#IBM & Apple Bed Partners
59 messages in this thread
[ continuation ]
the next two to three years.
CONTACT: Paul Bergevin of IBM, 914-765-6630; or Barbara Krause of Apple
Computer, 408-974-3719; or Ken Phillips of Motorola, 602-952-3637
—————————————————————————That's
it! I'm curious to know what CBM, the developers, and you think about this
odd couple. That should keep a message thread going for awhile 8^)
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
John,
IBM has seen their share of MS-DOS going down the tubes for years
now. They see Windows outselling OS/2. They see SVR4 becomming the
standard version of UNIX with IBM's AIX (and the OSF) becomming a
"curiosity". They see graphic oriented machines gaining more and more
share of the marketplace.
In other words, they see their only chance to remain dominant in
the computer field is to join forces with one of their competitors to
hopefully stem the loss of business.
How does that play with CBM and the Amiga?
Well..the Amiga has never been much competition for MS-DOS
machines, so at this point in time…the IBM/Apple hookup should have
little, if any, effect on Amiga sales. As to 3000UX sales….Commodore
wisely went with AT&T and now has SVR4 on the market today. SVR4 appears
(to me) to be the clear winner of the 'who's UNIX is to be the future
standard?' competition…thus there should be little, if any, effect on
Amiga UNIX machines.
In other words…I see very little in that announcement to impact
the Amiga. In fact…the IBM/Apple deal *may* slow down their individual
efforts…and allow the Amiga to gain sales IF the Amiga continues to move
forward in the near future.
Don
So if I buy your vision of the Apple/IBM alliance, I should take a large
home equity loan on my home and buy Commodore stock, right? :=)
Apple and IBM have a number of reason to ally themselves. Apple gets
instant respect in "IBM shops" and IBM RISC technology, IBM gets access to
a user interface they can use across their entire (or nearly entire)
computer line. Both will work towards increased multimedia performance as
they see money there. That has to spell trouble for Commodore, who's bet
the Amiga ranch on multimedia, in the future.
This leaves UNIX and CDTV as revenue sources for the company. CDTV has
not proved that there is even a market for the product and, if there is,
they will have to share it with CD-I in the future. That leave UNIX to
carry Commodore. UNIX appears to be a very crowded market and, therefore,
a tough sell.
Over the flight pattern… – via Whap!
Tony,
No one is in a position to "win" the marketplace of the future.
Those that deal in such things say that clearly the future lies in
open platforms. That is…those where you're not tied to any one
manufacturer or a proprietary operating system. The user should be able to
"mix and match" pieces from multiple vendors pretty much at will.
Because platforms will become somewhat standardized…that
is…based on industry standards such as UNIX for the OS and SCSI for
pehripherials then anyone that meets those standards with a quality machine
at a reasonable price has a chance of getting a piece of the pie. Those
that hit the market first have a greater chance than those that hit the
market late in the game.
At this point in time, neither IBM nor Apple have such a machine.
They do have machines that are based on off-shoot versions of UNIX but so
far…the public hasn't accepted those versions in great numbers.
The public at large has accepted UNIX in either the BSD or SVR3
versions and with SVR4 (which is what the 3000UX uses) being a merger of
those two (and backed by the biggest "guns" in the UNIX world)…the the
likelyhood of SVR4 becomming the defacto standard UNIX (much as MS-DOS was
the defacto standard personal computer OS) is quite good.
Obviously a major part of a machine's success, besides the above,
is how it's marketed. Commodore hasn't been known for great marketing in
the past. You could have the greatest thing since sliced bread…but if no
one knows about it.. so what.
Commodore has the machine, needs to market it properly…and it
needs to shed it's 'game machine company' image. I'm not so sure how well
they'll be able to do that.
In other words…it's entirely up to Commodore how well they
succeed in the future. The so called Apple/IBM "merger" should have little
effect on the Amiga, but Commodore itself (marketing and image) will have a
major effect.
Don
Don,
I agree with your assesment 100%. Infact, I'll go a step further and
suggest that the joint venture (and that's what it is, not a merger) if it
accomplishes anything, will succeed in standardizing some formats and/or
platforms. OTOH, joint ventures between competing companies that have
opposite approaches to marketing have, on occaision, resulted in a lot of
chaos that actually produced nothing (RUBBERMAID-ALLIBERT).
– Whapping from the North Coast Michael
I agree with much of what you said, but…
Certainly, Apple and IBM are out to carve up the market amongst
themselves and those who they deem fit to license their technology. While
I understand your considerable UNIX experience, we are talking about two
different markets. UNIX in its present incarnation (and I'm talking a bit
from ignorance here as I have never tried UNIX; my office machines for the
most part don't have the horsepower to run it) will not significantly
penetrate the small business, due to its complexity and hardware/software
requirements. No doubt there is a significant installed base of UNIX
machines, but there is a difference between that and general acceptance in
the business community, and THERE is my disagreement with your position.
Even in medium sized companies and larger, UNIX is not as generally
accepted as PCs, IMHO.
Commodore is apparently doing the right things in its approach to
porting UNIX. But if its other markets dry up in a few years due to
competition from IBM/Apple, will UNIX alone be enough to carry them? Maybe,
but it's certainly not a given.
Over the flight pattern… – via Whap!
Tony,
UNIX is the fastest growing OS in the world. SVR4 is much simpler
from the user's standpoint…in particular with the various GUI's now
available.
I believe that over the next few years…you'll see more and more
business applications ported over to UNIX (Word Perfect, dBase and Lotus to
name a few are already there) and with that…more and more businesses
moving onto UNIX platforms.
This is particularly true (in my opinion) for medium and large size
businesses, less so for small businesses where there's only one or two
people using computers at any one time.
Don
It's curious to note that in the entire news announcement that the M word
was never mentioned. I wonder if this means that Microsoft has been told
"There's the door–don't let it hit you in the A** on the way out." 8^) It
would probably be the best thing to happen to IBM in years. I've never
cared much for Microsoft because of their arrogance and attitude to their
customers. To see them finally get the boot doesn't hurt my feelings 8^)
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
John – there's little doubt that Apple and IBM's dislike towards Microsoft
(for messing around with both of them) is a big reason they got together.
When you take the Apple/IBM announcement along with Ford's decision to use
Motorola cpus, it feels kind of like the second coming… and Microsoft and
Intel are finally going to get sent to, well you know where, for their sins
🙂
Kev
Well MS-DOS was definitly a sin upon the PC world. Maybe IBM & Apple should
get together and create 10 commandments for their new OS, such as:
Thou shall not create 640K barriers Thou shall not use paged memory Thou
shall use true multitasking
etc. 8^)
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
just, thou shalt use non segmented processors, should make up for a
multitude of sins. :^)
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Eh, so Ford wants to start using Motorola stuff now, too. Great! Must be
that 68332 – one neat controller chip.
73, Kelly
Yah, that's what I thought at first (Ford and 68332 or similar). But
others are saying that Motorola will be making a custom version of the
88000 for the cars, instead. Sounds wild!
Custom 88000 – wow!
The car computer will have more horsepower than some of the smaller cars
out there. Hey, they may have to put in a bigger engine to get the power
to drive the computer!
Yeah, can't you hear it now?
My car has more MIPS horsepower than YOUR car does! Yuk yuk. 🙂
John,
Everything I've been reading in the trade papers (when I read them)
says that IBM and MicroSoft are now moving in different directions.
MicroSoft is moving towards Windows in a big way…and apparently no longer
working on OS/2. IBM is not the least interested in Windows…is upset
with MicroSoft over OS/2 v1 and working on OS/2 v2 themselves for the most
part.
I obviously can't confirm any of this…but yes indeed…it would
appear that IBM and MicroSoft have parted ways.
Don
Well I read that Microsoft and IBM were miffed at each other about OS/2 and
Windows. This was a few months ago, but they seemed to have made up shortly
after. But now it looks like they are really breaking up. Good news for the
IBM world, bad news for Microsoft.
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
I think it's a "so what". It'll take years for anything to reach the
market; and the Amiga market doesn't seem to intersect with either Apple's
or IBM's market.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
But the Amiga market will have to eventually intersect Apple and IBM's
market if Commodore is ever to increase Amiga sales in the US. Certainly
you would not argue that Amiga sales (not upgrade sales) has not been good.
In Connecticut, Amiga is a non-issue, as there are only three dealers I
know of in the whole state, and two of them are not volume dealers. In
comparison, there are hundreds of IBM and compatible dealers. Even if a
customer would best be served by buying an Amiga, chances are (s)he'll
never see one.
Amiga's market will intersect IBM and Apple's principally because IBM and
Apple want to become a competent force in multimedia.
Over the flight pattern… – via Whap!
No, I don't think so, myself.
The Amiga is a better hardware platform, with a better OS, and one of the
most interesting combinations of built-in capabilities of anything out
there.
That attracts "a certain sort".
I don't think that now, or anytime in the past, or for that matter, anytime
in the future, "multimedia" is, was or will be a significant factor in the
sales of the Amiga. CDTV, maybe – if it sells at all.
I personally think that all the hullaballo about multimedia, and video
compatibility, are the work of marketers who just don't have anything else
they can talk about. Not that these things aren't there – they are, and to
those who need them, the Amiga offers good price/$, but I don't think they
are significant in the sales of the machine.
I don't believe that the Amiga sells because of anything in these issues…
I think it sells because Amiga users are evangelical, and they have some
really good facts that they can use to preach.
I think CBM will continue to totally (expletive deleted) the marketing of
the machine, and that it will die a slow death as a result, simply because
it's getting old, and it's advantages are being "caught up to". But it'll
be a slow death, and there will be several years yet before it goes.
But I don't think that anything IBM and/or Apple do will either hasten or
retard this process. Motorola and InTel, those are the people that are
killing the machine by making things we don't get to use because there is
no "new" AMiga. No gfx, no signal processing, no laptops, no CMOS chipsets
for us, and of course the true deathnell, CBM themselves.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Ben–
Having a bad, are we?
I don't know,… last night my cable tv went on the fritz while I was
watching the 'program guide' channel… you know, where they show you
what's on each channel… the weekend late night person at the studio must
have fallen asleep at the switch… and as I stared glassy eyed at this
video screen that made no sense, (text across the lower half, a window in
the upper right and another in the upper left, both showing realtime video
clips of stupid movies), I suddenly noticed a border appear around the
screen… a familiar border… a workbench 1.3 border!
Needless to say, I elbowed my wife in the head to wake her (it was about
1:30am), 'cause I knew she'd want to see this (boy was I wrong, go figure).
CableVision is one of the 10 largest cable service companies in the US. I
don't think that their decision to use Amigas was based on some individual
Amiga enthusiast. And I doubt that Disneyland uses Amigas to control much
of their computer controlled animatronics shows just because someone there
'likes' the Amiga. MultiMedia IS taking hold in industry. Corporate types
like it. The Amiga as a MulitiMedia machine is not just hype… look at
the reviews the Amiga/Toaster is getting in NON Amiga magazines…
CBM didn't start a MultiMedia marketing campaign until 3rd party vendors
(much like BBS) started exploiting the capabilities of the machine. As
usual, it's you guys that are driving the Amiga marketplace, not CBM.
In anycase, IMHO, MultiMedia and VIDEO are real for the Amiga, and ARE
selling machines. (I just sold a GVP3001 kit to a guy in CA doing TV
commercials… he's putting a Toaster system together).
(sorry, didn't mean to get carried away)
– Whapping from the North Coast Michael
I never said the machine can't "do" multimedia, nor video. I just don't
think it's a major factor in the sales of the machine – I think that is
wishful thinking. It is "a" factor, yes.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
We've got them at NBC.
…Dave
C. Dave–
What is NBC doing with them?
Jonathan
– via Whap!
What is NBC doing with what?
…Dave
Uh, Amigas and Toasters..
–> "having a bad, are we?"
Nope. :^)
I've felt this way all along – nothing new has happened to make me feel
more, or less so.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Sure, video work sells some Amigas. And if you meant the reputation itself
sells some more computers, that may be marginally true.
What I think Ben's saying is that "multimedia" and "video" are not what
_most_ Amiga sales are about. Myself, I'd guess that less than a few
percent of machines are used for those purposes. It's like talking about
using a computer to balance your checking account… very very few people
actually do that 🙂
I do agree with you that it was the 3td parties which made Amiga a video
machine. Heck, CBM didn't even call it "a multimedia computer" in their
press releases until last year.
That is what I was saying…. but I was getting doubtful that I was being
understood. :^)
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Heck, I thought you were very clear in your message 🙂
Kevin:
One of the the things we (those of us that have been using the Amiga for
years) have complained about is CBM's dismal marketing of the Amiga to the
business community. Now, CBM has latched on to two areas where the Amiga
excels (multimedia/video & UNIX). Business folk were not impressed with
nor ever really understood multitasking… video & unix, however, they
understand.
I'm sure that most Amiga's being sold right now are not ebing sold on the
strength of video… in fact, most Amiga's at this time, are being sold to
Amiga owners (ala POWER-UP). However, I would bet that nearly all Amiga's
being purchased now, by businesses, ARE being purchased for either
video-multimedia work, or as unix workstations. And that signals the first
time in the Amiga's history, that business has found a reason to evaluate
the Amiga and choose it for its superiority, and, the first time that CBM
has had any success placing the Amiga in the business environment.
As a home computer, the Amiga is purchased by enthusiasts… but as a
business machine, the Amiga is now a multi-media/video machine.
– Whapping from the North Coast Michael
And in Connecticut, they're hardly being purchased at all…
Over the flight pattern… – via Whap!
Ben,
Sounds like you're evaluating from an unbiased position. Things are much
more clear that way.
IMO, CBM is not nearly as stupid as some Amiga enthusiasts would have us
believe. They are making a fine piece of cash doing just what they are
doing. A huge marketing push would sell more competitor computers than
Amigas. They know that, and, like you, they know their time is limited.
CBM's best bet is to continue milking the cows they have.
I have sold a lot of computers via demo'ing my Mac set-ups.
Unfortunately, almost all the "sold" folks ended up opting for a cheap DOS
clone. From that point, one of two things typically happen; they either
quickly tire of the stress involved with using DOS systems and relegate
their unit to collecting dust, or they really get into DOS and thus build
up a large "learning-curve" investment. Either way, neither Macintosh nor
Amiga will ever capture those folks (okay, not to be so absolute, allow me
to say perhaps 2 or 3 percent will later move to Macs or Amigas).
So where does Macintosh get it's new, greatly expanding sales?
Currently, the main driving force is a pent up desire that is surfacing due
to the new, lower priced Macs, as well as the serious price cuts from
Apple. Next, Mac gets still gets a lot of folks moving from the old Apple
II line (just as Amiga should still be getting a trickle of Commodore 64
converts). Third, Mac generates a lot of sales from it's educational
efforts. Forth, Mac has made serious inroads in the graphic departments of
most business and industrial firms, and continue's to gain sales therein.
Fifth, many folks who work with high powered workstations on the job tend
to consider a Mac or an Amiga over a DOS clone, 'cause they know the
difference.
[continued in the reply]
[continued]
The market is fickle. Folks are interested in certain things only. Price
and *compatibility* are the most often major considerations. Uninitiated
folks, who represent the largest market share, can take a stab at
understanding the price thing, but they haven't a prayer in figuring out
the compatibility issue and all it entails. If they listen to _everyone_,
they will quickly become very leery of anything other than an IBM
compatible. This is a sad state of affairs, IMO, but it's lucid, all things
considered.
Just take a look at what happened to Sony's Beta VCR format. Did it help
that Beta was superior? Or take a look back at other equipment in a similar
situation as today's Mac and Amiga.
I expect Apple to survive and develop yet more powerful platforms, but
it will be close. Not so for the Amiga. If CBM attempts to market the Amiga
into a major player it will destroy itself.
Just my opinion (send any hate mail to your Congressman <g>), —GeM~~~~
Um. I don't think so. However, I doubt we'll ever find out.
A full page ad in Byte that says:
Want Multitasking on your desktop? Amiga; we've had it for five years. Want
really fast windowing? Amiga; we've had it for five years. Want fast
graphics? Amiga; we've had it for five years. Want IBM AT compatibility?
Amiga; we've had if for 3 years. Want Mac compatibility? Amiga; we've had
it for two years. Want four channel stereo sound built in? Amiga; we've had
it for five years. Want built in speech synthesis? Amiga; we've had it for
five years. Want to have true preemtpive multitasking? Amiga – yes, we've
had that for five years – and DOS, Windows, and Apples System 7 still don't
offer it. Multimedia? Amiga is the best, hands down. Midi? Sure. Bit
blitter? Yes – since the beginning. Multiple graphics resolutions at once?
No problem. From 4096 base colors to 16 million colors, the Amiga can
handle all your graphics needs. There are base home models from $500 to
models that outrun 486 machines (and cost less than they do!)
Don't make the big mistake and swallow the marketing of the "big fellows".
Take a look at an Amiga, and see why Amiga owners just laugh when asked to
switch.
Or, something like that. <evil grin>
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Ben,
I have regular Amiga/Mac rivalry discussions with my son. James is
definitely an Amiga fanatic now, just as he was an Atari (almost
overbearing) fanatic during his youth (he still has a _very_ powerful Atari
set-up, but seldom uses it these days). Believe me, he is quick to point
out, while sitting at my Mac IIfx, anything that he feels is inferior to
his Amiga. He also grudgingly admits that the Mac has the Amiga beat in
other areas.
As for myself, I fully admit that I'm essentially wearing blinders.
That's right, I have never actually test drove James's impressive Amiga
set-up. I have, however, been _forced_ <hehe> to sit through a
demonstration or two in which he felt certain I'd be impressed. I was.
While Macintosh's co-operative multitasking may have its advantages, the
Amiga's preemptive is hard to beat. Perhaps the most impressive thing,
though, is Amiga's greater sound fidelity, and I have my Mac connected to
an amplifier and speakers! My hope is that the Mac will soon catch up with
Amiga in stock sound ability. Apple has already made strides in that
direction, which has brought on the long dreaded international lawsuit from
Apple Recording. Apple Records confronted Apple Computer early on, and
Apple Computer promised not to expand the Mac's sound abilities.
Regards, —GeM
"While macs co-operative multitasking may have it's advantages…"
The only advantage it has is that it can, with a lot of careful work and
tuning by the developer of a new application, provide fair multitasking as
long as there are NO misbehaving tasks around.
There are *no* specific advantages to co-operative M/t, as compared to
pre-emptive in the general case. Co-operative M/t is an ugly neccessity on
the Mac; they'd kill it in a centon, if they could.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Ben,
All I can say is that I use it regularly and it works great. If I had
not so satisfactorily enjoyed the Mac multitasking, I would have been very
mislead by your message.
To me, the way you chose your words and applied emphasis therein is
enough to mislead the uninitiated/uninformed. I certainly would have been!
I can testify, however, that Amiga users who sit at my Mac are not
disappointed with the multitasking _performance_, and the Amiga users I
speak of are _very_ loyal to the Amiga.
Even though I have an Amiga within reach, I still have very little
experience with Amiga. I want to make that clear so I am not guilty of
misleading.
Fact is that the Mac's multitasking is completely transparent, requiring
absolutely no maneuvers on the part of the user. True, I do not have the
advantage of setting priorities, but I don't have to set _anything_.
In fairness, allow me to say that from what I've seen and heard, I look
forward to preemptive multitasking, but I hope the cooperative type can
coexist so I don't have to give it up.
The Mac platform, and I speak mostly of software, not hardware (as
usual), is moving full speed ahead with the new interactive application
handles provided by the new System 7 operating system. Like cooperative
multitasking, that too will require a good deal of work from software
developers. Hey, I'm sorry for developers who must continue to rework their
programs rather than just watch the money come in, but it is we users who
much continue to finance said rework. Actually, the process provides job
security for programmer types, while helping to prevent us users from the
burden of having to carry around so much money <hehe>.
Regards, —GeM
I don't think you would have been misled at all. What I said was 100%
factual.
You say you use your mac this way every day.
What happens when you start up some program that doesnb't co-operate?
Everything else just hangs up. Have you run into this yet? If so, what do
you do? THrow out the s/w, or just shrug and say, "that's the way it is"?
That's the situation that I warn against – it's totally uneccesary, and
that is why they'd like to get rid of co-operative multitasking.
You also say, you "hope the co-operative type can co-exist so I don't have
to give it up"
<sigh> If you have pre-emptive multitasking, you don't need, and further,
you won't want, co-operative multitasking. Programs will work together.
Very well. And you won't have to worry about it.
I'm not saying that you can't have nice co-operation with the current Mac
OS. You can – you just have to give up a large number of the current
progams that are out there. Which is a shame, but unavoidable at this time.
When you say that the Mac's multitasking is completely transparent,
requiring no manuevers on the part of the user, it is you who are
misleading people. If you run a non-co-operative program, you, as the user,
ahev stopped the multitasking (you may be unaware of it until you see that
program B has not proceeded past where it was when you started, though).
You, as the user, need to be aware of this, and manipulate your use of
programs so that your multitasking doesn't quit. One non-cooperative comm
program, database, paint program and you're stopped cold. If you want your
multitasking to work, you WILL manuver… either to manage your misbehaving
software, or to eliminate it from your collection of stuff you use.
These are pains that you have as a direect result of the co-operative
method. Also, even co-operative programs can "hog" more than you want,
which doesn't take managment (you're stuck with it) but it is a pain.
In short, looking behind all the smoke, it's less than the optimum – as is
the Amiga's multitasking… but we're a lot closer than the Mac is.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
As an Amiga owner and programmer at home, and a Mac programmer at work, I
assure you that I am *quite* dissapointed, and often incredibly frustrated,
with the Mac's cooperative multitasking scheme, both from a user and
programmer point of view. Hardly a day goes by when I'm not gnashing my
teeth waiting for the Mac to finish *something*, whether it be formatting a
floppy or printing a file or compiling a module. (Yes, I know that those
Mac users blessed with a Laserwriter have a background printing module, but
those of us who don't are stuck waiting for the printout to finish.)
From a programming point of view, it's even worse. The Mac's cooperative
multitasking is a *kludge*. It was never originally designed for
multitasking of any sort, and as such causes incredible problems for
certain types of programs. Half of the programming problems I run into on
the Mac can be traced, either indirectly or directly, to it's lack of
preemptive multitasking.
Finally, multitasking on the Amiga is transparent too. Moreso than the
Mac. It's transparent to the user, and transparent to the programmer. (As
for task priorities, yes they're nice, but I never set them myself, nor
have I ever needed to.)
–>Steve Bennett
Ben,
I have mentioned a similar 20 second video spot. An Amiga in between a Mac
and an IBM visibley running multiple tasks (preferable AMAX II and BB tasks
included with a one liner….
"Amiga – we've been doing more for less for years – check us out."
wmc
That would be very cool. :^)
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Ben-
well, _I_ like the ad, at least. Nice to see an Amiga ad with some
punch to it.
————————————————————TL———-
I think you missed the point. IBM compatibles are purchased by people who
are either ignorant of alternatives, need a particular application program,
or can pirate a majority of their software from work or somebody they know.
[DThe Mac and Amiga are very specialized computers with strengths in
certain areas. The Mac is ideal for desktop publishing and low end CAD
applications. The Amiga has found its home in the video market. I
selected the Amiga because of its multi-platform capability. I am able to
run IBM (A2286), Mac (AMAX II), Unix System V Release IV, and AmigaDOS all
on one system for the cost of a MAC II. By the way, the Amiga 2000 equiped
with the GVP Series II 33MHZ 68030 outperforms the Mac IIFX (40 MHZ 68030)
in integer computations. The Amiga performs 10000 dhrystones/sec. and the
MAC IIFX does 9800 dhrystones/sec. using dhrystone version 2.1. The Mac
IIFX even has a ram cache!!! I do have to concede however, that the Mac has
the world's most refined idiot interface (GUI), but I find it very annoying
not to have a command line while developing software.
Tim
RE: "By the way, the Amiga 2000 equiped with the GVP Series II 33MHZ 68030
outperforms the Mac IIFX (40 MHZ 68030) in integer computations."
RE: "The Amiga performs 10000 dhrystones/sec. and the MAC IIFX does 9800
dhrystones/sec. using dhrystone version 2.1."
It gets nobody nowhere to compare enhanced platforms with unenhanced
platforms. Surely you must know that the IIfx can be enhanced as well.
Like many other knowledgeable computerists, I've long ago realized that
laboratory-type speed comparisons serve only to give magazine reviewers
something to do. Only real-world speed tests mean anything, and that's
difficult to do across platforms. I do play close attention to speed tests
that perform the same operation using the same software on various Mac
platforms, but beyond that I'll leave such tests to you believers <hehe>.
RE: "I find it very annoying not to have a command line while developing
software."
You're wasting your breath discussing software development with me, Tim.
I'm not a developer and the only true programming I've ever done was on
other platforms in the early days of computing. Contrary to what you
contend, though, I have personally witnessed claims from major
multi-platform developers that the Mac is an easy platform for development.
You couldn't prove it either way by me.
Have fun, —GeM
Jim,
Humm…while the A2000 w/ GVP 33MHz 68030 is an enhanced
Amiga…it's still running the same CPU as the II FX, and running it at
7MHz *slower* than the IIFX and thus…all else being equal should show
lower on benchmarks. The fact that it didn't would imply that the basic
design (hardware/OS) is more efficient.
Don
Thanks Don,
I forgot that the Amax emulator actually out perofrms a stock II FX.
Does that have anything to do with Amax utilizing the Amigas custom chip
set?
– Whapping from the North Coast Michael
Michael,
NO idea.
Don
Why bother bouncing that off me. Sounds like you've already got yourself
convinced.
Myself, I wonder why I've attracted hardware-first folks. I'm just not
interested in discussing hardware benchmarks. They are about as reliable as
the weatherman (sorry weathermen/women).
Please don't bother me with this, —GeM, with a deep sigh, but no malice
No, I'm sorry, but I don't know how the Mac IIfx can be "enhanced". Please
enlighten me on the possibilities. Besides I find your arguement flawed.
The Mac IIfx unenhanced costs more than an Amiga 2000 enhanced with less
computing power running the same source code. As to productivity, you must
agree that a preemptive multitasking system provides a smoother feel to the
user. If you don't, then you obviously not used an Amiga. As to the ease
of programming, you yourself have said that you know little about it, so I
suggest you not comment. I leave you with a program that will surely show
that the Amiga is more productive. Run the C program on a Mac and on an
Amiga and see which machine allows you to do other things while it's
running.
main() {
while (1); }
Tim,
You're message took us both in a circle, with you drawing your own
conclusions without the input initially requested. I liked it, though. It
was entertaining <hehe>. Next time, why not let the big boys handle the
folks from other platforms? This forum has its share of informed
individuals who do a fine job of promoting the Amiga (at least
hardware-wise), so all you need do is sit back and follow the threads.
That's what I do when the really knowledgeable Mac folks start hashing out
hardware and/or software issues. Why should I show my ignorance. I don't
mind, and can handle, yielding to the masters.
Yes, there are both NuBus cards and PDS (processor direct slot)
enhancement cards currently available for the Mac IIfx. I've read about
them in both news releases and advertisements, but I have not explored them
(I'm more interested in the new Macs coming this October). I would be a bit
surprised, after speaking with them herein, if some of the "big boys" of
the Amiga realm don'tknow more about Mac IIfx enhancement products than I
do. All ya gotta do is read the journals.
Can't say I didn't try, —GeM, no longer available
It appears that I have called your bluff. You have not given me any
information about these "enhancements" and my statement still stands as is.
The Mac IIfx is slower than an Amiga 2000 with a GVP Series II accelerator
card and the Mac is more expensive. This statement stands. I am very
confused about why one would buy a Mac IIfx in the first place. A Sun
Sparc is very close in price and orders of magnitude more powerful. I
suppose, Apple has a religious following of people that are sometimes
blinded by the light. If I had the money, believe me, I would have a Sun
Sparc or an HP 720 CRX not a Mac IIfx. As for this nonsense about the
masters, I am not sure whether it is an ill conceived attempt at an insult
or a ploy to divert attention from the issue at hand. Either way, my point
is still valid.
Tim
Gee, Ben, how in heck do I argue with logic? 🙂
If you read the IBM mags(or AmigaWorld and Amazing Computing for that
matter), you'd think the Amiga could do nothing else but multimedia. But
you may be right in your assessment that not many people buy the Amiga for
that reason; I can't comment on it because so few have been sold around
here recently.
Your point about the Amiga dying a "slow death" is also enlightening.
Call me a cynic, but my feeling is that the IBM/Apple alliance is to teach
Microsoft a lesson, but if they could get Commodore out of their hair, it
would be icing on the cake. But it will take two to three years for that
to happen, and the Amiga may commit suicide by then…
Do you really think that CBM is "in their hair"? I sure don't. Only
when they shout about multimedia… and again, I don't think it's a
real issue – I think the "suits" are blowing smoke (again).
> Do you really think that CM is "in their hair"?
Yes, I honestly do. Back in 1985, Commodore and Apple were both sucking
wind. Apple wound up "hitting a home run with desktop publishing", and not
only saved themselves, but went on to prosper (the quotes were from a
Commodore spokesperson, I don't remeber his name, but he's not there
anymore).
I believe that Apple and IBM believe that Commodore can "hit a home run"
in the area of multimedia, as Apple did some years earlier. In particular,
I feel Apple, now that they've crossed the bridge, wants to burn it to make
sure no other companies follow their foot steps. This is why I feel Apple
completely ignores the Amiga and sometimes makes dubious claims, like the
one where they claimed that the Apple Macintosh can run more software than
any other computer on the market, because they can run Mac, PC (with
SoftPC) and UNIX. This ad actually ran in PC Magazine, which got me mad
enough to EMAIL a complaint to PC Magnet; I haven't seen the ad after the
first two times it ran.
Over the flight pattern… – via Whap!
It just goes to show you, it takes the combined efforts of the two largest
computer makers to come up with 1 decent computer and/or Operating System
8^) Maybe they should just purchase CBM, the Amiga, and AmigaDOS and get it
over with. I just had to say that, the devil made me do it 8^)
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
I'm not so sure it was the devil… likely it was an angel, if "other"
pressures were involved.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
John–
Sounds like the two are ready to take over…a joint IBM/Apple hegemony?
Could cause a few headaches at CBM..
Jonathan
– via Whap!
Yep, this IBM/Apple monopoly (sounds like a antitrust suit just waiting to
happen) will be interesting to watch in the coming months. It depends what
IBM/Apple have in mind. Become the ONLY computer manufacturer's in the
industry and try to squash the competition, ignore the competition, or
include the competition in their plans. But like others have said, it will
be a few years before they could probably come up with a product anyway.
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!