Xref: utzoo comp.lang.pascal:664 comp.sys.atari.st:8054 comp.sys.amiga:15454 Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!mupsy!liv-cs!sqrkl From: sqrkl@csvax.liv.ac.uk Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal,comp.sys.atari.st,comp.sys.amiga Subject: WARNING ! Atari ST owners look away now.... Message-ID: <463@csvax.liv.ac.uk> Date: 4 Mar 88 11:48:38 GMT References: <12045@brl-adm.ARPA> Lines: 62 Organisation: Computer Science CSVAX (VAX1), Liverpool University In article <12045@brl-adm.ARPA>, JEMCCABE%MTUS5.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU writes: > Oh come on now... This group is NOT for computer bashing. > If you are so insecure about your machine that you need to post > such crap, go write it on a bathroom wall or tattoo it on your > ass!!! And while you're at it, try to come up with some valid > arguments! OK, you asked for it ... 1) The Atari ST's OS has been ported from an IBM PC and has several features removed (no fonts for example) and has had several (hundred ?) bugs introduced (40-folder bug, can't rename a folder, can't rename a disk...). 2) The ST has the same sound chip as a Sinclair Spectrum Plus 2 - a prime example of Atari ST cost-cutting. 3) 99% of all available software is either a very poor imitation of Macintosh software (First Word Plus, Publishing Partner, Fleet Street Editor etc.) or just a poorly-written arcade game... 4) Virtually all the compilers I've seen (and I've seen plenty of them !) for the ST have been quite disgraceful. They either have numerous bugs, have a user-hostile interface (such as a cryptic command line) or are extremely slow. This just shows that ST software companies are in the market to make a quick buck off people foolish enough to buy an ST in the first place. 5) The official ST hard disk is appalling. A friend of mine was so disgruntled that he ripped out the Atari mechanism and replaced it with a faster hard disk mechanism. 6) As mentioned in comp.sys.atari.st, Atari have been caught red-handed shipping STs with faulty disk drives that don't sense the write-protect notch on a disk correctly...typical of such a cost-cutting company (price without the power - or safe disk drives !) > Calling the ST a "hunk of dross" is uncalled for. The Amiga > has nicer features than the ST, of course, but that doesn't > mean that anything less than an Amiga 3000 is trash. Using your own > logic, I could say that your Amiga and the Mac II and the > Vax and IBM mainframe machines are all "dross" because a better > computer exists. Grow up, and take a course or two in logic > before you waste our time with childish bullshit. I never said that the Amiga/VAX/Mac etc. were the BEST computers in the world - just that they're BETTER than the ST !! My philosophy is that if the machine is fast, has a good OS and a good (high level) language then it is GOOD. If it doesn't have these attributes then it is BAD (aka DROSS). From your rabid defensive posting, I can only assume that you are an Atari victim..oops, sorry...owner. This is why I've pointed out what a mistake Atari owners make when they part hard-earned money for what, in effect, is a very large door wedge. Richard K. Lloyd, *************************************************** Computer Science Dept., * JANET : SQRKL@UK.AC.LIV.CSVAX * Liverpool University, * UUCP : {backbone}!mcvax!ukc!mupsy!liv-cs!SQRKL * Merseyside, England, * ARPA : SQRKL%csvax.liv.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk * Great (?) Britain. *************************************************** "I have VERY strong opinions which are nothing whatsoever to do with the University of Liverpool, so blame ME if I bitch about useless IBM PC clones, even more redundant IBM mainframes and the terrible Atari ST..."