From: philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough)
Subject: Re: Oh my God! Help my friend not buy an IBM!
Organization: University of Toronto, Dept. of Statistics
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 07:11:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.104630.10722@mercury.unt.edu> west@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Bruce West) writes:

[ ]
>
>   I'm a CS major, so I know what you spend your time on you computer doing.
>Amiga is awesome for C programming (*the* language).  And, as I said, you
>can remain productive during some more of the menial tasks of life.

Languages come and go. The current craze is C for now. Is there a good
Fortran compiler for the Amiga? APL? Before you laugh , I am also an EE and
have been in this business for a long time. Both Fortran and APL (to a smaller
degree) are important. The answer to the APL question is yes there is a very
good one for the Amiga. The Fortran one is less obvious.

[ ]
>
>    Still assuming you the have the afore mentioned system.  First, Amiga
>blows away the sound blaster pro card - but screw sound...it's not really
>important.  The 030 beats the 386, the 040 beats the 486 - fact.  The mz.
>rating on the motorolla chips is about 15% faster than the comprapable
>Intel chip.  Amiga techies - come back me up  here.  So that is your
>"raw computing power".  
>    Now your reference to animation and multitasking is laughable!  The Amiga
>*is* multitasking.  The IBM does *NOT* premtive multitask - period.  The
>IBM does not use special coprocessors - period.  To name a few of the
>revolutionary video and animation devices for Amiga only.... one word,
>Toaster.  In terms of 24 bit hi-res scientific analysis check out thenew
>GVP card.

The 030/040 do not overwhelm the 386/486. We could argue this for years. The
real facts are that both sets are  very could and one set has become a 
standard while the other is falling behind. OS/2 does do preemptive
multitasking. For someone in EE you seem to be missing a few lectures 
somewhere.

[ ]
>
>   You don't have one of those hacked up 486s do you?  Now those are sad.
>Can you say bottleneck?  Waste of power?  knew ya could.  4000 blows away
>all the current clone PCs and IBM OSs.               

Depends on what you want to do. If you want to run S+ or Scientific Word it
doesn't as these aren't available for the Amiga.

[ ]
>
>better 24 bit card.  You add a sound card, I'll add a DSP.  You get OS/2  
>I have AmigaDos3.0.  Every step of the way I win.  That's my point.
>    Besides, I must make an ideological point - since you are a EE. The
>Amiga has and always will be the "hackers" computer in my view (hacker in
>the true sense of the word).  Much like my old Apple ][+.  Anyone
>remember double-hi-res on the Apple.  We just pulled it out of our ass!
>That's the type of machine the Amiga is.  The Toaster, where the hell does
>a product like that come from and cost under a k to make?!?  AmigaLand.
>The Amiga is a computer of potential and product.  The users take it
>to its limits.  You buy a Mac, you have a mac, that's it.  You buy a clone,
>you have an Intel chip surrounded by the cheapest parts guys like me and you
>could find - all put together.  You buy an Amiga (later models), you have
>a streamlined, NTSC compatable (big plus for CS graphics),premtive     
>multitasking system with the most creative consumers (hackers).  These hackers
>are the real key to Amigas success and will be the key to its continued
>success.

I agree with most of what you have said here. I haven't played around with 3.0
so I can't compare it to OS/2 version 2.0 . If it's better then great.
 
Philip McDunnough
philip@utstat.toronto.edu