Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!quiche!genius From: genius@cs.mcgill.ca (Michel NGUYEN) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Amiga basher Message-ID: <1991Jun14.062332.2079@cs.mcgill.ca> Date: 14 Jun 91 06:23:32 GMT References: <1991Jun13.042836.8112@marlin.jcu.edu.au> <1991Jun13.065150.3529@cs.mcgill.ca> <1991Jun13.174328.15471@cs.mcgill.ca> Sender: news@cs.mcgill.ca (Netnews Administrator) Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada Lines: 116 > But there ARE some people who do know what they are talking about. > Perhaps, you should listen to some of them seriously... Ok, ok tinyguy, don't be such a wise guy. I was talking to the guy who wrote the original posting. I know that within each group, there are people who know what they are talking about and other don't. And yes I will listen to them if they do. But here we are talking about someone who doesn't... so what's your point?? > But why would I do that? Those are what defines Amiga. You wanna > compare Amiga with other computers? Leave them there! Ok, then compare the Amiga with a all-coprocessed Mac or PeeCee. There is maybe a definition of a Mac but not a PeeCee. Let's be fair here. The guy was saying that the display is faster in the Amiga (compared to a non-coprocessed system), I was merely explaining to him why is that so. > Well, for one thing, what are your most common applications that > you use on your machine? For most applications, there's no way > that each application takes that much CPU, especially on A3000. > Even on 7.14MHz 68000, I can download, un-lharc, and edit a file > without much distraction. In fact, you can start downloading a > file and simply forget about it, as if it doesn't exist. Try that > on Windows.(I have both machines :) ^^^^^^^^^^ I did and still do and it works fine. Maybe you don't know how to set up your .ini files. Drop me a mail and I'll show you. Is this your most common applications?? downloading files, un-lharc, and edit a file?? ok. good for you. I don't do that anymore as you know 2400 is slow, and we (you and me, yes) have the NeXTstations with a 1.44 drive, I use that instead. My most common apps was AutoCAD. Now it's games, and Fractals. And I was talking about _serious_ work (I know it's very subjective). If you go into a company (such as a bank, a lawyer's firm, pharmaceutical lab, etc...), do you think the people are spending most of the time downloading, archiving and playing Blazemonger in a window? How about developper/grad students/prof./reseachers?? (it's becoming a little too much childish, so I stop here). > The most distracting thing about Windows is that it does NOT update > screens(windows) similtaneously. You start formatting a disk, and > switch to another window, the window freezes. Nice multitasking. :) The handicap is not Windows, it's DOS. DOS is my worse nightmare. Knowing that DOS is a brain-dead OS and what Windows can do, I'll say 'nice touch' for Windows (3.0 of course). From all the GUI I have seen/ tried/worked on, NeXTstep is best (graphically speaking), followed by Windows 3.0, then Motif, and the Mac. Amiga GUI comes last (although with 2.0, I'll prefer 2.0 over the Mac even 7.0). > Believe me, I have(and still do). In my opinion, both machines have > their pros and cons. On Amiga, by biggest dissapointment is the > resolution. And on the IBM, the performace of the display, until > you spend $700 on ATI Ultra + $200 on another SVGA card. > But up here in Canada, Amigas are not that cheap, and PCs do look > pretty attractive if you consider value for money. :( > > Oh, I didn't know they were also considering Amigas... But common, > you have to consider the fact that the former System Manager was one > of the craziest NeXT lover(sorry Peter!). No other platform would > have changed his mind. you didn't know. I though everybody in CS knew. Anyway, I think the staff have receive some of the Amigas for evaluation purpose (correct me if I am wrong here Luc). > As I said before, there are some who know both(not me, yet:) and > are keeping quiet for now. I think 'bashing' isn't so bad as long > as they don't exaggerate. > Aha, but you should go and study about Amigas a little more, just > merely trying out isn't good enough. How much do you know about > customizing your own environment? Amongst my Amiga friends, almost > every user has a completely different setup, with some help from > fish libraries. Until you try them properly, you won;t appreciate it, > that much I can tell you. I have a friend who happens to own an Amiga 2000 for 2 years now (I think), and I happen to play with it some time. He has customized his env. alright, but still I didn't like it. I have spend almost 4 hours playing with an Amiga3000 and UX with 2.0 (playing: try DynaCADD, try the Toaster, run several apps, some games, trying to customize the env., and some sound prgs). I could stay (it was at SIMM) and try longer, but I got bored :-( . I follow (but not as religiously as I should) some of the Amiga Mags (that's why I spend most of my time at Camelot). What is for you "properly"? Knowing what it can do and what it does isn't enough? Did I say I don't appreciate the Amiga?? If I did, my mistake. My posting was for the guy who said the Amiga can beat the shit out of the Mac and PeeCee. I say no and I was trying to tell him why. I think you miss the point here. > Yup. And better make that Torpedo. :) Let's call Q. >+-----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+ >| Yeo-Hoon Bae tinyguy@homer.cs.mcgill.ca | /// | >| Dept. Computer Science, McGill University, Canada | /// | >|-----------------------------------------------------------| \\\/// | >| Amiga2000 & 386SX | \XX/ | >+-----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+ *************************************************************************** "L'avocat du diable" ***************************************************************************