HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: slvj6@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: 680x0 vs 80x86, lets get busy
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:37:16 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

Ok guys... I've heard a lot of people saying they want a benchmark of
386s vs 030's and 486's vs 040s.

Fine!  Run the stupid benchmarks compiled under GNU C and see what results 
you get under brand x unix vs Amiga unix.

I hear constant claims that the other side will cheat... from both sides.
This is the poorest excuse I've ever heard for not actually running the
benchmarks.
I think we can find several people on both sides that can be trusted.

I've used benchmarks under AmigaDOS and MS-DOS, and unless AmigaUnix really
sucks, compiler output won't make a huge difference in the outcome.
(the first version I saw was running in too little memory and was slow... but
 that's virtual memory for you)

Lets find the C source we want to use and do the benchmarks so we can bring 
this argument to a close.

After the C benchmarks are finished, if anyone has the time and energy, we
can convert a benchmark or two and see what speed improvement we get over the
originals.
This should satisfy the people that think the compilers will effect the
outcome.

So, who has the Unix's we want to test?  Who's got the benchmark code?
And what configuration should we use?

It's time to put the benchmarks where our mouths are.
Anyone have an objection to this?

Do the benchmarks or shut up!  This is getting real old.

James
From: Paula_Lieberman@amicol.UUCP (Paula Lieberman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom" ?
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:40:55 GMT
Organization: Amiga Colony BBS

re article by Skip Sauls:  What use is multiple monitors? How about high
resolution image on one monitor, other monitor with the controls interface
for image manipulation? -- as in Firecracker usage, Video Toaster, quite a
few non-Amiga systems including GIS [Geographical Information Systems],
satellite image processing [I remember seeing Symbolics machines with dual
monitors -- one with a Landsat image being image-processed to bring out
specific "features" whether they be geological formations, roads, foliage
types, soil characteristics, etc.], video material development [sequencing
of frames, manipulation of individual frames in a sequence, etc.].  
Perhaps you can remember settings effects being used to manipulate images
when the controls user interface isn't directly in front of you; me, I was
to be able to see them and not have them obscuring the image I'm working
with.  An alternative which partially works is a lot of pixels on a monitor
-- however, it -is- nice to see the entirety of the image in decent
resolution and have the controls interface also fully in view,
simultaneously.


-- Via DLG Pro v0.991
From: po87553@cs.tut.fi (Pasi 'Albert' Ojala)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga Inadequacy
Date: 12 Apr 92 18:06:21 GMT
Organization: Tampere University of Technology

In article <1992Apr11.211607.24483@crash.cts.com> dvan@pnet01.cts.com (David Vandeven) writes:
>  Now I sit here blissfully, launching multiple copies of TEACHTEXT, watching
>my little lovely ZOOMRECTS all day long.  

There are little programs out there to make amiga windows zoom also, so..
I used one back in '89.
-- 
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Pasi 'Albert' Ojala
po87553@cs.tut.fi	albert@cc.tut.fi
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: mikeh@starnine.UUCP (Mike Haas)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom" ?
Date: 14 Apr 92 03:19:23 GMT
Reply-To: mikeh@starnine.UUCP (Mike Haas)
Organization: StarNine Techonoligies, Inc., Berkeley

In article <z3vtr5_@rpi.edu> johnsd2@rpi.edu writes:

RE: GetNextEvent() on the mac...

>
>|> >The reason you don't have to call it a lot is because when you do call it,
>|> >it will wait a bit before it comes back. This the user will have time to
>|> >do things before you get control again.
>|> 
>|>   And you end up with jerkyness.
>
>Well, *I* don't end up with jerkyness. Perhaps YOU do, I wouldn't know.

>But some of the things being said [like that "jerkyness" bit above]
>made me think that some people here had only a shakey understanding
>of what it is, and how it works.

Oh, make no mistake about it... the Mac is VERY prone to jerkiness.

I sit at a 25 MHz 030 mac every day...many's the time I click on a window
or double-click something and there is absolutely NO RESPONSE from
the system for several seconds!  Often, I double-click again, maybe
several times.

It really peeves me...I start clicking in the windows of other apps...
back to finder...NOTHING!  Then, all of a sudden, all the click
responses start happening and I've got windows poppin' all over the place!
Sometimes even doing things I didn't want done 'cause windows have now
fronted and one of those delayed clicks happen (on a control that
wasn't there when I clicked 'cause the window wasn't fronted).  It's
insane.

All it takes is some network activity or having the right (wrong) app
doing something "in the background".  (some "background"!  keeps
things from happening in the foreground!).


Now, the mouse usually MOVES smoothly, 'cause it's movement generates
interrupts which don't have to wait for GetNextEvent().  However, try
moving the mouse on a Plus or SE while it's reading from the floppy...
You'll witness the very definition of JERKINESS!  It's smooth on the
accelerated machines 'cause they have the bandwidth to handle their
interrupts quickly.

I am an Amiga fan, but I'm not blowing smoke here.  The system
response of the Mac on ANY processor is horrible.  As soon as
stuff starts going on in the background.

It's cause the MacOS is so poorly designed for background processing that
there are many situations it has to lock out every thing else...due
to it's lack of re-entrancy.  Many, many restrictions on times when
applications can allocate memory, do I/O.

System 7 seems to further aggravate the problem with system response.
Just turn on "calculate folder sizes" and watch how it runs.  To
get absolutely nothing done, enable VM at the same time.

Now, the amiga's not perfect, but I can honestly say that no matter
how cpu-bound the machine is, the responses to clicks ALWAYS seem
instantaneous.  If it's busy, it may actually do work slower, but
the system ALWAYS responds immediately to the mouse.
From: Mike_Whalen@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Mike Whalen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Beer (was Re: New Amigas Announced!!!!)
Date: 12 Apr 92 15:03:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: agwbbs.Mike_Whalen.0bu0
Organization: The Amiga GateWay BBS * New Orleans, La.

In a message dated Sat 11 Apr 92 16:21, Kdarling@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (ke
wrote:

 K> Gentlemen... please at least change the subject heading if you're
 K> going
 K> to discuss just beer all weekend long.   Especially when that current
 K> "New Amigas" header is bound to draw unsuspecting readers in :-)

  Hmmm.. well.. computers are best worked on with a beer in hand.. yeah.
That's it!

 K> Thanks!  And btw, I'm one of those who believe that beer is only
 K> rented
 K> by the drinker :-)   Give me a straight shot of Chivas Regal any day!
 K> (I picked up the habit in the Army in Korea... $4 a bottle... cheap!)

  I can see how that would be attractive.. but I like my Guiness anytime.

-- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Yet another fine quality message from.. Mike Whalen Brand Message Prod.
If you like it.. you like it.. if not... FNORD!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
InterNet:                  Mike_Whalen@agwbbs.new-orleans.la.us
UUCP:                             rex!agwbbs!Mike_Whalen
                                 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: Intel HW
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 21:49:15 GMT

jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>>How so?  They are both processor-driven graphics card that give 8-bit,
>>high resolution graphics.
>
>I thought the Resolver had a coprocessor on it.  Doesn't it?

Yes.  When I said "processor-driven" I meant that the boards have their
own processors.

-- Gerald
From: grubba@lysator.liu.se (Henrik Grubbstr|m)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: The Gail-chip and its uses
Summary: Special hardware to stop piracy, using the AFD-technique
Keywords: chip, piracy, AFD, Gail
Date: 8 Apr 92 09:36:51 GMT
Organization: Lysator Computer Club, Linkoping University, Sweden

One use of the Gail-chip I have not heared someone on the net mention yet, is
that it incorperates the AFD-technique.
The first time you use a new Amiga you have to enter a personal code, wich then
gets burnt into the Gail chip. Then each time you use new commercial software,
this code is transfered to the disk (even if it's write-protected).
Each time you use the disk after that, it compares the two codes, and if they
don't match, the computer will be permanently blocked, and only CBM service
people, will be able to reset it, and they are told to notify the police
immediately, if an blocked amiga arrives.
You could try to copy the disks before the code is transfered, but Gail will
sense it and erase the disks.
CBM have been installing the Gail-chip in all amigas since the first of April.

All of the above information from issue #7/1992 of `DatorMagazin' (the largest
swedish computer newspaper).

A couple of questions:

	* Will Commodore recall all old amigas to swap Gary and Gail, since
	  this obviously doesn't apply to the ones shipped with Gary?

	* Is it really possible for the chip to write on write-protected disks,
	  even on external drives?

	* Will these disks be usable on old amigas?

Regards,
--
Henrik Grubbstrom					grubba@lysator.liu.se
Lysator Computer Club,
Linkoping University, Sweden
From: kevinm@ocf.berkeley.edu (Kevin Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: UNIX for the Amiga
Keywords: Amiga, UNIX, BSD
Date: 15 Apr 92 09:03:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: agate.sgrgvINNn2k
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: planecrash.berkeley.edu


  

I've seen a message from Matt Dillon saying that he is porting BSD Unix to the
Amiga.  The great part is that it will be distributed as **freeware**!
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene)
Subject: Re: Game machines and such
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 01:47:16 GMT


> I wonder about this.  Let us suppose that the A600 is priced at about $250.
> For those who want a game machine, this is still a bit high compared to
> SNES and Genesis.  People who want an inexpensive home computer are more
> likely to look at cheap Intel PCs, since these are what the "average user"
> is familiar with.  People who are more familiar with computers, and the
> Amiga in particular, are not likely to be happy with the A600.  I could
> be wrong; we will see.
> 
> -- Gerald

	Does anyone have any idea when the US is going to see this A600??
  Has CBM released it in Europe yet?

							G.Greene
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: 040 and 486_ (bunch O' Kaka anyway)
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 22:42:16 GMT

davidy@sumax.seattleu.edu (Stimpson J. Cat) writes:
>
>Before Jerry reviles me as another rabid Amigan, I would like to point
>out that I think the segemented architecture of the 80386 and above is a 
>bonus, not a detriment.
>

Why would I revile you?  Even if you hated the segmented architecture I
wouldn't do that.  You stated your opinions without flaming, throwing a fit,
or pretending to know more than you do.  My hat's off to you.

>
>David L. Yee
>
--
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
| 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                               |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: dat91lho@ludat.lth.se (Holmgren Lars)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Gail-chip and its uses
Keywords: chip, piracy, AFD, Gail
Date: 10 Apr 92 09:57:13 GMT
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden

[April fool deleted]

Ha Ha Ha!

Jag skrattar ndstan pe mig!

/Lars
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: justin@mik.uky.edu (Justin Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom"
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 13:09:54 GMT
X-Bytes: 

Rob Healey writes
> 	Hmm, Publish & Subscript is message passing... The thing with
> 	AREXX is that one or more apps can CONTROL one or more other
> 	apps through the ports in addition to passing data, messages,
> 	pointer, etc.

Are you blind? Publish & Subscribe is data transfer.. AppleEvents is  
application/system/process control.. The two work in perfect harmony, they just  
go by two different names.
 
> 	Both of these are the fault of the application, not the scaling
> 	technology in AmigaDOS. It could also be said that the Amiga
> 	doesn't need the Mac's outline support because the Amiga gets
> 	along just fine with IT'S support.

So what if it does? It's still nonstandard and can cause headaches and  
surprises when it goes to a PostScript printer.
 
> 	By the way, I can scale type 1, Speedo and other scalable font
> 	technologys under X11R5 on my Amiga. Be careful that you say
> 	AmigaDOS when you make sweeping statements like this. The X11R5
> 	contrib area has code that lets any X capable system do font
> 	scaling with the standard X11R5 font scaler.

So what does this have to do with Amiga? I can do it on a Sun, on an RS/6000,  
on an SGI, on a 3090-600J, and many other machines we have here running X11R5.  
What makes the Amiga unique?

--
*******************************************************************************
* "Imagine sky.. High above, in Caribbean Blue.." <sigh>                      *
* The University of Kentucky doesn't pay well enough to share my opinions.    *
*******************************************************************************
From: tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (Kenneth Jamieson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: AppleEvents, how to they work?
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:44:09 GMT
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.

In article <torrie.702441620@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes:
>
>ObligAdv:  How does AREXX know which applications support what
>messages?  For example, when you're writing a script, can you tell
>whether an application handles a particular message, and whether
>it requires or has optional parameters, and what types those
>parameters are?  

	Actually - not really.

	There is no hard and fast specification on what commands a
AREXX compatible application supports, nor what paramaters it will
take for them.

	Every application is, for most purposes, a seperate language
that must be learned (though REXX will standarddize the control constructs).



-- 

+--[ 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: LEEK@QUCDN.QueensU.CA
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Zorro III Stuff (Was: Guesses, et al.)
Date: 11 Apr 92 16:49:03 GMT
 <mykes.1839@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> <30097@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston

In article <30097@cbmvax.commodore.com>, daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave
Haynie) says:
>
>Zorro III can technically keep up with other 32-bit buses out there; it's
>faster in practice than many PC and Mac implementations already.  You're going
>to run into problems going much faster on any bus, which is why the top
>practical speeds of Zorro III, NuBus, EISA, MCA, etc. all seem to be around
>the same point.  Going much faster then the practical limits on these buses

May be you could propose to have the Zorro III adopted as one of the
personal computer standards...  Things like  IEEE bus standards comes
to mind.  I am serious !!

>--
>Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
>   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      BIX: hazy

K. C. Lee
Elec. Eng. Grad. Student

P.S. I was the first one to suggest making a Amiga card for the PC,
port Amiga DOS over to PC.  Now I am suggesting to make ZorroIII a
bus for the PCs (all personal computers)
From: root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:   The Under $10K Unix Workstation!
Distribution: world
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:18:50 EST
Organization: Rick's Amiga

In article <nq1t2kh@rpi.edu> borres@aix.rpi.edu (Steven D. Borrelli) writes:
>In article <1992Apr6.114450.22359@nic.unh.edu> pss1@kepler.unh.edu (Paul S Secinaro) writes:
>>In article <p9ztbrc@rpi.edu> borres@aix.rpi.edu (Steven D. Borrelli) writes:
>>
>>>
>>>After paying lic. fees to AT&T and Adobe, UNIX is going to be expensive. 
>>>Price Commodore's UNIX offering or any other one (like AU/X).
>>
>>
>>I think it's more a function of volume.  A UNIX license costs, what,
>>$100K or so?  That's not a lot of money for a large company.  IBM
>>spent hundreds of millions on OS/2 2.0 (maybe billions), and you can
>>buy a copy for $49 (Windows upgrade price).
>>
>>I don't see why there couldn't be a good UNIX package for $200 or less
>>(for any theoretical machine for which sufficient demand exists).  Or
>>does AT&T charge a per-copy royalty?  That might be a problem.
>>
>>Paul
>>
>I don't know how the royalty scheme goes, but I think the last few posts
>have shown that UNIXes are generally expensive. Commodore's offering is
>$1300 (a good deal since it comes with source for the drivers), NeXT will
>start at $1000, Solaris is $795 (I think it will be more if you want 
>the compiler). If price is based on volume, it is pretty obvious that
>there isn't much demand for UNIX out there.  
>
>My original point (responding to R. Kelly) was that the NeXT/486 OS,
>while expensive, was not that out of line when compared to other unixes.
>While I'd love to see a cheap UNIX out there, the only place I can 
>see it happening is in the PC world, with its huge installed base. 

This system, rkamiga, is fed by rmkhome which sits on the other side of
the room.  rmkhome is a 386/33 running Coherent, which is a SYS7/SYSV
compatible UNIX clone that costs $99.  I have been running it for over
a year now, and have had little trouble running software that runs in
286 protected mode using the small memory model.  Real soon now, Coherent
386, which is SYSV compatible throughout, will be making an appearance.
It is going to really exciting, but I can't say any more than that as I
am under non-disclosure.  But, I use all kinds of UNIX system ( R3, R4, BSD )
since I work as a UNIX consultant, and I have been very pleased with Coherent.

USL and Novell are working on "Unixlite", which will be AT&T UNIX for PC
clones at a $200 price.

You can buy complete SVR4 development systems with X11 and networking for
$695 to $1600 depending on the vendor and the number of users.

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

		think!unixland!rmkhome!rkamiga!root
From: rhealey@kas.helios.mn.org (Rob Healey)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom" ?
Date: 3 Apr 92 05:05:36 GMT
Organization: Rob's home system, Hopkins, MN

In article <1992Mar30.181146.5506@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, hauer@roby.ecn.purdue.edu (Corey Hauer) writes:
|> If you want preemptive multitasking on the Mac use A/UX or wait for the 
|> microkernal.
|> 
	Why wait? I can have it NOW! I can boot either AmigaDOS or UNIX
	and both multitask great and have done so for many months.

	All this stuff the Mac will have RSN... I have it now under AmigaDOS
	CLI, sksh, csh, 2.04 shell, AREXX, etc.

	As far as using A/UX, I think AmigaUNIX does quite a bit better and
	is a full SVR4 UNIX without all the guesswork; "hmmm, is this
	Berkeley sorta, SVR2.x sorta, Mac sorta or sorta sorta?"

	Try again with a stronger argument,

		-Rob
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: Comics for Sale
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 04:38:44 GMT

baggettw@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
>Collection of 5000 comic books for sale.
>X-Men and Mutants specialty.
>DCs, Marvels, and independents.
>Collection worth $20,000.  
>Will sell whole collection for $10,000 or best offer.

Great.

100 Baseball Cards for sale.  Mint condition.  $5.2mil for whole collection.

-- Gerald
From: kdarling@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: CDTV
Date: 16 Apr 92 11:05:40 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University

Raymond Ulibarri writes:
>CDTV Development may happen on any of the Amiga family of computers.
>Commodore presonally recommends the A2500, since with 68000 fallback you can
>partially emulate CDTV (1MB Chip RAM, 8MHz 68000 CPU).  However, CATS has a
>(rather pricey for the backyard developer) CDTV emulator board which plugs
>into the A2x00/A3000 computer and emulates a CDTV unit for testing purposes.
>This CDTV emulator board is available from CATS directly to registered CDTV
>developers.

Well don't keep us in suspense :-)  How much is it?  Do you have one?

thx - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams)
Subject: Re:    C= policy (Re: Apple problems "Home computer")
Organization: James Cook University, North Queensland
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 02:17:06 GMT

In article <root.01e7@rkamiga.UUCP> root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>In article <1992Apr12.213844.2389@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>Windows does not run in 386 protected mode.  

Yes it does.  It even does paging in 386 protected mode. 

>Rick Kelly		Rick's Amiga		Framingham, Mass.

-- 
Colin Adams         Honours Student - James Cook University of North Queensland
I've seen you smile, but I've never really heard you laugh.  So who is rich
and who is poor I cannot say. - The Smiths