Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!sbcs!umcvmb!c506634 From: c506634@umcvmb.missouri.edu (Eric Edwards) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware Subject: Is the Amiga a BIG Atari 800? (was Re: Hardware Idiots ? Message-ID: Date: 31 May 91 03:37:49 GMT Sender: usenet@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Usenet poster) Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.hardware Organization: Hackers without Hard Drives Lines: 18 In article <22009@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: > money in the early 80s, when game machines were hot. If the Amiga were really > intended as an 80's answer to the C64 and Atari 800, it would have come with > an operating system similar to that of those machines; one step behind MS-DOS > instead of two or more steps ahead. And C= would have two or three programmers Hmmm. AmigaDOS as we know it, was developed after Commodore bought Amiga, Inc. and was, as I understand it, one of Commodore's big contributions. It, along with things like ZorroII, came out of Commodore, not Amiga, Inc. If they had not run into financial trouble, what kind of OS did J. Miner and the gang at Amiga, Inc. have in mind for the Loraine? Did they intend for it to be a bit Atari 800? Eric Edwards: c506634 @ "I say we take off and nuke the entire site Inet: umcvmb.missouri.edu from orbit. It's the only way to be sure." Bitnet: umcvmb.bitnet -- Sigourney Weaver, _Aliens_