Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!lll-lcc!csustan!csun!cs1!cbcscmst From: cbcscmst@cs1.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm Subject: Re: Whaddaya do with the damned thing? Message-ID: <297@cs1.UUCP> Date: Fri, 16-Jan-87 20:15:27 EST Article-I.D.: cs1.297 Posted: Fri Jan 16 20:15:27 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 17-Jan-87 16:30:12 EST References: <310@rlgvax.UUCP> <1922@sunybcs.UUCP> Organization: Calif State Univ, Northridge, Computer Science Dept Lines: 47 Keywords: I'm bored... I have had my C64 since 1982, and in that time I have used it for such things as wordprocessing, telecommunications, graphics, software development,... At the moment I have an IBM sitting on my desk (at home) right beside the 64. I am using the IBM for telecommunications (I prefer the 80 column readable text) and for working on a graphics system that two friends of mine and I started back in 1985. I use my C64 for wordprocessing using Fontmaster II and data storage using Mirage Database. I will admit that I have not used much in the database area, but MDB works about the same (VERY close) to the InfoStar system for the IBM's. As far as wordprocessing goes, Fontmaster II may not be WYSIWYG but it does nicely for the type of output it gives. I have games aplenty, but no interest in playing them. I use the Proline C-Power system for any serious programming (I have the Abacus C, but would never touch it again). I have been considering rewriting the graphics system in C for the C64, but without the new 256K expansion for the 64, it doesn't seem feasible. I do however prefer Doodle graphics software above most, but if Geos gets out a new version of geoPaint using multicolor mode (I can't stand blotchy graphics) I will probably use it more. I am not saying that I prefer the C64 to the IBM, I really like the Macintosh best, and GEOS comes close enough for me. Both worlds give you a lot of variety in software and as it looks, Commodore is not letting the 64 sit stagnant. What used to be a limited toy is now offering more memory, more types of input (mouse, lightpen, digitizer, ...), better programs with current state of the art user interfaces, etc. So in my humble opinion, one thing that IBM users will not be able to claim in the near future is that it is *just* a toy. The price tag on the C64c might not be in the thousands, but have you checked the prices of the IBM clones lately? They are now down to what the C64 first came out as back in 1981. If IBMers can say that the C64 is a toy because of its price ( < $1,000), then the IBM must be considered a toy also. If they call it a toy based on the amount of memory, or any other capability, they had better reread the above and try again. The graphics were fantastic in their day (320x200 with 16 colors/160x200 with 16 colors) but can the IBM say that theirs are much better (640x200 with 2 colors/ 320x200 with 4 colors (notice this is the CGA not EGA)). For the money the C64 is still a very good buy and I don't regret the purchase one bit (or is that one byte?). -- .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. Michael Temkin {inhp4,hplabs,psivax,ttidca}!csun!cs1!cbcscmst "Is there anybody out there?...Hello?..." .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.