Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ucselx!bionet!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ysub!psuvm!mbs110 From: MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: NeXT/Amiga Flamage: Get a life. Message-ID: <91110.010457MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> Date: 20 Apr 91 05:04:57 GMT References: <47402@ut-emx.uucp> Organization: Penn State University Lines: 31 In article , melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) says: > >In article >judge@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us (rory toma) writes: > > I thought improvements in OS's made them faster. Why is this slower? It > suretook them long enough to release it? > >And how long has it taken Commdore to go from 1.3 to 2.0, which still >isn't available on any computer except the A3000? Oh, picky, picky. :) They took ^2 years because they were busy getting it RIGHT, that's why. And, looking at the result, they GOT it right. 2.0 is faster, looks way better, and vastly expands the Amiga's functionality. All this with only a 512K ROM chip and a single 3-1/2" floppy. And need I remind you that it STILL multitasks beautifully in one half megabyte of memory? Compare that to the bloated System 7 (8 disks, 4 MB RAM required, and it's SLOWER than System 6??). I will GLADLY wait for something that works rather than something bloated and inefficient rushed out the door. ...If you can call two years "rushing," that is. Oh, yes. During that long wait for V 2.0, Commodore was ALSO busy getting every last bug out of the system. Nice of them, huh? / Mark "Remixed for Common Household Appliances" Sachs - MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu \ | DISCLAIMER: It's NOT MY FAULT. Kei and Yuri || // || | forced me to say it. || \X/ AMIGA || \========= "Oh, I'm just a NO-OP in the instruction set of Life..." ==========/