CompuServe Messages

Matt, you're outta my territory on this one. I've read plenty which seems to indicate that you can do more in video terms on an Amiga with 1/4 the hardware and cost it takes to do it on a Mac, but I don't have any experience with this so I just can't say. All I know is that I find the MAC's OS incredibly clumsy and slow (great for first-time users, but then you waste all that time wading through and waiting for all the icon software hard-wired into the OS to do something you could do in a snap with a half-line CLI command, once you've learned it), and the Amiga's wonderful because you can run a number of chores in the background (like disk copying, telecommunicating, etc.) and *still* have full availability of the computer for whatever else you want to use it for. Also, to continue to use the hackneyed auto analogies, comparing an A500 to a MACIIcx is like comparing a basic Honda Civic to a top-of-the-line Audi; compare Amiga's "Acura Legend" with Macintosh's "5000" for a more realistic comparison: an A2000 with a 68030 card, 4 megs of memory, an 80 meg 11ms access-time SCSI hard disk with a flickerfixer and multisync monitor will go *lots* further than Macintosh's best, and still at about a full half the cost. And there's lots of video software out there, all of which is a breeze to sync with a television's video signal due to the flexibility of handling interlace that comes built-in on the Amiga. But again, I'm talking theory here now; I don't need any of the stuff for what I do, I'm a text-based person — Thoreau living in a Long Island suburb of hardware, if you will. <grin> sw