Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ra!emory!hubcap!ncrcae!ncr-sd!se-sd!cns!dltaylor
From: dltaylor@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dan Taylor)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: 486 clone vs. Amiga 3000
Message-ID: <955@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM>
Date: 13 May 91 21:23:49 GMT
References: <o#3H6uz@cs.psu.edu> <48814@ut-emx.uucp> <24739@well.sf.ca.us> <1991May12.211848.7252@athena.mit.edu>
Organization: NCR Corp. SE-San Diego
Lines: 26

You don't cover the only real issue here.  How much MS-DOS software do
you HAVE to run, and how much do you want to run, versus the AmigaDOS
software?  If you have to run many MS-DOS titles, get the 486 (period).
If you only have an occasional, or no need, to run MS-DOS, get the Amiga,
since you can run MS-DOS stuff on a co-processor.  CGA and 286, unless
you upgrade to a separate VGA, and bump the processor, but it does run.

I had to make the same choice, both times I bought an Amiga.  The first
time was during school.  A professor "wanted" a project turned in on
a PC diskette, under MS-DOS, so he could grade it easier (not required,
but I can take a hint).  I went out and bought an early A1000, and
"Transformer", a software emulator.  It was slow, but I didn't need it
for much, so it worked for me.  Just before the end of the 1990, I
needed a PAL/EPROM/etc programmer.  The most cost-effective ones run
in an XT slot, and the driver software is an MS-DOS application.  So,
I bought an A2500/30, and the XT-compatible bridgeboard.  Again, my
MS-DOS needs are handled, but I'm not stuck with a machine that doesn't
suit me otherwise.

As for UNIX compatiblity, there will be more commercial packages for the
486, for some time, if not always, than the 68K.  The PD spread will even
out quickly, since SysV will be almost identical on the two.  You have
to decide, for yourself, whether the available programs fill your needs
and wants, then buy the computer that runs them.

Dan Taylor