CompuServe Thread

general amiga info

25 messages in this thread
#97524From: Jonathan WayneDec 9, 1987 4:33 PM
Well, it may be time to buy a new computer. I am coming from MS-DOS land and MUST have some MS-DOS compatibility. Have wanted an Amiga from the day it came out, and was wondering about the current state of Amiga affairs. 1) What is the status on MS-DOS capabilities? Compatiblity and speed. 2) How much for a full blown color system (including at least 30 meg hard disk and an extra floppy)? 3) Can I use my LQ800 Epson printer and my Hayes compatible modem? 4) How is the selection of Amiga shareware? 5) Any other stuff I should be aware of? Thanks for any info you can give me… jon
#97647From: Don Curtis/SYSOPDec 10, 1987 10:41 AM
Jon, With the A2000 and the bridgeboard, you can get 99.9% MS-DOS compatability at 100% PC speed (4.77Mhz). The BridgeBoard is a PC clone on a board that uses the Amiga display and keyboard for input/output. You can run both the PC side and the Amiga side at the same time since the PC display is just another task for the Amiga. A full blown A2000, 3 Meg of RAM, 30 Meg HD, 2 floppy plus BridgeBoard will run in the $4 to $5,000 price category. Shareware, look thru our DL's, there's lots of it. Don
#97656From: Jonathan WayneDec 10, 1987 11:41 AM
Thanks for all the info, Don. Wonder why BridgeBoard went with a 4.77 processor if indeed "all" it is is a clone on a board? Anyway, for $4-5000 (which I can't blow on a computer system now) I think I'd rather get a full-blown 386 machine and run both Unix and DOS! (and any lookers on, please, I don't want to debate relative merits). Should I bother looking into a Amiga 1000 or is it a has-been? And is the model 500 worthy of the name Amiga or should it be considered more along the lines of a 64/128 home computer? jon
#97684From: John DraperDec 10, 1987 4:46 PM
Jonathan, The three Amigas are mainly different in hardware configuration. The A1000 can have a 'sidecar', and so far there is no provision for a 'clone' box on the 500. The three machines are all compatible in software, and are all worthy of the Amiga name. It will pay you to look at the Amiga very carefully before even considering a 386 box, with all its limitations and need to buy a lot of extras to get what comes standard on the Amiga. Regards, Larry.
#97749From: Don Curtis/SYSOPDec 10, 1987 10:08 PM
Jon, I know I'm going to get some heat on this…but yes, the A1000 will soon become a 'has been'. It's a fine machine, and it is obviously an Amiga, but it has limits and those limits can't easily be bypassed, such as a new chipset that can address a full Meg of CHIP RAM. There just aren't enough of them out there for hardware manufacturers to invest the amount of money needed for new hardware add-ons to the A1000 so I think you'll see any new items for the A1000 dry up. The A500 is 'really an Amiga', but also has it's limits. A weak power supply for add-ons and the 'all in one' design could cause some problems in the future. Don
#98058From: Jonathan WayneDec 12, 1987 5:26 PM
How has that action of Commodore affected the feelings of those that want to go with the latest technology? I mean, if I had a 1000 I'd be pretty p'd off, and would have serious reservations about trusting a new machine to nonobsolescence! Even the IBM XT, as kludgy as it is, can still run about everything (albeit slowly) in the MS-DOS world. You can even upgrade it to a 386 machine! And the C-64 is still well supported! How can Commodore do this to what is obviously near-state-of-the-art for micros? jon
#98065From: John DraperDec 12, 1987 5:39 PM
Jonathan, Why? The A500 and A2000s are simply repackaged A1000s, with a few small differences. Your example of the XT is rather funny, since with each MSDOS release and each new machine, compatibility problems have plagued the users, to a far greater degree than the Amiga's changes. Life is like this on the prehistoric machines. Here on the leading edge, we should expect radica oops… radical changes that cause all sorts of problems, but so far it hasn't happened that way with the Amiga. Regards, Larry.
#98222From: Jonathan WayneDec 13, 1987 9:31 PM
Larry – Maybe I misinterpreted your own Don Curtis when he said that the A1000 will soon be a "has been" (sorry Don, but you may as well get some of the heat you said you would get <grin>) and that any new items for the A1000 will dry up. To me this means that A1000 owners will be stuck since new applications might require hardware capabilities that the 1000 cannot be upgraded to handle. Regarding the XT, I don't know of any "plague" of compatibility problem "with each MSDOS release". The XT is eminently upgradable, both in software and hardware. I would be hard put to name a program that will run on the AT and not the XT. Not being wealthy, I'm just concerned with having my investment last, especially since we're not talking about a $500 system here. The trick in todays microcomputer world is to put off the natural obsolescence of a system as long as possible! jon
#98237From: John DraperDec 13, 1987 11:44 PM
Jon, Each new release of MsDos has brought new problems of compatibility with previous versions, or at least thats the way I have interpreted the grumblings from IBM owners. Perhaps I'm wrong. Every machine will be obsolete one day, and the current crop of Amigas is no exception. When you say that perhaps programs will be written that need a particular piece of hardware, you are correct. Does it bother you that you can't run Digi-View software without owning the hardware? Commodore offered a deal to A1000 owners to allow purchasing a 2000 at a good price. How many other computer companies have done that? I think that it is up to every computer owner to assess their needs and act accordingly. If you look at it like your machine is an orphan, that's your priviledge. I happen to disagree with you. it is every bit as good as it ever was, and better than it started out as. The fatc that there are 2 more models to carry on the line and that they are compatible with the 1000 is enough for me. If it isn't enough for you, then i think that you should seriously consider trading it in before the offer has expired. from the gripes I hear, I get the feeling that the gripers would have preferred to remain with the 1000 and all its limitations, and never to advance to anything else. I wince when I think of what these same people will say when a machine comes out that is truly differet. Different to a degree that will virtually guarantee incompatibility with the 500, 1000, 2000. Like I say… that's life on the leading edge, and if it's too hot for those used to the stodgy pace of IBM and its ilk, then perhaps it isn't the place for you. Personally, I wouldn't be anywhere else. Regards, Larry.
#98263From: Jonathan WayneDec 14, 1987 8:17 AM
No, no. I don't own an Amiga. I am considering buying one and was voicing a concern (which was based on VERY sparse knowledge) about possible obsolescence. I appreciate all the info you, and others, have given me which will allow me to make a much more intelligent choice. Thanks for your input! jon
#98342From: John DraperDec 14, 1987 9:53 PM
Your welcome jon, I do tend to recommend the A2000 for those that can afford it, as it seems to be the most easily expandable, and will in time become the most versatile as peripherals proliferate. (sorry… alliterations are a weakness). Hope you make the right choice for your ownm needs though. Regards, Larry.
#98322From: greg gossDec 14, 1987 6:31 PM
Larry: IBM managed to keep the compatability by crippling the AT. Even though the AT hardware is capable of addressing 16M, the DOS is only willing to look at 640K. Then you get the ludicrous kludge of a paging memory system (EEMS) to allow your application to fit into 640K on a system capable of 16M. No-one but IBM could have brought out a machine as incompatible as the AT. At the time the AT came out, the Olivetti machines were taking quite a bit of flack for minor incompatibilities in their 16 bit machines. Then Big Blue brought out a new semi-compatible, and within weeks, everything had been converted. The compatibility situation is a combination of domination of the market by a few large software companies and deliberate restricting of the capabilities of the AT and 386 machines. ../greg
#98082From: Don Curtis/SYSOPDec 12, 1987 8:49 PM
Jonathan, CBM can do it the same way IBM just obsoleted their entire line of PC's with the new PS/2 seri. The only difference is that there are so darn many PC, PC/XT and AT's out there, manufacturer's still have a vast audience of potential customers that it's still profitable for new hardware and/or software to be developed. At this point anyway, the A1000 can run everything the A500 or A2000 can run…and that should remain that way for a long time. I didn't say, and don't believe that the A1000 is suddenly obsolete…what I did say was that it was a machine that is not going to have much, if anything, new in the way of hardware add-ons developed for it. That doesn't make the A1000 any less of a machine today than it was the day it came out, in fact, due to add-ons, it's a better machine today than it was 2 years ago. Things already in the works, such as the 2000+1 will make the A1000 a viable machine for some time to come, but there is only so much that can be done to it and there comes a point where adding further to an existing machine is no longer cost effective with buying a new machine IF YOUR NEEDS dictate adding to the machine. Just like you can only add so much to a PC, and then it behooves you to sell it off and buy an AT or '386. As your needs grow, then perhaps the specific machine you need changes also. CBM had no choice but to make changes, they did their best to continue to be compatible with the A1000. If CBM hadn't made the changes they did, the Amiga would have died a slow death. At least this way, it has a future. Don
#98224From: Jonathan WayneDec 13, 1987 9:33 PM
Well, I wouldn't be so quick to say that the entire line of PC's is now obsolete because of the PS/2! The "only" difference (the number of XTs & ATs) that you mention is a BIG one. IBM PC clones are being manufactured cheaply and in great quantities. And OS/2 will run on the vast majority of the AT clones. The AT will be around for quite awhile. Well, I'm just trying to get the poop from Amiga freaks on Amigas. So, let me start a new line of thought. Assume that one is involved in business applications. No need for the incredible graphics of the Amiga. No need for the sound capabilities. Understanding that the Amiga has not made inroads into the business world (versus academia & engineering) what would you say to sell that person on the Amiga being aware of the force with which the IBM-type world will be pushing 286/386 machines and windows? Secondly, all you folks that have experience with C programming in both worlds (and here I am not real interested in the standpoint of 8088 versus 68000 architecture): how do you compare the difficulty of programming for the two machines? jon
#98248From: Don Curtis/SYSOPDec 14, 1987 1:37 AM
Jon, You are aware that the original PC (circa '82) had 16K of RAM and a cassette interface…now please don't tell me that $1600 machine is not obsolete..it clearly is. Also, did you want CBM to wait until it had sold 2 or 3 million A1000's before it made any improvements so that there would be a large enough base of A1000's out there to keep new goodies comming? The A1000 is expansion limited, the A2000 is not and that is the major difference between the 2. As long as the task requires no special hardware that (in the future) is only available for the A2000 then the program WILL run on the A1000. The only piece of hardware that I am aware of fitting this category is the deLacer (and it's not on the market yet) and that doesn't change 1 thing about the software. As to programming….the Amiga has a very steep learning curve to use anything other than stdin/stdout. Remember, the Amiga has true multi-tasking, a windowing interface, command line interface and several UNIX like low level functions such as message passing, semaphores, etc. Once you get past that curve…it's no different than any other machine. It's hard to say much more than that since there are so many differences between the 2 machines that it's like night and day. Neither is 'harder' than the other…but vastly different. Don
#98264From: Jonathan WayneDec 14, 1987 8:22 AM
Ok, thanks for your clarification of the A1000. As for the original PC, I wouldn't mind buying one – it will definitely be highly collectable years from now! My programming, for all intents & purposes, started off on a Unix machine. So I am no stranger to multi-tasking. But I haven't programmed for a graphics interface, such as is found on the Amiga or Mac. That is what scares me! How about reliability? How many (if any) times have you had to take you machine(s) into a shop? How difficult (read expensive) is repair work? jon
#98303From: GreG Tsadilas/SYSOPDec 14, 1987 5:15 PM
Jon, in the 2 years and 3 months I had my Amiga 1000, it has never been in the shop for repairs. That doesn't mean that others haven't had problems. GreG
#98346From: John DraperDec 14, 1987 10:10 PM
Jon, I've had the A1000 since Sept '85, and have had one disk drive go out of alignment and the keyboard develop a few baddly stuck keys. These were the result of some rough handling by the airline baggage gorillas (the fiberglass carrying case was visibly damaged). I fised the keyboard myself, and had the drive aligned, cleaned and tested for about $35. I also lost an 8520 chip, again due to a known cause (I used to plug/unplug drives with power on), and that cost me about $40 for the chip. They are probably a lot cheaper now, as CBM charges about $22 or so for it last I heard. I also have had the machine apart to install a 68010, to deinstall it again, to install the 'Insider' memory expansion, and recently to muck about with a few things I'm working on. All in all, it has been more than satisfactory. Regards, Larry.
#98321From: greg gossDec 14, 1987 6:30 PM
First you say that everything will run on an XT, then you start talking about OS/2. Their operating system will not run on their earlier models. I think you've answered your own question. IBM's hardware bus was changed in the latest upgrade. I call that pretty incompatible. Can you get an adapter box to run microchannel from an AT? You can get zorro cages to plug into the A1000, and probably soon for the 500. Call us when you have a DOS, available on the open market for a finite price, that can handle more than 640K. ../greg
#98350From: Jonathan WayneDec 14, 1987 10:20 PM
Greg – What's a zorro cage? jon
#98354From: John DraperDec 14, 1987 10:38 PM
Jon, Zorro was the original internal CBM cde name for an expansion backplane designed to plug into the A1000. The Zorro spec details the bus, which is a 100 pin general purpose expansion. At least 1 company is working on an expansion that will handle Zorro and IBM style expansions in the manner of the internal A2000 buses (Zorro, XT, AT). Regards, Larry.
#98092From: Ben BlishDec 12, 1987 9:18 PM
Jon; software-wise, the Amigas are as compatible as possible; there are very few things (like maybe 5 or 6 out of thousands) that will not run across the various models. IBM, on the other hand, has released the PS-x series, which isn't very compatible with anything. Of course, they're ________, so what do you expect? –Ben–
#98020From: Mike BerroDec 12, 1987 2:16 PM
Jon, As far as the LQ800 is concerned, mine works quite well with the Amiga. —Mike
#98059From: Jonathan WayneDec 12, 1987 5:27 PM
How about the serial port – can one use a Hayes compatible (9 or 25 pin)? jon
#98106From: Mike BerroDec 12, 1987 10:14 PM
A Hayes compatible what? Printer? The serial port is standard, except that it has some DC power on some of the pins. It is a 25 pin connector. You can configure the system to look for the printer on the serial or parallel port. —Mike