Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!pacbell!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mandrill!gatech!ncsuvx!ece-csc!rss
From: rss@ece-csc.UUCP (ML)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: A500 vs. A2000
Message-ID: <3677@ece-csc.UUCP>
Date: 26 Jun 88 22:52:10 GMT
References: <3153@crash.cts.com>
Reply-To: rss@ece-csc.UUCP (ML)
Organization: the loony bin
Lines: 33

In a previous article gregb15@pro-charlotte.cts.com (Greg Beckham) wrote:
>
> I was just talking to a friend about the A500 and the A2000... and he said
>that the 2000 had some of the ports flipped or switched, some software was
>incompatible, and the system was buggy.... this is very disheartening to me
>because I was planning on buying an A2000. Are these alegations true? 
> 

Perhaps in the most literal sense they're true, but I would say that these
changes were for the better, not the worse.

    Ports flipped/switched:     The gender of the serial and parallel
         connectors are reversed now, to conform more with common usage
         elsewhere (as in PC-land).  Means it's easier to buy common
         cables.  Buy a $7 gender-bender if you've got 1000 compatible
         cables.

    Incompatible software:   So far, all the incompatible stuff I've seen
         was just written poorly and broke because the 2000 has 1 Meg
         memory whereas the 1000 only had 512K (Max).  Before expanded
         memory became commonplace, developers sometimes wrote programs
         without testing them on expanded memory systems, and so didn't
         find the problems.

    System buggy?  News to me.  My 2000 works as well as my 1000 ever did.
    And I sure never found an acceptable way of adding 2Meg memory + hard
    drive to my 1000 (without shelling out megabucks).

Yeah, I still wish I could slide my keyboard under my machine when I'm
not using it :-) but otherwise I'm perfectly happy with my 2000.

             Mark Lanzo
        ...mcnc!ece-csc!rss