🚀 go-pugleaf

In <dmkasten.04gy@redorc.chi.il.us> dmkasten@redorc.chi.il.us (Bowie Poag) writes:


>What the industry is now faced with, is a machine that can run full-screen
>animations (read: NOT miniature window-sized movies) at a full 30 frames per
>second, using 262,144 colors simultaneously, which puts image quality
>indiscernable from full 24-bit graphics. Ontop of that, it has an '040 under
>the hood for some pretty beefy horsepower for whatever else interests you,
>everything from DTP to 3-D modeling..A bus architecture faster than the
>Macintosh Quadra's NuBus, and EISA, and slick NeXT'ish user interface, and a
>high-speed  multitasking OS driving the whole thing have been the trademarks of
>the Amiga line since day one.

 I guess I'd comment, big deal.  First, I don't care about animations, as I
don't use them at work or at home.
 
 While an '040 gives it some horsepower, and so does the bus architecture. 
There aren't enough applications available to make use of it.
 I guess if I need speed and power and want to run applications that require
that speed and power, I'd more likely go with a workstation from Sun or DEC.

 Further, the Amiga OS needs work.  It's falling behind the times, and
really does not take full advantage of the current computing power.  The
lack of memory protection and virtual memory is real noticeable.

>All the bragging aside, im curious as to how the MSDOS community views this
>machine. Whats your reaction to it? Being an ex-MSDOS user myself, I can
>identify with the pretty inaccurate assumption of "Amigas are game machines" 

 Being a former Amiga owner, I'd say "Amigas are game machines".  I had real
difficulty finding programming tools and applications programs.

 I should qualify that because the "Amiga is a video machine".  There is a
good deal of video and graphics software.  Unfortunately, that does not
interest me.

>response, primarrily because I once believed that statement was true..So for
>those of you who still think this way, ill ask you to refrain from commenting..
>the last thing I want to have here is another Amiga vs MSDOS flame war. What id
>primarrily like to hear is the reaction from those of you who consider
>yourselves "wise" as to having experience with platforms other than your own.

 I don't think it matters.  IMHO, the Amiga 1000 had something of an impact
on the computer world.  At that time most home users had C-64's, and so the
Amiga appealed to them at the time.  However, with the growing popularity
and sales of PC clones, along with the increased development that goes into
them, the Amiga is an interesting curiosity and will not make a serious
impact on the market.

>As an Amiga user myself, the A4000 (and more specifically, the third
>[Bgeneration Amiga chipset its built around) represent a fairly substantial
>leap forward in the state of our platform, finally giving the Mac / Unix and
>especially MSDOS communities something to think about..

 But I don't think it does.  In regards to PC/Mac/Unix technology in 1990,
perhaps.  But today you'll find a wide variety of system offerings which
offer similar features to the Amiga 4000, or exceed it's capabilities in
many other areas.

>Again, I should stress that this post is NOT intended to begin an MSDOS vs
>Amiga flamewar.. Id just like to hear some comments from the other side of the
>table. :)

 No flames intended.  Being a former Amiga advocate, I just want to say that
every once in a while Amiga owners need a "reality check".  Which usually
means a switch kick in the... :-)
-- 
sheldon@iastate.edu                Steve Sheldon
Project Vincent                    ICSS Resource Unit
SCO ODT, Arc/Info, Atlas GIS       2142 Agronomy Hall
                                   Iowa State University