#Workbench 2.0
Mike,
Your welcome, and I hope you caught the message written by my son.
RE: "When you say that you "lump the Amiga with the Atari", I think that is
how a lot of people feel (perhaps that is the fault of Commodore marketing)
… but the Amiga is a _very_ different machine to the Atari."
I'm sure you are correct, Mike, and James, my son, says the same thing
(James roots are in Atari, and he still has a powerful ST set-up). Just
bear in mind that there are surely items that you unwittingly lump just as
I do. If the Mac did not so fully satisfy my computer needs, either the
NeXT or the Amiga would be my next check-it-out consideration.
RE: "the Amiga is a true multi-tasking computer and has very powerful
graphics"
James has never wowed me with on-screen Amiga graphics, but he has
impressed me with some of his print-outs.
Multi-tasking remains a debatable issue. Some knowledgeable folks I know
who have played with your preemptive multi-tasking _and_ the Macintosh
cooperative musti-tasking say they both have some advantages over the
other, but preemptive is the overall best. James seems to think many Amiga
folks are led to believe Macs can not truly multi-task. A demonstration is
easy to set up <g>.
Of course, many purists hold that __TRUUUURE__ multi-tasking requires two
or more central processors, that what the Amiga and Mac does is merely
time-sharing, rather than _real_ multi-tasking. Can't speak for the Amiga,
but while the central processor is aware, some things the Mac does is done
by other onboard processors. Guess that's still not what the purists mean,
but I don't really care. Someday, I think, I will have a personal computer
that uses three top level central processors.
RE: "Yet the Amiga is finding a popular place within the audio/video world"
[continued in the reply]