Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!pyrdc!grebyn!ckp From: ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Why are Amigaoids hell bent on proving the Amiga is better ? Message-ID: <1991Jun29.052526.21901@grebyn.com> Date: 29 Jun 91 05:25:26 GMT References: <1991Jun27.170049.21231@grebyn.com> <29440@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> Organization: Grebyn Timesharing Lines: 73 In article <29440@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> leh@crane.cis.ufl.edu (Les Hill) writes: >Even though I normally avoid posting to this group, Mr. Krehbiel has >made such an astounding claim that I felt compelled to reply (even though >I know I'll regret it :) Fear not, blaze away bold sir... >In article <1991Jun27.170049.21231@grebyn.com>, ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) writes: >|> Here's the thing: Game machines require only medium >|> reliability. If a game machine crashes, you lose what? Your best high >|> score? If your business computer crashes, you may lose untold $$ worth >|> of data. So you guard it with things like, oh, parity RAM, so that >|> you are assured that incorrect answers are not propogated. And you >|> choose a vendor that has a reputation for reliability. >...much deleted... > >Clearly every business using "business computers" (read PCs) has UPS >systems, disk shadowing systems, redunant backup systems, heck even >"parity RAM". (The previous was meant as sarcasm.) > >I have worked (and continue to do so) in MANY different "business" >environments, from Hospitals to start-ups that never got a product >out the door AND *NEVER* have I seen any kowtowing to this mythical >"PC reliablity" god beyond what any reasonable personal computer user >should do -- make frequent backups. Ideally, every personal computer >would have such protections in place; the naked truth is >most don't (including a majority of "business computers") have them >in place, yet miraculously we all seem to keep humming along! >Perhaps you have a vested interest in spurring on "My computer will >fail at any moment!" [or "Amigas will fail at any moment"] paranoia? Well, I obviously spoke poorly. I personally don't think of the Amiga as being unreliable. I never had a problem with my A1000, A2000, or A2500, and I expect the Amiga 3000 is the same. No, I really was speaking about a "game computer", and addressing a question which I pose once again: why is it even necessary for the Amiga to shed it's "game computer" image? What makes that image bad? I think part of it is perceived reliability. Actual reliability has nothing to do with it. Toys break. The Amiga has a reputation for crashing, true or not the reputation is there. I say confront it. Put some effort into increasing the *perceived* reliability. I think another real issue is "support". When your toy breaks you throw it away, you don't get phone support from the toy maker and you surely don't get "upgrades". Commodore supports the Amiga quite well I think, though perhaps some dealers could stand to lose the "game machine" attitude and do better. >If this red herring is your best "argument" against the Amiga being a >"business computer" (just what does that mean anyhow? "This computer >means business!" The epithet "business computer" MEANS ABSOLUTELY >NOTHING [this comes as no surprise, the phrase was coined as a >marketing tool.]) then I think you are either trying to >advance some hidden agenda (unlikely as it implies a higher level >of reasoning than you've shown here) or (more likely) you are one >of the many millions of Americans who is uninformed about one topic >or another (in this case personal computers) who >will nevertheless spout some jargon, some half-remembered factoids, >and some "expert" opinions on any topic that strikes their fancy. > >In short, all of your "argument" against the Amiga not being as >reliable as any other personal computer (whether it is used in >business or not) is just HOT AIR... > >Les Ah, .advocacy... Since we're flaming, Les, why can't you get your lines under 80 columns? I reformatted all that using vi, since I can't seem to get emacs to work reliably from rn... :-) :-) -- Richard Krehbiel, private citizen ckp@grebyn.com (Who needs a fancy .signature?)