From: papresco@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod)
Subject: Re: HELP--AMIGA OR IBM PC CLONE?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 12:43:48 GMT

>And what happens if you don't want to use Windows?  You hope that there
>is a driver for your application or game that works with your board.  If
>not, you are SOL.  

VGA is acceptable.  It's better then the Amiga used for years.
Productivity is more important then games anyways.

If you don't want to use Windows for productivity, you can use OS/2.

>If DEC advertises the Alpha as a 200MHz chip and explains that it is 
>100MHz or 50MHz external, it is not a scam.  But most bozos will believe
>that the whole computer runs at 200MHz unless they are informed of what
>is really going on.

Intel named the chip 486DX2.  It is a different chip.  What would you
prefer them to name it...the 486DX2inside1outside.  It is the computer
manufacturers responsibility to explain the specs of the MOTHERBOARD.
It is Intel's to explain the specs of the CPU.

>Intel conveniently left out the fact that the DX2's do not run at 66 or
>50MHz externally, confusing many people.  In fact, I've seen people become
>very upset when they realize that they'd been had by Intel...

Yes, I'm sure you have.  I'm sure you told them:"Guess what, your CPU
isn't really faster then a 50Mhz 486." which is bull.
o
>Then they should explain that in their ads.

Their ads feature an OLD motherboard getting a NEW CPU.  What are
people supposed to think????  That the motherboard is the same, but the
CPU is faster.  That's exactly the case.

>Did I ever say anything about slowing the chips down?  I don't think so.
>My point is simply that Intel should not try to fool people into believing
>that the DX2 machines are full blown 66MHz Clones...

Who is intel trying to fool?  The DX2 machines are the fastest machines
for most applications period.  They are the closest we will get to a
66Mhz motherboard for a while.  (actually, that's a lie, 486s running
at 66Mhz have been selling for years, but not in any quantity, and I
wouldn't vouch for the reliability)

>The bottleneck is having to be compatible with the XT, AT, and ISA designs.
>Put a 386 or 486 in a 32bit design without all of the crap that makes up
>a Clone and you'd have a nice computer.  Throw out the need for 8088
>compatibility and you'd have an even nicer computer.

Zorro and ISA coexist on the Amiga motherboard...why not on a VESA
motherboard, or an EISA/ISA or MCA/ISA or an EISA/ISA/VESA mother
board.  There is no cost (other then monitary) for that backwards
compatibility.
>
>Unfortunately, the new video and audio applications aren't going to fit
>into the cache as well as the older business apps.  A multi-megabyte
>30fps 1024x768 24bit animation won't fit in the cache.

Hopefully when this is common, a coprocessing daughter board will be
doing the work.

Besides, we are talking about TODAY.  You claim the DX2 is a scam.  I
say it's just advancing technology.

>>can't wait for the motherboard to catch up...it never will.  Alphas
>>will be running at 200Mhz, probably on a 50Mhz board...are you going to
>>call this a scam?
>
>If DEC doesn't say that in their ads, yes, it is a scam.

What is dec supposed to put in their CPU ads: If you buy this CPU and
put it in an actual computer, the motherboard won't be running at
200Mhz, because that would be  a fire hazard....give me a break.  REal
companies don't do stuff like that. I don't see commodore advertising:
"Beware, the A1200 has a 1980 (or was it earlier) CPU...it is out of
date." "Beware the hard drive on the A4000 is slower then the hard
drive on the A3000, so that might be a better purchase."  
 
Intel makes a chip, publishes the specs, releases them for benchmarking
and sells them.  That's their business, not hand holding.

>So you use OS/2?  If you are using Windows, you are not using an OS, you
>are using a glorified program launcher which mimics an OS.

As a matter of fact, I do use OS/2.  But I think your ridiculing of
Windows is silly.  Call it what you like...it's still the second most
popular OS (probably in history).  Amigados comes in somewhere after
CP/M but before MiNT.

>Good for you, but too bad you'll have to switch when OS/2 dies.

I'll only switch because OS/2 has truly died, and OS/2 will only be
killed by a better Windows NT, in which case I'll be glad to
switch...if I don't like Windows NT, I'll use destiny, NeXtstep,
Solaris, Linux or BSD386.  Gee, wouldn't it be nice if YOU had that
many options?  Amiga users wouldn't be so dogmatic about Amigados if
they had the option of using something else.

>So what did you get?  You got a standard based on a brain dead 8086 and
>a CP/M clone.

The 386 is much closer, architecturally to a 68000.  It can emulate an
8086 in hardware, true...but that's a feature, not a problem.


>  You have 1 major bus and 2 minor buses, with a few new
>ones trying to break in.

What's wrong with that?  All of them are well supported by their
vendors, and there is a wide range of peripherals for all of them
(except, perhaps MCA).  Different busses for different tasks...A EISA
is great for a server.  VESA is great for single users.  PCMIA is great
for laptops.  MCA is great for IBM customers :).  PCI will be probably
be good for both servers and single users.

Where's the problem?

>  You have dozens of different video boards, each
>of which needs a specific driver to work.

Oh, geez, isn't competition AWFUL!  Actually there are hundreds, and
that's why the prices drop so much faster then Amiga video boards.

>  You have several sound boards,
>but the LCD is barely a step above the lowly C64. 

Exactly which of *TODAY'S* sound boards have you heard?

 And the lack of vendor
>dominance gives you low prices, but makes it tough for even the big boys
>to turn a profit.

What do I care about their profit.  It just forces them to make the
peripherals makers lower their prices, and add value.  It's great.
Look where the the PC has come in 6 years, from CGA, 8086 and DOS.  Now
look at the Amiga  AmigaDOS 1.3-Amigados 2.0  whopee!  AGA...whopee!
68000-68040.  The Amiga was about 4 years ahead in technology at it's
introduction and now it's playing catch up with SVGA and sound boards.
That's what competition does.

>You don't know what you are talking about.  Monitors, modems, printers,
>scanners, hard drives, tape drives, and other peripherals are the same
>price for the Amiga as they are for the Clones.  How could they not be?
>I've bought several peripherals over the last few years and only two
>were from Commodore.  Most came right out of Computer Shopper...

You (or someone) claimed that the world had been "taken in" by
Microsoft and IBM.  I merely pointed out that things are a lot cheaper
because of the existence of clones.  If there were no clones,
everything, software, peripherals, everything, would be more expensive.
Peripherals would be more expensive, because computers would be more
expensive, and therefore do less volume.  Less volume=less economies of
scale=higher price.  Check out the price of Mac and Amiga perhipherals
if you don't believe me.

>Thank you for that lesson, oh master of economics.  I fully realize that
>companies are out to make money and care very little about the customer.
>But just because the Clones are big sellers does not mean that they are
>good.  Chevrolet and Ford sell many times the number of cars that BMW
>or Mercedes does, yet no one will argue which is the better car.
>
>
And yet, the parts market created by Chevy and Ford probably drives
down the prices for Mercedes and BMW.  Not that I would admit that the
Amiga is a BMW and the PC is a ford.  Technology is a very differnet
ball of wax from automobiles.



Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy