From: philip@utstat.toronto.edu (Philip McDunnough)
Subject: Re: HELP--AMIGA OR IBM PC CLONE?
Organization: University of Toronto, Dept. of Statistics
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 10:36:36 GMT

In article <C0p5B4.HF@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> papresco@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Paul Prescod) writes:
>>As long as you're running all Windows software, you're laughing.  All these
>>"SVGA" cards have drivers for OS/2, I suppose?
>
>Mine does...most do.

Wrong. There is no such thing as SVGA. Ever wonder why IBM, NeXT, etc...are 
having such hassles figuring out which "SVGA" chip sets to support?
>
>>And neither can most (affordable) monitors.  Oh, they'll do it, but try
>>separating two single pixel lines, a pixel apart, on most 14" monitors at
>>anything above 800x600 some time...
>
>And yet there is a noticeable improvement in 1024X768 over 800X600 even
>on a 14" monitor.  

It's absurd to use 1024x768 on a 14" monitor, unless you have a magnifying
glass.
>
>I thought the idea was that you WEREN'T supposed to be able to tell the
>difference between lines of pixels.  That means they are small enough
>that you can't see the dots.  That's GOOD.

Actually that's only usually true. Children usually prefer a coarser grid.
>
[ ]
>
>No I'm basing the arguement that the ISA bus is a limitation on today's
>PCs.

No kidding! However local bus will probably do in EISA and possibly MCA, even
though there's no clear standard.
>
>>Let's get this straight.  "SVGA" is *NOT* anything and everything.  It must
>>bear some passing relationship to VGA, which is strictly a dumb card.  If you
>>have hardware bit blitting and line drawing, you're talking TIGA or S3, etc.
>>Not SVGA.
>
>SVGA is anything that can do the "strictly dumb card mode."  Let me
>assure you, these accelerated video cards can do that.  They are,
>therefore, SVGA.  Tiga and S3 are SVGA...as you'll see if you see any
>review of SVGA cards.

Having mentioned S3, and OS/2 having drivers, have you seen any for the Stealth?>
>>It has nothing to do with Windows.  Try installing a simple little tape
>>controller card in a PC which already has a SCSI interface, a network card,
>>and a Targa board, then get back to me.  Until you've tried supporting dozens
>>of PCs in a range of hardware configurations, you really have no idea just how
>>cretinous they can be.
>
>Luckily, the great majority of us only deal with one or two PCs at a
>time, and upgrade something in them less then once every 6 months.
>The rest have someone like YOU doing their upgrades.  And you get
>employment.  This point is as beat to death by Amiga users as the bus
>thing, although I suspect you recognize that it is weak, because it is
>not much of a problem for most people.

It is starting to be a big problem as people start to add audio cards, CD-ROM's,scanners, etc...The Apple ads have it right. Interrupts, win.ini. system.ini,
etc...are just a plague on the computer scene. The world would be far better 
without them.
>
>>But, what if some had Amigas, and some Macs, and some Unix boxes, and some
>>even had PCs.  We don't all need to own Amigas.  But, I object to the
>>stifling sameness of a PC-only world.  Alas, that seems to be the way we're
>>heading.  Maybe RISC workstations will save us yet.  I hope so.
>
>There is no "sameness" in the PC-world.  95% of all Amigas run
>AmigaDOS, the rest run that rotten unix you have.  PC users can run 20
>different versions of Unix, OS/2, Windows, NT, Dos, QNX, NeXTStep,
>DR-DOS, CPM-86, you name it.  That's not stifling sameness, it's
>resounding choice.

And total confusion.
>
>Most Amiga users use only the built in graphics hardware.  PC
>accelerated video boards go from $150.00->$3000.00 depending on the
>power you want.  That's not stifling "sameness" it's wonderful options.

Most PC programs support VGA. Options don't get supported except by 
specialed programs, until they become very popular. The lack of a reasonable
lowest common denominator has turned the PC world into a bit of a joke.
>
>Most Amiga users use "standard" sound.  PC users can choose from one of
>20 new sound boards, most released in the last six months.

Sure, and few companies can support all but a few. Even the SB Pro is 
generally not supported (usually just the SB). Sound should be standard on
a computer. With the type of arguments you're giving, you might as well just
hand someone a power  supply, Intel chip and tell them to assemble whatever 
they want from the back room. It's total chaos, and IBM for instance knows
it. They tried with MCA and now with OS/2 to turn the PC into something 
reasonable. They've been stopped at every turn by those who'd rather save $1
and spend 2 weeks configuring their systems.
>
>Most Amiga users use one of 2 or 3 wordprocessors.  There are 97 PC
>wordprocessors.

How many do you need? At an average cost of over $100, you're talking about 
$10,000 to produce a memo.
>
>All Amiga users use some form of Zorro bus.  PC users can choose one of
>VESA,EISA, ISA, MCA, PCI and any combination of them!

That is the problem. VESA has yet to prove itself. EISA hasn't gone anywhere,
the ISA reigns and IBM is left pushing what really is a decent bus.
>
>All Amiga users use Motorola chips.  PC users can use AMD, Cyrix, or
>Intel.

True, competition definitely is good. That's coming to every computer market.
The cpu is somewhat irrelevant. The software is what matters.
>
>Where is this stifling sameness.  Just because PCs are everywhere
>doesn't mean yours has to look like everyone else!  Use a different OS,
>different applications, a different programming language...dare to be
>different without giving up compatibility with the application
>development standard.

I guess chaos is everywhere...!

Philip McDunnough
philip@utstat.toronto.edu


Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy