Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!decwrl!bacchus.pa.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!meridn.enet.dec.com!barrett
From: barrett@meridn.enet.dec.com (Keith Barrett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Some MAC and Amiga Comparisons.  aka Marc Blunders
Message-ID: <16413@shlump.nac.dec.com>
Date: 17 Oct 90 04:11:19 GMT
Sender: newsdaemon@shlump.nac.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 29

I'm getting tired of hearing from Marc Barrett - why does this guy "waste"
his time on the Amiga conference when he obviously doesn't do more than
put the system down? His post is so full of errors I'm not going to even waste
my time addressing them. If "Apple Computer" themselves state that they will
never promote a low-cost MAC because they feel that it's a "toy" market,
why is he trying to convince us that it's already lower than the Amiga? 
For one thing, I can spend a VERY small amount of money and obtain a
fully functional Amiga with dedicated processor sound, graphics, color, etc.
THEN add on (when I can afford it) to include the accelerator board,
printer,com board, etc that the MAC comes with - and still stay 99.9%
compatible with all my previous software and other amigas AND have a better
system than the MAC. Even using his figures and accepting that the prices are
close -- I CAN BUILD TO THAT CONFIG while the MAC user is stuck dropping big
$$$ initally. And as far as being initially impressive - I can't count the
number of "ooooo's" I've gotten when demoing standard software and CAD
rendering and stated the cost. Never mind the IBM Bridgeboard ability.
I noticed that you DIDN'T state what the Mac system was missing that the Amiga
came with (speech synthesis, 4096 colors, better sound, CLI, etc).

The bottom line is that the systems each serve a purpose. You sound like
you are just trying to justify your own preference for a MAC to everyone.
Do it elsewhere.

It's enough to make me want to change my name

Keith


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~