Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!caip!brl-adm!brl-smoke!smoke!roberts@NBS-VMS.arpa From: roberts@NBS-VMS.arpa (ROBERTS, JOHN) Newsgroups: net.micro Subject: Re: Application availability on Mac, Atari ST, and Amiga Message-ID: <2787@brl-smoke.ARPA> Date: Mon, 4-Aug-86 15:51:31 EDT Article-I.D.: brl-smok.2787 Posted: Mon Aug 4 15:51:31 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 5-Aug-86 06:04:09 EDT Sender: news@brl-smoke.ARPA Lines: 91 > From: Steve Langdon > About 9 months ago I posted an article explaining my views on the importance > of a consistent user interface on a single user micro. I still feel that > this is a critical issue, but now it is time to ask if high quality > applications for the Atari ST and Amiga are available. Both machines have > been around for a while and it is reasonable to expect good software. Please post replies to INFO-MICRO/net.micro. I think it would be useful for developers and users to see the best of what is available for their own and other machines. > To attempt to organize the discussion I will suggest some categories, and > provide a summary of what is available for the Mac. > Word Processing... > Spreadsheets... > Communications... > Database... > Development Systems... > Graphics... > Multifunction... > DeskTop Publishing... By now I think there are fine programs available for the Amiga in most or all of these categories, in both commercial and public domain form. I have only used a few of them, and would appreciate it if some knowledgable person would post a more complete summary. By category: Word Processing - yes, several. In addition, several editors, including microemacs, are available for the Amiga. Spreadsheets - yes, at least one. Communications - many, both commercial and public domain. Database - yes, at least one. Development Systems - quite a few. There are at least two C systems available. In addition, there are assemblers, Pascal, Lisp, Prolog, Modula-2, Forth, and, of course, Basic. Graphics, Animation, Sound - The Amiga has a lot of hardware to support these functions. A number of really exceptional programs are available, and even better are possible. Multifunction - yes, at least one. Desktop Publishing - not sure. There are also more advanced programs for the Amiga, including a printed circuit layout program, an advanced BBS program, etc. > ...I also do not see any indications > that application-independent text-and-graphics cut-and-paste exists except > on the Mac. Many Amiga programs store graphics in a standardized format (IFF), and images (including text) can be interchanged. >> There has been a fair amount of discussion about the relative merits >> of the Amiga, ST520, and the Mac. However, little of it has covered >> what I consider to be a fundmental issue - user interface consistency. >> >> One of the most important aspects of the Macintosh is the predictable >> nature of the user interface presented by applications. I own almost >> all follow the user interface guidelines that Apple established. This >> means that I can transfer between applications without having to learn >> a completely new set of commands or conventions. >> >> I see no sign of Atari or Commodore making a vigorous commitment to a >> uniform interface. Most programs I have seen for the Amiga can either boot when the disk is inserted or be selected in a standard manner using the Workbench. I have seen both of these approaches in Macintosh software. A third approach on the Amiga is to access programs from the Command Line Interpreter, which is pretty much like a conventional operating system interface. Once they are running, most of the programs are ultimately controlled by commands selected from a hierarchical menu structure. There are also standard techniques to implement help functions. I suspect that any program having a complex user interface is going to have certain aspects that are confusing to all but expert users, no matter what machine it was written for. Many features of programs written for the Macintosh, as well as other machines, are not really comprehensible unless you carefully study the manuals, and many users do not read the manuals if they can possibly avoid it. I think that the Amiga has an acceptably uniform user interface, and I suspect a similar claim could be made for the ST. John Roberts roberts@nbs-vms.ARPA ------