HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: magu@se.alcbel.be (Mike Aguilar)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Amiga Future?!?
Date: 22 Jul 92 09:30:24 GMT
Reply-To: magu@se.alcbel.be
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Organization: Alcatel Bell Antwerp (AAL)



Hi guys,

Reading about the "dying Amiga" and not being able to do anything about it
except shout at Commodore is depressing.  But maybe there's something else
we can do ...

One of the reason for the PCs dominance was the proliferation of its 
compatibles. Why can't the Amiga have a compatible?  Who says it can't,
Commodore?  I'm sure most of you will agree that Amiga is not just Commodore.

Remember how the Amiga was rescued from its early demise by faithful
programmers who filled the PD market with a lot of their goodies?

Thats the software part of things.  Aren't there any hardware hackers who
could hack up a similar Amiga hardware from off-the-shelf chips, and of course
add in improvements/innovations etc... that Commodore lacks.  Maybe if we
start a discussion on this topic, someone might pick things up and give
Commodore some competition.  And competition in the PC (+compatibles) market
is what's giving them the edge over the Amiga, right?

If anything, that discussion would provide us something more educational
than a post that whinges on Commodore's inadequacies.


--
  // Mike Aguilar                          Phone: (32) 3 240 4289
\//  email : magu@se.alcbel.be             BELL ext. 4289
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche)
Subject: Free Beer for Dr Kittel (was: PC's vs. mortals)
Organization: MetaPro Systems, Perth, Western Australia
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 07:46:12 GMT

In <242@cbmswe.se.so.commodore.com>
   hjalmar@cbmswe.se.so.commodore.com (Peter Hjalmarsson Sweden) writes:

>In article <9403@cbmger.de.so.commodore.com> 
   peterk@cbmger.de.so.commodore.com (Dr Peter Kittel Germany) writes:

>>Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel
>>Commodore Frankfurt, Germany

>Sorry to correct a fellow Commodorian. (Hope I am right, I'll buy you a beer
>next time I'll get to Frankfurt otherwise.)

Oh you are a generous chap. How about you buying him a beer
in Stockholm? (I presume that's where you're located.) Or
don't you get paid that much? ;-) Now, if we all chip in a
few ore (sp?), that just might be enough.

Back to beer again! Must be something about advocacy.

Skol && Prost
-- 
+-----+ Bernd Felsche                     _--_|\  #include <std/disclaimer.h>
| | | | MetaPro Systems Pty Ltd          /      \ bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au
| | | | 328 Albany Highway,              X_.--._/         Fax: +61 9 472 3337
|m|p|s| Victoria Park, Western Australia 6100  v        Phone: +61 9 362 9355
From: TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: What does the Amiga lack?
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 16:32:56 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Jul17.163031.6077@news.iastate.edu>
  <1992Jul17.204350.6000@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>
  <1992Jul18.081650.11781@news.iastate.edu> <33302@cbmvax.commodore.com>

Much as I hate to say this, I think its impossible for one person
to write "really great software".

Flame away, but when I see Word for Windows 2.0, I see "really
great software". I won't talk about size, because its big. But
the functionality is terrific. its worth giving up 14M of HD
space.

But programs this size require teams, and pockets willing to
spend money upgrading, and marketers who understand their client's
needs.

If the greatest programmer sat down to write the ultimate word
processor, I'm convinced it wouldn't come close to W4W 2.0, or
1 or 2 other Windows word processors. 

The expectations I have from software are probably 100 times
what I had 10 years ago.
From: foax@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Date: 24 Jul 92 22:09:57 EDT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Cornell University

In article <al158305.711824179@academ01>
al158305@academ01.mty.itesm.mx (Gustavo Cordova Avila) writes:
> pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew) writes:

> >On a 286 machine, yes.  On a 386 machine, no.  You can have multiple DOS
> >sessions and Windows sessions running concurrently.

>    Yeah! BUT!!!!! A '386 isn't akin to a 68k processor, more like the '286
> is comparable, external 16bit architectures, etc etc. I mean, the '386
> has virtual modes and all than. If you are to keen to compare the '386
> processor to something Motorola has, compare it to the '030, which is
> much more similar, and also was released at about the same year or something
> like that.

Actually the 286 and the 68000 aren't all that similar either.  While
the 68000 was concentrating on implementing a 32-bit programmer's
model on chip to hide the internal 16-bit arithmetic logic unit and
data paths (ask Jarkko Lindblad about this if you doubt me, I got it
from him) and to prepare for true 32-bit processors, the 286 was
putting a rather complex multitasking & protected virtual memory
scheme on chip.  It is rather ironic that the first major multitasking
system (at least the first major one I remember) came out on the
Amiga, a 68000 machine.  Perhaps the 286 scheme was too complex for
people to get used to quickly.  The 386 only extended the 286 scheme
and added "virtual real mode" which allows you to easily create
multiple independent 8086-mode tasks (i.e. "DOS boxes").

>    COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES!!!

The Motorola and Intel lines are really too different to make that possible.

>    Sure you can run a command line box in windows, BUT NOT ON A 286!!
> Which is a similar processor to the amiga's (in age and physical design?)

Like I said, not that similar.  Actually, the 286 design seems to
allow you to make virtual "DOS boxes" too, but it would be harder than
on a 386, and Microsoft probably felt it wasn't worth it since the
market was abandoning 286's.  It might also be too slow.

> have fun.

Thank you, you too.
-- 

--Colin Howell			email to howell@astrosun.tn.cornell.edu
--Cornell Astronomy Dept.	(hopefully switching to computer science)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: leavitt@cheshire.oxy.edu (Thomas VanNess Leavitt)
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:23:37 GMT

What sort of person that could afford to pay the high prices for an
OS/2 app wouldn't be willing to pay $500 more to go from a relatively
wimpy $150 386sx-20 to a relatively hefty $650 486-33?  Think about it.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block)
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 07:47:00 GMT

jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
: Greg, these two sentences just don't parse for me.  350K of *source* code?
: 32 megabytes of what?

If the OS used by CD-I systems can do VM, MP, and RT in under a meg,
I don't see it taking MORE than that full meg to do it to AmigaDOS.

: I didn't want to get into this, but what makes you think that VM, MP, and
: resource tracking are the only things OS/2 2.0 has over AmigaDOS?

Well, there's DIG, but that comes in time.

Greg

--
(: (: (: (: Have you overdosed on smileys today?  Why NOT!?! :) :) :) :) :)
(:"The person who said size doesn't matter was probably a very small man":)
(:	gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu			Gregory R. Block         :)
(: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Games on consoles
From: jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz (John Bickers)
Date: 31 Jul 92 16:07:51 PST
 <mykes.0arh@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> <1992Jul30.151513.17626@newshost.unh.edu>
Organization: TAP, NZAmigaUG

Quoted from <1992Jul30.151513.17626@newshost.unh.edu> by ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene):

    [Quoting someone else]

> >OK, looks like you mentioned 4 or 5 "must have" games for the PC.  Can anyone
> >name one for the Amiga?

    Sidewinder.

> 						G.Greene
--
*** John Bickers, TAP, NZAmigaUG.        jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz ***
***    "Radioactivity - It's in the air, for you and me" - Kraftwerk    ***
From: jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anybody care to crush this Falcon Rumor?
Date: 20 Jul 92 12:48:00 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <1992Jul19.185524.13740@ecsvax.uncecs.edu>, urjlew@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Rostyk Lewyckyj) writes:
> 
> 
> Whatever happened to the ATARI transputer computer?

Well, it was produced (and sold) in small quantities a few years ago. I
recall it's final name was "Abaq" (I'm not sure). But it definitely came
out, the price was too high, though.

> Oh and din't they announce, advertise some laser printer?

??? Atari has sold the SLM804 Laser Printer for many many years. They
are widely used, at least in europe. They have lately announced a
cheaper SLM604 (or whatever), but I don't know if they are available
(probably are).

			Jouni
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: mlelstv@spckll.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Subject: Re: I DID giev up on the Amiga!
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 19:57:39 GMT

In <1992Jul23.162026.7775@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett) writes:
>   Yes it does.  I ask you agin: what is the ratio of Amigas without 68000s
>on the motherboard to Macintoshes without 68000s on the motherboard?  Or,
>what is the ratio of Amigas with 24-bit palettes and 8-bit graphics on the
>motherboard to Macintoshes with 24-bit palettes and 8-bit graphics on the
>motherboard?  Or, an even more basic question: what is the ratio of Amigas
>with built-in SCSI controllers to Macintoshes with built-in SCSI controllers?
>Finally, what is the ratio of notebook Amigas to notebook Macintoshes?

What is the ratio of Macintoshes with a crippled 68020 on the motherboard
compared to Amigas with a crippled 68020 on the motherboard (i.e those with
16bit memory only) ?
What is the ratio of Macintoshes with NTSC/PAL compatible video outputs on
the motherboard compared to Amigas with such a video output.
What is the ratio of Macintoshes with a slowed down non-really standard
SCSI port compared to Amigas with a slowed down non-really standard
SCSI port ?

>   SuperHires is ONLY useful for video titling.  It's too slow for anything
>else, has horrible color capabilities, and can't be deinterlaced.

Mac 24bit graphics is too slow for anything, has horrible animation
capabilities and can't be fed directly to video equipment.

>   What is the big deal about that?  As Kevn Darling pointed out, there many 
>are cheap, off-the-shelf video chips than can adapt to NTSC and PAL. 

The point is that it exists as a standard feature built into every Amiga
model.

>   Oh, yes, the infamous 160x480 and 160x960 HAM modes.  Too bad the
>horizontal resolutions are lower than on my old VIC-20.

Those modes aren't VGA.. can you read ? He said VGA compatible modes.

>   Oh, you mean the ONE new chip that is a no-brained cross between the older
>Gary chip and a simple IDE drive interface.  Excuse me, but I'm not impressed.

Are you ever impressed ?

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: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO)
Subject: Re: PC's are *total* kludges
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 17:38:54 GMT

In article <191903@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov> pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew) writes:
>In article <1992Jul20.160954.3931@ctr.columbia.edu>, jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO) writes:
>>>
>>>Well, it took about 30 seconds of disk I/O before I get an MS-DOS
>>>prompt on a 286 (10 MHz, 4Meg or memory) running Windows.  Is this
>>>absolutely necessary every time I switch tasks?
>> 
>> Running Windows on a 286 is much different from running it on a 386.
>> The 286 can only run DOS in Real Mode, which means that Windows must
>> clear out the lower 640K to run a DOS shell.
>> 
>>>Now the 386
>>>upgrade that is currently in use takes about 15 seconds or so
>>>every time a task switch is done to/from the MS-DOS shell.  Should
>>>I be satisfied?
>> 
>> This sounds like BS to me.  I run Windows on a 386, and switching between
>> DOS and Windows applications is instantaneous.
>
>His 286 claim is BS, too.  I run Windows on my 286 and the delay to shell out
>to DOS is not 10 seconds.  I'll time it next time I have a chance, but I
>expect it's in the neighborhood of 2-3 seconds.
Paul, perhaps it would have been more constructive if you *timed* it first
and then posted the finding.  Also, if your times are significantly less
then mine, perhaps we can discuss it offline and find out why you're running
so much faster.  After all, I am stuck using the Windows environment at work
and if I can find a way to avoid delays between task switches, I certainly
would like to know.  And of course, I won't call your figures BS, even if they
are in stark contrast with my experience.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Paul Bartholomew          |   "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of
>                          |    many things..."                  Lewis Carroll
>pdb059@mipl3.jpl.nasa.gov |   Disclaimer:  Opinions?  What opinions?
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
John G. Ata                     | Internet:     hfsi!ata@UUNET.UU.NET
Technical Consultant            |     UUCP:     uunet.uu.net!hfsi!mercury!ata
HFS, Inc.		  VA20	|    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601 |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
From: doiron@starpt.UUCP (Glenn Doiron)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anybody care to crush this Falcon Rumor?
Date: 25 Jul 92 04:05:34 GMT
Organization: 68K Software Development
X-NewsSoftware: Amiga GRn V1.16b 5/26/92 by Mikes Schwartz & Smith

In article <1992Jul17.082855.1894@cs.ruu.nl> ajlmvoer@cs.ruu.nl (Tonio Voerman) writes:
>In <1992Jul15.160322.28974@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill) writes:
>
>
>>   What is the deal with this Atari "Falcon"?  I've seen a lot of Atari
[... vaporware.]
>
>Hi,
>
>I am an Amiga user and I was wandering for some time how come there was no
>debate anymore about Amiga or Atari being better.

Well, the fact that Atari has all but dried up and blown to the wind might
have something to do with it.  Most of the ST people seem to have purchased
another computer.

>In fact I thought that the
>Atari had died a silent death as I don't see adds for Atari, I don't know any
>people proudly saying they have an Atari. Simply put: it seems to be very
>quiet about Atari. Now I read something about a Falcon, which should be an
>Amiga-killer.

Well, if it was a toxic Atari, then the vapors most certainly could kill a
girlfriend  :)

>Can somebody tell me what this machine can do ( detailed of
>course ) ?

Nope.  It's all speculation.  Nobody knows the specs.  Nobody knows if it even
exists.  Nobody knows if Atari can market a bottle of water in the middle of the
Sahara, either.  [Wow!  True c.s.a.a. spirit!]  And nobody can kill a new system
quite like Atari.  [Well, at least they are finally selling licenses to produce
Lynx stuff.]

>I am very contented with my Amiga, but I think Commodore is as
>always utterly slow in developing new exiting hardware, so I'm very curious
>what other people CAN develop in the already 7 ( ! ) years the Amiga exists.

Developing new hardware is trivial.  Making it compatible with the rest of the
product line, however, is not.  We could have had 1024x768x256 out of 16mil
years ago with TIGA boards.  But it wouldn't have been backwards compatible.

>Please respond with some information about this Falcon.

It doesn't exist.

>Tonio Voerman

Glenn Doiron
--
Amiga UUCP+
Origin:  uunet!starpt!doiron     (Organization:68K Software Development)
         BIX: gdoiron
** Not enough memory to perform requested operation.  Add 4 megs and retry.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: leavitt@cheshire.oxy.edu (Thomas VanNess Leavitt)
Subject: US $895 and less for a barebones 2000.
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:35:44 GMT

Prices in other countries are less...

or more, too.

Thom

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie)
Subject: Re: Amigas are cool
Originator: torrie@Xenon.Stanford.EDU
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 29 Jul 92 00:18:23 GMT

mlelstv@speckled.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst) writes:

>In <dridi.034i@choco.UUCP> dridi@choco.UUCP (Gilles Dridi ERF004) writes:
>>    It's an utopia to think all programs are safe. Since the beginning
>>    until NOW this has never been the case.

>True. However, memory protection won't save you since the OS, like every
>piece of software, will have bugs. In my experience MP doesn't lead to
>better or safer software but to sloppy programming.

  In my experience, MP allows you to FIND those cases of sloppy
programming, whereas without it you're blissfully unaware until
it jumps up and bites you one day when you're working on a 
critical presentation due for the board meeting in 10 minutes.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evan Torrie.  Stanford University, Class of 199?       torrie@cs.stanford.edu 
Embrace rationalism, reject superstition.           Break away from the past.
From: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block)
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 06:48:00 GMT

andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel) writes:
: Giving the 'source' a name doesn't help much.  Unless Timothy
: (whoever he is) has deputized you to speak for him, posts it
: himself, or published it in a source that you can reference, 
: you don't add anything to your argument.  For instance, if someone said  
: that he'd  heard that Vice-President Quayle also believes that a 386 PC with 
: 4 megs of memory could run OS/2 just fine....

Actually, V-P Dan Quayle said:

	"A 386 PC with 4 megabytes of memorie can run OS/2 just fin."

:)

: andy finkel		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy

Greg

--
(: (: (: (: Have you overdosed on smileys today?  Why NOT!?! :) :) :) :) :)
(:"The person who said size doesn't matter was probably a very small man":)
(:	gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu			Gregory R. Block         :)
(: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie)
Subject: Re: I DID give up on the Amiga!
Originator: torrie@Xenon.Stanford.EDU
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 22 Jul 92 06:28:27 GMT

philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes:

>In article <torrie.711624470@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes:
>[ ]

>>  CD-ROM readers have to be tougher than the ordinary audio CD player.
>>I don't know how much that extra ruggedness adds to the cost though, 
>>or how much is just due to lack of market demand.

>This is the standard line and it has been disputed by enough people that I
>don't believe it. I do realize that a CD-ROM reader is not exactly an audio
>one, but they basically work the same way.

  I was only reporting what I'd heard from test engineers inside a
large computer company (who had done this in their labs).  Obviously,
there must be something different between a CD audio, and CD-ROM drive
if a CD audio drive falls over after 3 days of use.

>There's no reason why CD-ROM's
>shouldn't cost around $200 except for that fact that few computers use them.
>When the SNES, Sega CD-ROM's come out at that price we shall see how the
>computer industry justifies $800 readers. 

  I think only NeXT charges $800 don't they?  Apple's CD-150 is 
less than that (although still expensive, it's about $400 educational), 
and the prices have been coming down.  I think around $200 O.E.M. is
what large companies are be paying now.

>And by the way, NEC has a $150
>CD-ROM reader for their game system, and it does have to do a fair amount of
>accessing.

  I don't claim to know anything about NEC's game system, so I'll leave
this one.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evan Torrie.  Stanford University, Class of 199?       torrie@cs.stanford.edu 
Embrace rationalism, reject superstition.           Break away from the past.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: mlelstv@speckled.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 22:02:55 GMT

In <1992Jul24.162126.9614@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> chuj@horton.Colorado.EDU (CHU JEFFREY) writes:
>That's gotta be just a little bit of a joke right?  I mean for the performance
>of RAW cpu, a 386 already matches up to a 030 processor, take for example of
>Mac ads on their POWERBOOKS, I think I have already posted the ad info before.
>Anyways unless your A600 is carrying a 030-16, it wouldn't be at the performance
>of a 386SX20.  

Not quite. An A500 is about same speed (as far as processor speed counts)
as a 12MHz 286. A 386SX isn't much faster as a 286 at the same clockspeed.
A 68030-16 would match the speed of a 386DX at 20MHz.

However, the peformance of a computer system cannot be measured alone
by the speed of the CPU. x86 systems usually have to compensate for the
efficiency of MS-DOS or Windows by sheer processor power.

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."
From: kdarling@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: A4000 article
Date: 30 Jul 92 20:33:38 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University

Mike Whalen writes:
>  It's true. I heard rumblings about some Super New Amiga 4000 over on
>GEnie's Amiga RT. I checked in and it mentioned something about it. So, I
>looked on the list of newsgroups and signed into Advocacy. That's when I
>saw the posting of the article. Since then, I have found out that it's over
>on CompuSpend and, though I know of no one over there and I can't confirm
>this.. I hear it's on Tragedy (Prodigy). People are taking this for real
>and spreading it all over the place. I don't know if the word has gotten
>around that it's fake.
 
No, the fake report is definitely NOT on CompuServe, altho it has been
talked about some.  Mark Manes and I made sure it was never taken seriously
there either time it came around (right after it was first posted here,
and again just recently).

Most users there are too old to believe anything like that anyway, at least
not without getting confirmation.  Even the one or two people who mentioned
the "A4000" article did so as a question, not as a fact.

kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
From: jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Perot ?
Date: 27 Jul 92 21:06:02 GMT
Organization: FAA Technical Center, Atlantic City NJ

TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko) writes:

>Who destroyed the Savings and Loan system?

>It was rea...

>Nope, just kidding. A guy who had a lot to do with it was,

>Jim Wright, congressman from texas.

  No matter how cuplable Wright was made out to be he did not sign the
legislation into law that deregulated the industry.

  It amounted to giving the fox's the keys to the henhouse.

>Be careful bringing up the S&L debacle, the truth is a lot more 
>horrid and mundane (interesting, no?) than is believed.

  As is the Iran-Contra debacle...

  -jack-
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy