Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!ohstpy!miavx1!jwwalden From: jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Darc Tangent) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: GS (What you want _requires_ moving closer to the Amiga...) Message-ID: <1162.2603c187@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> Date: 18 Mar 90 22:12:39 GMT References: <90030820242943@masnet.uucp> <1990Mar9.205605.2836@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu> <1160.2600f4c1@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> <1990Mar17.122507.18534@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu> Lines: 100 >> There is far much >>more productivity software available for the Amiga than for the Apple IIGS. > > Fine. But the marketing still sucks. Until Commodore can get the kind of > network that Apple, IBM, and Tandy have going they won't be considered by many > people because they don't know if Commodore will still be there after the sale > Commodore's marketing definitely sucks. Commodore is a huge corporation and will certainly be there after the sale, but they fail to project that fact. >>Where are the GS CAD programs? TeX applications? Math programs like Maple and >>MatLab? The GS doesn't have them because it doesn't have the processing or >>graphics power for those types of applications. The Amiga does. > > We're aware of that. We've been flaming Apple for years and they haven't really > listened until now, and now they seem to need convincing that it is worth their > time and effort to produce a decent GS -- a task so simple that third parties > have provided the (sadly) necessary add-ons for years! > Yes, I also flamed Apple for many years about the same problems, but I still haven't seen evidence that they have listened. I hope they have - just a faster processor would be enough to make the GS usable (for GS specific applications). >> The Amiga >>certainly has as many word processors, dtp programs, spreadsheets, and data >>bases as the GS (not counting all the ancient general Apple II software that >>is hopelessly behind the times (I'm not talking about the newer Apple II >>software like DB Master Pro, etc.)). > > Hopelessly behind the times? They still work! Why should I stop using something > because it is old, when it still does what I want better than anything else > available? > If it does what you want, then use it; however, much of the older software doesn't do what I want and newer software provides more capabilities and is generally better supported. What I'm trying to say is that large quantities of old programs are not necessarily better than smaller numbers of newer more capable programs. Number of software packages is not a measure of good software availability. >> Of course, for graphics and sound >>processing, there is much more available on the Amiga, > > Graphics, yes. Sound, HELL NO. Not until the Amiga has a 32 voice synthesizer > on board. You've never heard of SoundSmith, I take it. And when the new sound > tools start showing up in applications... > No, I haven't heard of Soundsmith, and yes, the GS's sound hardware is definitely better (although you really do want a stereo card), but there is a lot of Amiga sound software out there and you did admit that you were several years behind on Amiga software. >>Before I get flamed, I would like to mention that I've owned an Apple II for >>ten years. > > Good for you. But that doesn't mean you're automatically right about what > _we_ see in the Apple II. Who is "we?" I certainly didn't mean to imply that owning an Apple II made me right about everything, but that I knew where I was coming from - and yes, I do still like the Apple II. I think it's a shame the way Apple has abandoned the Apple II. > There are qualities that the Apple II has that the > Amiga does not, and probably never will. Until the Amiga has a programming > language and a hands-on machine language environment built in I will never > buy one. They are what I like most about my Apple II's and I wouldn't give > them up for the world. I'd rather see a machine like my Apple //f, that does > anything I'd want from an Amiga and still gives me my II. By built-in I assume you mean in ROM? Why? ROM languages are difficult to update and modify. I prefer the vareity and choice of non-ROM programming languages. What exactly do you mean by a hands-on machine language environment? I know you are referring to the monitor, but what exactly is it that you want abou it. Will the Apple IIf ever be built? > > Todd Whitesel > toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu -- [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] [] [] [] Darc Tangent d(arctan(u)) = du/(1+u^2) jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu [] [] [] [] "I am made from the dust of the stars, the oceans flow in my veins." [] [] - RUSH, Presto [] [] [] [] "Reading legal mush can turn your brain to guacamole!" - Amiga RKM [] [] "Objective truth is a social disease." - Nietzsche [] [] [] [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]