Path: utzoo!edhnic!becker!root
From: root@becker.UUCP (Root Boy)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Amiga or PC-AT ?
Message-ID: <115@becker.UUCP>
Date: 5 Aug 88 09:47:48 GMT
References: <1820006@hpuamsa.UUCP>
Reply-To: root@becker.UUCP (Root Boy)
Organization: G. T. S., Toronto, Ontario
Lines: 33

In article <1820006@hpuamsa.UUCP> marco@hpuamsa.UUCP (Marco Lesmeister) writes:
>Hello from Holland,
> [...]
>So, what should I do, should I buy a cheap AT with an expensive 
>monitor and an expensive graphics card (which one should I buy?), or
>should I buy an amiga with the disadvantage that I can't expand the
>graphics capabillities.
>
>So to all you PC and amiga fans out there, I ask you which solution
>is better?
>
>Greetings,
>
>Marco Lesmeister, HP Holland.

Perhaps you should go with the amiga. Look at the new 2500AT which has
a 68020/68881 card and a 80286 bridge-card. Also Commodore will (someday
soon they say) open up the graphics resolution/# of colors...

The software and the hardware base for graphics & sound are far advanced
from AT-based systems, plus the AT bus in the amiga gives access to a
great deal of hardware which is visible thru the bridge-card interface to
the amiga, and vice-versa.

I imagine lots of discussion will flow from your query - I hope it is
helpful to your decision...

Cheers,
-- 
Bruce Becker        Toronto, Ont.
UUCP: ...!lsuc!becker!bdb, ...!lsuc!humvax!becker, ...!ncrcan!ziebmef!becker
BitNet:	BECKER@HUMBER.BITNET
"Money is the root of all money..."