Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!hplabs!hpda!hpcuhb!hpcilzb!daves From: daves@hpcilzb.HP.COM (Dave Scroggins) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Re: Amiga in cinema (again) (or why I bought the Amiga) Message-ID: <2030111@hpcilzb.HP.COM> Date: 20 Sep 88 00:28:25 GMT References: <505@nsscb.UUCP> Organization: HP Design Tech Center - Santa Clara, CA Lines: 41 Doug, >>In a article Ted johnson writes.... >>> The Mac has good printable fonts.. or words to the effect... >>This is true... if printout is important to you... the Mac is a machine to >>look at... However Gold disk produces Pro-page ONLY for the Amiga... which >>does color seperation. And to my knowledge, is the only such program on a >>Micro... I'm not Ted nor an Worm_food owner ;-) (Jeeze I hope I don't start anything with this IT'sJUST A JOKE!!!) I have an AMIGA. I love it. BUT Good quality printouts for graphics AND text (Fancy stuff like Gothic etc.) Can't be done well without getting some help such as someone else's fonts. I think the AMIGA should have these built in. It's kinda like buying a car, and inflatable tires cost extra. > >---------- Wayne, >> ... After 3 years only Amiga still knows how to do multitasking >> right! > >Maybe, maybe not. OS/9 has been around for a long time on coco's, Atari's, >pc's etc. Anyway well a lot of people always talk about multitasking, I >just don't think it is such a killer feature. Just look at all the Apple, >IBM sales. It seems that most people are willing to live without multitasking >or settle for a limited form of multitasking. So while multitasking is a >definite plus, I doult if it is the reason for people to buy the Amiga over >something else. This is true ONLY if they have not used multitasking machines to any extent. (in MY opinion) I find that when I have to go to a non multitasking, or multitasking windowless system things are painfully more tedious to do. I'm not sure which I like better about the AMIGA -- the graphics or the multitasking. Dave S.