Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!news.iastate.edu!vaxf.iastate.edu!TAAB5
From: taab5@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett)
Subject: Re: The Amiga's Future
Message-ID: <1991Jun23.190454.16318@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Reply-To: taab5@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
References: <1991Jun21.183216.29240@news.iastate.edu> <430@hfsi.UUCP> <1991Jun22.140127.19580@news.iastate.edu>,<17304@chopin.udel.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1991 19:04:54 GMT
Lines: 61

In article <17304@chopin.udel.edu>, don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd) writes:
>>   *With extra VRAM ($300), the MAC LC can display 32,768 colors at once
>>at 584x386 or 256 colors at once at 640x480.
>
>	 With HAM-E ($300) the Amiga 2000 can display some huge # of colors in 
>lo-res.  Yes, I know it's not a well-supported type thing, but it's there.
>

    Can you paint in real-time on the HAM-E, with all of the screen gadgets,
windows, menus, etc.. properly displayed along with the picture you are
creating?  You can with the MAC LC.  Also, is the HAM-E output flicker-free
at the highest resolutions?  The MAC LC display is rock-solid at 640x480 
and 584x386.  Further, can you use the HAM-E to improve the general look
of the GUI?  System 7.0 looks *GREAT* on a color MAC (much better than 
AmigaOS 2.0 looks on any Amiga).

>	 There are a few changes I'd like to see in the 2000 series, but nothing
>as radical as you suggest.
>	SIMM sockets on the motherboard are one thing I don't see any problem with.
>Although some 3rd party companies might be hurt by this, there aren't any
>that I know of who make almost all their money from memory devices.
>	A Faster processor might be feasible, but I'd stay away from an '020.  I
>think the Mac LC is the only thing keeping the 020 in production at this
>point.  With the cheap MMU-less '030s now available, the price advantage of
>the 020 over its faster descendant is fading.  Seems to me that if it weren't
>for Apple, Moto would be better off dropping the 020 to focus more on the '030
>and '040.
>	 Anyway, I think a faster 68K would be reasonable, even if it is in the form
>of Processor Accelerator/AdSpeed type hack... as long as this could be done
>without adding considerably to the cost (could it?) and without causing many
>incompatibilities.

   Stay away from a faster processor for the A2000, as this is what the
A3000 is for.  Just put in on-board SCSI and display enhancer, and everything
will be fine.

   BTW, it is actually coming as quite a shock to me that an *Amiga* user
would be opposed to a fully integrated architecture.  The Amiga's 
integrated architecture is what kept it alive in spite of Commodore's bad
marketing, at least until the video started becoming obsolete.  For a long
time, Amiga people would harp the Amiga's integrated system as the best
reason to buy it.  Now that systems have started becoming available from
Apple and others that are even more highly integrated than the Amiga is (for
a lower price, too), people are suddenly saying that an integrated
architecture is not necessarily a good thing.  What gives?

>
>
>
>-- 
>  Gibberish   May the        Publications Editor, AmigaNetwork 
>  is spoken   fork() be      Amiga Student On-Campus Consultant, U of D
>    here.     with you.      DISCLAIMER:  It's all YOUR fault.

  -------------------------------------------------------------
 / Marc Barrett  -MB- | BITNET:   XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET        /   
/  ISU COM S Student  | Internet: XGR39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU   /      
------------------------------------------------------------    
\        The great thing about standards is that          /
 \       there are so many of them to choose from.       /
  -------------------------------------------------------