Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!sugar!peter From: peter@Sugar.NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Amiga bashing Message-ID: <1991Jun21.024820.27900@Sugar.NeoSoft.com> Date: 21 Jun 91 02:48:20 GMT References: <1991Jun11.204407.16603@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991Jun20.200326.16487@bmerh409.bnr.ca> Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX Lines: 24 In article <1991Jun20.200326.16487@bmerh409.bnr.ca> drews@bmerh796.bnr.ca (Drew Stevens) writes: > Could someone expand on these statements? A $2000 386/33Mhz actually > multitasks quite well under OS2/UNIX/WIN3. Yes, a $2000 386/33 feels pretty good. It's got some rough edges, but so does the Amiga. But remember that the Amiga we're comparing it with costs $500, or $1000 with a hard disk. Also, all the Amiga software runs under Intuition, whereas most software for windows has to run in a compatibility box. You also get a lot of stuff that requires a lot of tweaking to work reasonably well. > Also, a $100 SuperVGA card provides resolutions up to 1024x768 > (non-interlaced up to 800x600) and a quarter-million colour palette. Yes, but the AT bus puts enough wait-states on I/O to the card that it's barely adequate for animation. > Which Amiga configurations are available that offer superior capabilities > and how expensive is such a system? Well, the Amiga 500 provides nearly as good images, better animation, and better system software... for $500. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' . 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"