From: u9148043@cs.uow.edu.au (Justin Jay Lister)
Subject: Re: Oh my God! Help my friend not buy an IBM!
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 05:24:33 GMT

x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:

>In article <1992Nov11.112204.11012@mercury.unt.edu>, west@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Bruce West) writes:
>> In article <1992Nov10.110930.6270@gw.wmich.edu> x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:

>	Listen, I will try to put it in simple terms so that you do not
>get confused.  I said I had not seen an Amiga 3000 that had animation
>that would blow me away.  I have used plenty of Amiga 3000s.  I had an
>Amiga.  I had an Amiga until I found that I needed a real comptuer to get

And amiga is not real computer thanx for the info (NOT).

>some real work done.  The Amiga was good for playing video games on or
>using some of the lamo word processors for it for somall papers.  But
>when college came, I needed a computer that had some engineering software

Gee college ohh no my amiga better go now, I don't know how I do without 
your PC.

>like IPLS for coding intel chips and Altara for coding chips and an
>easily accessible version of spice (the Amiga version sucks).  for your
>information, I work at a company that sells IBMs and sells Amiga hardware

Yeah and amiga is gonna support INTEL chips hahahahah. You have a job that
is one thing I don't have 8( (can I have it ?? )

>(hard drives, ks20 chips, etc.) I haven't seen an Amiga 4000, I admit it
>but it wasn't out when moved to the PC platform but it still doesn't
>change the fact that there is very little software for the Amiga and
>getting it is often an ordeal.  Throw away your pirated stuff for a moment
>and tell me how much software you would really have?  

Nah

>	Furthermore, I needed bulletproof software and my IBM compatible
>PRE-EMPTIVELY multitasks in a protected Os unlike the Amiga which is
>not only protected but a great deal of the software actually takes over.
>For doing 3d modeling, I need to be able to do in in the background such
>that I can still be doing my program compiling and other tasks at near
>full speed.  The Amiga 3000 just doesn't do that as well.  And, as I said, the

And you know claim to know lots about OS's anybody knows you can't do more
without slowdown of system. You are loading the system with 2 processes and 
have to take account of context switches, and other sys related overheads,
(besides the 500 can compile and run a raytrace - sure you need an accl)
but you dont wanna try comparing a 68k to a 486 do you, this is where it
becomes amusing our little 500 with an 040 makes your os/2 pc seem like 
silly putty.

you think OS/2 is faster in switching processes (I think not), OS/2 isn't a
real time OS - ha that is what you get for having an OS that has to have
virtual mem going! (ohhhh those disc access are a pain shame i can't jump in
right now) And create screen support it has no layering of the screens like the
amiga sys. And such speed at which you can switch between (hmm meet the mac 
multifinder hheheh) I can hold the left mousebutton and press the right fast
and swap between 10 apps that are currently running. And I have only 9 meg 8(

>4000 wasn't available at the time.  You accuse me of not researching
>my computer, and then make ignorant statements like "PCs can't preemptively
>multitask -- period."  Try os/2 2.0.
Hahah and have to wait for the disc nah..

>>     I carefully researched my choice of computers and am not a mindless
>> Amiga follower.  But I will say Mac went out the window right away - an

Hope I don't get called mindless 8) Moneyless but being a student has things
to do with that.

>> OS in which you can't type, 'nuff said.  And IBM simply couldn't measure
>> up.  I'm a CS student with a serious interest in graphics.  With my Amiga
>> I can enjoy a cheap, fast, multitasking environment with some nice base
>> graphics and sound and great multimedia and presentation software.  Awesome
>> support for programmers.  And if I ever get into real serious graphics I can
>> get a card to make my Amiga look like an Silicon Graphics Iris - or if I
>> get into the video end I can get a toaster for about the same price.  Now
>> THAT is what I call open options - *and* being happy along the way.
>> 
>	Then you made the right choice.  The Amiga is BETTER for doing
>graphics cheaply than a PC.  A 7mhz amiga can do graphics animation as
>well as a high end IBM PC and the Amiga costs less.  
>	I too needed a good programming environment and OS/2 provided
>it but I also needed easy access to chip encoding programmers, altara,
>ipls, and 2d/3d modeling.

Only thing I see here is the chip encoding programmers but I am sure if you
looked there would be some. God most of the amiga people are hardware guys.

[Amiga history deleted]

>to a PC.  So I got a 386 with windows and was marginally happy with it
^^^^^^^^ biggest mistake should keep the amiga and have both!
>but missed the multitasking.  A few months later, I put in a 486
>motherboard and 16 megs of memory and a 24bit coprocessed grahics card
>and now I am very happy with it (now that I have os/2).

As long as you are happy that is what it is all about!

>	So I wouldn't exactly chime that I didn't think about my hardware
>platforms.
One could argue, but it is ultimately your choice. I aint on -MB- 8)
>						-Brad

Till next time 
-- 
|.####...#....#..######.| Amiga 2000 HD 120+9Meg  &  Amiga 500              |
|.#...#..#....#..#......|   email:  u9148043@cs.uow.edu.au                  |
|.####...#....#..###....| OS/2 - If your happy with half and OS fine with me|
|.#...#...####...#......| He who rides the tiger can never dismount         |