Thread: Bloat
View Single Post
Old 05 October 2001, 03:42   #6
Registered User
Maverick357's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bruxelles / Belgium
Age: 52
Posts: 176

I am not against you because you had 800 pirated games (i had only +-500 games pirated games/software ), but because you say that:

The Amiga never had the flexibility that the modern PC does: mutliprocessor support, 3D video/audio, unified [DirectX] API for 3rd party hardware abstraction, native networking support, virtual memory, protected memory model, etc. Windows 2000 does all of these things. Do you really think that Windows is all that bloated when you consider all of the services that the OS supports? It's like some of you guys completely missed the boat when Microsoft phased out Windows 3.x and DOS...
1)First, don't forget that Amiga computers is dated of 1985, the technology is from 1985 years and not 2001 year.
It is normal that they whas not an high-priced computer like the pc (just for information: back in 1988, i have paid 22500 FB (512,19 $) for an Amiga 500, with an very good OS free, today, my pc is priced at 125000 FB (2845,50 $) and more .
I am not rich, i have buy some basic one and upgrade a lot with only high-quality hardware...
Yes, today i have a modern hi-tech multimedia pc with 3d accelarated graphics card, ect...
But the price is very higher than the amiga.
For the flexibility, there whas the choice of the Amiga 2000 because the Amiga 500 whas an family computer.

Others aspect of Amiga computers: one Amiga 500 (same wb 1.2 or 1.3) whas 100 % compatible with another Amiga 500.
If a software work on it, it work certainly on the other Amiga 500.

Today, you can use high-priced games/software that work on one pc, but work not (or not without crash/reset/incompatibility with another pc because all pc in the world are hardware different.

2) The worst thing in the software/OS in the world is Microsoft because:
- with a very agressive marketing they sold every 2-3 years a upgrade of a bugged to death OS named Windows.
- The users are happy to use it because they think that a OS that crash/reset/ is bugged/ is incompatible with himself is a standard.
Microsoft sold millions of it every upgrade, and they users/buyers are happy :kill

Don't say that an 600-1000 Mb OS like windows is better than a Workbench 3.1 that need only 25 Mb on a hd because that is not true.

If you look inside the Api of Windows, you will see that winxx is just a piece of shit.
Most of the APi is usefull (like directx) but are very complex to use, are bugged, or use a technology of 1980 (Like the file format name of 8.3 because the long name of windows is a trick, they don't really exist, and you can see that if you go in the command line).
The reality of Windows is that windows is not an OS but only an graphical interface on the Ms-Dos 7.xx (and you can verify yourself, just change a flag in a config file 'Ms-dos.sys'



BootGUI=1 <==== set this to zero and reboot, you will be in the ms-*dos OS.


Yes, Windows is not an OS but really an graphics user interface with dosextender and some multimedia library, that's all.

I prefer a real OS like the Workbench that use modern functions, that is optimized in size and speed, and that the API whas wonderful of easy to use.

What i hate today, it is hear how wonderfull is windows and what wonderfull are the software of today.

I have buy original cd-rom of Windows 3.1 (disks 3.5 but i don't have anymore because i hate this buggy windows), the cd-rom of Win95 (bugged to dead too), the cd-rom of Win98 OS release2 (bugged too, need a lot of 'upgrade' on the MS server) but i will never use the win 2000 or later release.
The size of it is big like 2 cd-rom an they need 512 Mo of ram if you want use it. Really foolish to use this shit.
All the power is used by the OS.
If today, a new Workbench come out for pc, i will immediately by it because this is what i call a 'modern OS', like the Mac OS for example.
Maverick357 is offline  
Page generated in 0.03905 seconds with 10 queries