Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!att!whuts!homxb!ho7cad!mgh
From: mgh@ho4cad.ATT.COM
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Atari-bashing (was Re: Looking for an Evangelist)
Summary: I beg to Differ
Message-ID: <428@ho7cad.ATT.COM>
Date: 1 Jan 89 00:50:04 GMT
References: <474@ur-cc.UUCP> <6847@spool.cs.wisc.edu> <12835@cup.portal.com> <3161@sugar.uu.net>
Sender: nuucp@ho7cad.ATT.COM
Lines: 25

> It's worse than teh C=64, because much of that machines limitations are the
> result of when and how it was produced. When the ST came out, there were at
> least two decent operating systems for the 68000 available: OS/9 and Tripos.
> Why they went with Gem-DOS I have no idea.
> 
Either you never owned a C-64 or have a very short memory. The C-64 is no
comparison to the ST. If anything it has a tough time being considered the 
equal to the Atari 8bit line.

> Programming on the ST is exactly like programming on the IBM-PC, except that
> there are fewer tools available, and more bugs to work around. After a couple
> of months of struggling the ST went into storage and I financed an Amiga.

I can only guess that you do not have any good software stores avaiable to you
that sell ST software. I find lots of programming utilities available for the
ST. Far more than I can find for my Amiga. My main source for utilities for the
Amiga is thru mail order and not local software houses.

As far as comparing the two machines op sys, I find GEM totally superior to
Workbench. It is much more friendly and easier to work with. As far as CLI
is concerned, I find third party ST stuff far better than either Amiga 1.2 or
1.3. I also get far more Amiga GURU's tha ST bombs. There is no way ever I would
mothball my ST, I am too happy with it and feel very comfortable using it.

					Matt Hetman