HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dtiberio@csws17.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio)
Subject: Re: Intel HW
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 05:29:21 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.213210.5408@seas.gwu.edu> gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip 'AdaX' Sauls) writes:
>>gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>>>jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>>>Well, if the Intel-based machine cannot even hope to compete, then why does
>>>>*my* 386 clone consistently perform better than a comparably equipped A3000?
>>>
>>>How are they suitably equipped (i.e., what hardware does each system have)?
>>>Curious.
>>
>>               A3000                          PC386
>>
>>cpu            68030-25                       80386-25

	stats deleted...

>With the above systems, modified or not, I find it hard to believe that the
>386 could give better performance than an A3000.  I have used an A3000 (25MHz
>030) and a 33MHz 486.  I found the performance of the two to be very close.
>In any event Mr. Shekhel did not say what performance he was comparing.
>Perhaps the 386 falls faster from a 2nd story window.

	You are so out of it that I can't believe you would think such
a thing. Now I know better than to listen to any more of this crap. I don't
care if you have been using a 486 or an XT; your personal opinion doesn't
mean anything. How dare you claim that the speed of a 386 is any different
than an A3000 when dropped from a 2nd story window...they both accelerate
at 9.8 meters per second, which is around 32 feet per second!

(:

-- 
      //   David Tiberio  SUNY Stony Brook 2-3662  AMIGA  DDD-MEN   
     //  Not the llama! Come here Earl; I want to tell you something...
   \X/  Liverpool, New York	flames to suggestions@cbmvax.commodore.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Game machines and such
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 05:21:21 GMT

ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene) writes:
>> Maybe this A600 thing will give them some extra cash for real computers.  It
>> is still hard to imagine many people buying a 68000 based home-computer in
>> this day and age.
>> 
>> -- Gerald
>
>	Depends on how much CBM intends to charge for it.

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
From: peterk@public.sub.org (Peter Kittel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Intel HW
Date: 13 Apr 92 07:59:03 GMT
Organization: Public News & Mailserver, Commodore Germany PM UNIX, Frankfurt

jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:

>That's *your* experience.  In *my* experience, Borland C++ 3.0 compiles
>faster than anything I've ever seen anywhere, including the Amiga.  It
>pre-compiles header files, so that they only have to be read once for the
>whole project.  Is there an Amiga compiler that does this?

Oh yes, sure. SAS/C does it for years. I saw it there the first time.
But that doesn't necessarily mean they invented it. But this isn't
impossible.

-- 
Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel  // E-Mail to  \\  Only my personal opinions... 
Commodore Frankfurt, Germany  \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
From: cs455138@ucs.usl.edu (Seidel Daniel F)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: C64 vs IBM486
Date: 8 Apr 92 04:44:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: usl.1992Apr8.044425.21456
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette




    64 Good reasons that the Commodore 64 surpasses the IBM 
(or any clone) 486 machine.


1.   Has a graphics co-processor (sprites).
2.   Flat memory (all directly accessible).
3.   Lots of software written *SPECIFICALLY* for it.
4.   Basic in ROM.
5.   Built in joystick ports.
6.   Hardware debugged.
7.   Don't have to worry about an Apple lawsuit.
8.   No noisy fan.
9.   Not crippled by compatibility with previous machines.
10.  Not compatible with 8088.
11.  Won't be made obsolete by the 586.
12.  Good user manual.
13.  Has cartridge port (built in ROM expander).
14.  Superior sound capability (can be hooked to external speakers).
15.  Volume of sound can be adjusted.
16.  Standard color graphics.
17.  Can draw with shapes on sides of keys (alt-A, ctrl-B, etc.).
18.  Brand name.
19.  Can be made Z80 compatible.
20.  Bus runs at full speed of processor.
21.  Can support 5 drives.
22.  Machine well documented.
23.  Sturdy (can survive multiple 3 foot falls).
24.  Small foot-print.
25.  TV adapter included.
26.  Doesn't need a cache.
27.  Memory map is well documented.
28.  Highly integrated design.
29.  Much larger user base.
30.  Bus has same number of bits as processor (no bottle neck).
31.  No bloated programs on 47 low density disks.
32.  Higher sales in Europe especially Eastern Europe.
33.  No waiting on IBM or Microsoft.
34.  Avoid brutal comparisons to workstations.
35.  Maximum repair cost $100.
36.  Cheap!
37.  Sprite collision detection.
38.  OS does not fall back to DOS on large error.
39.  OS takes full advantage of the hardware.
40.  OS is in ROM.
41.  Much lighter (notebook like weight).
42.  64C has GUI.
43.  Software is inexpensive.
44.  Can play music with floppy drive.
45.  More reliable.
46.  Bitmaps take less memory.
47.  No supersonic directory listings.
48.  Never have to use DOS.
49.  Longer useful life.
50.  Upgrade drive to 1571.
51.  Upgrade path to 128.
52.  Programs smaller and easier to understand.
53.  Can use 27" screen (family room TV or projection TV).
54.  Great first computer.
55.  Fond childhood memories.
56.  Might be in attic (don't have to go out and buy one).
57.  Won't depreciate much more.
58.  Fits into allowance.
59.  Low power consumption.
60.  Basic architecture is newer.
61.  More games.
62.  Better looking.
63.  Can be emulated by the Commodore Amiga at full speed.
64.  Boots to OS *MUCH* faster.



Do you realize how much worse the 486's look compared to a Commodore
Amiga instead of the lowly Commodore 64?!?!
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip 'AdaX' Sauls)
Subject: Re: New Amigas Announced!!!!
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 18:10:08 GMT

In article <Mike_Whalen.0brg@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US> Mike_Whalen@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Mike Whalen) writes:
>In a message dated Sat 11 Apr 92 10:18, Reaper@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (jaso
>wrote:
>
> R> Personally, Bud Dry is my favourite.  Also: Bud, Busch Light, Genuine
> R> Draft,
> R> and about anything else.  Of course I ofter opt for a cold shot of
> R> Jack
> R> Daniels green label most of the time.
>
>  Wait.. you actually LIKE Panther Urine (read: American Beer). What about
>Guiness Extra Stout? What about Harp? What about Chimay Ale?)
>
>  Jeez.

Aw, give him a break!  :-)

Unfortunately, some of us have trouble finding the brands that you mention.
This university is in the town of Oxford, MS, whose bible-thumping redneck
citizens will not even allow cold beer to be sold in stores!!!  You cannot
buy it after midnight or on Sunday either.  The only non-American beers 
available are the fake-imports like Heineken, Lowenbrau and Corona.

Seeing that you are from the New Orleans area, have you tried the Black
Voodoo Beer?  (or whatever the name is)  It is the one that was banned in
Texas for a while because some fools thought it was used by cults or some
such nonsense.

>InterNet:                  Mike_Whalen@agwbbs.new-orleans.la.us
>UUCP:                             rex!agwbbs!Mike_Whalen

Skip Sauls                     //    Graduate Student & Instructor
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu    \X/     CS Department, University of Mississippi
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: 14 Apr 92 18:28:39 GMT
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science

In article <1992Apr14.173411.10287@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> aa399@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Len Stys) writes:
>
>Can you say CBM losing many of their users in the U.S. due to Nintendo
>(a Japanese company) owning the company that produces the computer they own?

How is this different from a Bahamian company owning the company that produeces
the computer that they own?  And as to losing users in the U.S., big deal,
there are not that many in the first place.

>I wonder how many users would stick with Commodore once Nintendo bought
>them out ESPECIALLY when there are a growing amount of people out there that
>dislikes the way Nintendo does things.

How many users would stick with the Amiga if Apple bought them out, especially
when there are lots of Amiga owners who dislike the way that Apple does things.

>The only thing that this would accomplish is many of those users eventually
>selling their Amiga and purchasing a new Falcon or whatever it will be.

Get a clue!  Why in the world would Amiga owners sell their machines and
purchase a machine from a company that has less of a future than C=?

>By Winter, Atari will be offering everything that the Amiga has anyways.

After 6 years I would certainly hope so.

Skip Sauls                     //    Graduate Student & Instructor
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu    \X/     CS Department, University of Mississippi
From: dionf@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Dion Francois)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: I need some advice on a Audio/Video station.
Summary: Prices and info for production of videos
Date: 15 Apr 92 03:32:20 GMT
Organization: Universite de Montreal

Hi,
	I have to do some graphic videos ( based on fractals, cad objects and
rendering) and music ( not necessarily related). I know of several items i will
need, but i am new to the amiga world so could somebody enlight me on what the
items will cost me, and if something is missing from my list. (I am told that
the Amiga will be the cheapest solution)

-fast cpu with co-processor ( which amiga?) (i need SGI computational power)
-lots of ram ( how much? )
-Very big hard disk ( will any SCSI do? I have seen some 1 Gig drives cheap)
-24 bits video with broadcast quality NTSC in/out
-16 (or 18) bits audio card. Only digital, no FM synths. Digital interface and
analog interface. Digital studio quality.
-A monitor

I will also need other stuff but that has nothing to do with the Amiga. (video
disc recorder by Sony, ntsc monitor, video enhancer, audio monitor, etc...)

Software:
-Complete fractal generator with 3d renderer compatible out.
-3d object creator
-3-d Renderer (`a la Pixar Renderman)
-Image manipulator
-Animation program with real time for less than 30 seconds and frame by frame
for longer sequences. The sequencing must be automated ( the software must tell
my Sony laserdisc recorder to grab a frame and advance to the next frame etc...)
-Software sequencer ( like a mod editor but with the 48 KHz, 16 bits
support
-Sample editor with manipulations like standing waves, delay, chorus, reverb,
vocoder (with the audio input), echo, distortion for full 48 KHz, 16 bits.

So, am i missing something? How much will all that will cost me?
Any software that i need is SW, PD or cheap?

I have been proposed either a SGI Indigo and a 486-33 with Targa card and
Turtle beach audio card. I have not yet received the quotation on the SGI
because the salesperson has to find an animation program to drive my Sony.
On the IBM it seems that autodesk animator Pro can do it no problemo, but
my arms dropped when he told me the price for all the stuff...

Thank you for any advice,

Francois Dion  ( dionf@ere.umontreal.ca)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:  Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom"
From: sbiddle@aviate.cavebbs.gen.nz (Steve Biddle)
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:26:11 +1200
Distribution: world
Organization: Steves Amiga - Wellington, New Zealand.

In article <1992Apr3.210913.2100@ms.uky.edu> justin@graphlab.cc.uky.edu  (Justin Sullivan) writes:
>Ray writes
>>    Do you even know how to program in Arexx? I bet you don't know a single
>> thing about it, nor do you have it.
>
>Do you know how to program in AppleEvents?

You're avoiding the actual question.

>>    Output from AmigaTeX surpasses anything what I've seen done on the Mac,
>> except when it's done by an expert in typesetting/layout.
>
>What have you seen done on the Mac to compare this to?

It's not ewhat have you seen, it's what is known. It is quite well known
that the Amiga has a very good, many consider to be the best, TeX program.

>
>>    I will say that Display Postscript is vastly superior to the Mac. It's
>> easier and it's a more intuitive desktop metaphor. Why shouldn't paper
>> (windows) on your desktop look exactly like it does on the printer.
>
>Easier? Ever try to program in it? Who says Display PostScript won't be on the
>Mac soon, anyway.. It looks like it will.

But it's not YET.

--
 -------------------------------------------------------------
 Steven Biddle	     -	   Mail: sbiddle@aviate.cavebbs.gen.nz
 Wellington, New Zealand.    OR: BIDDLE_S@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
 -------------------------------------------------------------
From: dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: 040 and 486 and nap42487 knows nothing about CPUs.
Date: 16 Apr 92 22:20:22 GMT
Organization: Datapoint Corporation, San Antonio, TX

In article <1992Apr16.192947.14454@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>
>>Yes, I really bash on Intel, I have very bad experiences with their
>>design, and this I reported. And I got the impression that this opinion
>>is shared by all people I know that come from the same experience,
                          ^ ^^^^
>>having programmed both brands. Why on earth is that arrogant?
>>
>
>Assuming that your opinion is shared by everyone else *is* arrogance.
>
Jerry, you must be having a bad day.  Although many of your posts are
inflammatory, they usually indicate you actually read the post to
which you are responding.  Apparently, you missed the two words I have
pointed out (sorry about that pun); I see no claim of "everyone else".

No flame intended, honest.  I am just disappointed; I expect better
posts from you.

Dave
From: garym@castle.ed.ac.uk (Gary Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: CDTV
Date: 6 Apr 92 15:35:42 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

Some time back it was said that developers had the option of hard disk
through an internal SCSI card for the CDTV, though they weren't sure if
Commodore would be distributing the card to the consumer.  I can't
remember who said this - but more than vapourwear I think :-). 
	Your right about the development of titles on larger more gutsey
machines, but bugs have skill in getting through emulations - so a CDTV
with extra RAM and hard disk would be usefull for that final stage.... 

Gary.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: Intel HW
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 21:40:36 GMT

gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>>>
>>>Okay.  If you are comparing graphics performance, then you would have to use
>>>an Amiga equivalent to the ET4000 SVGA card.  The DMI Resolver should do it.
>>>
>>
>>Hmmm...  How much does the resolver cost?  The ET4000 SVGA is about $100.
>
>We were comparing performance.  Price is another issue.
>

OK, if price is not an issue, then it's not fair to compare the DMI to the
SVGA, is it?

>-- Gerald
--
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
| 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: jerry@cs.mcgill.ca (Gerald (Jerry) KUCH)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: *** ULTIMATE BASHING for PeeCee Users
Date: 4 Apr 92 22:52:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Apr4.225232.17050
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

In article <DOUGIE.92Apr4152608@figment.mit.edu> dougie@figment.mit.edu writes:
>
>
>In article <56840@cup.portal.com> TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko) writes:
>>>  Is it considered proper to poke the eyes of someone who says the
>>>  initials GUI as "gooey"?
>
>No, you may not... That's how it's pronounced.  How do _you_ say it?
>

I hear a lot of people say "Gee-You-Eye".  Gooey is a little odd.  Not nearly
as bad as when Apple's marketing people tried to get people to say "sexy"
instead of "scuzzy" when talking about SCSI interfaces in the early Macintosh
days.  I'm glad scuzzy stuck...

><dougie>
>--
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>The above opinions are mine... (copyright 1992)
>david r. williams -              internet: <dougie@athena.mit.edu.edu>
>                                    UUCP: mit-eddie!mit-athena!dougie
>Commodore Amiga: It's the only way...
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: leavitt@cheshire.oxy.edu (Thomas VanNess Leavitt)
Subject: Re: Apple problems "Home computer"
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA  90041
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 05:06:46 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.191733.712@maths.tcd.ie> mike@maths.tcd.ie (Mike Rogers) writes:
>In article <3416@tronsbox.UUCP>, tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (Kenneth Jamieson) wrote:
>>	You know, I have been thinking about this a lot lately (what's
>>that smoke ?) and have decided that C='s non announce policy is
>>hurting more than it is helping.
>
>Does the name Osbourne mean anything to you? 
>
>Seriously though, suppose tomorrow C= were to announce the Amiga Plus line, say
>030/040 based, varying configuration. Say they came with (hypothetical) AA 
>32bit chipset giving 4 channel 16bit voice, 8bit hires and 24bit super HAM
>graphics. Now, imagine how many 'old' Amigas they'd sell in the interim...
>It was enough to sink Osbourne, it'd hurt C= badly.
>-- 
>Mike Rogers,Box 6,Regent Hse,##EveryoneHasTheRightToFreedomOfOpinionAndExpressio
>TCD,EIRE. <mike@maths.tcd.ie>##nThisRightIncludesFreedomToHoldOpinionsWithoutInt
>###############################erferenceAndToSeekReceiveAndImpartInformationAndI
>deasThroughAnyMediaAndRegardlessOfFrontiers...#10 UN Declaration of Human Rights

By this logic, C= would never dare to even begin development, unless they
secretly locked up all their people in a basement somewhere and threatened
to shoot on site any escapees... as word *would* leak sometime in the
development process.  And if even the slightest inkling of even the 
thought of the possibility on CBMs part were to be made known to one Amiga
person, the rest of the Amiga world would know the next day.

Thom
From: lindblad@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: nap42487 "knows" 486's faster than 68040.
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:40:16 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <1992Apr7.201127.7425@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:
> it is interesting how whenver Amiga owners are faced with evidence proving
> slower performance, they say, well it depends on the OS and the compiler
> and blah blah blah.

It's interesting when some PC owners rely on BNECHAMRKS....
	Why dont' you (sorry for typos, I'm getting drunk) some day watch for
manuals and check how many closk does it take to make instructions - also check
which CPU has copyback mode, which has more orthogonal instruction set, which
CPu has more general purpouse regoisters, which one has sepearate I & D caches?

--
Jarkko Lindblad
lindblad@cc.helsinki.fi
Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:12131 comp.sys.amiga.games:6690 comp.sys.amiga.misc:8258 comp.sys.amiga.multimedia:790 comp.sys.amiga.graphics:3533 comp.sys.amiga.hardware:8541
From: slvj6@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: 040 and 486_ (bunch O' Kaka anyway)
Date: 15 Apr 92 09:37:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: cc.1992Apr15.033713.54487
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Apr14.175326.3341@ctr.columbia.edu>, jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>>
>>The way to do the benchmarks is to code them in hand crafted assembly.  That
>>way, the quality of the 'C' compiler does NOT come into play.  The same coder
>>should do both programs.
>>
> 
> You've got to be joking.  The 486 code should be written by an expert in
> 486 assembly language, and vice versa.  Otherwise, the coder's preferences
> will easily show in the results.

It's entirely possible for someone to be an expert on both processors.
See previous post...

> What's wrong with using GNU C, for more of a "real world" comparison?

Anyone in the real world would use a real compiler... not just a free one.
And there is a lot more room for improvement in the code generation of
680x0 compilers than there is in 80x86 compilers.

Register allocation and usage is poor and really limits the 680x0's potential.
A better compiler could mean a big difference in benchmarks.

There is a reason why there isn't as much room for improvement on the 80x86.
"The 8086 fails to be a truly general-purpose register machine, however,
becouse nearly every register has a dedicated use." - Computer Architecture a
Quantitative Approach
The 486 has been stuck with the same problem.

Do you want to benchmark machines, compilers, or both?

>>The above test will show how the shuffling of registers makes a difference.

> Since you haven't conducted the experient, isn't your conviction premature?

Anyone that has written a lot of assembly on both processors, and has seen the
compiler output for both processors would be aware that much of the 680x0's 
potential is being wasted.
There isn't as much room for improvement with the compilers for the 80x86.

>>Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
>| Jerry J. Shekhel  | Molecular Simulations | Time just fades the pages      |

James Diffendaffer