HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tmc@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Tim Ciceran)
Subject: Re: RISC Amiga?
Organization: Brock University, St. Catharines Ontario
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 05:22:20 GMT

In article <C0qstz.7CD@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) writes:

>So if I want a 68060 based computer, I can buy a A4000 for $2500.00,
>throw out the 68040, and put in the 68060...good plan!

And what does one do to upgrade the processor on a PC? Use the native
CPU in parallel. Not likely.

>How long was the 68060 out before a stock Amiga supported it?

The 68060 hasn't even been released. If it were tomorrow, it could be used
immediately.
From: pss1@kepler.unh.edu (Paul S Secinaro)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: clone prices & doom & gloom
Date: 3 Jan 1993 19:48:35 GMT
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
NNTP-Posting-Host: kepler.unh.edu

In article <1993Jan3.185526.14646@samba.oit.unc.edu> John.Carver@launchpad.unc.edu (John Carver) writes:


>I thought 486s would bottom out at about $1500, but they appear to have
>kept on falling in price.  Wonder where it will stop?  Although I find
>the working environments on clones unbearably primitive, you have to
>admit that a 486/33 is a lot of CPU horsepower for $999 *with* monitor.

Was that a DX or SX system?  Cyrix or Intel?  These days, you have to
be careful about what the vendors mean when they say "486" on low-end
systems.

Typically what happens is that if the clone vendors can't get around
$1000 (give or take) for a fully-configured system, they will stop
selling that system and bump the low end up to the next level of
technology.  That's why you don't see 286's being sold much anymore,
and 386's becoming scarce.  IMHO, it will be a while before the 486/33
gets to this point, though, especially with the Pentium (i.e. '586)
being delayed.

Paul
-- 
Paul Secinaro
pss1@kepler.unh.edu
Synthetic Vision and Pattern Analysis Laboratory
UNH Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: fihsu@athena.mit.edu (Hsu I-wei)
Subject: Re: HELP--AMIGA OR IBM PC CLONE?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 13:39:02 GMT

In article <C0ouvJ.C9J@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) writes:
>
>>	If you do want it, you DO pay for it, and I mean PAY.
>
>Hmm, i wonder how much an alternate, 16 bit, wave synthesis sound card
>for the Amiga costs?  Or an internal modem?  Or a video upgrade (for
>the non-AGA machines).

Do you really wonder?  If so, internal modem Supra 2400zi (2400 + v.42bis)
goes for $119 at Creative Computers... if not, thanks for wasting my time.

>
>>	What are the differences between the 66 and 33 mHz 486 chips?
>>Other than the fact that one is double clocked?
>
>One runs TWICE the speed of the other.  That doesn't mean system

Ok, but a 50 MHz 486DX also runs at twice the speed of a 25 MHz. So if that's
what matters to you, a 50MHz 486DX is the same as a 25/50MHz 486DX2?

>performance doubles, but it sure as hell improves by quite a bit.

You could say the same for a 33MHz 486. The system performance doesn't double,
but it sure as hell improves by quite a bit. So which do you get, a 33MHz 486
or a 50MHz 486DX2? Kinda depends on what you want to do on your clone, huh.

Francis

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: das9674@ucs.usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Subject: Re: Jim Dionne mentioned in MicroTimes
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 14:42:09 GMT

Who is this person?
-- 
Dan Stephenson   das9674@usl.edu 
"Even inferior PC demos seem to require more RAM than demos for the Amiga 500"
                                                                -John Bickers
"You're probably right.  The Amiga OWNS the demo market." -Jerry Shekhel
From: das9674@ucs.usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: HELP--AMIGA OR IBM PC CLONE?
Date: 6 Jan 93 23:10:56 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette

In article <Ray_Hines.08b3@dream.uucp> Ray_Hines@dream.uucp (Ray Hines) writes:
>In a message dated Tue  5 Jan 93 13:41, Das9674@ucs.usl.edu (stephenson Dan
>wrote:
>
> DD> Example: The Amiga4000/25Mhz costs from $3500 to $3800.  I am  not
> DD> positive if that includes a mnitor, though.
>
>CORRECTION!  $2700 is more the selling price of the Amiga 4000.  You wanna
>quote retail prices for the Amiga, then you'd better do the same thing for
>the compatibles, to be fair.  Naturally, this is what I expected from some
>Ms-Dog-Head comparing Apples and Oranges. :)

What does that come with?  A monitor?  Keyboard?  HD size?
Also, there is very likely variances in prices around, too.

>>2) Can Amigas take things like 20" monitors with video cards that permit
>very
>>   large graphics modes (like 1200-or-so pixels square)?
>
> DD> Ya got me.  Amigas do seem to have weird modes, don't they?  You
> DD> know, the ol' 1280X400 or somesuch mode.  Gack!                     
>
>Yup, they can indeed take all sorts of monitors, video cards, etc.  If
>you're REALLY into graphics power on the Amiga, go out and by a VIVID 24
>bit card with 4 co-processers.  The manufacture says it is faster than a
>$200,000 Silicon Graphics Workstation. Wheeeeeeeeeee!
>
Hmm, how do these type of coprocessors you can add for the Amiga
stack up to localbus ATI Graphics Ultra Pro or The Diamond SuperStealth?

I am not looking for a flame, nor would I acknowledge one- I am
just curious.

> / /\     Raymond Hines              Internet: Ray_Hines%dream.uucp@ufl.edu
>/_/  \  DreamStates BBS                    or: dream!Ray_Hines@ufl.edu
-- 
Dan Stephenson   das9674@usl.edu 
"Even inferior PC demos seem to require more RAM than demos for the Amiga 500"
                                                                -John Bickers
"You're probably right.  The Amiga OWNS the demo market." -Jerry Shekhel
From: mr_scary@lakes.trenton.sc.us (Chris Hurley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Byte's Amiga 4000 review...
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 21:15:16 EST
Reply-To: mr_scary@lakes.trenton.sc.us (Chris Hurley)
Organization: Lakes Public Access

papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) writes:

> 
> IBM was singletasking in 1981, when Apple was single tasking, before
> Commodore was single tasking etc.  The reason they didn't start out
> with a multitasking operating system is because with 64k of ram, you
> can't load two useful programs, plus a multitasking operating system.
> 
> 

You are quite incorrect.  Commodore was easily single-tasking in 1981 
(consider the Vic-20 or prior to that the PETs etc...)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: ccb8m@onyx.cs.Virginia.EDU (Charles C. Bundy)
Subject: Re: Byte's Amiga 4000 review...
Organization: University of Virginia Computer Science Department
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 16:43:34 GMT

In article <C0ouLu.C14@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) writes:
>>     OS/2 was a project started by MS and IBM after the Amiga had already
>>been on the market for a while.  Every once in a while around here someone
>>brings up the posting on an internal bulletin board at IBM in the early days
>>of OS/2 development in which one of the programmers said something like,
>>"Why don't we just buy AmigaOS from Commodore and save ourselves four years?".
>>
>>>Or did they ALL steal the concept from the Amiga.
>>
>>     Yep. :-)
>
>I love anecdotal evidence...it's so "authoritative."  Do you want to
>OUTLINE what in OS/2 you believe was "borrowed" from the Amiga?

His evidence is no more "anecdotal" than yours, sirrah.

>
>>     The Amiga OS can be run from floppy, as can most applications.  Try
>>doing a full-blown OS/2 install to a 1.44 meg disk.
>
>When we talk about computers without hard drives, we aren't really
>talking about computers any more.  We are talking about consoles.
>Indeed, I think those little console cartridges probably have as much
>memory as a 1.44 MB floppy disk, and a much better access time!

Only the latest 12Mbit> carts exceed 1.44Meg, on game consoles.  BTW
do you consider "diskless" Sun/etc. Workstations to be consoles?  What
if we boot our amiga "consoles" via the network :)

>
>>
>>     It's interesting that when I took my Amiga to work (to get some things
>>done more efficiently than I could have on my 486), several of the people
>>who saw me using it were amazed.  One of them is now saving for a 1200, 
>>and another has started buying copies of Amiga magazines to learn more about
>>the machines.  These are both former die-hard DOS/Windows/OS2 users.
>>     Who's defecting?
>>
>We'll see six months from now, when there are 3 or 4 486 clones, Intel
>is dumping the Pentium to kill off the clone business and prices are
>falling through the floor....we'll see who defects then.

Nah Nah Nahh <Thpppttt>.  Paul, your reign of info_mania "Intel correctness"
is wasted on people who for the most part, know and like IBM PC's, yet still
choose the machine better suited to their needs (namely ME).  I had a 386sx,
liked it for CAD work, BUT that was about all I used it for.  I'm getting
much better throughput on my 1200...  (Games, Graphics, Software development,
etc..)

PC's are great until you've been spoiled by a few SGI's or Sun's.  Since I
couldn't afford one of those, I intelligently shopped around, and CHOSE the
A1200...


Charles C. Bundy IV
ccb8m@virginia.edu

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: robart@agora.rain.com (Joe Bob)
Subject: Re: 1200/4000 pricing
Organization: a gora
Distribution: world 
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 20:31:16 GMT

In article <mbrown.0yt2@legend.akron.oh.us> mbrown@legend.akron.oh.us writes:
>No Really? I Know the Damn amiga 600 doesn't cost 600 bucks. But I will tell 
>you this, I paid 620 dollars for My amiga 500 with 1/2 meg of ram in 87. 

  And I will tell you this, 1987 was 6 years ago.

>I don't see wear [sic] a 200 dollar price difference in the 
>600/1200 will turn people away.  

  I guess that's why you're not in marketing.

>If people out there are going to pay as little as
>they can for a Computer they'll buy and [sic] Atari 8 bit.

  Not if they want an Amiga.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: dtiberio@engws10.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Byte's Amiga 4000 review...
Date: 11 Jan 93 03:02:23 GMT
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook

In article <C0np2J.69C@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) writes:
>Read my lips:  All IBM operating systems (or at least new ones) have
		^^^			   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	What a profound statement. Or at least stupid.

>IBM was singletasking in 1981, when Apple was single tasking, before
>Commodore was single tasking etc.  The reason they didn't start out
>with a multitasking operating system is because with 64k of ram, you
>can't load two useful programs, plus a multitasking operating system.

	Hmmm... Geo Publish was about 180k. That is more than 64k. And it 
still ran on my 64k computer. Please explain how this happene. BTW, there
do exist programs on the Commodore 64 that allow multitasking and task 
switching. See old Compute! and Compute!'s Gazette magazines. There was
one that had 4 banls of memory and you could load 4 different programs at
the same time and switch between them.


>As soon as multitasking was feasible (with the advent of the 286) IBM

	I LOVE this line! This is going to be a contender for Most
Humourous Quote of 1993!

>started work on OS/2, the multitasking OS for it.  The amiga was not an
>influence.

	There are those who will tell you that the Amiga was and still is
an influence.


-- 

      Amiga Graphics Association BBS (516) 473-6351  24 HRS 14.4 v.32bis
Thanks Gwen. Like I said, I had faith in #3. At least it answers the phone now.
	
                                                                            
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: papresco@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Paul Prescod)
Subject: Re: Does reading this group make you depressed? The story of a victim.
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:05:37 GMT

>"Good" productivity apps?  I happen to -detest- Microsft Word and Microsoft
>Excel -- are they examples of what you view as "good"?!!  
>
>What about Superbase, which was developed on Amigas and then ported over to
>Windows?  It's still being supported and improved for Amigas, under a new
>names since the oringal supplier was gobbled out by an acquisitive company
>interested only in platforms running under Microsoft operating and control
>systems....  Superbase is so bad that somebody bought the company out to
>get the program?!!  Yeah, sure......

Superbase was good when it was one of a few in the gui market.  Now
there is access, Paradox/win(soon), FoxPro, Forests and Trees and a
bunch of others, and that's not even counting ObjectVision, and Visual
Basic which are taking over some of the jobs dedicated databases used
to do.

In today's market, and tomorrows fiercly competitive windows database
market, Superbase is merely mediocre.

BTW, Word is an *AMAZING* piece of software.  I was expecting it to be
absolute crap, because I hate microsoft and windows, but when I tried
it I was very impressed.  It has a turing-complete script language, and
you can change every keystroke, every button on the button bar (do
Amigans know what a button bar is?) every menu everything.  It's
totally configurable and programmable.
From: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: More Amiga OS weaknesses and strengths
Date: 6 Jan 93 17:10:16 GMT
Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel)
Organization: Flying Cat, Inc.

In article <1ie2q2INN3c0@uwm.edu> bloc1469@ee.ee.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:
>In article <C0F5z7.A7A@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes:
>>   BTW, this is the first mention of a problem with the surface features of
>>the Mac OS that I've seen mentioned after wading through 100 messages.  I

Perhaps because this is an Amiga newsgroup ?  Find a Mac advocacy group
if you want to read Mac complaints.

>>   I've been using 2.0 for a LONG time (since right after it became available),
>>and I noticed that feature only just now.  Shows how often I use it.
>
>Perhaps it's because you're always trying so hard to use your Amiga
>like a Mac that you're not trying to examine the capabilities given
>you by the system you're using?  Perhaps you're playing the conformist


I don't believe Marc actually _uses_ the computers he posts about.  I
also don't believe he actually _reads_ the articles he responds to.  I
also don't believe he actually _reads_ the technical articles he
occasionally posts bits and pieces of.

What I think he does is more like a keyword scan through the
computer's interface and programs, or a keyword scan through the
articles.  He then seems to use these keywords as a basis for
continuing his hobby, his reason for living, his way of life:
starting Amiga flamewars.

This recently started flamewar is a case in point;  he starts
by basically saying 'It's better to look good than to feel good', 
claiming that surface polish is more important that real functionality.
He then points out some flaws (mostly minor) with a few areas of the
Amiga. (but hey, what do you expect from a keyword scan).

But here's the key:

He attempts to phrase his 'findings' in the most offensive manner
he can think of, in an effort to ignite a flame war.

Apparently, this is what he gets off on.  

There's no cure for him;  he probably doesn't even have an Amiga of his own
any more (so its no use hoping he'll move on to another platform),
you can tell from this posts that he doesn't actually use the Amiga
for anything (so there's no use hoping he'll use another platform;
I don't know if he's using another platform;  but whatever he's using,
its not an Amiga), there seems to be no hope he'll graduate
and get a life of his own, and ignoring him just means he starts
adding additional newsgroups to the distribution list until
someone starts flaming him about _that_.

>Greg

			andy
-- 
andy finkel		andy@cbmvax.commodore.com

"There are two kinds of fool.  One says, 'This is old, and therefore good.'
And one says, "This is new, and therefore better.'" - Dean Inge

Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.
I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: mlelstv@specklec.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Subject: Re: CBM does it again... 23 watt p.s. for A1200?!?
Keywords: gimme a break
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 13:49:01 GMT

In <C0K3Dv.22B@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes:
>   BS on both counts.  I can get nice 150W power supplies with built-in fans
>and numerous outputs for $40 new, in tiny quantities (IE: one).

Now.. I can't, I have talk about prices I have to pay.

>Think of how
>much it would cost Commodore to purchase such power supplies with only a single
>output in huge quantities.

Bulk prices for mass products aren't much lower than the street price for
a single unit.

>And heat would not be a problem, because the fan
>could still be there.

The fan would just distribute the heat. I have seen lots of A500 power
supplies that died because of overheating. A 200 Watt supply would just
be more dangerous.

Regards,
-- 
Michael van Elst
UUCP:     universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: das9674@ucs.usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Subject: Re: CBM mention on 12/11/92 Computer Chronicles
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 23:05:41 GMT

In article <Ray_Hines.08ap@dream.uucp> Ray_Hines@dream.uucp (Ray Hines) writes:
>In a message dated Tue  5 Jan 93 13:41, Das9674@usl.edu (stephenson Daniel 
>wrote:
>
> DD> I have come to the conclusion that the Amiga, while having a nice OS,
> DD> often does NOT have a consistant interface.  They often seem little
> DD> better than a MSDOS-written GUI-on-the-fly.
>
>I'd agree with you under WB1.3.  However, the interface is more consistent
>under 2.04 and up.

That is good to hear!

>>Before Windows 3.1, my 386 PC was a bit slower in window updates.  With
>3.1,
>>however, it became noticeably faster.  No, I'm not talking about screens,
>just windows.
>
> DD> OS/2 has pretty fast windowing, too.  
>
>Er.  I disagree.  Perhaps merely because the machine I tried out OS/2 on
>was slow or something. It was a high speed 386 system and OS/2 was just too
>damn slow for my patience.  My Amiga spoils me. :)

I must say that a RAM-deficient OS/2 box can be REALLY REALLY SLOW.
Like, if you have something really big going on, you tend to ask
your self "d'you think it's stilll thinking, or do you think it crashed?"

BUT, with, say, 8 meg RAM, it FLYS.  On my 386/33 with 8 megs RAM (7.6,
actually), the windowing updates are lightning fast.  Even big ones.  I
impressed the heck out of a Windows friend the other day with it.
Naturally, there are non-optimal conditions where this of course
may degrade, but not so you would notice.  Wow, I wonder what 12 or
16 megs RAM would be like!!
>
> / /\     Raymond Hines              Internet: Ray_Hines%dream.uucp@ufl.edu
>/_/  \  DreamStates BBS                    or: dream!Ray_Hines@ufl.edu
-- 
Dan Stephenson   das9674@usl.edu 
"Even inferior PC demos seem to require more RAM than demos for the Amiga 500"
                                                                -John Bickers
"You're probably right.  The Amiga OWNS the demo market." -Jerry Shekhel
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.graphics
From: davidme@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au (David Meiklejohn)
Subject: Re: Deleting Directories Re: VistaPro & clones
Organization: Qld Dept Primary Industries
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:15:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.224102.2314@usl.edu> das9674@ucs.usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A) writes:
>
>Look, I think this $99 'shell' the original poster ever-so-slyly misrepresented
>is the Norton Desktop for Windows.  It costs $99, deletes directories, and SHITLOADS
>more, TOO!

What it does is to give Windows a front-end that combines both program and file
management.  It gives the Windows user a screen where disks are represented by
icons down one side, and double clicking on these opens windows showing the
disk contents as icons.  Files can be moved and copied by dragging icons, and
directories can be selected and deleted at will.  Not only that, but this truly
amazing environment allows the user to launch apps as well.  Makes the machine
seem almost Amiga-like.  Of course, it's not *that* good, but what can you
expect for $99 or so?  :-)

>Good grief, you people really though Windows users were SO depraved that they
>bought a directory-deleter for a hundred buck! Gimme a break!  

Why not?  They'll buy a screen saver for a hundred bucks, after all...   :-)


>Dan Stephenson   das9674@usl.edu 


-- 
David Meiklejohn (davidme@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au)
 - PC's, Unix, and networks by day, Amigas by night...
Currently residing in Mareeba, Far North Queensland, Australia
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip Sauls)
Subject: Re: Will PC Makers Survive Mutimedia?? 
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 16:50:14 GMT

In article <C0n5J3.GG5@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) writes:
>>Mammals is in fact quite good, although strictly speaking it is not an MPC
>>title. Both the Beethovan and Mozart CD's would never be enough to convince
>>anyone to buy a 12" monitor+computer in order to listen to them. They really
>>have a limited audience, especially on that solitary unit known as a 
>>computer.
>
>There is no law that says you must buy a CD-ROM based computer for a
>single title.  Most CD-ROM drives ship with three or four BUNDLED!

We just got a couple of SoundBlaster "multimedia" upgrade kits and they
came with a few disks.  The Microsoft Bookshelf has some of the sorriest
graphics, animation, and sound I've ever seen and it is utter crap.  The
Sherlock Holmes disk has a few slow, jerky, crude animations and a Nintendo
style user interface.  The others have sounds, graphics, etc., as well as
a few utilities for controlling the player.  In all, it is utter crap and
I can't believe that people are getting so excited by this stuff.

>>As for an encyclopedia, I haven't seen the one Microsoft is coming out with,
>>but I have yet to see an encyclopedia on a computer better than Grolier's,
>>and that exists for CDTV. Compton's has never been taken seriously in book
>>form. Why both spending $500 to listen to the thing? Now, the Oxford 
>>dictionary is another matter. I really think that CD-ROM's are only of use
>>for delivery of large programs, and not as a unit to use these on. It's far
>>too slow.
>
>This too shall pass.  Ever heard of "multispin?"  Compton's is not

And you'll be buying a new drive in most cases to get it.

>$500.00.  As I recall it was QUITE cheap, compared to the other two (I
>think there are three big encyclopedias).  And I am looking forward to
>Microsoft's.  They claim it will be the first encyclopedia made by and
>for computers, instead of ported from a book.  This should be
>interesting.

Hopefully.  Their current offering is pitiful.

>>I didn't say they were better. I said they had more potential. They are 
>>family oriented and computers are solitary devices. 
>
>Why are they more "family oriented."  Because they work off of a TV and
>are a little (a very little) cheaper?

Mainly because they don't have the horrible Windows interface.  As for the
price, they are much cheaper when you consider the price of a usable MPC
system.  And I have yet to see an MPC machine that can be upgraded to a 
full-blown Amiga system...

Skip Sauls, Amiga Advocate
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu