HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kent@m31.nde.swri.edu (Kent D. Polk)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:  The Under $10K Unix Workstation!
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:03:14 GMT
Organization: Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas

In article <1992Apr8.030057.21135@ux.acs.umn.edu> har@ux.acs.umn.edu (--SeebS--) writes:
>In article <1992Apr6.215229.8645@nic.unh.edu> pss1@kepler.unh.edu (Paul S Secinaro) writes:
>
>>If you
>>want to do really heavy commercial development, you often have to buy
>>a third-party dev.  system anyway (I think Saber C is one), which can
>>cost thousands.
>
>Why? What do these development systems offer? gcc -pedantic -Wall
>provides more error checking than many of the famous commercial development
>systems.

Saber C++ can do some pretty neat runtime checking and analysis.
However, there are a couple of prices to pay. First is with money :^)
Second, even on a Sun 4/690 MP machine with noone else on it, SaberC++
takes about 3 HOURS to link everything together to run a debug session
for one analysis channel on the commercial version of my X11 data
analysis software (though under X that one channel does take up 8MB
when loaded :^( ). It only take about 3 minutes to compile all that
same code.  Needless to say, I only use SaberC to confirm bugs in the
Sun OS. Also it wants to throw up a window everytime you push a
button.  'Window Overkill' - it's really annoying.

--
=============================================================================
    Kent Polk - Southwest Research Institute - kent@swrinde.nde.swri.edu
 Holy Hyperbola Batman! It's a pathologically coupled differential equation!!
=============================================================================
Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:12552 comp.sys.amiga.games:6906
From: mr_scary@lakes.trenton.sc.us (Chris Hurley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.games
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:42:00 GMT
Organization: The Veronica Lake Fan Club

gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
> 
> Yes, but is not Zorro II the equivalent of ISA, and Zorro III the equivalent
> of EISA, roughly speaking?  There is a price difference between ISA and EISA
> 486 systems I believe.  Of course, the A3000 is a better machine than the
> A2000, but, for some reason, we are comparing Amigas to Intel PCs, not Amigas
> to Amigas.
> 
> -- Gerald

I would say maybe it's equivalent to 16 bit Microchannel, rather than ISA 
as it is autoconfiguring, and doesn't suffer from jumperitus.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.misc
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: Video Toaster
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 17:19:07 GMT

mike@maths.tcd.ie (Mike Rogers) writes:
>gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) wrote:
>>Now that is the real point.  If you dislike the $4000 Video Toaster
>>setup because it does not match the performance of a $500000+ setup,
>
>Hmmmm. 500000 divided by 4000 equals 125.
>
>That's a lot of toasters/inputs/keying/whatever, anyway you look at it.

Yes.  If one is going to spend $500000+ on video equipment, it would not
hurt to spend some change on a couple of Toaster setups.  (One for the
studio, and one for me. ;-)

-- Gerald
From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip 'AdaX' Sauls)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Date: 13 Apr 92 01:40:19 GMT
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science

In article <1992Apr12.164341.21031@seas.gwu.edu> gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>chucks@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Erik Funkenbusch) writes:
>>gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>>>Curious.  How do you know his A1000 does not have these features?  There are
>>>many upgrade paths for the A1000, including replacing its motherboard with
>>>an A2000-type board.
>>
>>He didn't say he had upgraded.  He said his 1000 was from 85/86.  Although a
>>late 86 1000 would have extra half brite, one from 85 would not.  If he had
>>upgraded his motherboard, then the machine would not be from 85/86, it would
>>be a 1000 CASE with a 91 motherboard.  Also, the same argument would hold true
>>in the reverse if you were to replace an 1982 PC with a 1992 486DX
>>motherboard.  IF he had upgraded, his argument would be moot, because the
>>whole point of the statement was trying to say that his 1985 1000 could do
>>everything that new amigas can today.  Which it obviously cannot.
>
>I doubt he was playing these word games.  If he purchased the A1000 in 1985
>or 1986, then he probably calls it an 85/86 machine whether he upgraded or
>not.  This seems reasonable to me.  (Where did the guy run off to, anyway!)
>If he did upgrade, this in no way invalidates his point.  What other computer
>can be upgraded so that its first machine runs all current software?

Well, you could "upgrade" an original IBM PC with a replacement motherboard,
SVGA card and monitor, HD and controller, etc., but then you are replacing
practically everything but the case and power supply.

The fact that the first machine can be upgraded to run all current software
is great, but I am afraid it is also holding back progress.  The A3000 is
a hell of a nice machine, but the right side of the motherboard (the cpu, 
fpu, ram, SCSI, buss, etc.) is being held back by the left side (the three
original custom chips).  I would prefer a more "balanced" system that has
32bit custom chips with at least 8 bit video and 16 bit audio.  If such a
system were to be introduced I am sure that some software would break, but
that is the price that must be paid sooner or later (hopefully sooner).

At some point the upgradability of any computer will become very difficult,
if not impossible, and a new machine is the best option.  As Amiga owners
we should consider ourselves lucky that C= and third parties provide the
means for us to upgrade to most, if not all, new features.  But we should
also hope that C= will not let the compatibility issue hold them back.

>-- Gerald

Skip Sauls                     //    Graduate Student & Instructor
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu    \X/     CS Department, University of Mississippi 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: grstate@crocus.waterloo.edu (Gavriel State)
Subject: Re: A3000 & AMax, Available Memory
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 19:25:51 GMT

In article <jayson.01la@tbag.UUCP> jayson@tbag.UUCP (Jayson Phillips) writes:
>>From: Larry_Rosenstein@taligent.com
>>Subject: 
>>Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1992 15:59:25 -0800
> 
>>In article <jayson.010s@tbag.uunet.uu.net>, jayson@tbag.uunet.uu.net
>>(Jayson Phillips) writes:
>>> 
>>>     Memory   5824K
> 
>>What does About the Finder say?  You might have 5.8 Mb, but the system
>>might not be able to use it all with the 128K ROMs.

The 128K ROMs are capable of addressing almost 16Megs of memory.  What 
AMAX does is similar to what Connectix's (sp?) virtual memory product
for accellerated non-Mac-II-class machines - basically they patch the
memory manager and convince it that the application heap is larger 
than it actually is (ie: 16 megs), but inserts non-relocatable 'holes'
in places where there isn't really any available RAM (from what I recall
there is a 'hole' between chip and fast ram on the amiga - yes?) or 
where memory mapped hardware i/o is done (on a Mac).  

Thus you don't really have quite 5824K available, but you get pretty 
close.

Now what surprises me is that Larry Rosenstein doesn't know this!  For 
all you fanatical Mac-hating Amiganoids out there, Larry Rosenstien was 
one of the more important mac engineers.  Under Finder 6.0.x, when you 
choose 'About the Finder...', one of the things it says is: 'by Larry, 
John, Steve, and Bruce'.  That's one and the same Larry. 8-)

Hopefully the reason why Mr. Rosenstein didn't know this is because he 
has been hard at work at Taligent, where such mundanities as memory maps
are a thing of the distant past. Everything lives in ObjectLand.....8-)



-- 
Gavriel State | 2A Systems Design Engineering/Economics | University of Waterloo
grstate@crocus.uwaterloo.ca (School)  |  "What in God's name is going on?"
grstate@vader.ocunix.on.ca (> Apr 17) |   "FOUL!  No rhetoric!  Two-one!"
(519)746-2215 (Waterloo)              | Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.games
From: jerry@cs.mcgill.ca (Gerald (Jerry) KUCH)
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Organization: McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 17:36:05 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.052558.12028@seas.gwu.edu> gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene) writes:
>>>    And look at the speed comparisons of a A3000 w/68040 to a 486.. The 40
>>> wins.. But as stated above, with the Amiga, its not JUST the processor that
>>> does all the work...
>>
>>	Plus the 486 system is a heck of a lot less expensive then an 040
>>  based A3000. 
>
>If you are going to get an 040 board, you might as well get an A2000.  This
>is much cheaper, plus it can use a Video Toaster.
>

People have got the Toaster working in the 3000 now.

-- 
 Jerry Kuch (jerry@cs.mcgill.ca) | "Sic Gorgianus Allos Subjectatus Nunc."
 "I was wrong to play God.  Life is precious, not a thing to be toyed with.
  Now take out that brain and flush it down the toilet."
                  --- M. Burns  "Treehouse of Horror II"
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: dano@usl.edu (Dan Stephenson)
Subject: Re: Wild rumor, potential for massive sea change in Amiga world
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern Louisiana
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 03:17:28 GMT

dtiberio@csws17.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:

>	A500 = $399
>	A2000= $1600?
>	A3000= $1900 - $2500

>	Why is there such a large gap between the A500 and the A2000?
>Why doesn't CBM release an $800 machine? The CDTV comes close, but the
>keyboard and mouse are extra. CBM should have a professionally styled
>Amiga at the $900 price range.

WOW!  Why in the world is there such a HUGE difference between the
Amiga 2000 and the A500???

You'd think the A2000 use something besides a 68000,... _does it_??
I don't think so.

What come with the A2000 over the A500 warranting a  *1200* dollar
prices difference?! Hell, for 41600, I'd get an A500 and a niiice 386
with the 1200.
 
Also, with the A3000 $300-900 more,it seems that te A2000 sales are
lousy, no?

_Dan
.


>-- 
>      //   David Tiberio  SUNY Stony Brook 2-3662  AMIGA  DDD-MEN   
>     // Today is my 21st brithday, and I still have high insurance!
>   \X/  Liverpool, New York	flames to suggestions@cbmvax.commodore.com
--
Daniel Anthony Stephenson, player of Praetorius, namer of The Solarium.
dano@srl01.cacs.usl.edu das9674@usl.edu
"I can be, what I want to, and all I need is to get my boogie
down"- Al Jarreau.
From: root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:   C= policy (Re: Apple problems "Home computer")
Distribution: world
Date: 11 Apr 92 12:55:28 EST
Organization: Rick's Amiga

In article <1992Apr10.140033.27807@cs.mcgill.ca> costin@cs.mcgill.ca (Costin RIZAN) writes:
>In article <1992Apr10.020525.20486@nic.unh.edu> ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene) writes:

>>> It's shakeout time in the PC clone world.  The cheap clone companies that
>>> can't live with the low margins will go out of business, and then the bottom
>>> end prices will rise back to a more normal level.

>	Even if your theory WAS true, when the prices start going up,
>there will be other entrants in the market, which will make the 
>prices go down again. So don't hold your breath. 
>	By the way, what is a normal level? To me a normal level for
>technology is starting out high and after a period of time bottoming.
>Seems like it's exactly what the clone market is doing. Just because
>you are used to getting ripped off by CBM it doesn't mean that it's
>prices are 'normal'.

Well, since I own an Intel box as well as two Amigas, and since I've spent
the last few years dealing with UNIX on pc clones, I think that I have
some idea of what I'm talking about.

The bottom end of the PC market is so low now, that quality assurance is
starting to suffer.  There are 386/486 pc clones being sold that can't run
in protected mode due to timing and other problems.  The boards are being
designed and slapped into systems as fast as they can make them.  The
result is very cheap boxes that can run MSDOS, and that's it.  They are
being sold at such a low margin, and there are so many companies trying
to undercut each other, that there will soon be a point where small clone
companies will start dropping like flies.  The prices will ease back up
to the DELL or Gateway level.

An Intel box that can only run MSDOS would be of little use to me, as
I don't use MSDOS.

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

		think!unixland!rmkhome!rkamiga!root
From: tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (Kenneth Jamieson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Date: 10 Apr 92 13:01:07 GMT
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.

In article <1992Apr9.224927.15625@ux.acs.umn.edu> har@ux.acs.umn.edu (--SeebS--) writes:
>
>On my "wimpy" amiga, I've compiled about a megabyte of source code with
>*no* disk access, 'cuz the compiler, the assembler, and the source were
>all in the pseudo-disk-cache. Thus, I could compile the *whole* thing with
>one disk access - that of make reading its makefile.
>
>Let's see your DOS clone do *that*.

	Are you really so ignorant that you don't think that DOS
machines have disk cacheing software (I had it in '85 when I started
doing dos work)???  Remember, there was a 640 limit on executable code
for a while, but for ramdisks and cache's there has always been the
ability to use extra memory.
>

>Jerre, *PLEASE* trim your .signature. Some sites have a 4-line maximum,
>enforced by inews - this is why. Sheesh! Us old folks who work on greenscreens
>because we can't afford a brand new 486 box to use as a terminal are stuck
>with a third of our screen taken up by one bleeding signature!

	Ack! A whole 3rd of a screen!


-- 

+--[ Xanadu Enterprises Inc. Lingerie, Consulting, RPG's and ANIME ]-+.sign
|  Please send email for detailed product or catalogue information!  |ature
|             Ken Jamieson: uunet!tronsbox.xei.com!tron1             |Virus
|---NONE of the opinions represented here are endorsed by anybody!---|V3.2
|              Original contents are Copyright (c)1992               |1992!
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: Paula_Lieberman@amicol.UUCP (Paula Lieberman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun doesn't join Taligent, it takes their programmers.
Date: 6 Apr 92 10:29:08 GMT
Organization: Amiga Colony BBS

Evan Torrie in article wrote words to the effect of SPA just voted
QuickTime
'"Best New Use of a Computer.'" -- course, that doesn't say -who- voted,
who -is- SPA?  Most of them are PC or Mac types to start with who haven't a
clue about Amigas or other machines, the SPA is so concerned about
"software piracy" it soesn't seem to have any interest in seeing that
graphics artists in other mediums don't get ripped off, it doesn't seem to
have any concern that the customer base gets value in return for money it
spends on software..... I haven't heard that the SPA's ever taken the side
of the consumer who feels screwed over by bugware being delivered months
after promised delivery date and not having the features, performance,
compatibility, stability, and utility promised and paid for.....  

The SPA voting something best doesn't impress me all that much, the SPA
isn't exactly a user community.....


-- Via DLG Pro v0.991
From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:   Atari Falcon (wasn't: Amiga Falcon)
Date: 9 Apr 92 08:14:34 GMT
Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA

In article <root.0199@rkamiga.UUCP> root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>In article <1992Mar29.183453.21348@lth.se> d91jn@efd.lth.se (Jerker Nilsson) writes:
>>In article <root.016z@rkamiga.UUCP> root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:

>>>From the 386/25 and up, most Intel boxes can run the AT bus at 10 or 11
>>>megahertz, these days.  My other machine, rmkhome, runs it's bus at 11 mhz.
>>...

>>So???? 8 or 10 or even 11 MHz makes no big difference! The bus is STILL far 
>>too slow. A 25 MHz processor should have a 25MHz bus, else you will find the
>>bus is a bottleneck!

>True.  Unfortunately, the designers of "clone" motherboards are hamstrung
>by the fact that most add on cards would fail on a 25 or 33 mhz bus.  

Well, don't blame the motherboards or their "designers" (with the support you 
get from glue chip companies these days, designing a reasonable motherboard
is only about one step beyond buildin' yourself a HeathKit.  Some of the better
designs, though, do take real live hardware folks.  I'm not sure if anyone
does much of what you could call "architectural work" in that field anymore).

The problem is the bus, plain and simple.  The Amiga bus has the same problem,
actually to a greater degree, since there are generally more complex bus
transactions going over the Amiga bus, it's basically a synchronous bus, etc.
In the late 70s and early 80s, little if any thought was given to expansion
bus design by anyone doing microcomputers.  The bus you got was more than 
anything what was easy to do.  The Amiga'a orginal Zorro bus is as guilty as
the PC bus on this, it's just that the Amiga designers had a higher ideal of
"what's easy", and the benefit of a few more years of technology.  The real
triumph of the PC bus was its ultimate prevalence; if a piece of hardware
exists, it's on the PC/PC-AT bus and MAYBE some others, for the most part.
The triumph of the Amiga bus was the firmware specifications, Autoconfig and
all.  The designers basically nailed every concern that's been covered, kludged,
hacked, bolted into and jammed onto modern PC buses.  And it still does it
better.  Don't take my word; as anyone what's involved in "automatically"
configuring an MCA or EISA card, compare that to real AUTOCONFIG(TM).


-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      BIX: hazy
   "We can't be silent, because they might be giants" - The Might Be Giants
 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 23:51:55 GMT

tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (Kenneth Jamieson) writes:
>	My point (that I already admitted was badly made) was that
>while there have been evolutionary changes to the Amiga since that
>time, there has been none that was revolutionary.
>
>	For the most part, my 85 machine is as capable as the majority
>of Amiga's sold in 91/92. And that is sad.

Yes, thanks for clearing this up.  That is a valid point.  Supposedly
Commodore is working to remedy this, but that has been the case for
quite a while.

-- Gerald
Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:12550 comp.sys.amiga.games:6905 comp.sys.amiga.misc:8509 comp.sys.amiga.multimedia:822 comp.sys.amiga.graphics:3699 comp.sys.amiga.hardware:8825
From: bleys@tronsbox.UUCP (Bill Cavanaugh)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.games,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.multimedia,comp.sys.amiga.graphics,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Date: 13 Apr 92 01:03:16 GMT
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.

In article <7459@orbit.cts.com> chucks@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Erik Funkenbusch) writes:
>
>He didn't say he had upgraded.  He said his 1000 was from 85/86.  Although a
>late 86 1000 would have extra half brite, one from 85 would not.  If he had
>upgraded his motherboard, then the machine would not be from 85/86, it would
>be a 1000 CASE with a 91 motherboard.  Also, the same argument would hold true
>in the reverse if you were to replace an 1982 PC with a 1992 486DX
>motherboard.  IF he had upgraded, his argument would be moot, because the
>whole point of the statement was trying to say that his 1985 1000 could do
>everything that new amigas can today.  Which it obviously cannot.
>

Well, my 1987 A500 can do everything a new amiga can do.  The only
upgrades I've done were to add the A501 board (not putting the extra
half meg and the clock in the machine in the first place was pretty
stupid) and a GVP Impact A500 hard drive/ram upgrade.
 
There's been an incremental upgrade to the chip ram, an incremental
upgrade to the max fast ram (from 8 meg to 18?), a move from a 68000
cpu to a 68030, and that's it.

For the price of an A3000/33-100meg I can get a '486/50-100meg with
SVGA, a Soundblaster Pro, OS/2, Windows 3.1, and a few apps.

BTW, I've used Windows 3.1 on a '486/33, and it's faster than WB 2.0
on an A3000/25 at opening windows and moving them around...

-- 
 *         Bill Cavanaugh       bleys@tronsbox.xei.com          *
 *                                                              *
           "Thought and affliction, passion, hell itself,
           She turns to favor and to prettiness."
                   Laertes (speaking of Ophelia)        XY + XX = :-)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:   Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom" ?
From: jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz (John Bickers)
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:39:35 PST
Organization: TAP, NZAmigaUG

Quoted from <1992Apr7.125251.7543@ms.uky.edu> by justin@mik.uky.edu (Justin Sullivan):
> John Bickers writes
> > Quoted from <1992Apr6.195635.10380@ms.uky.edu> by justin@graphlab.cc.uky.edu   
> (Justin Sullivan):
> > 
> > > A/UX 3.0 is *SVR4*.
> > 
> >     Why doesn't it have "Unix" in the name, BTW?
> 
> Because an intelligent reader would know what SVR4 is and assume it is UNIX.

    So Apple actually say "A/UX 3.0 is SVR4", do they (seriously, I don't
    know - I _thought_ they didn't say that about any A/UX)?

    If they don't, then the question becomes "why doesn't it have SVR4
    in the name, BTW?".
--
*** John Bickers, TAP, NZAmigaUG.        jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz ***
***    "Radioactivity - It's in the air, for you and me" - Kraftwerk    ***
From: TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Wild rumor, potential for massive sea change in Amiga world
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 15:29:28 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Apr14.182839.21215@ra.msstate.edu>

It WOULD be a big deal to lose the North American market. With apologizes
to our European counterparts, I don't see much productivity or utility
software coming from outside NA.

If the NA market, so goes the productivity and utility stuff. Then how
long will the Amiga hold out against game consoles?

TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko)
sun!portal!cup.Portal.com!Tomk
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.games,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.multimedia,comp.sys.amiga.graphics,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
From: leavitt@cheshire.oxy.edu (Thomas VanNess Leavitt)
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA  90041
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 03:12:05 GMT


My buddy Paul has this cool looking wallpaper program on his Workbench...
he's currently got this wild-looking midevial dragon.

Thom

Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:12044 comp.sys.amiga.games:6648 comp.sys.amiga.misc:8214 comp.sys.amiga.multimedia:783 comp.sys.amiga.graphics:3507 comp.sys.amiga.hardware:8515