From: kholland@hydra.unm.edu (Kiernan Holland)
Subject: Re: Falcon vs Super Famicon
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 08:21:32 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <Iejr7Vy00awIMHlXA4@andrew.cmu.edu> Stefan Monnier <sm86+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.atari.st: 22-Sep-92 Falcon vs Super
>Famicon Yoshi Yellow@gate.powerp (820)
>
>> Hi There !
>
>> Why should I buy a Falcon ? Nintendo's Super Famicon is much better !
>> Just look at all those mighty guys writing Super Famicon games ! 
>> It's an armada compared with those writing Falcon games.
>
>> And the Super Famicon offers even the same power for a lesser price !
>
>> - 3D graphics chip for fast 3D games
>> - 512 hardware sprites 
>> - 32K colors simulatenusly what is really enough for playing
>> - *very* smart CD rom drive
>
>> Ok, maybe there are some guys out there that would like to use the Falcon
>> for serious applications. But wouldn't it be *much* more efficient
>> to buy an IBM compatible for applications and a Super Famicon for
>> gambling instead of fooling around with a Falcon that lives from 
>> announces and buggy software ?
>
>> Come on, tell some reasons *not* to buy a Super Famicon instead of a Falcon !
>
>> Yoshi
>>  
>
>I never play on my ST (well sometimes stetris). But I
>won't buy a PC just cause I HATE it !!!
>What do you think of a nice segmented memory, with a
>nice 640K limit ?
>ST is not perfect, but it's clean !
>
>	Stefan Monnier
>
>PS: by the way: does your *(&*# nintendo have a midi 
>interface ?
>I think the main difference between the Falcon and the
>NSF is that the Falcon is a machine with which you can
>play whereas the NSF is a machine with which you can 
>only play !
>
>-----------------------------------------------------
>-- On the average, people seem to be acting normal --
>-----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>

You are reading a message from a guy who could really give a 
sh*t which system he was working on. I own an Amiga, 
I work on PC's and a UNIX machine all day long, and doo 
all my reports ona MAC II. PC's are actually beating the heck out 
of Amiga's and ST's, I'm sure of this.. But the thing is is that 
there will be more software developed for a specific basic 
configuration than for a system that has no basic configuration.
What I'm saying is that if the Atari Falcon comes with a 
DSP like everyone talks about, it will make it the first 
computer in its class to use a high-quality Digital Signal 
Processor. I'm interested to see what kind of real-time 
reverb effects programs will appear in PD, aren't you???

Well, if I had a choice, I would get something that 
could have the expandability of a PC (with an EISA, ISA and Local
Bus set of expansion ports), the crowd of enthusiasts and shareware
developers that the Amiga has, the quality of hardware and software 
that the MAC's have and the price that Atari has.

By the way, I know a guy who just bought a 3000 recently, Ex-ST 
owner for many years. 6 months ago he was pro-ST user. 
his brother had a Amiga, and my friend wanted to get one too.
So he got one. I had him look at Deluxe Paint III, and he was thrilled.
Then I told him that I had seen copies of DPAINT III going for 
under 40 bucks. Talk about Future Shock. Now, GVP has a 
piece of software called CINEMORPH that does exactly the kind
of MORPHing effects that are used in some TV commercials and 
of course were used in Terminator 2. Look at the most recent Amiga 
World to get a taste.

Now, you don't have to have a 3000 to run this software.
Just a 500, about 8 megs of ram, which is like 300 bucks, 
maybe a 68030, which is another 300 bucks, and a hard drive, 
to make it useful. The total system cost you would need is about 
1000 bucks, but you could do it with a system adding only 
4 megs of ram. Now, since prices are getting so low, I might 
sell my 3000, get a 500 and a 25mhz 68030 (by the way, I saw that the 
68040 upgrade for the 500's is going for 1000 dollars).
Now, then I get a Falcon, and a Local bus based 33mhz 486. 

See the smile on my face??       

It ain't a matter of pride, but a matter of what can be done...

Being a mono-computer-user is like limiting your capabilities.

But the reason I'm into everything is becuase I'm a 
computer AIDE that is working 20 hours a week doing 
nothing but helping others with thier UNIX/MSDOS/MACOS problems.
And don't I just love to play with my 3000... 
I like PC's for video games... but they have other uses... 
I'm sure!!

ST's would be great for me too.. I have 2 MIDI synths 
and a Piano. I would love to get a sequencer for the ST's 
(since they are so cheap, it is amazing) and would probably 
be a point in getting a ST or a falcon. 
 
But as I see it, everybody that limits themselves to just 
one computer is not being realistic. I could 
look at the market right now and say that just 
about everybody is doing well. 

Amiga programmers are writing much better code that will 
not crash.

PC developers are making super graphics cards that 
can display 32K colors from 2^24 palette, for almost 
nothing.

Atari is fixen to come out with a Motorola DSP based computer
that sounds like it will cost under 1000 bucks, which 
opens the oportunity to many starving programmers to 
write super DSP-based code.

MACs now come in laptop form and are getting easier to setup
and live with.

UNIX is the same'ol thing but everybody I know, wants to 
learn more about it, while most do wish they had a 
friendlier system. It is healthier for users to get 
this kind of experience becuase they depend on GUI's 
so much that some day they will have to use 
some form of CLI, or they will be fired. About 90% 
of everything is CLI based. Besides, you can't do wildcards 
ina GUI. You also can't alias a bunch of commands that 
do several jobs as one. A mouse is intuitive, but is by no means
faster. But I'd let you decide on this issue. It depends on 
what you do...

Well later