CompuServe Messages

Hmm… I'll probably get hate messages for this, but here goes… Video quality — side by side, I like the ST's picture better than the Amiga's. Personal opinion here — things like this are subjective. The ST monochrome is superb, and the color monitor seems to have less of an inter-scanline gap (probably just the monitor). Like I said, personal viewpoint and not gospel. The Amiga IS a great game machine (and not just that, of course). The chip set makes it perfectly suited for games, while the ST is not. I've said this from day 1. The chip set was designed by the same person, and IS a logical extension of the work Jay did on the Atari 400/800. That doesn't mean the 8-bit Ataris are as powerful as the Amiga (far from it) but the Amiga would have been a perfect Atari machine (i.e. 800's big brother) because the concept is similar but far more advanced. I'm not an engineer, so I can't comment on the speed aspects. The Amiga will, of course, be faster in blitter ops — the ST will be faster in raw processing. I have been told by top-notch Amiga developers that certain graphics modes do take a chunk out of processing time available to the 68K. All I know is what I've been told. I don't want to get in a big argument here about all this, but based on what I know and have been told, Tramiel's comments don't seem that far out of line. I might question the speed stuff if I knew the EXACT data on what the various graphics modes do to the 68K. Some of the things he said could be based on personal opinion, which no one can quantify. OK, folks, open fire. I just hope this doesn't get out of hand. -Tom