View Single Post
Old 08 January 2002, 07:42   #20
Give up the ghost
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: U$A
Age: 27
Posts: 4,662
I really don't think I can say much better what has already been so said so beautifully already. But I do have some...erm, inconsistencies...

Originally posted by Shadowfire
finally, you left out in your reply is that all the programs you cited are 3rd party programs, none of which (let me qualify this -- and you can correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe I am) have anything close to general acceptance. When Commodore left town, there was nobody to set standards (like IFF).
Oh dear... Many references to OS tools were in his response, as well as mine. Only the 3rd party apps were given links (so you could reference them, if neccesary), so it may have sidetracked you. The various multimedia files that are supported, which we both brought up, are supported by the OS, to name but one example. Your words about general acceptance - well, being as you are no longer a real Amiga user, I don't imagine you have anything to offer here but conjecture. On the PC, general acceptance means it comes from Microsoft or from a select handful or mammoth, global corporations. That's what PC users look for when deciding on an app to use, trust, accept. The Amiga user looks at the reliability, and thus, even the small guy can achieve general acceptance. Even on the PC, though, the zip command did not gain general acceptance by being a part of the OS. Nor did the jpeg/mpeg formats. The Amiga doesn't need Commodore around to set its standards for it. All they did was market (?) and sell another team's dream machine and continued further development of the OS (using a dream team of rebel programmers). You seem too caught up in labelling what is required to gain acceptance.

twist: yes pc compatibility has finally been MOSTLY dropped. its a good thing, too (IMO).
So now you are contradicting your original point about PC compatibility. You should pick one side and stick with it.

BTW I've been running Windows2000 ever since they released SP1, and haven't had 2nd thoughts about going back to Win98 or NT4, and I would suggest that you try Win2000 instead of XP.
XP I have only looked/laughed at from an aisle at Best Buy, whilst W2k I use every day at work. What's up with that cryptic update of the Find command?!? There's probably some things that make it work better on our networks at work, but I don't see any more reliability or stability in any of the apps I use (mostly gfx & dtp apps).

XP pro has some nice points too though, but I haven't upgraded because of MS's WPA, and make no plans to until they stop treating me like a child.
I wouldn't hold my breath...

since DirectX7, music has been directly supported by the OS, I would suggest (if you have broadband) downloading the DirectX7 or 8 SDK and checking out the docs on "DirectMusic".
But think about what you are saying here...the DirectX api was designed to enhance gaming, basically. It has expanded beyond that, as some other apps I use take advantage of this api (like Cool Edit Pro, among others), but at the end of the day, it still means all of this has to funnel through the OS. That might not be such a bad thing on a streamlined OS like AmigaDOS, but considering all of the existing overhead of Windows, it certainly has drawbacks, considering the stability of some of the DirectX plug-ins I have used. Some, on the other hand, are good. BTW: one can only download DirectX 8, as all previous versions are no longer offered and DX8 is uninstallable.

You brag about M$ offering DirectMusic, but the reality is that it's a replacement for a terrible previous MIDI api. I tend to not like Microsoft products. They do poor usenet news reading, I don't like Media Player, their email and IE tend to lean in the direction of little control and security (XP being no exception), and try installing any single component of Office (it claims to let you, but doesn' their Office uninstaller doesn't expunge registry entries properly, which affects other programs' functionality, etc.) So why should I suddenly think that their built-in music software is going to eclipse what I already use? It's certainly not gonna mess with Cakewalk. So is it for the casual user? Not with over 100 pages of documentation. Maybe web designers or game programmers will use it for their products, so why would this bloat be needed as part of the operating system? What does this have to do with an operating system. Nothing. It's just MS once again trying to own the music market the way they want to own the CD burning, virus checker, etc. markets. It's a case of "use the MS brand and stop buying X brand". There's not many program types MS have not tried to squash yet. I guess in (your) perfect world, every app in the world would have Microsoft's logo on it. Then they can go after television, films and the music industry.
multiview, yes, isn't that the application that lets you open any type of picture? Did any other program actually use datatypes? That must have been a post-Commodore addition to the OS.
Multiview is not a picture viewer. It handles most any format which a datatype exists for. It's was the replacement for AmigaGuide, which was doing hypertext before the PC had any such tool in its OS! So no, it was not post-CBM. And multiview is capable of handling pictures, audio files, multimedia, documents (doc, eps, pdf, etc)...why would you try to assess a product you have no clue about?

finally, say what you may about processor speed, there's never enough and you always want more. come on, admit it.
You seem to be confusing want and need. Sure, we all want more power, always. But to have hundreds of megs of ram just for the OS itself is absurd. To have to use raw processor power just to get you past sluggish architecture and a fake OS running on a hidden DOS is hardly a case of a user craving more power. A machine requiring enough power, more like.

Last edited by Twistin'Ghost; 08 January 2002 at 07:50.
Twistin'Ghost is offline  
Page generated in 0.04020 seconds with 10 queries