Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!en.ecn.purdue.edu!doctorj From: doctorj@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Jeffrey W Davis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: A3000UX - Born to run UNIX SVR4 Message-ID: <1991Feb9.072054.24527@en.ecn.purdue.edu> Date: 9 Feb 91 07:20:54 GMT References: <1512@pdxgate.UUCP> <1991Feb9.032953.14709@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1519@pdxgate.UUCP> Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network Lines: 81 In article <1519@pdxgate.UUCP> hal@eecs.UUCP (Aaron Harsh) writes: > The NeXTstation has no color and no expansion [slots] available. But >looking through Amiga World (yeah so what if I read it, Amigas still suck :-) >all the expansion cards I see fall into three categories: That is pretty harsh. Stating that Amigas suck in an Amiga forum shows a lack of knowledge/intelligence and really damages your credibility. > 1) RAM/Hard drive cards > Who cares about this? The Station is expandable to 32 Megs, and has > a SCSI connector on the back. The Amiga will be able to adapt to any new type of hardware items that develop at a later date. Maybe a new type of SCSI? The big point here is that it is not LIMITED. The slots are there to allow FUTURE products to also be used. When the 040 merits a card, it will be available. Just plug it in and go. Same with the 050, 060, etc. I believe that Motorola already has the 070 in the works. Expandability is the key word here. That is the major reason that I chose the Amiga for development work. > 2) Video things (genlocks, Toaster, etc.) > The Amiga is a much better multimedia machine than a NeXT. If you're > going to be using a lot of video, go with an Amiga. If you're going to > want to use a really fast machine and an incredible programmeing setup > you should go with a NeXT. Have you programmed on the Amiga? This is a pretty touchy area too. I am able to create new programs to do what I want in a matter of minutes now. There are a LOT of great programming resources out there for the Amiga and I think your statements/opinions are insufficiently justified. > 3) IBM/Mac emulators > SOFT-PC on the NeXT runs an AT window faster than a 12Mhz AT. Uses > all the NeXT serial ports, disk drives, etc.. too. You can also run > more than one on the screen at a time. (Yeah, I know. Why would you > want to run more than one PC window at a time? Well.. why would you > even want to run one :-) Now I totally agree here. If you want to run IBM, RUN an IBM. There are available resources to cross-development FOR an IBM, but again WHY? > Maybe an '040 3000UX will beat a NeXT, but I doubt it. It will do better >at video, but not at number crunching. Someone posted some benchmarks >comparing A3000 and NeXTCube (030 model) a while ago.(I think that was >in the pre-advocacy days). The NeXT was a little faster than the Amiga. How do arrive at the conclusion that the NeXT will outperform the Amiga on number crunching. If they are running the SAME program on the SAME processor, how can the NeXT possibly be faster? I am sure that they are on (or will be on) equivalent levels here. I realize that system overhead may play a part here, but this is negligable in perspective. The ram setup has also been nicely done on the UX to support the various burstfetch modes available on the processor. > You probably haven't played with one of the new NeXTs. They're speeded >up a lot. You can even format disks while you're downloading a file :-) >I've had Mandelbrot, Digital Webster, and Writenow running at the same time >without slowing down the Writenow window. You obviously haven't 'speeded' to your English classes either! So what! The Amiga has always been able to format a disk while running a terminal program and downloading a file. That requires almost no processor time. And running a Mandelbrot, 5 wordprocessors (another process that takes almost no processor time to keep updated) and downloading MULTIPLE files on 4 serial ports doesn't slow down any of my windows! > Yep, the Amiga is better with video. > Try doing raytracing in any reasonable amount of time on an Amiga. Try >designing a functional graphical interface to one of your programs in a >half hour on an Amiga. No problem. Again, do you believe that the processor in the NeXT is doing MORE than the same processor in an Amiga? And designing a graphical interface is very easily done. In fact I use a program that writes them FOR me. How does a few MINUTES sound? > >Aaron Harsh >hal@eecs.cs.pdx.edu Non informative comments should be re-directed to nil: *********************************************************** * Jeff Davis * Relax! And get into /// * * doctorj@en.ecn.purdue.edu * the STRESS!!! /// * * * \\\///030 * * * -Gigahertz!- Amiga\XX/ 882 * *********************************************************** -=[ In Stereo Where Available ]=-