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