From: ccb8m@uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU (Charles C. Bundy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: PC vs AmigaPlay it again Sam)
Date: 28 Sep 92 02:48:21 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia Computer Science Department
Originator: ccb8m@onyx.cs.Virginia.EDU

Philip McDunnough writes:
>(Charles C. Bundy) writes:
>>My two cents on picking an Amiga or an Intel Clone:
>>
>>If you are going to be doing a lot of number crunching, and you
>>don't need animated visual display go with the Intel box.  In
>>terms of raw number crunching the Amiga doesn't keep up with
>>a 486 or Weitek based Intel 386.
>
>You don't do the number crunching on your local system. You do it on things
>which are 10 times faster. The 486 is hardly a replacement for a good 
>workstation.

Err, the person asked specifically whether to buy an Intel PC or
Amiga upon entering a doctoral program in math.  Sorry, I thought
the above intro; "picking an Amiga or an Intel Clone" pretty much 
excluded PA-RISC, MIPS, etc...

>>
>>If you want to do some dazzling presentations, would like to be
>>running something in conjunction with your math programs, or
>>want to do some memory intensive stuff, go with a motorola
>>based Amiga.
>
>Whatever...

Per your above lack of attention, I'd suggest getting a clue.

>>
>>Bottom line - software and compatibility at school.
>
>To a point.
>>
>>The Intel box has tons of stuff (Mathematica, Maple, Math CAD, etc)
>>Most educational institutions use Messy Dog machines + WordPerfect.
>>Most journal submissions require WordPerfect (unfortunately) format,
>>tho many will accept other text formats w/ conversion fees & delay
>>to print.  The Amiga can be used in this scenario, it just requires
>>more work on the part of the user to interface with a Messy Dog
>>mindset.  (Please don't yowl about MS-DOS = Messy Dog.  It was a
>>wonderful accomplishment in 1980, its just a pity that MS hasn't
>>improved upon it.)
>
>Most journal submissions do no insist on Wordperfect. I don't know of any 
>that do. Maple is on the Amiga. Mathematica runs better on workstations
>than via bank switching. In any case Maple is every bit as good. MathCad
>is not to be taken seriously.

Umm Mathematica/Maple are aimed at an entirely different user than
MathCAD.  (Symbolic theory -vs- applied math)  In what context is
an engineering program such as MathCAD not to be taken seriously?

>>
>>If you don't want to deal with interoperability issues, and you
>>want extensive software and support go with the Intel box.  In
>>your case of running math programs it will be the best choice.
>
>I simply don't agree. Mathematical journals prefer TeX documents, if anything.
>Please keep in mind that it's the content not the look that matters. A hand
>written document would do if it was a substantial result. The Intel boxes

See my conversion fee remark above.  No journal accepts hand written
submissions, no matter how "good" they are.

>do not really have the software. They are still hounded by the 640k issue.

You really haven't done much 32 bit code development, have you :)  I've
worked in CFD for the last 3 years and we didn't have a market for
the Motorola based PC's  (Mac, Amiga, etc...)  Also, benchmarking the
3D flow solver, placed a 50MHz 486DX 11% slower than a Sun accelerated
4/260 deskside unit.  Of course the 486 didn't have any OS overhead :)

Tell me about segmented memory arch. again?

>Should OS/2 succeed, then at that point it might be a different story. At the

The above benchmark example was run using PharLap VMM/Extender 
in flat mode over top of MS-DOS 4.01.  Same source as the workstation
/supercomputer version, same problem (electronic cooling ~24K nodes)

>moment there are only a few programs that a mathematically inclined
>person could profit by. On the other hand, their sense of elegance would be
>so upset with the PC that the end result might very well be negative.

PC's were designed for number crunching, what does "sense of elegance"
do for a problem that has to be solved?

>Having worked in a mathematical environment for over 20 years now, I have
>yet to meet anyone who really liked the PC among colleagues. They are still
>dismissed and for very good reasons.

Hmm, pretty damn elitist for a person who would accept such eccentricies
as "hand written journal submissions".

> 
>Philip McDunnough
>University of Toronto
>philip@utstat.toronto.edu
>

Charles C. Bundy IV
ccb8m@Virginia.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy