HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (Kenneth Jamieson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.games,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.multimedia,comp.sys.amiga.graphics,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:32:36 GMT
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.

In article <1992Apr6.221833.19914@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp) writes:
>
>>
>>So much for the V8086 mode being useful for multitasking.
>>
>
>So much for your knowledge of what V86 mode is and how it's used.

	True.

	I support a number of customers here in nj that use 386/486
systems to support multi-user systems in their offices.

	

-- 

+--[ Xanadu Enterprises Inc. Lingerie, Consulting, RPG's and ANIME ]-+.sign
|  Please send email for detailed product or catalogue information!  |ature
|             Ken Jamieson: uunet!tronsbox.xei.com!tron1             |Virus
|---NONE of the opinions represented here are endorsed by anybody!---|V3.2
|              Original contents are Copyright (c)1992               |1992!
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: jayson@tbag.UUCP (Jayson Phillips)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: re: CBM Announcements (And PC Clone Users)
Date: 10 Apr 92 05:42:35 EST
Organization: Tampa Bay Amiga Group

>From: torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie)
>Subject: Re: CBM Announcements...
>Date: 19 Mar 92 21:24:46 GMT
>
>cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) writes:
>
>>The chance of C= moving to a new chip series is almost nil.   Since Moto.
>>are bringing out a 68050 and higher speed 040s there is absolutely no
>>need.  People do not need faster cpu's for home computers.
 
Another  way to say this might be that, since the 040 (and 050?) is keeping
up very well with current chip and CPU technology, it won't be necassary to
jump   to   another  CPU,  which  would  cause  untold  chaos  in  software
compatability  anyway.   Sure  there are some new CPU's that are faster but
that  will  always  be  the  case.   And  they will always be aimed at more
expensive systems.
 
>  Hmmm.  
>
>  People do not need more than 640K of RAM (for a PC)
>  People do not need more than 10MB of hard disk space (for a PC)
>  People do not need more than 1 MIPS for their personal use (for a PC).
>
>  Even with the weaker qualifying clause, these statements look ridiculous.
 
Actually  these  statements  look just about right for most MSDOS users.  I
found  at  IBM  (NY)  that most people didn't know how big their hard drive
was,  how much memory they had, or even what processor was in the computer.
There  were quite a few that could remember these things after I told them.
But  most  didn't  even  care.  And I'm talking about engineers, though not
computer  eng.   Anyway, the vast majority of MSDOS users use just a single
program  day after day.  This is, of course, usually a word processor.  And
it  runs  just fine in 640K on a 286 (<1MIP) and, say, how big is that hard
drive???   An  advanced  MSDOS  user  uses  two  programs (one at a time of
course)  and  the  second one is Lotus 123.  This will also run fine in the
mediocre 640K 286 system.  Unless you're running Windows.  Then you have to
"quit"  windows  to  run  Lotus.   But  most MSDOS users don't like Windows
anyway.   "What?  You mean now I gotta learn this shit to do the same thing
I've been doing?  No thanks."
 
>-- 
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>Evan Torrie.  Stanford University, Class of 199?       torrie@cs.stanford.edu

>Blasphemy is a victimless crime.
 
 
                            _        _   _   _   _
  Jay Phillips  /\  |\/| | / _  /\   _) / \ / \ / \ 68030/68882-25MHz
  Tampa FL USA /--\ |  | | \_/ /--\  _) \_/ \_/ \_/ 6MB-RAM   Q105-HD
  -------------------------------------------------------------------
  USENET: tbag!jayson@uunet.uu.          GENIE: B.Phillips13
  -------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: 040 and 486 and nap42487 knows nothing about CPUs.
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: Amiga GRn V1.29 4/10/92 (Beta) by Mike Schwartz
Date: 17 Apr 92 11:12:22 PST
Organization: Amiga makes it possible

In article <1992Apr16.214416.16845@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>har@ux.acs.umn.edu (--SeebS--) writes:
>>
>>>Wow.  For a man of your education, a PhD, your attitude sure is arrogant.
>>
>>Wow. For a man without a PhD, your attitude sure is arrogant.
>>
>
>Gosh, Peter, aren't you clever.  Look, Dr. Kittel said, "If you don't
>share my opinion, you must be from another planet."  Do you deny that that
>is an arrogant attitude?  The Dr. himself admitted it was impolite.
>

I deny it's an arrogant attitude, as do the many people that Peter knows
who share the same experiences with many CPUs.

>Now please explain what I said to warrant your calling *me* arrogant.
>

Excuse me, Mr. GOD, what do YOU call yourself?

>>
>>Face it - no one has yet spoken up who has programmed both chips in
>>assembly and who does not feel that Intel is a total kludge. I know
>>that the computer science department at my old school was full of people
>>who all "grew up" programming the 80x86's. According to your theory, they
>>would like the one they started on better, explaining why none of them
>>are willing to touch the 80x86 series except as a mention of "this is
>>one of the stupid backwards chips."
>>
>
>Yeah right.  And I'm sure those people are resting easy knowing that
>they've got you to speak for them all.

Nobody is speaking for anyone else.  Just sharing a widely known set of
shared experiences.

>
>>
>>He *was* right, y'know. It's only arrogant if you're wrong.
>>
>
>Nope, he was wrong, just as you are.

Mr. GOD has spoken.  If we are wrong, we must be because Shnekel says so.

(Note:  Misspelled on purpose, same as last time).


--
Author of Amiga GRn, MailMinder, Budokan, Beyond Dark Castle, Dark Castle,
and Genesis Dick Tracy and Marble Madness.
Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
1124 Fremont Ave.
Los Altos, CA 94024

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: Intel HW
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 00:30:57 GMT

nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:
>Nobody takes screen
>refresh into account when considering how powerful a computer is.

I have seen quite a few posts here which deny that claim.  I even deny
it myself.

-- Gerald
From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: 040 and 486_ (bunch O' Kaka anyway)
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: Amiga GRn V1.29 4/10/92 (Beta) by Mike Schwartz
Date: 17 Apr 92 11:04:20 PST
Organization: Amiga makes it possible

In article <1992Apr16.192143.9291@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:
>To Mike, Ifyou believe that you have to do so much work and overhead just to
>program the 80x86, then you are obviously are NOT very good at it, and you will
>not be able to produce good code for it just by looking up a few things in a
>manual. This is ridiculous. There is no way you can develop as good code as 
>someone proficient in it just by reading a few things about it. If you still
>honestly beleive this is true, then would you mind letting an Intel programmer
>develop code for both if there was some kind of comparison being done. Oh, I
>know, The Intel programmer will be biased and produce junk for the m68k. But
>obviously it will not work the other way around, right?

I'm all in favor of an 8088 programmer coding for the 68K.  Once he does,
he'll never (prefer to) go back.  And I am NOT scared of someone's bias
to one CPU or the other, as long as he attempts to make the test fair.
Is the object to prove that the 8088 is superior, or to let the CPUs themselves
tell the answer?

And I never said you have to do so much work an overhead to program the 8086.
I have only said that due to the fewer and dedicated registers, you have to
shuffle stuff between the registers more often.  I've also pointed out that
the 8088 has a LOT more in common with the 6502 than with the 68K.  With both,
you use several instructions to accomplish one logical operation.

The 8088 has a minimal amount of setup overhead to get an assembly program
running.  You just need to set up DS and CS.  It's when you want more than
64K of code and/or data that you run into difficulties.  This also affects
'C' programming.  If you can program with 64K of code and 64K of data, you
get wonderful 'C' compiler generated code.

Take a look at the code generated by your 'C' compiler for this:

	huge char *ptr;
	...
	while (*ptr++)  do something

On the 8088, you have to increment a pointer register AND a segment register.
It is even worse, because the segment register is a multiplier of 16.  On the
68K, you just use a simple 32-bit address register and the instruction set
has autoincrement built-in.

Take a look at far procedure calls and returns and you will see that this
is yet another bunch of extra stuff to keep track of when coding.

The 8088 excels at string moves up to 64K bytes long.  The 68010 and up do
nearly as well, if not equally.  This is due to the CPU caches and loop
modes.

--
Author of Amiga GRn, MailMinder, Budokan, Beyond Dark Castle, Dark Castle,
and Genesis Dick Tracy and Marble Madness.
Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
1124 Fremont Ave.
Los Altos, CA 94024

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: rjc@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray)
Subject: Re:  Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom" ?
Organization: /etc/organization
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 01:44:22 GMT

In article <sajeqINNs3q@agate.berkeley.edu> calvinc@ohm.berkeley.edu (Calvin Cheng) writes:
>The fact is that, there is hardly any system software that tries to do
>as many things as the Apple system software.  Many of these may even
>find there way into other OSes like Windows (yes, Apple is trying to beat
>Microsoft at its own game) and even Solaris etc.  The focus is on cross-
>platform compatiblity now that Apple is clearly migrating towards RISC
>architectures.  That is what I view to be the biggest advantage of the
>Mac OS over the AmigaDOS - it is far more generic in nature and will continue
>to move along those lines (once that get rid of all the silly things that
>have been put into the 1984 Mac).  You are not tied to any single hardware setup
>(one or more monitors of arbitrary size and pixel depth, arbitrary kind of
>CPU - perhaps the 680x0, 880x0, or POWER etc).


    This is Apple's problem. They are rushing headlong to "standardize
everything under the sun." It takes time to come up with good standards.
Just look at ANSI and CCITT, sometimes they work years on standards and
they still come up inadequate. A standard has to look far into the future,
unfortunately, its hard to predict future demands.
    If Apple enacts a standard that isn't forward looking enough, then
5 years down the road, you will be stuck with backwards compatibility.
So many of you programs will support this standard that if you try to
radically alter it, your software base crumbles.
    Proof is by example. MS-DOS and ISA. Look how long MS-DOS kepted back
the pace of clone technology. Why did it take so long for a more modern
"non dos" based OS to become standard? Even now, ghosts of MSDOS
are echoing, in OS2 and Windows. (dos emulation) DOS should be dead, but
it isn't.


   You are also wrong about the MacOS doing more than any other OS.
Many workstation OS's, Unix in particular, have far more standard libraries
availible than the Mac. SGI's GL library along blows away the whole Mac
graphics toolbox.  The /lib dir on this AIX machine is 44 megs.

  What the Mac has more than any other OS is "interface guidelines".
I don't really care about those since I'm a CLI man, and in a GUI I
like to see variety. I get tired of seeing the same old boring
gadgets.
From: root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:  Considering switching to IBM
Distribution: world
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:00:32 EST
Organization: Rick's Amiga

In article <1992Apr6.195757.23946@seas.gwu.edu> gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>It could be, but IBM will supposedly attempt to change that view by bundling
>>OS/2 with its home systems (PS/1's) and doing heavy advertising.
>
>They had better advertise.  I just saw the latest Windows commercial by
>Microsoft.  It was good.  Almost as good as the latest Intel 486 commercial.
>It was interesting how these two commercial were played almost back to back.

IBM is also offering volume discounts to clone manufacturers.  So there
will be a price war between Microsoft and IBM on the wholesale level.

--
Rick Kelly		Rick's Amiga		Framingham, Mass.

		think!unixland!rmkhome!rkamiga!root
From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip 'AdaX' Sauls)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Wild rumor, potential for massive sea change in Amiga world...
Date: 16 Apr 92 15:57:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: ra.1992Apr16.155725.9650
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science

In article <1992Apr15.225616.22438@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett) writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.143822.9901@ra.msstate.edu> skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip 'AdaX' Sauls) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr15.011619.7706@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett) writes:
>>>   By winter, Commodore should have finally announced their new systems
>>>(if the rumors are correct).  I don't expect to be too wild about them, but
>>>they should be enough to marginally beat the new Atari systems.
>>
>>If C= released an Amiga with the power of an Indigo for $300 you would find 
>>some way to complain about it.
>
>   And if Commodore released a whole line of VIC-20s in different packages 
>you would be completely satisfied with Commodore's product-development 
>efforts.

Besides their sloth-like nature, I do not know anything about Commodore's 
product development efforts.  As to what they are working on, I really wish
that I knew, but I have learned not to believe in anything that I hear until
the product actually ships.

>   Besides, what you said about me is just words.  Really, I challenge you

Sticks and stones, eh?  :-)

>to name just one truly innovative product that Commodore has produced in the
>past six years that I wasn't totally enthusiastic and supportive of when it
>was released.  Hell, go back 8 years if you like.  The fact is, I am totally
>supportive of new Commodore products that are truly innovative (as I was with
>the A1000).  The fact also is, Commodore hasn't released a single truly
>innvoative product since the A1000. 

If you are expecting a new Amiga that is as far above the current crop of 
machines as the A1000 was, you are wasting your time.  If you look at the
specs on the A1000 versus the PC AT, Mac, Apple ][, etc., it was almost
unbelievable.  Soup sucks, but that is why I eat tomatoes. But how could 
C= produce an Amiga that was that much better than a Quadra, NeXT, or a 
486/SVGA/etc. combo?  I just do not think that will happen.


>| Marc Barrett -MB-  |  email: barrett@iastate.edu
>--------------------------------------------------

Skip Sauls                     //    Graduate Student & Instructor
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu    \X/     CS Department, University of Mississippi 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: sctconno@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Dave Connors)
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Organization: ITC, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
Date: 10 Apr 92 10:41:23 GMT

aissmith@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Doug Smith) writes:

>kdarling@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes:

>>Most Amiga owners here are mature, intelligent people... and can give
>>decent arguments without bashing someone.  Try it, you might like it.

>I used to do that often - quite often - too often in fact.  To be brutally
>honest, there is a stark difference between Amiga and IBM owners.  Amiga
>owners tend to look into things and don't follow blindly (thats probably
>why they own Amigas over IBMs) whilst IBM owners tend to be geeky people
>who just follow the croud.  I have *NEVER* seen an IBM owner offer
>truthful facts in an argument against Amigas.  Its either lies (stretched
>truths mostly) or plain insults.  They just don't listen to anything
>rational/sensible you have to say.  There are many people I know who have
>also derived this same conclusion independantly.  They'll back me up.
>Anyway, I'm so used to their behaviour that when I see something *SO*
>rediculious and off-the-mark as that, I lash out - and it usually works. ;-)

I will most certainly back you up their Doug. At a recent meeting of the
SCA (Griffith University Student Computing Association) I was very surprised
(actually unsurprised because I expected it) to see that of the 30-40 people
who turned up for the meeting, 90% were Amiga owners. 100% of what was
demonstrated was Amiga stuff, and 100% of the rude, arogant bastards who
sat down the back talking ALL of the way through the presentations were
IBM-PC owners. 

If any PC owners tries to spin their "PC's rule because they're the only
serious machine" CRAP on me - then watch out! I don't stop until they
either shut up or capitulate.

>>It's all up to you as to how you wish to be viewed.

>As I said - I gave up on rational debate long ago - I now handle the abuse 
>department.  It almost works.

*ha!* As for how you want to be viewed, if you want to be a sheep with no
brains - get a PC. 

-- 
WARNING: people quota (/sol/earth) exceeded  | Dave Connors              //
Delete all IBM owners        ----------------  D.Connors@sct.gu.edu.au \X/
God# rm -R *.IBM.people     |  " My opinions may have changed, but the 
God#                        |        fact that I am right hasn't. "
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: dano@usl.edu (Dan Stephenson)
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern Louisiana
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 23:44:36 GMT

bleys@tronsbox.UUCP (Bill Cavanaugh) writes:
>In article <dano.703116039@srl06.cacs.usl.edu> dano@usl.edu (Dan Stephenson) writes:
>>bleys@tronsbox.UUCP (Bill Cavanaugh) writes:
>>>In article <dano.702926807@nasa08.cacs.usl.edu> dano@usl.edu (Dan Stephenson) writes:
>>>>And, I think it is encouraging that it is assumed OS/2 2.0 will run ifne
>>>>with a 386SX CPU. BUt I am not sure what Mhz the PS/1 runs at.
>>>>_Dan
>>>OS/2 1.<whatever> runs fine on a six-year-old PS-70 with four megs.
>>SO? What in the hell does that have to do with PS/1's??
>>Note: you posted not understanding the original conversation.
>>-Dan
>Nope, I understood perfectly.  The new PS/1 machines are faster than
>the old PS-70.  The old machine is an six-year-old '386 that runs at
>15 Mhz on a good day with a tail wind.  The new machine is a '386SX
>that runs at 16 Mhz, and that's got more than a half-decade of
>debugging behind it.

>THAT'S "what in the hell" that has to do with PS/1's.

Oh, thanks for telling me.
-Dan

>bill
>-- 
> *         Bill Cavanaugh       bleys@tronsbox.xei.com          *
> *                                                              *
>           "Right now time is having its way with you."
>                                            Van Halen
>XY + XX = :-)
--
Daniel Anthony Stephenson, player of Praetorius, namer of The Solarium.
dano@srl01.cacs.usl.edu das9674@usl.edu
"I can be, what I want to, and all I need is to get my boogie
down"- Al Jarreau.
From: random@presto.UUCP (Jeff W. Hyche)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: "Room" for Windows
Reply-To: presto!random@uunet.uu.net
Distribution: na
X-Newsreader: Arn V1.00 alpha rel3
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:09:03 CST
Organization: I'm Just Me.

In article <1992Apr6.144908.27235@clipper.ingr.com>, Thorne Kontos writes:

> Peanut #2: If Commodore has any patents/copyrights to multitasking
>            then perhaps now is the time to fire up the big
>            lawyers, and go for the jugular vein. (Or at least
>            license it out for an enormously fat fee. Perhaps
>            then we will see all those things the posters on
>            .advocacy dream about come true.)
>  

If you want to talk law suit about multitasking, you will find
Unix has had multitasking for about 20 years now.  Unix is owned
my AT&T, which has bigger guns than Commodore.
--
"If winning is not              // Jeff Hyche           
 important, then            \\ //  UUCP: ...!uunet!sci34hub!presto!random
 why keep score?" Lt. Worf   \X/   GEnie: J.HYCHE
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: *** ULTIMATE BASHING for PeeCee Users
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 16:29:23 GMT

gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:
>
>(Knock, knock) McFly?  ;)  Yup.  As of 2.0, CompuGraphic Outline Font
>Technology is standard.  And they're pur-ty.  ;)
>

Cool.  I have another question.  Imagine you're running ADOS 2.0x.  Imagine
you've got several LARGE apps (each at least 800K) in memory, each using
lots of scalable fonts, graphics, images, etc.  How much memory do you
need to keep such a system running?  512K?  1MB?  I don't think so.

>
>: No.  I wasn't complaining about anything.  Please read the articles you're
>: following up.  I was just trying to explain why OS/2 takes up more memory
>: than ADOS -- it has more features.
>
>Doesn't OS-9 have MP and VM?  I believe it has MP, and it definitely
>doesn't require several megabytes...
>

Does OS-9 have a GUI with a device-independent graphics engine consisting of
several hundred calls?  How about a windowing library?

OS-9 doesn't require several megabytes.  Neither does OS/2, if all you
want to do is multitask non-GUI apps.

>Greg
--
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
| Jerry J. Shekhel  | Molecular Simulations | Time just fades the pages      |
| Drummers do it... | Inc.  Waltham, MA USA | in my book of memories.        |
|    ... In rhythm! |     (617) 890-2888    |              -- Guns N' Roses  |
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+