HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: seifert@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael S. Seifert)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Doug Barney is the Antichrist (AW Lies: The Sequel)
Date: 6 Sep 92 21:31:34 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <js1yfqc@rpi.edu> danaf@bray1b.its.rpi.edu (Frank R. Dana Jr.) writes:
>In article <1992Sep6.011946.2979@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> rickan@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Mark Rickan) writes:
>>Now he's gone and done it. Nothing but blasphemous lies (not to
>>mention gutteral sounds, the occasional spinning head and a some
>>projectal pea soup thrown in for good measure).
>>
>>On page 44 of the October 1992 edition of Amiga World, Doug Barney
>>states:
>>
>>     "Since its release, the Amiga 500 has been Commodore's
>>      best-selling CPU, giving users multitasking, sound and
>>      great graphics for the price of a good, used moped."
>>
>>I don't know about the rest of the world, but demographically speaking,
>>my area is rife with authorized moped dealers. I have yet to see
>>an Amiga 500 system comparably priced with a second-hand moped.
>>Obviously this is a desperate act of a disillusioned journalist.
>
>Oh, come on! What is this, hate Doug Barney month?? for god's sake, we're
>quibbling over MOPED prices now! This is getting out of hand. Ever heard of 
>the concept of FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE???
>
>Geez...
>
>Nobody cares that I am...
>    -Frank Dana, known (718)-(212)-(516) over as Amiuse/Doc Ami!

Is it me or is Frank Dana truly the stupidest man physically capable of typing
a post in .advocacy (a truly incredible distinction considering the mire of 
stupidity that is .advocacy)  Perhaps I misunderstood the original post, but
the moped bitch seemed to be a not-so-subtle form of sarcasm.

Please disregard ill treatment of Frank's mental capacity if the original post
was not sarcasm.  Thank you.

mike seifert, supra-genius
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: A4000 at WOC
From: lkoop@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (LaMonte Koop)
Date: 12 Sep 92 16:21:30 -0600
Reply-To: lkoop@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU
 <1992Sep12.071832.16158@news.iastate.edu> <1992Sep12.141053.1196@msus1.msus.edu>,<1992Sep12.193651.17020@cco.caltech.edu>
Organization: St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, MN

In article <1992Sep12.193651.17020@cco.caltech.edu>, keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:
>lkoop@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (LaMonte Koop) writes:
>
>>    Interesting enough how you are making your own assumptions based upon
>>second and third hand reports.  In actuality, it depends on personal opinion
>>as to how fast the new chipset is under high resolution, 256 color mode.
>>Most liken it to the speed of an A3000 under a 640x400 interlaced 16 color
>>WorkBench.  Under lesser modes the machine is very snappy indeed.  Please
>>do not make unfair comparisons before you've actually seen the system Marc.
>
>He wasn't using a second hand report.  He was using mine.  I tried one of the
>things out, and it was much slower (in 256 color mode) than my A3000 in
>16 color mode.

Which is second hand from Marc's perspective.  It is a matter of opinion as
to the speed of the system in the 256 color mode.  Some feel it is faster than
you say, some slower.  This one point is highly subjective in this setting.

                 ----------------------------------------
           LaMonte Koop -- SCSU Electrical/Computer Engineering
 Internet: lkoop@tigger.stcloud.msus.edu -OR- f00012@kanga.stcloud.msus.edu
              "You mean you want MORE lights on this thing???"
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:17:00 EDT
From: <DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000 & HYPE!
 <mykes.0djk@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> <1992Sep11.124342.21442@gbrmpa.gov.au>
 <1992Sep15.174350.29978@news.eng.convex.com>

In article <1992Sep15.174350.29978@news.eng.convex.com>, swarren@convex.com
(Steve Warren) says:

>Lines: 33

>In article <1992Sep11.124342.21442@gbrmpa.gov.au> matt@gbrmpa.gov.au (Matt)
>writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep7.022556.14423@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU>
>8800529@hydra.maths.unsw.EDU.AU () writes:
>>>> >> GVP EGS? Well, it does 1600*1280 in 16M colors too...
>>
>>Just out of interest, I saw Local Bus Video Card prices today :-
>>
>>       S3 1280x1024x24bit - $310 AUS !!!!!

>I have some news for you - I've been researching these local bus
>video cards, and so far I haven't found a single one that can
>demonstrate any significant performance gain over ISA bus cards
>based on the S3 chip (clue - I don't consider 5-10% significant).

No kidding. S3 is an "accelerated" gfx card (meaning it has blitter/linedraw
hardware). The writes to the S3 chip go faster in the localbus version, but
the blitter is the same. Thus the modest performance improvement.


Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falc
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 21:26:10 GMT
X-Posted-From: connection.prospect.com
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel) writes:
>
>[BB is a kludge]
>
>What's surprising is that _Jerry Shekhel_ admits this in public.
>Usually the mere presence of the 'Intel Inside' sticker will
>cause him to defend a kludge to the death. :-)
>

No, I just think that a computer grafted on top of another computer is
a kludge.  It has nothing to do with the Intel CPU.
--
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
| 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: jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz (John Bickers)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Perot
Date: 12 Sep 92 09:54:51 PST
Organization: TAP, NZAmigaUG

Quoted from <18ombfINN2ic@koh-sun1.usc.edu> by dleslie@koh-sun1.usc.edu (David Leslie):

> -> unimportant a country as Sweeden.

> 	How about 'important' is a having an impact on the world? Or
> making a difference in the history of mankind?

    Well, Sweden fits that definition.

> | Amiga  ///    |  U.S.C. Trojans  | Live   | David Leslie           |
--
*** John Bickers, TAP, NZAmigaUG.        jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz ***
***    "Radioactivity - It's in the air, for you and me" - Kraftwerk    ***
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: bleys@tronsbox.xei.com (Bill Cavanaugh)
Subject: Re: A4000 at WOC
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 03:39:03 GMT

In article <7txnfzp.damiel@netcom.com> damiel@netcom.com (Paul Theodoropoulos) writes:
>
>ummmm.... this thread has all the making of a Pointless Thread from Hell (tm),
>but think about it for a second:
>
>your argument only confirms the original thesis. All second-hand reports start
>out somewhere as a first-hand report - that's an undeniable fact. when someone 
>makes a statement based upon someone elses observations, that's a second-hand
>report. no twisting of language, no subversion of facts, no bullshit.

Y'know, I can see a silly, pointless debate looming over the horizon,
too...<chuckle>

Marc made a statement based on something he was told by someone who
had the experience.  That's a first-hand report;  it's second-hand
data.  The original post I was replying to said, "Interesting how you
are making your own assumptions based upon second and third hand
reports."  He was coming to a conclusion based on a first-hand report.
If we could only rely on what we sense directly to make decisions, no
one would ever get anything done.

[stuff about subjectiveness of reporting of speed deleted]

The only reports I've seen about the speed of the gui were ones saying that 
the machine is slower, and ones saying, "'tis not!!!!"

>in this instance, marc's "observations" based upon second-hand information
>are neither right nor wrong. they are specious and ultimately irrelevant.

Marc didn't make an observation, he came to a conclusion.  We're
allowed to do that based on things people we trust tell us about their
experiences.  Marc's posts are frequently specious, but so are
everybody elses who posts here...  It's the hallmark of debate in the
'90s.  Just ask Bush and Clinton...<chuckle>  As for the rest...

>said state obtains for all of marc's postings, it should be noted.

Everything posted here is irrelevant.  Nobody is watching who makes
any decisions, and if the people who ARE reading this ever get in a
position to make decisions, they'd be nuts to let US tell them what to
do.<grin>

bill
(who thinks this is more interesting than the usual machine/Marc
bashing...)

-- 
 *         Bill Cavanaugh       bleys@tronsbox.xei.com          *
 *                                                              *
    "There is nothing more frighful than ignorance in action."  

                           Malcolm X
XY + XX = :-)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: Interlace video (Was Re: PC (OS/2) / Amiga debate)
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 15:12:06 GMT
X-Posted-From: connection.prospect.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <BuLLxn.Bx7@starnine.com> mikeh@starnine.com (Mike Haas) writes:
>>
>>I think you've got your facts backwards.
>
>No, he doesn't.  Two displays, one interlaced, one not, both painting
>their scan lines 60 times a second... the interlaced display will
>make 2 passes over it's vertical field in the same time it takes the
>non-interlaced one to do one.
>
>Ergo, assuming the same phospors, brightness, contrast, etc, the
>interlaced display will have less perceivable flicker than the
>non-interlaced one.
>
>This is with 60 FRAMES/second (interlaced = 120 FIELDS/second).
>

The problem is, if a typical multi-sync monitor is capable of a non-interlaced
display at X Hz, it can only display an interlaced mage at ~X/2 Hz (at the
same resolution).  So, on any particular monitor, an interlaced display is
worse than a non-interlaced one.
--
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
| 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: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Random tidbits regarding WOC & A4000
Date: 14 Sep 92 12:17:06 GMT
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900

In article <3736@faatcrl.UUCP> jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan) writes:
> It's actually a better deal
> since it gives 3rd party vendors the chance to create SCSI cards of their
> own which might be better and cheaper than a Commodore offering (as if we've
> not seen that before in other peripherals).

I don't buy a system to plug peripherals in. I buy a system to do work. If I
have to buy extra hardware to do that work, when the standard hardware in the
previous models was perfectly good (the CURRENT CBM SCSI is pretty good, it's
going to be hard for a third party to do significantly better without costing
a LOT more), that's a worse deal.

> The SCSI port was not a "must have" for the large majority of them,
> so why include one?

Yeh, the same can be said of every other individual feature. So what's the
future going to hold? A 486-based Amiga? It'd be cheaper, and you could
always buy a 68030 card. :->
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
  'U`
From: James_Mcormond@jammys.ocunix.on.ca (James Mcormond)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unreal demo!
Distribution: world
Date: 9 Sep 92 10:35:05 EST

In a message dated Wed  9 Sep 92  9:10, Ralph@bugend.edvina.se (staffan Vil
wrote:

 RV> Why call it "Euro-synth"? Why do people say "Euro-demos"?
 RV> Is it perhaps because americans aren't creative (or competent) enough
 RV> to make demos and music?

Or maybe its simply that the people on this side of the pond (i'm not an
american, so won't "quote" exactly what you said), simply have a life
outside of computers and wouldn't want to spend the time?

jammer

-- Via DLG Pro v0.992

James A McOrmond - Ottawa, Ontario - V32bis HighSpeed Modem!
Fidonet#1:163/109.3
UUCP: Jam@Jammys.OCUnix.On.Ca
From: jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Random tidbits regarding WOC & A4000
Date: 14 Sep 92 01:21:37 GMT
Organization: FAA Technical Center, Atlantic City NJ

peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

>There are other compiler vendors. Personally, I'd like to be able to buy
>Watcom C for the Amiga. The Watcom 486 compiler does significantly better
>than even GOOD assembly.

  Jeez, that would be nice, eh?  It's output would humble these assembly-only
dweebs big time...

  -jack-
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: copes@cs.curtin.edu.au (Simon Cope)
Subject: Re: aga in 500/2000/3000?
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 05:35:42 GMT

dingebre@imp.sim.es.com (David Ingebretsen) writes:

>> A3000/2000/500/600 or 1000. AGA requires a whole new motherboard.
>> A motherboard upgrade is a marketing decision, and I cannot answer for them,

>hope for an upgrade deal or clever third party solutions.

Expect it.

>This machine can only help in maintaining current and future development
>for the whole Amiga line.

>-- 
>	David

--
copes@cs.curtin.edu.au
From: mario@mbunix.adsp.sub.org (Mario Bayer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: A4000 at
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:24:07 GMT
Reply-To: mario@mbunix.adsp.sub.org (Mario Bayer, ECA008)
Organization: PS -> POWERSystems

>> He wasn't using a second hand report.  He was using mine.  I tried one of the
>> things out, and it was much slower (in 256 color mode) than my A3000 in
>> 16 color mode.

>So, did the WB 3.0 icons have more than 4 colors in higher color modes???

Yes... 8 colors... for the windows, icons & so on...

But you can also choose a 256 colors Workbench... but this is slower, sure!

>-- 
>{ the itchman cometh   /-/         _          i don't want to be your angel }
>{ itch@cbnews.att.com /-/        _|_|_          i want to be your witch!    }
>{ att!cbnews!itch \-\/-/         ( * )tch                 -yello            }
>{                  \/\/           /^\                                       }


---
Bye....
       .   
        ... Mario Bayer, ECA008

E-Mail: UUCP to mario@mbunix.adsp.sub.org, over Z-NETZ to M.BAYER@LINK-ATU.ZER 
           --------------------------------------------------------           
           You can also send a E-Mail to BTX Austria user 912214584          
           --------------------------------------------------------           
            Or you call my host & login as guest.. # +43(1)3306878            
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: andrey@cco.caltech.edu (Andre T. Yew)
Subject: Re: World of Commodore summary, 9/12, part 2 (LONG)
Keywords: new chipsets, WOC
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:08:01 GMT

ecarroll@maths.tcd.ie (Eddy Carroll) writes:

>cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) writes:
>>andrey@cco.caltech.edu (Andre T. Yew) writes:

>[ Lots of amazing stuff which leads me to believe that Eggebrecht had too much
>  to drink on Friday Night. I _really_ hope CBM management follow through on
>  all this! I'll even forgive them for not including a DSP in the base A4000. ]

	I guess he was so drunk, he even made an AmigaVision flow
for his presentation which had all of what he said in it :).

>The only thing is, I hope people won't put off A4000 purchases in the hope
>that all this stuff is right around the corner. I'd say the chances of
>seeing any of this next generation stuff before 1994 are pretty close to
>zero.

	Well, it seems to me that the magic of the 4000 is that it's
modular -- we can get these new chipsets by buying a new card.
Perhaps a Commodore engineer can comment here.

--Andre

-- 
Andre Yew                             andrey@tybalt.caltech.edu (131.215.48.100)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene)
Subject: Re: Complete A4000/A600/A570 Press Release
Keywords: AA, Display Modes
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 14:31:02 GMT

>>	God, I hate normal VGA modes, there's never enough room on the desktop
>>   for everything I want displayed.  Whether its OS/2 2.0 or WINOS2, I like
>>   to have a 1024x768 screen resolution.  I'm using a Sony 1304 monitor by the
>>   way and don't have any problems using it at that high a resolution.     
>
>I'm using the exact same monitor. 1024x768 requires a magnifying glass. Do
>you have several?

	I have no problems, everything is quite readable at that resolution.
   I won't deny that I'd like a larger monitor though, but not because of my
   Sony 1304 being unusable at 1024x768.  I'd like to get a monitor that does
   1280x1024 non interlaced at 70+hz.

							G.Greene

>Philip McDunnough
>University of Toronto
>philip@utstat.toronto.edu
From: nan@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Nan Zou)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interlace video (Was Re: PC (OS/2) / Amiga debate)
Date: 7 Sep 1992 17:15:12 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

danaf@vccsouth28.its.rpi.edu (Frank R. Dana Jr.) writes:
>nan@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Nan Zou) writes:

>|> Hey Frank, do you HAVE TO quote the whole 100+ lines just to add these two
>|> irrelevant comments?

>I *AM* sorry about that... I considered posting an apology-message... I just
>switched over to a new news reader and the concept of block-editing somehow 
>seems to ...

Apology accepted.  Scrolling down 130+ lines is no fun at 2400 baud,
especially if I've seen most of the lines before.

>|> >I refuse to repeat this one more time. Read through that statement, S-L-O-W-L-Y
>|> >and carefully. THE AMIGA SUPPORTS NON-INTERLACED DISPLAY MODES AS WELL AS 
>|> >INTERLACED ONES.
>|> 
>|> DID I EVER SAY THE AMIGA DOESN'T SUPPORT NON-INTERLACED VIDEO MODE?  WHERE
>|> DID YOU GET THE IDEA THAT I SAID SUCH THING?

>By the way that you KEEP going on about how the Amiga's interlaced video is so
>annoying, and that on the PC you'd rather switch down to a non-interlaced video
>mode than use a higher-res interlaced one... my point is that you can do the 
>SAME thing on the Amiga! So what's the big difference?

None!  It's a good thing you can choose a video mode that's easier on the
eyes.  I never mean to rag on the Amiga for its interlaced vidoe modes, I
only want to state that my experience with interlaced video on BOTH the
Amiga and PC has been less than pleasent (admittedly, the flicker is due
to the lower refresh rate rather than the interlacing, I hope that point is
clear).

-- Nan
From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unreal demo!
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (beta) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 4 Sep 92 21:21:37 PST
Organization: Amiga makes it possible

In article <1992Sep2.231332.7170@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au> davidme@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au (David Meiklejohn) writes:
> In article <65142@cup.portal.com> devasoft@cup.portal.com (David Michael Alves) writes:
> >
> >Yes, that's true, UNREAL does require a speedy machine to run with any
> >respectability.  But now that prices on 486 machines are coming down so
> >quickly, (not to mention the fact that a lot of the big clone companies
> >don't even sell anything below a 486 anymore), we'll probably see the 486
> >become a pretty common setup.
>
> It's becomming a common response here :
>
> Amiga Advocate:
> "You need a 486 to do some things as fast as a stock Amiga."
>
> Real-world reply:
> "But, the 486 is cheaper than the Amiga!"
>

Real-world reply:
"Which one ray-traces faster?"

> --
>
> David Meiklejohn                  | Internet : davidme@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au
> Computer Systems Officer, QDPI    | Fax      : +61 70 92 3593
> Mareeba, Australia                | Voice    : +61 70 92 1555

--
Amiga programmer of: GRn, MailMinder, Budokan, Beyond Dark Castle, Dark Castle
Sega Genesis programmer of: Dick Tracy and Marble Madness.
Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
1124 Fremont Ave.
Los Altos, CA 94024
From: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falc
Date: 10 Sep 92 14:03:38 GMT
Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel)
Organization: Flying Cat, Inc.

In article <1992Sep9.212610.28937@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel) writes:
>>
>>[BB is a kludge]
>>
>>What's surprising is that _Jerry Shekhel_ admits this in public.
>>Usually the mere presence of the 'Intel Inside' sticker will
>>cause him to defend a kludge to the death. :-)
>>
>
>No, I just think that a computer grafted on top of another computer is
>a kludge.  It has nothing to do with the Intel CPU.


Then, by obvious implication, an operating system grafted on top
of another operating system is also a kludge.  Therefore, the
DOS box grafted to OS/2 is a kludge.

Seriously, read the book _Inside OS/2_ by Gordon Letwin.  If you are
at all familiar with the details of other operating systems, and
the details of MS-DOS, you'll be amazed at the kludges that MSDOS
compatibility forced into OS/2.  The first time I read the book I
was not familiar with MSDOS, so in a lot of places I was puzzled
as to why they took a clean concept, then grafted a really twisted
mode into it.  I recently reread the book , and now that I know MSDOS
I understand why the screwy twists got in.  The MS-DOS compatibility
box is probably the worst thing to happen to OS/2 as an operating
system.  (You can argue all you want about how it was necessary
to OS/2 as a marketable product;  this is different from what it did
to OS/2 as an OS)


On the realtime nature of OS/2:   Again, from _Inside OS/2_, the
scheduler always runs the thread with the highest priority, until
that thread blocks for some reason, or a higher priority thread
requires the CPU.  (Has this changed in OS/2 2.0 ? )  

>| Jerry J. Shekhel  | Molecular Simulations | Time just fades the pages      |

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

"OS/2 is the operating system for the next thousand great applications." -
 one of the things Bill Gates probably wishes he hadn't said.


Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.
I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.