From: das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falcon
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 00:46:55 GMT


Children, children...

In article <1992Aug21.014023.22763@ultb.isc.rit.edu> eas3714@ultb.isc.rit.edu (E.A. Story ) writes:
>In article <1992Aug20.143959.2210@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>heuvdp@cbmnl.nl.so.commodore.com (Paul Heu vd Netherlands) writes:
>>>
>>>Well I would think he is right though. Or do you really think
>>>IBM decided to include MS-DOS and WINDOWS compatibility
>>>because they thought it would be a good feature..
>>>
>>>I would think they did so because they HAVE to be compatible
>>>with those to even sell OS/2 .. So I would call it a
>>>NESSESITY, not a feature..
>>
>>Look up the word "feature".  It means "characteristic".  It doesn't imply
>>anything about desirability.  For example, an crooked nose is a facial feature
>>that's not necessarily desirable.
>
>What the hell are you talking about then?  I could say that AmigaDOS has
>the feature of being able to run 68k binaries... thats a feature that
>OS/2 doesn't have.  You see why you're being involved in this
>discussion?  It pretty obvious that you implied that having DOS/WIndows
>compatibility is a good thing for OS/2 and not having it is a bad thing
>for AmigaDOS.  (Point of fact, ever hear of a bridgeboard?..duh)

1) The discussion was only about OSes, not the 68000, or any Interl CPU.

2) As a 'for the hell of it' feature, I'd sure consider running the programs
of two other OSes (DOS, Windows) a BIG plus.  While it doesn't detract
from the Amiga per se, it sure isn't a plus.

3) Bridgboards are too slow, limited, and expensive to make it worthwhile
to run Windows/DOS programs, so you may count yourself lucky in that regard, if
you so choose.  Only for Amigan who need to bring work home, etc. does a BB
make sense.  This, for example, is the prime mover in the Apple superdrive.

>Jerry, Frankly I am getting tired of you weaseling out of arguments.

He just demolishes even arguement countering his.  Totally so, and whining
won't compensate.  All in all, c.s.a.a. has been doing a lousy job
of advocating the Amniga.  If the point of .advocacy is to settle
"My machine VS your" flame-fest and to 'advocacte' a system over another,
then c.s.a.a. does not get high marks for the posts I've seen in the past
9 mos wrt 'I finally bought a 486', or 'I cannot count on the Amiga in the
future', etc. type posts.  You sure don't hear the same sort of thing in
the PC newsgroups, only squabbling over OS/2 or Windows.  That is not the
same thing as the hardware and ALL the other software whichmakes a computer.
And you sure do not see 'I'm giving up my 486EISA/OS/2 2.0 for an A3000'
posts in comp.os.os2.*.  At least i have not.

>Hell, someone even PROVED that you stated OS/2 is superior to AmigaDOS
>after you challanged them to try and find the article where it was.  I
>don't really care, and in fact, OS/2 *does* sound like a superior
>operating system.  But either you say something, or you don't.. If you
>can't live with the consequences.. DON'T SAY IT! 

No comment.

>You wanna argue semantics?  Argue with a linguist... ok?  Implication is
>everything in this newsgroup.

Say...what in the hell are you implying???


:)
>eas3714@ultb.isc.rit.edu, his trusty(?) mailing address.
--
Dan Stephenson das9674@usl.edu 
"Is it that Blake has a genius for leadership, or merely that *you* have a 
 genius for being led?" -Avon, from Blakes 7