HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: fihsu@athena.mit.edu (Hsu I-wei)
Subject: Re: I DID giev up on the Amiga!
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 06:27:19 GMT

In article <mykes.09pe@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>In article <33215@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>> In article <mykes.09ag@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>>
>> >Now for the really sad part:  How many machines (models) has apple released
>> >this year?
>>
>> Apple came out with a new Quadra this year.  Those, and the laptops, were
>> reasonably interesting.  Things like LCs and Classics are just powered down
>> rehashes of old Mac IIs.
>>
>
>Would anyone else out there in AmigaLand like an Amiga laptop?  How about 2
>or 3 models to choose from?  How about a powered down A3000 (as much power
>as the Mac IIs at the same price)?

Um..  the IIsi (3M RAM, 40MB HD) educational is $1895.  With the C= $500
rebate in combination with educ. pricing, the A3000 25/50 is $2047.  I imagine
that the A3000 16/40, if it still exists, is as cheap or cheaper.  By the
way, that IIsi doesn't come with a keyboard.  :)  A powered down 3000 is
highly desireable, and I pray NOT at the same price as the Mac IIs.

As for your other questions, no I don't particularly care for a laptop of any
kind.  But yes, it would be nice for others out there if C= came out with one!

>> >Why has Apple and NeXt come out with 040 based machine months and months ago
>> >while there is no 040 Amiga.
>>
>> Marketing.  Apple and NeXT required it, C= marketing decided for the moment
>> that the 3rd parties were doing the job.
>>
>
>Fools.

They are, aren't they..  :|

> [UNIX debate deleted  :)]
>
>> --
>> Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
>>    {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      BIX: hazy
>> 	"Work like a horse, drink like a fish"	- Psychefunkapus
>>
>
>--
>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
>

Francis
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga Future?!?y
From: f00020@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU
Date: 29 Jul 92 22:04:27 -0600
Reply-To: f00020@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU
Organization: St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, MN

In article <Paula_Lieberman.069k@amicol.UUCP>, Paula_Lieberman@amicol.UUCP (Paula Lieberman) writes:
>re articles by Marc Barrett: The amount of money and percentage of income
>that a company spends on R&D doesn't necessarily say if the company is
>getting any value out of it -- just look at all the money spend by Xerox on
>R&D that everyone EXCEPT Xerox exploited....   Don't know about Marc
>Barrett, but I've had a ringside seat view of wasted R&D effort -- LOTS of
>wasted R&D efforts... and I've some some modest R&D expenditures that got
>results that big efforts flopped at..... depends on -who's- doing the work,
>how competent at it they are, and whether management a) listens to them,
>and b) knows how to get products out based on the R&D.  There's a lot of
>stuff that never quite makes it out to the retail shelves.....>

These are all valid points...but it still boils down to whether or not 
management (in this case C= ) is listening. I'd say they are, but barely.
As a result their limited funding is a starvation diet instead of the 
successful "modest" R&D effort you describe. Sigh. That we even ever get 
goodies in the end is something of a minor miracle.

William Lewis
Only as long as it's fun...  ;'p
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: mlelstv@specklec.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Subject: Re: Need Help - 50 Hz flickers
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 09:33:57 GMT

In <gromyko.03oa@sputnik.rhein-main.de> gromyko@sputnik.rhein-main.de (Michael Grom) writes:
>Shit, you really don't know what you're talking about.
>Needless to say that PAL is superior!(compared to NTSC)
>Come, and have a look at a german TV set. I think you know
>damn shit about PAL.

That is probably a true point.

>To the best of my knowledge, there exist several flickerfixers wich
>can output video to a multisync upto 100Hz in noninterlace 640x256, using
>software to control the agnus chip. Well, multisyncs capable of managing
>frequencies upto 100Hz may be quite expensive.

But this has nothing to do with PAL or the complaints about PAL.

Regards,
-- 
Michael van Elst
UUCP:     universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com (Dennis Heffernan)
Subject: Re: Commodore's Reply
Keywords: C=
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 21:19:29 GMT

In article <mac1.712473990@Ra.MsState.Edu> mac1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Mubashir Cheema) writes:
|  Now honestly how many people disagree and really find it
|  MOST EXCITING time for an Amigan ?
|
	I do.  I thought last year was pretty good, what with the ECS and WB
2.0 and the 3000 and all, but this year looks like we have even more to look
forward to.

	Not to mention all the third-party goodies.


dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com    Dennis Francis Heffernan	GEnie: D.HEFFERNAN1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Look...I sympathize with your problem, but all things considered, I'd rather 
talk about me."  --Murphy Brown

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: bill@snoopy (Bill Poitras)
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Reply-To: bill@msi.com
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 16:42:12 GMT

mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
[bullshit about OS/2 taking up too much hardware deleted]
: OS/2 (full loaded system) and Turbo C++ 3.1 do not fit on a 60MB drive together.

I never said "full loaded system".  The OS/2 full loaded system has a lot
of unneeded stuff.  Also I can't see why Turbo C++ 3.1 (does such a thing
exist?) takes up so much space.   If you are saying Borland C++ 3.1
(thats a different product) then yes BC++ 3.1 under DOS and Windows doesn't
fit on a 60MB HD.  But since 100+ MB systems are quite common, it isn't
that big of a deal for those people who like "full loaded systems".

: Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
: 1124 Fremont Ave.
: Los Altos, CA 94024

--
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |
| (bill)          | Sunnyvale, CA USA             |                         | 
|                 | FAX (408)732-0831             | bill@msi.com            |
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
From: "robert buonincontro" <robert.buonincontro@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: are you people dumb!
Date: 31 Jul 92 14:18:17 EST
Reply-To: "robert buonincontro" <robert.buonincontro@canrem.com>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Canada Remote Systems


-> production of the Amiga.  However, how long did it take to develop
-> 2.04, cdtv, & the ECS for example?  How long did it take to get
-> released?  The CDTV adaptor for the 500's is still not released.
-> WHY? I have an answer.

 Are you people that dumb. Workbench 2.04 was such a dramtic chance that
had they released it too early it would have failed. One of the main
reasons for the delay was the fact that many programs under 1.3 would
not run under 2.04. I saw a demo of Workbench 2.0 about a year before
it was released. At the time I asked the Commodore rep demonstrating the
OS why it was talking so long. He said they wanted to make sure it was
stable enough.

 That's just what Commodore did with Workbench 2.04. Sure I would have
liked to have gotten WB2.0 a year earlier. Think of what it could have
done. NOthing would have run under 2.0 so no one would have purchased
it.

 The funny thing is people like you would have been bitching that they
released it too early because nothing worked on it!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert.Buonincontro@canrem.com
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: evermic@prism.cs.orst.edu (/X\.BiSON)
Subject: Re: Virtual Memory for the Amiga?
Organization: Oregon State University, Computer Science Dept
Distribution: orst
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 04:48:19 GMT

I have come across a program called 'gigamem' if anybody wants it.  It is very
well made and the latest update I have is version 2.0 July 92.  It is
obviosly made in german, but all the docs and stuff are in english.  There
is a catch though.  It only works with some SCSI controller I have never
heard of, obviosly a german brand too.  Well maybe somebody out there can
fix it for the rest of us.

quote:

- This GigaMem works only with SCSI-Controller from
  bsc broautomation AG.                           


/X\.BiSON
From: cse_stu@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga Future?!?
Date: 23 Jul 92 12:28:35 -0600
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Distribution: world
Organization: Memphis State University

> Thats the software part of things.  Aren't there any hardware hackers who
> could hack up a similar Amiga hardware from off-the-shelf chips, and of course
> add in improvements/innovations etc... that Commodore lacks.  Maybe if we
> start a discussion on this topic, someone might pick things up and give
> Commodore some competition.  And competition in the PC (+compatibles) market
> is what's giving them the edge over the Amiga, right?
The Amiga is build around the Co-processors and it cann't be duplicated. There
is one thing that could be done and that is use the operating system which is
written mostly in C. This means that if you rewrite the graphics software it
could run on any machine. So maybe someone should push for Workbench to be
ported to IBM's and MAC's and SUN's etc. Basicly it would take to much to make
a better chip set from off the shelf parts. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't know of
many chips that have sprites and co-processors that can share memory like the
amiga chip set. The last thing that the amiga has done is the ability to sync
the computer to video. When a genlock is added to the system the whole system
runs a the colorburst(x2, x4) freq. What off the shelf chips do this?
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO)
Subject: Re: Atari is irrelevant.  Falcon is irrelevant.  You will be assimilated.
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 20:23:27 GMT

In article <mykes.09p8@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>In article <33217@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>
>Do you really want to revisit the Amiga's early history?  It is embarassing,
>Dave.  Look, I bought my A1000 4 months after the launch (December 1985).  It
>came with an operating system that gurued if you looked at it funny.  It wouldn't
>run for 3 minutes even if you didn't do anything to it :)  INCOMPETENT.  That's the
>only word to describe the A1000 with OS 1.0.  Gosh, I remember actually trying to
I also brought an Amiga 1000 in December of 1985.  However, I
remember getting 1.1 almost immediately and for the things I was
doing back then it was ok.  I remember being able to run ABASIC
programs at least for the simple things :).  I course 1.2 was a vast
improvement, but I don't exactly remember it as bad as you describe.

>program the thing from floppy drives in 512K of CHIP using a piece of SHIT
>Lattice 'C' compiler.  The Amiga linker was quickly named "Deep Thought" because
>it would spin the disk for a second then the machine would sit and appear to do
>nothing for minutes.  That was until I found the "FASTER" command line switch
>which did make it faster.  But the machine crashed after running ALink.  Nice
>touch.  And my favorite application was the Mandrill demo, which threw up a
>nice picture and hung the machine.  But the machine did do something useful -
>it let me do DIR from AmigaDOS and run the lines and boxes demos.

Never ran Lattice C back then or now, so can't comment on this.  I
do know that Artic Fox ran quite well in 1.1, much better as a
matter of fact than 1.2 :)

-- 
John G. Ata                     | Internet:     hfsi!ata@UUNET.UU.NET
Technical Consultant            |     UUCP:     uunet.uu.net!hfsi!mercury!ata
HFS, Inc.		  VA20	|    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601 |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
From: TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 09:10:23 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world
  <mykes.0a4i@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG>

You can't blame OS/2 for Borland 3.1 C++ for a couple reasons:

Borland's product can take from 42 to 52 M of space depending on the
cluster size of your HD. So are you flaming OS/2 or Borland 3.1?
(BTW, I think its the nicest compiler I've *ever* used. Its miles
ahead of anything else I've use._

Borland 3.1 C++ is not an OS/2 product. Its a windows product. If you're
developing Windows 3.x stuff, I don't think that's the optimal way
to develop code.

TomK@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett)
Subject: Re: I DID giev up on the Amiga!
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:03:36 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.133614.20870@ra.msstate.edu> skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip Sauls) writes:
>Was that machine the last one to be developed at Commodore?  I know that
>you guys have made minor improvements to the Amiga line that had the 
>misfortune of coming under your control, but nothing really new has been
>introduced.  
>
>Whoops!  I forgot the ECS!  How ignorant of me to overlook such an innovative
>chipset!  And the A2024 monitor with the Hedley Hack!  Whoa, how could I
>forget the 1/2 speed high-density floppies, the BridgeBoards with their
>high-res displays, and all of those 040 accelerators!
>
>You guys sure are innovative.

   I made a point a few months ago that was never disproven to my satisfaction.
This was that, if new systems are released this fall based on a new chipset, 
it will be the first time that Commodore has developed a major new computer
systems technology (forget peripheral technologies) entirely on their own in
more than *10* years.  The last time Commodore developed a major new computer
systems technology was with the C-64.  All computer systems developed by
Commodore since then were either bought from outside the company (A1000), or
were very modest upgrades to an existing technology (C-128, A500, A2000, A3000,
and A600).  (I am also ignoring the UNIX PC, because you can hardly call that
system 'developed' when none were ever sold)

> _____________________________________________________________________________
>| Skip Sauls                | |       Head Chief Software Engineer Dude #1    |
>| skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu | |                    SAIR, Inc.                 |
>|___________________________| |_______________________________________________|
>|"Post softly and carry a big .sig" | |            A000:0000H               | |
>|___________________________________| |_____________________________________| |
>|   /X\                                              | Has anyone pissed in   |
>|  // \\  Amiga - Upside down and backwards as ever! | your cornflakes today? |
>| //      ___________________________________________|                        |
>|//      | Redneck?  Yeah, but I'm happier than you! |________________________|
>|________|____________________________________________________________________|

---
| Marc Barrett -MB-  |  email: barrett@iastate.edu
-----------------------------------------------------
"If you like Congress, you'll **LOVE** Bill Clinton."
                                --new campaign slogan
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 21:32:00 GMT
X-Posted-From: connection.prospect.com
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata FSO) writes:
>
>I would venture that given two operating systems A & B, which had
>roughly equivalent usefulness, then if one of them ran on 1/2 the
>hardware that the other required, this would be considered a
>positive point in its favor.  Therefore for your posting to have
>any meaning, both operating systems compared should have been
>equivalent in usefulness and functionality.  Not knowing anything
>about this AtariDOS system, but keeping the above in mind, then I
>would say this this AtariDOS system is great.  I will look into
>buying one! :)
>

Exactly my point, John.  OS/2 2.0 and AmigaDOS 2.04 do *not* have roughly
equivalent usefulness and functionality.  So why should they be expected
to run on the same hardware and occupy the same amount of RAM and HD space?

>
>John G. Ata                     | Internet:     hfsi!ata@UUNET.UU.NET
>
--
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
| 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                               |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: I DID give up on the Amiga!
From: fheitkamp@desire.wright.edu
Date: 29 Jul 92 07:16:08 EST
Organization: Wright State University 

In article <doiron.073w@starpt.UUCP>, doiron@starpt.UUCP (Glenn Doiron) writes:
> In article <hgm.711390476@fbi.cc.ncsu.edu> hgm@ncsu.edu (Hal G. Meeks) writes:
>>mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) asks:
>>
>>>Why hasn't CBM ported the AmigaOS to the Mac hardware?  (How's that for
>>>a wierd idea? :)  Anything worth porting would be ported (QUICKLY) and
>>>there likely might be a significant amount of software that would work
>>>right away...  Your users are QUITE adaptable.
>>
>>And here's an equally strange thought -- how about porting AmigaDos to the
>>Genesis? 
>>> 
> You see, the problem with this, is that Sega, like Nintendo, operate
> monopolies with the licensing/development info on their machines.  If they
> ever did such a thing they could kiss all their -charge-me-up-the-butt-
> for-writing-software-for-your-system- income goodbye.  It will never happen.
> 
	This is the old charge 'em peanuts for the razor  make 'em pay
	out the butt for the blades game.  Actually, now that I think
	about this is exactly what Microsoft is doing... Get Windows
	and DOS 5.0 for a song and dance and then charge more for 
	Word, Excell, etc.  Just a thought.
> 
> Glenn Doiron
> --
> Amiga UUCP+
> Origin:  uunet!starpt!doiron     (Organization:68K Software Development)
>          BIX: gdoiron
> ** Not enough memory to perform requested operation.  Add 4 megs and retry.
Fred Heitkamp   ** Not an Organization **

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 13:13:02 GMT

pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew) writes:
>gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>> Okay, so the A500 and 386 system have roughly the same price.  That meets
>> one of your comparison criteria.  They do not have roughly the same perform-
>> ance or capabilities.  You may as well compare 386 systems to component
>> stereo systems.
[...]
>I'd be interested in your reasoning as to why you believe they differ so
>much in capabilities and performance that no comparison should be made.

For performance the 386 is obviously faster.  The similarly priced system
will also have such capabilities as running Unix and displaying 15-bit
graphics.

-- Gerald
From: Mike_Whalen@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Mike Whalen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: A4000 article
Date: 30 Jul 92 15:41:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: agwbbs.Mike_Whalen.0kn2
Distribution: world
Organization: The Amiga GateWay BBS * New Orleans, La.

1. I didn't see the original article.

2. Commodore execs are on here..

3. Amiga News is a bonafide newspaper.

4. I apologised to Skip for blasting off about something he had no control
over (i.e. deleting of key lines).

Thanks...

Mike.. 

-- Via DLG Pro v0.992

---------
Phillip Robinson author of Washington Post/San Jose Mercury
article is RIGHT about Commodore atrocities regarding the Amiga!
Let's make HIM our voice! Since Commodore won't listen to us!

                              Phil Robinson
                              P.O. Box 1377
                           Sausalito, CA  94966
---------
From: root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:  I am giving up on the Amiga
Date: 27 Jul 92 13:36:57 GMT
Organization: Rick's Amiga

In article <1992Jul26.200404.14441@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> chuj@horton.Colorado.EDU (CHU JEFFREY) writes:
>>> heard, a 386SX-20 w/8MB RAM runs OS/2 2.0 quite well.  If you just want
>>> the base operating system, DOS but no Windows, no extra applications that
>>> you don't need or system tools you don't understand, OS/2 2.0 would fit
>>> quite nicely on a 60MB Drive.
>>>
>>
>>OS/2 (full loaded system) and Turbo C++ 3.1 do not fit on a 60MB drive together.
>>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
>>
>Just curious how much does Turbo C++ 3.1 take then?  My C++ 3.0 Professional kit
>only took up ~20 megs (Windows developer, etc...) and then OS/2 took up
>~30 megs.

A friend of mine just loaded up Borland C++ 3.1 with all the SDK stuff and
class libraries, and it is about 45 megs.

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

		think!unixland!rmkhome!rkamiga!root
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: Amiga Future?!?
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:00:46 GMT

stelmack@eggo.tmc.edu (Gregory M. Stelmack) writes:
>The Amiga community is THRIVING here in Tampa, FL, and from e-mail discussions
>seems to be moving well in Texas.

Hah, do not announce that so broadly.  If Commodore finds out how business is
booming, they will surely do something to kill it.

(Announcing the A700!  A compact A600 featuring no expansion ports or IDE
 controller!  Only $800!  Prices will drop after all other Amigas in stock
 are sold out!)

-- Gerald
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy