HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: heuvdp@cbmnl.nl.so.commodore.com (Paul Heu vd Netherlands)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falcon
Date: 19 Aug 92 10:55:55 GMT
Organization: Commodore Netherlands

jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
> 
> 
> 	"Snicker. Because there is such a schisma in the PC world and such
> 	 a load with some *ancient* OS that current OS'es still have to
> 	 support, you will tell *me* as a *feature* or *advantage*???
> 	 Hahahahahahahahaha!!!"
> 
> And then you have the nerve to claim that you're unbiased?!  Oh my.

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..

-- 
     //        Whatever I write here are my personal opinions..
   \X/         E-mail : heuvdp@cbmnl.nl.so.commodore.com                  

            LIVE from the Mothership, the StarChild is here...
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd)
Subject: Re: Vivid 24 graphics card
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 19:04:16 GMT

<1992Aug16.131405.2750@sarah.albany.edu> tw5232@albnyvms.bitnet writes:
>
>Now back to DMI's product.  As I understand it (I was considering 
>the purchase of a Resolver a couple of months ago), the main 
>restraint that most of these graphic display boards have is the fact
>that there is virtually no software which supports them.  Sure the
>resolver has its paint program, OpalVision has its paint program, and
>the list goes on and on.  But which board allows me to use PageStream
>at 256 colors (or even 24bit) in resolutions of 1200x1024?  I thought
>not!  Now the Vivid, great specs but what the hell can it do in the 
>real world?  $3000 or $4000 just seems way to much to have to spend for
>a framebuffer!!!  When C= decides to put out a RTG like X Windows, 

 
     The Resolver & Vivid 24, as well as EGS, can run hi-res, many-colored
workbenches which will support pretty much any app that will run on the
Workbench.



-- 
Don Lloyd                / "...my brain IBM; so if you see me acting strangely,\
don@chopin.udel.edu      \ don't be surprised." - Styx, 'Mr. Roboto'           /
Gibberish is Spoken Here.          Publications Editor, AmigaNetwork 
      MicroSoft Slogan: Resistance is Futile.  You Will Be Assimilated.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Think Re: ** NEW AMIGAS **
From: Eric.Schwartz@afitamy.fidonet.org (Eric Schwartz)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 00:08:08 EST
Organization: AFIT Amiga Users BBS(AFITAUG), Dayton, Oh. (513) 879-9798

*** Quoting Andrew L. Hansford to All dated 08-22-92 ***
> 
> A800, A1200, A2200, A2400, A3400, A4000, A3000+ ,A1000 classic,
> A1000jr
> 
> 
> We've probably heard some bits of truth but they have been obscured by
> tons of BS.
> 
> 
> KS3.0 :  Well C= may be working on something that will be called 3.0
> that supports whatever features but 2.1 seems to have more credibility
> around and seems closer to a release.  If the schedule from the WOA
> show is correct then 2.1 will be introduced in Sept. We are still a
> few weeks away and things that C= intends to introduce at what MSRP
> can still change. 
> 
> 
> -- Andrew Hansford
>    ahansfor@wpi.wpi.edu
> *!* DB B1068/002094
>  * Origin: AFIT Amiga Users BBS/UFGateway (1:110/300)
As for names, you missed A1000+

As for ADOS 3.0, I saw it being beta tested.(believe me or don't) I had no good idea of its full potential, as i didn't really investigate it and it was running on a plain ol' A3000, but a few apparent things that you can get commercially or in Free Distribution are built into the new version(pictures in workbench background and windows and sounds instead of flashes on errors.)

I've heard 2.1 has at least some of these as well, but I was told that KS 37.175 is 2.04, 38.xxx is 2.1, and this was 39.something. oh well

--- T.A.G. 2.6c Standard
 * Origin: AFITAUG BBS/Internet Gateway  (afitamy.fidonet.org) (1:110/300)
--  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFIT Amiga Users BBS/UFGateway |Eric Schwartz - via FidoNet node 1:110/300
    1:110/300 Dayton, Ohio     |UUCP: afitamy!Eric.Schwartz
        (513)-879-9798         |ARPA: Eric.Schwartz@afitamy.fidonet.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: CBM, This is not STUPID this is a PROPOSITION
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 17:20:54 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Aug11.141929.22041@newshost.unh.edu>
  <1992Aug13.001612.16988@microsoft.com> <9f5m#3d@lynx.unm.edu>

>Have you seen Final Copy?

To put down Word for Windows 2.0 and then mention Final Copy betrays
such a lack of understanding about what makes a word processor useful
that I can't take the rest of the article seriously.

Sorry, but if we use a Baseball analogy, If Word For Windows is a major
league baseball player, Final Copy is a really good little leager.
From: abs0@coos.dartmouth.edu (Kelvin Leung)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falcon
Date: 16 Aug 92 01:45:46 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:

>I specifically want to drag a window off the left side of the screen.
>I want this because the ZOOM box is in the upper right hand corner
>of a window - hence I can move the damn windows out of the way and
>still get at the zoom box to put them back on the screen where I
>want them.

>I want to have my screen title displayed at all times, as well as
>the depth gadget.  Virtual screens are a 20% solution at best.

>The Mac lets me drag windows where I want - and when.  So does
>MS windows, OS/2, and X-windows.

Not to flame Mykes, but I remember dragging a Mac Window out of the screen
once.  That window then went to never-never land, and I can never find 
it again... but was a while ago though, things probably have changed.

Yours Sincerely,
Kelvin
e-mail: abs0@coos.dartmouth.edu
From: richk@grebyn.com (Richard Krehbiel)
Subject: No alchemy required was Re: HAM/SuperHAM
Organization: Grebyn Timesharing
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:17:30 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.063354.3412@desire.wright.edu> fheitkamp@desire.wright.edu writes:
>	Bill Gates is God and can turn sand into silicon with a wave of his
>	hand.

	Hey, I can do that (turn sand into silicon)!  Does that make me a
God?

	Oh, I guess not.  Sand *is* silicon...
-- 
Richard Krehbiel                                 richk@grebyn.com
OS/2 2.0 will do for me until AmigaDOS for the 386 comes along...
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: mlelstv@speckled.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falcon
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 14:01:52 GMT

In <64421@cup.portal.com> TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko) writes:
>...not integrated in to the OS fully.

That sounds like other people that a math coprocessor is not integrated
into the OS fully..

>And if you need an explanation, use Truetype fonts in Windows or
>Adobe fonts in OS/2 to see what I mean.

Be more specfic.

Regards
-- 
Michael van Elst
UUCP:     universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: bill@snoopy (Bill Poitras)
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falcon
Reply-To: bill@msi.com
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 21:53:21 GMT

Jerry Shekhel (jerry@connection.prospect.com) wrote:
: fheitkamp@desire.wright.edu writes:
: >	Jerry,  I think what David meant (He can correct me, natch') was
: >	that, on the Amiga there are programs that allow you to move your
: >	mouse pointer to the edge of the screen and by clicking the mouse
: >	button, the screen will scroll in that direction (no scroll bars
: >	are invloved).  Also depending how far from the edge you move the
: >	mouse pointer, you can control the speed of the scrolling.  This
: >	feature is great for browsing through a large text file (I really 
: >	think this is cool, sorry)  Does OS/2 have a utility like this?
: >
: 
: This is a function of the display driver, and I haven't seen one for OS/2
: that does this.  In fact, third party OS/2 drivers are still in their early
: stages at this point.  However, SVGA hardware makes this possible.

Trident has one out for thier 8900 chipset.

--
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |
| (bill)          | Sunnyvale, CA USA             |                         | 
|                 | FAX (408)732-0831             | bill@msi.com            |
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block)
Subject: Re: CDTV is dead.
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 03:36:33 GMT

pepin@CAM.ORG (Jean Pepin) writes:
: The question is, it's right or wrong, not serious non-serious. I know CBM 
: associates non-democratic to serious. Did you think i was expecting an answer

I don't know:  Were you?

: You are just confirm than we can only receive information by respectable
: people like Marc Barrett, who try to retablish democracy. Personnaly i think 

Alright, I'm going to flame this one to hell.  Marc Barrett and
respectable, after that last "fiasco", do NOT belong in the same
sentence.  The man stretches the truth as faithfully as a damn geyser.

You wanna know what C='s working on?  Become a developer.  Do
something for the Amiga.  You act like he's some insider--he's not.
Get used to it.  But don't ask C= to jeopardize the future by spilling
their guts on every little question you ask.  That's why developers
are under non-disclosure, so that they can keep things secret--right
or wrong.

And it has nothing to do with being pro or anti-democratic.  Marc
Barrett doesn't re-establish "democracy" with those kinds of posts, he
brings anarchy into a newsgroup where people believe rumor as gospel
and it takes a few people from C= to wipe away the shit being slung by
people who know more than some, but not enough to make statements
about anyone's future.

: society with free information is most advanced than under military secret
: politic for security (paranoia?) serious. Finally "fiasco" is not a serious

Everyone has secrets.  The sky is blue, water is wet, people have
secrets.  Some people profit from keeping things secret.  Get used to
it, and stop complaining that C= has to hold your hand and tell you
"Don't worry, we're doing everything we can for the Amiga.  It'll be
okay."

Do you think they OWE you?  Not.  They supply computers.  They make a
profit, and in order to continue to make a profit they do what they
can to stay competitive.

: word because it's not in usage in politician vocabulary, Apple IIgs, Next and
: CDTV are not fiasco because serious company never admit it, this is arethoric
: form called "SERIOUS".

You call CDTV a "fiasco" and ask for a serious answer.  The word
fiasco is not a "serious" term.  It's something used to make a mockery
of something, such as Marc Barret's unmitigated post on the untimely
demise of the CDTV, a unit he believed was a mistake, and should have
been aborted long before birth.  It is not something one uses in a
rhetorical or any other kind of question one expects a serious
response from.

: Sorry for the black eye, Jean Pepin

There are greater things on heaven and earth than one could imagine.
This only proves that there are also lesser things.

--
(: (: (: (: Have you overdosed on smileys today?  Why NOT!?! :) :) :) :) :)
(:	  "Flesh-pressing:  It's not just for politics anymore."         :)
(:	gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu			Gregory R. Block         :)
(: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: mlelstv@speckled.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Subject: Re: DIR
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 21:16:43 GMT

In <1992Aug12.184148.22794@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> chuj@horton.Colorado.EDU (CHU JEFFREY) writes:
>As for cpu power, the 486-50 beats it by quite a few marks.  A 040-25 only
>has the performance of a 486-33 cpu.  But if you compare a 040-33, well
>that may be another story.  

Well, even that is only partially the truth. The 040 is remarkably fast
at floating point operations and a large part of todays software that
needs CPU power uses it for floating point.

Regards,
-- 
Michael van Elst
UUCP:     universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.misc
From: nan@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Nan Zou)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: MIPS (was: DIR)
Date: 18 Aug 1992 01:32:59 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

> == davidme@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au (David Meiklejohn) writes:
>> == mk9629@future.UUCP (Mike R. Kraml) writes:
>>> == das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A) writes:

>>>I beleive the full 50Mhz 486 runs a little over 40 MIPS, maybe 41-42.          
>>   I kind of doubt it, the 486/50 dx2 which does run internally at 50MHZ
>>   averages 9 MIPs on the C&T MIPS benchmark...

>Excuse me, but could you define "decent MIPS benchmark"?

>As far as I'm aware, there are two common definitions of MIPS.  Firstly,
>there's native MIPS...
[...]

>So, to get more "meaningful" mips figures for comparison, the relative
>performance is scaled to what a VAX 11/780 (or 750?  - one or the other) does.
[...]
>a standard benchmark, and the standard here is Dhrystones.  For MIPS ratings,
>you use the old 1.1 version, despite it's known problems with dead code and
>hence dependency on compiler optimisations.  You take this number and divide
>by 1760...

Didn't people start using Dhrystone 2.1 as the basis for MIPS calculations?
What number do you divide Dhrystones 2.1 by to get MIPS number?

>  486/25 (64k cache)  : 25073 dhrystones

>  68030/25 (no cache) : 8772 dhrystones

>  68040/25 (no cache) : 29240 dhrystones

Good article.

-- Nan
From: das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falcon
Date: 22 Aug 92 15:20:35 GMT
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana

In article <64421@cup.portal.com> TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko) writes:
>>We already have CG font support
>
>...not integrated in to the OS fully.
>
>And if you need an explanation, use Truetype fonts in Windows or
>Adobe fonts in OS/2 to see what I mean.
>
>TomK@cup.portal.com

Tom, i'm curious what you mean by 'integrated' font manager in my OS/2.
Perhaps i do not have a point of reference for the 'integral-ness' of
the Adobe Type Manager in OS/2 2.0.  Could you please eleaborate?

For example, my OS/2 comes with some fonts.  I have downloaded more fonts,
uncompressed then, and 'told' my Font Palette where there were stored.  Voila,
now I can select them from the editor or that Enhanced Editor.  They print out
in WYSIWYG fashion as best as my 9-pin printer will allow.  

I do not think fonts are so great to go whacko over, but: how, in your
opinion, is the Amiga CG fonts 'less' integrated?

Thanks-
.

-- 
das9674@usl.edu
" BERLIN WALL FALLS.  3 BORDER GUARDS LOSE JOBS.  CLINTON BLAMES BUSH! "
        -George Bush, '92 Republican nomination acceptance speech
From: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Updates (Was Re: Commodore's Reply)
Date: 13 Aug 92 17:52:55 GMT
Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel)
Organization: Flying Cat Software

In article <1992Aug10.195735.25480@regina.cs.uregina.ca> gorrie@hercules.uregina.ca (Dennis Gorrie) writes:
>Hmmm.  Say you didn't have to have 'extreme compatibility'.  What
>things would you have changed in 2.0?  What things would you have
>broken (from 1.3 that is)?  Can you provide a more detailed picture
>of what you thought 2.0 should have been?


We would have been able to release sooner.  Basically, the
'extreme compatbility' process involved testing hundreds (or thousands)
of applications, finding the ones that didn't work, identifying exactly
why they weren't working, then writing patches, changing new routines in
the OS, etc. to make the application work again.  All without source
to the application.  What we were doing in most cases was covering the
bugs of the old applications that happened not to cause a problem
in the past (sometimes) or (more often) continuing support for some
assumption the application made in the past that happened to work,
but wasn't really intended.  Even with logic state analyzers, this took
a lot of time.


There were also  number of things that didn't get into the original 2.0
because of compatibility.  I'd have to really think about it to remember
those right now.

			andy
-- 
andy finkel		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy

"A new release is where old bad assumptions are replaced by new
 bad assumptions."

Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.
I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.
From: leavitt@cheshire.oxy.edu (Thomas VanNess Leavitt)
Subject: Re: Offic. new C= Announcements!
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:42:10 GMT

The session list for WOC had AmigaVision 3.0 on it... at least that
rumor can be partially corroborated.

It seems wierd that CBM would only allocate 15 minutes to new product
announcements... would suspect that  is 4000/aa is real, would likely
be much hubbub.

Can you say chaos around demonstration booth?

Thom
From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: amiga rules!
Date: 17 Aug 92 23:44:28 GMT
Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA

In article <1992Aug17.034934.27257@wam.umd.edu> gcasa@wam.umd.edu (Gregory John Casamento) writes:

>This is not exactly true.  I used to own a C-128 and there were some pieces
>of software which would not work on the C64 side of the machine.  ...
>God only knows what they are, but I accepted it.

(THUNDERBOLT SOUNDS.  BOOMING VOICE KICKS IN)

A handful, as I recall.  You had to have some very serious bugs in a C64 program
to fail on the C128.  Basically, the program had to overwrite new VIC chip
registers, count on nonstandard images of the SID chip, or other really stupid
things in order to fail.  

>The reason the C-128 failed was because there was no software SPECIFICALLY for
>the C128 side.  

We sold over three million C128s, I don't think that exactly constitutes 
failure.  Sure, that's not as many units as the C64 sold, but no other computer
has sold as many either, and probably never will.

>The only piece of software I saw which took advantage of the 128's 
>capabilities was BASIC8.  

Aside from CP/M, there was a good deal of C128 mode software.  I recall a few
telecommunications programs, wordprocessors, spreadsheets, paint programs,
etc.  The only thing you really didn't see were games.  Kinda makes sense,
who needed C128 mode for games?

>It would be more accurate to say that the C128 was about 98% compatible with
>the C64.

There are something like 5000 C64 programs available, probably more.  I don't 
know just how many don't work on the C128, but it's certainly fewer than 100.
My guess is that the C128 is close to 100% C64 compatible, if you round it
off.  The 1571 drive was less compatible with the 1541, so some programs will
fail because of that.  Also, you lose a very small bit of compability when you
enter C64 mode via the "GO64" route -- some early system initialization behavior
will be more C64-like if you power up with the C= key held down.  Of course then
you can't get the cool secret message (SYS 12800,123,45,6).

>Also, I believe the incompatability came from the fact that the 128 had a 6510
>installed and used it for both the C64 and C128 modes.  The  C64 however had
>a straight 6502 processor.

Nope, the C64 has a 6510.  The C128 has something called an 8502, which is 
essentially a 6510 that runs at 2MHz (the "65" vs. "85" indicates the IC 
process, the former being plain vanilla C= NMOS, the second latter high speed 
NMOS process).

>Not a flame... Just my $0.02 worth...

Ya get what ya pay for.
-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      BIX: hazy
	"Work like a horse, drink like a fish"	- Psychefunkapus
 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO)
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falcon
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 18:37:45 GMT

In article <mykes.0cbt@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>In article <1992Aug12.171839.3364@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO) writes:
>> Well, I'll ask you this question again.  What "functionality" does
>> OS/2 2.0 provide that is not present in AmigaDOS?  I already know
>> about VM and MP but what else is present?  Does it perhaps support
>> multiple users like Unix, or multiple processors?  Please back up claims
>> such as "faster" file systems with objective comparisons.
>>
>
>You can drag OS/2 windows partially offscreen.  Something sorely missing

I thought that AmigaDOS had virtual screens that could be larger
than the physical size.  If that's the case, why couldn't you drag
a window off the physical screen?

>on the Amiga!  OS/2 supports TCP/IP/NFS networking built-in.  OS/2 fills
>a disk requester faster than Amiga OS because of the more efficient file
Where do you get your conclusion that the OS/2 file system is more
efficient?  I have gotten around 650K bytes/second throughput with
a lowly 68000 processor and a Qunatum 105S SCSI drive going
through the 2.04 Fast File System.  What performance figures do
you have for the OS/2 file system and with what hardware?

>Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)


-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:     hfsi!ata@UUNET.UU.NET
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:     uunet.uu.net!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: kolstad@cae.wisc.edu (Joel Kolstad)
Subject: Re: Sofware Piracy & Software Prices
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
Date: 16 Aug 92 00:32:18 CDT

In article <1992Aug16.045420.13697@usl.edu> das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A) writes:
>
>Aye, $65 for SNES Chessmaster...good grief! I wonder if this cart is
>comparable to Chessmaster 3000 for PCs.  Anyone know?

Anybody know WHY the cartridge and console prices for Nintendos, SNESes, 
Genesises, etc. are ALL THE SAME!?  Sheesh... stripped SNES, $99.95; regular
$129.95.  Genesis... $129.95; stripped $99.95.  Atarti Lynx... $99.95; deluxe
package $129.95.  Same prices.  EVERYWHERE.  Software Etc., Toys-R-Them,
ShopKo, you name it.

Whatever happened to COMPETITION?!?!  There's LOTS of computer software
competition, why not cartridge software?  I guess that most of the console
market is kids who probably aren't paying for it themselves.  Game
companies like Sega and Nintendo set their console prices just about at cost
so that you'll buy them, and then be hooked into buying the high profit margin
games.

What they're doing, it's a darn good business practice from the money making
point of view.  Too bad some consumers lose out, though.

					---Joel Kolstad

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy