Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!harvard!bunny!ci-dandelion!ulowell!page
From: page@ulowell.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.graphics
Subject: Re: PC2 Graphics beats Amiga
Message-ID: <1237@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu>
Date: Wed, 29-Apr-87 11:31:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: ulowell.1237
Posted: Wed Apr 29 11:31:59 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 1-May-87 01:48:08 EDT
References: <500@titan.camcon.co.uk>
Reply-To: page@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu (Bob Page)
Organization: University of Lowell
Lines: 19
Keywords: PC2 PS2 Amiga 82786
Xref: utgpu comp.sys.amiga:4065 comp.graphics:549

anc@camcon.co.uk (Adrian Cockcroft) wrote in article <500@titan.camcon.co.uk>:
>Summary vs  Amiga:   better to look at (no flicker, more colours)
>but much slower.

...and more expensive.

How easy is it to upgrade the low-end PS/2's to take advantage of
faster video processors, or better (you define it) video?  Can I get
NTSC/PAL/SECAM output cheaply?  How about chromakey, genlock or
other neat effects?

It seems that for generating stills/slides or using the machine as
a color terminal, the PS/2 wins over the Amiga, if you forget about
the price difference.  I can't imagine doing animation, imageing,
or video production work on a PS/2.

..Bob
-- 
Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept.   page@ulowell.{uucp,edu,csnet}