Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site faron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!faron!rjd
From: rjd@faron.UUCP (Robert DeBenedictis)
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: The real debate begins: Atari ST vs Commodore 128
Message-ID: <425@faron.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 9-Jan-86 11:14:35 EST
Article-I.D.: faron.425
Posted: Thu Jan  9 11:14:35 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 10-Jan-86 05:55:37 EST
References: <330@3comvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: rjd@faron.UUCP (Robert DeBenedictis)
Distribution: net
Organization: The MITRE Coporation, Bedford, MA
Lines: 38
Summary: 

In article <330@3comvax.UUCP> mykes@3comvax.UUCP (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>Does Jack Tramiel think he can get away with undercutting his competition,
>retailing his products at K-MART type outlets, and forcing the competition
>to drop their prices (and eventually drop out of business) again?  ...
> Tramiel has ... got all of his
>distributors upset by lowering the price of the ST to about $400 ...
>
>If Mr. Tramiel is trying to drive Commodore to its knees by forcing it
>to drop its Amiga price down near the ST's new price, he may be in for
>a rude awakening.  What he has actually done is downgraded the 'a-priori'
>notion of the ST that we all have, and turned it into a real tough
>competitor for the COMMODORE 128.  If the Amiga prices don't fall, then
>(MY OPINION) people might just give the machine the respect it deserves.
> ...
>/mykes
>...
>At $400, the ST might make a nice printer buffer for my Amiga....

I have been watching the flaming in this newsgroup from a safe distance for
some time now, but I could not restrain myself from responding to this
idiotic article.  

It would seem that Mr. Schwartz is saying that the Atari 520ST will not
succeed because its price has dropped too low, thus leaving the Amiga all
alone in its price range to gobble up the entire market.  This is the
some of the stupidest reasoning I have yet heard in this newsgroup (which is
really saying something).  

Tramiel didn't change the *machine*.  He just lowered the price.  Yes, its
still the same machine that beats the Amiga in at least one well-established
benchmark.  If you think he actually reduced the machine's chances of success
by doing this, then I would appreciate some further explanation of why you
think so. 

Granted, people who judge computer hardware using their "a priori" notions
based solely on the price of the machine probably won't buy the 520ST, but I
certainly don't see any reason to expect them to buy the Amiga either.  (It
seems like they usually end up with stuff from IBM.)