Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site topaz.RUTGERS.EDU Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!columbia!topaz!dan From: dan@BBN-LABS-B.ARPA Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga Subject: Re: amiga & st Message-ID: <3702@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> Date: Fri, 20-Sep-85 02:38:47 EDT Article-I.D.: topaz.3702 Posted: Fri Sep 20 02:38:47 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 22-Sep-85 15:49:35 EDT Sender: daemon@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 53 From: dan@BBN-LABS-B.ARPA Thanks for your corrections to my chart. I still think I'm right about Atari's comparing a color Amiga to a monochrome ST, but the Amiga's price has been fluctuating so much recently that the retailer I spoke to may have been wrong. The price Atari quoted is definitely within a hundred dollars of what it costs to get an Amiga with color monitor. > The point of this ad is not which machine is techically better (Commodore > is Clearly a better machine), but whether the Commodore is at least TWICE AS > GOOD, and whether you want to pay that much. You're right, of course. I think the answer depends on the application; specifically, if you care a lot about color or sound, and all that that implies, the Amiga is probably worth it. If your main need is B&W, for text processing, telecommunications, and program development, then the ST is clearly the better buy. Also, given that neither machine may last very long and that there may never be a lot of software for either one, if you buy an ST you're risking a lot less money. I should know--I just bought one! > It is interesting that they > didn't compare themselves to the ... APPLE ][, and ... VT100. Yes, it is. Why would anyone want to buy an Apple ][ now? Software, of course. Gee, I wonder how hard it would be to do a 6502 emulator for the ST... It could probably run almost as fast as the real thing. That would sink the Apple ][ completely. And an ST plus the VT100 emulator ($125) is a lot cheaper than a VT100! The ability to do local editing at this price (the emulator includes Kermit and MODEM7 transfer protocols) ought to make every software company in the world run out and buy them to relieve their overloaded VAXes. > My guess is that Atari is > trying to encourage more third party developement, but they don't seem > to realise that anyone crazy enough to buy a machine less than a month > after release is probably a "developer". Mostly I agree. But this machine is so cheap, and has such a nice monochrome display, that if you were hesitating about buying a machine just for word processing or using as a terminal this would probably be your choice. Sure, Express is a toy by Mince standards, but it's a lot better than a typewriter. I think Atari really is encouraging third-party development, especially compared to Commodore. To get the Amiga's program development package you have to be certified as a real, bona-fide developer who's going to help make them rich. To get the Atari program development package all you have to supply (in addition to $300) is the serial number of your machine. My guess is that they're afraid that the people who bought it to run Express would find 4000 pages of documentation and a user-hostile development environment much too intimidating. (Why don't we rename this list info-amiga-st?) Dan Franklin