CompuServe Thread

#Educate me, Please!

3 messages in this thread
#90879From: Chris AntleyMar 3, 1993 9:21 AM
Rest assured that before giving anyone any investment advise on a particular security, a thorough research process is undertaken. The first step in that process is to gather enough basic information to decide whether further research is necessary, and since the PC Magazines, PC Worlds, etc. that I subscribe to do not follow Amiga's, I thought the Forum would be a good starting ground. With the information I have gathered from your response (much thanks) and others, I now have enough of a foundation to decide to continue my research. From here my staff and I will spend many hours gathering fundamental information on the product and corporation as a whole, and then a "black box" (computer aided statistical analysis) approach will be used to analyze the underlying security. I don't mean to slap you in the face, but I want to make sure that you understand that we as a profession do not act on whims when acting as good faith fiduciaries for the investing public. (ALTHOUGH, take a group of 20 Wall Street computer stock analysts and ask them what the difference is between a Mac and a PC is and you will probably receive 10 wrong answers). P.S. Back on the subject of the Amiga (1) how does its performance compare to the Mac, (2) is it 100% compatible with MAC software, and (3) what is the price range? THANKS, CHRIS ANTLEY
#91165From: Greg SeelyMar 5, 1993 8:26 PM
Answers to you questions. 1. WHich Amiga to which Mac? The Amiga is less expensive than a Mac. 2. The Amiga 0% compatable with Mac software. Their are products that will let you run mac and IBM pc software. 3. From $300 to $5000 or so. If you add big Drives.
#91520From: Robert MarsanyiMar 8, 1993 10:00 PM
A quick take on your questions: 1) Performance relative to a Mac: when comparing models with similar CPUs, the Amiga is significantly faster from a user's perspective. I think this is probably attributable to the operating system, and to the fact that the CPU is not responsible for performing all the operations for the machine. I don't have actual specs to hand, though, sorry. 2) 100% Mac compatible: the stock Amiga is not Mac-compatible at all. With the addition of one of two commercially available Mac emulation hardware/ software products, the Amiga is capable of running _most_ Mac applications, including those that expect Mac-specific hardware (high-speed serial ports, for example). Everything I've wanted to run from the Mac world has run on the Amax II emulator, but I can't attest to 100% compatibility. 3) Prices: with the recent lowering of Mac prices and introduction of new Macs, prices comparisons seem to me to be slanted in favor of Apple. At the low end, the '030 Macs run for about the same price as the new '020 Amiga 1200. The Amiga 2000/3000/4000 are expandable, in the same way as the Mac II line; from the limited looking about I've done, it seems that the low-end Macs are limited to one or two Processor Direct Slots (not Nubus), while expandable Amigas offer many more. So: Mac beats Amiga on CPU for the money, Amiga beats Mac on expandability. IMHO, the Amiga is a better machine to write software on. I have used one for music composition and performance for the better part of five years now, and the projects I've done with the Mac have led me to this conclusion. The Mac, however, is a better machine to use, so long as the application you're inter- ested in is already written. –rbt