Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!dorner
From: dorner@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: More: Amiga vs the Mac
Message-ID: <96900044@uiucuxc>
Date: Wed, 1-Oct-86 09:09:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uiucuxc.96900044
Posted: Wed Oct  1 09:09:00 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 4-Oct-86 08:40:14 EDT
References: <855@navajo.STANFORD.EDU>
Lines: 51
Nf-ID: #R:navajo.STANFORD.EDU:855:uiucuxc:96900044:000:2550
Nf-From: uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU!dorner    Oct  1 08:09:00 1986


>> How about what it CAN,T do
>>
>> Like run Microsoft EXCEL........
>
>Not to downplay the Mac here, but I suspect that a lot of the Mac applications
>that people mention as "proof" of the Mac's superiority (such as LightSpeed C)
>would be just as happy running on an Atari ST or an Amiga as on a Mac. Whether
>these programs will ever be seen running on an Atari or an Amiga has much more
>to do with marketing (it might be harder to charge $300-$400 for a spreadsheet
>when selling to ST owners than when selling to Mac owners) and manpower issues
>than to tit-for-tat comparisons of the different machines.
>
>                                        -- Thomas Newton

I of course can't say anything about the original poster's intent, but I
DO think that pointing out that the Amiga can't run EXCEL is a valid thing
for someone comparing the machines to do.  Oh, I agree that there is 
probably no reason Excel couldn't be ported to the Amiga (after all, Gates
& Co. are porting it to IBM PCs), and that it probably would run fine.

But, as Tom pointed out, don't hold your breath--it may never happen.  And
therein lies the validity of saying, ``The Amiga can't run Excel.''  As a
computer buyer, the absolute, in-a-vacuum capabilities of a machine are
not unimportant, but the rubber hits the road when I say, ``What can
I DO with it, NOW?''  With the Amiga, for better or worse, one of the
answers is, ``You can't run Excel.''  That may make the mac a ``better''
machine for me, now, than the Amiga.

I can hear some of you howling, ``That's exactly what IBM PC'ers said
when the mac came out.''  My answer to that is that the mac (or the Amiga
or the Atari ST) are so much better, in-a-vacuum, that it compensates for
the initial software drought, for most people.  And indeed, the people who
said, ``I'm gonna buy a PC because it runs 1-2-3 and the mac doesn't,'' are
now wistfully (or would be if they were smart enough) watching Excel on
the mac.

But it is not at all clear to me that the ST and the Amiga are that much
better, in-a-vacuum, than a mac.  So I don't think I would be willing to
lose out on all that software that will run on a mac, but not on an Amiga,
just because of a small difference in capability.

EOT (End Of Tirade)
---
Steve Dorner
University of Illinois Computing Services Office
dorner@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU, ihnp4!cbosgd!uiucdcs!uxc!dorner

I am the OFFICIAL SPOKESMAN not only of UIUC, but of the State of Illinois,
The President of the United States, and the EMPEROR of the WORLD.  All my
decisions are final.