HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tmc@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Tim Ciceran)
Subject: Russian Game Rocks World of Computers
Organization: Brock University, St. Catharines Ontario
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 04:21:47 GMT

From the Toronto Sun:

"Super Mario and Sonic the Hedgehog better watch out - the Russians are
 coming. A computer game captivating Moscow schoolchildren is being
 acclaimed as the next superstar to hit the lucrative world of
 entertainment software.

 Black Hole II features blob-shaped characters struggling to avoid
 falling into dark holes. The game isn't even available in the West,
 but has been hailed as even bigger than Tetris - another Russian
 computer game that has become a money-spinning classic around the
 globe... 

 The game's inventor is George Pachikov, a Moscow university professor.
 He is also director of entertainment software at Para Graph, a
 Russian company with offices in Moscow and Colorado in the U.S. It
 has been collaborating with Microsoft, the world's largest software
 company, on voice recognition."

No flight trajectories or 3-D perspective. Go figure. Who would think
that something so simple and addictive would offer so much market
potential?
From: johnh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (John J Humpal)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: More Amiga OS weaknesses and strengths
Date: 11 Jan 1993 17:44:01 -0500
Organization: Homewood Academic Computing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu

In article <C0IxE6.Jy4@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes:
>
>   The inelegance of the OS probably has something to do with it.  A person 
>can sit down at an unconfigured, uncustomized Macintosh for the first time
>and figure out how to use it in minutes.  An Amiga -- especially one with the
>default out-of-the-box preferences in place -- is a MUCH more difficult system
>to use.  AmigaOS 2.0 still has not changed much, really.  You have to add a
>lot of PD/freeware utilities to the system and make major changes to the
>preferences to make an Amiga more attractive and usable.
>
	Marc, you simply cannot make a claim like that without some data
to back it up.  So, here's some data.  It's anecdotal, I'll admit, but 
it's more than you've offered.  
	There are people -- intelligent, well-educated people -- in our
labs who, after 5 years *still* tremble with fear when they approach one
of the half-dozen Macs we are saddled with.  They are barely capable of
launching an app from the Desktop.  Never mind manipulating windows and
icons, trashing files, using a DA, or any of those other things that
make the Mac's GUI so "elegant."  The fact is that a user must learn
*any* OS, and that includes both Finder and AmigaDOS.
	And while we're on the subject, most of your claims for the
Mac's "elegance" refer to its GUI, not its OS.  The Mac's OS is a true
horror, and its GUI has its share of problems, too.
-- 
-John

John J. Humpal -- johnh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu -- short .sig, std. disclaimer
From: joe@cbmvax.commodore.com (Joe O'Hara - Product Assurance)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: CBM mention on 12/11/92 Computer Chronicles
Date: 7 Jan 93 15:00:34 GMT
Reply-To: joe@cbmvax.commodore.com (Joe O'Hara - Product Assurance)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA

In article <1993Jan6.151225.20783@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@msi.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>Nonsense.  If you take two systems with *equal RAM*, running the same
>set of applications, and one system has VM, the only "performance" hit
>in that system is the MMU overhead, which is negligible.

I agree. In this scenario, there is obviously enough memory to hold the
active set of applications, so no swapping should occur (unless the *system*
overhead, i.e. the OS size, creates a situation where swapping is necessary).

>: >VM does not impede anything.  In fact, it can only show improved performance
>: >over a non-VM system with the same amount of RAM.

This is an interesting statement, Jerry. I'd like to know the basis for it,
given that the VM system adds MMU overhead, slight though it might be.

-- 
==========================================================================
  Joe O'Hara                ||      Disclaimer: I didn't say that!
  Commodore Electronics Ltd ||
  Product Assurance         || "I never lie when I have sand in my shoes."
  Systems Evaluation Group  ||             - Geordi LeForge, Star Trek TNG
==========================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: trevore@vast.unsw.edu.au (Trevor Elbourne (Supr. Hell) BE)
Subject: Re: More Amiga OS weaknesses and strengths
Organization: University of New South Wales
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 23:43:09 GMT

barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes:

[ stuff deleted ]

:    ARexx is no micacle scripting language.  It only allows you to slightly 
: integrate the abilities of two applications.  But if no application has a
: certain feature, then ARexx is useless to give you that feature.

  Depends what you mean here. ProVector does not offer any graph
  plotting facilities, yet through arexx I can get ProVector to generate
  all sorts of graphs, charts ..etc. I think arexx is great!!


: For example, I would like to have an Amiga word processor with
: lots of structured fonts and which can import IFF DR2D or EPSF
: structured clip-art.  But even collectively, none of the Amiga word
: processors supply these features.

  Pagestream 2.1 has all of these features!

:   BTW, ARexx also not very useful if you are on a tight budget and can only
: afford a small number of productivity programs.  For example, to be able 
: to link ProWrite and Final Copy II together with ARexx, you have to purchase
: ProWrite and Final Copy II, unless you are a pirate.  And this gets very
: expensive.  I purchased Mac WordPerfect for $150, which includes a drawing
: program. To get the equivelent base functionality from Amiga software, I
: would have to spend about $400 on Amiga word processors and a drawing program,
: and it would still be lacking in features over Mac Word Perfect.
: 
: ---
: | Marc Barrett -MB-  |  email: barrett@iastate.edu
: --------------------------------------------------------------------
: "No, I just think that a computer grafted on top of another computer
: is a kludge.  It has nothing to do with the AGA chipset." -- me
: 
: 
: 

--
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|"Border and Matthews are each on 69, and that's a pretty comfortable position   |
| for them both".                                                                |
|	- D. Gower                                                               |
+------------------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|   Trevor Elbourne 	       |      VLSI and Systems Technology (VaST) lab     |
|   trevore@vast.unsw.edu.au   |      Dept of Computer Science & Engineering     |
|   trevore@cs.unsw.oz.au      |          University of New South Wales          |
+------------------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip Sauls)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: HELP--AMIGA OR IBM PC CLONE?
Date: 12 Jan 93 17:48:05 GMT
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science

In article <torrie.726828938@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes:
>peterk@cbmger.de.so.commodore.com (Dr Peter Kittel Germany) writes:
>
>>But when I compare the Basic interpreters of the Old Days by Bill & Co
>>against the compiler competitors from then (can you say UCSD Pascal?), 
>>it won and wins hands down.
>
>  Obviously you aren't a fan of structured programming.  UCSD Pascal
>(at least on the Apple II) was far, far superior to the Microsoft-derived
>Applesoft Basic.  You could create libraries, write and link in assembly
>language routines, it had modules for multiple source files, not to 
>mention the integrated full screen editor and filer.  But the most important
>thing was that UCSD Pascal was the best way to teach structured design
>principles on microcomputers until at least 1984/85 when True Basic
>emerged.
>  The high school I was at used UCSD Pascal from its release of 1980
>on the Apple II until well into 1986.  I'd shudder to think what most
>of the students would have turned out like if they'd been taught the
>Basics of the same era.

Most of us turned out just fine.  I taught myself Applesoft BASIC in 1981
and used it until 1985, yet today I have no problem with Ada, C++, and 
others.  Occasionally I have even programmed in Pascal, but I don't if I
have any choice in the matter.  And I managed to write functional language 
programs just fine, as useless as they may be.

Is it too hard for you to accept the fact that people can continue to learn
and adapt throughout their lifetime?
 
>Evan Torrie.  Stanford University, Class of 199?       torrie@cs.stanford.edu 
>Embrace rationalism, reject superstition.           Break away from the past.
>"...there is only one thing worse than having marketing people on a project,
> and that is having no marketing people on a project."  - Larry Tesler.

Skip Sauls, Amiga Advocate
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: mashton@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (M.S. Ashton)
Subject: Re: Amiga 1200 HD versus non-HD
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:59:35 GMT

In article <Paula_Lieberman.07ou@amicol.UUCP> Paula_Lieberman@amicol.UUCP 
(Paula Lieberman) writes:
>re article by Jonas S. Green jsg@css.northeastern.edu
><1992Dec24.235808.26458@random.northeastern.edu> was  suggesting gettig a
>1200 HD rather than a 1200 -- C'mon Jonas, Commodore is supplying a 40 MB
>hard drive in the 1200 HD.  A drive that small is just large enough to
>realize it's mostly a crock.
>
>
>-- Via DLG Pro v0.992
>

I found this a little difficult to decifer(Re: who wrote what) but I think 
that you are sneering at a 40 Meg drive for being too small.
Well, you're wrong.
It's plenty big enough for many applications.
This isn't a PC running windows or OS/2 or something - Amiga applications are
*small*(read: compact/efficient); no 22 Meg wordprocessors here...
Most of what I do on my Amiga is compiler work which consists of:
WB 3.0: 3 Meg
Compilers: 1+2+3+4Meg = 10 Meg
plus about 5 Meg of PD Utils to make life a little more fun....
That leaves me 22 Meg pratting around space.....
Why sneer at 40M-- it's big enough for me...
Ok,if you're image processing or morphing etc. you need a bit more room, but 
try to remember that it really does depend what you are doing with your 
machine.
___
mashton@dcs.warwick.ac.uk
The best way not to be unhappy is not to have a word for it.

The opinions expressed are entirely those of myself and the little purple 
people that visit me from time to time.They are not those of my employer,
basically,because I haven't got one.
 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: aramsey@ugly.UVic.CA (Aaron  Ramsey)
Subject: Re: More BS from -MB-
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 20:54:49 GMT

Unbelievable.

Question Marc.....

 Which would you rather have... a really great looking car with no engine
 (gee... why can't I get any where???) or just some regular car with a ding 
 here and there, but runs like a dream?   8-)

 I'd take the car that works any day. I could give a shit less about the 
 one that doesn't run, no matter how fantastic it looks. This whole argument
 of yours about surface details, and ignoring the unlying 'engines' of the
 two machine is useless. Surface details are secondary.

BTW- I'd take the Amiga's looks AND engine over a piece of mac any day.
     Everytime I'm forced to use one at the university, in about 10 minutes
     it has driven me to the point where I just want to toss it out a window.


I don't think the real problem here is which computer is inherently better,
because the Amiga comes out on top of the Mac and IBM with no problems....
the only reason that IBM and Mac have come on top so far is the simple
reason of marketting. John Q. Public will go out and buy most whatever is
pushed into his/her brain. It's sad really. But I guess.... can't really
blame them, if they haven't heard of the Amiga, they have no real choice.

---
Aaron Ramsey
amramsey@sirius.UVIC.ca

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu (Douglas Taylor)
Subject: Re: HELP--AMIGA OR IBM PC CLONE?
Keywords: Neuroses lobotomies penis envy spam spam spam humbug
Organization: Florida State University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 16:52:38 GMT

In article <1itb3sINN9m9@mozz.unh.edu> ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene) writes:
>
>	Isn't $600 for a 16 bit sound card kind of expensive?  I mean, you can
>   get a Gravis Ultrasound which does the same for around $140.

 No, it isn't - considering that, as far as I can remember about IBM sound-
	cards, they have a lower frequency rate (22 kHz, I believe), whereas
	the sound card I am referrring to has around 44.1 kHz; too, I believe
	Amiga uses digital sound whereas IBM's use analog... but then, since I
	dislike IBM's sound anyway, I could be wrong :)

>
>							Greg Greene
>                                                        ggg@kepler.unh.edu
>
>
>'>|=========================================================
>'>| L. Douglas Taylor InterNet: dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu
>'>|=========================================================

/============================================================================\
| L. Douglas Taylor InterNet: dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu |    IMPORTANT:    |
|=========================================================|   This message   |
| Guildenstern: We cross our bridges when we come to them | has cost the Net |
|   and burn them behind us, with nothing to show for our | hundreds, if not |
|   progress except a memory of the smell of smoke, and a |    thousands,    |
|   presumption that once our eyes watered...             |    of dollars    |
|                                                         |     to send.     |
\============================================================================/
From: bloc1469@ee.ee.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: More Amiga OS weaknesses and strengths
Date: 9 Jan 1993 07:23:26 GMT
Organization: Electrical Engineering Dept. University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.2.33

In article <C0Ix0r.Jt6@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes:
>   PageStream is not a word processor.  It's like using an ax to pound a nail.
>You can do it, but it isn't as elegant or as easy.  For example, PageStream
>lacks MS Word's advanced outlining features.  PageStream also lacks MS Word's
>mini typesetting language.  There are a host of word processing features that
>PageStream lacks because PageStream is not a word processor.

You have some of THE THICKEST brain cells I've ever had the
displeasure of not being able to avoid responding to.

Listen.  The way I see it, you're trying to do things ALL WRONG.  Take
this example:  You want a word processor that does outlining.  You
don't want a word processor for that, you want an outliner.  You want
a word-processor that'll do basic typesetting.  You don't want a word
processor, you want a typesetter.

Use the right tool for the right task, and stop trying to make one
tool handle all of your needs.  IMHO, I prefer something similar to
the unix philosophy, combining tools, with Arexx, that do the job(s) I
want.

You say PageStream isn't a WP.  Fine, use ProWrite.  ProWrite has an
EXCELLENT interface.  You need to add an outline?  Use an OUTLINER.
There's an _EXCELLENT_ PD one available.  Or, if you commonly do lots
of really advanced things, use PageStream.  If PageStream "feels" too
slow, use PageLiner, and hotlink it.  You need graphs?  Add 'em, but
use a program that SPECIALIZES.

If you want a marginal program to do a marginal job all-around, then
the way you're doing things is fine.  But don't make the mistake of
thinking that it wouldn't be better to use each program's best
abilities to their fullest advantages, and combining their functions
into a format that is usable for you.  That's the purpose of ARexx,
which seems to have totally passed over your head, like a buzzard in
search of food.

Greg



--
(: (: (: (: Have you overdosed on smileys today?  Why NOT!?! :) :) :) :)
(: "Our father, who art in Iowa, Hollow be thy head, Thy ideas run    :)
(:  Thy will be done, At Commodore as it is at Apple"  -Dan Barrett   :)
(: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: () :) :) :) Wubba, the Dark Angel :)
From: mbrown@legend.akron.oh.us (MARK BROWN)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: RISC Amiga?
Reply-To: mbrown@legend.akron.oh.us
X-Software: Legend (216-825-2747) UUCPShell v4.9/med20Dec92
X-Disclaimer: Opinions of users do not necessarily reflect those of managment
Date: 9 Jan 93 22:09:52 EST
Organization: The Legend BBS Public Access (216)825-2747

Why worry about every one Moving on and up to something from the 68K, 
Its darn good that we do, and you all know that. there has got to be 
some point in Hardware Design (Specificaly the CPU in general) that 
Backwards Compatibility is Thrown out the Window so Something Really 
amazing and fresh can be developed with out worrying about killing a 
market. All this means to ME, at least, is C=, Apple, Atari( eck! ), 
IBM and everyone else would come out with New Competeing platforms 
that aren't compatible(will wait for the die hard hackers to make the 
new machines Compatible, AKA GO 64 and the like) with the older 
machines. Here is some Simple truth also, all machines are the sum of 
thier foundation, the Better Foundation the bigger you can build and 
the Amiga has a stronger foundation than the IBM clones and the Macs, 
.
     Mark(I have got the Retroactive Asbestos Flamer Resistant suit on
          So let me have it, I guess)
From: ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: HELP--AMIGA OR IBM PC CLONE?
Date: 12 Jan 1993 02:41:00 GMT
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
NNTP-Posting-Host: kepler.unh.edu
Keywords: Neuroses lobotomies penis envy spam spam spam humbug

'>>Hmm, i wonder how much an alternate, 16 bit, wave synthesis sound card
'>>for the Amiga costs?  Or an internal modem?  Or a video upgrade (for
'>>the non-AGA machines).
'>
'> Flipping through my AmigaWorld... 16-bit sound card, CD quality: roughly $600
'>	for the SunRize product;

	Isn't $600 for a 16 bit sound card kind of expensive?  I mean, you can
   get a Gravis Ultrasound which does the same for around $140.

							Greg Greene
                                                        ggg@kepler.unh.edu


'>|=========================================================
'>| L. Douglas Taylor InterNet: dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu
'>|=========================================================
From: TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Byte's Amiga 4000 review...
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 21:23:29 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <C0n57o.GDs@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>
  <1993Jan10.181620.13665@nntp.hut.fi>
  <C0np2J.69C@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>

>As soon as multitasking was feasible (with the advent of the 286) IBM
>started work on OS/2, the multitasking OS for it.  The amiga was not an
>influence.

I know you like to be accurate, so it was actually Microsoft that
started the development work on OS/2. They continued until IBM took
over the development with version 1.3 of OS/2. Then Microsoft and
IBM decided to part ways.

Also, Multitasking was feasible in personal computers several years
before the 80286.  AT&T had a version of Unix for the 68010 about
6 or 7 years ago.

TomK@cup.portal.com
Tom Krotchko
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: das9674@ucs.usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Subject: An Amigan does it *again* Re: clone prices & doom & gloom
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 07:52:45 GMT

In article <doiron.0kpz@starpt.UUCP> doiron@starpt.UUCP (Glenn Doiron) writes:
>In article <jeremym.726120538@sfu.ca> jeremym@fraser.sfu.ca (Jeremy Thomas McDonald) writes:
>[zap]
>> 
>> That's because North American users are not concerned with having fun,
>> and only consider the best CPU vs. price ratio.  Ever notice the only 
>> difference between all the IBM-compatibles/clones is CPU type?  Where
>> are the custom chips to make it all happen?  Oh well, price arguments
>> are stupid when comparing anything non-IBM compatible to anything
>> IBM-compatible in the US or Canada.  North American users are socially
>> pressured to buying IBM-compatible machines.  At least there's a large 
>> Amiga market in Europe.  At least Europeans know how to have a good time.
>
>Oh, brooooooother.

I agree.  Is this guy crazy?  The CPU dithers the terrain in my Falcon 3.0
F-16 simulator... and I am supposedly not have fun with it on my
Incredibly Boring Machine?  Civilization is a BLAST, too.  Do you think
it would be sped up but gee-whiz graphics chips?  Hardly.  Wait, you Amigans
DO have Civilization available for AmigaDOS, don't you?
 
>> - jeremym@fraser.sfu.ca - yes, a lowly computer science student
>Glenn Doiron
>Origin:  uunet.uu.net!starpt.UUCP!doiron (Organization:68K Software Development)
>** Not enough memory to perform requested operation.  Add 4 megs and retry.
 
Heh heh, that sound like OS/2 2.0.... before I added 4 more megs! 8)
-- 
Dan Stephenson   das9674@usl.edu 
"Even inferior PC demos seem to require more RAM than demos for the Amiga 500"
						-John Bickers
"You're probably right.  The Amiga OWNS the demo market." -Jerry Shekhel
From: mbrown@legend.akron.oh.us (MARK BROWN)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Does reading this group make you depressed? The story of a victim.
Reply-To: mbrown@legend.akron.oh.us
X-Software: Legend (216-825-2747) UUCPShell v4.9/med20Dec92
X-Disclaimer: Opinions of users do not necessarily reflect those of managment
Date: 7 Jan 93 16:09:21 EST
Organization: The Legend BBS Public Access (216)825-2747

Your Full of it, The Walden Books/soft I go to carry amiga Format and 
some other euro Mag.If you want My honest opinion though, I hate those 
euro rags, and to think they are cutting down Forest to produce those 
rags with.
    Mark
From: kgray@hotcity.COM (Kerry Gray)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Byte's Amiga 4000 review...
Date: 12 Jan 93 13:30:40 PST
Organization: BBS

In article <C0np2J.69C@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>,
papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) writes:
>
>As soon as multitasking was feasible (with the advent of the 286) IBM
>started work on OS/2, the multitasking OS for it.  The amiga was not an
>influence.
>
Gee, it took the 286 to make multitasking feasible?
I remember doing real-time multitasking in 1979 on a 64k Data General Nova.
I musta been dreaming though...that was pre-286.

IBM has been the enemy of multitasking since the beginning.  Just have an
old-timer tell you about TSO, or even OS/360.  IBM fought multitasking and
multi-user capability way back then, even.  IBM's philosophy was always, "if
you want more processes, get more processors."  IBM was dragged kicking and
screaming into multitasking by its competitors.  It still hasn't learned that
lesson.

IBM was in the 60's and is now an anchor chain around the feet of Computer
Science Progress.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet: kgray@hotcity.com                  UUCP: domains!are!for!wimps
      "I always get myself into trouble when I try to treat MS-DOS as if
                      it were a real operating system."
                   --T.R. Elberfeld, MS-DOS Application Developer
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.misc