martens@CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (Jeff Martens) (02/05/91)
Rick, I'd lean towards the Amiga, though at least partially due to ignorance of the Atari line. Anyhow, here's my reasons: 1) The A500 seems at least comparable to the old 1040ST, plus it multitasks. Multitasking, despite Apple's claims to the contrary, is quite useful. 2) There are high end Amigas, allowing a migration path. I don't know of anything bigger than the 1040 on the Atari side, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. 3) The installed base of Amigas is larger. The Atari seems to be fading, at least in the US. I never see adds for them anymore, and don't know anyone who has one. 4) I've got a 4.5 year old Amiga 1000 which I've been quite happy with. It's been a reliable and very usable machine. One thing I do like about the Atari ST is the monochrome display. I saw it in a dealer once, about 4.5 years ago, and it was quite sharp. The color display on the A500 and A1000 are somewhat lacking for text applications, but they are adequate. I'm following up in the slightly more appropriate group comp.sys.amiga.advocacy in case you're interested in following this thread further. -- -- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu) "We have to shoot and kill and destroy. We represent everything that's good in the world." -- Max Smart
cr1@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Anubis) (02/07/91)
In article <1991Feb6.205829.2142@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> carter@cat27.cs.wisc.edu (Gregory Carter) writes: >Notice the third word in the paragraph...OPINION. Obviously this man >never EVER owned an ST. I would contend, that after the equavalent ad ons >such as a color board/graphics card, in Europe which there are many, >the ST would look just as nice as an AMIGA machine. First of all, the add ons you are talking about are hard to impossible to get in the US. Second of all, the add ons that you are talking about are either specialty items for people who want to work in graphics (and thus have very limited support) or are not as great as you are making them out to be. I have an Atari ST with a JRI 4096 color board. Big deal, I have 4096 color pallette. I can't display all of them at once like I can on my Amiga 3000. >As for sales, thats funny, a German friend on my floor says thats all there >are in Germany is Atari's with a few Amiga's sprinkled here and there??? > Amiga is doing quite well overseas. Atari is doing well from what I hear, but I've also heard that they are failing in support and are being sold mostly as game machines. Atari in the US has almost no support at all. >Atari has very healthy markets abroad and just like commodore, Atari has >yet to take advantage of the USA market. > Atari take advantage of the US market?! HAHAHAHAHA! Don't be so absurd! You know full well that it will never happen. Atari has lost their chance. Software companies are stopping their support, dealers are switching computers or going out of business...How many Atari owners live near an Atari dealer? >If you want to do word processing, I hardly think you would have time to >play a game at the same time. As for multi tasking, Atari multitasks >REALISTICALLY. That is, if you want to print something out, or download >something or do something else like play music that doesn't require >your constant interaction there are plenty of options available to help you >do these things in the background so you don't waste time so you can do >something else..like play games. > >Really, multitasking is WAY overplayed by AMIGA people. They are not >the only people who have multi tasking machines, its just that workbench >supports this option automatically. While on the ST its an add on. > Here again is the words of someone who has never had a multitasking machine. First of all, the Amiga OS multitasks, but that is probably what you meant. You can't 'add on' multitasking to the ST, so stop decieving this poor guy who is trying to find out information. You can use things like Revolver to stop one memory partition and switch to another. this is not multitasking because you are doing one thing. YOu can use things like Masterlink (hahaha...if they ever come out with another version) to download in the backround, but that is pretty much the extent of it. You are alwasy very limited. And don't breath to hard while you are doing this, you might crash it! I suggest anyone who is thinking of buying an ST look at the support available for both machines and DO use both machines. Take it from someone who owns both...You DON'T want to buy an Atari. >---Gregory -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=That is not dead which may eternal lie-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= * Christoper Roth * The Pyramid BBS (904)373-3989 * InterNet : cr1@beach.cis.ufl.edu * Amiga 3000, TAG Software. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Yet with strange eons even death may die-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
s37837k@saha.hut.fi (Jari Lehto) (02/10/91)
In article <1991Feb8.042312.16582@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >In article <1991Feb7.222920.13058@santra.uucp> s37837k@saha.hut.fi (Jari Lehto) writes: >> >>AMIGA-USERS, GET THE HELL OUT OF THIS NEWSGROUP!!!! >> >>or I will definitely come and mess up yours with hundreds of articles >>filled with the same kind of shit you've written here... > > Take a look at the header. You've already done that. These articles >were CROSS-POSTED meaning both groups get this crap. The Amiga gets it by >far the most with the Mac vs Amiga, ST vs Amiga, NeXT vs Amiga flames that >pop up constantly. > All people reading this article, pay attention! I am deeply sorry that I posted that article here, so I cancelled it as quickly as I could. But unfortunately someone got there before me and red it. So if there are followups quoting that article of mine, please ignore them and cancel them if they are yours. This is too damn bad way to start a flame-war... For information: You can not possibly beleave this if you have red that article, but belive it, it is the truth. I USE BOTH ATARI AND AMIGA REGULARLY AND I THINK THAT BOTH MACHINES ARE ABSOLUTELY USEFUL TOOLS FOR EVERYTHING YOU NEED A COMPUTER OF THAT SIZE! I HAVE MANY AMIGA-USERS AS FRIENDS AND I HAVE HIGH ACCESS-LEVELS TO IN A NUMBER OF AMIGA-BBS'S. THE SYSOPS AND OTHER USERS PRETTY WELL KNOW THAT I AM A ST-USER, BUT THEY COUNT ME TO THE GROUP OF MOST IMPORTANT USERS IN THO- SE SYSTEMS. But if you still after this keep throwing those flames on my face, I have to admit that I am disappointed to you. If you distinguished Amiga-users are as nice and fair as those I know, you except my apology and bury that war-axe under your keyboard, so we could keep on the peaceful life on our own usergroups. I have to admit, that I get *a lot* carried away sometimes. I think that my deep christian conviction sometimes goes over my brains and fills me with the same hate that I feel toward those people who insult those things that are holy to me. Atari is definitely no SainT in my life!!! (nor is Amiga) Jartsu *** Jari Lehto, jartsu@otax.hut.fi, s37837k@saha.hut.fi ***
jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz (John Bickers) (02/11/91)
Quoted from <1991Feb8.042312.16582@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> by rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell): > In article <1991Feb7.222920.13058@santra.uucp> s37837k@saha.hut.fi (Jari Lehto) writes: > >Do you know any serious, famous musician using Amiga? I don't. > >Do you know any serious, famous musician using Atari? I do, in fact too many > > to count... > > B.B. King! Devo have used the Amiga (DEVOVISION '88). There was some discussion elsewhere of their work with Timothy Leary on Amiga stuff. -- *** John Bickers, TAP, NZAmigaUG. jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz *** *** "Patterns multiplying, re-direct our view" - Devo. ***
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (02/11/91)
In article <1991Feb10.160548.17877@santra.uucp> s37837k@saha.hut.fi (Jari Lehto) writes: >That Multitasking-OS I have for my ST works like the regular ST-desktop. >The different tasks are in their own windows. You change between them simply >by clicking with mouse inside the window. And you can ewen go to the back- >round-process without bringing it out by holding down the right mouse-button. >This OS also has its dark points. It demands a huge amount of memory and >a very fast CPU to operate without complaints. But so does every OS with >multitasking. Jari, I don't want to call you a liar, but maybe you'd better describe that "multitasking" OS a bit better. It sounds like a simple task-switcher to me. Multitasking means that all of the programs are running at once. BTW, your statement that every multitasking OS requires huge amounts of memory and a fast CPU is simply wrong. My A500 still has the stock 7.14Mhz 68000 in it. I have 3.5MB of RAM, but I use 1.5MB of it as a recoverable RAM-Disk, and I have 1.3MB free. That means that I am using about 700K of memory and I have 10 CLI-processes alone running. In all, there are 21 tasks currently running on my system. I use this particular setup every day, and the machine still works as if each program is the only one running. That's basically due to the provisions made in the OS that eliminate CPU- intensive programming techniques such as busy-waiting fo keyboard input. Greg -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I don't know what it is I like about you, but I like it a lot." -- Led Zeppelin, Communication Breakdown -------Greg-Harp-------greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu-------s609@cs.utexas.edu-------
jph@ais.org (Joseph Hillenburg) (02/11/91)
In article <A0b0moog@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca writes: >In <1991Feb10.073020.9858@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, Ray Cromwell writes: >>In article <1991Feb10.023415.8641@santra.uucp> s37837k@saha.hut.fi (Jari Lehto) writes: >>>In article <1991Feb9.213904.782@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@churchy.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >>> [...] >>>> Atari under Unix? What the hell is this? You mean Minix? or do you >>>>mean an emulated Atari running on a Workstation? >> >> This must be a 'hacked' up port. I'm not aware of an official >>Atari AT&T Unix port yet. (Unix has to be licensed, it costs lots of $$$ >>for the source). Besides, the Amiga can do everything you mentioned above. >>(i've downloaded and extracted simulatenously, vied GIF pics, formatted >>disks, etc) > > Again you show a lack of any knowledge about Unix on the TT. Just >as Amiga Unix was out in Universities this fall in beta test, so now >Atari Unix is out in Europe under beta. This is a real SVR4 port done >by a company contracted to Atari to do the port. It will be (or is) >running X-Desktop and who knows when we'll see it in North America. Heehee...Atari couldn't do the port themselves? Atari CAN'T do well in North America. They've shot their reputation all to hell here. And they're loosing it in Europe. Atari is the ONLY company that I know of that fucked upward compatability up because they used an illegal instruction. (With the exception of Tandy.) [...] >>>I don't get it. Is multitasking some kind of religion to you? You don't >>>propably even buy a pen, unless it multitasks... >>>I have often found multitasking (specially in Unix) more confusing than useful. Well, for me, and most Amiga users (if not all) multitasking blends right in. I couldn't stand a single-tasking machine, and thats one of the MANY reasons why I won't be caught dead owning a PC or Mac. >>>Human beings can not concentrate to more than one task at a time. >>>Buy If I want to multitask, I'll do it. I have a true multitasking OS for >>>my ST. One of my Amiga-using friens said that it is better than Amiga's. >>>Again something made in Germany. Hope those never get there, because there >>>are so many people like you, who are too biassed to understand anything >>>strange and new. Yes, but it costs. We get it FREE, and it works. WHERE it's made is no concern, unless you refer to the Soviet Union, where the public technological level is near zilch. [...] >>>> Seriously. The Atari's niche is MIDI. You don't need fast CPUs for >>>>MIDI(atleast not above 16mhz). The Amiga's niche is multitasking >>>>and video which does demand faster CPUs. (real time video, compression, >>>>ray tracing). To actually display the video/sound doesn't require a fast CPU. Just lots and lots of RAM. The rendering, etc requires the RAM. >>>> I have nothing personal against STs. If I need MIDI I'd buy one. But >>>>personally, I am hooked on multitasking and can't do without it. Also >>>>since I work with Unix, the fact that AmigaDOS is simular to Unix >>>>makes it attractive. >>> >>>Good enough MIDI-software needs fast CPUs. I am about to go for 33MHz. >>>You are the first Amiga-user that is proven to be a multitasking-maniac. >>>I know about 60 Amiga-users, 10 of them are my good friends... >>>They either have nothing agaist ST, some of them even use one frequently. >>>My opinion is that Amiga is a master of graphics and soud, but it is not >>>very handy in word-processing, DTP or things like that. OPINION! Really? Neither the ST or Amiga is word processing machines, DTP, maybe but The ST's best DTP program is also out for the Amiga. [...] >>>BTW, PCs are the most unuserfriendly machines I have seen. I think Mac is >>>something special. But if you really want something cool, get NeXT or >>>Sun SPARCstation. Those are far more superior than any of these Atari- and >>>Commodore-toys discussed here... ***OPINION AGAIN!!!*** When the '040's are available in mass quantities, an Amiga will eat a NeXT or SPARCstation I for lunch. [Lots of boring .sigs deleted] -- // Joseph Hillenburg, Secretary, Bloomington Amiga Users Group \X/ joseph@valnet.UUCP jph@irie.ais.org jph@ai.mit.edu "Only Apple could slow down a 68030 chip" --Computer Shopper
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (02/11/91)
In article <1991Feb10.160548.17877@santra.uucp> s37837k@saha.hut.fi (Jari Lehto) writes: > That Multitasking-OS I have for my ST works like the regular ST-desktop. > The different tasks are in their own windows. You change between them simply > by clicking with mouse inside the window. And you can ewen go to the back- > round-process without bringing it out by holding down the right mouse-button. "The" background process? You mean the different tasks are not executing concurrently in their own windows? Or do you mean it pulls the damn Mac trick and wants to pop the current process to the top? > This OS also has its dark points. It demands a huge amount of memory and > a very fast CPU to operate without complaints. But so does every OS with > multitasking. This is pure hype. I've no complaints with multitasking on my stock Amiga 1000 with 512K and two floppies. Going back a few years, I've used a 3-user development system with a single 4-bit CPU, and 12K of RAM. Multitasking doesn't require any great resources... it's the cost of back-patching onto a monitor-type operating system that causes so much trouble for IBM, Microsoft, Apple, and now it appears Atari. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
ko0m+@andrew.cmu.edu (Kevin Richard O'Toole) (02/12/91)
This is pathetic. Let's get out of our dungeons people! Do we really
have nothing better to do with our lives than argue about Amiga vs. ST?
It would seem that there are a few people in this world who base the
very existence of their self confidence on proving that their machine is
better than everyone else's. I too have fallen prey to this complex
from time to time...but think about it:
You people are fighting it out around the world, utilizing hardware that
had to cost tons of money, in order to decide whether or not TOS and
Workbench suck.
Come out of your caves, get some social lives. Didn't you hear?
There's a WAR going on. Stop arguing about friggin' computers! Get
lives!
{Flame repellent suit on? check.
Fire extinguishers ready? check.
Good no flames, just thoughts.}
Later,
Kevin R. O'Toole
ko0m@andrew.cmu.edus37837k@saha.hut.fi (Jari Lehto) (02/12/91)
In article <BY%-29_@irie.ais.org> jph@ais.org (Joseph Hillenburg) writes: > >Heehee...Atari couldn't do the port themselves? Atari CAN'T do well in >North America. They've shot their reputation all to hell here. And they're >loosing it in Europe. Atari is the ONLY company that I know of that fucked >upward compatability up because they used an illegal instruction. (With the >exception of Tandy.) Laugh it up, jerk. Can you do it? Why not use a third party if they can do it better? Being an Amiga-user does not give you the right to insult the name of Atari, even that I kind of agree your opinion. I don't either have any right to insult Amiga, and why to insult A GOOD MACHINE? >Well, for me, and most Amiga users (if not all) multitasking blends right in. >I couldn't stand a single-tasking machine, and thats one of the MANY reasons >why I won't be caught dead owning a PC or Mac. I wouldn't get a PC (486 & UNIX is an exception) either. Mac, maybe, multifinder is good enough for me, and Mac definitely is poverful enough for most of us! I would get myself a A3000, if it would not be so hell expen- sive in here. (Finland) But NeXT and Sun and Atari TT ARE real competitors! >Yes, but it costs. We get it FREE, and it works. WHERE it's made is no >concern, unless you refer to the Soviet Union, where the public technological >level is near zilch. Free Amiga? Where? I want one now!!! Do not even mention Soviet Union here, we have enough trouble because it being our neighbour... >To actually display the video/sound doesn't require a fast CPU. Just lots and >lots of RAM. The rendering, etc requires the RAM. If we need RAM, we go and get RAM! >Really? Neither the ST or Amiga is word processing machines, DTP, maybe but >The ST's best DTP program is also out for the Amiga. Calamus for Amiga? Then you definitely need better display than the standard Amiga has... Calamus for Amiga? Haven't heard such thing... >When the '040's are available in mass quantities, an Amiga will eat a >NeXT or SPARCstation I for lunch. Well see about that! Amiga with 040 will be so expensive that it will never be a real alternative... NeXT is very reasonable priced, it is cheaper than A3000!!! (If I get myself a NeXT here, it will cost about 18.000,- FIM. I can't get a good-enough A3000 package under 23.000,- FIM...) Jartsu *** Jari Lehto, jartsu@otax.hut.fi, s37837k@saha.hut.fi ***
s37837k@saha.hut.fi (Jari Lehto) (02/12/91)
In article <43991@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: > >Jari, I don't want to call you a liar, but maybe you'd better describe that >"multitasking" OS a bit better. It sounds like a simple task-switcher to >me. Multitasking means that all of the programs are running at once. You don't have to. It is no switcher, you just have to select which window is the active one. You can only do things with the active one. Others remain running at the backround. You can also do things at the unactive windows by holding down the right mouse-button. Only thing it doesn't do is updating the unactive windows during process. But when for example a download is ready on a terminal, it updates the window to let you know about this. This OS is a German beta-version, a very restricted one. I am not allowed to give any further details out! >BTW, your statement that every multitasking OS requires huge amounts of >memory and a fast CPU is simply wrong. My A500 still has the stock 7.14Mhz >68000 in it. I have 3.5MB of RAM, but I use 1.5MB of it as a recoverable >RAM-Disk, and I have 1.3MB free. That means that I am using about 700K of >memory and I have 10 CLI-processes alone running. In all, there are 21 >tasks currently running on my system. I use this particular setup every >day, and the machine still works as if each program is the only one running. >That's basically due to the provisions made in the OS that eliminate CPU- >intensive programming techniques such as busy-waiting fo keyboard input. The need of speed and memory is because programs for ST are not planned to be run in a multitasking-OS. They reserve certain amount of memory to run and if they can't get it, they will crash. Speed is needed for... You must know! I had Cubase and Calamus running simultaneously, that definitely was slow! Especially when I tried to output to laser from both simultaneously. It worked, but was very slow indeed! Jartsu *** Jari Lehto, jartsu@otax.hut.fi, s37837k@saha.hut.fi ***
greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (02/13/91)
My news reader choked every time I tried to follow up to this post, so I had to re-post it. Jari Lehto <s37837k@saha.hut.fi> writes: In article <43991@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: >Jari, I don't want to call you a liar, but maybe you'd better describe that >"multitasking" OS a bit better. It sounds like a simple task-switcher to >me. Multitasking means that all of the programs are running at once. You don't have to. It is no switcher, you just have to select which window is the active one. You can only do things with the active one. Others remain running at the backround. You can also do things at the unactive windows by holding down the right mouse-button. Only thing it doesn't do is updating the unactive windows during process. But when for example a download is ready on a terminal, it updates the window to let you know about this. Well, that certainly sounds better than other multitasking implementations on otherwise single-tasking machines. This OS is a German beta-version, a very restricted one. I am not allowed to give any further details out! >BTW, your statement that every multitasking OS requires huge amounts of >memory and a fast CPU is simply wrong. My A500 still has the stock 7.14Mhz >68000 in it. I have 3.5MB of RAM, but I use 1.5MB of it as a recoverable >RAM-Disk, and I have 1.3MB free. That means that I am using about 700K of >memory and I have 10 CLI-processes alone running. In all, there are 21 >tasks currently running on my system. I use this particular setup every >day, and the machine still works as if each program is the only one running. >That's basically due to the provisions made in the OS that eliminate CPU- >intensive programming techniques such as busy-waiting fo keyboard input. The need of speed and memory is because programs for ST are not planned to be run in a multitasking-OS. They reserve certain amount of memory to run and if they can't get it, they will crash. Speed is needed for... You must know! I had Cubase and Calamus running simultaneously, that definitely was slow! Especially when I tried to output to laser from both simultaneously. It worked, but was very slow indeed! That's the problem with trying to multitask in a machine that doesn't have proprietary multitasking. You see, on the Amiga programs use the OS routines to do I/O and other tasks that might conflict with other programs. When a program wants keyboard input, for example, the it tells the OS to wake it up when a key is pressed and then goes into a sleep stage. On other systems that don't normally multitask, the program would just sit there and poll the keyboard until a key is pressed. Busy-waiting is what eats up most of the speed of a multitasking system, so it is avoided on the Amiga. The rest of the OS is designed with a similar philosophy, so what you get is clean, fast multitasking without the need for tons of memory or a super-fast CPU. I could easily run Pro Page, Excellence, and DPaint while using my multi-shell terminal. I wouldn't even notice a loss of speed since these programs, although ready for input at any time, are not taking CPU time. Jartsu *** Jari Lehto, jartsu@otax.hut.fi, s37837k@saha.hut.fi *** Greg -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I don't know what it is I like about you, but I like it a lot." -- Led Zeppelin, Communication Breakdown -------Greg-Harp-------greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu-------s609@cs.utexas.edu-------
hyc@math.lsa.umich.edu (Howard Chu) (02/14/91)
Shoulda known when I started getting behind in this newsgroup it was 'cause a flame war was going on, nothing else ever generates nearly as much traffic... }-) In article <26769@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> cr1@beach.cis.ufl.edu () writes: >Here again is the words of someone who has never had a multitasking >machine. First of all, the Amiga OS multitasks, but that is probably >what you meant. You can't 'add on' multitasking to the ST, so stop >decieving this poor guy who is trying to find out information. You >can use things like Revolver to stop one memory partition and switch >to another. this is not multitasking because you are doing one thing. >YOu can use things like Masterlink (hahaha...if they ever come out >with another version) to download in the backround, but that is pretty >much the extent of it. You are alwasy very limited. And don't breath >to hard while you are doing this, you might crash it! You're really confused here. There is nothing in the ST hardware that prevents it from multitasking. You can add various hooks into the ST OS to allow pre-emptive multitasking. That's what MicroRTX does, or MiNT, or MX2. All of these packages work, though they present varying degrees of Unix-flavor. Contrary to your belief, this is real multitasking, and all three of these programs maintain TOS compatibility. It's not very thrilling on an 8MHz 68000, but it works. -- -- Howard Chu @ University of Michigan Flame all you want - we'll take more.
kskelm@happy.colorado.edu (02/15/91)
> Devo have used the Amiga (DEVOVISION '88). There was some discussion > elsewhere of their work with Timothy Leary on Amiga stuff. I also remember a while back a big deal about Oingo Boingo using Amigas for their concerts.