Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site uwmacc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!pyrnj!topaz!uwvax!uwmacc!oyster
From: oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicious Oyster)
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga,net.micro.atari
Subject: Re: Commodore and ST debate
Message-ID: <1874@uwmacc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3-Jan-86 08:47:50 EST
Article-I.D.: uwmacc.1874
Posted: Fri Jan  3 08:47:50 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 5-Jan-86 01:12:40 EST
References: <447@ssc-bee.UUCP>
Reply-To: oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicious Oyster)
Distribution: net
Organization: UWisconsin-Madison Academic Comp Center
Lines: 12
Xref: watmath net.micro.amiga:1401 net.micro.atari:2168

In article <447@ssc-bee.UUCP> ditzel@ssc-bee.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) writes:
>
>>4) Commodore/Amiga has been fairly open and honest about the internal
>>structure and functioning of their machine, while by comparison 
>>Atari has been relatively secretive (specific examples furnished upon 
>>request). 
>more nonsense.

   The first opinion above (>>) is probably due to the fact that Atari is not
using the resources (i.e. $$$) of the thousands of universities on USENET to
provide product support, whereas the folks at Commodore are.  Must be because
Atari just doesn't care about it's customers, eh?