgroup if we want to compare the Macintrash to a Next. Remember, this is comp.sys.amiga.advocacy. Go create your own ^^^^^ group if you want to exclude the Amiga... Sheesh... %*&#$@ NeXTite... ;-) Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/22/91)
In article <1991Apr21.084145.13978@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu writes: > ARexx is VERY powerful, though with AmigaOS2.0 is is limited to >'power users'. I do wish Commodore would design some kind of icon- >oriented ARexx script builder (somewhat like AmigaVision) that would >allow novice users to make use of ARexx. My other beef with AmigaOS >2.0 is that ARexx was not really built into the OS, but merely included >with it. I would like to see ARexx more heavily integrated into >the OS, replacing the AmigaDOS script langauge. Well, ARexx _is_ really integrated into the OS. Remember all you have to do is provide a disk-based shared library to make OS extensions. You consider text-to-speech part of the OS, don't you? The translator.library is on disk until it gets loaded for use. Most likely the RexxMaster will be run in your startup-sequence, so the only difference to the user between the AmigaDOS shell script language and ARexx language is typing 'rx' instead of 'execute.' Replacing the AmigaDOS script language is a no-no, anyway. First of all, you have the issue of downward compatibility. Also, there are things that may be more easily done in a simple shell script. Imagine having to type 'address command' for every line (a bit of an exaggeration) in a script. >Even with outline >fonts, AmigaOS will not have font technology that is even half as >sophisticated as that of the MAC System 7.0. Commenting about something you have absolutely no knowledge about again, eh Marc? How can you make predictions about the Amiga OS's future? > One thing that I wish Commodore had included with AmigaOS2.0 is >a preferences utility to change the system SetBeep() to a digitized >sound, a la MAC System 6.0. Does anyone know if preferences on >AmigaOS2.0 has been modified to allow third-party preferences utilities >to be added, like on the MAC? If so, this is one utility that I >would definately like to see someone write. There's nothing really to it. Someone could write an intuitionized program with maybe a file requester to pick out the sample. They could conform to the standards for the Preferences utilities and stuff the program in the same directory. There isn't just one preferences program anymore, you know. There's a drawer with all of the programs in it. It's a whole new beast for 2.0... Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/23/91)
In article <FyiR13w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes:
Which I'm sure has it's place in another newsgroup. Get a life. Read the
title of this newsgroup. It has AMIGA in it. Does it say NeXT? Can you
read?
rory
It is also advocacy. Quite a pretentious name. You guys have a dozen
other newgroups in which to get some work done. Here you must defend
the Amiga. Was this newgroup formed before the latest Amiga killing
NeXT was released? I bet that you thought you were going to beat up
on Atari TT owners.
-Mikerjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (04/23/91)
In article <?*9Gxf4w1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <FyiR13w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > > Which I'm sure has it's place in another newsgroup. Get a life. Read the > title of this newsgroup. It has AMIGA in it. Does it say NeXT? Can you > read? > > rory > >It is also advocacy. Quite a pretentious name. You guys have a dozen >other newgroups in which to get some work done. Here you must defend >the Amiga. Was this newgroup formed before the latest Amiga killing ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Haha, funny, but a $3200 mono machine can hardly kill a $500 color machine. >NeXT was released? I bet that you thought you were going to beat up >on Atari TT owners. > >-Mike You don't understand what the originally posted meant. You asked for a comparison of NeXT vs Mac, but this group is for Amiga vs XX comparisions specifically, not XX vs YY. For that you would neeed comp.sys.next.advocacy, or alt.religion.computers. -- / INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu * // The opinions expressed here do not \ | INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net | \X/ in any way reflect the views of my self.| \ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023 * /
judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) (04/23/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <FyiR13w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithac > > Which I'm sure has it's place in another newsgroup. Get a life. Read the > title of this newsgroup. It has AMIGA in it. Does it say NeXT? Can you > read? > > rory > > It is also advocacy. Quite a pretentious name. You guys have a dozen > other newgroups in which to get some work done. Here you must defend > the Amiga. Was this newgroup formed before the latest Amiga killing > NeXT was released? I bet that you thought you were going to beat up > on Atari TT owners. > > -Mike > And just tell me where NeXT vs. System &.0 fits in inAmiga advocacy, Amiga OS 2.0 vs 7.0 vs Next, maybe... rory
blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) (04/23/91)
>Oh my God, I couldn't resist. Amiga users doing their HW before screaming >standard lines of propaganda? (This is going to be like stepping on ants) >Propaganda? You've got to be kidding. On this side of the fence (Amiga) >we face more propaganda from other computer users >(assuming themselves literate and 'informed') about how the Amiga is dying, >only a game machine, never compete, unsupported, lousy software....and >on and on. Try out this sometime, mention the Amiga in one of your >computer related discussions with someone else and watch the propaganda >flow. Like: "Yeah, I've heard about that machines, so-and-so says >[insert propaganda here]" Amiga owners must face the same things Mac owners faced before 1987. Like: It doesn't run 1-2-3, it isn't made by IBM, it's too small, it looks like a toy. Now you face: It doesn't run Pagemaker, Excel, or Word, it's a game machine, it's not made by Apple OR IBM, no 32-bit color, etc. Apple beat their arguements down in 1987-88 with Word 3.0, Pagemaker, the Laserwriter, and the Mac II/SE. They now enjoy the number one position in unit sales according to Friday's WSJ. Commodore needs to pull the same thing Apple did. The playing field is a little different today. In 1986 there was Apple vs. IBM and the clones. 1991 brings Apple, IBM, a lot more clones, NeXT, Atari;-), Sparclones. The mac was significantly different that anything else on the market. Although there are definate differences between platforms, you can accomplish basically the same things on most machines. If Commodore's goal is to become a force in the US computer industry, they need to pull a hell of a rabbit out of their hat.
rjc@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (04/23/91)
In article <11034@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Corey) writes: >>Oh my God, I couldn't resist. Amiga users doing their HW before screaming >>standard lines of propaganda? (This is going to be like stepping on ants) >>Propaganda? You've got to be kidding. On this side of the fence (Amiga) >>we face more propaganda from other computer users >>(assuming themselves literate and 'informed') about how the Amiga is dying, >>only a game machine, never compete, unsupported, lousy software....and >>on and on. Try out this sometime, mention the Amiga in one of your >>computer related discussions with someone else and watch the propaganda >>flow. Like: "Yeah, I've heard about that machines, so-and-so says >>[insert propaganda here]" > >Amiga owners must face the same things Mac owners faced before 1987. Like: >It doesn't run 1-2-3, it isn't made by IBM, it's too small, it looks like a toy. > >Now you face: It doesn't run Pagemaker, Excel, or Word, it's a game machine, >it's not made by Apple OR IBM, no 32-bit color, etc. Hmm, so Apple beat IBM by having Microsoft develop software for it? >Apple beat their arguements down in 1987-88 with Word 3.0, Pagemaker, the >Laserwriter, and the Mac II/SE. They now enjoy the number one position in >unit sales according to Friday's WSJ. > >Commodore needs to pull the same thing Apple did. The playing field is a >little different today. In 1986 there was Apple vs. IBM and the clones. >1991 brings Apple, IBM, a lot more clones, NeXT, Atari;-), Sparclones. The mac >was significantly different that anything else on the market. Although there >are definate differences between platforms, you can accomplish basically >the same things on most machines. If Commodore's goal is to become a force >in the US computer industry, they need to pull a hell of a rabbit out of their >hat. If rabbits are classified as "big-name flashy packages" I guess the Toaster is a rabbit. Word is a rabbit. And Excel is a rabbit. I feel that there are better word processors and spreadsheets than Word and Excel but I guess the name "Microsoft" is a household word in businessland. It's ironic. Microsoft is part of Apple's success and Apple is suing them. Since "Joe Average" is going to buy whatever he hears by word of mouth, or advertisements, the Amiga and Word Processors onit aren't going to get a fair look. If it takes "Word" to make Joe Average consider the Amiga, I say, port it. Obviously Microsoft developed Word in a portable manner, since they can quickly port back and forth between Mac and Windows (they probably developed an in house GUI independent set of routines to open windows, render, etc), so the port should be easy however Microsoft needs incentive for the port, and that costs $$$. I'd say, C= offering some money to MS, and perhaps a letter writing campaign from Amiga users might convince them to port it. One problem, is that "Word" ported to the Amiga probably won't take advantage of the Amiga's niceties like Arexx and Multitasking, not to mention IFF. As for Sparc and NeXT, I don't think the Amiga has to worry about them. They are in a different market, namely the >$3k Unix market. I suspect the majority of Mac systems are Pluses, Classics, etc just like the A500 is the number 1 Amiga model by volume. I don't know how much Word costs on the Mac, but it will have to be sold cheap on the Amiga as we are not used to paying rediculous prices for software. -- / INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu * // The opinions expressed here do not \ | INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net | \X/ in any way reflect the views of my self.| \ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023 * /
billc@cryo.UUCP (William J. Coldwell) (04/23/91)
In article <?*9Gxf4w1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <FyiR13w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > [stuff deleted, sorry rory] > >It is also advocacy. Quite a pretentious name. You guys have a dozen >other newgroups in which to get some work done. Here you must defend >the Amiga. Was this newgroup formed before the latest Amiga killing >NeXT was released? I bet that you thought you were going to beat up >on Atari TT owners. Nah, TT owners are hating life enough as it is, they don't need our help. I too, am impressed with the number of newsgroups that are supporting this machine - guess that says something -eh? "Amiga killing NeXT"? ;-) Kill my Amiga 2000 (please!): Have some numbers: 68040,53c710,68230,85230 (and that's just on the CPU CoProc board). Throw in AmigaDOS 2.0 just for fun (with the cache control functions patched for a certain CPU). I'm waiting for my PP&S Rembrandt board (32bit (24bit dual Framebuffer/capture w/ 8bit overlay) 34020/082) just to output my renderings on... though I could run XWindows just on the board while still using my Amiga to run a few programs just to keep it busy. Of course, you could probably do the same thing with enough money on your NeXT, but I'd prefer the Countach... ;-) Besides, whenever Commodore gives us U*ix for A2500's and 3rd party CPU boards, then we'll have just one more OS to toy with... >-Mike -- +------+ William J. Coldwell Amiga Attitude Adjuster Cryogenic Software /|3DPRO/| PLink: CRYO, BIX: wjcoldwell, UUCP:...tektronix!percy!cryo!billc +-|----+ | NAG-BBS: 503/656-7393, NES-BBX: 503/640-9337, Work: 503/254-8147 | +----|-+ // Sometimes you gotta be cool to be hot: I'm a 3-DPro Tracer. |/ 2.0 |/ \X/ Amiga Call 1-900-3Dis4me (so good you can't Imagine it). +------+ STD_DSCLMR "All opinions above are mine, and you can't have them."
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (04/23/91)
In article <1748@sjfc.UUCP> bpv9073@sjfc.UUCP (Brett VanSprewenburg) writes: >In article <6hdG18ik1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >Try out this sometime, mention the Amiga in one of your computer related >discussions with someone else and watch the propaganda flow. Like: "Yeah, >I've heard about that machines, so-and-so says [insert propaganda here]" And I suppose you think this is simply ignorance? Ha! Ha! Ha! It's the result of a long standing conspriacy, I tell you! You think IBM really thought their PC or the PC-DOS they had Microsoft write for them was any good, even back in '81? Of course not, it was simply a move at self preservation. IBM didn't want to be in the personal computer business at all, but realized that if the rate of growth of these machines during the 70's were maintained during the 80's, their mainframe markets would be in serious trouble. Realizing that it would be impossible to naturally restrain this market, IBM set out to build a new computer. Only, unlike other systems, this computer, which became the original PC, would be designed to cripple the personal computer market. It would be every so slightly better than the state of the art 8 bit systems out there at the time. It would be easily copied, but not easily improved. IBM made deals with Intel to keep the technology crippled at least through the mid 80's. And then they set out to convince the market as a whole that only an IBM PC, or the eventual clones, were worth of business computing. Any other system would be written off as a game machine, or a computer for hippies, or a hacker's machine, etc. Now does it all make sense? -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (04/23/91)
In article <1991Apr23.010819.1970@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: > Hmm, so Apple beat IBM by having Microsoft develop software for it? Arguably, it was the PageMaker/LaserWriter combo that made the Mac a hit. > One problem, is that "Word" ported to the Amiga probably won't take >advantage of the Amiga's niceties like Arexx and Multitasking, not to >mention IFF. Well, given that Microsoft has announced that it will do its own extensions to the Mac OS, I don't know if you should be so hot to have it. You might end up with the tail wagging the dog.
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (04/24/91)
In article <?*9Gxf4w1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >It is also advocacy. Quite a pretentious name. You guys have a dozen >other newgroups in which to get some work done. Here you must defend >the Amiga. Was this newgroup formed before the latest Amiga killing >NeXT was released? I bet that you thought you were going to beat up >on Atari TT owners. Come on, you moron. This group was created for hacking out anything Amiga-related. That includes comparing it to other machines, and it can (and has) been done intelligently. However you, in your continual NeXTite rantings, have just been fanning flames. (Thank God for NeXT owners! They took away the Amiga owners' reputation of insanely die-hard defenders of their computer. Ask around if you don't believe me....) The charter of this group doesn't say "defend the Amiga." This group is for real discussion of Amiga-related topics. People express their opinions here and others present arguments or support. This groups is NOT just a catchall for computer vs. computer flame wars. Take yours to a NeXT or Mac newsgroup if you want to compare those two OSs. Should we suffer for having the wisdom to create a group for Amiga advocacy? No. BTW, we made peace with the Atari owners a good while back. You see, we are reasonable and so are they. Unfortunately, as you have exhibited, not all net users are reasonable. -- Greg Harp |"I was there to match my intellect on national TV, | against a plumber and an architect, both with a PhD." greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu| -- "I Lost on Jeopardy," Weird Al Yankovic
jdutka@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Dutka) (04/24/91)
In article <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >IBM PC, or the eventual clones, were worth of business computing. Any other >system would be written off as a game machine, or a computer for hippies, or >a hacker's machine, etc. >Now does it all make sense? Much clearer now :) So how can the 80486 be explained? I can't wait (grin) -- | husc6!m2c!wpi!jdutka | "Hey, baby - wanna do some HEAT TRANSFER? | | jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu | Heh, heh, heh!" | | John Dutka, Jr. | -Mechanical Engineers On The Prowl |
ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) (04/24/91)
In article <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >And I suppose you think this is simply ignorance? Ha! Ha! Ha! It's the result >of a long standing conspriacy, I tell you! > [ remainder of paranoid delusion deleted ] After reading news about the 486SX and 487SX, I'm more inclined to go along with this way of thinking. Get this: The 486SX contains the original 486 silicon, but limited to 20MHz and with the floating point disabled. And for this they charge less for it. And the 487SX is even better. See, the 486SX is really a 486, but the 486 has no co-processor interface, so a 487SX co-processor wouldn't work. So instead, the 487SX is really a *fully* *functional* 486, with some magic done to the pins so that when you plug it into your 487SX socket, it *disables* the 486SX and takes over all the CPU chores. The cost of deciding you need a math chip is *really* steep: the 20MHz 487SX is slated to list for $700. You should have bought a 25MHz 486 in the first place, bub. This sounds very much like Intel is conspiring to f**k both their customers and competitors (AMD) in one blow. To succeed, it depends upon the PC marketplace being stupid enough to buy into this. You know what? I think they just might be that stupid. After all, they bought the 386SX... -- First comes the logo: C H E C K P O I N T T E C H N O L O G I E S / / ckp@grebyn.com \\ / / Then, the disclaimer: All expressed opinions are, indeed, opinions. \ / o Now for the witty part: I'm pink, therefore, I'm spam! \/
nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) (04/24/91)
In article <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: > >And I suppose you think this is simply ignorance? Ha! Ha! Ha! It's the result >of a long standing conspriacy, I tell you! You think IBM really thought their > >-- >Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" ...kind of like when General Motors and one of the oil companies bought the electric rail system that ran around L.A. They bought it and then ran it out of buisiness so people in L.A. would be forced to buy cars. ...this kind of thing goes on all the time. Wouldn't be surprised a bit if what Dave says is the unadulterated truth. I ask this before... what is the status of the fiber optics cable system. Does anyone know? IBM may just be waiting it out ...it would be a boon for them and their mainframes. ...you know ...speed of digital info only limited by the hardware ...terminals and mainframes everywhere. NCW
s110a010@deneb (04/24/91)
In article <1991Apr23.201029.9844@wpi.WPI.EDU> jdutka@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Dutka) writes: >In article <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >>IBM PC, or the eventual clones, were worth of business computing. Any other >>system would be written off as a game machine, or a computer for hippies, or >>a hacker's machine, etc. >>Now does it all make sense? > >Much clearer now :) >So how can the 80486 be explained? I can't wait (grin) > >-- >| jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu | Heh, heh, heh!" | >| John Dutka, Jr. | -Mechanical Engineers On The Prowl | Do you know anything about the ORIGINAL 8086 architecture? It's a bunch of kludges so Intel could get peak performance out of the chip since at the time it was made, the number of transistors that could be put on the little piece of silicon was rather small (relatively.) While the 80486 is a very nice chip indeed, it still needs to be binary code compatible with the 8086 and all of its wierdness. That's how the 80486 can be explained ;-) The 68000 family (released about a year later) is a more orthogonal architecture, so expanding it has been less painful than the Intel 80X86 series. Now put the 80486 in protected mode and it's REALLY nice, but unfortunately DOS still operates in real mode. So does it all make sense? Pat... "I'm on the NightTrain... - G'n'R"
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (04/24/91)
In article <47713@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: > >BTW, we made peace with the Atari owners a good while back. You see, we >are reasonable and so are they. Obviously this peace is managed by simply ignoring each other. Just for my interest I'm reading also some Fidonet areas with Atari stuff. And guess, they have *exactly* the same comparisons of their machine (TT) with the NeXT and they have the same NeXTites that advocate only regarding their NeXT. And during nearly all these comparisons, our A3000 simply is not mentioned at all, same as with the TT here. I only wanted to tell an observation. This is *not* intended to encourage TT advocates to get involved in here, no, really not! :-) -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
jleonard@pica.army.mil (04/24/91)
> Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" > {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy > "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M. Amiga, it's not just a computer, it's a religion. Don't lose yours :) ___________________________________________________________________________ |Jeff Leonard Usenet: jleonard@pica.army.mil | | My strength is as the strength of ten because my code is pure. | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (04/24/91)
In article <1991Apr23.201029.9844@wpi.WPI.EDU> jdutka@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Dutka) writes: >In article <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >>IBM PC, or the eventual clones, were worth of business computing. Any other >>system would be written off as a game machine, or a computer for hippies, or >>a hacker's machine, etc. >Much clearer now :) >So how can the 80486 be explained? I can't wait (grin) Well, realize of course that's Intel, not IBM. Intel has been riding high on the hog all this time, since via IBM's powers, they could turn out total drek for the longest time and still charge many times the actual cost of such toys, reaping obscene profits. However, both IBM and Intel started losing control of the personal computer market in the later 80's. Even though the publicity campaign and the crippled PC and clones did wonders in holding back the personal computer market, it didn't stop it. And IBM failed in their attempt to build a crippled workstation. Well, actually, they succeeded in building a crippled workstation, the PC-RT, but failed to trick anyone into standardizing on it as they did the PC. So the heat from both personal systems and workstations was increasing. This didn't phase IBM all that much, but Intel saw the end of their joy ride looming big on the horizon. The first sign of this was the 80386 chip. Although they sold it for 10x its expected silicon value, they had to make it reasonable to compete with 680x0 machines, rather than extremely crippled as was the 80286. IBM delayed a long time in building a '386 machine, since that was too powerful for their plans, but the rest of the industry, not subject to IBM's adjenda, went ahead anyway. Intel, faced not only with competition from RISC machines at the top and 680x0s in the competing industry, got a taste of real competition within the PClone market itself, when AMD whipped out a '286 that went faster than theirs. At this point, Intel decided to totally bag the IBM adjenda, and grab up cash while the grabbing was good. Out of this came the crippled '386SX, to compete with AMD, and the '486, to compete with the other, faster CPUs. They crippled the '486 somewhat so that it would still run MS-DOS ok, but they figured it would still be awhile before everyone chucked MS-DOS, because they knew that the masses aren't all that clever. After all, how else would you explain Economy Cars. IBM didn't stop the personal computer revolution, anymore that one guy dragging his feet would stop a truck rolling downhill. But IBM had big feet, and they definitely slowed things down. Using disinformation techniques they borrowed from the Bavarian Illuminati, they continue to covertly discourage the use of non-IBM compatible systems. After all, it has not really been that long since they lost control of the Clone market. After all this time, their nearest competitor, Apple, is still trying to make the five million mark. You see major computer magazines occasionally mention a few too many non-Clones, only to mysteriously snap back to Clones-only coverage without so much as a word. These boys are big and powerful, and they don't take defeat lightly. >| John Dutka, Jr. | -Mechanical Engineers On The Prowl | -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.
farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren) (04/25/91)
blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Kevin) writes: >If Commodore's goal is to become a force in the US computer industry, >they need to pull a hell of a rabbit out of their hat. But that trick never works! -- Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.us
jdutka@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Dutka) (04/25/91)
In article <20915@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >crippled the '486 somewhat so that it would still run MS-DOS ok, but they >figured it would still be awhile before everyone chucked MS-DOS, because they >knew that the masses aren't all that clever. After all, how else would you >explain Economy Cars. Okay - that clears things up a bit. Economy cars? My Celica's about as much of an economy car as my 64C is a supercomputer... -- | husc6!m2c!wpi!jdutka | "Hey, baby - wanna do some HEAT TRANSFER? | | jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu | Heh, heh, heh!" | | John Dutka, Jr. | -Mechanical Engineers On The Prowl |
cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) (04/26/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: < < judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: < < Which I'm sure has it's place in another newsgroup. Get a life. Read the < title of this newsgroup. It has AMIGA in it. Does it say NeXT? Can you < read? < < It is also advocacy. Quite a pretentious name. You guys have a dozen < other newgroups in which to get some work done. Here you must defend < the Amiga. Was this newgroup formed before the latest Amiga killing < NeXT was released? I bet that you thought you were going to beat up < on Atari TT owners. Well, you really put your foot in your mouth this time. Assuming that you are intelligent enough to understand the usenet newsgroup hierarchy, you should be able to understand that, since the '.advocacy' in its name is preceded by 'amiga', the purpose of this newsgroup is Amiga-related advocacy. There is nothing pretentious about it. It merely serves as an invitation to anyone who wishes to discuss or flame the strengths and weaknesses of the Amiga, as compared to other, competing platforms. A discussion (or flame-fest) regarding the comparative strengths and weaknesses of the Next versus the Mac has no direct bearing on the Amiga, and is therefore inappropriate for this group. You should also realize that such snide, childish remarks as your closing sentences will serve to accomplish little more than to get your name added to a fairly large number of kill-files. This will not help you in your efforts to 'convert' the lowly Amiga heathens to the bliss of Next-ownership, since no one will see your diatribes. Let me emphasize that last part. When you are added to everyone's kill-file, no one will see your diatribes. Regards, Chris -- Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | o\ /o See cseaman@sequent.com <or> | || "Attack of the Killer Smiley"! ...!uunet!sequent!cseaman | \vvvvvv/ Coming Soon | \____/ to a newsgroup near you!
jcav@quads.uchicago.edu (john cavallino) (04/27/91)
In article <20915@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >IBM didn't stop the personal computer revolution, anymore that one guy dragging >his feet would stop a truck rolling downhill. But IBM had big feet, and they >definitely slowed things down. Using disinformation techniques they borrowed >from the Bavarian Illuminati, they continue to covertly discourage the use of >non-IBM compatible systems. After all, it has not really been that long since >they lost control of the Clone market. After all this time, their nearest >competitor, Apple, is still trying to make the five million mark. Data point: according to the Wall Street Journal, for the first time in a decade, Apple sold more PCs than IBM over an entire fiscal quarter. (1Q91) -- John Cavallino | EMail: jcav@midway.uchicago.edu University of Chicago Hospitals | USMail: 5841 S. Maryland Ave, Box 145 Office of Facilities Management | Chicago, IL 60637 B0 f++ w c+ g+ k s(+) e+ h- pv (qv) | Telephone: 312-702-6900
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/27/91)
In article <1991Apr23.201029.9844@wpi.WPI.EDU> jdutka@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Dutka) writes: > So how can the 80486 be explained? I can't wait (grin) Easy. After 1988 or so IBM was obviously no longer the power it used to be, and besides they were building these RISC things, so intel reneged on their agreement. Like they say, "That trick never works". > Much clearer now :) I hope so. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/27/91)
In article <1991Apr24.013250.2454@grebyn.com> ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) writes: > After reading news about the 486SX and 487SX, I'm more inclined to go > along with this way of thinking. This is a joke, right? > know what? I think they just might be that stupid. After all, they > bought the 386SX... Why not? In 286 mode the 386 is no better than the 386SX. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) (04/27/91)
In article <12764@aggie.ucdavis.edu> s110a010@deneb.ucdavis.edu () writes: >In article <1991Apr23.201029.9844@wpi.WPI.EDU> jdutka@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Dutka) writes: >>In article <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >>>IBM PC, or the eventual clones, were worth of business computing. Any other >>>system would be written off as a game machine, or a computer for hippies, or >>>a hacker's machine, etc. >>>Now does it all make sense? >> >>Much clearer now :) >>So how can the 80486 be explained? I can't wait (grin) >> >>-- >>| jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu | Heh, heh, heh!" | >>| John Dutka, Jr. | -Mechanical Engineers On The Prowl | >Do you know anything about the ORIGINAL 8086 architecture? It's a bunch >of kludges so Intel could get peak performance out of the chip since at >the time it was made, the number of transistors that could be put on the >little piece of silicon was rather small (relatively.) While the 80486 >is a very nice chip indeed, it still needs to be binary code compatible >with the 8086 and all of its wierdness. That's how the 80486 can be >explained ;-) The 68000 family (released about a year later) is a more >orthogonal architecture, so expanding it has been less painful than the >Intel 80X86 series. Now put the 80486 in protected mode and it's REALLY >nice, but unfortunately DOS still operates in real mode. So does it all >make sense? That's the horror of MSDOS and INTEL. No matter which Intel processor you use, you are always in 16 bit 8086 "real mode". The best thing for MSDOS would be 33 mhz 80286's. People who buy 32 bit processors to run MSDOS are only getting clock speed for their money. At on point, CompuAdd was selling a 20 mhz 80286 (made by Harris) AT. They put it up against their own 80386SX 20 mhz AT, and ran some benchmarks. The 80286 box was faster. If you want to run MSDOS get the fastest 80286 box you can find. 8086 "real mode" is not as efficient as a 8086 or 80286. That is the bottom line. I have 2 systems here at rmkhome. An AMIGA and a AT clone running Coherent. When I switched from MSDOS to COHERENT it was as if I had put a supercharger on my AT. MSDOS was optimized for the 8088 and 8086. I know that when I upgrade my AMIGA to a faster processor, I will get a good linear increase in the speed of AmigaDos. I would feel like a fool using a 80386 or 80486 to run MSDOS. What a waste of money. Rick Kelly rmk@rmkhome.UUCP frog!rmkhome!rmk rmk@frog.UUCP
sysop@tlvx.UUCP (SysOp) (04/28/91)
In article <?*9Gxf4w1@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <FyiR13w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > > Which I'm sure has it's place in another newsgroup. Get a life. Read the > title of this newsgroup. It has AMIGA in it. Does it say NeXT? Can you > read? > > rory > > It is also advocacy. Quite a pretentious name. You guys have a dozen > other newgroups in which to get some work done. Here you must defend > the Amiga. Right! Then why was this fellow replying to a post that objected to the comparison of an Amiga to a NeXT? The post rory replied to sounded to me like it was griping about the suggestion that Amiga be mentioned, that the thread was between Sparc and NeXT? Weird.... ;-) > Was this newgroup formed before the latest Amiga killing > NeXT was released? I bet that you thought you were going to beat up Oh yes, I'll run out and buy a NeXT right now! (not ;-) Seriously, I'm thinking about getting another machine (as I've posted before). I'd love to hear all suggestions. Please explain why the NeXT is going to "kill" the Amiga. BTW, my price range is around $2500, and I am not taking classes, so I can't have the educational pricing. I don't need UNIX, and I would like a color monitor. :-) (From what I recall, this amounts to around $7000 for the "low end" NeXT, which admittedly is in the same ballpark as what an Amiga 3000 UX would be, but it's hardly going to kill off the Amiga line, since most Amiga owners won't be buying a 3000 UX.) Sounds like NeXT is out of the picture, for me. Not even in the race. :-) If I were interested in a UNIX machine, I have more choices than Amiga or NeXT. What do y'all think about the Aviion or machines based on other architectures? Other than people who are interested in buying a UNIX machine, the NeXT will have no effect; calling the NeXT "Amiga killing" is ludicrous. If anything will kill the Amiga it's the onslaught of cheap clones (which could kill the NeXT, given that you can put UNIX on them). > on Atari TT owners. (If you really want to know why this group was created, you should have read some of the threads started by posts by M.B. :-) It would be incorrect to think that Amiga owners aren't willing to examine possibilities. I would think most have owned (or do own) other machines. Maybe some people just prefer an Amiga. :-) (Not a terrible thing to have happen. ;-) Then again, maybe you're afraid to challenge owners of other UNIX machines or perhaps the clones? ;-) (Hmm, that might be interesting, to cross- post the NeXT vs. Sparc discussions to the other appropriate newsgroups...) > > -Mike -- Gary Wolfe, SYSOP of the Temporal Vortex BBS // Amiga! ..uflorida!unf7!tlvx!sysop, unf7!tlvx!sysop@bikini.cis.ufl.edu \X/ Yeah!
hunter@phoenix.pub.uu.oz.au (James Gardiner [hunter]) (04/28/91)
In <1991Apr23.201029.9844@wpi.WPI.EDU> jdutka@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Dutka) writes: >In article <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >>IBM PC, or the eventual clones, were worth of business computing. Any other >>system would be written off as a game machine, or a computer for hippies, or >>a hacker's machine, etc. >>Now does it all make sense? >Much clearer now :) >So how can the 80486 be explained? I can't wait (grin) Its like this (I my own opinion), if you take a lolly from a baby and it does not cry, then you just do it again and again... The general PC user does not realy care, as long as its faster and runs the same software, they will sit there and buy it. Bring out a slightly faster chip next year and you can rip them off all over again. Basic IBM type tactics. ie I hear Intel plan to bring out a 586 686 786 etc over the next few years. All slightly faster then the privious. Keeps you buying the expensive monsters and also stops you from affording to experiment on other systems. (Let me note here, I work in the UNIX Software development indestry, the number of Gov departments that have a unix machine on site test is surprising.) James. -- James Gardiner [Hunter]. System Admin, Public Access UNIX Melbourne, Australia PubNet: phoenix!hunter | (voice)+613-532-8030 (data)+613-523-9865&+613-532-8029 Internet: hunter@phoenix.pub.uu.oz.au | PO BOX 54 Chadstone Centre UUCP:..!uunet!munnari!labtam!eyrie!phoenix!hunter | Melbourne Australia 3148
jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Shekhel) (04/28/91)
In article <12764@aggie.ucdavis.edu> s110a010@deneb.ucdavis.edu () writes: > >Now put the 80486 in protected mode and it's REALLY >nice, but unfortunately DOS still operates in real mode. So does it all >make sense? > Well, DOS also runs in Virtual 86 mode. This is a special case of protected mode in which the running program is fooled to think it's running in real mode, while the OS can do all sorts of tricky memory mapping and paging/multi- tasking underneath. There are several (7?) special debug registers which allow the OS to trap on any kind of access to any memory location or range of memory locations. This is how Windows is able to put DOS processes into windows on the screen -- it traps on direct writes to the video buffer and redirects the output into a window. I think the whole design of the [34]86 is technically ingenious, although I do agree that the instruction set could be better. "What?! The name of the program counter is ECS:EIP?!" -- +-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+ | JERRY J. SHEKHEL | POLYGEN CORPORATION | When I was young, I had to walk | | Drummers do it... | Waltham, MA USA | to school and back every day -- | | ... In rhythm! | (617) 890-2175 | 20 miles, uphill both ways. | +-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+ | ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry | | jerry@polygen.com | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) (04/29/91)
sysop@tlvx.UUCP (SysOp) writes: >thinking about getting another machine (as I've posted before). >.... BTW, my price range is around $2500, and I am not taking >classes, so I can't have the educational pricing. I don't need UNIX, You should be able to use Commodore's new Power Up Program to pick up an A3000 16/50 or 25/50 for under $2500 easily. You do not have to be a student, and you have until June 30. >> -Mike -- Dan Griffin griffin@frith.egr.msu.edu
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (05/01/91)
In article <1991Apr26.202908.13776@midway.uchicago.edu> jcav@quads.uchicago.edu (john cavallino) writes: >>After all this time, their nearest competitor, Apple, is still trying to make >>the five million mark. >Data point: according to the Wall Street Journal, for the first time in a >decade, Apple sold more PCs than IBM over an entire fiscal quarter. (1Q91) Not surprising, really. The PC Clone market is real tough these days, and companies are becoming educated in their purchasing habits. Even if they need a PC Compatible, why buy it from IBM. Anyway, we had something posted on the wall around here that said IBM lost some 1 billion+, they can't be doing too well all around to lose that kind of green. Apple competes with the PC Clones, but by offering something different, not just the same old thing, only faster-cheaper. >John Cavallino | EMail: jcav@midway.uchicago.edu -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.
dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) (05/01/91)
I noticed your post about buying a new computer under $2500, but that you
do not have a student discount. Commodore has a new upgrade policy until
June 30th, for $1150 - $1500 off any Amiga 3000, which drops the 16 mhz to
around $1700, and the 25mhz/50 to around $2000.
All you have to do is prove that you own a commodore product. It is just
as good to go out and buya C64 new just to get the full Amiga discount! :)
David
--
David Tiberio SUNY Stony Brook 2-3481 AMIGA DDD-MEN Tomas Arce
Any students from SUNY Oswego? Please let me know! :)
Un ragazzo di Casalbordino, Italia.amiga@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Boing) (05/02/91)
In article <1991May1.164244.3133@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@eeserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes: > < I noticed your post about buying a new computer under $2500, but that you <do not have a student discount. Commodore has a new upgrade policy until <June 30th, for $1150 - $1500 off any Amiga 3000, which drops the 16 mhz to <around $1700, and the 25mhz/50 to around $2000. < < All you have to do is prove that you own a commodore product. It is just <as good to go out and buya C64 new just to get the full Amiga discount! :) < <David actually the discounts on the Power Up program put the A3000-16/50 at ~$1850 and the A3000-25/50 at ~$2250. I also noticed in an earlier posting that you claimed just about *any* commodore product can be used in the trade up offer. according to the brochure, at least, you can use a VIC 20, C64, C128, or any of the amiga models, but it doesn't say anything about the PET, PC's or calculators... it should also be noted that this is program is probably to the USA. -baron -- // uhccux amiga archive | amiga@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu | amiga@uhccux.bitnet \X/ "just another peon" | baron@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu | baron@uhccux.bitnet
torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) (05/02/91)
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >need a PC Compatible, why buy it from IBM. Anyway, we had something posted >on the wall around here that said IBM lost some 1 billion+, they can't be >doing too well all around to lose that kind of green. I think this was a mistake in the original news reports, which was later retracted. IBM didn't go into the red this last quarter. Their profits may have dropped a huge amount ($1 billion), but they were still in the black if I recall correctly. Sidenote: You realise how big IBM really is, when their profits for one quarter are the same as a company like Apple's revenues. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu "Dear Fascist Bully Boy, Give me some money, or else. Neil. P.S. May the seed of your loins be fruitful in the womb of your woman..."
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (05/02/91)
In article <1991May1.205028.26336@neon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes:
Sidenote: You realise how big IBM really is, when their profits for
one quarter are the same as a company like Apple's revenues.
John Sculley was the second highest paid CEO in America last year.
And John Ackers wasn't first.
-Mikemmoore@ux.acs.umn.edu (Malcolm Diallo Moore) (05/16/91)
In article <yb8Gisp_1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >John Sculley was the second highest paid CEO in America last year. > >And John Ackers wasn't first. > >-Mike Who was? Malcolm "The Capital MD" Moore ----------Amiga: The One and Only. All the Rest Can Get the Bozack.----------- "I ain't never got gaffled like that, I used to do the gaffilin'-- McDonald's was my spot." "Man, what you used to do??" "Jack them motherfuckers for them Nissan Trucks. Right in the drive thru."
reeses@milton.u.washington.edu (Feltch Master) (05/19/91)
In article <3935@ux.acs.umn.edu> mmoore@ux.acs.umn.edu (Malcolm Diallo Moore) writes: >In article <yb8Gisp_1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >>John Sculley was the second highest paid CEO in America last year. >>And John Ackers wasn't first. >>-Mike >Who was? >Malcolm "The Capital MD" Moore I believe it is Bill Gates...the man recently bought rights to 10 000 paintings in the Seattle Art Museum, to be displayed on a high definition tv in his $5 million house...changed at the touch of a remote control... -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- reeses@milton.u.washington.edu University of Washington, Seattle "Reality is a cop-out for people who can't handle drugs"
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (05/19/91)
In article <1991May18.175528.19441@milton.u.washington.edu> reeses@milton.u.washington.edu (Feltch Master) writes: >>John Sculley was the second highest paid CEO in America last year. >>And John Ackers wasn't first. >>-Mike >Who was? >Malcolm "The Capital MD" Moore I believe it is Bill Gates...the man recently bought rights to 10 000 paintings in the Seattle Art Museum, to be displayed on a high definition tv in his $5 million house...changed at the touch of a remote control... It wasn't Bill, I would have remembered his name. -Mike