Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpfcso!mjs
From: mjs@hpfcso.HP.COM (Marc Sabatella)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Amiga's are far superior...
Message-ID: <7340077@hpfcso.HP.COM>
Date: 8 Feb 91 16:40:22 GMT
References: <1379@ssp18.idca.tds.philips.nl>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Lines: 24

>    #Both the Amiga and the Atari ST are far superior to any IBM PC or Mac, and
>    #the only people who should be called idiots are the people who buy these
>    #machines.
>
>    And the marketing people at Atari. Agreed?

Perhaps.  The people I would call idiots are the ones who think one computer is
inherently better than another, or that such a proposition would provable by
quoting spec sheets.

For what I want to do - integrated sequencing and notation - the Atari ST &
Notator does it the best for me.  Having, say, a "CRAY" on my desk, even if it
were small enough and cheap enough, would be pointless, since there is no
software to meet my needs.  Having 3,000,000 colors all on the screen at once
would be equally pointless.  The only multi-tasking I need is the complete
integration of sequencing and notation, since I do nothing else with this
computer.  And yes, I have used multi-tasking - the HP 425t's with 68040's we
have here at work, on which I do all other computer "work", will multitask
rings around the Amiga, are faster than the TT, and have better graphics than
Atari & Amiga combined.  But they are useless as sequencers.

Someone else may have different needs, and another machine (perhaps a PC for
data processing, or a Mac for DTP; I don't follow those markets) would address
them better.  That doesn't make them idiots.