Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!ames!sgi!mplevine@sgi.com From: mplevine@sgi.com (Marshall P. Levine) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Amigas in the big picture. Keywords: reliability quality speed graphics sound compare Message-ID: <38517@sgi.SGI.COM> Date: 21 Jul 89 22:07:03 GMT Sender: daemon@sgi.SGI.COM Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA Lines: 117 This message is to everyone who has ever insulted or supported the Amiga, especially to those who have recently publicized their views on the network. There are those of you who say, "The Amiga is outdated." There are also those of you who say, "The Amiga is the best computer on the market." I just want to try to present the facts objectively and bring some people back down to earth. Let's look at the computer market at about the time the Amiga 1000 was released. The three BIG microcomputer families available were: IBM PC family and compatibles, Apple ][ family and compatibles, and the Apple Mac family. IBM computers and most of the compatibles were solid, reliable machines. The newer machines were achieving higher speeds and larger memory capacities. EGA was the best graphics standard that IBM had to offer. Sound was still fairly crude. Macintosh computers were also gaining speed and memory. In fact, only their standard screen did not grow! Macs had high resolution and fairly good sound. They were not as solid nor as reliable as the IBM-type machines; software on the Mac did crash from time to time, albeit not often. But Mac users were not forced to learn MS-DOS. The Apple ][ family was constantly delivering yesterday's technology in different boxes. Things were fairly stable. Then, the Amiga was introduced. It is hard to tell whether the larger companies were afraid or not. I would find it hard to believe that anyone would take Commodore seriously. Weren't the VIC-20's selling at Toys-R-Us for under $20 at the time? But whether IBM, Apple, etc. were scared or not, they did begin to make changes. The Amiga was a radical new design, "Throw out all of the outdated technology of the giants and start from scratch, with TODAY's technology." Forget graphics and sound for a minute. The Amiga was not the fastest machine on the market. Apple was pushing (or about to push) 8 Mhz. IBM was on the 12Mhz frontier. And don't forget that the IBM could easily support math coprocessors. But nobody in this price range could come close to the Amiga's graphics and sound capabilities. The blitter, the copper, Agnus, Denise, Portia, 8 megabytes capacity. Revolutionary. But the Amiga was not a reliable machine. Remember 1.1? How about 1.0? How many software failures did you have per day? Any business that took that Amiga seriously for any application that required the least bit of reliability was making a big mistake. But times have changed. Partly in response to the Amiga, the giants invaded the graphics market. IBM machines supported VGA and the Macintosh II was introduced. Even the Apple ][ family began to move again (remember the ][gs?). Be honest, VGA is damned good. So is the Mac ][ 24-bitplane graphics. A palette of 16.7 million colors is better than a palette of 4096 colors. 400 lines of non-interlaced vertical resolution is better than 400 lines of interlaced vertical resolution. How about processor speed? The IBM and compatibles family is in the 50Mhz range now (or is it 60?). Where is the Amiga? The vast majority of us are still running at 7.14Mhz. Now, technology from the higher markets is starting to invade the lower markets. Specifically, the cost of high-performance graphics workstations is falling to the level of high-end personal computers. I'll assume that most of you have at least heard of the Silicon Graphics "IRIS" line of graphics workstations. Until recently, IRIS computers were in the 6-digit price range. But now, there is the personal IRIS. A fully configured personal IRIS (96 bitplanes, 24 available for color in each window, 24 bit RGB color mode and 12 bit colormap mode available simultaneously, built-in z-buffering, built-in Gouraud shading, standard UNIX system V, etc...) costs around $20,000-$25,000. A minimally configured Personal IRIS can be obtained for $12,000 - less than a fully configured Mac ][, and MUCH faster than any Mac or IBM PC. So what's my point? Those of you who run around waving Commodore flags and yelling, "The Amiga is the best personal computer on the market" are forgetting a few things. The Amiga is not the fastest PC, not even close. The Amiga hasn't the best sound. It doesn't have the highest memory capacity. Nor does it have the best (quality/speed) graphics. But these are comparisons against the state of the art. How about user support? Commodore isn't exactly known for being a pillar of customer support! For a long time, their management was changing faster than modern technology. For a long time, it was impossible to talk with any real Amiga technicians or engineers. How about software? I still haven't seen a word processor on the Amiga that even comes close to the reliability and speed of many word processors on the Mac (I own Excellence! 1.14, Prowrite 5.0, Scribble, Textcraft, and a few PD ones). I still haven't seen any database software on the Amiga that comes close to the speed and reliability of database software on the IBM. How about postscript support? Show me some GOOD postscript support (I don't want to wait 10 minutes for the Amiga to produce a postscript file) and I'll talk about postscript. How many people are working on the MANX compiler? On Lattice? Not many. But things have gotten better. Much better. The 1.3 operating system is a vast improvement. I am seeing fewer software failures than ever. Compilers are improving. Software is gradually becoming more reliable. Commodore is more responsive than ever. The Amiga is not the fastest nor the best. It remains a fairly unique design: rebel in its time. The Amiga is the only PC that honestly supports multitasking, largely because most Amiga software was designed for multitasking. It still has many unique hardware capabilities. But that does not make it the best computer on the market. And for all of its problems, it is not the worst computer on the market. It is a machine for programmers; for people who like to play with those unique hardware capabilities. I wish that I had a fast, reliable word processor. I wish that I had a fast, reliable database manager. I wish that the Amiga ran at a competitive speed (33Mhz would be nice). I wish that we had 24 bitplane color. An AT bridgeboard should cost far less than an AT compatable computer. Amiga hardcards should not cost $900 when equivalent IBM hardcards cost $500. I do have a number of complaints. I also have lots of respect for the computer, its engineers, and you: the owners and programmers. The Amiga is a GOOD computer and the Amiga users on the network seem like dedicated users. I happen to own a 1000 and a loaded 2000. My point is that we should all try to keep our feet on the ground and see things the way they are. The Amiga is a good computer, but not the best. It has a long way to go. Let's see more speed, quality, and reliability. Let's see some logic in Commodore. Let's see the Amiga magazines and Commodore itself EARN our trust. They have a long way to go too. In the meantime, let's not fool ourselves. As long as we're honest about this computer, we have a chance of making things better. I hope we succeed. I humbly thank you for your time. -- Marshall Levine mplevine@sgi.com mplevine@phoenix.princeton.edu Advanced Systems Design, Silicon Graphics Inc. Department of Computer Science, Princeton University This article reflects only my opinions, and in no way represents those of my university or employer. I apologize for any inaccuracies. All standard disclaimers apply.