Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!mcnc!gatech!gitpyr!byron
From: byron@gitpyr.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: AMIGA 2000 and IBM compatability
Message-ID: <3382@gitpyr.gatech.EDU>
Date: Fri, 3-Apr-87 16:37:06 EST
Article-I.D.: gitpyr.3382
Posted: Fri Apr  3 16:37:06 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 5-Apr-87 08:11:49 EST
References: <2845@ecsvax.UUCP> <1460@cadovax.UUCP>
Reply-To: byron@gitpyr.UUCP (Byron A Jeff)
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Lines: 22

In article <1460@cadovax.UUCP> keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes:
>I figure it means the Amiga 3000 will have to concentrate more on
>better graphics, better software, better you-name-it, rather than
>wasting time on me-too-ism.
>

What Amiga 3000? Most of the Amiga info I have is from reading this newsgroup.
I got the impression when the 2000 was introduced sans the 68020/68881,
better graphics etc. that the 3000/Ranger/Vastly better technology type machine 
idea was trashed (in my opinion). The dismantling of the original CA group
confirmed this (again in my opinion). So I have no expectation of CA to bring
out a new machine. They've put all their eggs into the 2000/IBM compatability
basket at least for the time being. Is there any evidence to the contrary?

I don't have a machine right now (Poor college student). But I was really
impressed with the Amiga line and was anxiously awaiting the introduction
of 68020 box with Amiga's awesome arch. But I feel I'll be waiting much
longer than I anticipated.
-- 
                                                Byron Jeff
E-mail address: 
...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!byron