rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) (05/06/91)
Here are the top ten (geez, short list for such a wide-open topic) computers
FAR BETTER than the Amiga:
10. Data General NOVA series. Much cheaper, and the core memory is non-volatile
9. IBM PC.
It's heavier, so it makes a MUCH better doorstop. And besides, there's so
many clones available, you wouldn't OFFEND anyone by using it as such.
8. PDP-11 series.
Much more scientific software available. More easily portable, too. I used
to work for a company that had a whole stockroom full of PDP-11/23's
permanently mounted fast to hand-trucks, so you could quickly wheel
them around whenever you needed one.
7. Gimix Micro-20.
No one's ever heard of it, so it's not likely that it will EVER become
the subject of a silly flame war. (oops, so much for that!)
6. HP 48sx calculator.
More portable, comes with full Kermit protocol and infrared data
interface. Plays Tetris, too!
5. Atari 400
Membrane keyboard is far less susceptible to water damage. Plays great
games, too!
4. ENIAC
Uses DECIMAL internal respresentation. Far superior to the stupid binary
number scheme used by the Amiga. Also doubles as a space heater.
3. Motorola 68HC11 Microcontroller
Fun to hack assembly language on; used in the Corvette
2. Hewlett-Packard's latest RISC box
70 MIPS superscalar RISC performance for under 20,000 dollars. Anybody
who'd fork out $2,000 for an A3000 surely could spend the little extra
to get a 12 times boost in performance.
1. Thinking Machines' Connection Machine II
Hey, by the same token as #2, why not fork out the extra dough and go
all the way? Heck, for the little extra cash, the 26 gigaflops is
worth it! And all the scientific application software you'd be able
to get your hands on... Think about it! ALL the kids on your block
would be BEGGING to use your computer. Even the kids with wimpy Amigas.
(BTW - I understand the latest version of Blazemonger only runs on this
hardware platform, so you'd better rush out and buy one soon)
All in fun....
Russell Hoffman
Roomate of an Amigoid Fanatic From Hell Who Is Glued To His Amiga As I SpeakLee Sailer <UH2@psuvm.psu.edu> (05/06/91)
WHOA!!! You forgot the Ohio Scientific machine (I forget the precise
model number) that came with an 8080, a 6502, and a 6800 all on board,
sharing access to the bus so that you could run programs for any of
those three stalwart chips of yore. Now *that* was a computer...
leedltaylor@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dan Taylor) (05/07/91)
In <8c9=MB600YU6QQ41tK@andrew.cmu.edu> rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: >8. PDP-11 series. > Much more scientific software available. More easily portable, too. We could put a J-11 in the co-processor slot ;^). Wouldn't it be FUN to run RSX, or RSTS? Hey, how 'bout Version 7? >7. Gimix Micro-20. > No one's ever heard of it, so it's not likely that it will EVER become > the subject of a silly flame war. (oops, so much for that!) It really is a nice little box. Real-time OS, etc. Needs a graphics accelerator, though. Wonder if I could hack my old A1000 chip set in? ;^) There are LOTS of computers out there that are better than the Amiga for some use, or other. VAXen make TOTALLY excellent room heaters, for instance. The smaller ones, like 11-730s are usable as doorstops, too. The only sad part is, sometime after 2000, the Amiga will be on someone's funlist of computer uses. I'll probably still be running my A2500, though. Dan Taylor /* My opinions, not NCR's. */
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (05/07/91)
In article <8c9=MB600YU6QQ41tK@andrew.cmu.edu> rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: >Here are the top ten (geez, short list for such a wide-open topic) computers >FAR BETTER than the Amiga: You forgot the Timex Sinclair! The all time BEST computer for use as a door stop. Its case is perfectly angled for stopping doors, the front end of the machine fits under even the lowest of doors, and it's rarely going to be stolen. No Amiga model has even come close. -- 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.
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) (05/09/91)
>> Lee Sailer mentions the Ohio Scientific 3 in 1 machine
Wasn't that called the Dimension 68000, and didn't it run MS-DOS, CP/M,
and Apple software. Hmmm seems to me it did have a 68000 chip though.
Maybe it was an 8088, 6502 and 68000.
Does anyone remember?
-Roger
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun
ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil
INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.competer@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (05/09/91)
In article <930@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM> dltaylor@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dan Taylor) writes: > In <8c9=MB600YU6QQ41tK@andrew.cmu.edu> rh2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Russell E. Hoffman, II) writes: > >8. PDP-11 series. > > Much more scientific software available. More easily portable, too. > We could put a J-11 in the co-processor slot ;^). Wouldn't it be FUN to > run RSX, or RSTS? Hey, how 'bout Version 7? I vote RSX-11S, with the AmigaOS as the loader and console processor. The PDP-11 is the only CPU I would consider doing real assembly language on. Well, that or a VAX. DEC CPUs might be hard to pipeline but boy were they fun to program. WT$QIO IO.RPR,#ALUN,,,<BUF,BUFLEN,> -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) (05/09/91)
>> Lee Sailer mentions the Ohio Scientific 3 in 1 machine > > Wasn't that called the Dimension 68000, and didn't it run MS-DOS, CP/M, > and Apple software. Hmmm seems to me it did have a 68000 chip though. > Maybe it was an 8088, 6502 and 68000. Does anyone remember? There was a Dimension 68000 (a friend of mine bought one). I can't recall if it did software emulation only, or used hardware cards to emulate the Apple and CP/M machines. Drat, I _just_ threw away a huge article on it!! Had been saving the info for years in case someone like you asked... and had finally decided no one remembered the thing at all. It figures <g>. The Dimension was a cool idea, but unfortunately was fairly unstable, expensive, and badly marketed... and passed out of sight rather quickly. The Ohio Scientific machine tho, was the C3 series. It had a 6502, Z80, and 6800. Came standard in 1981 with 48K RAM, dual 8" floppies, and the ones I saw were always rackmounted. It was supposed to support up to 8 users at a time. A company local to me used to sell/program them. Prices ran from about $7,000-14,000. Top models had a 23Meg hard disk. best - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR/AA) (05/10/91)
As quoted from <91126.164928UH2@psuvm.psu.edu> by Lee Sailer <UH2@psuvm.psu.edu>: +--------------- | WHOA!!! You forgot the Ohio Scientific machine (I forget the precise | model number) that came with an 8080, a 6502, and a 6800 all on board, | sharing access to the bus so that you could run programs for any of | those three stalwart chips of yore. Now *that* was a computer... +--------------- Wasn't that the C8D? In any case, why not mention the SuperPET? ++Brandon -- Me: Brandon S. Allbery Ham: KB8JRR/AA 10m,6m,2m,220,440,1.2 Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG (restricted HF at present) Delphi: ALLBERY AMPR: kb8jrr.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88] uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery KB8JRR @ WA8BXN.OH
cg@ami-cg.UUCP (Chris Gray) (05/10/91)
In article <1991May8.233606.14096@crash.cts.com> uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzu > >Wasn't that called the Dimension 68000, and didn't it run MS-DOS, CP/M, >and Apple software. Hmmm seems to me it did have a 68000 chip though. >Maybe it was an 8088, 6502 and 68000. >Does anyone remember? I never actually used one, but I talked to a guy (turned out to be the president of the company, I believe) at an Atlanta Comdex. It had a 68000, a 6502 and a Z80. I was curious as to how they did all of the disk I/O stuff (it supposedly could run stuff like copy-protected Apple games). He said that the raw disk lines (read/write, motor on, etc.) are present on the bus, so that the Apple card had a real Apple disk controller on it, etc. Too bad it didn't go anywhere - good use could have been made of the 68000. I seem to recall it was quite expensive, however. -- Chris Gray alberta!ami-cg!cg or cg%ami-cg@scapa.cs.UAlberta.CA