Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site well.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!seismo!lll-crg!well!farren
From: farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren)
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga,net.micro.atari
Subject: Reply to: Questions about ST vs. AMIGA
Message-ID: <352@well.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Dec-85 07:00:56 EST
Article-I.D.: well.352
Posted: Tue Dec 17 07:00:56 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Dec-85 00:44:25 EST
References: <342@unmg.UUCP> <840@h-sc1.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Whole Earth Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 47
Xref: watmath net.micro.amiga:1186 net.micro.atari:2015

In article <840@h-sc1.UUCP>, breuel@h-sc1.UUCP (thomas breuel) writes:
> It would be much more helpful if you stated WHY you believe that the
> AMIGA is better than the ST. Since I may buy a new computer soon, I
> would like to hear real information about the two machines. So far, the
> main differences appear to be:
> 
> (a) the ST is half the price of the AMIGA.

     Approximately true.  Depends on whether you want color or not.

> (b) the AMIGA has better special-purpose graphics capabilities than the
>     ST, but at the expense of main CPU speed.

    Absolutely false.  The graphics capability is achieved with co-processors
    which tend to let the CPU run at full speed much more often than if the
    CPU were responsible for display updates.  Note that the coprocessors
    also allow I/O to proceed independently of the CPU, as well.

> (c) the AMIGA graphics is said to be not usable at a 
>     resolution of 640x400 for text or serious graphics applications.

    Probably true, but only until monitors become available that address
    the special problems with 640 X 400 mode (using color - there are mono-
    chrome monitors which will work quite well at 640 X 400, and the ST, as I
    understand it, forces monochrome at that resolution anyway)

> (d) the AMIGA is said to be more expandable than the ST.

    Yes.  The AMIGA has the system bus available on a connector on the side
    of the machine, and expansion cards are already becoming available.

> (e) the AMIGA has a multitasking operating system. Definitely a big plus,
>     but as soon as OS9 is available for either machine, this does not
>     matter anymore.
 
    Perhaps, perhaps not.  The Amiga's OS ( NOT the AmigaDOS, but the under-
    lying kernal ) was specifically designed to take advantage of the large
    amount of intelligence held in the coprocessors.  Unless the OS9 imple-
    mentation is done VERY well, it probably will lose in efficiency.  Note
    that OS9 was probably not designed for a high-power graphics environment,
    and Amiga's EXEC was.

-- 
           Mike Farren
           uucp: {dual, hplabs}!well!farren
           Fido: Sci-Fido, Fidonode 125/84, (415)655-0667
           USnail: 390 Alcatraz Ave., Oakland, CA 94618