From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO)
Subject: Re: Amigas are cool
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 05:09:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.220049.2298@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett) writes:
>In article <1992Jul25.174707.12915@cs.rose-hulman.edu> catapcnl@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Chris Lawrence) writes:
>>AmigaOS has the advantage in that you don't have to load it from disk (well, at  
>>least 90% of us don't...).  Also, try running OS/2 on a base-level PC system.   
>>It won't even run on the (relatively fast) VGA-based 386SX-16mhz clowns that  
>>are sold today at $1000, without another $500 of ram and a good sized HD for  
>>another $500. 
>
>   Most such $1000 systems come with 2M of RAM.  To run OS/2 well, you need
>only add 6M, which is about $200-$250 at today's prices.  It has also been 
>mentioned that OS/2 will fit well onto a 60M drive, as long as you aren't
>trying to fit 40M of C++ development tools onto it as well.  60M SCSI drives
>can be had for $250 these days.
>
>> The Amiga base system (as low as $500) can run KS 2.04, which  
>>matches up favorably to OS/2.
>
>   In what respects?  AmigaOS 2.04 does not have virtual memory (which means
>that Amigas are limited in their usefulness for image processing and 
You are only limited by the size of physical memory.

>manipulation), does not have memory protection (which means that one badly
>written screen blanker could destroy many hours of a user's work), does not

Yes it could.  But let me assure you that you could also loose
many hours worth of work by shutting off your computer without
saving your work and much more easily. :) Memory protection is
much more important in a multi-user system than a single user
system.

>have retargetable graphics (which means that all Amiga users are limited to
>720x480 graphics with 16 colors out of 4096 for most productive applications,
>unless the user is willing to put up with four on-screen colors, slower screen
>updates, a 64-color color palette, and bad flicker of Super HiRes, or unless 
>the user is willing to plunk down $2000-$8000 for an Amiga third-party
>video card with an unstable third-party-written non-supported-by-Commodore 
>RTG system), an AmigaOS does not have anywhere near the variety of
>applications available for it.

I believe that anyone who brought an Amiga thinking that it had
the same variety of applications than OS, OS/2 or Windows is not
thinking.
>
> The comparison of the debate between OS/2 and AmigaOS to the debate between 
>AmigaOS and AtariOS is a very apt one, because OS/2 really does make AmigaOS 
>look like AtariOS.  It is quite simply a far more advanced and modern 
>operating system.
From everything I'm hearing in this group especially Jerry's and your
posting is convincing me that frankly you are wrong in this area.  Because
if that's the best you can say about OS/2, then at the very least both
OSs are comparable.

barrett@iastate.edu
>----------------------------------------------------- >"If you
like Congress, you'll **LOVE** Bill Clinton." > --new campaign
slogan >


-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:     hfsi!ata@UUNET.UU.NET
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:     uunet.uu.net!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729