Machine Wars - Fight!

[kovacm]

What software Amiga had, and Atari lack, that makes Amiga so much better??

I got impression that Amiga users have no clue about Atari software (by your comment here)...

I would really like to see (and to make) video where we could compare same tasks on both computer: Amiga 1200 and Atari Falcon030. Just like I made comparison of text processors on Mac LC II and Atari Falcon: [ Show youtube player ]

I am eager to see how Amiga excel so much Atari on software side!


On the subject of software:

long time ago I open thread "Programs born on Atari, Amiga, Mac... and then ported to Windows" so be free to add any other programs on list

[idrougge]

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver

This is so true the 1200 sold many thousands figures when the Falcon sold only 14.000 something......

And the 386 PC sold a thousand times more. So it must be the bestest computer evar, right?

[idrougge]

Originally Posted by kovacm

There was MagiC that is preemptive multitasking and far faster than single TOS.

It's a shame that MagiC took a long time to reach stability and never reached large market penetration outside Germany (which, of course, was the only really significant ST market).

Originally Posted by kovacm

There is also Geneve OS for Atari...

Geneva is co-operative multitasking.

Not to mention that multitasking on the ST is always a bit of a gamble because programs haven't been written with multitasking in mind, quite the opposite.

[idrougge]

Originally Posted by kovacm

What software Amiga had, and Atari lack, that makes Amiga so much better??

• A web browser that wasn't CAB.
• Non-linear video editing.
• Graphics and paint programs.
• A command-line interface.
• User interface guidelines and libraries that made programs easy to use. In TOS, user interfaces are extremely ad-hoc.
• Inter-process scripting to make full use of these programs in a multitasking environment.

Originally Posted by kovacm

I got impression that Amiga users have no clue about Atari software (by your comment here)...

Some of us do, but naturally most don't.
The ST/Falcon has some strengths software-wise:
• sequencing
• hard disk recording
• replacement OSes and desktops
• DTP (at least on par with Amiga)
• Word processing

[Estrayk]

Originally Posted by trixster

I had a blizzard 1220 28mhz 020 (which is broadly 25mhz 030 performance) and there's no way that machine could match either Dml's quake 2 demos or badmood (doom) on the falcon.

One thing to mention about these two is that they're not on 'stock' Falcons, they need 14mb!

The engine and the speed is the same if you've 4Mb or 14Mb. Simply, dml can add more textures or more bigger with more memory. Thats all.

Btw, Impressive too the last part from this demo for a 16Mhz machine.

[ Show youtube player ]


This one need FPU but also very impressive in 16Mhz.

[ Show youtube player ]

[frank_b]

Originally Posted by idrougge

It's a shame that MagiC took a long time to reach stability and never reached large market penetration outside Germany (which, of course, was the only really significant ST market).



Geneva is co-operative multitasking.

Not to mention that multitasking on the ST is always a bit of a gamble because programs haven't been written with multitasking in mind, quite the opposite.

GEM had a cooperative multitasking scheduler from day 1. It was limited to one app and 6 desk accessories though. Magic is quite a bit quicker and more responsive than Amiga OS on a 68000. Amiga OS is a bit slicker though.

[trixster]

Originally Posted by Amigajay

base models were;
£599 1mb
£799 4mb
£999 4mb with 65mb hdd

not base but i saw the earliest one with 14mb ram for £1299 no hdd

No wonder it tanked

[kovacm]

Originally Posted by idrougge

• Inter-process scripting to make full use of these programs in a multitasking environment.

How this translate to everyday computer usage?
Can you give us some examples?

Originally Posted by idrougge

• DTP (at least on par with Amiga)
• Word processing

What are best Amiga OS DTP, Graphics/Painting and Word processing programs?


btw
if somebody missed, some times ago I opened two threads regarding best 3D demos for vanila Amiga 1200:
http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=69697
http://www.atari-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=25174

[idrougge]

Originally Posted by kovacm

How this translate to everyday computer usage?
Can you give us some examples?

Any program with an ARexx port is scriptable. That way, you can do a printout of all the fonts in your word processor or DTP program. Or make Workbench open a certain directory, resize the window and rearrange all icons in a certain pattern. Or create a macro in your graphics program to crop, resize, apply a filter and save in a certain format. If two programs are scriptable, you can connect them together so that, for example, you can tell your graphics program to save a picture and then tell your DTP program to import the picture.

Originally Posted by kovacm

What are best Amiga OS DTP, Graphics/Painting and Word processing programs?

DTP: Pagestream. The ST had that one too, but stopped at version 2.
Graphics: DeluxePaint, Personal Paint, ArtEffect, Photogenics
Word processing: Final Writer, Wordworth. Neither is an industry leader, though.

[kovacm]

I am aware of ARexx (it was ported to OS/2) but I can not grasp how functional it is - it gave you access to all widgets and menus from program?

I would like to see it in action but unfortunate on youtube there is no video regarding ARexx.


Thanks for suggestion of programs. I need to install my Amiga 1200 and to make some video of Calamus vs Pagestream, PhotoLine vs Photogenics, Papyrus vs Final Writer...

[UberFreak]

For me it all boils down to ownership.
Back when I grew up, most of the kids in my school had either C64/128 or Sinclair Spectrum.
A few had Apple 2 or an IBM clone, only one kid I knew had an 8bit Atari.

When the 16bit era began, most moved to a PC or Amiga. Very few I knew had a Mac.
I'm 43 years old and only met two Atari ST owners in my life, both used it for MIDI and nothing more.

As for the Falcon, what does it matter how good it was if you couldnt buy it?
Never seen one in the flesh, not back then and not today.

Also, the poor design of the ST always amazed me.
How can a 16bit machine designed in 1984/5 not have hardware scrolling & sprites, when all Atari 8-bit machines had it ?
Boggles the mind...

[kovacm]

Here in ex-yugoslavia lot of peoples and companies had Atari ST and PC. Almost non had Mac (although Yugoslavia was sixth country in Apple register that have official import dealer). I guess that Mac was to expensive and people smart enough to recognize price/value of ST over Mac.

Amiga only become to appear after 1988/9., after cost-reduced Amiga 500 come to market and it was used to play games and demo scene. We had really strong demo scene in Serbia in 90s.

Originally Posted by UberFreak

As for the Falcon, what does it matter how good it was if you couldnt buy it?
Never seen one in the flesh, not back then and not today.

It is real shame and waste that such superior machine did not have a chance to be properly exploited in 90s. After 1991. Ataris profit halved and employees also get halved every consequent year so Atari simple did not have money and resources to support Falcon properly.

Originally Posted by UberFreak

Also, the poor design of the ST always amazed me.
How can a 16bit machine designed in 1984/5 not have hardware scrolling & sprites, when all Atari 8-bit machines had it ?
Boggles the mind...

Price, time and...:
since ST was going to be primary cheap serious computer with hi-res 71Hz B/W monitor, hardware scrolling would not help anyhow in this area.
You can see how they were not concern (or was in hurry) regarding hardware scrolling is by fact that video base address register for the bottom eight bits simply doesn't exist on the ST so its screen address is bound to 256 bytes steps. If they implement this low eight bits, than ST would have at least vertical hardware scroll for almost no cost in additional hardware. But they did not.
Atari ST simple never meant to be competing against Amiga (contrary to believes; idea that was perpetuate by some vocals of Amiga team engineers), it was meant to compete against Apple and IBM.

[drHirudo]

Originally Posted by UberFreak

Also, the poor design of the ST always amazed me.
How can a 16bit machine designed in 1984/5 not have hardware scrolling & sprites, when all Atari 8-bit machines had it ?

Not only that, but the Atari ST also had the sound chip of 8-bit Sinclairs and Orics - Yamaha YM2149
Even the 8-bit Atari had better sound thanks to the POKEY.
It was called the Jackintosh because it was the poor mans Macintosh. Sure it wasn't intended to compete with the Amiga, but it hurt the Amiga sales for sure.

[UberFreak]

Indeed, it wasn't meant to compete with the Amiga, but beat it to market, which it did.

Sadly, the fact that the ST had such limited video hardware for games, also hurt the Amiga due to all the games that were first developed on the ST and then quickly ported to the Amiga, without taking advantage of its capabilities.

[lordofchaos]

So now that we have the spectacular Sam's Journey released on C64, can we say with confidence, that the C64 is "the" superior 8-bit computer?!

[Foebane]

This in my opinion, so don't jump down my throat.

From what I've seen in decades gone by, Atari and Commodore released their hardware, 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit (64-bit for Atari?) and it seems that Atari has consistently lost out in sales and popularity compared to the Commodore machines.

True, the Atari 2600 was THE system to own (I suppose) up until the Videogame Crash of '83, and then the Commodore 64 took over, and even the Atari home computers couldn't compete because of poor marketing. The marketing expert at Commodore, Jack Tramiel, then switched to Atari, developed and launched the Atari ST as his team did for the C64, and for a while Atari is ahead in sales, but then the juggernaut that is Jay Miner's Amiga is launched at a competitive price and flattens the Atari ST once titles are released that show off the Amiga's hardware. So once again Atari is in a bind, and they launch the STE (not enough), the Falcon 030 (too expensive and lack of memory) and finally quits the home computer market. In the meantime, despite good sales outside of the USA, the Amiga is poorly marketed and several models are released to the point that Commodore can no longer sustain itself and goes bust.

But the way I see it, whoever's in charge and who develops the hardware, Atari is initially ahead at first, and then Commodore blows them out of the water in hardware and competition and marketing.

Well aside from the games libraries, I think this is also reflected in the Demoscene for both sets of machines: the C64 and the Amiga are HUGE in this area, and the Atari 8-bits, 2600 and ST/STE/Falcon have only a fraction of the prods available. Want proof? Go to Pouet.net, go to the prods and select a system on the right-hand list and see for yourself.

I wonder why popularity favoured Commodore over Atari?

[DamienD]

What is it with all these "a) vs. b)" threads of late?

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by DamienD

What is it with all these "a) vs. b)" threads of late?

My posts? Or in general?

[Amigajay]

Well in overall sales for both companies over their lifetime i dont think there is a big difference i.e Atari’s consoles sold around 32-35 million, its computers 8-10 million, whilst Commodores consoles a partry <250k! whilst its computers (not inc pc compatibles) are anywhere between 25-30 million, so if we talk plainly in numbers then ‘popularity’ wise Atari wins.

If you split it between the US and Europe, and lived in the latter then clearly Commodore wins, so it all depends where you grew up as how you inteript it.

[nobody]

Because Atari was always too late to the party.
After 1989 there was no reason why you would buy an ST with better Amiga games coming out. Or buy an Atari 8bit vs C64 with more and better games coming out for the C64 after 1986. In my opinion Atari was selling inferior machines after a certain point, people always want better games and Atari didn't care for them, they were selling computers like an alternative to Mac or IBM which were bad for entertainment.