🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <46c15364.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>, rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer) writes:
> In article <46bcb82f.14a1f@force.UUCP> covertr@force.UUCP (Richard E. Covert) writes:
> [ "Why buy a TT/P?" ]
> >What has happened to Atari Corp?? why can't they design and produce a new
> >machine as nice as the ST was back in 1985?? The ST beat other computers
> >hands down in 1985. I wish the TT could do the same in 1990!!
> 
>     Richard, I humbly suggest that what you seem to want, and what I myself
>     wouldn't mind having, is an ST emulator for the Amiga.  Think about it.
>     You want plug-in CPU upgrades (Amiga can do).  You want multitasking
>     (Amiga can do).  You want slots & a more standard bus (A2000 can do;
>     didn't C= design the A2000 with some slots that accept PC cards?).  You
>     want better graphics (well, C= continues to improve their graphics chips,
>     and with an A2000 you can buy a PC Targa board if you need something
>     better).  Outline screen fonts?  Well, I don't know of any box in the
>     general ST/Amiga/Mac price-range that does that (though I'm sure I'll
>     be "gently corrected" if I'm wrong ;-).
> 
>     As far as I can tell from your many previous postings, the only real
>     reason you have (or that any of us have, probably) for wanting to stick
>     with an Atari-brand machine is the (possibly substantial) investment
>     you've made in software.
> 
> --
> >>"Aaiiyeeee!  Death from above!"<< | Steve Rehrauer, rehrauer@apollo.hp.com
>    "Flee, lest we be trod upon!"    | The Apollo Computer Division of H.P.


Actually, the MAIN reason that I still like my STs (yes, I have two and I still
use both of them) is that the GEM interface is still better than anything that
I can buy for an IBM PC clone.

I just bought the current issue of the (US) magazine COMPUTER LANGUAGE, November
1989. It dealt with the various multitasking OSes and windowing packages 
available for the IBM PCs. and it was a very discouraging magazine. It appears
that PCs (even 80386 and 80486) are still stumbling around the 640K barrier
imposed by the original IBM PC/XT. So, there are few good Graphical User
Interfaces available for the IBM PCs. Oh, there are lots of windowing (single
tasking, single user) packages,but they are are unique and require learning
their library functions. There is NO standard GUI Desktop for IBM PCs 
similiar to the Mac or GEM.

Now, I need to research the availability of UNIX/X Windows for IBM PCs.
COMPUTER LANGAUGE had verry little to say about UNIX; it was strictly MS DOS.
If UNIX with X windows are becoming more popular then I will seriously
consider buying an IBM PC clone.

I really enjoy the GEM interface. I am writing some programs now with GEM
interfaces to them. My biggest problem right now is that I have an early,
buggy, version of HiSoft's WERCS (distributed by Michtron in the US). WERCS
keeps trashing my HRD file once I develope a BIG RSC file. I have asked 
Michtron on GEnie (well just last night) about how to upgrade WERCS. I was
informed that there is a newer version of WERCS which doesn't crash. My WERCS
is version 1.68 Dated October 28 1988.

Anyway, what I want in a computer is SPEED and a Good User Interface. What I
expect from a Computer Maker is variety and CHOICE and later Support. And that
is was is lacking from Atari.

Rich Covert