#Amiga/PC software
2 messages in this thread
Paul,
"I was talking about comparing equivalent functions on equivalent CPUs, between
Windoze and the Amiga. Someone had said that a PC would beat an Amiga with an
equivalent CPU, and I said that this was not true, despite the small
multitasking penalty. No more."
OK. Fair enough. I, too, just tried to elaborate on that statement based on my
experience. I have found PC software to be a bit faster specifically because
DOS/Windows allows hogging the CPU.
As for all the rest of that stuff, maybe I should explain myself a little…
I have been an Amiga user for about seven years, and a PC user for about 10
years. I have always been impressed with the Amiga's OS. That is why I plowed
over three thousand dollars into my system despite the fact that its
applicability to my computer analyst job is zilch.
I have however become embittered by Commodore's world-class incompetence and
the Amiga's continuing invisibility. As I stated earlier, I wrote to
Transactor-Amiga stating the the Amiga's OS could do anything the PC's could do
at the time (about 1988 or 1989 as I recall). The only problem was that few
people were ASKING the Amiga to run corporate-level software. When C= folded
several years later, that situation had not changed. Real sad.
Just to ice the cake, I have in my office six PC's (one running NT), and an old
Amiga 2000 w/ 3 MB RAM. I can still easily impress my computer analyst
co-workers by SHOWING them the Amiga's features. And there lies the rub. To
really be appreciated, the Amiga must be SEEN. Reading about it just won't do.
In ten years, Commodore never figured a way out of this dilemma. Over that
entire period, I've endured "oohs" and "aahs" from PC users over demonstrations
on the PC that would be considered a sick joke on the Amiga. But they NEVER got
to SEE the Amiga!
Finally, the hardware manufacturers simply blew through many of the PC's
inherent limitations. What nobody considered, is that you CAN put a square peg
in a round hole IF YOU PUSH HARD ENOUGH. That is the philosophy behind PC
hardware development, and it has worked. Intel runs commercials showing home
computer users playing video GOLF on a 100 MIPS Pentium!
Take care, and I'm sorry if this thread got out of hand.
Tab Trepagnier
Cruising on AutoPilot from Beaumont, Texas
Tab-
That's the exact problem. The PC world has rammed a square peg through a round
hole, and there's no one around to do reconstructive surgery.
As to the relative speeds… You're running an A2000. I've had an A500, and
A1200, and an A3000. Right now, my A3000 has a WarpEngine 3040 and a RetinaZ3.
Not exactly the standard Amiga setup, I grant you, but then C= has been out of
the fight for years now, so my enhancements have just done a partial job of
filling in the gap. As far as processor power, my 40MHz 040 is somewhere in
the neighborhood of a 66MHz 486, and my video controller isn't particularly
exceptional either. But my souped up A3000 has the responsiveness of at least
a fast Pentium running OS/2 with a nice video controller. Sure, this doesn't
make up for the lack of software, of for other shortcomings, but I still think
that for a 1990 computer made by a now dead company, it's pretty darn good.
As to showing the Amiga to people, you're right, if we only had had a bigger
sales force on our side. Every single person I demoed my Amiga to–even my old
A500, back when–was blown away. These were PC types, mainframers, insurance
adjusters, MIS people, and so on.
Mr. Zombie