Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!noc.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!udel!brahms.udel.edu!don From: don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Amiga is better then what??? Message-ID: <17330@chopin.udel.edu> Date: 26 Jun 91 16:18:21 GMT References: <677913506.0@therip.FidoNet> Organization: University of Delaware Lines: 217 In article <677913506.0@therip.FidoNet> Rod.Fulk@f24.n228.z1.FidoNet.Org (Rod Fulk) writes: >Tom, Apparently you have not really used an Atari computer... >There are many offerings available on the ST that are not available on any >other computer to date. Okay, I was going to sit back & watch, but I felt compelled to reply to this one... >Since atari does not make the ST computer any more that I know of you must >compare the capabilities of the STe to that of the amiga. >A 1040 Ste compares VERY favorably to an amiga 500. The ONLY thing the amiga >500 has over the atari is the fact that the atari can not do as many colors on >the screen at the same time... There are many who would disagree with this statement.... >However there is a 24bit card available for $800 with a coprocessor of some >sort for really good graphics... I can get a 24-bit card for $299 (list). It takes advantage of the Amiga's built-in coprocessors. For about $100 more I can get one that also includes a slow-scan video digitizer. This one (DCTV) has been demoed at shows paging full-motion, full-color video off a HD and displaying it through this advice in real time (Watched a few minutes of Back to the Future III...) >Adding things to the ST come alot cheaper over all then on the amiga and the >standard equipment atari sells is of better quality on average. Better quality in what way? I assume you're speaking of quality of 'workmanship' or quality control with this point. What data are you using to arrive at this conclusion? Besides, if you have a problem with your 500, you FedEx it back to Commodore (at CBM's expense) & it's promptly replaced or repaired & sent back. If your 2000, 2500, or 3000 go bad, and your warranty is still valid (1 year warranty on all models, w/option to purchase an extension), Commodore sends someone to your home to fix it there. >Compare.... >An Ste with tos 1.6 and blitter performs pretty well... >Compared to an Amiga 500 the amiga only has a slight edge over the Atari.. I've seen the so-called blitter on an ST. I was not impressed. The Amiga's blitter performs most operations about as fast as a 14 MHz 68020 (according to Dave Haynie, a CBM hardware guy who frequents c.s.amiga.*). The ST's processor runs .86 MHz faster than the Ami's 68000, but the blitter more than makes up for this in all but extremely processor-intensive apps. Of course, for about $10 (probably less) you can pop a 68010 into your Amiga & make up for that difference. Unless Atari has finally released a non-TT TOS version that supports 680(1+)0 chips, ST owners don't have this option. >(Note: for the price no other computer even comes close... ) The A500 can be had for about $400 now. It generally also comes bundled with some software as well. >Compare OS's... The St is built with a much more complete OS then ANY of the >amiga OS's.. (The 2.0 doesnt really count at this point since last time I >looked it was not available on amiga 500's yet) In what way are they more complete? Do they include a shell environment as well as a GUI? Do they support multiple simultaneous screens of different depths, resolutions, and pallettes? (Can the ST even change resolutions yet without a reboot?) Shared libraries & interprocess communication? (Oops! No need... no multitasking! Sorry.) >If you compare the amigas 2.0 to the Mega Ste's 2.x and the TT's 3.X the atari >beats it hands down. >(Beats it in all areas of ease of use and of pure power...) Workbench is just as easy to use as any most other GUIs. Double click the icon & away you go... As far as "pure power", I've yet to see a GUI with the pure power of a Unix-like command line, which is part of the Amiga OS (note that you don't _have_ to use this; it's just there in case you want to). > Of course the >amiga does multi task but I have very little use for multi tasking.. Normally, I'd counter this standard argument with another standard one ("Then you probably haven't tried it yet"....), but... >(I use a 25 mhz '386 with desqview.. On the BBS multi tasking is nice..) >VERY few people I talk to use multi tasking more then ocassionally. Nearly every Amiga user I talk to uses it on a regular basis. I'm doing it now. A BBS is certainly far from the only time multitasking is useful. A list of the processes currently running on my system (using Snap, one of those processes, to clip this text from a window & paste it here): CLI(1):artm CLI(2):iprefs CpuBlit V1.00 AssignX FaccII ForFacc RexxMaster CLI(4):c:snap CygnusEd CLI(3):loadwb jr-comm DMouse Virus_Checker jrcomm-clock SD (Note that I've deleted a number of system processes (devices & handlers) because they're not things that I specificaly started up in one way or another.) >As to sound? Well The ST is the only one so far that has the capability of 3d >sound. The STe series computers have the capability of using 3 seperate >speakers with different sounds out of each.... 2 of those full 8 bit digital.. How is this superior to the Amiga's 4 channel 8 bit stereo sound? (8 bit on all 4 channels, not just 2 of them). There's even software (Octaplayer?) that supposedly pushes out 8 voices. Of course, unlike the ST, the Amiga's sound is driven by yet another coprocessor, so it takes almost 0 CPU time to play a musical score or a digitized sound (as a background process in your multitasking environment, while you work on something else). >It is easy to use HD floppies on an ST.. I have yet to see on on an amiga... Applied Engineering and Commodore both make Ami HD drives. The problem with HD drives on the Amiga is that the floppies are controlled by a coprocessor (yes, another one!) that allows me to do things like formatting a floppy (which I'm doing now via the SD process listed above) with little loss of CPU time. This coprocessor, though, cannot handle the throughput speeds of high density drives (twice that of the older drives), so workarounds have had to be found. >Since the ST uses standard parts it is easy to get most of the items... Eh? Standard parts? Like the standard SCSI drive inside my Amiga, the standard memory chips, the standard printer connected to my standard parrallel port right next to the standard serial port which talks to my standard modem? >Comparing an ST to an Amiga at purely CPU intensive things the Amiga can not >be compared very favorably. No? Why not? That .86 MHz doesn't make much of a difference... especially if the ST also has to use the CPU to do I/O and/or graphics stuff at the same time. Oops! Forgot again... no multitasking. Never mind. >The amiga has a hand up on the serial port since the ST is limited to 19200 >baud... > >ALL the memory can be used in an ST as compared to the amigas limitation of >chip memory... (Note the ST does not waste memory... You must waste memory on >an amiga to do double buffered graphics and digital sound at the same time.) I can use all the memory in my system too. I just have to keep graphics & sound data in the 1st 2 megs. Why do you say the Amiga has to waste memory to do d.b. graphics & sound? Having to keep it in a limited section of memory only constitutes a limitation, not a waste. On the subject of memory, what exactly is the difference between "ST memory" and "TT memory" on the TT? Is ST mem 16 bits wide? >Each has its own strengths and weaknesses.. The Standard ST is MUCH better >suited to bussiness then an amiga. However the Amiga is better suited to >games and higher resolution color work... Oh? On what do you base this assumption? I really don't know what business software is available for the ST other than PageStream (is 2.1 out yet for the ST? I've been using it for a while, & am looking forward to the 2.2 upgrade they're now advertising for the Ami version), Calamus, and DynaCadd (now also available for the Amiga). Of course, around here, the Amiga will nearly always win out over the ST simply because there are no ST dealers around and no sources of ST software short of mail order. I've been to nearly every computer store in this state, but have yet to see an ST anywhere. >Start comparing at the TT to amiga 3000 level and the difference is alot less.. >The TT can do some graphic modes the amiga would be jelous of and visa versa. If I remember the TT specs correctly, the only grahics mode the TT has that can outdo a stock Amiga 3000 (or any other model, if it weren't for the flicker in interlace mode on <3000 Amigas) is the 1024x960 mono mode which needs a special monitor. With the CBM A2024 monitor or Moniterm Viking, any amiga can do 1008x800 (1008x1024 in PAL mode) mono. >The sound systems are for the most part the same.. Differences can be over >come by the speed of the processor. If you REALLY push it the amiga can do a >few things better in the graphics arena though.. Over all though you have no >bussiness stating the ST is no where as good as the amiga.. It is not true.. From what I've seen of the ST it doesn't take much pushing for the Amiga's graphics to beat it. The processor speed differences (ST vs A500) are so small they're almost irrelevant; the Ami's blitter, copper, and other coprocessors make up for them easily. >However Atari USA is missing the boat.... >Actually someone shot the boat they were on while they were sipping a toast >to what they thought was going on... Then federated almost killed them.. >From the current trends I would predict that the Atari will come on very strong >in the next five years.. If Atari ever gets over their fatuation of keeping >low graphics to keep the price down and offer a multi tasking environment then >there will be nothing any amigaite can say against the ST... ;-) From the current trends I would predict that Atari sales will continue to be negligible in the US and falling in Europe. Sales of the TT might go well for a little while as current ST owners upgrade, but IMHO, they'll die down shortly. I would also predict that Commodore's sales will continue the steady rise they've been experiencing worldwide. >(Multi tasking doesnt make a better machine but since most people dont realize >they are not gonna need it they think they need it and might lewt it make some >sort of an effect on them..) Multitasking _does_ make a better machine for any machine that's not completely dedicated to a single task. I won't buy a computer that can't do it, and feel extremely claustrophobic when I find myself having to use one that can't. -- 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.