From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip Sauls)
Subject: Re: Byte's Amiga 4000 review...
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 08:41:01 GMT

In article <C0o6Io.J8r@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) writes:
>>I believe that OS/2 started around the time of the original AT, but it 
>>was not the same beast that it is today.  It has only recently reached
>>the point that people are actually able to use it comfortably...
>
>People could always use OS/2 comfortably.  It's the DOS suppor that
>sucked.  In fact, OS/2 v1.x was one of the most stable operating
>systems for any microcomputer.  It used to be *MORE* stable then it is
>now.

It's a shame that DOS support is so important to Clone users.  Why not
just give it up and be done with it?  I'm sure that a significant chunk
of resources are being wasted to ensure DOS support for Win NT.

>>Did I say that it did?  Not once have I claimed that the Amiga invented
>>multitasking or that it has some sort of lock on the concept.  OS/2 may
>>be nice, but it looks like the MS tank is going to roll all over it and
>>leave little Windows trackmarks behind.
>
>If Windows rolls over it, it will be with NT, which looks to be a
>technically better OS. IT is Object oriented, microkernel and portable.
>If it wasn't for the stupid interface, I wouldn't mind using it at
>all.

Too bad it won't run on most of today's machines with any sort of speed.
Hell, Microsoft doesn't even believe that everyone will be using NT,
they think that Windows is just fine for the masses...

>>As for the operating systems mentionned above, Windows does not have 
>>true multitasking, it is more like what the Mac offers.  The others are
>>all true multitasking systems, but they are not exactly geared to the
>>same sorts of machines that AmigaDOS and OS/2 are.
>
>Windows has full, "true" multitasking.  It does not have preemptive
>multitasking, which is a subset of "true" multitasking.  If the
>computer can make the user feel like he is doing two things at once he
>is multitasking.  You can't change the definition every few years.

Why not?  Everyone else does.  You don't have a problem with defining
a clock-doubled 33MHz 486 being advertised as a 66MHz system...

>Windows NT and OS/2 3.0 will have even "truer"
>multitasking...multiprocessing.  SCO does now, and so does the Mac,
>(with an add-on).

And AmigaDOS 4.0 promises to suck your dick...

>>Please, I don't consider Joe's Bozo Clone Emporium prices to be a fair
>>comparison to Commodore. 
>
>The companies are Austin, Compudyne, Micro Express and Aplus, all
>popular, stable companies.  Besides, when I can get a 486DX-33 for less
>tehn $1000.00, I tend to not care where it came from, as long as it
>works when I get it, and for a month after that, the company is welcome
>to go out of business...I've got my money's worth :).

And there goes that 24 hour support you were saying was so wonderul a
few articles back...

> Stick with Dell, Gateway, or one of the other
>>reputable Clone assemblers, or a Clone manufacturer like IBM or Compaq.
>>The lowest priced Gateway is a $1295 386sux-25 system with SVGA, 80M IDE,
>>4M, ISA, etc.  An A1200 with 100M IDE drive and SVGA monitor goes for
>>about the same or less and will blow the Gateway away.  Throwing in a
>>cheap soundcard and OS/2 still won't get you what the Amiga offers.
>
>You neglected to mention that for $200.00 more then the 386sx you get
>about 10 times the machine...4MB RAm, 170 MB hard drive, Local BUS hard
>drive, accelerated SVGA, and too applications.  Microsoft
>works...$170.00, free with the system.  What does Amiga have in that
>price/power range?

No, you get the same amount of RAM, 110M more HD space, the same video
board, the same pitiful ISA bus, the same applications, the same keyboard,
the same floppies, the same case, a faster IDE interface, and a faster CPU.
How is that 10x the machine?

What sort of Amiga can you get for $1500?  Well, an A1200 with 2M, 1 floppy,
AGA, and IDE interface goes for $600.  Add a 128M Maxtor HD for $430 and
an IDEK 14" multisyn for $380.  That brings you up to $1400 and adding 4M
of Fast RAM should run you around $300, making it $1700.  To be fair, add
a sound board and OS/2 to the Gateway, and the prices are quite similar.

But where do I get an Amiga emulator for the Gateway?

>>I guess the A4000 and A1200 piss you off then, eh?  I'm on my third Amiga,
>>a nice A4000, which replaces my A3000, which replaced my A1000.  I'll be
>>buying an A1200 for use at home and the company I work for will be buying
>>a few A1200s and A4000s for graphics and video work.  And we may be selling 
>>several kiosk systems based on the new Amigas in the near future.  Given my
>>investment in the Amiga and the fact that it is crucial to my livelihood,
>>I won't be defecting any time soon.
>
>Funny...looks like you already have:

No, I just happen to be able to differentiate my personal life from my 
work.  I work on a Clone, program Clones, and have written software that
has been used on Clones by more than 15,000 people in the last 9 months.
Yet despite the fact that my boss has bought me a 20" monitor, an SBPro,
a CDROM, and tons of other goodies, I still prefer my Amiga.

>>You want to know what's funny?  I make a living selling programs for the
>>Clones, yet I prefer the Amiga for personal use.  The great thing is that
>>everything I've bought in the last year, including my A4000, 17" monitor,
>>ethernet, software, etc., has been paid for by Clone programming.  Ain't
>>life great?  :-)
>>
>Those that haven't invested so much into the Amiga don't have as much
>incentive as you to stay with it.  That's why they are leaving in
>droves.

Really?  I certainly wish that you were among them instead of lingering
around and being a complete nuisance.

Skip Sauls, Amiga Advocate
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy