Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!ginosko!usc!ucla-cs!oahu!stephen From: stephen@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Stephen Whitney) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: TT vs 386 boxes Message-ID: <28320@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> Date: 20 Oct 89 06:56:07 GMT References: Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU Reply-To: stephen@oahu.UUCP (Stephen Whitney) Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Lines: 54 In article cmm1@CUNIXA.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Christopher M Mauritz) writes: >Well, unless you are a diehard Atari fan (I know, there are still a few >left), I would advise you to buy the 25mhz 386 now (if you do indeed >need it now). Besides, if you want to use it for work you would be >much better off with an industry standard 386 rather than the TT (if it >ever does hit the market). You'll be able to get software for nearly >every application at reasonable cost and not have to worry about the >lagging support of Atari Corp and vaporware promises. However, I'm not independently wealthy. Not only will the TT be cheaper than its fruity computer equivalent, but I can save my _substantial_ software (not to mention programming time) investment and continue to use my hard disk without hacking it to bits first. > It is really to >bad. The 68030 is such a nice mpu compared to the Intel mpu's. (add ^ >an o here) Besides, who needs another workstation with non-industry >standard 16 bit slots. C'mon...what a waste...Although I would like to >see the TT fly, I don't think you will see it happen (That is IF you >ever see a TT up close and personal...Ha!) You're right about the 68030. I'm not going to buy an Intel chip based machine. Yecccch! Even though the 80386 _can_ have a flat address space, about 95% of the machines out there are running 8086s so the software people don't yet have much incentive to write '386 enhanced software. >Now that I've got my own little 68030 worksation (named after a popular >red fruit ) and have it actually in front of me (yes, you can >actually see and touch it!), I can't believe how slow my ST seems in >comparison. All I use my ST for now is Air warrior and an occasional >game. Best of luck in your computer search! > Sure, Mac IIx, cx, and ci machines are nice. They're also _really_ expensive. If the TT truly has VME slots (yes, they _are_ a standard, even at 16 data bits)and SIMM-based memory along with 512k of ROM space, it will be quite user expandable. We'll be able to plug in new and better graphics cards, run UNIX with hardware memory protection (built into the '030), and expand our memory quite effectively. With the SCSI port, we'll have cheap hard disks, and the built-in video modes are nothing to sneeze at. >Chris Mauritz > >------------------------------+--------------------------- >Chris Mauritz |Where there's a BEER, >cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |there's a plan. >(c)All rights reserved. | >Send flames to /dev/null |Need I say more? >------------------------------+--------------------------- Who's flaming? I just don't have the option you chose available to me. If I weren't a student, I might buy whatever they use at work, but I enjoy being different anyway... :-) --Steve