From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip Sauls)
Subject: Re: PC (OS/2) / Amiga debate -- hopefully a rational debate, an I an ideali
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 20:46:47 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.170218.14810@usl.edu> das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A) writes:
>In article <BuB6Lq.GAJ@starnine.com> mikeh@starnine.com (Mike Haas) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep3.153516.42760@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> thompson@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>>>In article <BtxoCu.In4@starnine.com>, mikeh@starnine.com (Mike Haas) writes:
>>>> In article <1992Aug27.161036.384@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>>>>In article <BtM61A.Bs@starnine.com> mikeh@starnine.com (Mike Haas) writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>OS/2 itself is solid.  There are bugs in the WPS, but the WPS is brand new
>>>>>software -- and very sophisticated software at that.
>>>> 
>>>> That's why it has bugs?  Because it's s-o-o-o sophisticated?
>>>
>>>As sophistication goes up, so does the chance of bugs.  Are you rational
>>>enough to see this?
>>
>>Sure, so I can tell how sophisticated my OS/2 program is by how
>>many bugs it has.  Okay.
>
>Come on guys, the WPS has some faults to it, but have you guys ever
>used it?  It is like...a cross between the Mac GUI structure, the
>flexibilty of Windows, and...the look of Motif or something!  Plus,
>throw in  WAY more customization that any sane person could totally
>take advantage of.  Yes, it is not 100% bug free.

The IBM RS6000 series have a shell that runs under Motif that looks 
something like the WPS.  I've never used OS/2 and don't know if
it is the same thing or not, but I did like the version on the
RS6000.  It was similar to a NeXT in some ways and was nice, but
I still used the command line for most operations.

>>>>>>>Don't compare OS/2 2.0 to AmigaDOS -- AmigaDOS
>>>>>>>isn't even close in terms of functionality,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Of course it is... pre-emptive multitasking, GUI based system.  Probably
>>>>>>better than OS/2 in real-time response.  Addresses 1.8 GIG of memory.
>>>>>>Multi-media capable... make that natural.
>>>>>
>>>>>It still isn't even close to OS/2 in terms of functionality.
>>>> 
>>>> Sure Jerry, you can just stand there and repeat it over and over...
>
>[Jerry list reasons and is countered]
>
>>If this is your bag... get the Bridgeboard or any of a multitude
>>of MSDOS emulators, many of which multitask on the Workbench.
>
>SLOW SLOW SLOW, or alternatively,
>
>EXPENSIVE.  This BB discussion has been hacked at for a long time now.

I'd buy a BridgeBoard if C= would make a 486 version that used Zorro III
and supported the VGA modes of the AA chipset.  :-)

>>>1-2,000 OS/2 apps (numbers are approximate) plus anyting that runs under
>>>a real mode operating system booted in a virtual machine, every process
>>>runs in its own memory address space--protects the apps from each other,
>>>30 day money back guarantee, etc.  I could go on.
>>
>>You've stated maybe 3 facilities that OS/2 has over the Amiga...
>>...as I said above, AUTO-CONFIGURATION as well REAL-TIME OS
>>are two on the Amiga's side that OS/2 doesn't support...
>>I'm sure I could come up with more (like virtual screens),
>>but the point is that the Amiga is VERY comparable to OS/2 and 
>>superior in some respects.
>
>You know, Jerry wasn't asking what the Amiga had, just pointing out
>that OS/2 has certain features that the Amiga OS doesn't.

Surely you don't expect an Amiga owner to respond rationally when
comparing the Amiga to another machine, do you?  :-)

>I think OS/2 is the best thing to hit PCs since VGA.

It may be, but it may not ever catch on now that MicroSoft and IBM
seem to hate each other.

>>>>>How much for one of those BridgeBoards?  What's on it, a 286?  If you think
>>>>>a BridgeBoard is comparable to having a PC, you're sadly mistaken.
>>>> 
>>>> I know... with the 386 BB from C=, you also have the AMiga!
>>>> You're right!  A PC can't compare!

>>>Again, how much for a 386 BB?

The best price that I've heard is $999.  For a CGA only 386sx with
1M RAM, that sucks.

>> don't know, probably about the same or more as a clone, but like
>> I said...you end up with the Amiga, too!  (YOU can't run a video
>> toaster, genlocking, Mac emulation...in your Intel box.)
>
>All these things are extras.  The discussion was OS/2 and Amiga OS,
>specifically, the WorkPlace Shell under OS/2.

Ah, but in the true spirit of .advocacy, we have to talk about
everything else under the sun!  Hell, neither the Amiga, Mac, 
or PC is good for brewing beer, but that doesn't make them 
useless.  :-)

>>Far as I know, yes.  (not in the market for Intel-based crap)
>>And I ststed above 386 BB.  Do you know what 386 means?
>>
>>>A dx, sx, 20mHz, etc.?  
>>
>>I believe it's an SX at 20 MHz, but like I said, I could care less
>>about PC-compatible junk so I'm not sure.

>I guess you were hurrahing about the BB for other Amigans,then?

Amigans?  Ugh, what a stupid name.  If you are going to call us a
name, please use something more suitable like Amigoids, AmigaNuts,
FlameBaiters, or Bozos.  :-)

>>>>>>Yeah.  I have both 2.04 AND 1.3 installed on my hard disk in less than
>>>>>>8 meg (my 2.04 partition is 6 meg and has 3 meg free).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>From what I understand, OS/2 needs something over 30 meg, minimum?
>>>>>>'Zat right?
>>>>>
>>>>>'Zat's wrong.
>>>> 
>>>> Well, Jerry, what's the right number? 28Meg? 25Meg?  Decline to comment?
>>>
>>>It is wrong.  It can take up 17 megs for just OS/2 compatibility.  At 
>>>work, with OS/2 fully installed, it takes 27 megs.
>>
>>Then hell, I was just a little high.  27 Megs, eh?  What were you
>>saying about the number of bugs as OS/2 software gets more
>>"sophisticated"?
>
>GOOD GRIEF!  It's not like 'ooh, its so big an really buggy AND
>totally useless!'  No, no, no - it is extremely powerful.  THink of
>it as a race car needing new tires often.

Nah, a better car analogy would be a 1970's design that has been
updated and improved.  It has fuel injection, ABS, aerodynamic styling,
etc., but the chassis and engine block are still the same.

>>>Anyway, you are 
>>>getting two operating systems, and an operating environment (Windows),
>>>plus Adobe Type Manager 2.0.  You are also getting more features.  If 
>>>you don't want the features, you can nix them off your hard disk.
>>
>>As I said, MSDOS & WIndows (gag) ARE available on the Amiga with both
>>hardware & software emulators.  Scaleable fonts are in AmigaOS 2.0.
>>And I haven't "nix"ed any system software off my hard disk yet (but
>>I can see why it's common practice with OS/2...lower the incidence
>>of "sophisticated" software).
>
>More money, more money, more money... come on, we we talking about OS/2
>vs. Amiga OS.  IF Amiga OS is sooooo deficient that you resort to
>'oh, well I can emulate it' arguements, you've totally missed the point
>to the discussion.

Oh come on, you're not getting serious on us, are you?  As Amiga
owners we have to say things which are totally irrelevant to the
discussion.  Sheesh, if we stuck to the subject we'd never be able
to hold our own against all the non-Amiga owners around here.

>>>>>No video support out of the box?!  What box?
>>>>>Find me a clone vendor that doeesn't sell complete systems.
>>>> 
>>>> Yeah.  All different.  Show me 2 vendors that sell the SAME system?
>>>
>>>Gateway, High Definition, Acma, and hundreds of others will sell you
>>>the same system configuration.  They may have peripherals made by 
>>>different companies, but they operate the same.
>>
>>Yeah, sure.  The SAME system, just different.
>
>Once again, an Amigan think that just because ONE company doesn't
>make the computer that they all all different, like people are or
>something.  Once and for all, in the vast majority of cases, the
>differences between PCs are only in terms of the equipment, not the
>quality/support/compatibility.

But there are differences in quality, support, and compatibility.
A Clone from Joe's Bozo Clone Emporium is not as well engineered
as an IBM or Compaq and the support is certainly much worse.  As
for compatibility, that does vary somewhat and it can be a nightmare
getting several different machines configured so that they appear
the same to users.

>>>If you want to be
>>>locked into just a few choices and a few prices for a computer, fine.
>>
>>If the system is designed right, you don't NEED that many choices!
>
>I have been on the newsgroup long enough tos see a decent number of Amigans
>either see away their Amigas to get PCs or get a PC in addition.

You may see several more if the news from the WOA is not good.

>Don't make such lofty assumptions about a computer - however great a 
>computer was (exaggerating) 20 years ago - it is shit today.

However, if it still serves its purpose, it is good shit.  :-)

>>>I prefer competition to drive the price down.  And please don't
>>>spout off about incompatibilities, because I have had no problems.
>>
>>No.  MOST of the time the crap works.  It's the HOOPS you
>>have to jump through to get it in that state.  Make sure them
>>memory map is right, not tromping on another IRQ, ... it ain't
>>easy gettin' that ol' Intel sh** to cooperate!
>
>Good grief, you are either really unlucky in experiencing Clones,
>or wanting to do really WEIRD things with it.

I get the impression that many Amiga owners last experienced a Clone
in the mid-eighties.  Or maybe they are just plain stupid.

>'memory map'===>typing a line in a configuration file, or the 
>                program does it for you.

We have dozens of different clones around here and none of them have
memory map problems.  What is the big deal?

>IRQ===========> systems that do not come with lots of peripherals
>	        should not have problems filling up IRQs.  In the
>	        most cases, the default IRQ for the card (like a Soundblaster)
>		is the correct one.

Amiga Owner : "But we have AutoConfig(TM)!"

If there were lots of neat boards for the Amiga, AutoConfig would be
something to brag about.  But there aren't and the wonders of the
Zorro bus are simply wasted on most machines.  How many A3000 owners
have one or more boards in their machines?  I'd bet that there
aren't that many.

>PCs 'headaches' IF existing are almost always 'cured' by simply reading the
>manual  that comes with the card.

Sheesh, real computer users don't need manuals.  :-)

>>I've been "guessing" at setting up an Ethernet card and rebooted
>>and the display turned to 1/2 it's normal height!  (Is THAT why
>>they call it OS/2?)
>
>I don't know about such things.  Did you know what you were doing?

I assembled a 486 box at work which included cards for the IDE drive,
SVGA, Ethernet, and scanner without a hitch.  Again, I'd bet that
it is not that setting up a PC is difficult, it's that most people
are just plain stupid.

>>>>>Kludged in?!  You mean, kind of like your built-in flicker-fixer, Mike?
>>>> 
>>>> No, I don't mean factory-installed, present-in-every-system features.
>>>> BTW, the interlace of the AMiga is a GOOD THING.  It's one of the
>>>> reasons the Amiga is so much better at video that Intel trash.
>>>> (Seen Pournelle's latest column?  Even HE admits how superior
>>>> the Amiga is for creating multi-media!).
>>>> 
>>>> The fact that some systems flicker simply means their owners
>>>> can have high-quality tools at less cost.  MY system is
>>>           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> rock-solid.  Just like Amiga VS. PC prices...you get what
>>>> you pay for!
>>>
>>>What?  You totally lost me.  Interlace is good?  You like going blind?
>>
>>Yes, interlace is good.  Ever heard of NTSC?  It permits genlocking the
>>CPU to a video signal...the capability that makes the Toaster
>>possible on the Amiga and IMPOSSIBLE on either Macs OR PCs.
>
>I see TVs on PCs becoming common in the future.  The hardware, etc.
>is available today, and with the fall in PC hardware prices...
>IBM sells a TV for $500.  I need to get back to the dealer to see about
>any deals...that price was LIST.  You get a full screen TV or
>pop it into a non-resizable (drat) windows. There is a menu panel on the
>desktop to change various settings.

IBM sells a TV?  For $500 it better be at least 25", cable ready, and
have stereo support.  :-)

I do think that it sucks that such devices are available for the Mac
and PC but not the Amiga.  If the Amiga is so video-capable, why can't
I have a TV on the Workbench?  Oh sure, there is the GVP board, but
the price on that thing is ridiculous.

>>And there's a lot you can do about the flicker... right up to
>>eliminating the flicker entirely.
>
>If, as you claim, the Amiga was SO fine to begin with, why does it flicker
>at all?

Flicker?  My Amiga doesn't flicker at all.

>What is the dot pitch on the 1084S, the vastly most common Amiga monitor,eh?
>Wanna tell me?

I don't know what it is, but I'd swear that my old 1080 that I bought in
1986 is sharper than the newer models.

>>>So flickering is a sign of high quality?  Sure it means low cost, but
>>>high quality?  What are you saying?  
>>
>>I'm saying that your PC is crap for video... that to do decent
>>video, you'll have to pump mucho bucks into it.
>
>I agree that the Amiga is more 'suited' for this, but you can't tell me
>that PCs will always lag.   Plus, the 'suited' aspects of the Amiga
>has other drawbacks...and the world doesn't turn on Video.

The world most certainly does turn on video.  People all over are
turning on video all the time.  Hell, some people never turn it off!

>>>My system's display is flicker free because it is noninterlaced.  
>>>1024x768x256 colors at 70 Hz refresh rate.  That is higher quality
>>>than a flickering 43 Hz interlaced display.  
>>
>>As I said, not for video... it is useless.  My 1950 Multiscan
>>provides a rock-solid display (zero-flicker) AND my Amiga gives
>>great video.
>
>Fine, already.

Hey, don't give up so easily.  Remind him that the flicker-free display
is low-res by today's standards and that the video is limited to a just
a few colors.  

>>>> 
>>>> Face it... they're garbage!
>>>
>>>You have not make the distintion between hardware and software.
>>>8 character filenames are gone in OS/2.
>>
>>What IS the limit in OS/2?
>
>255.  This includes all manner of spaces, etc.

I think the Amiga is limited to 32 characters.  I just tried to create
a file called "A really big filename to test the limits of the Amiga's
filesystem naming convention", but it was truncated after the word test.

While I agree that the 8.3 names under DOS are too short, I hate the
assholes who use spaces in their filenames.  Having to put the damn
quotes around a filename is just wasted typing.  If people feel the
need to use anal-retentive filenames, at least use underbars!

>>>    start a flame thread, instead you'll start an informative thread
>>>    about the differences between Amigas and PC's.
>
>>There are some topics I like being emotional about.  Dealing with
>>all this IBM-smugness and self-serving OS2/0-is-god nonsense is
>>one of them.  Believe me.  The "emotionality" is not by accident.
>
>Well, I cannot say that I have used the Amiga OS or GUI, but OS/2
>is REALLY REALLY GOOD.

And AmigaOS is great!  The GUI is lacking a bit, but part of that
comes from being designed for lo-res screens with few colors.  A
256 color Workbench at hi-res would look really nice, but most
Amigas will never have that capability.

>>The original PC/MSDOS was, pure and simple, an inferior machine.
>>The severe machine limitations (640K, no multitasking, etc.) were
>>so blatent that IBM could only have planned those bits of obsolescence.
>
>In ten years people will bitch that OS/2 has a multi-gig limit. 

If OS/2 survives...

>>Now it has been many years since it's introduction, and the machine
>>HAS gotten more powerful.  It has improved in graphics (couldn't
>>get any worse!), sound capabilities, and faster CPU's.  (Although
>>the original hardware is now useless, no?).
>
>Yes.

Funny, the original IBM XTs that we use as routers work just fine.
Not every person or every application needs the latest and greatest
hardware.  A lot of "useless" hardware can be donated to schools or
given to a child.  I'd love to see kids playing with PCs and learning
something instead of wasting their lives on Nintendo, Genesis, and
that sort of crap.

>>But THAT is where the significant improvements end, IMHO.  Except for
>>CPUs & their speed, the hardware dis not "grow up" in a standard way,
>>but by a multitude of third-party-products, much of it incompatible.
>>Or unsupported.  Some new sound board comes out... no software uses it.
>
>Oh, but you;re wrong.  The 'magic of the Market' occurrs.  IF
>Soundboards are wantewd, there WILL be software.  Witness zillions of games
>and Multimedia.

Hah!  Do you actually believe in the MultiMedia bullshit?  Apple, IBM,
and everyone else are acting like MultiMedia is something new and that
it will have great impact on the world.  It's a freaking buzzword which
has been worn out by all the hype and lies from marketing types.

>>The architecture of the hardware is virtually unchanged... still all the
>>configuration headaches of early computers.  Installing, changing,
>>configuring hardware is a pain...if it's lessened in complexity at
>>all, it's due to the toil of a third-party-developer who designed
>>his stuff to be friendlier...NOT by the OS giving any help here.
>
>Hopefully, OS/2 or NT will wean us to RISC.
>And the MCA bus.

MCA?  Nah, I'd bet that whatever bus is used on the Alpha machines
will be more popular.

>>MSDOS is a complete joke....doesn't even deserve discussion
>>in this arena.  Windows on top of MSDOS... same story.  Same
>>round-robin multitasking as on the mac.
>
>The main part is task switching and the GUI.

If one considers the foundation, Windows is pretty amazing.  And
despite its drawbacks, there are some things that it offers that
the Amiga does not.

>>OS/2 does fix a lot.  It provides true multitasking (even if it
>>isn't real-time).  It IS much better than the older systems, but
>>27 Meg?  But all in all, it probably has a place in the realm of
>>modern-day, "sophisticated" OS's (even if it IS limited to
>>single-letter drive specs), if Windows doesn't knock it out
>>of the marketplace (is OS/2 compatible with Win3.1 stuff?...
>>is it endangered by Win/NT?).
>
>SO much more comes with OS/2.  From what I have seen, the Amiga OS
>(I saw 1.3) comes with minor screen customizers and a C64-clone 
>speech synthesizer.

You ain't seen nothing.  Amiga OS 2.04 is a different animal from 1.3.
It looks better, does much more, and comes with quite a few things
that allow for lots of customization, among other things.  What it
lacks are lots of nice applications, but that is improving and may
get much better if the news from the WOA is good.

>>But it's patently ridiculous that AmigaOS is not "comparable
>>in functionality" to OS/2.  That term doesn't imply better or worse,
>>it doesn't say more powerful or less...just comparable.  It is
>>CERTAINLY more comparable that the piece of mucus MSDOS and
>>Windows abortion that OS/2 is related to.
>
>Perhaps it is comparable, but the machines they run are are different,
>as is the software they run.   The OS is useless w/o those.

And the machine is useless without an OS.

>And, OS/2 DOES come with a LOT to get a person started. LOTS.

I really don't know how AmigaOS compares to OS/2 when it comes to 
getting started, but it is pretty easy.  C= really should consider
including a few disks of demos, min-apps like mod players, and that
sort of thing.  It would give new users something to do and make
them feel like they had gotten more for their money.  My A1000 came
with a Kaleidescope disk that kept me busy for hours (and it works
on my A3000, proving that some people wrote software correctly) as
well as an Electronic Arts slideshow disk.  In Britain they often
bundle a few games, DPaint III, and simple apps with the A500s.  I
saw 2 or 3 different packs, each with a theme.  

BTW, I know that some Amiga's come with AmigaVision, but that thing
is such a piece of crap that it's useless.

>Dan Stephenson                                           das9674@usl.edu
>" BERLIN WALL FALLS.  3 BORDER GUARDS LOSE JOBS.  CLINTON BLAMES BUSH! "
>        -George Bush, '92 Republican nomination acceptance speech

 _____________________________________________________________________________
| 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! |________________________|
|________|____________________________________________________________________|
|                                                                             |
|                                                                             |
|                            This space for rent                              |
|                                                                             |
|                                                                             |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|



Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy