🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1iojg0INNjna@life.ai.mit.edu> dmb@case.ai.mit.edu (David Baggett) writes:

>In article <1iobpvINN79q@golem.wcc.govt.nz> wells_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>>> OS/2 2.x?  NeXTstep '486 (when it comes out)?
>>
>>And what are the minimum system requirements for that!?  How much RAM
>>does it Need!?

>A losing argument.  No one complains that the ST's TOS requires more
>than 4K of RAM, but in 1978 it would have been a real problem.
>Likewise, one or two megs is no big deal now that SIMM prices are so
>low.  You will sound sillier with every passing month.

>>And doesn't NEED a Hard Drive to run!!  

>Big deal.  Get a hard drive anyway.  They're cheap.

>>OS/2 and windows are HUGE

>Huge by 1985 (ST creation date) standards, maybe.  Not by "real OS"
>standards.  You really have to try using a real OS sometime before you
>pass judgement on these things.

>>and VERY expensive

>That's a GOOD one.  $50 is *real* tough to manage for an OS, yeah.

Yes, that's for the software! But what is the cost for the hardware
requirements? The sodtware/hardware priceratio has been decreasing steadily
for the last years for DOS-machines (IBM-clones), but it's still a bit to high
for me or for the general user IMHO.

>>the ST's operating system
>>comes built in - you don't have to pay for it!

>Right, and consequently you have to pay $75 to upgrade the OS.  That
>is, every 3 years when they fix the pending 100 bugs in TOS.

Come on now! Don't tell me there is no bugs in Windows or OS/2? I have used
Windows 3.1, and what is bugging me is when the program-manager crashes
everything else crashes! You are left with a nice, clean desktop with no
icons or windows! Great... As for OS/2 which I have used very little, it has
some bugs too, but is more stable than Windows in my experience. MS/DOS I won't
even discuss.. :)

>>MS-Doze is the standard on IBM clones, and it is VERY under-productive!

>What, exactly, do you DO with your ST that would be so much more
>unproductively done on a PC?  And in terms of calls, TOS is more
>minimal than DOS is.  And there IS no CLI for the ST, as far as Atari
>is concerned.  Only the (snicker) GEM desktop.

Oh, so the GEM desktop is no good as GUI you mean? I find it very nice myself.
It's not cluttered with loads of strange stuff that doesn't belong there,
and btw the filemanager under windows is a joke. I haven't come across anything
as effective and easy to use as the "filemanager" that GEM have. BUT: GEM is
a bit outdated yes, but it's a perfectly good GUI as any.

>Dave Baggett
>--
>dmb@ai.mit.edu           MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory                  
/Hasse
-- 
/     email: hasse@solace.hsh.se, irc: Knightman, mud: Kniggit@VikingMud      \
\     snail-mail: Hans Holmberg, Sommarvagen 5, 854 67 Sundsvall, Sweden      /
/                  phone: +46 60 569169, fax: +46 60 569266                   \
\          "In a crazy world a sane person would appear to be crazy."         /