🚀 go-pugleaf

Limit this gibberish to advocacy groups please. Then I *might* try to
set you straight. The world isn't as black&white as you seem to think.

Gregory David Thomas wrote:
> 
> The Mac is a nice machine. It has a nice LOOKING operating system. It is
> easy to use (good for secretaries). And it is part of the Micro$oft
> stratergy of global software domination. Without Mac they will be broken
> up.
> 
> Amiga is a better machine. That is why it has survived TWO bankrupt owners
> and no support for three years! There are still between half a million and
> two million Amiga users. Aminet is over 15GB of FREE quality software
> (23CD's). Our operating system is better (still some to learn from Mac
> though) than both Mac and Micro$loth.
> 
> Amiga's are going PPC too. Amiga will not stop, it will assimilate.
> 
> We can EMULATE Macintosh faster than a real one! Our hardware is better.
> PowerMac emulation will be here before the end of the year when QUAD G3
> Amiga mini computers are out!
> 

-- 
Eelke Blok, student Electrical Engineering, member of ATO
e.blok@student.utwente.nl, http://wwwedu.cs.utwente.nl/~genderen/blok
Amiga-page: http://wwwedu.cs.utwente.nl/~genderen/blok/amiga
"Our Lady of Blessed Acceleration, don't fail us now!" 
           -- Elwood Blues

Gregory David Thomas wrote:
> 
> The Mac is a nice machine. It has a nice LOOKING operating system. It is
> easy to use (good for secretaries). And it is part of the Micro$oft
> stratergy of global software domination. Without Mac they will be broken
> up.


Actually, a broken up Microsoft would probably emerge as even more
influential than the company is today. Don't delude yourself by thinking
that breaking Microsoft into smaller pieces will curb the company's
growth. Most likely, it would allow Microsoft to trim away a lot of fat
and organizational overhead, making it leaner and more focused than it
already is. I think the company's parts would emerge even more
competitve than it currently is. Aside from that, after a break up, the
DOJ's anti-trust power over the company would be essentially gone, as a
"break up" is the worst the DOJ can do. Much easier to curb the hydra
with one head than curbing it with six heads.

> 
> Amiga is a better machine. That is why it has survived TWO bankrupt owners
> and no support for three years! There are still between half a million and
> two million Amiga users. Aminet is over 15GB of FREE quality software
> (23CD's). Our operating system is better (still some to learn from Mac
> though) than both Mac and Micro$loth.
> 
> Amiga's are going PPC too. Amiga will not stop, it will assimilate.


Unless GW2K does something substantive with the Amiga, something very
soon and very dramatic, I think the Amiga has been assimilate-ed
already. A shame, too. Yet another great alternative that, in the right
hands at the right time, could have gone far.

> 
> We can EMULATE Macintosh faster than a real one! Our hardware is better.
> PowerMac emulation will be here before the end of the year when QUAD G3
> Amiga mini computers are out!

Sorry, but I can't see how a 68040 Amiga can emulate a 266Mhz G3 Mac
faster than the Mac can run. Doesn't hold water. Years ago, sure, a
68040 Amiga could emulate a 68040 Mac faster than the Mac could
run--that's true. But it hardly applies to today's PPC Mac. As for the
"Quad G3" Amiga mini computer you talk about--I'm a bit skeptical. While
it's relatively easy to throw together a basic quad G3 unit in hardware,
the trick is in doing the OS to make it useful--not to mention backwards
compatible, hopefully, with a lot of older Amiga software. That's the
trick, indeed. Don't hold your breath, is my advice...:)

Back on 07-Apr-98 01:14:26 Gregory David Thomas s9551343@minyos.its.rmit.EDU.AU
Wrote:

>We can EMULATE Macintosh faster than a real one! Our hardware is better.
>PowerMac emulation will be here before the end of the year when QUAD G3
>Amiga mini computers are out!

If they get released.  Remember the A/Box?

Can we take out c.s.a.hardware from this discussion?

>Greg:  Amiga user since 1989      | Member of Convergence International
>              and                 | The non-Wintel user-group
>Nootropic (smart drug) enthusiast | http://convergence.eu.org
            ^^^^^^^^^^
Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

P.S. I've been an Amiga user since 1985, I've also been a wintel user since
1982.

<TSB>
Greg Tallent     |Amiga2000/040/33mhz/3.1 26 megs ram,2 gig/OpalVision |
gwt @ gte.net    |Supra 28.8k, Lightwave 3.5, SCSI-Zip, Toshiba 3501 CD|

CONCLUSION: Where somebody got tired of thinking.

Jonathan Harker (Limeyville@spamtoNull.com) wrote:
: Actually, a broken up Microsoft would probably emerge as even more
: influential than the company is today. Don't delude yourself by thinking
: that breaking Microsoft into smaller pieces will curb the company's
: growth. Most likely, it would allow Microsoft to trim away a lot of fat
: and organizational overhead, making it leaner and more focused than it
: already is. I think the company's parts would emerge even more
: competitve than it currently is. Aside from that, after a break up, the
: DOJ's anti-trust power over the company would be essentially gone, as a
: "break up" is the worst the DOJ can do. Much easier to curb the hydra
: with one head than curbing it with six heads.

Microsoft doesn't have a lot of fat.  Microsoft is actually one
of the leanest machines because it leaves all the unprofitable or low margin
support and development activities to PC vendors and the channel.
Breaking up Microsoft would make it harder for the OS group to
leverage the application group and vice versa.  That would expose each
to more risk, and encourgage each to consider new partners and new
markets that might conflict with the goals of the other.

Besides breaking up Microsoft would mean there is no more Microsoft
as there is today, so how could it be more focussed.

In article <6gdtg9$ie3$4@gte1.gte.net>, "Greg Tallent" <gwt@gte.net> wrote:

> Back on 07-Apr-98 01:14:26 Gregory David Thomas
s9551343@minyos.its.rmit.EDU.AU
> Wrote:
> 
> >Nootropic (smart drug) enthusiast | http://convergence.eu.org
>             ^^^^^^^^^^
> Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.
> 
> P.S. I've been an Amiga user since 1985, I've also been a wintel user since
> 1982.

You used Windows in 1982?  Are you sure you're not on drugs?  :-)

-- 
Eric Bennet (www.pobox.com/~ericb)
Cornell University Biochemistry Department

Why do you THINK GW2k bought out Amiga?

Surley, I would have expected them to announce SOMETHING by now, but look
what happens if they did:

They offend Bill Gates
They offend Intel
Suddenly, GW2K has trouble getting their hands on Pentiums.
They get outcast by the PC press
They are stuck with a platform with almost NO application support, and no
reason for developers to adopt it over Windows.

They die

(Not neccessarily in that order)

Of course, if they sweep Amiga under the rug, that's one less "Emerging
Standard" for M$ and Intel to worry about.  I.E., they earn BROWNIE
POINTS.

Call me Pessimistic.


Though I don't know if that was the case with Compaq/Digital...(doubtful)

Gregory David Thomas wrote:

> The Mac is a nice machine. It has a nice LOOKING operating system. It is
> easy to use (good for secretaries). And it is part of the Micro$oft
> stratergy of global software domination. Without Mac they will be broken
> up.

Dear David Thomas.

You ended up in 1998. There's something wrong with your time-machine. Flying
saucers have not yet approached earth.

> Amiga is a better machine. That is why it has survived TWO bankrupt owners
> and no support for three years! There are still between half a million and
> two million Amiga users. Aminet is over 15GB of FREE quality software
> (23CD's). Our operating system is better (still some to learn from Mac
> though) than both Mac and Micro$loth.

On the Macintosh we've had, for several years, the following emulators
(forgive me, if I fergot some):
ZX81 emulator.
ZX Spectrum emulators.
Commodore 64 emulators.
Amiga emulator.
Sinclair QL emulator.
Atari ST/STE Emulators AND simulators.
PC emulators as both software and hardware. Many different companies offer these.

I was sad, when Atari were on their way down. They were beaten by the
PowerMac, and the Playstation. I just ask you.. Where do you get an Amiga
these days ?
-Try answering realistic. -From the local Amiga store ? -or from "Buy and
Sell" ?


> Amiga's are going PPC too. Amiga will not stop, it will assimilate.
I've heard that 2 years ago. I thought they had already a PPC.

> We can EMULATE Macintosh faster than a real one! Our hardware is better.
> PowerMac emulation will be here before the end of the year when QUAD G3
> Amiga mini computers are out!

Just for the notebook: Alot of Macintosh people read comp.sys.powerpc.* and comp.sys.mac.*

Greetings, and good luck.
-WoF-
I wish the best for the Amiga, though. It was a fine machine, but it'll be
very 
hard for it, to make it to the top.

Anil Thomas Maliyekkel wrote:

> 
> Besides breaking up Microsoft would mean there is no more Microsoft
> as there is today, so how could it be more focussed.


When you chop off one of the hydra's heads, two grow back in its place.

Jonathan Harker (Limeyville@spamtoNull.com) wrote:
: Anil Thomas Maliyekkel wrote:

: > 
: > Besides breaking up Microsoft would mean there is no more Microsoft
: > as there is today, so how could it be more focussed.


: When you chop off one of the hydra's heads, two grow back in its place.
But you wouldn't be chopping off its head, rather you would be slicing
the entire creature down its midline.  You may end up with two hydras
but they both have only one head, and they might just decide to turn
on each other.

Anil Thomas Maliyekkel wrote in message <6gdtpn$e01$2@joe.rice.edu>...
>Besides breaking up Microsoft would mean there is no more Microsoft
>as there is today, so how could it be more focussed.


From the point of view of the market, breaking up Microsoft would be a
disaster.

Imagine lots of small companies, all with their own views, eventually the
system would collapse, they would never agree on common APIs, standards,
etc.

This would leave ~90% of the world's computers without a company to
support/develop the applications they use. It would be equivalent to
Commodore going bust to us, but scaled up immensely.

Sadly, for the sake of the market, Microsoft HAS to stay in one piece. That
doesn't mean they can't be restricted though.

Chris Jones
cm.jones@ukonline.co.uk

P.S. Did this post ever make it onto USENET?

Back on 08-Apr-98 15:53:18 Anil Thomas Maliyekkel maliyekk@rice.edu Wrote:
>Jonathan Harker (Limeyville@spamtoNull.com) wrote:
>: Anil Thomas Maliyekkel wrote:

>: >
>: > Besides breaking up Microsoft would mean there is no more Microsoft
>: > as there is today, so how could it be more focussed.


>: When you chop off one of the hydra's heads, two grow back in its place.
>But you wouldn't be chopping off its head, rather you would be slicing
>the entire creature down its midline.  You may end up with two hydras
>but they both have only one head, and they might just decide to turn
>on each other.

If that doesn't work then drop a nuke on the sucker...

I'd like to see it grow a new head after that...

<TSB>
Greg Tallent     |Amiga2000/040/33mhz/3.1 26 megs ram,2 gig/OpalVision |
gwt @ gte.net    |Supra 28.8k, Lightwave 3.5, SCSI-Zip, Toshiba 3501 CD|

FOOT: A device for finding furniture in the dark.