Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!ncar!noao!arizona!cjeffery
From: cjeffery@cs.arizona.edu (Clinton Jeffery)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Amiga competitiveness
Message-ID: <420@caslon.cs.arizona.edu>
Date: 29 Sep 90 08:03:15 GMT
References: <90271.190320UH2@psuvm.psu.edu>
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson
Lines: 28

A paraphrased extract from an article by UH2@psuvm.psu.edu (Lee Sailer)
>...DOS machines can't use memory so no wonder they all have hard disks, etc...
> I might be strange, but given the choice between 3MB of memory, FACCII, and
> 2 floppies on the one hand, and 1MB memory and a 20MB hard disk on the other,
> I'd take the memory.

   Yup, you're strange. :-)  But seriously, this depends ENTIRELY on what
you are doing with your computer AND how well your computer vendor's
hardware performs.

Example #1: the amiga _can_ use memory better than MS-DOS, and worse than
	(any real flavor of) UNIX.  (Go ahead, argue against this one saying
	that AmigaDOS requires much less memory.  With 6 MB I am more
	concerned with OS protection from GURUS than with kernel size.)
Example #2: an Amiga's hard disk, even with FFS, is *ridiculously* slow
	compared to the _identical_ hard disk running DOS or UNIX/386.  This
	is based on empirical observation doing heavy C compiles on a 2000
	with 1MB ram and a 40 Meg ST-251-1.  Sorry.  I wish it were untrue.
Example #3: The Amiga can use graphics hardware far more efficiently than
	comparable UNIX software (X Windows).  I hope the Amiga's graphics
	capabilities catch up with the times (remember when the Amiga didn't
	have ANY competition for affordable color graphics?).

Hope I haven't offended too many folks...
-- 
| Clint Jeffery, U. of Arizona Dept. of Computer Science
| cjeffery@cs.arizona.edu -or- {noao allegra}!arizona!cjeffery
--