Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!tybalt.caltech.edu!toddpw
From: toddpw@tybalt.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: My next personal computer will be a PC
Keywords: PC
Message-ID: <1990May5.094813.16564@laguna.ccsf.caltech.edu>
Date: 5 May 90 09:48:13 GMT
References: <2968@sactoh0.UUCP> <1990May4.055855.23151@athena.mit.edu> <12658@wpi.wpi.edu>
Sender: news@laguna.ccsf.caltech.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 53

ggray@wpi.wpi.edu (Gary P Gray) writes:

>  I don't want a Mac, because I would rather have a the flexibility
>of a command line interface and text based display over an all graphics one. 
>Also, I have some questions on how easy a Mac would be to program with its
>user interface the way it is.  The Amiga could be the machine I'm looking for,
>the "high horsepower" Apple //.  

In many ways that is exactly what the Amiga is. The fact that Apple has allowed
the Amiga to exist for so long (I maintain that Apple could easily nuke them
in the marketplace IF they wanted to) is really sad because the Amiga appears
to have finally gained the reliability image it needs to become a major market
contender.

>I guess what I am saying is that I really don't care about Apple // the
>architecture as much as I care about Apple // the design philosophy.  Keep the
>computer simple.  Support the user *and* the hacker (remember the good old
>days, when Apple gave you all the documentation you would even need with the
>hardware, including a schematic?) And most of all, deliver a good piece of
>equipment at a reasonable price.  I believe that Apple once embodied these
>ideals, and hasn't yet totally lost them perhaps.  

This is yet another brilliant paragraph -- comp.sys.apple2 seems to have an
amazingly high hit rate lately.

My beef with the Amiga is that their design tradeoffs from 1985 are coming
back to haunt them and I can devise a "Super GS" that should be able to solve
most of those problems. When I first saw the Amiga I decided its design was
too centralized (made sense then but not now) and that its special purpose
hardware was often overkill or simply too complex compared to the usage it
would get (excluding games of course). Using today's technology (VRAMs and
custom gate arrays, mostly) it is possible to implement a much more distributed
and truly parallel processing design -- unfortunately for the Amiga they have
too much hardware compatibility to deal with. The GS is really just implemented
inefficiently and a true redesign (ROM 03 doesn't count at all) would reveal
just how simple the thing really is. Maintaining 95% hardware compatibility
would be a joke, and providing adequate tools from the start (for once) would
save developers from temptation.

But until Apple sobers up and starts to make such a machine, you are probably
better off buying an Amiga. Just make sure you check it out thoroughly first;
I have found that the Amiga does not have the "charm" my //gs has, in spite of
all the capability.

I feel that a properly redesigned //gs would be able to give us the best of
four worlds: easy as a Mac, cheap as a Clone, whiz-bang as an Amiga, cozy as an
Apple //.  The sad fact is that only Apple has the resources to construct such
a machine, and they are very under the weather right now.

It is a pity to lose another comrade, but not everyone can afford to wait.

Todd Whitesel
toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu